Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.an.BMC West.38005 Hwy 82 & rezoning.2011 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Don Taylor, Director of Finance THRU: Bany Crook, Assistant City Manager {oU DATE OF MEMO: February 16, 2011 MEETING DATE: February 28, 2011 RE: Fiscal Impact of BMC West Parcel Annexation REQUEST 01? COUNCIL: This is to provide information requested by City Council at the first reading of an ordinance approving annexation of the BMC West parcel. The request was to provide information on the fiscal impact of the annexation. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: City Council approved the Ordinance annexing the BMC West parcel at first reading on February 14, 2011. BACKGROUND: When a parcel of land is annexed to the City it is subsequently subject to the laws and regulations of the City including fees and taxation. It is also eligible for the services provided by the City. A fiscal impact analysis evaluates the impact of the annexation to the City from a strictly financial perspective. Typically these are related to development proposals were the impacts may be complex. As this is a parcel that is already developed and has no appreciable City infrastructure associated with it, the fiscal impact analysis is relatively simple. There has been no effort to estimate the fiscal impacts of a future redevelopment of this parcel for employee housing as the development plan, timing and density are unknown at this time. DISCUSSION: The major revenue sources that will arise from the annexation of this parcel are sales taxes and franchise fees. The total amount of estimated revenue to be received on an annual is basis is shown below. Sales Tax 5 129,600 Franchise Fees 5,300 Cigarette Taxes 1,100 Specific Ownership Taxes 1,000 Motor Vehkle Registrations 100 Total Additional Revenue $ 137,100 Estimated sales tax includes additional sales tax on utilities that would be sold and an estimate for use taxes that are credited against any sales tax that might be received. Franchise fees are also estimated based on various sales by utilities. Cigarette taxes are allocated by the state based on the total retail sales within the city compared to the State as whole. Specific Ownership taxes and Motor Vehicle tax revenues are just rough estimates. Since the parcel is owned by the City Page 1 of 2 there are no property taxes that are collected from this parcel as the City is tax exempt. This includes the building. Since no public right of way is to be annexed as part of this action, incremental costs should be relatively low. FINANCIAL/BIIDGET IMPACTS: The financial impacts of this annexation are shown above. - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: This is to provide information related to the fiscal impacts of the annexation only. RECOMMENDED ACTION: No action required. This is provided as information only. ALTERNATIVES: None PROPOSED MOTION: None Page 2 of 2 VI t Memorandum Ottlresett TM libill -- TO: Mayor and Members of Council FROM: John P. Worcester DATE: February 14, 2011 RE: BMC West Property Annexation - Ordinance No. 5 , Series of 2011 - First Reading Attached for your consideration and review is a proposed ordinance which, if adopted, would annex the Bar/X Ranch Property to the City of Aspen. This matter is before you on First Reading. The petition for annexation was filed with the City Clerk on November 17, 2010. On December 6, 2010, City Council adopted a resolution finding substantial compliance with Section 31 -12- 107(1), C.R.S. A public hearing was held on JANUARY 24, 2011, at which time Council determined that the proposed annexation was in compliance with §§ 31 -12 -104 and 31 -12 -105, C.R.S. City staff will be present at the public hearing and second reading of the proposed ordinance to answer any questions you might have on the proposed annexation and potential impacts the annexation will have on City operations. The decision to annex property to the City is a legislative act and is entirely within your discretionary powers. You may annex, or not, for any reason, or no reason at all. ACTION REQUIRED: A Motion to approve Ordinance No. 5 , Series of 2011. CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: cc: City Manager Community Development Director 1 re- ORDINANCE NO. 5 (Series of 2011) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, APPROVING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, TO BE KNOWN AND DESIGNATED AS THE "BMC WEST PROPERTY" ANNEXATION. WHEREAS, on November 17, 2010, the City Manager on behalf of the City of Aspen, the owner of the property proposed to be annexed, did file with the City Clerk of the City of Aspen a Petition for Annexation of territory to the City of Aspen; and WHEREAS, the petition, including accompanying copies of an annexation map, has been reviewed by the City Attorneys Office and the City Engineer and found by them to contain the information prescribed and set forth in §31 -12 -107, C.R.S.; and WHEREAS, the City Council, by resolution (Number 98, Series of 2010) at its regular meeting on December 6, 2010, did find and determine said Petition for Annexation to be in substantial compliance with the provisions of §31 -12 -107, C.R.S.; and WHEREAS, the City Council, by resolution (Number 10, Series of 2011) at its regular meeting on January 24, 2011, did find and determine, following a public hearing, said Petition for Annexation to be in substantial compliance with §§ 31 -12 -104 and 31 -12 -105, C.R.S.; and WHEREAS, the City Council does hereby find and determine that approval of the annexation of said territory to be in the City's best interest; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1. That the tract of land described in the Petition for Annexation, commonly referred to as the "BMC West Property ", and as shown on the annexation map, is hereby annexed to the City of Aspen, Colorado. Section 2. The City Clerk of the City of Aspen is hereby directed as follows: v »,r (a) To file one copy of the annexation map with the original of this annexation ordinance in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Aspen. (b) To certify and file two copies of this annexation ordinance and of the annexation map with the Clerk and Recorder of the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. (c) To request the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County to file one certified copy of this annexation ordinance and of the annexation map with the Division of Local Govenvnent of the Department of Local Affairs, State of Colorado. Section 3. The City Engineer of the City of Aspen is hereby directed to amend the Official Map of the City of Aspen to reflect the boundary changes adopted pursuant to this annexation ordinance. Section 4. That 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 5. That this ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on 28 day February, 2011, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. 2 INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 1 1 / day of , 2011. Michael C. Ireland, ayor ATTEST: .. . Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this 2 q day of , 2011. / Michael C. Ireland, ayor ATTEST: wtie Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk 3 THE CITY OF ASPEN City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NUMBER 0064.2009.ASLU PARCEL ID NUMBER 2735 0310 1801 PROJECTS ADDRESS 38005 STATE HYW 82 PLANNER CHRIS BENDEN CASE DESCRIPTION ANEXATION REQUEST REPRESENTATIVE CITY OF ASPEN DATE OF FINAL ACTION 2/28/11 CLOSED BY ANGELA SCOREY ON: 04.01.11 THE CITY OF ASPEN Annexation Request: 38005 State Highway 82, Aspen Airport Business Center, Block 1, Lots 1 and 2 (Former BMC West Property) Prepared by: Steve Barwick, City Manager City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 (970)920 -5000 www.aspenpitkin.com September 10, 2009 1 • Page 1 of 27 FINAL DRAFT City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request Table of Contents I. Introduction A. Annexation Request Page 3 II. Petition A. Completed Petition Page 4 B. Property Legal Description / Proof of Ownership - Attachment "A" Page 5 C. Proposed Annexation Map — Attachment "B" Page 8 III. Annexation Statement A. State of Colorado annexation criteria Page 9 B. Local annexation criteria Page 13 IV. Initial Zoning A. Completed Application Page 18 B. Pre - Application Conference Summary Page 20 C. Vicinity Map Page 22 D. Description of Compliance Page 23 E. Proposed Zoning Map Page 25 F. Improvement Survey Page 26 F. Electronic Files Page 27 Page 2 of 27 FINAL DRAFT W 8 8 g 0 I/ $ =il EE fs F z i I 0 11 g ® 1 '- a <""arin 11 1 I t, t b 4 ,4 a _ 41 774,tbei r , 47 A7E, P ` � <o> 0 d . p .>�.,, � �r 8 rLq p 3 � p. -� @€ ay :IN d b 6 ,2 R. a w ® Et 4 a P i 'r' >�o> y IN 1 i }ia L`F� 4 0 Do + , F llY r rl PDo el :� o, 1i am go ml 9 Qi g . K nG B g � � t u 1 ,9® 0' 3 h0" 1 8 b Er Z 8®Sd -- -- k _ �q b a j ° zlh ‘352E ; 114 Le ' ' 11 S3 �� I oz N n • i l c $ ^ �Y n � Y r a i b farn% ° a•tvl -1 i 43 ; . W NM o p pBW01.B si .ICILG � e 1g ® p K . 6B'[B .1 EE EX I ® Q - __. 3 . 0 0.1 , LCON -- -- a it $La p = r F �.. QG @YA = f{' /W/SMN 3[Y15 < 3 R£ bi i • �� ®� ° �R AIL, �Obb - Q de CC aa� r ° ® —i h t b g F- o &gig AI i W a�t0 J a 30aa tea® 4 a J 2-0 _ a �� m a �r r z n kk 0 e °� NI 4 g 7 tl $p u b 8 s I gt s °� ` g Q ® , 4 o 1 s s n t 4 N b b 1E 'PP g 3 x y a ) o 0 1 € z a a b @ I : Q b o s - a n p 39 ! E T( o§ 3 9 s 9 y $ 3 E g N 1 I bl C d 3 E N p t d a s^ t 1 < 4 r t 1111 C et „4E b 5 N t E . � II 4 1. a 1 Q g if , 4 h t; a ' r • 4 i t t 3 ' y r i i i giE g 0 ' N g ! 5 .. '. a I g 6 a g b +' a MI • F�. City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request I. Introduction A. Annexation Request This application contains a request for two actions: 1. Annexation of the subject property, located at 38005 State Highway 82, into the City of Aspen and, 2. Establishment of the newly annexed parcel's initial zoning as SCI — Service, Commercial, Industrial The property is currently zoned B2 — General Business in Pitkin County. The property is 201,683 square feet in size and was created before June 12, 1978, predating Pitkin County's subdivision regulations. For this application, the City of Aspen is the applicant. In creating this application, City of Aspen staff has met with the City attorney as well as city planning to facilitate the annexation process. The benefits of the requested application to the applicant /City include: 1. In the short term, the City will benefit from the increased revenues associated with sales tax and f o r building materials tax generated from the existing lumber yard operation on the property. 2. In the long term, the City will have approximately 4.6 acres of property available for affordable housing development. While the initial zoning request for the subject property is SCI — Service, Commercial, Industrial (which will facilitate the continued operation of the current lumber yard operation on the site), the future development intent of the site is for affordable housing. A future land use application (separate from this annexation request) will be processed by the City of Aspen to request that the property be rezoned as AH -PUD. The AH -PUD designation will be requested based on affordable housing development plans that will be developed in the future for that specific purpose. This annexation request is the first step in a number of land use applications that will facilitate future affordable housing development at the subject property. FINAL DRAFT Page 3 of 27 City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request II. Petition A. Completed Petition PETITION FOR ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF ASPEN THE UNDERSIGNED (hereinafter referred to as the "Petitioner ") hereby petition the Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado for the annexation of an area, to be referred to as the BMC Annexation to the City of Aspen. Said area, consisting of approximately 201,683 square feet (4.630 acres), is more particularly described on Attachment "A ", attached hereto. The Petitioner alleges: 1. That it is desirable and necessary that such area be annexed to the City of Aspen. 2. That the requirements of Sections 31 -12 -104 and 31 -12 -108, C.R.S., exist or have been met. 3. That not less than one -sixth (1/6) of the perimeter of the area proposed to be annexed is contiguous with the boundaries of the City of Aspen. 4. That a community of interest exists between the area proposed to be annexed and the City of Aspen. 5. That the area to be annexed is urban or will be urbanized in the near future. 6. That the area proposed to be annexed is integrated with or capable of being integrated with the City of Aspen. 7. That the Petitioner herein comprises 100% of the landowners in the area, and the Petitioner represents that it owns all of the area described in Attachment "A ". WHEREFORE, said Petitioner requests that the Council of the City of Aspen approve the annexation of the area described on Attachment "A ", legal description of the land. The Petitioner reserves the right to withdraw this petition and their signatures there from at any time prior to the commencement of the roll call of the City Council for the vote upon the second reading of the annexation ordinance. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have executed this Petition for Annexation this day of , 2009. Petit Owner's Signature Petitioner's /Owner's Printed Name Address City, State, Zip Page 4 of 27 FINAL DRAFT City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request B. Property Legal Description / Proof of Ownership — Attachment "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOTS 1 AND 2, BLOCK 1, ASPEN AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER, FILING NO.1, according to the Plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 7 at Page 79. LESS that strip of land conveyed in Quit Claim Deed recorded September 25, 1984 in Book 474 at Page 1. RECEPTION#: 544963.,.12/17/2007 at 03:28:22 PM, 1 OF 3, R $16.00 D£ $1825.00 Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO 4►fta DV • WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO: City of Aspen Attention: John Worcester 130 S Galena Street, 2" Floor Aspen. Colorado 81611 WARRANTY DEED THIS DEED. effective as of the 17 day of December. 2007 Between 8MC WEST CORPORATION. a Delaware corporation, GRANTOR, And CITY OF ASPEN, whose legal address is 130 5. Galena Street, 2"" Floor, Aspen, Colorado 81611. GRANTEE WITNESSETH. That the grantor. for and in consideration of the sum of TEN DOLLARS and other good and valuable consideration. the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, has granted. bargained. sold and conveyed. and by mese presents don grant. bargain, sell and convey and confirm unto the grantee its hairs and assigns forever. all me real property togathe with Improvements. d any. situate and tying and being in the County of PITKIN. Slate of COLORADO. described es follows: LOTS 1 AND 2. BLOCK 1, ASPEN AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER. FILING NO. 1, according to the Plat thereof recorded in Plat Book 7 at Page 79. LESS that strip of land conveyed in Quit Clam Deed recorded September 25, 1984 in Book 474 at Page 1 • TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditemenls and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining. and the reversion and reversions. remainders; rents, laves and profits thereof. and ell the estate, right, tale, inlarest. claim and demand whatsoever of the grantor either in law or equity, of, In and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances. TO I4AVE AND TO HOLD the said promises above bargained and described. with the appurtenances. unto the grantee. its heirs and assigns forever. And he grantor, for Itself, 113 helm and Mini. does covenant. grant, bargain, and agree to and wth the grantee. Ito hells and assigns that at the 4111 of the ennaling and delivery of the presents, granter is well sear of the premises above conveyed. nos good. sure. perfect. absolute and indefeesibb estate of inheritance. in law. in fee simple, and has good right. full power end lawful authority to grant, bargain. all and convey the same n manner and form as aforesaid and that the same are free and clear from all former and other grants, bargains, sales, liens, taxes. assessments, encumbrances and restrictions 01 whatever kind or nature whatsoever. except as set forth on Exhibit "A' attached hereto Furthermore, the premises I5 conveyed to Grantee hereunder subject to the following Deed Restriction DEED DEED T HE PREMISES CONVEYED TO GRANTEE HEREUNDER SHA NOT Be US D AJ,UMBER YARD 8Y ANY PARTY OTHER THAN WEST CANYON INVESTMENTS. LLC. The grantor shalt and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above bargained premises in the gwet and peaceable possession of the grantee, as heirs and assigns. against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whore or any part thereof. The singular number shall include the plural, the plural the singuar, and Inc use of gender shall be applicable to all genders. Page 5 of 27 FINAL DRAFT City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request RECEPTION#: 544963, 12/17/2007 at 03:28:22 PM, 2 OF 3, Janice H. Voe Caudill, Pitkin County, CO IN WITNESS WHEREOF the grantor has executed this deed. BMC ST CmRPOR • ION. a Delaware corporation i ---- By: h D. Fa, Vice P -.Went of Real Estate STATE OF 1 -S i" :...,.j ) ss COUNTY OF t 1J ) • Tne foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of December, 2007. by John D Fa. Vs:e President of Real Estate of BMC WEST CORPORATION, a DD are corporation. WITNESS my hand and o icia �s , _,r My commission expires' C/ Notary Pu • ""'s ANCEM , ; n: MIGENS 'VT. iO • Page 6 of 27 FINAL DRAFT City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request RECEPTION*: 544963, 12/17/2007 at 03:28:22 P14, 3 OF 3, Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO MtHIBIT A' TQ WARRANTY PEED 1. Taxes for the Year 2007, now a Gen, but not yet due or payable 2- Right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to extract and remove his ore therefrom. should the same be found to penetrate or Internet the premises hereby granted and right of way for ditches or • canals constructed by the authority of the United States es reserved in United Slates Patent recorded March 18. 1923 in Book 65 at Page 670 3 Easements and rights of way granted to Rocky Mountain Natural On Company. Inc . in instrument recorded in Book 195 a1 Page 427 and 481. 4 Easement and right of way for an electric transmission or distribution Una or System, as granted 10 Holy Cross Etectr c Association. Inc., in Instrument recorded in Book 242 at Page 634- 5. Easement and right of way as granted to The Mountain Slates Telephone and Telegraph Company in instrument recorded in Book 253 at Page 61 6 Easement and right of way for sewer line purposes granted to Aspen Metropolitan Sanitation District in instrument recorded January 19. 1971 in Book 253 at Page 210 7 Restrictions. which do not contain a forfeiture or reverter clause but omitting restrictions. if any. based on race, color. religion IN nebonal origin as contained in instruments recorded June 17, 1971 in Book 255 at Page 918 and October 23. 1974 in Book 292 at Page 502. 9 Easements for utilities, sewer and roadways as shown on the recorded Plat of Aspen Airport Business Center. Filing No 1. Amended and Restated recorded in Plat Book 7 at Page 79 9 Avigation Easement as granted to the County of Pitkin by John P McBride in instrument recorded August 20, 1974 in Book 290 at Page 373. 13. Terms, conditions. provisions and obligations as set forth in Colorado Department of Transportation Possession and Use Agreement recorded October 19. 2000 as Reception No. 448097. 11. Permanent Easement granted to the Department of Transportation. Slate of Colorado by instrument recorded October 15, 2002 as Reception No 473636. 12 Terms, conditions provisions and obligation as set forth in City of Aspen Easement Agreement recorded November 28. 2003 as Reception No. 491780. 13. Any and all leases and tenancies. Page 7 of 27 FINAL DRAFT City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request C. Proposed Annexation Map — Attachment "B" Containing the information required by C.R.S. 1973 31 -8 -107 Page 8 of 27 FINAL DRAFT • City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request III. Annexation Statement A. State of Colorado annexation criteria 31 -12 -104 C.R.S. Eligibility for Annexation (1) An area is eligible for annexation if the governing body, at a hearing as provided in section 31 -12 -109, finds and determines: (a) That not less than one -sixth of the perimeter of the area proposed to be annexed is contiguous with the annexing municipality. Contiguity shall not be affected by the existence of a platted street or alley, a public or private right -of -way, a public or private transportation right -of -way or area, public lands, whether owned by the state, the United States, or an agency thereof, except county -owned open space, or a lake, reservoir, stream, or other natural or artificial waterway between the annexing municipality and the land proposed to be annexed. Subject to the requirements imposed by section 31 -12 -105 (1) (e), contiguity may be established by the annexation of one or more parcels in a series, which annexations may be completed simultaneously and considered together for the purposes of the public hearing required by sections 31 -12 -108 and 31 -12 -109 and the annexation impact report required by section 31- 12- 108.5. (b) That a community of interest exists between the area proposed to be annexed and the annexing municipality; that said area is urban or will be urbanized in the near future; and that said area is integrated with or is capable of being integrated with the annexing municipality. The fact that the area proposed to be annexed has the contiguity with the annexing municipality required by paragraph (a) of this subsection (1) shall be a basis for a finding of compliance with these requirements unless the governing body, upon the basis of competent evidence presented at the hearing provided for in section 31 -12 -109, finds that at least two of the following are shown to exist: (I) Less than fifty percent of the adult residents of the area proposed to be annexed make use of part or all of the following types of facilities of the annexing municipality: Recreational, civic, social, religious, industrial, or commercial; and less than twenty -five percent of said area's adult residents are employed in the annexing municipality. If there are no adult residents at the time of the hearing, this standard shall not apply. (II) One -half or more of the land in the area proposed to be annexed (including streets) is agricultural, and the landowners of such agricultural land, under oath, express an intention to devote the land to such agricultural use for a period of not less than five years. (III) It is not physically practicable to extend to the area proposed to be annexed those urban services which the annexing municipality provides in common to all of its citizens on the same terms and conditions as such services are made available to such citizens. This standard shall not apply to the extent that any portion of an area proposed to be annexed is provided or will within the reasonably near future be provided with any service by or through a quasi - municipal corporation. Response: The total perimeter of the subject property is 2,049.29 Iinear feet. The contiguous portion of the boundary is 813.98 linear feet. The total contiguous boundary is 39.7% of the total perimeter of the subject property. This is approximately 2.38 times greater than the minimum requirement of one - sixth (1 /6) thus the property proposed for annexation meets the contiguity requirement. In addition, none of the conditions described in the above exception items (1)(b)(I), (1)(b)(11) or (1)(b)(111) apply to the subject property. Page 9 of 27 FINAL DRAFT City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request (2) (a) The contiguity required by paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of this section may not be established by use of any boundary of an area which was previously annexed to the annexing municipality if the area, at the time of its annexation, was not contiguous at any point with the boundary of the annexing municipality, was not otherwise in compliance with paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of this section, and was located more than three miles from the nearest boundary of the annexing municipality, nor may such contiguity be established by use of any boundary of territory which is subsequently annexed directly to, or which is indirectly connected through subsequent annexations to, such an area. (b) Because the creation or expansion of disconnected municipal satellites, which are sought to be prohibited by this subsection (2), violates both the purposes of this article as expressed in section 31 -12- 102 and the limitations of this article, any annexation which uses any boundary in violation of this subsection (2) may be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be void ab initio in addition to other remedies which may be provided. The provisions of section 31 -12 -116 (2) and (4) and section 31- 12 -117 shall not apply to such an annexation. Judicial review of such an annexation may be sought by any municipality having a plan in place pursuant to section 31 -12 -105 (1) (e) directly affected by such annexation, in addition to those described in section 31 -12 -116 (1). Such review may be, but need not be, instituted prior to the effective date of the annexing ordinance and may include injunctive relief. Such review shall be brought no later than sixty days after the effective date of the annexing ordinance or shall forever be barred. (c) Contiguity is hereby declared to be a fundamental element in any annexation, and this subsection (2) shall not in any way be construed as having the effect of legitimizing in any way any noncontiguous annexation. Response: The proposed annexation does not create a disconnected municipal satellite, and although the boundary used to establish contiguity is a boundary shared with a property that was previously annexed, the previously annexed property met the 1/6 contiguity requirement at the time of its annexation. 31 -12 -105 C.R.S. Limitations (1) Notwithstanding any provisions of this part 1 to the contrary, the following limitations shall apply to all annexations: (a) In establishing the boundaries of any territory to be annexed, no land held in identical ownership, whether consisting of one tract or parcel of real estate or two or more contiguous tracts or parcels of real estate, shall be divided into separate parts or parcels without the written consent of the landowners thereof unless such tracts or parcels are separated by a dedicated street, road, or other public way. (b) In establishing the boundaries of any area proposed to be annexed, no land held in identical ownership, whether consisting of one tract or parcel of real estate or two or more contiguous tracts or parcels of real estate, comprising twenty acres or more (which, together with the buildings and improvements situated thereon has a valuation for assessment in excess of two hundred thousand dollars for ad vabrem tax purposes for the year next preceding the annexation) shall be included under this part 1 without the written consent of the landowners unless such tract of land is situated entirely within the outer boundaries of the annexing municipality as they exist at the time of annexation. In the application of this paragraph (b), contiguity shall not be affected by a dedicated street, road, or other public way. Page 10 of 27 FINAL DRAFT City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request (c) No annexation pursuant to section 31 -12 -106 and no annexation petition or petition for an annexation election pursuant to section 31 -12 -107 shall be valid when annexation proceedings have been commenced for the annexation of part or all of such territory to another municipality, except in accordance with the provisions of section 31 -12 -114. For the purpose of this section, proceedings are commenced when the petition is filed with the clerk of the annexing municipality or when the resolution of intent is adopted by the governing body of the annexing municipality if action on the acceptance of such petition or on the resolution of intent by the setting of the hearing in accordance with section 31- 12 -108 is taken within ninety days after the said filings if an annexation procedure initiated by petition for annexation is then completed within the - one hundred fifty days next following the effective date of the resolution accepting the petition and setting the hearing date and if an annexation procedure initiated by resolution of intent or by petition for an annexation election is prosecuted without unreasonable delay after the effective date of the resolution setting the hearing date. (d) As to any annexation which will result in the detachment of area from any school district and the attachment of the same to another school district, no annexation pursuant to section 31 -12 -106 or annexation petition or petition for an annexation election pursuant to section 31 -12 -107 is valid unless accompanied by a resolution of the board of directors of the school district to which such area will be attached approving such annexation. (e) (1) Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph (e), no annexation may take place that would have the effect of extending a municipal boundary more than three miles in any direction from any point of such municipal boundary in any one year. Within said three -mile area, the contiguity required by section 31 -12 -104 (1) (a) may be achieved by annexing a platted street or alley, a public or private right -of -way, a public or private transportation right -of -way or area, or a lake, reservoir, stream, or other natural or artificial waterway. Prior to completion of any annexation within the three -mile area, the municipality shall have in place a plan for that area that generally describes the proposed location, character, and extent of streets, subways, bridges, waterways, waterfronts, parkways, playgrounds, squares, parks, aviation fields, other public ways, grounds, open spaces, public utilities, and terminals for water, light, sanitation, transportation, and power to be provided by the municipality and the proposed land uses for the area. Such plan shall be updated at least once annually. Such three -mile limit may be exceeded if such limit would have the effect of dividing a parcel of property held in identical ownership if at least fifty percent of the property is within the three -mile limit. In such event, the entire property held in identical ownership may be annexed in any one year without regard to such mileage limitation. Such three -mile limit may also be exceeded for the annexation of an enterprise zone. (II) Prior to completion of an annexation in which the contiguity required by section 31 -12 -104 (1) (a) is achieved pursuant to subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (e), the municipality shall annex any of the following parcels that abut a platted street or alley, a public or private right -of -way, a public or private transportation right-of-way or area, or a lake, reservoir, stream, or other natural or artificial waterway, where the parcel satisfies all of the eligibility requirements pursuant to section 31 -12 -104 and for which an annexation petition has been received by the municipality no later than forty -five days prior to the date of the hearing set pursuant to section 31 -12 -108 (1): (A) Any parcel of property that has an individual schedule number for county tax filing purposes upon the petition of the owner of such parcel; (B) Any subdivision that consists of only one subdivision filing upon the petition of the requisite number of property owners within the subdivision as determined pursuant to section 31 -12 -107; and Page 11 of 27 FINAL DRAFT City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request (C) Any subdivision filing within a subdivision that consists of more than one subdivision filing upon the petition of the requisite number of property owners within the subdivision filing as determined pursuant to section 31 -12 -107. (e.1) The parcels described in subparagraph (II) of paragraph (e) of this subsection (1) shall be annexed under the same or substantially similar terms and conditions and considered at the same hearing and in the same impact report as the initial annexation in which the contiguity required by section 31 -12 -104 (1) (a) is achieved by annexing a platted street or alley, a public or private right -of -way, a public or private transportation right -of -way or area, or a lake, reservoir, stream, or other natural or artificial waterway. Impacts of the annexation upon the parcels described in subparagraph (II) of paragraph (e) of this subsection (1) that abut such platted street or alley, public or private right -of -way, public or private transportation right-of-way or area, or lake, reservoir, stream, or other natural or artificial waterway shall be considered in the impact report required by section 31 -12- 108.5. As part of the same hearing, the municipality shall consider and decide upon any petition for annexation of any parcel of property having an individual schedule number for county tax filing purposes, which petition was received not later than forty -five days prior to the hearing date, where the parcel abuts any parcel described in subparagraph (II) of paragraph (e) of this subsection (1) and where the parcel otherwise satisfies all of the eligibility requirements of section 31 -12 -104. (e.3) In connection with any annexation in which the contiguity required by section 31 -12 -104 (1) (a) is achieved by annexing a platted street or alley, a public or private right -of -way, a public or private transportation right-of-way or area, or a lake, reservoir, stream, or other natural or artificial waterway, upon the latter of ninety days prior to the date of the hearing set pursuant to section 31 -12 -108 or upon the filing of the annexation petition, the municipality shall provide, by regular mail to the owner of any abutting parcel as reflected in the records of the county assessor, written notice of the annexation and of the landowner's right to petition for annexation pursuant to section 31 -12 -107. Inadvertent failure to provide such notice shall neither create a cause of action in favor of any landowner nor invalidate any annexation proceeding. (f) In establishing the boundaries of any area proposed to be annexed, if a portion of a platted street or alley is annexed, the entire width of said street or alley shall be included within the area annexed. (g) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (f) of this subsection (1), a municipality shall not deny reasonable access to landowners, owner of an easement, or the owner of a franchise adjoining a platted street or alley which has been annexed by the municipality but is not bounded on both sides by the municipality. (h) The execution by any municipality of a power of attorneyfor real estate located within an unincorporated area shall not be construed to comply with the election provisions of this article for purposes of annexing such unincorporated area. Such annexation shall be valid only upon compliance with the procedures set forth in this article. Response: None of the limitations described above are applicable to this annexation request. Page 12 of 27 FINAL DRAFT City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request B. Local annexation criteria AACP Compliance Annexation requests should be reviewed for compliance with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Annexation of certain lands could facilitate accomplishment of the plan's goals, objectives, or specific action items. Newly annexed properties should be assigned zoning supporting public policy directives of the AACP. Response: While the initial zoning request for the subject property is SCI — Service, Commercial, Industrial (which will facilitate the continued operation of the current lumber yard operation on the site), the future development intent of the site is for affordable housing. A future land use application (separate from this annexation request) will be processed by the City of Aspen to request that the property be rezoned as AH -PUD. The AH -PUD designation will be requested based on affordable housing development plans that will be developed in the future for that specific purpose. This effort is underway in an effort to fulfill the housing goals established in the AACP. Urban Growth Boundary (UGBI The City of Aspen and Pitkin County jointly approved Aspen's Urban Growth Boundary via adoption of the 2000 AACP. The UGB identifies the land surrounding Aspen as either appropriate for urban development (within the UGB) or inappropriate for urban development (outside the UGB). Land within the UGB is expected to become part of the City's urbanized area and should be considered appropriate for annexation. Land outside the UGB should only be annexed as a method of preserving the non -urban character of lands surrounding Aspen. The UGB does not necessarily need to be amended unless the land is intended for an urban level of development. Annexation of land outside the UGB, in fact, may serve a significant public purpose. Response: The subject property is located within the UGB and falls into the category of "Aspen Business Center and North Forty" as described in the City of Aspen Annexation Plan of September 2005. Significant Annexations Changing the regulatory structure and jurisdiction of significant community facilities, large developments, and large tracts of vacant land present considerable potential for community change. These annexation proposals should involve discussion between the Aspen City Council and the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners. Ajoint work session at which various land use issues are discussed can only benefit the City in it analysis of a significant annexation. For example: properties entitled by the County and annexed into the City can require complex administration of development rights, especially when amendments are requested. Discussing the primary elements of the land use review can simplify administration and provide benefit to the annexing landowner. Likewise, certain annexation proposals may present concerns to other governmental and quasi- governmental agencies with jurisdiction or other interest in the property. As necessary, formal referral comments or work session-format meetings can be held to identify these concerns. Response: Based on the description above, the subject property is not considered a significant annexation. FINAL DRAFT Page 13 of 27 City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request Fiscal Impact Analysis The City should fully understand the financial implication of assuming additional lands upon each of its functions. The City Finance Department has modeled fiscal impacts of recent significant annexations and this information has been critical in determining the appropriateness of annexation. Certain capital improvements may be necessary as well as additional operation and service costs. These need to be balanced with additional special fund revenues that are gained. Pitkin County voters adopted a 2 percent Countywide sales tax, including a provision distributing 47 percent of the tax proceeds to Pitkin County and 53 percent to the City of Aspen. At some point, the distribution of countywide sales tax may need to be reconsidered as more service responsibilities shift to the City. Response: In the short term, the City will benefit from the increased revenues associated with sales tax and building materials tax generated from the existing lumber yard operation on the property. At the time when the City develops plans for affordable housing at the site, part of the integrated design process will be to create a comprehensive budget for site redevelopment. At that time, costs to upgrade utilities to the site will be quantified. Development Rights /Zoning Development rights associated with a property in Pitkin County verses those if the property is annexed into the City of Aspen should be considered. Annexations are typically associated with a proposal to further develop the property. Traditionally, the City weighs an increase in development rights in relation to accomplishment towards community goals available through annexation. A complete understanding of a property's development potential, prior to annexation, should include a zoning build -out analysis considering regulatory limitations, such as growth management and impact fees, and regulatory incentives, such as the use of Transferable Development Rights. The public policy of such regulations and the impact of changing the regulatory structure upon the City should be considered. Zoning of newly annexed land should approximate development rights prior to annexation, unless a site - specific development plan is approved concurrent with annexation. The creation of non - conformities should be avoided, although custom legislation to address special interests can further complicate the City's regulatory environment. The City should encourage the legalization of "bandit units" through the City's Accessory Dwelling Unit provisions to ensure compliance with the health and safety standards of the Uniform Building Code. These units should be expected in older subdivisions surrounding Aspen. Response: The City funded the 2007 purchase of the subject property from the 150 Housing Fund. In a future land use application (not part of this application), the City will request approval for an affordable housing development at the subject property as well as rezoning to City of Aspen AH -PUD. It is also the intention of the City to combine the subject property in the future with a portion of the adjacent Burlingame Lot IA property (a subdivision which will also be requested at a future date) to create a larger parcel for affordable housing development at the subject property. None of those future requests are part of this current application. However, as part of the current application it is nonetheless required to compare the development constraints for the current zoning versus the proposed new zoning for the subject property. Page 14 of 27 FINAL DRAFT City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request The subject property is currently zoned Pitkin County 82, which "is intended to provide for the establishment of commerdal and low - intensity, non - polluting industrial uses that do not require or generate high customer traffic volumes and to permit customary accessory uses, including a small portion of the land area in high density, long -term residential dwelling units. " The maximum allowable floor area for the subject property under its current zoning, Pitkin County 82, is 72,605.9 sq ft. The current lumber yard operation is in compliance with an existing 24,316.8 sq ft of FAR. "The purpose of the Service /Commercial /Industrial (SCl/ zone district is to preserve and enhance locally- serving, primarily non -retail small business areas to ensure a more balanced permanent community; to protect the few remaining such small business parks historically used primarily for light industrial uses, manufacturing, repair, storage and servicing of consumer goods, with limited retail, showroom, or customer reception areas. The SCI zone district contains uses that may not be appropriate in other zone districts or do not require or generate high customer traffic volumes, and permits customary accessory uses. ... SCI uses which may use up to 100% of the floor area for retail sales, showroom, or customer reception include the manufacturing, repair, customizing, servicing, detailing, sales, and rental of consumer goods such as building materials, components, hardware, fixtures, interior finishes and equipment." Under the proposed City of Aspen SCI zoning, the maximum allowable floor area for the subject property would be 302,524.5 sq ft. However, expansion of the existing lumber yard operation is not part of the current request. A comparison of the property under City and County zoning is as follows: Dimension Proposed: City of Aspen — SCI Existing: Pitkin county — B2 Actual Lot Size 201,683 sq ft 201,683 sq ft Minimum Lot Size 3,000 sq ft 6,000 sq ft Minimum Front Setback No requirement 30 ft Minimum Side Setback No requirement 10 ft Minimum Rear Setback No requirement 10 ft Maximum Height 35 feet 28ft Floor Area Ratio 1.5:1 (commercial use) 0.36:1 Allowable Floor Area 302,524.5 sq ft 72,605.9 sq ft Pitkin County Transferable Development Rights Certain lands in the County within the City's annexation area are eligiblefor increased development rights through the extinguishment of transferable development rights (TDRs). Certain site specific approvals granted in Pitkin County may involve or require the use of TDRs. And, certain development may have already occurred by use of these TDRs necessitating acknowledgement of the realized increased development right. Until the City adopts a program for accepting Pitkin County Transferable development Rights, each individual annexation request should include an analysis of TDR- contingent land use scenarios and, if necessary, an agreement should be reached describing the future use of Pitkin County TDRs within the newly annexed area. Response: The proposed annexation does not contemplate the use of Pitkin county TORS. FINAL DRAFT Page 15 of 27 City of Aspen September 10, 2009 • Annexation Request Usefulness and aoarooriateness of each jurisdiction's regulations As Aspen City limits expand beyond the original townsite, the effects of environmental constraints and hazards on development increase. Pitkin County's 1041 regulations address development on steep slopes, in wildfire hazard areas, in rockfall and avalanche hazard areas, and within wildlife corridors. The City's Environmentally Sensitive Area review standards address flood hazard areas and development above the 8,040 -foot elevation. The County's regulations primarily attempt to minimize land use intensity and minimize the infrastructure and operational effects of development. The City's land use code encourages the intense use of land and addresses urban development issues, such as architectural character. In transition areas, the City's PUD regulations should be used to establish an appropriate balance. Design standards for public improvements also reflect the rural and urban aspect of each jurisdiction. The appropriateness of each jurisdiction's development regulations and design standards should be considered in each annexation. The acceptance of substandard public improvements and potential public costs of upgrading those facilities should also be considered. The City may require certain facilities be upgraded prior to annexation. Alternatively, the City may require a cash payment to accommodate expected City capital improvement and operational expenses. The City currently has no experience administering remote backcountry and Forest Service lands. These lands could require significant changes to the City's emergency services. The public costs of annexing remote lands should be considered in relation to the public goals of such an action. • Aspen recently adopted the Ski Area Base (SKI) Zone District to administer development at the base of ski areas. The zoning provides for a mixture of skiing, recreational, commercial, and tourist - oriented uses and requires adoption of a Planned Unit Development. This zoning was applied to Aspen Highlands Base Village and may be appropriate for the Buttermilk Ski Area base, upon annexation. Response: Given the location and the current use of the subject property as a lumber yard operation, there are no short term concerns regarding Pitkin County's 1041 regulations nor are there any issues of architectural character. For future development of the site as affordable housing, architectural character will be one of a number of primary design criteria for the affordable housing planning and design effort along with the existing covenants that exist on the subject property - which will require a significant amount of additional research, planning and design consideration as part of the future affordable housing land use application for the subject property. Page 16 of 27 FINAL DRAFT City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request Infrastructure and Ability to Serve Annexation reviews typically focus a great deal of fiscal analysis on the potential extension of urban services to annexed territories. Cost, capacity, and engineering issues related extension of the City's municipal water system to developing land on the urban fringe is a significant annexation issue. Currently, there are several small water districts serving residences located outside the City's boundaries but within the service area of the water system. These small districts may present a problem s expensive, or e ty as their capital facilities may not be providing acceptable standards of service. Upgrading and may become the responsibility of the City following annexation. The County does not currently require new periphery development to join the City's municipal water system. However, these county development proposals must be reviewed by the City Council and found in compliance with the AACP in order to obtain City water service. In these cases, the City often requires compliance with City development regulations. Property owners developing a property eligible for • annexation should consult the City's Community Development Department and consider annexation. Response: The property proposed for annexation is currently served by City municipal water and district sanitary sewer service. For the continued short-term operation of the lumber yard at the subject property, there are no service upgrades contemplated. At the time when the City develops plans for affordable housing at the site, part of the integrated design process will be to create a comprehensive budget for site redevelopment. At that time, costs to upgrade utilities to the site will be quantified. Simplicity of City Boundary The City /County boundary has created confusion for citizens and staff responsible for enforcing public policy. A complex boundary can complicate emergency service provision and, in extreme cases, defeat efforts of City police officers. Annexations simplifying the boundary should be encouraged while those further complicating the division should be avoided. Response: To some extent, the proposed annexation does further complicate the City /County boundary by isolating parcel #2273503100045 (located adjacent to the southwest corner of the subject property). This should not be a significant issue since there is Pitkin County land on the other side of Hwy 82. FINAL DRAFT Page 17 of 27 n City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request IV. Initial Zoning A. Completed Application PROJECT: Name: Aspen Airport Business Center, Block I, Lots 1 and 2 (Former BMC West Property) Location: 38005 State Highway 82, Aspen, CO 81611 (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) Parcel ID #: 273503101801 and 273503101802 APPLICANT: Name: City of Aspen Address: 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, CO 81611 Phone #: 970- 920 -5000 REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Steve Barwick, City Manager Address: 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, CO 81611 Phone #: 970- 920 -5205 TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply) ❑ GMQS Exemption ❑ Conceptual PUD ❑ Temporary Use ❑ GMQS Allotment ❑ Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) ® Text/Map Amendment ❑ Special Review ❑ Subdivision ❑ Conceptual SPA ❑ ESA — 8040 Greenline, Stream Margin, ❑ Subdivision Exemption (includes ❑ Final SPA (& SPA Hallam Lake Bluff, Mountain View Plane condominiumization) Amendment) ❑ Commercial Design Review ❑ Lot Split ❑ Small Lodge Conversion/ Expansion ❑ Residential Design Variance ❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Conditional Use ❑ Other: EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) The property is currently zoned B2 — General Business in Pitkin County. The property is 201,683 square feet in size. The subject property is currently used as existing Harbert Lumber operation. PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) Annexation of the subject property into the City of Aspen and establish the newly annexed parcel's initial zoning as SCI — Service, Commercial, Industrial in the City of Aspen and continue the operation of the existing lumber yard. Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ Z Pre - Application Conference Summary ® Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement N/A Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form Z Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements - Including Written Responses to Review Standards N/A 3 -D Model for large project All plans that are larger than 8.5" X 11" must be folded. A disk with an electric copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format) must be submitted as part of the application. Large scale projects should include an electronic 3 -1) model. Your pre - application conference summary will indicate if you must submit a 3 -D model. Page 18 of 27 FINAL DRAFT a „d THE CITY OF ASI'1;A Community Development Department Internal Funds Transfer Date: 1 7/20/; 0 1 Department 53- Ill G Aa 4y M \7I Amount Requested: 12 0• no I Account Number: II50,a 14p I Permit Number: 1 oo(o4- . 01.161.41 Permit Address: 13 icor 5 hit fi Permit Description: I z ©,3 ,,vkgp j neC 0 ,4,4 Requested By: I (4k s (v fl S Q r Received By: '6, G. 5vxc t September 10, 2009 City of Aspen Annexation Request CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT cement for Payment of Cit of A s en Develo meat A hcation Fees and CITY OF ASPEN CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) a FOLLOW (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE 1. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for Annexation of the sub'ect I ro i e located at 38005 State : '.. hwa 82 into the Cit of As I en. (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that the City of Aspen has an adopted fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the s parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to additional it ddit additional c to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will eefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Historic Preservation Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Historic Preservation Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right all pay an to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, s Community D initial deposit in the amount of $ which is for staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly essing of post PP Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. CITY OF ASPEN APPLICANT By: 11-- By: Chris Bendon Community Development Director Billing Address and Telephone Number: Ci of As 130 South Galena Street. _ A en CO 81611 (970)920 -50 Account # 150.23.23140.8 FINAL DRAFT Page 19 of 27 r City of Aspen Annexation Request September 10, 2009 B. Pre - Application Conference Summary CITY OF ASPEN PREAPPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER Erin Evans, 429 -2745 DATE: 11.052000 PROJECT: 38005 Highway 82 REPRESENTATIVE: Adam Trzdnski DESCRIPTION: The City owns two loll at the south end of the Airport Business Center. The There currently located cated in P County. On behalf d the Properties are properties located at 38005, Highway 82, for an affordable housing like 10 an The are r e currently businesses operating on the premises with a lease. The lease wz he years, at that time the propertywfll be used for afbrdable housing. a it a few • Annexation Is govemed by Colorado Revised State Statutes (CRS 31-12-102 et.seq.) Please refer to the City's annexation plan located at hoot/ wHw.asoenphkin.com/pdfsideotsl41/annex plan.pdf for ai overview of the process and an example petition for annexation. It is important to note that a property's pemreter boundary must have a minimum a nonmt of contiguity with the City's boundary b be able to annex and that the subject property is • capable of being integrated and serviced (utilities, etc.) by the City. The appicant may wish to schedule a development noisy committee meeting to find out if any ngrovements wA be • required of One property as a pant of an annexation agreement prior to submitting a petition for application. If the applicant Is not securing any development approvals al this time, other than the zoning designation, it wi be Important to include a summary in the annexation proposal on the existing development potential within the County compared to the development potential within the City. Once the annexation peli0on is filed with the City Clerk, the City, through the Attorney's Office, males ens annexation process as outlined in the City's Annexation Plan. As part of the annexation process, the City concurrently initiates zoning of the property to a City zone district Relevant Land Use Code Section(s): 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.310 Amendments to Text and Zone District Map 26.575.020 Calculating FAR CRS 31 -12-102 st.seq. Cdorado State Statutes • http: / /www.as pendtkin .comldepts /38/citycode.cfm Review by: - Staff for complete application - Referral agencies for technical considerations - City Council for annexation process • - Planning and Zoning Commission for recommendation on the zone district designation of the property to the City Council ' Public Hearing: Yes, at P8Z and City Council Planning Fees: 52,940 Deposit for 12 hours of staff time (additional staff time P required p is billed at $245 per hour) associated with the applicant initiated zoning d the subject t property Total Deposit: $2,040 Page 20 of 27 FINAL DRAFT September 10, 2009 City of Aspen Annexation Request Total number of application copies: 4 Copies of petition and map (state requirement) 20 copies of zoning (Map Amendment) application To apply, submttthefdfowing Information: 1. Total Deposit for review of application. 2. Applicants name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and tga des pam of th parepresentative development Is act on behall of the proposed to occur, consisting 3. Street address and l ng of a m a l ge ins uo Sheaf c s of all from a title the pr , company, and all pan attorney licensed , to practice aments, contracts and Colorado, rating the names of all owners of the property, d ring e thew judgments agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's tight to apply for the Development Application. 4. Completed Land Use Apptwaron and annexation petition. 5. Signed fee agreement (If applicable — there is no fee associated with submitting a petition for annexation and if • staff initiates the zoning of the property; however, 0 the applicant submits the request for zoning the fee Is $2,940.0). 6. Pre - application Conference Summary. 7. An 8112" x 11' vicinity map locating the subject parcel within the City of Aspen. 8. Proof of ownership. • 9. An annexation plat 10. A site improvement survey that includes al existing natural and man -made site features. 12. A written description of the proposal and a wdtten explanation of how a proposed development • complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. 13. All other materials required pursuant to the spec �b iitt�p'equirremen above) well as the text only on either of the A ollo w following digit ita l formats. Compact paper ct Disk (CD referred, Z Disk or Floppy Disk. Microsoft Word format Is e folloing digital fm. ct }p p . preferred. Text format easily convertible to Word Is acceptable. Disclaimer. The foregoing summary Is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, Mich Is subject to charge in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. FINAL DRAFT Page 21 of 27 r- o City of Aspen Annexation Request September 10, 2009 C. Vicinity Map The su bject property is located at 38005 State Highway 82, Aspen Airport Business Center, Block 1, Lots 1 and 2; across State Highway 82 from the south end of the Aspen /Pitkin County Airport. VICINITY MAP r. N. c T SUBJECT PROPERTY �►�__ ACE R I r Page 22 of 27 FINAL DRAFT r°"■ September 10, 2009 City of Aspen Annexation Request D. Description of Compliance Aspen Municipal Code Sec. 26.310.040, Land Use Regulations, General Procedures and Regulations, Amendments to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map, Standards of review: In reviewing an amendment to the text of this Title or an amendment to the Official Zone District Map, • the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. Response: The applicant proposes an initial zoning of SCI for the continued operation of the lumber yard. Because the current request will facilitate only the annexation of the property and the continued operation of the lumber yard, this request does not represent a new land use policy or a change in land use policy. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan. Response: While the initial zoning request for the subject property is SCI — Service, Commercial, industrial (which will facilitate the continued operation of the current lumber yard operation on the site), the future development intent of the site is for affordable housing. A future land use application (separate from this annexation request) will be processed by the City of Aspen to request that the property be rezoned as AH -PUD. The AH -PUD designation will be requested based on affordable housing development plans that will be developed in the future for that specific purpose. This effort is underway in an effort to full the housing goals established in the AACP. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Response: This request will facilitate the continued operation of the current lumber yard operation on the site. As such, this request does not create any adverse effects on the subject property's neighborhood orsurrounding environment When the City develops lansfe affordable thou that development at the subject property, a separate land use application the subject property be rezoned as AH -PUD. At that time, compliance with the AH-PUD zone district will be established. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Response: This request will facilitate the continued operation of the current lumber yard operation on the site. As such, this request does not propose additional traffic generation that might contribute to road safety issues. When the City develops plans for affordable housing development at the subject property, a separate land use application will be submitted which will address traffic generation and road safety for that (future) application. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools and emergency medical facilities. Response: The property proposed for annexation is currently served by City municipal water and district sanitary sewer service. For the continued short-term operation of the lumber yard at the FINAL DRAFT Paee 23 of 27 City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request subject property, there will be no additional demands on public facilities, nor would the current application cause the capacity of transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools or emergency medical facilities be in any way exceeded beyond current uses. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Response: This request will facilitate the continued operation of the current lumber yard operation on the site. As such, this request would not result in signlficantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City. Response: The current lumber yard operation on the site is immediately adjacent to the City of Aspen as previously described in this document. As such, the Petitioner attests that the existing lumber yard operation is already integrated with and thus consistent with the community character in the City. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Response: Not Applicable I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest and whether it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this Title. Response: eased on the above responses, the Petitioner attests that the proposed amendment would not be in conflict with the public interest and that the proposed amendment is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the City of Aspen Land Use Regulations. This request meets all of the "Standards of review" criteria established in the above noted Section 26.310.040 of the City of Aspen Land Use Regulations and as such the Petitioner requests annexation and initial zoning as requested. Please see the proposed zoning map included in the next section of this application. Page 24 of 27 FINAL DRAFT City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request D. Proposed Zoning Map Proposed zoning map attached FINAL DRAFT on�0 7S of 77 City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request E. Improvement Survey (one full -size copy) Improvement survey attached Page 26 of 27 FINAL DRAFT i R W C N C O u�i el, N O-U U y �p mE m a 'F 2- N V N 10 Q N N C m O Q U m aL a o 11' S g 7 ~ °- N W ` E N C U m o m rn ° -o a y a U o 0 v L N n ' o a ce o - a t V- i `, m fl „, Q c \ ° ma >. .6 ----c....„ , LL " \ •�''�`. s ed U 1 ■ \ \ U j 1 t i N illit b a ■ i ; ° c d 1 \\\\ v V L Q. . m ■ \\\ \ w � _ a f t 4:1) Q i \ \i,,.. CL EZ� I � _ r A i i r.ereeimnrn-nr'u_.. ■.ru W OODW a i 1 1 : , ..w.,N.■■■•■■•■■■■■ 'V \ • a Ei ,1 \ E. U t `\ c U j U I A N e Q Z8 A/ViH — f ❑b laOcialt/ 3 c� 3 _ O U c Y ; m a. --, i ‘.---) 1 1 8 ^2 i .aSrr33 2F y �* N � b � � !q r i Al 7 fin € C li 1 11;1b li i 11 t 4 1 II g A . 5 NI k8 % N_ vin t ) $ ® 14a M K a F z 8 a m6 f ; T ;Vii 1 IN yN EN Nho' 411::1:§ agl J 9Y g H.1 h Q 0— a a „� ® ®a g len n 0 Y y � Y R., W F l o m /� (� a Q B Fba °bbbinbbbNbbbbae'aan is roPe= p , \ ry bii. A,FbF Q P�/�, podgy� \\ `d`Laa< "e ee2`daeeaeco2tleatl II VY r.r � n a aa,;® NC O — Ma w a0b gfi ` y g l° is € � Y Q Q hvye % IN ! y ! ± 1 1 g ; S ` ! bit x- 1e F r d ab ITA 1 I 1 ° 1 s 3 I a § 05 &@ 3 E a cg g G i l B 6 ha R ¢ 1 AO Iii a 3 - 7 i 8 ! ; 1: Q . b _ 4 , Ilse. 4 1 Ili! 3 l �° 4 i s °0 I g a g3 a 6 a c. p g Gg 1 `i g Ell I IA d i .. a i l . 5 p ' . ' € , p € 4 °8 p j 5jjjRI IiP � R 'J 4 n G ° r ajg� n j i $� X i d c3 p@ h 2111; S 11' 1i i 1R � R b L i ! % la A e_ /p i i k s 75 d g Q _ , E 5g s ° p ?Q � ° 1 ° 3 �3 � " 13 R a = gip x. a a s. ` i 3 5 & s i bs R �3b :a a ° 6 /q11 1 !1 ° 1 L4 lig ! kk 'x twg i y 9 8.8:: a gP U 515 5 2e , 2 i A i : 1i c !I 1 T� f i €i � s � p Ni a � ySry E 1 _ u 43a tg d • 1 deli a. .n d tl d. g . a A d n. 'r. 4 .1A4A d r d S 1 el 4 i?§ 1 • 3 €cd 7 o i 4 " g ,� 3 S � & G ET S silt uxc sn/y, ssc sf M.a . _ -. O p srcii E_2TB.BZ 1\ I t.- \ � \ s J 84 \ i �� _ / S ' ! o.J bg pnp \ IN. ie 4-.4,7 � h 1'J� 8.0 I 1 I e 1- M I , , ‘,... � `` t ■ w .... I 1 1 \ `z � 6 \` R \ „0 `1 � / � �\�� 41:2 41,,, �':& R 6 >t*a/b / td P.,, ba Abuiry t. @��'�' I h �Ak I I , I E `\ i yy � o yw° I � 4 ' � \ O :3 J o I " t \ i • a k, s , A 3 i: b q l ml -- \ \ �$ >3$ Om eg ". ._ I I 8 r+e 1 S . .y � ma _ -\ 'Y Y 7�- Y > ` \ \ 1\ I V i �® € \ ` 1 I y�� / 'ten Q MU ' .. ONV12:m _4 U N 1 CC C� \T'0.; / / / . (1 l ' Z'fll � / im .l'65 \ R 1 �2t VV 99 B A: i 1 lo f / s 123ry pxr / i Q A MLLSI D S : _ ; p : / /! . Jo= � G' / /” � xl m ure' avoo am \ IN- _ / 4 o 3 c $ Q 080 /1 / ' - E iron Amesz i 'rAwu i 1 . y $ i f im d g as Or YO• ! I „ -- I <,, / .. ® & ®G g w M \/ �, / `® ® II � _ y , /' I ��•• ' \ \ q' O N bay — ��� / ' g �01-r' k I II I e \ - / � � A - - / \ � k - f YLVy m� i_ .I - / III / a. W / a. 5 b 3 M b Ix 7 tt yL� `.� 3 < <3,Y. ' I 'I / v Q Q € • • ` X / 1 1 A' -LM6LKW W¢ b d � � �f / I �C ' -- s -> ° �' .fl. t ) ' € 6 w rorx dcgatrox bW W W 0 r , g m' 1 4.... xysr� . 1i� ostl t Rh pp � eh / g �(d� b $ "tl g H f111 \\ \> /,. -,,e` .IS4 A �:S'_,y; -11CI $i$ ` 71 " A q t o i „tw t ill O M .. „, 1 „ N N , 4 J ' I I rig H2O V E $ l C 0h/=a tik L r ___ = - .- == inn = g 1A - :. $� i g III __ At _ _ _ t- � ' ,,5 1 $ ., g - / -_ _,,, ^ " 77 Wi .: - -1_172 % ''2 ,41 \ 3 0- 3 Qp� ® -- -- -7-�< __ =- - 1' sa ' £msLccv " - -� - - Qa� 4' Ltz)aaag a Non an) g Cl 9 — a 8a ` 9 el? 30Y75 4 1,11 414 gl ® 8; Q p ®. a id e 1/1 -. ti. . s 's 2' : fig $ r n F. t 5 w w t a i Y . ; $ e el 5 12 t. X1! 1 1 � 5 1 ! 1 5 lilt i e • 0 K R. 8 :. 1 I R i O e l 1 l I - eee Bf8 i.. i AG. i 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 • u r0 L. City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request F. Electronic Files (Compact Disk) List of files to be included on CD - Annexation Request Document including land use application and forms - Annexation Plat - Proposed Zoning Map - Improvement Survey Page 27 of 27 [\IAI non rT MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council FROM: Chris Bendon, Community Development Directo>1 ► J4j MEETING DATE: February 28, 2011 �JYVY•' RE Amendment to the Zone District Map — Zoning of the BMC West property 2 " Reading of Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2011 APPLICANT /OWNER: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City of Aspen Staff recommends City Council assign the property to the Service Commercial REPRESENTATIVE: Industrial Zone District with a Planned Steve Barwick, City Manager Unit Development overlay (SCI -PUD). Scott Miller, Asset Manager And, staff recommends Council approve a Chris Everson, Project Manager PUD Plan reflecting current conditions. LOCATION: P&Z RECOMMENDATION: 38005 Highway 82 The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended in favor or this application SUMMARY: by a five to zero vote. This property is being considered for annexation. If annexed, the City needs to provide the property with zoning within 90 days. LAND USE REQUEST AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The application requires the following reviews: • Amendment to the Zone District Map [Initial Zoning] — An application for Amendment to the Zone District Map, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.310.020, requires the Planning and Zoning Commission, at a public hearing, forward a recommendation to City Council. The City Council is the final decision - making body. • Consolidated Conceptual and Final PUD — An application for Consolidated Conceptual and Final PUD, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.445.030(B)2, requires the Planning and Zoning Commission, at a public hearing, forward a recommendation to City Council. The City Council is the final decision - making body. BACKGROUND: The City of Aspen purchased the 4.6 -acre BMC West property in December 2007, with the long -term intent of developing affordable housing. However, the City has no intent to initiate a public process to plan the property for at least three to five years. In the meantime, the City has a fiduciary responsibility to its taxpayers to annex the property in order to collect property tax, sales tax and Construction Materials Use tax. Applicant is in a parallel review process for annexation. The intent at this time is to essentially "freeze" the site in its current condition as a lumber yard. This will be accomplished by the adoption of a Final PUD Plan that establishes the dimensional requirements and use of the parcel as they are today, referencing the 2009 Improvement Survey Plat (see application). A new development plan for the parcel would require a full review by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council either through a PUD Amendment or rezoning — and very likely both. STAFF FINDINGS: Many of the standards of review for an Amendment to the Zone District Map do not apply in this case, because there is no "proposed development." For example, standards for an Amendment to the Zone District Map ask whether the proposal is "compatible with surrounding zone districts;" if it would have an impact on "traffic generation;" if it would place "demands on public facilities;" or if it would have "adverse impacts on the natural environment." If the City were seeking only to have the subject parcel rezoned to Service /Commercial /Industrial, the applicant would need to conduct an analysis of the potential build -out of the parcel under the allowances of the S /C /I Zone District. However, by adopting a Final PUD Plan that effectively "freezes" the current condition in place, this application does not include any "proposed development." The concept is that once the City is ready to move forward with a development plan in approximately three to five years, a land use application would be submitted, resulting in a comprehensive land use review. Therefore, this Amendment to the Zone District Map would not have any impact on surrounding zone districts, traffic generation, public facilities or infrastructure, or the natural environment. RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the application meets or exceeds the standards of review. Staff recommends the property be zoned SCI -PUD and the existing conditions be considered the approved PUD plan. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move the adoption of Ordinance No. 6, Series of 2011." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A — Application — Provided in February 14 packet Exhibit B — Staff Findings for Amendment to Zone District Map Exhibit C — Staff findings for Final PUD Plan Exhibit D — P &Z Minutes 0 titwit.la �/ v V BMC Parcel • hir VVVV r , 0: * 3 � � .: '• t ," . V 115 $ D . . � „ 14 17 1 .., ,,, ,. r f =r I: . , ova ,..,�.) . te , � �' Y . t i . t .. ,, , 1. o " ,, e ms ,, ` , CO v 1 ❑ - ri I ' • 13 y W • . C aY .. Q y `*`� * ' " r • Q •" O al r . It A ' . 4. V__ , , . „ . y{ Y isW +' fi ' 205 . / } . . ,,,,,,,,..-:"":„:1,-,,..... • . .1 4 ..,•• - • ;- -. 8 - a i ::,, .._, , ,li mss s ' �- 7- �- ! /���f - �' ` { T'".'•''''''''',.',4.. ar • ay . r . :5 d a �. "; — BMC Parcel ` �I 1 -----•• City Limits .v, ti t ;, 1 ''' ,•4 r 2 e r . xi ...:;-=./5=.-'...,,,. -' , • A . .0 175 5 350 goo i,os Feet 3 MEMORANDUM V/ 14 TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council FROM: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director M MEETING DATE: February 14, 2011 RE: Amendment to the Zone District Map — Zoning of the BMC West property / 1 Reading of Ordinance No. (0 , Series of 2011 Second reading scheduled for February 28th APPLICANT /OWNER: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City of Aspen Staff recommends City Council assign the property to the Service Commercial REPRESENTATIVE: Industrial Zone District with a Planned Steve Barwick, City Manager Unit Development overlay (SCI -PUD). Scott Miller, Asset Manager And, staff recommends Council approve a Chris Everson, Project Manager PUD Plan reflecting current conditions. LOCATION: P &Z RECOMMENDATION: 38005 Highway 82 The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended in favor or this application SUMMARY: by a five to zero vote. This property is being considered for annexation. If annexed, the City needs to provide the property with zoning within 90 days. LAND USE REQUEST AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The application requires the following reviews: • Amendment to the Zone District Map [Initial Zoning] — An application for Amendment to the Zone District Map, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.310.020, requires the Planning and Zoning Commission, at a public hearing, forward a recommendation to City Council. The City Council is the final decision - making body. • Consolidated Conceptual and Final PUD — An application for Consolidated Conceptual and Final PUD, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.445.030(B)2, requires the Planning and Zoning Commission, at a public hearing, forward a recommendation to City Council. The City Council is the final decision - making body. BACKGROUND: The City of Aspen purchased the 4.6 -acre BMC West property in December 2007, with the long -term intent of developing affordable housing. However, the City has no intent to initiate a public process to plan the property for at least three to five years. In the meantime, the City has a fiduciary responsibility to its taxpayers to annex the property in order to collect property tax, sales tax and Construction Materials Use tax. Applicant is in a parallel review process for annexation. The intent at this time is to essentially "freeze" the site in its current condition as a lumber yard. This will be accomplished by the adoption of a Final PUD Plan that establishes the dimensional requirements and use of the parcel as they are today, referencing the 2009 Improvement Survey Plat (see application). A new development plan for the parcel would require a full review by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council either through a PUD Amendment or rezoning — and very likely both. STAFF FINDINGS: Many of the standards of review for an Amendment to the Zone District Map do not apply in this case, because there is no "proposed development." For example, standards for an Amendment to the Zone District Map ask whether the proposal is "compatible with surrounding zone districts;" if it would have an impact on "traffic generation;" if it would place "demands on public facilities;" or if it would have "adverse impacts on the natural environment." If the City were seeking only to have the subject parcel rezoned to Service /Commercial/Industrial, the applicant would need to conduct an analysis of the potential build -out of the parcel under the allowances of the S /C /I Zone District. However, by adopting a Final PUD Plan that effectively "freezes" the current condition in place, this application does not include any "proposed development." The concept is that once the City is ready to move forward with a development plan in approximately three to five years, a land use application would be submitted, resulting in a comprehensive land use review. Therefore, this Amendment to the Zone District Map would not have any impact on surrounding zone districts, traffic generation, public facilities or infrastructure, or the natural environment. RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the application meets or exceeds the standards of review. Staff recommends the property be zoned SCI -PUD and the existing conditions be considered the approved PUD plan. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move the adoption of Ordinance No.(0, Series of 2011, upon first reading." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A — Application Exhibit B — Staff Findings for Amendment to Zone District Map Exhibit C — Staff findings for Final PUD Plan ORDINANCE NO. 1,o , (SERIES OF 2011) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REZONING TO THE SERVICE COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL ZONE DISTRICT AND APPROVING A FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE FORMER BMC WEST PROPERTY LOCATED AT 38005 STATE HIGHWAY 82, ASPEN AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER, BLOCK 1, LOTS 1 AND 2, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 273503101801 and 2 73 5031 01 802 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the City of Aspen, represented by City Manager Steve Barwick, requesting approval of an Amendment to the Zone District Map and a final Planned Unit Development (PUD), for the property at 38005 State Highway 82, commonly known as the BMC West property, and legally described as Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Aspen Airport Business Center, Pitkin County, Colorado; and, WHEREAS, the property is located at 38005 State Highway 82, and is zoned B2 (General Business) in Pitkin County; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant requested and received annexation into the City of Aspen and the City has a requirement to designate zoning for the property; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department found that the application meets or exceeds applicable standards of review and recommended the property be zoned into the Service Commercial Industrial Zone District with a Planned Unit Development overlay (SCI -PUD); and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and considered the proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on February 1, 2011, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 1, Series of 2011, by a five to zero vote, recommending approval of an Amendment to the Zone District Map, initially zoning the property as Service Commercial Industrial with Planned Unit Development overlay (SCI -PUD), and recommending the Aspen City Council approve a Final PUD plan reflecting existing dimensions; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council reviewed and considered the proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code, has reviewed and considered the r. recommendations of the Community Development Director and the Planning and Zoning Commission, and has taken and considered public comment; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on February 28, 2011, the Aspen City Council approved an Amendment to the Zone District Map, initially zoning the property as Service Commercial Industrial with Planned Unit development overlay (SCI - PUD), and approved a Final PUD plan reflecting existing dimensions; and, WHEREAS, the City Council fords that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable standards and that assigning the subject property to the SCI -PUD Zone District is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: Initial Zoning to SCI -PUD Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in City of Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.310, Amendments to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map, The Official Zone District Map of the City of Aspen shall be amended by the Community Development Director to reflect Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Aspen Airport Business Center, as included in the Service Commercial Industrial Zone District with a Planned Unit Development overlay (SCI -PUD). The Community Development Director shall use the survey descriptions contained in the Improvement Survey Plat of April 22, 2009, attached as Exhibit A, as the basis for determining the zoning boundaries. Section 2: Approved PUD Dimensions The dimensional allowances and limitations for Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Aspen Airport Business Center, shall be the existing conditions as outlined in Improvement Survey Plat of April 22, 2009, attached as Exhibit A. Section 3: This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this Ordinance, to record a copy of this Ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 6: Public hearings on the Ordinance were held on the 28 day of February, 2011, at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. Section 7: This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final adoption. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 14 day of February, 2011. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, Michael C. Ireland, City Clerk Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2011. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, Michael C. Ireland, City Clerk Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney Exhibit A: Improvement Survey Plat of April 22, 2009 C a 6SG ; g b ej a "g 1 Sh e -r ! _: d =a' IIN A- - - - - -- li ti A 4 t ; it H. S .), , s eel 6 i ` o a , i l a �-.„. „tea w- a b v I I 1••• ® a g gig e 6 9 N \ j I V ;4l I 4 H! IC ppx§ 4 L. y a �� -1 g J @ 61 �G4 4 ,\ , by € 5 n ¢- tl " . a m hog, � tl ' \ a ` 1� yn ewe ' 6 swot, i :33y11 {{N� Ne 1,4. .p 'f gl- A. i ac �F. �a7. 1 u) iotg paeoc a� a a - 4;41.172g. Hgg[4 2 FFiF � 1 �.,�., t,,, (0 14 OMe d s J' 2 0 °2 .2 ' +r gym. ® __- �® i J( / / - aal b' - > LIP 4 10 8 3 k "t d € r . t .I I 4 ,h,5 e� °z 5 . � b ®�� 515 i4 4 i 04 u sI s I i•I ? 1! 4 ' t. ix eai I v s. .; + e { � e . 43 ' -s b e 9 l'g o y 4 f — n - « . :e ■1 _ - -" - pa — CI p e , x ( ZIT tor e _ _ — _ C = j ® ® P" RE g 8 S Q r' P ® S @¢@¢ A 4 3 a ¢ a I� o ---lit o .. H A p a lig! ,.. ' pR g i 1/ 4,0 / 4 q pd $ i I i ¢¢ : Ihigg 99 [� 3 r � 1 $[[ ee 3 ¢ no ' . si7�3 e E d � �[3i � �i 'a t • 0 P SL: o a I •• pH }•, fA'fv`M1aS eW i'pAr /1 A City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request IV. Initial Zoning A. Completed Application PROJECT: Name: Aspen Airport Business Center, Block 1, Lots I and 2 (Former BMC West Property) Location: 38005 State Highway 82, Aspen, CO 81611 (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) Parcel ID #: 273503101801 and 273503101802 APPLICANT: Name: City of Aspen Address: 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, CO 81611 Phone #: 970- 920 -5000 REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Steve Barwick, City Manager Address: 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, CO 81611 Phone #: 970 - 920 -5205 TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply) GMQS Exemption ❑ Conceptual PUD Temporary Use [ GMQS Allotment ❑ Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) M Text/Map Amendment ❑ Special Review ❑ Subdivision ❑ Conceptual SPA ❑ ESA — 8040 Greenline, Stream Margin, ❑ Subdivision Exemption (includes n Final SPA (& SPA Hallam Lake Bluff, Mountain View Plane condominiumization) Amendment) ❑ Commercial Design Review [ Lot Split ❑ Small Lodge Conversion/ Expansion ❑ Residential Design Variance ❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Conditional Use L Other: EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses. previous approvals, etc.) The property is currently zoned B2 — General Business in Pitkin County. The property is 201,683 square feet in size. The subject property is currently used as existing Harbert Lumber operation. PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) Annexation of the subject property into the City of Aspen and establish the newly annexed parcel's initial zoning as SCI - Service, Commercial, Industrial in the City of Aspen and continue the operation of the existing lumber yard. Have you attached the following? FEES DI!E: $ M Pre - Application Conference Summary M Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement N/A Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards N/A 3 -D Model for large project All plans that are larger than 8.5" X 11" must be folded. A disk with an electric copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format) must be submitted as part of the application. Large scale projects should include an electronic 3 -D model. Your pre - application conference summary will indicate if you must submit a 3 -D model. Page 18 of 27 FINAL DRAFT City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for Annexation of the subject property, located at 38005 State Highway 82, into the City of Aspen. (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that the City of Aspen has an adopted fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and /or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Historic Preservation Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission and /or City Council to enable the Historic Preservation Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission and /or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $ which is for hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $245.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. CITY OF ASPEN APPLICANT By: By: Chris Bendon Community Development Director Date: Billing Address and Telephone Number: City of Aspen, 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, CO 81611 (970)920 -5000 Account # 150.23.23140.82770 Page 19 of 27 FINAL DRAFT City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request B. Pre - Application Conference Summary CITY OF ASPEN PRE - APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Errin Evans, 429 -2745 DATE: 11.05.2008 PROJECT: 38005 Highway 82 REPRESENTATIVE: Adam Trzdnski DESCRIPTION: The City owns two lots al the south end of the Airport Business Center. The properties are currently located in Pdkin County. On behalf of the City, Adam would like to annex these properties located at 38005, Highway 82, for an affordable housing prated. There are currently businesses operating on the premises with a lease. The lease will expire in a few years, at that time the property will be used for affordable housing. Annexation is governed by Colorado Revised State Statutes (CRS 31-12-102 et.seq.) Please refer to the Citys annexation plan located at htlpl iwww. aspenplkm .com /pdfsldeplsl4l /armex plan.pdf for an overview of the process and an example petition for annexation. II is impatient to note that a property's perimeter boundary must have a minimum amount of contiguity with the City's boundary to be able to annex and that the subject property is capable of being integrated and serviced (utilities, etc.) by It* City. The applicant may wish to schedule a development review committee meeting to find out if any improvements will be required of the property as a part of an annexation agreement prior to submitting a petition for application. If the applicant is not securing any development approvals at this time, other than the zoning designation, it will be important le include a summary in the annexation proposal on the existing development potential within the County compared to the development potential within the City. Once the annexation petition is filed with the City Clerk, the City, through the Attorneys Office, Initiates the annexation process as outlined in the City's Annexation Plan. As part of the annexation process, the City concurrently initiates zoning of the property to a City zone district. Relevant Lend Use Code Section(s): 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures 26.310 Amendments to Text and Zone District Map 26.575.020 Calculating FAR CRS 31-12-102 et.seq. Colorado State Statutes • http: llwww, aspenpitkin .comldepts/38/citvcode.cfm Review by: - Staff for complete application - Referral agencies for technical considerations - City Council for annexation process - Planning and Zoning Commission for recommendation on the zone district designation of the property to the City Council Public Heaving: Yes, at P&Z and City Council Planning Fees: $2,940 Deposit for 12 hours of staff time (additional staff time required is billed at $245 per hour) associated with the applicant initiated zoning of the subject property Total Deposit: $2,940 • Page 20 of 27 FINAL DRAFT City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request Total number of application copies: 4 Copies of petition and map (state requirement) 20 copies of zoning (Map Amendment) application To apply, submit the following information: 1. Total Deposit for review of application. 2. Applicant's name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant staling the name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 3. Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current certificate from a title Insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owners right to apply for the Development Application. 4. Completed Land Use Application and annexation petition. 5. Signed fee agreement (if applicable — there is no fee associated with submitting a petition for annexation and if staff initiates the zoning of the property; however, if the applicant submits the request for zoning the fee is $2,940.0). 6. Pre - application Conference Summary. 7. An 8112• x 11' vicinity map locating the subject parcel within the City of Aspen. 8. Proof of ownership. 9. An annexation plat. 10. A site improvement survey that includes all existing natural and man-made site features. 12. A written desorption of the proposal and a written explanation of how a proposed deveopment complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. 13. All other materials required pursuant to the specific submittal requirements. 14. Applications shall be provided in paper format (number of copies noted above) as well as the text only on either of the following digital formats. Compact Disk (CD)- preferred, Zip Disk or Floppy Disk. Microsoft Word format is preferred. Text format easily convertible to Word is acceptable. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. Page 21 of 27 FINAL DRAFT City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request C. Vicinity Map The subject property is located at 38005 State Highway 82, Aspen Airport Business Center, Block 1, Lots 1 and 2; across State Highway 82 from the south end of the Aspen /Pitkin County Airport. VICINITY MAP J T Q • \11 r v :No 060 SUBJECT PROPERTY STAGE RD f 1 Page 22 of 27 FINAL DRAFT City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request D. Description of Compliance Aspen Municipal Code Sec. 26.310.040, Land Use Regulations, General Procedures and Regulations, Amendments to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map, Standards of review: In reviewing an amendment to the text of this Title or an amendment to the Official Zone District Map, the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. Response: The applicant proposes an initial zoning of SCI for the continued operation of the lumber yard. Because the current request will facilitate only the annexation of the property and the continued operation of the lumber yard, this request does not represent a new land use policy or a change in land use policy. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan. Response: While the initial zoning request for the subject property is SCI — Service, Commercial, Industrial (which will facilitate the continued operation of the current lumber yard operation on the site), the future development intent of the site is for affordable housing. A future land use application (separate from this annexation request) will be processed by the City of Aspen to request that the property be rezoned as AH -PUD. The AH -PUD designation will be requested based on affordable housing development plans that will be developed in the future for that specific purpose. This effort is underway in an effort to fulfill the housing goals established in the AACP. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Response: This request will facilitate the continued operation of the current lumber yard operation on the site. As such, this request does not create any adverse effects on the subject property's neighborhood or surrounding environment. When the City develops plans for affordable housing development at the subject property, a separate land use application will be submitted to request that the subject property be rezoned as AH -PUD. At that time, compliance with the AH -PUD zone district will be established. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Response: This request will facilitate the continued operation of the current lumber yard operation on the site. As such, this request does not propose additional traffic generation that might contribute to road safety issues. When the City develops plans for affordable housing development at the subject property, a separate land use application will be submitted which will address traffic generation and road safety for that (future) application. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools and emergency medical facilities. Response: The property proposed for annexation is currently served by City municipal water and district sanitary sewer service. For the continued short-term operation of the lumber yard at the Page 23 of 27 FINAL DRAFT City of Aspen September 10, 2009 Annexation Request subject property, there will be no additional demands on public facilities, nor would the current application cause the capacity of transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools or emergency medical facilities be in any way exceeded beyond current uses. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Response: This request will facilitate the continued operation of the current lumber yard operation on the site. As such, this request would not result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City. Response: The current lumber yard operation on the site is immediately adjacent to the City of Aspen as previously described in this document. As such, the Petitioner attests that the existing lumber yard operation is already integrated with and thus consistent with the community character in the City. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Response: Not Applicable I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest and whether it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this Title. Response: Based on the above responses, the Petitioner attests that the proposed amendment would not be in conflict with the public interest and that the proposed amendment is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the City of Aspen Land Use Regulations. This request meets all of the Standards of review" criteria established in the above noted Section 26.310.040 of the City of Aspen Land Use Regulations and as such the Petitioner requests annexation and initial zoning as requested. Please see the proposed zoning map included in the next section of this application. Page 24 of 27 FINAL DRAFT Exhibit B Amendment to Zone District Map Review Criteria & Staff Findings Standards of Review: In reviewing an amendment to the text of this Title or an amendment to the Official Zone District Map, the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment is not in conflict with any applicable portion of this title, as the responses to standards of review illustrate below. The applicant proposes an initial underlying zoning of Service /Commercial/Industrial, which is the only city zone district that expressly permits a lumber yard. The applicant proposes a Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay with the express intent of "freezing" the existing development on -site in its current condition, including the existing dimensions and use. Any future change to the existing dimensions and use would require a rezoning and/or PUD Amendment. The intent of the current request is to facilitate only the annexation of the property and the continued operation of the lumber yard; this application does not represent a proposed development. Staff believes this criterion is met. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment would make no changes to existing conditions. However, the proposed amendment requires any future proposed development to rezone and/or gain approval for a PUD Amendment. Both a rezoning or PUD review process includes a criteria assuring that any future development must be "consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan." If the property is annexed, the City of Aspen has an obligation to assign a zone district to the property. Staff believes S /C/I- PUD for this property is consistent with all the elements of the AACP. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Finding: This request will facilitate the continued operation of the current lumber yard operation on the site. As such, this request does not create any adverse effects on the subject property's neighborhood or surrounding environment. Any future development proposal must comply with this standard under rezoning, or similar standards under a PUD Amendment. Under a future PUD Amendment, any future development proposal must comply with a set of more specific criteria regarding compatibility. Staff believes this criterion is met. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. BMC Zoning Exhibit B Page 1 Staff Finding: This request will facilitate the continued operation of the current lumber yard operation on the site. As such, this request does not propose additional traffic generation that might contribute to road safety issues. Any future development proposal must comply with this standard under rezoning, or similar standards under a PUD Amendment. Under a future PUD Amendment, any future development proposal must comply with a set of more specific criteria regarding traffic generation and road safety. Staff believes this criterion is met. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools and emergency medical facilities. Staff Finding: The property proposed for annexation is currently served by City municipal water and district sanitary sewer service. For the continued operation of the lumber yard, there will be no additional demands on public facilities. Any future development proposal must comply with this standard for rezoning, or similar standards under a PUD Amendment. Under a future PUD Amendment, any future development proposal must comply with a set of more specific criteria regarding public facilities. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Finding: This request will facilitate the continued operation of the current lumber yard operation on the site. As such, this request would not result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Any future development proposal must comply with this standard under rezoning, or similar standards under a PUD Amendment. Under a future PUD Amendment, any future development proposal must comply with a set of more specific criteria regarding impacts on natural resources. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City. Staff Finding: The existing lumber yard operation is already integrated with and thus consistent with the community character in the City. Any future development proposal must comply with this standard under rezoning, or similar standards under a PUD Amendment. Under a future PUD Amendment, any future development proposal must comply with a set of more specific criteria regarding "consistency with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area," as well as criteria regarding site design and architectural character. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. BMC Zoning Exhibit B Page 2 Staff Finding: The City has purchased this parcel and wishes to annex it at this time, largely in fiduciary responsibility to city taxpayers through the future collection of property and sales taxes. Any future rezoning proposal must comply with this standard. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest and whether it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this Title. Staff Finding: Based on the above responses, the proposed amendment would not be in conflict with the public interest and the proposed amendment is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the City of Aspen Land Use Regulations. This request meets all of the "Standards of review" criteria established in the above noted Section 26.310.040 of the City of Aspen Land Use Regulations. Any future rezoning proposal must comply with this standard. BMC Zoning Exhibit B Page 3 Exhibit C PUD Review Criteria & Staff Findings A. General requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment does not represent or reflect a "proposed development," and would make no changes to existing conditions. However, the proposed amendment requires any future proposed development to rezone and/or gain approval for a PUD Amendment. Both a rezoning or PUD review process includes a criteria assuring that any future development must be "consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan." This parcel is part of the urbanized area of Aspen. Staff finds this criterion is met. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment does not represent or reflect a "proposed development," and would make no changes to existing conditions. The existing lumber yard operation is already integrated with and thus consistent with the character in the surrounding area. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment does not represent or reflect a "proposed development," and would make no changes to existing conditions. Initial zoning and PUD designation will not adversely effect future development of the surrounding area. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. Staff Finding: No GMQS allotments are being requested. B. Establishment of dimensional requirements: The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD as described in General Provisions, Section 26.445.040, above. The dimensional requirements of the underlying Zone District shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing BMC Zoning Exhibit C Page 1 development patterns shall be emphasized. The proposed dimensional requirements shall comply with the following: 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property: a) The character of and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b) Natural or man -made hazards. c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade and significant vegetation and landforms. d) Existing and proposed man -made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking and historical resources. Staff Finding: The proposed dimensional requirements in the Final PUD Plan limit development on the site to existing conditions and uses. Staff finds criteria a -d are met. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. Staff Finding: The proposed dimensional requirements in the Final PUD Plan limit development on the site to existing conditions and uses. Staff finds the proposed dimensional requirements are appropriate. 3. The appropriate number of off - street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any nonresidential land uses. b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and /or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the City. Staff Finding: There is no proposed development. The proposed dimensional requirements in the Final PUD Plan limit development on the site to existing conditions and uses. Staff finds these criteria met. Any future PUD Amendment must comply with this criteria. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: BMC Zoning Exhibit C Page 2 Staff Finding: The proposed dimensional requirements in the Final PUD Plan limit development on the site to existing conditions and uses. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: Staff Finding: The proposed dimensional requirements in the Final PUD Plan limit development on the site to existing conditions and uses. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's physical constraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if: a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area plan to which the property is subject. b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in Subparagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided or those characteristics mitigated. c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern, land uses and characteristics. Staff Finding: Not applicable. There is not a proposal to increase allowable density. C. Site design. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man -made features and the adjacent public spaces and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man -made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. BMC Zoning Exhibit C Page 3 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. 7. For nonresidential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. Staff Finding: There is no proposed development at this time. Potential future development or redevelopment will need to address these criteria. Staff believes accepting current conditions on the parcel meets this standard C(1 -7). D. Landscape plan. The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the City, with surrounding parcels and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well - designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing significant vegetation and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. 2. Significant existing natural and man -made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. Staff Finding: There is no proposed development at this time. Potential future development or redevelopment will need to address these criteria. Staff believes accepting current conditions on the parcel meets this standard D(1 -3). E. Architectural character. 1. Be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the City, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for and indicative of the intended use and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade and vegetation and by use of non- or less - intensive mechanical systems. 3. Accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. Staff Finding: There is no proposed development at this time. Potential future development or redevelopment will need to address this criteria. Staff believes accepting current conditions on the parcel meets standards E(1 -3). BMC Zoning Exhibit C Page 4 F. Lighting. The purpose of this standard to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both Public Safety and general aesthetic concerns. The following standards shall be accomplished: 1. All lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. Lighting of site features, structures and access ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. 2. All exterior lighting shall in compliance with the outdoor lighting standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD documents. Up- lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. Staff Finding: There is no proposed development at this time. Potential future development or redevelopment will need to address this criteria. Staff believes accepting current conditions on the parcel meets standards F(1 -2). G. Common park, open space or recreation area. If the proposed development includes a common park, open space or recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD, the following criteria shall be met: Staff Finding: Not applicable. There is no common park or open space propsed. H. Utilities and public facilities. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. Staff Finding: Not applicable. There is no proposed increase in development at this time. Staff believes accepting current conditions on the parcel meets standard 1-1(1-3). I. Access and circulation. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: BMC Zoning Exhibit C Page 5 1. Each lot, structure or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way or other area dedicated to public or private use. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. 3. Areas of historic pedestrian or recreational trail use, improvements of or connections to, the bicycle and pedestrian trail system and adequate access to significant public lands and the rivers are provided through dedicated public trail easements and are proposed for appropriate improvements and maintenance. 4. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan and adopted specific plans regarding recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths and transportation are proposed to be implemented in an appropriate manner. 5. Streets in the PUD which are proposed or recommended to be retained under private ownership provide appropriate dedication to public use to ensure appropriate public and emergency access. 6. Security gates, guard posts or other entryway expressions for the PUD or for lots within the PUD, are minimized to the extent practical. Staff Finding: There is no proposed change to the access or circulation patterns. Staff believes accepting current conditions on the parcel meets criterion I (1 -6). J. Phasing of development plan. The purpose of this criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with the following: Staff Finding: Not applicable. There is no phasing proposed. BMC Zoning Exhibit C Page 6 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 35OOD5 S4act * ''"j $ , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: hora J +wk, 0-93° c 5 IO0 () r\ , 20th STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) (name, please print) being or repre enting an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that 1 have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: `� D ub4 p ' n o notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official r r der of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days Pilot 4o tliLe public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. r• < _ Posting of notice: By posting of notic&", 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 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 2 6.304.060(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 owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (Continued on next page) fl 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. 41 4 ., - - a Signat The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this tilt day of , 20 1 I , by An/vtdai S' cnS j WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: .1(( m A RE: 38099 BTA NNi ENT TO THE ZONE 4. 1 1 . • t ' •iI - THE MIMC DISTRICT PUBLIIC ataxy Publi NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public will be hell on February 26.2011. at a mehearing e0n9 to begin at 5: 00 P.m. befor Hell 19 Council, re di Galena S . e Aspen. nml Cto review. City a proposal for an A Aspen, CO, 0, r arlln9Me Amendment at 138 5 St to H hwa Airport rt property si 3800 State Highway 2, And 2 ir . c Businows Center, Black 1, oW 1 and 2, i 2735-031-01-802. ha 1 "Akan eh initial *Is he Citning y 0. Aspen. wroth Pr °Posers to e eatabli zo ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: for the property es 8ervb/CommemiaNntluerlal antl P nip Development (SCI-EDD)_ IE PUBLICATION Initial zoning is a parallel process with annexa tion of this parcel into the city 119I s*0pe 01l1a cure" paf pH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) poga d dIr a5 zan g lovem0nts us n etig p r "e Y ti m t uy " Alin nsea. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES NOTIED curren on Ne "roped lan may be D rop e the t OWNERS AND at a ue nmu s er tl ormati n, co p� Chris Bendon For farther information Develop City of Aspen Commumly sye CA 8161 1, �hbbe 42 r )_ b Al w ritte n l chrs- CERTICICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE Dondeno relates r application should be s e-mail or Physical address. D BY C.R.S. §24- 65.5 -103.3 senl the above Barwick. A ° City otA 81611 920.5212. 130 o 1 S S. 0 Galena. Mayor. Iry d AaPert Publi� s�hal IIn spen 'mes Weekly on Fe I , the 13,201 6159385 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 33 S if IGPJ. Kl g - L._ , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARIN. DATE: r€13 ith -pith - ,20 H STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) G4 -I(ZIS TO 1 f-�CIZ CO ER'S ° j I, (name, please rint) being or representing an ApplioApt j the Oit, ,Of Aspen, Colorado, her y gr�gp ,l y certify that 1 have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: I Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official ealie dd a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior tq the public hearing. fI copy of the publication is attached hereto. _ I 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 ftpen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible f r o m the 1 A k day of rEP.,,, a 1 1 1 1 , 20 1 f , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted 7 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) 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 tly proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall // b- available for public inspection in the planning agency during all busitt: s hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amen.. • i t7! g it Sisi ature The fore oing "Affidavit of Notice" was ' cknowled ed before me this a e h day of , 201k , by O 3 rti y> WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: 4041 � Notary Public ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: * COPY OF THE PUBLICATION * PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) * LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENT AGENGIES NOTIED BY MAIL * APPLICANT CERTICICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24- 65.5 -103.3 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 38005 STATE HIGHWAY 82, THE "BMC WEST PARCEL ", AMENDMENT TO THE ZONE DISTRICT MAP, PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on February 28, 2011, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen City Council, in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, to review a proposal for an Amendment to the Zone District Map regarding the property at 38005 State Highway 82, Aspen Airport Business Center, Block 1, Lots 1 and 2, commonly known as the `BMC West property" or "Harbert Lumber." Parcel ID #2735- 031 -01 -801 and 2735- 031 -01 -802. The applicant is the City of Aspen, which proposes to establish initial zoning for the property as Service /Commercial /Industrial and Planned Unit Development (SCI -PUD). The initial zoning is a parallel process with annexation of this parcel into the City of Aspen limits. The purpose of the initial zoning is to permit the current uses and dimensions of the improvements currently on the property until such time as an alternative development plan may be proposed. For further information, contact Chris Bendon at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO 81611, (970) 429 -2765, (or by email at chris.bendon@ci.aspen.co.us). All written correspondence related to the application should be sent to the above e-mail or physical address. Applicant: City of Aspen c/o Steve Barwick, 130 S. Galena, Aspen, CO 81611. 970. 920.5212. Michael C. Ireland Mayor, City of Aspen Published in The Aspen Times on February 13, 2011 City of Aspen Account Easy Peel Labels rp i See Instruction Sheet 1 Use Avery® TEMPLATE 5160® Std IF. Asper •• for Easy Peel Feature' 9 cl AVERI/ ®51600 A ALAMO RENTAL CAR ALDERDICE MARK 6746 E CEDAR AVE #A PO BOX 4573 512 PASS G DENVER, CO 80224 ASPEN, CO 81612 512 EN LN ASPEN, , CO C 81611 816611 1 ASPEN MINI STORAGE LLC ASPEN /PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING 105 WOODWARD LANE AUTHORITY AUGUR WHEATON ASPEN, CO 81611 530 E MAIN ST #001 PO BOX 3614 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 BARBETTE JEAN ROBERT BARROW DAVID J 209 VENTNOR AVE #Q 520 PASS GO LN 209 VEN OR AN ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 AS EN PEN, , CO C8 AVE #N ASPEN, 81611 CITY OF ASPEN CLARK EBEN P ATTN FINANCE DEPT COULTER JEAN N CONARD M BRYAN 130 S GALENA ST 209 VENTNOR AVE #J PO BOX 9996 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 DANGLER TERRI DAVIS DYLAN ROSE 50% 311 PASS GO LN 320 PASS GO LN P BOX 9 KIM AO BOX 91 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 DEER HILL COMM CONDO OWNERS LLC DEER HILL COMM /LOFTS CONDO 210 AABC STE AA ASSOC DELAY JOHN P ASPEN, CO 81611 COMMON AREA PO BOX 2724 209 AABC ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 DITTMAR GERMAN DOCKEN ANDREW J DTG OPERATIONS INC SHERYL DENBAR 721 PASS GO 211 PASS GO LN DBA DOLLAR RENTAL CAR ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 5330 E 31ST ST 10TH FL TULSA, OK 74153 EMENS BRADY ENTERPRISE RENT A CAR 303 W 8TH PLACE 2390 W 104TH AVE A3 S EN 322 PAS GO LN R CARBONDALE, CO 81623 THORNTON, CO 80234 ASPEN, , CO C 81611 816611 1 FREEMAN PERRIN N III GASPERETTI JOHN PO BOX 2664 212 PASS GO LN R MICHAEL D ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 AS BOX 9 ASPEN, CO 81612 GIAMPAOLO JOSEPH F JR HAWKINS DUDLEY W L JR PO BOX 7871 PO BOX 37 AP S BOX 2 BOX 2584 SON ASPEN, CO 81612 CARBONDALE, CO 81623 ASPEN, CO ,131612 Etiquettes fables h peler • Utilisez le gabarit AVERY® 5160 Sens de chargement Consultez la feullle wwwaverycom Easy Peel Labels ,, i - ; ' Fs ?a per See Instruction Sheet Use Avery® TEMPLATE 5160® l P for Easy Peel Featurel 9 0 AVERY ®5160® 1 1 HOULIHAN SARA B HOWELLS THOMAS 110 PASS GO LN PO BOX 10763 JAHN MARCIA L ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 610 PASS GO LN ASPEN, CO 81611 KAVANAUGH JOHN T & ANN M KING JESSICA A 312 COLLEGE PL 722 PASS GO LN 711 EN PA S S GO AN C #71 M 1 NORFOLK, VA 23510 ASPEN, CO 81611 A ASPEN, CO 8 816611 11 KNEIFEL NATHAN R 50% LEE JOEL D 320 PASS GO LN 511 PASS GO LN LIDDINGTON JENNIFER ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 AS BOX 1 ASPEN, CO 81 81612 LOYD KEELE S LYNK HARRY All 210 PASSGOLN 510 PASSGOLN MARS BO 5O7 KAMALA AS BO ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 X 5 ASPEN, CO 81612 MARTINEZ LUIS MELTON LILY PO BOX 2981 310 PASS GO LN MILLER MICHELLE ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 A EN LN ASPEN, C CO 81611 816611 1 MONRONEY MICHAEL MULCAHY EDWARD LEE JR 720 PASS GO LN 611 PASS GO LN 620 PASS N ARTHUR R O ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 AS EN LN ASPEN, , CO 81611 816611 1 NORLUND KAREN L NOTO PAUL 621 PASS GO LN 209 VENTNOR AVE #M OTA NATHAN ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 AS EN LN ASPEN, , C CO 81611 816611 1 RUTLEDGE WILLIAM 0 IV SACHS HARRISON & SARAH 412 PASS GO LN PO BOX 12063 P BOX GRETCHEN ASHLEY A ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 9 ASS BOX PEN, CO 81612 STRICKLEN MICHAEL 0 SUNDSTROM JOHN & KEANAAINA 220 PASS GO LN FARRAH TAMEZ DANIEL ASPEN, CO 81611 612 PASS GO LN PO BOX 9830 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 TCI OF NORTHERN NEW JERSEY INC D /B /A TCI OF CENTRAL CO ATTN: TAX VENTNOR DEP C//O O MARK UHFELDER OWNERS LLC ARFELDER VU TRUC K & TERESITA S PO BOX 173838 210AABC STE AA 112 PASS GO LN DENVER, CO 80217 -3838 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 Etiquettes ladles A peter • Utilisez le gabarit AVERY® 5160® Sens de chargement Consukez la feuille vvwwavervcom Easy Peel Labels ® ® /°a See Instruction Feature' CIAVERVp516o® i Use Avery TEMPLATE 5160® k, IF Paper for Easy Peel Featurel • WEST CANYON INVESTMENTS LLC DBA HARBERT LUMBER CO PO BOX 2607 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81502 -2607 Ltiquettes fadies i peler • 11}iliem lo noIxA evcov® tic's® COIISUlte2ld feuille WWW.aVeryCOm AIMIIIVE : t ,, , , :"...i;' :, :i ", , ‘,.. '',:: ., 44 ‘ . . I .:,,,....„ . ...: .. . .. 1.80. ...„ ....;.,k 4.- .... . - ;;- 17 ' i l 1 7 ,: 9.`• ,.. .4, N:iiil ,yea w ,1 A /t 1 r (r y \ • .;,. 1 J O • N R O �' S N •__ v e N ea y- = d C i !it, v w.p N d O t . v � � �- 2 R a w a. a l t• V '_ N a.. = G. Z a pC V d� O N N +� J _ d :c5 Ci) R V S N'in 4= Z N R 0 � W �� m O C� _ .v 0 r a = C/) in R N '4+ d O F W O N o .. O K . , ,• " fj W W V ° y •_ = Q Q . *W' ti: a o F- d. O r = C N CO O , y�ila. x: Y �r� f' :1'n' 'i /. f 41 ,.44t i i i: -.L..,,, ! ---. t 4 : . �i� c \ '�' `v '� [ tt , �`1 • , ,.,` / ......,..1 ,, .4, 1,, a i �� , ma � f i'� a . ,, t, : ., ae, , .'1 1- [ � ., y 1 � '°" fit : ti r ai . � A Ili 1 ; e f ''. .. ,., ....;., .4:ira.... . : r �. 4 = • .., , _► . ,•,~* N ,, . i , . WV1 4i : I. 1. 4• ( ,, 0 1 -; 44. i , 1 ..� .b q r; • • t .. k _ ., .. . , .., , .. ., 4 - . 11110 1 i . : , 111 - ....4141 eg f l 1' ' ,. L, j .,..,,r V. 4 i , s z _ s„, z , ' /•\ , / / \ \\\ \ ' - '' , \,... , \ / - \ / ' . ' - i ' ' ,t. ° 11.61V 4 \ r ,. , ...■ , Ot t . 1 10 011,11111 4:41.111 III 7 loisiiiimi , _ . 7 11N. 01#101._,Blit, ii.,,,,,,,,_ ..., ---...4190,„ --, •••-- _ .- i - --wr 4 dop irio ■ v 4f 4 Mr . , •Ad ( ,Af ' 4 ,_ / \ ;.; ' 4, . 40 . 1 40po r r /e... 45 #1, ' - ei If A I I A 0 , _ • . IlVe . \ \ \ 4 , • * 4040S, , r 1 . jilli\** At 4110 t( I , \ ...‘ \ . ., \ .. , , ..„.„• ... , \ \ . , i I , . . .,, , . ., , . • . \ -4 ' -( 41P, • ..14V1r4111111 1 ,-/ i • di — 0 __. , • t, 1 ) t . 0 .F, .7 ,-2 t i .., , 1 . 1_11! il1 ■ if - - /-',../' -' s . ■ ... "1 • (.., E t- E _.* I El St - - 0 / ,/ i , , \ Z P?" ° • u ci o L' r i 3 ii i f ..., 4_ 1 01 ..:// . • - ‹ ...= ce ' = if `,.g ' u ' : — ''' 7 2 / • \ / , .=, -0 m kr, :L.' . - . . p -/ o3 . — E 1•,,' 2 z :42: . . . 1 s, s \ — , LU '63 E. li . • - rz '' 4": dr „ Xe, - - - ' k - - ' - ' ' . ' ! ' = i- i A ■ 1 g= ,,, 5 i! f 2 4' AL 1 J ./ . ' 4 \' ../' : ,' ,* ., ./ .. 4 i .011 2 OVfl' , . PTI „ 4 g * ■.. ' , .4, 4 4 . . ' \ p , _A ,t, 4,1* & • • ; kil . ALF.A*4 4 4 . \ i 1 mr • iviW.A+Alit. -1* A6-- ernt,II404 4 I WA ., 4 , _ :A : Va ,.. ,... :, , '- . - ., - kl■Tpl■ 41■'' * \ \ c i 4 , - . - *4■ 4 P 4/fkA • ' s 0 i . $. 044 0 119 A l . ' ii \ 4 In i■ , 4 0 r ._g , $ 1 f r \ : - 410 ° ' 4 ',Too, .AK.: 4 ,,, _•4 ' , , .:*, ,4fr■ • t■ • 4 , , ,...„ .. . . ,.. • ... , •••• 4- , , _ _ .-f . .. •-, A!, g 0 - _ - . ,, 4,40i .. .. .4. ... # k i te , -nly- , 7 .... ..... . s \--,,,fit4 ... .. ........ \ \ \\ \ ', • N. '. - , *ro I" . - t v* i - - ,I*, „)< ; pf- r- AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: • 3 0ccr 4-1-v vi 87 /h0 &1C , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: /ST 4? T :,ynel , 20 /I STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) . -e - (name, please print) being or represe ing an Applicant to the City of spen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that 1 have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: (/ Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained- from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty -two (22) inches wide and twenty -six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the _ day of , 20 , 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) 0 L "' 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. Z — Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this IS day of , 20j, by sit- • -r 'cc7 RE: 50 005SY/.r wmtwllr 82(TH Eio '" rt ` e `� P( WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL WEB SISSWOA �' 11Eottsec ,•waa B� 1 1 a.� i NOTICE K Y 0IYEI NE I 011 t6m hearing will be held Y � � �/ e br b , 2011 a atameetingto / begin at 4:30 m. before 1 the Aspenitien"me and iNDA M. • l l , n 130 tt. naS%., mee 1 Zoning Com ^ .co,to ANNING • My co ssion expires: Room' Cil HaN,13° S. Galena 5L, Aspen. e e Dis Mappats38005 Ste a Hlg 62, Aspen •9 �� Airport Business l ��� �.�// / '�/ / Cener, Block 1, ots 1 an 2 / / / u/i44 40�� (BMC Waat o pa coo Parch I 0O2 73 L 50310 1001 au�•�••��� ((( of r A far Sin PhMttYpr 'apa,Uwm°ial [7�J4— J spen. which otary Public SS m. h Eyes 0312912014 (S /Gp and Pluirlad Ural MwMOpr j u„,S„aPn Intl " pSf0 1 l °In erthe ~ktlGel2 1e to rr She current dimension � t as an al- ounanW on the Pr^P an can be generated. For tu ma0vi P^laoi contact Ben Gagnon at the CM of Asp information omtiun ty Dev ertmen of Aspen Community elopment D 9 2]55, or g°09141 a alen 51.spe , An• CO (970) AU AS APPLICABLE: at n Ga n i. .cp. c q ation written correspondence relate to the app should be sent to the above e+ma•I or physical ad- 3E PUBLICATION d` dryy PH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) A 305. Galena, Aspen. GO 61 mossappr E OWNERS AND GOVERNMENT AGENGIES NOTIED Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission 20 °; Aspen Times on January 16, CERTICICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24- 65.5 -103.3 • 4,0 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 31foor Stmt N \u4iJA1 0 Z As CO I en P SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: fen it h , 2011 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. County of Pitkin ) C ({ RA S Tbh) pelt 1. v t Y'-S,,, '. (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requir ction 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following m ".; J Publication of notice: By the publication ' Y thjlegal notice Nti& 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 taciled hereto. / V Posting of notice: By posting of notice, whic rypi;•ti ' d from the Community Development Department, which w uita 1 waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty -t4 PI4`€ 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 f 'j day of "r d An."' , 20 (( , 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) 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 amend ents. Signs e The foorY ing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this I� d y V of ON ,201, by C h vi sYophe✓ Elk o1/4 ..?C ungjo I I I WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL I '+ • I ; My commission expires: 6 112-6179 s 1 3 I OA ie\9i•� t 4pQ`P Notary Public wOaanYlbp ExplmstIMMOIS ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: * COPY OF THE PUBLICATION * PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) * LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENT AGENGIES NOTIED BY MAIL * APPLICANT CERTICICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24- 65.5 -103.3 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 38005 STATE HIGHWAY 82 (THE BMC WEST PARCEL), AMENDMENT TO THE ZONE DISTRICT MAP, PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on February 1, 2011, at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, in the Sister Cities Meeting Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, to review a proposal for an Amendment to the Zone District Map at 38005 State Highway 82, Aspen Airport Business Center, Block 1, Lots 1 and 2 (BMC West property), Parcel ID #273503101801 and 273503101802. The applicant is the City of Aspen, which proposes to establish initial zoning for the property as Service /Commercial /Industrial (S /C /I) and Planned Unit Development (PUD). The initial zoning is a parallel process with annexation of this parcel. The purpose of the initial zoning is to retain the current dimensions of the improvements currently on the property until such time as an alternative development plan can be generated. For further information, contact Ben Gagnon at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 429 -2755, (or by email at Ben.Gagnon(2 ci.aspen.co.us). All written correspondence related to the application should be sent to the above e -mail or physical address. Applicant: City of Aspen c/o Steve Barwick, 130 S. Galena, Aspen, CO 81611 Stan Gibbs, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in The Aspen Times on January 16, 2011 City of Aspen Account , ` 0. , ,. I, r ib ty 1 t .t I, t ,YR, , k 4 • 1 4 t , A ., ,, .. .. ,14/. -,. 1 : 1 . , .r.,... . r I .. � G, 5 _ . . .• pi i ' t �.' 4 ' p,L _Il ii? z It 1 R OW '..''' 1 ... . i k r 7. r......, '' / * ... i . . , \ . • + . + ice. ` it .i - ��rr a 1 . % L 44 -� L } 4 t a P 1/ N ' r . .., -;-..---- . - '' ' ' li '.,,,..----7-z..,,,,,ii2,,f;ii.,4- '..,.. - , - ` L t Pi !. .2. 1 . a di � V ' �.: a�.s - � -y.a - " . °_' =r; • a emu Ift P s 1 ' .`` C,r A 1 4 Z i ; c " . 7 1. . ''' ' .r :, e ' e 4 , i _ .1+ . 1 . ..1t 14 1 _ *4 ... ,.... , . , _ . , c lit 4 ` . 4 41,.. , - tr i ... 1 . , i ' i - --- i .,,, , e .,,i.... v I 7, i , ii,,,,,, % , i. 0 ,.., . 7 1 L - "' hoi k *4 - ?` i ' ..., _ _ q i . ,:-. - N, A I ?ills it rAlli 40 , ii 4.1 - - it. ---- - - iQ ".• 0 .• .. f.y, ' \ It *ti f F I t y : Y k 1 1 b i o 1 • 1 ■ - F n ` i x y m 2 i I 31' t: 4 r i a -....t .. . , , . ,. s { . , I , , ., .8 Q t f w . . i A i f_ i L _ MELTON LILY ALDERDICE MARK KNEIFEL NATHAN R 50% p0 BOX 4573 310 PASS GO LN 320 PASS GO LN ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 DANGLER TERRI CONARD M BRYAN DAVIS DYLAN ROSE 50% 311 PASS GO LN PO BOX 9996 320 PASS GO LN ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 STRICKLEN MICHAEL 0 HOFFMANN JASON 220 PASS GO LN PO BOX 2584 NATHAN ASPEN, CO 81611 411 ASPEN, CO 81612 411 PASS GO LN _____ ASPEN, CO 81611 LYNK HARRY A II HOWELLS THOMAS 510 PASS GO LN PO BOX 10763 MILLER MICHELLE ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 522 PASS GO LN ASPEN, CO 81611 KAVANAUGH JOHN T & ANN M 312 COLLEGE PL CLARK EBEN P LEE JOEL D NORFOLK, VA 23510 COULTER JEAN N 511 PASS GO LN 209 VENTNOR AVE #J ASPEN, CO 81611 RUTLEDGE WILLIAM 0 IV ASPEN, CO 81611 412 PASS GO LN JAHN MARCIA L ASPEN, CO 81611 610 PASS GO LN MONRONEY MICHAEL ASPEN, CO 81611 BARROW DAVID J 720 PASS GO LN 520 PASS GO LN ASPEN, CO 81611 MULCAHY EDWARD LEE JR ASPEN, CO 81611 611 PASS GO LN NERBONNE ARTHUR R ASPEN, CO 81611 620 PASS GO LN FERRER TREVOR R ASPEN, CO 81611 322 PASS GO LN ARIEL KYLE ASPEN, CO 81611 512 PASS GO LN ASPEN, CO 81611 DOCKEN ANDREW J AUGUR WHEATON 211 PASS GO LN PO BOX 3614 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 BERKLEY ALISON PO BOX — 209 VENTNOR AVE #N MARSH KAMALA ASPEN, CO 81611 EMENS BRADY 507 303 W 8TH PL ASPEN, CO 81612 LOYD KEELS S CARBONDALE, CO 81623 210 PASS GO LN ASPEN, CO 81611 DECARLO KIM PO BOX 9301 HOULIHAN SARA B VU TRUC K & TERESITA S ASPEN, CO 81612 112 PASS GO LN 110 PASS GO LN ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 SACHS HARRISON & SARAH GATES MICHAEL D PO BOX 12063 SUNDSTROM JOHN & KEANAAINA PO BOX 9143 612 12 PASS GO LN ASPEN, CO 81612 FARRAH ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 STRAUB GRETCHEN ASHLEY VENTNOR 209 OWNERS LLC C/O MARK UHFELDER BARRETTE JEAN ROBERT ASPEN, CO 81612 210AABC STE AA 209 VENTNOR AVE #Q ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 MARTINEZ LUIS PO BOX 2981 A corm C0 81612 DITTMAR GERMAN 721 PASS GO KLANAC SAMANTHA M ASPEN, CO 81611 711 PASS GO LN #711 ASPEN, CO 81611 NORLUND KAREN L 621 PASS GO LN ASPEN MINI STORAGE LLC ASPEN, CO 81611 105 WOODWARD LANE ASPEN, CO 81611 TCI OF NORTHERN NEW JERSEY INC D /B /A TCI OF CENTRAL CO ATTN: TAX DEP DELAY JOHN P PO BOX 173838 PO BOX 2724 DENVER, CO 80217 -3838 ASPEN, CO 81612 LIDDINGTON JENNIFER PO BOX 12126 KING JESSICA A ASPEN, CO 81612 722 PASS GO LN ASPEN, CO 81611 GASPERETTI JOHN 212 PASS GO LN ASPEN, CO 81611 FREEMAN PERRIN N III PO BOX 2664 ASPEN, CO 81611 GIAMPAOLO JOSEPH F JR PO BOX 7871 ASPEN, CO 81612 DEER HILL COMM /LOFTS CONDO ASSOC COMMON AREA TAMEZ DANIEL 209 AABC PO BOX 9830 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81612 HAW KINS DUDLEY W L JR NOTO PAUL PO BOX 37 CO 81623 209 EN, CO OR #M ASP CARBONDALE, EN, CO 81611 WA HAMER," LUM8LF2 CO PO BOX 2607 DEER HILL COMM CONDO OWNERS LLC GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81502 -2607 210 AABC STE AA ASPEN, CO 81611 VA • MEMORANDUM TO: City Planning and Zoning Commission THROUGH: Chris Bendon, Director, Community Development Department DATE OF MEMO: . January 27, 2011 MEETING DATE: February 1, 2011 RE: Amendment to the Zone District Map for the initial zoning of the BMC West property Resolution No. , Series of 2011 APPLICANT /OWNER: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City of Aspen Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission determine that this REPRESENTATIVE: Amendment to the Zone District Map Steve Barwick, City Manager meets required standards, and recommends Scott Miller, Asset Manager Council approval of a PUD Plan. LOCATION: SUMMARY: 38005 Highway 82 Applicant requests that the Planning and Zoning Commission determine that this PROPOSED ZONE DISTRICT MAP Amendment to the Zone District Map AMENDMENT: meets required standards, and recommends As part of a parallel annexation process, Council approval of a PUD Plan. applicant seeks initial zoning of S /C /I— PUD as a method of maintaining the existing lumber yard with no changes to current conditions and use. LAND USE REQUEST AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The applicant is requesting the following review procedure from the Planning and Zoning Commission: • Amendment to the Zone District Map :Initial Zoning] – An application for Amendment to the Zone District Map, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.310.020, requires the Planning and Zoning Commission, at a public hearing, to determine if the application meets the standards for an amendment to the Zone District Map. The City Council is the final decision - making body. • Consolidated Conceptual and Final PUD – An application for Consolidated Conceptual and Final PUD, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.445.030(B)2, requires the Planning and Zoning Commission, at a public hearing, to recommending City Council approve, approve with conditions or deny the Final PUD. The City Council is the final decision - making body. a ,� BACKGROUND: The City of' Aspen purchased the 4.6 -acre BMC West property in December 2007, with the long -term intent of developing affordable housing. However, the City has no intent to initiate a public process to plan the property for at least three to five years. In the meantime, the City has a fiduciary responsibility to its taxpayers to annex the property in order to collect property tax, sales tax and Construction Materials Use tax. Applicant is in a parallel review process for annexation. The intent at this time is to essentially "freeze" the site in its current condition as a lumber yard. This will be accomplished by the adoption of a Final PUD Plan that establishes the dimensional requirements and use of the parcel as they are today, referencing the 2009 Improvement Survey Plat (see application). A new development plan for the parcel would require a full review by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council either through a PUD Amendment or rezoning — and very likely both. STAFF FINDINGS: Many of the standards of review for an Amendment to the Zone District Map do not apply in this case, because there is no "proposed development." For example, standards for an Amendment to the Zone District Map ask whether the proposal is "compatible with surrounding zone districts;" if it would have an impact on "traffic generation;" if it would place "demands on public facilities;" or if it would have "adverse impacts on the natural environment." If the City were seeking only to have the subject parcel rezoned to Service /Commercial /Industrial, the applicant would need to conduct an analysis of the potential build -out of the parcel under the allowances of the S /C /I Zone District. However, by adopting a Final PUD Plan that effectively "freezes" the current condition in place, this application does not include any "proposed development." The concept is that once the City is ready to move forward with a development plan in approximately three to five years, a land use application would be submitted, resulting in a comprehensive land use review. Therefore, this Amendment to the Zone District Map would not have any impact on surrounding zone districts, traffic generation, public facilities or infrastructure, or the natural environment. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends in favor of the proposed Amendment to the Zone District Map and a Final PUD Plan, finding that the application meets or exceeds the standards of review. RECOMMENDED MOTION: If the Planning and Zoning Commission chooses to recommend approval of a Zone District Map Amendment and Final PUD Plan to City Council, the commission may use this motion, "I move the adoption of Resolution No._, Series of 2011." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A — Application Exhibit B — Staff Findings for Amendment to Zone District Map Exhibit C — Staff findings for Final PUD Plan RESOLUTION NO. , (SERIES OF 2011) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DETERMINING THAT REZONING MEETS APPLICABLE STANDARDS AND RECOMMENDING THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) FOR THE FORMER BMC WEST PROPERTY LOCATED AT 38005 STATE HIGHWAY 82, ASPEN AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER, BLOCK 1, LOTS 1 AND 2, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 273503101801 and 2 73 503101 802 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the City of Aspen, represented by City Manager Steve Barwick, requesting approval of an Amendment to the Zone District Map and a final Planned Unit Development (PUD), for the property at 38005 State Highway 82, commonly known as the BMC West property, and legally described as Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, Aspen Airport Business Center, Pitkin County, Colorado; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant requests the Planning and Zoning Commission find that the Amendment to the Zone District Map meets applicable requirements; and, WHEREAS, the Applicant requests a recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission to the City Council for approval of Final Planned Unit Development (PUD); and, WHEREAS, the property is located at 38005 State Highway 82, and is zoned B2 (General Business) in Pitkin County; and, WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Department found that the application meets or exceeds applicable standards of review; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on February 1, 2011, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. , Series of 2011, by a vote, approving an Amendment to the Zone District Map, initially zoning the property as Service /Commercial/Industrial —PUD, and recommending the Aspen City Council approve a Final PUD, with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, • - - - _ _ - _ - , and has taken and considered public comment; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, • WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Initial Zoning Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in City of Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.310, Amendments to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends that City Council initially zone 38005 State Highway 82 as S /C /1 —PUD. Section 2: Approved PUD Dimensional Requirements The following dimensional requirements are recommended to City Council for the Final PUD at 38005 State Highway 82. Dimensional Req. 38005 Highwy 82 Minimum Lot Size Existing Min. Lot Area / Dwelling Unit Existing Maximum Allowable Density Existing Minimum Lot Width Existing Minimum Front Yard Existing Minimum Side Yard Existing Minimum Rear Yard Existing Maximum Site Coverage Existing Maximum Height Existing Minimum dist. between buildings Existing Minimum Open Space Existing Allowable Floor Area Existing Minimum Off- Street Parking Existing The dimensional requirements of the Final PUD Plan reflects existing conditions as outlined in Improvement Survey Plat of April 22, 2009, attached as Exhibit A. Section 3: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 4: 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. Section 5: 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 Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 1st day of February, 2011. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney Stan Gibbs, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk Exhibit A: Improvement Survey Plat of April 22, 2009 . .T a . I. e c i 'a ini, ai ± e El L S - pp 2 m R 1 :!i A ! 5 1 v= IS T @ l e ' g® gee B 92lIi 1 r s Y 6 p l $e 0 a FF 1 �� •; e . 0v0 1 I re ! !' ':` �" l Nwl EH t !-Elba , ':p co cogor r- ® o- CI— ci Ce Ch VALI ft 4 =Ogg r [l5111111111lilis1k1s111 • e.§8 t3 c W a,, o .0 >ESpOY troo t0 = tlb §0 A 8ag go, 1 6e In 1 eIA } 1 F Ie I p e :1 !! g ▪ I.1 i�la E9 I ill; 0 1 1. i l l E 1 ;PI T y 1! j O 41t f 9 9 F 1 i e b e � q 1 • lo 4 /I 11@1 liit`a [ �� R p 9 2 E 0 i F S p A ° ;III ) !7 11 { •9 e � AP : p � B • b I�1 •l L e a e°! ill II l 1 ! 1 l F l ie V ! lQ s v 0 e [ ITI Fl i F A ! aT 1i, CI) O e�I1 1 04 It i't 7! li 1 1ap p i i E_ @ t F 1 A ill 1 I ' l II 1 fli1 e� e ! e 1 ilF O P I ip b �� I Dv, !a 1 I I � ! i 0 4 �g ° pc1 • } i e 12111 Iij T 1 i i p p j { p PP I of o 6 i ir1 I ;ie` i i t i? . �Q i iii 0 1 x17 4 1! 1 !e 1 . 1 4ejl l ; t %!, 0 i I I1 Ili a I5 51 . MIMI S�1 . t l F i- E 1 ii / 5 y1 e F 1 1 414. e � °p = II P WI p t P i 7 v� , B . 1075,11I1(ISM!! 1I? A9 � It g '[!la!p /p 11 eSI it it IT i ! 7 A T 1,1; A ` II I p pP ' r el it Ar i gpp A. �9 S8 p 3 °'T I �iEOlIIIr���1� I?!11dE11i 1 ! 4� ri a i61 s �i di it 11 1 _ !7 _ ° Exhibit B Amendment to Zone District Map Review Criteria & Staff Findings Standards of Review: In reviewing an amendment to the text of this Title or an amendment to the Official Zone District Map, the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment is not in conflict with any applicable portion of this title, as the responses to standards of review illustrate below. The applicant proposes an initial underlying zoning of Service /Commercial /Industrial, which is the only city zone district that expressly permits a lumber yard. The applicant proposes a Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay with the express intent of "freezing" the existing development on -site in its current condition, including the existing dimensions and use. Any future change to the existing dimensions and use would require a rezoning and/or PUD Amendment. The intent of the current request is to facilitate only the annexation of the property and the continued operation of the lumber yard; this application does not represent a proposed development. Staff believes this criterion is met. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment would make no changes to existing conditions. However, the proposed amendment requires any future proposed development to rezone and/or gain approval for a PUD Amendment. Both a rezoning or PUD review process includes a criteria assuring that any future development must be "consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan." If the property is annexed, the City of Aspen has an obligation to assign a zone district to the property. Staff believes S /C /I- PUD for this property is consistent with all the elements of the AACP. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Finding: This request will facilitate the continued operation of the current lumber yard operation on the site. As such, this request does not create any adverse effects on the subject property's neighborhood or surrounding environment. Any future development proposal must comply with this standard under rezoning, or similar standards under a PUD Amendment. Under a future PUD Amendment, any future development proposal must comply with a set of more specific criteria regarding compatibility. Staff believes this criterion is met. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. BMC Zoning Exhibit B Page 1 Staff Finding: This request will facilitate the continued operation of the current lumber yard operation on the site. As such, this request does not propose additional traffic generation that might contribute to road safety issues. Any future development proposal must comply with this standard under rezoning, or similar standards under a PUD Amendment. Under a future PUD Amendment, any future development proposal must comply with a set of more specific criteria regarding traffic generation and road safety. Staff believes this criterion is met. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools and emergency medical facilities. Staff Finding: The property proposed for annexation is currently served by City municipal water and district sanitary sewer service. For the continued operation of the lumber yard, there will be no additional demands on public facilities. Any future development proposal must comply with this standard for rezoning, or similar standards under a PUD Amendment. Under a future PUD Amendment, any future development proposal must comply with a set of more specific criteria regarding public facilities. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Finding: This request will facilitate the continued operation of the current lumber yard operation on the site. As such, this request would not result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Any future development proposal must comply with this standard under rezoning, or similar standards under a PUD Amendment. Under a future PUD Amendment, any future development proposal must comply with a set of more specific criteria regarding impacts on natural resources. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City. Staff Finding: The existing lumber yard operation is already integrated with and thus consistent with the community character in the City. Any future development proposal must comply with this standard under rezoning, or similar standards under a PUD Amendment. Under a future PUD Amendment, any future development proposal must comply with a set of more specific criteria regarding "consistency with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area," as well as criteria regarding site design and architectural character. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. BMC Zoning Exhibit B Page 2 Staff Finding: The City has purchased this parcel and wishes to annex it at this time, largely in fiduciary responsibility to city taxpayers through the future collection of property and sales taxes. Any future rezoning proposal must comply with this standard. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest and whether it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this Title. Staff Finding: Based on the above responses, the proposed amendment would not be in conflict with the public interest and the proposed amendment is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the City of Aspen Land Use Regulations. This request meets all of the "Standards of review" criteria established in the above noted Section 26.310.040 of the City of Aspen Land Use Regulations. Any future rezoning proposal must comply with this standard. BMC Zoning Exhibit B Page 3 Exhibit C PUD Review Criteria & Staff Findings A. General requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment does not represent or reflect a "proposed development," and would make no changes to existing conditions. However, the proposed amendment requires any future proposed development to rezone and/or gain approval for a PUD Amendment. Both a rezoning or PUD review process includes a criteria assuring that any future development must be "consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan." This parcel is part of the urbanized area of Aspen. Staff finds this criterion is met. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment does not represent or reflect a "proposed development," and would make no changes to existing conditions. The existing lumber yard operation is already integrated with and thus consistent with the character in the surrounding area. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment does not represent or reflect a "proposed development," and would make no changes to existing conditions. Initial zoning and PUD designation will not adversely effect future development of the surrounding area. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. Staff Finding: No GMQS allotments are being requested. B. Establishment of dimensional requirements: The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD as described in General Provisions, Section 26.445.040, above. The dimensional requirements of the underlying Zone District shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing BMC Zoning Exhibit C Page 1 development patterns shall be emphasized. The proposed dimensional requirements shall comply with the following: 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property: a) The character of and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b) Natural or man -made hazards. c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade and significant vegetation and landforms. d) Existing and proposed man -made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking and historical resources. Staff Finding: The proposed dimensional requirements in the Final PUD Plan limit development on the site to existing conditions and uses. Staff finds criteria a -d are met. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. Staff Finding: The proposed dimensional requirements in the Final PUD Plan limit development on the site to existing conditions and uses. Staff finds the proposed dimensional requirements are appropriate. 3. The appropriate number of off - street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any nonresidential land uses. b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and /or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the City. Staff Finding: There is no proposed development. The proposed dimensional requirements in the Final PUD Plan limit development on the site to existing conditions and uses. Staff finds these criteria met. Any future PUD Amendment must comply with this criteria. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: BMC Zoning Exhibit C Page 2 Staff Finding: The proposed dimensional requirements in the Final PUD Plan limit development on the site to existing conditions and uses. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: Staff Finding: The proposed dimensional requirements in the Final PUD Plan limit development on the site to existing conditions and uses. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's physical constraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if: a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area plan to which the property is subject. b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in Subparagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided or those characteristics mitigated. c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern, land uses and characteristics. Staff Finding: Not applicable. There is not a proposal to increase allowable density. C. Site design. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man -made features and the adjacent public spaces and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man -made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. BMC Zoning Exhibit C Page 3 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. 7. For nonresidential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. Staff Finding: There is no proposed development at this time. Potential future development or redevelopment will need to address these criteria. Staff believes accepting current conditions on the parcel meets this standard C(1 -7). D. Landscape plan. The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the City, with surrounding parcels and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well - designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing significant vegetation and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. 2. Significant existing natural and man -made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other Landscape features is appropriate. Staff Finding: There is no proposed development at this time. Potential future development or redevelopment will need to address these criteria. Staff believes accepting current conditions on the parcel meets this standard D(1 -3). E. Architectural character. 1. Be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the City, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for and indicative of the intended use and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade and vegetation and by use of non- or less - intensive mechanical systems. 3. Accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. Staff Finding: There is no proposed development at this time. Potential future development or redevelopment will need to address this criteria. Staff believes accepting current conditions on the parcel meets standards E(1 -3). BMC Zoning Exhibit C Page 4 , F. Lighting. The purpose of this standard to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both Public Safety and general aesthetic concerns. The following standards shall be accomplished: 1. All lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. Lighting of site features, structures and access ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. 2. All exterior lighting shall in compliance with the outdoor lighting standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD documents. Up- lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. Staff Finding: There is no proposed development at this time. Potential future development or redevelopment will need to address this criteria. Staff believes accepting current conditions on the parcel meets standards F(1 -2). G. Common park, open space or recreation area. If the proposed development includes a common park, open space or recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD, the following criteria shall be met: Staff Finding: Not applicable. There is no common park or open space propsed. H. Utilities and public facilities. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. Staff Finding: Not applicable. There is no proposed increase in development at this time. Staff believes accepting current conditions on the parcel meets standard H(1 -3). I. Access and circulation. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: BMC Zoning Exhibit C Page 5 1. Each lot, structure or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way or other area dedicated to public or private use. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. 3. Areas of historic pedestrian or recreational trail use, improvements of or connections to, the bicycle and pedestrian trail system and adequate access to significant public lands and the rivers are provided through dedicated public trail easements and are proposed for appropriate improvements and maintenance. 4. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan and adopted specific plans regarding recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths and transportation are proposed to be implemented in an appropriate manner. 5. Streets in the PUD which are proposed or recommended to be retained under private ownership provide appropriate dedication to public use to ensure appropriate public and emergency access. 6. Security gates, guard posts or other entryway expressions for the PUD or for lots within the PUD, are minimized to the extent practical. Staff Finding: There is no proposed change to the access or circulation patterns. Staff believes accepting current conditions on the parcel meets criterion I (1 -6). J. Phasing of development plan. The purpose of this criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with the following: Staff Finding: Not applicable. There is no phasing proposed. BMC Zoning Exhibit C Page 6 a o E Q W C _ N 0 Q C h .�_ N N m t C i V��I ' ,n 0) C T 7' c7D n C!) (.7 c Z 3 �yE O Z d co ->, a fl Z a'aU o z y p W c, . 3 N w o c 2— "2 0 2 5 W G E L N 04 H U CO N 2 L V/ CO - m U 0 0 LL 3 a 0 c � a ° u> al � a L N N U a" a a o - E Om ---------------___ \ H *"...e ,.....? r ,....., \ . ( / , . c c. N Q , a � en LL U U 1 s . -,,,,,„ d Vi \ 1 t \.\,,, ,, ?1,), ,..c ' a* \ > ,-,c .7, _\ I 4 w c.) y''� a °. V m,, w a k\ cL cc Ca ' \ ti ` �\ • Y w00 0WAR° i n f E-4 a r+ 1 O [i O c O ; U 6\____ ck a Z8 AMH iii a ab 11Oc1HIV 3 c � ❑ U c cF, E m m J1 i I 0 ANNEXATION PLAN '''' °` CITY OF ASPEN OCTOBER, 2008 , ,� • CONTENTS 2 City Council Resolution 4 Purpose 5 Annexation Area 6 Annexation Area Characteristics 9 Sequential Steps to Complete Annexation 12 Statutory Annexation Criteria 13 Local Annexation Criteria 16 Example Annexation Petition 18 Map A 19 Map B PREPARED BY City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 970.920.5090 THE CITY OF ASPEN 1 ■ C e N r1/4 RESOLUTION NO. 95 (SERIES OF 2008) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING THE CITY OF ASPEN ANNEXATION PLAN. WHEREAS, pursuant to Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS) 31- 12- 105(e)(l), the City of Aspen must annually adopt a "plan" guiding future annexations; and, WHEREAS, the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) called for an update of the City's annexation plan to reflect the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) as jointly adopted by the City of Aspen and Pitkin County; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission discussed a draft of this updated plan during a work session on May 28, 2002; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council and the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners discussed a draft of the updated plan on July 16, 2002; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Community Development Department refined and updated this plan, in consultation with the Pitkin County Community Development Department, to be consistent with the 2000 AACP; and, WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the updated annexation plan on September 22, 2002; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has subsequently adopted annexation plans with minor boundary changes as a result of annexations on an annual basis; and, WHEREAS, there has been no annexation of land in the past year resulting in no amendments to the annexation plan of 2007; and, WHEREAS, during a regular meeting on , the City Council considered the City's boundary, the city's annexation plan, and a recommendation of approval from the Community Development Director; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the annexation plan meets or exceeds all applicable standards and that adoption of the plan is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: That the City Council has formally adopted the City of Aspen Annexation Plan. RESOLVED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED FINALLY this th day of , 2008. Attest: Approved as to content: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Signed copy on file with City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorney v. PURPOSE The City of Aspen Annexation Plan reflects land use policy of the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) with regard to adding urbanized land, and land appropriate for urbanization, surrounding Aspen to the City's jurisdiction. The Plan provides landowners whose property is adjacent to the City of Aspen with the relevant requirements and processes for requesting inclusion into the City of Aspen. The City of Aspen shall use its legislative authority of annexation and this annexation plan to: • Ensure the natural and well- ordered development of the City. • Distribute fairly and equitably the costs of city services among those persons who benefit therefrom. • Extend the city's government, services, and facilities to eligible citizens forming part of a whole community. • Simplify jurisdictional boundaries and reduce administrative confusion. • Increase the City's ability to provide its citizens with the services they require. Colorado Revised Statute All annexation actions by cities in Colorado are governed by CRS 31 -12 -102, et. seq. These statutory requirements include the City's need to maintain an annexation plan for a three -mile boundary around the existing City limits. The specific requirements include the following: "Prior to completion of any annexation, within the three mile area, the municipality shall have in place a plan for the area, which generally describes the proposed location character, and extent of streets, subways, bridges, waterways, waterfronts, parkways, playgrounds, squares, parks, aviation fields, other public ways, grounds, open spaces, public utilities, and terminals for water, light, sanitation, transportation, and power to be provided by the municipality and the proposed land uses for the area. Such plan shall be updated at least once annually." Urban Growth Boundary The City of Aspen and Pitkin County jointly approved Aspen's Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) via adoption of the 2000 AACP. (The 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan may be obtained from the Aspen / Pitkin Community Development Office, City Hall, Aspen.) The UGB identifies the land surrounding Aspen as either appropriate for urban development (within the UGB) or inappropriate for urban development (outside the UGB). Land within the UGB is expected to become part of the City's urbanized area, at some point, while land outside the UGB should only be annexed as a method of preserving the non -urban character of lands surrounding Aspen. The UGB should be amended upon determination that the subject land should be re- categorized, independent of an annexation decision. Disclosure The City of Aspen Annexation Plan has been adopted to meet the compulsory requirements set forth by the State of Colorado, pursuant to CRS 31 -12 -105. The plan should not be considered a replacement or complete reflection of the state statutes. Property owners seeking annexation should consult the Colorado Revised Statutes. The plan is not binding upon the City of Aspen. CITY OF ASPEN ANNEXATION AREA Map A depicts Aspen's annexation area, corresponding to the State's three -mile area requirement, based on the September, 2008, jurisdictional boundary. The jointly- adopted Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) is also shown. The City of Aspen is currently approximately 2,420 acres. The area within the UGB is approximately 4,860 acres, roughly twice the size of the current City jurisdiction. This land within the UGB has been determined appropriate for urbanization and is likely to become part of the City of Aspen. The three -mile area is approximately 48,000 acres, 46,000 acres larger than the current City jurisdiction. Much of this three -mile area is outside Aspen's UGB and considered inappropriate for urbanization. Annexation of areas outside the UGB should only be considered as a means of preserving the non -urban character of the land. To understand the City's potential service needs, annexation areas within the UGB have been analyzed as smaller land areas. The boundaries for each area were developed based on the following factors: physical features, existing development patterns, existing property lines, and established neighborhood areas. ANNEXATION AREA CHARACTERISTICS The City is required to identify the area within three miles of its boundary. (See Map A.) The proximity of these areas, however, does not necessarily mean these areas are desirable for annexation. The three -mile area is a State requirement and should not be considered an intention of the City of Aspen. Many areas, outside of the UGB especially, may be entirely inappropriate for annexation. Following is an overview of land use characteristics for each area within a three -mile radius of the City, with particular attention paid to the areas within the UGB. The areas described are shown on Map B. These general characteristics provide a basis for understanding potential land use issues that may need to be addressed during an annexation. Ute /Northstar, Shadow Mountain, Red Butte Generally, rural areas with very limited growth potential due to their physical circumstances. These areas are particularly affected by environmental hazards and each request should include an analysis of the regulatory tools used to address such hazards. The City's Land Use Code provisions for Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA's) may adequately guide the growth and development of these areas. Further consideration should be given to the more stringent County 1041 regulations particularly with regard to development on steep slopes. Mountain Valley, Red Mountain Generally, suburban areas comprised of predominantly developed subdivisions. Several similar subdivisions, such as Eastwood and Knollwood, have already annexed into the City. The major land use issues affecting this group include floor area ratios, legitimizing "bandit dwelling units," wildfire mitigation, wildlife corridors, and the status of the roads and ability of the City to adequately maintain and upgrade them as necessary. Remote Subdivisions Several small residential subdivisions, located along the Maroon Creek, Castle Creek, and Roaring Fork River drainages, are within the three -mile area. These subdivisions have little to no additional development potential. These areas do not appear to provide any advantage to the City and could become infrastructure service burdens. New land use regulations addressing wildfire, wildlife, avalanche, and development on steep slopes would be required. Lower Smuggler This area contains large development parcels with growth potential, existing subdivisions with little remaining growth potential, the historically important Smuggler Mine, and steeply sloped areas with limited growth potential. Continued public access to the Upper Smuggler area and recreational opportunities would need to be ensured. Land Use Code provisions for mining activity would be necessary. Regulatory tools to address development on steep slopes would be necessary. Upper Smuggler This area contains large publicly and privately -owned parcels with significant infrastructure limitations and steeply sloped areas with very limited growth potential. This area was an active mining area. Currently, this area is a very popular recreation r"‘ area and is a primary public access to public lands. Much of this area has been identified as "land with conservation value" in the AACP. Continued public access to public lands and recreational opportunities would need to be ensured. Regulatory tools to address development on steep slopes would be necessary. Meadowood, Tennis Club, West Buttermilk Subdivision, and State Highway 82 Corridor Generally, suburban areas comprised of predominantly developed subdivisions. The major land use issues affecting this group include floor area ratios, legitimizing "bandit dwelling units," trail connections, and the status of the roads and ability of the City to adequately maintain and upgrade them as necessary. A few large parcels with significant development potential exist between Meadowood and State Highway 82. The Aspen Valley Hospital, in this area was annexed. Bar X Ranch, AVLT, and Lower Maroon Creek Generally agricultural in character with significant growth potential. Development issues include preserving the riparian habitat along Maroon Creek, trail connections, fishing access, and traffic generation impacts to the Highway 82 corridor. The Bar X Ranch and AVLT land was annexed for the purposes of developing a mix of free - market and affordable dwelling units. The Soldner Family parcel remains in County jurisdiction. Buttermilk Base Area The base of Buttermilk Ski Area represents significant development opportunity with potential impacts on, and benefits to, the City of Aspen. This area is presently underutilized and is identified in the MCP as a development node for concentrated mixed -use, transit - oriented development. Residential, commercial, and lodging development would affect the City's infrastructure and the area's commercial and lodging profile. This area represents a significant opportunity for transportation improvements. Additionally, the redevelopment of this area may provide the City opportunity to reach community goals. This area should be annexed into the City of Aspen prior to development review. If redevelopment of this area is entitled in the County and then the land is annexed, significant coordination on the administration of development approvals will be necessary. Aspen Business Center and North Forty Suburban areas with moderate growth potential. The North Forty subdivision is reaching its residential build -out and has some potential for additional commercial development. The ABC has moderate growth potential in both residential and commercial sectors, most of which would involve redevelopment. Significant expansion of commercial uses in the ABC would affect the profile of commercial activity in the Aspen area and may affect transportation patterns. A new zone district would likely be required to accommodate the ABC. Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, County Maintenance Facility, RFTA bus barn, Sardy Field (Aspen /Pitkin County Airport), North Highway 82 Corridor These public infrastructure facilities are currently operated by either the county or special districts. Expansion of these facilities could be expected to coincide with growth of the area's population and service needs, although physical constraints may limit expansion capabilities. Expansion of the airport is also controlled by public policy discussions of increasing Aspen's tourist capacity. Intergovernmental agreements may be necessary for annexation of these facilities. Brush Creek Village, Cozy Point Ranch. Starwood, McLain Flats Suburban subdivisions comprised of single - family residences. Cozy Point Ranch is an agricultural and equestrian operation owned and managed by the City of Aspen. These areas, while within the three -mile area, are removed from Aspen and not likely to become incorporated into the City. The major land use issues affecting this group include floor area ratios, legitimizing "bandit dwelling units," wildfire mitigation, wildlife corridors, and the status of the roads and ability of the City to adequately maintain and upgrade them as necessary. Woody Creek The three -mile area includes a portion of the Woody Creek drainage. This rural area is predominantly agricultural and estate ranches. Although geographically proximate to the City's boundary, this area lies in a separate drainage basin and is logistically remote from Aspen. This area is not expected to become part of the City of Aspen. Snowmass Village The three -mile area includes part of Snowmass Village, an incorporated town. Only unincorporated lands are eligible for annexation. This area is not expected to become part of the City of Aspen. Owl Creek Ranch, Droste Ranch This rural area functions as a buffer between the urbanized areas of Aspen and Snowmass Village. Predominantly single - family homes on large lots, this area could sustain significant additional development with the extension of urban infrastructure and bring about significant change in the character of the area. The major land use issues affecting this group include the desired character of the area, additional development potential, wildfire mitigation, wildlife corridors, recreational trails, and the status of the area's infrastructure. Ski Areas - Aspen Mountain, Aspen Highlands, Buttermilk These areas correspond with ski area permit boundaries. This land is typically Forest Service land, although substantial portions of Aspen Mountain Ski Area are owned by the Aspen Ski Company. The City's Land Use Code is better suited to regulate base facilities. Annexation would necessitate new land use legislation to regulate ski area operation and may also necessitate backcountry emergency rescue operation. Forest Lands These areas correspond with Federally -owned land maintained by the United States Forest Service and privately -owned "in- holdings." These areas are remote, with little or no existing services and have limited access. These areas are typically zoned Rural and Remote (RR) by Pitkin County to maintain the backcountry character. These areas do not appear to provide any advantage to the City and could be a burden. Annexation of these areas would necessitate new land use legislation to regulate backcountry development, agreements with the Forest Service for permitting and administration of forest - related activities, and may also necessitate backcountry emergency rescue operation. c • a SEQUENTIAL STEPS TO COMPLETE ANNEXATION Annexation Process: Associated Processes: Pre - Application Conference. (See Note #1) Annexation Petition Filed - Landowner submits necessary application materials to the City Clerk. (See example petition, attached.) Property owner may enter into a pre - annexation agreement with the City of Aspen. (See note #2) Resolution #1 — City Council Initiates annexation process by adoption of a resolution. Resolution establishes a public hearing be scheduled more than 30 days and less than 60 days. City Engineer verifies contiguity requirement for eligibility. Public Hearing and Resolution #2 — City Council identifies properties eligible for annexation according to State Statute. Annexation Impact Report — For annexations of more than 10 acres. (See note #3) Land use reviews — The landowner may initiate any City land use review process necessary to develop the property. (See note #4) Acknowledgement of Development Rights — The City reserves the right to accept land use approvals granted in the county and establish an agreement for the administration of said rights. (See note #5) Initial Zoning — The Community Development Department begins an initial zoning process and establishes public hearing schedule with the Planning and Zoning Commission. (See note #6) First Reading of Annexation Ordinance - City Council establishes second reading and public hearing date. The City may postpone second reading to permit a property owner to confirm associated land use reviews. Second Reading of Annexation Ordinance - Property either annexed or denied. Initial Zoning Ordinance — Newly annexed land must be assigned zoning within 90 days of annexation. (See note #6) Process Notes: 1. Pre - Application. Potential applicants are encouraged to meet with the City Attorney to discuss the annexation process and with the Community Development Director to discuss the potential benefits of annexation. An annexation petition must be found in compliance with the statutory annexation criteria and is subject to compliance with local annexation criteria, to the extent those criteria are considered applicable to the specific petition. 2. Pre Annexation Agreement. A property owner seeking annexation may negotiate a pre - annexation agreement with the City of Aspen. Such negotiations may include, but are not limited to, the type, amount, character, and timing of development and may specify certain improvements required of a property owner and financial arrangements securing such improvements. At such time of actual annexation, a final annexation agreement may be confirmed. 3. Annexation Impact Report. CRS 31 -12 -108.5 requires the annexing municipality prepare an annexation impact report at least 25 days prior to the public hearing (Resolution #2). The report must be filed with the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners (BOCC). A report is not required for annexations of 10 acres or less or when the City and the BOCC agree the report requirement may be waived. An annexation Impact Report shall include, as a minimum: A. A map or maps of the municipality and adjacent territory showing the following information: 1. The present and proposed boundaries for the municipality and in the vicinity of the proposed annexation. 2. The present streets, major trunk water mains, sewer interceptors and outfalls, other utility lines and ditches, and the proposed extension of such streets and utility lines in the vicinity of the proposed annexation. 3. The existing and proposed land use pattern in the areas to be annexed. B. A copy of any draft or final pre- annexation agreement, if applicable. C. A statement setting forth the plans of the municipality for extending to or otherwise providing for, within the area to be annexed, municipal services performed by or on behalf of the municipality at the time of annexation. D. A statement setting forth the method under which the municipality plans to finance the extension of the municipal services into the area to be annexed. E. A statement identifying existing districts within the area to be annexed. F. A statement on the effect of annexation upon local public school district systems, including the estimated number of students generated and the capital construction required to educate such students. 4. Land Use Reviews. A property owner seeking annexation into the City of Aspen may initiate land use reviews with the City after the petition for annexation has been found valid (after adoption of resolution #2). Property owners seeking to develop the property, in fact, may wish to secure entitlements prior to completing annexation. Land use approvals granted prior to annexation are subject to final adoption of an annexation ordinance. City r Council may postpone the final adoption hearing of the annexation ordinance to allow a property owner to complete a land use review process. 5. Acknowledgement of Development Rights Property subject of an annexation request may have certain development rights granted by Pitkin County. The City of Aspen may choose to recognize these exact development rights or reach another solution in consultation with the landowner. In instances where land use approvals were granted in the County prior to annexing into the City, the City has significantly benefited with the adoption of a Development Guidebook in combination with the annexation of the land. This guidebook can be used to define the approvals and describe how the City will administer the development of the land, including the applicable design standards for capital improvements. This guidebook can serve an interest of the landowner, developers interested in realizing the development approvals, the interests of prospective property owners within the annexed area, and helps clarify the City's understanding of the development rights. 6. Initial Zoning. The City is required to assign zoning to newly annexed property within 90 days of annexation. Failure to zone land within 90 days may permit unwanted land uses on newly annexed lands. The City typically begins an initial zoning process prior to final annexation. This aids a landowner in determining the benefit of completing an annexation. This initial zoning process follows the process for amending the Official Zone District Map (rezoning), as outlined in the City of Aspen Land Use Code, and requires a review and recommendation from the City Community Development Director and a public hearing and recommendation from the City's Planning and Zoning Commission. Adoption of an ordinance by City Council is the final step in the initial zoning process. Ideally, second reading of an annexation ordinance and second reading of a zoning ordinance occur simultaneously. Property owners are encouraged to participate as an applicant, although not required, in this initial zoning process. STATUTORY ANNEXATION CRITERIA In accordance with CRS 31 -12 -104, an area is eligible for annexation if the governing body, at a hearing, finds and determines the following. 1. That not less than one -sixth of the perimeter of the area proposed to be annexed is contiguous with the annexing municipality. Contiguity is not affected by the existence of a platted street or alley, a public or private right -of -way area, public lands (except county -owned open space), or lake, reservoir, stream, or other natural or man -made waterway between the annexing municipality and the land proposed to be annexed. Subject to the requirements of CRS 31 -12 -105, contiguity may be established by the annexation of one or more parcels in a series, which annexations may be completed simultaneously and considered together. 2. That a community of interest exists between the area proposed to be annexed and the annexing municipality; that such area is urban or will be urbanizing in the near future; and that said area is integrated with or is capable of being integrated with the annexing municipality. The fact that the area proposed to be annexed has the contiguity with the annexing municipality required by the above requirement shall be a basis for a finding of compliance with these requirements unless the governing body, upon the basis of competent evidence presented at the hearing, finds that at least two of the following are shown to exist: a. Less than fifty percent of the adult residents of the area propose to be annexed make use of part or all of the following types of facilities of the annexing municipality; Recreational, civic, social, religious, industrial, or commercial; and less than twenty - five percent of said area's adult residents are employed in the annexing municipality. If there are no adult residents at the time of the hearing, this standard does not apply. b. One half or more of the land in the area proposed to be annexed (including streets) is agricultural, and the landowners of such agricultural land, under oath, express an intent to devote the land to such agricultural use for a period of not less than five years. c. It is not physically practicable to extend to the area proposed to be annexed those urban services which the annexing municipality provides in common to all of its citizens on the same terms and conditions as such services are made available to such citizens. This standard shall not apply to the extent that any portion of an area proposed to be annexed is provided or will within the reasonably near future be provided with any service by or through a quasi - municipal corporation. L i J LOCAL ANNEXATION CRITERIA Annexation is a quasi - legislative authority of the City and as such the City may consider the interests of its citizens as guiding annexation policy, in addition to the procedural statutory requirements. This section identifies specific public policy concerns likely to arise during consideration of an annexation request. These criteria should be used to determine when annexation is appropriate, which land should be annexed, and how it should be zoned. Additional considerations, beyond those identified herein, may also arise and guide public policy. AACP Compliance Annexation requests should be reviewed for compliance with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Annexation of certain lands could facilitate accomplishment of the plan's goals, objectives, or specific action items. Newly annexed properties should be assigned zoning supporting public policy directives of the AACP. Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) The City of Aspen and Pitkin County jointly approved Aspen's Urban Growth Boundary via adoption of the 2000 AACP. The UGB identifies the land surrounding Aspen as either appropriate for urban development (within the UGB) or inappropriate for urban development (outside the UGB). Land within the UGB is expected to become part of the City's urbanized area and should be considered appropriate for annexation. Land outside the UGB should only be annexed as a method of preserving the non -urban character of lands surrounding Aspen. The UGB does not necessarily need to be amended unless the land is intended for an urban level of development. Annexation of land outside the UGB, in fact, may serve a significant public purpose. Significant Annexations Changing the regulatory structure and jurisdiction of significant community facilities, large developments, and large tracts of vacant land present considerable potential for community change. These annexation proposals should involve discussion between the Aspen City Council and the Pitkin County Board of County Commissioners. A joint work session at which various land use issues are discussed can only benefit the City in it analysis of a significant annexation. For example: properties entitled by the County and annexed into the City can require complex administration of development rights, especially when amendments are requested. Discussing the primary elements of the land use review can simplify administration and provide benefit to the annexing landowner. Likewise, certain annexation proposals may present concerns to other governmental and quasi - governmental agencies with jurisdiction or other interest in the property. As necessary, formal referral comments or work session - format meetings can be held to identify these concerns. Fiscal Impact Analysis The City should fully understand the financial implication of assuming additional lands upon each of its functions. The City Finance Department has modeled fiscal impacts of recent significant annexations and this information has been critical in determining the appropriateness of annexation. Certain capital improvements may be necessary as well as �.+ additional operation and service costs. These need to be balanced with additional special fund revenues that are gained. Pitkin County voters adopted a 2 percent Countywide sales tax, including a provision distributing 47 percent of the tax proceeds to Pitkin County and 53 percent to the City of Aspen. At some point, the distribution of countywide sales tax may need to be reconsidered as more service responsibilities shift to the City. Development Rights /Zoning Development rights associated with a property in Pitkin County verses those if the property is annexed into the City of Aspen should be considered. Annexations are typically associated with a proposal to further develop the property. Traditionally, the City weighs an increase in development rights in relation to accomplishment towards community goals available through annexation. A complete understanding of a property's development potential, prior to annexation, should include a zoning build -out analysis considering regulatory limitations, such as growth management and impact fees, and regulatory incentives, such as the use of Transferable Development Rights. The public policy of such regulations and the impact of changing the regulatory structure upon the City should be considered. Zoning of newly annexed land should approximate development rights prior to annexation, unless a site - specific development plan is approved concurrent with annexation. The creation of non - conformities should be avoided, although custom legislation to address special interests can further complicate the City's regulatory environment. The City should encourage the legalization of "bandit units" through the City's Accessory Dwelling Unit provisions to ensure compliance with the health and safety standards of the Uniform Building Code. These units should be expected in older subdivisions surrounding Aspen. Pitkin County Transferable Development Rights Certain lands in the County within the City's annexation area are eligible for increased development rights through the extinguishment of transferable development rights (TDRs). Certain site specific approvals granted in Pitkin County may involve or require the use of TDRs. And, certain development may have already occurred by use of these TDRs necessitating acknowledgement of the realized increased development right. Until the City adopts a program for accepting Pitkin County Transferable development Rights, each individual annexation request should include an analysis of TDR- contingent land use scenarios and, if necessary, an agreement should be reached describing the future use of Pitkin County TDRs within the newly annexed area. Usefulness and appropriateness of each jurisdiction's regulations As Aspen City limits expand beyond the original townsite, the effects of environmental constraints and hazards on development increase. Pitkin County's 1041 regulations address development on steep slopes, in wildfire hazard areas, in rockfall and avalanche hazard areas, and within wildlife corridors. The City's Environmentally Sensitive Area review standards address flood hazard areas and development above the 8,040 -foot elevation. The County's regulations primarily attempt to minimize land use intensity and minimize the infrastructure and operational effects of development. The City's land use code encourages the intense use of land and addresses urban development issues, such as architectural character. In transition areas, the City's PUD regulations should be used to establish an appropriate balance. Design standards for public improvements also reflect the rural and urban aspect of each jurisdiction. The appropriateness of each jurisdiction's development regulations and design standards should be considered in each annexation. The acceptance of substandard public improvements and potential public costs of upgrading those facilities should also be considered. The City may require certain facilities be upgraded prior to annexation. Alternatively, the City may require a cash payment to accommodate expected City capital improvement and operational expenses. The City currently has no experience administering remote backcountry and Forest Service lands. These lands could require significant changes to the City's emergency services. The public costs of annexing remote lands should be considered in relation to the public goals of such an action. Aspen recently adopted the Ski Area Base (SKI) Zone District to administer development at the base of ski areas. The zoning provides for a mixture of skiing, recreational, commercial, and tourist - oriented uses and requires adoption of a Planned Unit Development. This zoning was applied to Aspen Highlands Base Village and may be appropriate for the Buttermilk Ski Area base, upon annexation. Infrastructure and Ability to Serve Annexation reviews typically focus a great deal of fiscal analysis on the potential extension of urban services to annexed territories. Cost, capacity, and engineering issues related extension of the City's municipal water system to developing land on the urban fringe is a significant annexation issue. Currently, there are several small water districts serving residences located outside the City's boundaries but within the service area of the water system. These small districts may present a problem for the City as their capital facilities may not be providing acceptable standards of service. Upgrading is expensive, and may become the responsibility of the City following annexation. The County does not currently require new periphery development to join the City's municipal water system. However, these county development proposals must be reviewed by the City Council and found in compliance with the AACP in order to obtain City water service. In these cases, the City often requires compliance with City development regulations. Property owners developing a property eligible for annexation should consult the City's Community Development Department and consider annexation. Simplicity of City Boundary The City /County boundary has created confusion for citizens and staff responsible for enforcing public policy. A complex boundary can complicate emergency service provision and, in extreme cases, defeat efforts of City police officers. Annexations simplifying the boundary should be encouraged while those further complicating the division should be avoided. [Example] PETITION FOR ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF ASPEN THE UNDERSIGNED (hereinafter referred to as the "Petitioners ") hereby petitions the Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado for the annexation of an area, to be referred to as the Annexation to the City of Aspen. Said area, consisting of approximately ( ) acres, is more particularly described on Attachment "A," attached hereto. The Petitioners allege: 1. That it is desirable and necessary that such area be annexed to the City of Aspen. 2. That the requirements of Sections 31 -12 -104 and 31 -12 -108, C.R.S., exist or have been met. 3. That not Tess than one -sixth (1/6) of the perimeter of the area proposed to be annexed is contiguous with the boundaries of the City of Aspen. 4. That a community of interest exists between the area proposed to be annexed and the City of Aspen. 5. That the area to be annexed is urban or will be urbanized in the near future. 6. That the area proposed to be annexed is integrated with or capable of being integrated with the City of Aspen. 7. That the Petitioners herein comprise more that fifty percent (50 %) of the landowners in the area and own more than fifty percent (50 %) of the area to be annexed, excluding public streets, alleys and lands owned by the City of Aspen. WHEREFORE, said Petitioners request that the Council of the City of Aspen approve the annexation of the area described on Attachment "A," legal description of the land. The Petitioners reserve the right to withdraw this petition and their signatures there from at any time prior to the commencement of the roll call of the City Council for the vote upon the second reading of the annexation ordinance. Individual Petitioners signing this Petition represent that they own the portion(s) of the area described on Attachment "A." IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I/we have executed this Petition for Annexation this day of ,2 Petitioner's /Owner's Signature Petitioner's /Owner's Printed Name Address City, State, Zip 4.. Please attach the following: ATTACHMENT "A" — LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ANNEXATION ATTACHMENT "B" — AFFIDAVIT OF CIRCULATOR STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY OF PITKIN The undersigned, being first duly sworn upon his oath states: That he was the circulator of the attached Petition for Annexation and that each signature therein is the signature of the person whose name it purports to be. Circulator's Signature Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of 2 , by WITNESS my hand and official seal. Commission Expiration Notary Public ATTACHMENT "C" — PROOF OF OWNERSHIP Constituting more than 50% of the landowners in the area proposed for annexation, as said area is described on Attachment "A ", and more than 50% of the land in said area, exclusive of streets and alleys. ATTACHMENT "D" — FOUR PRINTS OF AN ANNEXATION MAP Containing the information required by C.R.S. 1973 31 -8 -107. , 0 4 I c < I 1 k .11 • * • -10k411 1111 rr LC A >.... c u (...) c / < 0 C '2 co 1 1 1 ( • . a ‘■ k ..... , \ ... D , .... . \ Cl . g , . C a) a 0 ra u.) < o cz a = — MI a) .— "01 TIS "6 ,4_ Ira x 1 „ OA" 1 Pi i3 I-- E a . I .52 in CO ' ' kr - - e c.: Rp. a 2 de . i ! 0 • . 0 ,,VPI E II IIM. • : .....' . i O gi PI , . . ... , , .. ..... , ro : .7 ■ _1 tig _ . . , I _ 3 1— c • • . . . , . C ni a) a) w 3 4 k - o. :•— .. _ .- . • . —. .._.. ... .. .. ,... . .. . • • ORDINANCE NO. 25 (SERIES OF 1999) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL, OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, ASSIGNING LOT #1, BURLINGAME RANCH SUBDIVISION, TO THE CONSERVATION (C) AND RURAL RESIDENTIAL (RR) ZONE DISTRICTS. PARCEL NO. 2735-031-00-805 WHEREAS, a parcel of land located on either side of State Highway 82 at the Owl Creek Road intersection, commonly referred to as "Burlingame Ranch" was annexed into the City of Aspen on May 10, 1999, pursuant to Ordinance No. 16, Series of 1999; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Aspen must designate a zone district fo the property within 90 days of the annexation; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance Number 23, Series of 1999, the land was subdivided into two lots, the Burlingame Ranch Subdivision, and Lot # 2 of said Subdivision was included in the Residential Multi - Family (RMF -A) Zone District and, WHEREAS, Lot #1 of the Burlingame Ranch Subdivision is legally described in Exhibit A, WHEREAS, the City Council may approve Amendments to the Official Zone District: Map (Rezoning) after taking and considering recommendations from the Community Development Director, the Planning and Zoning Commission made at a duly noticed public hearing, and taking and considering public testimony at a duly noticed public hearing in conformance with the review criteria set forth in Section 26.92; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department analyzed Lot #1 of the Burlingame Ranch Subdivision and recommended the property be included in the Conservation (C) and Rural Residential (RR) Zone Districts; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 1, 1999, the Planning and Zoning Commission took and considered public testimony and recommended, by a six to one OM j 3 vote (6- 1),. City Council inctde this property in the Conservation (C) and Rural Residential M (RR) Zone Districts; and, �a M 7 WHEREAS, the boundaries for said zone district designations are described herein; => $ g z and, ▪ g WHEREAS, City Council reviewed and considered the recommendations of the Nom. $ Community Development Director and the Planning and Zoning Commission during a duly ▪ e noticed public hearing; and, _o ea z WHEREAS, the City Council fmds that the Conservation (C) and Rural Residential NMI ▪ •- (RR) Zone Districts, as applied to Lot #1 of the Burlingame Ranch Subdivision with the ri o boundaries described herein, are the most appropriate zoning classifications for this property, 's o meeting or exceeding all applicable standards, and consistent with the goals and elements of the m Aspen Area Community Plan; and, � *. a WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for Ilia • m the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. Era g ma Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1999. Page 1 0 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: The Official Zone District Map of the City of Aspen shall be amended by the Community Development Director to reflect Lot #1, Burlingame Ranch Subdivision, as described in Section 2, as included in the Conservation (C) and Rural Residential (RR) Zone Districts. The Community Development Director shall use the survey descriptions contained in Section 2 as the basis for determining the zoning boundaries. Section 2: Burlingame Ranch Subdivision Lot #1 Legal Description: ' Lot #1 of the Burlingame Ranch Subdivision is legally described as a tract of land located in the west %] of section 2, Section 3, and the northwest % of the northwest'/. of Section 2, all in T1OS, R85W of the 6th P.M., Pitkin County, Colorado, more fully described in Exhibit A. Land to be included in the Rural Residential (RR) Zone District: Land to be included in the Rural Residential Zone District shall include: I. The portion of Burlingame Ranch residing east of State Highway 82 and commonly referred to the "bowl" and legally described as land located in the west of Section 2 T1OS, R85W of the 6th P.M., Pitkin County, Colorado, more fully described in Exhibit B as "Parcel A." 2. The portion of Burlingame Ranch residing east of State Highway 82 and south of the Aspen Airport Business Center, legally described as land located in the northeast / of Section 3, T1OS, R85W of the 6th P.M., Pitkin County, Colorado, more fully described in Exhibit B as "Parcels C & D." se> 8 Land to be included in the Conservation (C) Zone D � � Land to be included in the Conservation Zone should include: - y F The entire portion of Lot #1, Burlingame Ranch Subdivision, as described in Exhibit ao A, excluding the lands described in Exhibit B intended for the Rural Residential Wig Zone District. • M = N _ Land Within Road Rights -of -Way: - gg All land within State Highway 82 and other public street rights -of -way shall be - • zoned consistent with the City Zone District designation of the adjacent parcel. In - 1 z the event the right -of -way is bordered by two different City zone districts, the center •• g line shall become the zoning boundary. In the event the right -of -way is bordered Eag entirely by parcels in Pitkin County jurisdiction, the zoning for that area of the right - -� o ! of -way shall be consistent with the City Zone District designation of the parcel in = � m closest proximity. 'V' Section3: NMI ~u This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an — r abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances a a repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1999. Page 2 Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: That the City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this Ordinance, to record among the real estate records of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder a copy of this Ordinance. Section 6: A public hearing on the Ordinance was held on the 12th day of July, 1999, 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 was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUC1D, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 14th day of June, 1999. Attest; , , t bf 33er 4%lk tiY b;tCity Clerk Rac el Richards, Mayor S n10 .WALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 4, day of c •999. ' y AltfestSa : Kathryn S: ach, City Clerk Rac el Richards, Mayor Approved as to form: 1 111111 11111 111111 11111 111111 1111 111111 111 11111 1111 1111 437982 11/23/1999 09:559 ORDINCNC DAVIS SILYI 3 of 9 R 40.00 D 0.00 11 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO City A Exhibit A -- Legal Description of Lot #1, Burlingame Ranch Subdivision Exhibit B -- Legal Descriptions for Zoning Boundaries Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1999. Page 3 Pqcvq isms • BURLINGAME -RANCH SUBDIVISION 1,91 444:44u._ 4 and 1,'21 tttAs 1111 1U3. BURLINGANE SEASONAL HOUSING PROJECT P.U.D. g 4k • CONTEXT PLAT 9:2361192 1.1615. 606110105 ZOZOI1 fbat\ 11701[ 010 RANCH ISANO 45 001121_2_5123110N 14 1/2 0 3 : MD M N'N /M 0 M II9/4 Of WNW 4 NI N MR NOM Of TRMK 100 1227.00 FM Mac M SOWN UNE Of THE EMI PY. POW 000114 110000. IWM b FOLLOW 0240110100 LOT 0 TO M 1/0111M61 MNW M 02 11010[ 1144204, 23.47 RR mow we [IS WE 04 4540045 ATM 101101147 COMM 04 Wl 110004 3 CM 101011 020110017 1.01 N N 2A0 SECTION 3 TO OY 011117022 CO M 0/ 10 Of 4W MOO. 3 OMS. 2132420/2 DEICE MAT 14507 04 WO AS =MO N COM 0454500 N OP K! C1OM tl10 K COW '1004 TNT WCTC WW b 1 12012206.33 710114041.1 UM 0244110 NOM MONO= 50 .400K w AT PAM 773 Of M MOO= CO MKT Of LAND AS.MS0M0 VI 4M BOON 226 AT M OlpdgfNlNM111 /i 0115O 1 �Y � _ M ROW N40Ctpr1W3; . I 44.04 C C _ _ Cain. . TONY SW OMNl, 032.7 MET � /WC TM YOM LSE Of OM 1)005 41111'00'6. OW MET NWO M 1NN MN Cf TIE 0050110440 LM 0 b M bl1E0.r UM Of 1110 740 04 LW M NM/4 Cr 421 SWIM 3 TO M C4000W CORNER 0 NA ' MONO N 2 ®104400 N IOW M AT PAN 144 Of M MOMS LAND AS MONO N NEED MOWED N ROM 326 AT PAN Of Mob 001114 0001110 11102102 Of 701111 COMM 00500A00 M r00OM0 clan AID 0011442 AM NOM M war 6.1E M 14111061110 COLAS NO 1MTAICC AM HOMO M 1113. • 414T TRACT Of W IND AS DEMO N 100 OM X4 AT PAM Mk INC 07 THAT DUCT 04 1330 AS 004]110 N 4O NOM 33 T O ww M'O at % ! 521 3'S' THEME 000446. AZ fat 4, 1 m 11010E 07•1112%. WWI 1 1, WI non 014.26 CM o E Iwa MET; • W 1 I Male 51011 VOCE l s F¢ TOMO Y6Y NWT M M 1106.111/0 04 Mr MIME *rut OW IMT, Y 1*07 O LOW b 0132020 N DEED COMM N DOOR M AT 111011191110'10 127.05 101: P! PAP 3101 4 M 110 0114 4 111011 COUNTY OOIOIIOh TOM b`31Yrz LAP RT I NM 3 1 1145110E O A 15 M CPU in 4 4,11 4 KM0 AO NMI DO'y ]Ot 00.1 11ED O rAOW 1 00010O!AD NOM 345 AT Pa IN. �. OW 101¢0114452 Oar WC M C ALONG M I01TRY 110 Or MO ILLY/ 4 U 04100 40110 125•54 ]45.02 2111; NEW OM M At PAM a0 M M 110114503 (01001 1100451 TOOL Oy Oky4 15434 0Ot 70 M 50TT431 CO. • 114110E 0'45'00,. 0045 NIT ALONG IC NEST 111E 0 MAT WT MKT 0 WI ND b KfCTMD N DUD WOK JJ! . ' 1 311/6.1 LAND MOFSO�N4010000 AT Pa WMM y1). - gt Pi bY111[iT COMER 1110002 THOU LEMW M BWMLELADLY LNE Of MC TRC1 05 151 1MO:Y 132'27'5% 211.70 MIT 1100 M 01111 UNE 4 MT DENIM) N WO 101. 336 Ai MC 312. 2107707, 476 J I 11RAM 4 AND a a M WO a000 * AT PACT 21a ALCM M 1OMASWLY UM 4 NAT AMY 4 pm 4 _ -y F 00 %.45w% MW ' ppI11111 70 1 M MMTI LY URI Of II 014 1 W10Y M 421 NOOK 335 AT PAC 311 TO M MMMASM4Y alt A oAT�ON I SOW 0014) III %At FOI( 11 M ' AT PAZ n 0 ME 10fC110t y RECORDS COUNT; C N GOON W, 1/1 0 Of M2M 000111Y. M M CAW DOMES AID MT*103 ME 7010450 M MO COSAO w • I M 000.!111110 MO MT4® ME AM M 101111114 NO LSE 0 MT 1457007 4 INC N 0{20110 N W0 DOM 1: SOY ` MY4LlY CNC Cf SAD MAROON OEM 13.110 1®1001 MOM) a 1100 5, I ANO9 M�Y41{ I Tl1X W 05.215111 Z 1010 NW 010 1611. 110/4 110/4 345 237.E MET: w FEM 6..20' , a a p F1M�R 01421 SP 223.32 .� F MEC 10.11 MM E0 Ur 36.20 IMTi w 019'0 • I D iue sa T D.. 4.61 PAO MEL . =w IL J4' __ I 1 �, 00MP 5*711 0 w'Om'c oo STATE rfLf TO M MOmY 111. �� WAY 10 0 MOM° ST 111041151 12 AS . OR. 1110'1S'0T 0 POMMO NOM YD AT RAM 2364 M MO SIN 43.21 111012121 I 75)4 TIME *2*50 Y *10 0 our 1TRACT 4: • • - -a 0 � MICOMM COMM N SW 5000 217 AT PACE 31, MOMMSg Y, N MONO . 1'17'0 I o40 !106.11 E m1 M SICILY 1104L•00-1110 1104L•00-1110 LW 4 WD am NDI W N 10 10 T, X 0MMO NO. 4 MO 4511011 MO 4 A 100E COME 1. 91_� 2 _ .45' I 140 warn STYE 11�p� M MO K W 21.11119400 BY * 236220 ITE7 04 1111Yr 9 - aria . :9 10irt 11111702 .r 70•40 ALCM M K0 4 A 01K 1104OT1�SAb MO MET MAO M 4111011.2 MWT -. N97'l300 01104E TO M WITI EASt O A MINT 1121101111 1u0 MC NACHO 111E 4 YO 006.0700107011 141016•10 450. BT A MOUd 00110 100 A 011145 MCC Of MO 6.111004 wIMM4/101T MSS MT SLOW M 401AEY It - Wj� f M Q 4501100 0 AOOW THAT 11.1100'110 766.79 ON0 l '00 1)t MC 421 ALM Ma G $ i 0000911 A 4145706. CCU 42147 AND 11010 SLOT j tlN 0 A 0010 MILT, spas 54511444'114 21170 TOO ' \ OY4 MN m 11«2 MI3sbY1106Y MET TO M 01110,.4 11011-07-. . =� N „ 4 W CA.C4 31 STAR MOST /4 m f 51 . . UK TOO 4501114. 5045 9M NOW M EM MY 1541'. �� \ 11116.. RID 06.011100 VAR 450111.4IID.SAND KOIOn - ' 4 '2709' MK OmAM 10 M WT M A PONT 6.40451. MO ARC CENTRAL I e 2.79' 111450 • %m 0 20 A C 5110 01C01204071. 02 11011 50 . .. �^ TOME 00,.1100'6 004 311Y 1100 M (AMMO M O -. 11� 0 ....p. ...,„�� �MN �'A'7Y Or 1ME411O 00u111470 STATE MOM, NO M TO M I. _8 4 145 1401 4 LBO M OTE0110111110) 0110111110) N CPO ROTC p rr COMM 0r wok IM a IIOE 0 4 11E MOON 4 MON C2111Y. CC. r 0 MCC 11451/1 .116.36 1411 Auld M PE E 4 -� C N99 1 79.991 TUC 4 a LAND 43 N 2100 SA0 COI MI AT PAM 0 ' M SPAN 6.1E 41M 'MOT 07 4 a LAW COMM N O 4587'3914'0 109.9911 . 343 /1 S M Me 100 2144 AT PAP 4 WD 0111 • AT ENE "-4597'4919'9/ 142.90' 1)001111`3 201. Tut MO COMW M 0111141 UM 0 CAC Of WO A3 041[0 N SAO BOOM 243 AT PNE 77 3971109•0 97.991 - 1)0004 0111'N0t 25.411 Pm ALCM M EASTERLY LM T 11(11 Of LMO M LW NON 243 a PAM 77 • ) 2649' 1)OM 003011'45 047 NAN3 M 03121.Y UM K 1'35'00 15.27' 1ITADT 4 LAND a N s9/ DOOM w AT PACT f7 • AMA. 1 3 AWOL MM M LESS JUN -22 -99 15.33 FROM.DRrL 10.3034. 4336 PAGE 4/e w: Drexel Barrell & cu. ailOUw SC ci1 ., 4' nil GDtlit- 15 Engineers/Surveyors June 21, 1999 Boulder. C°loradoSprings. A legal description of a tract of land located in Greeley the W1 /2 of Section 2, TlOS, RS5W of the 6th P.M., Pitkin County, Colorado to be rezoned described as 4840 Pearl tau Circle follows: Suite 114 Boulder. Colorado 80301.2475 PARCEL A 303.U2&338 303 442 4573 Fax Commencing at the W1 /4 corner of said Section 2 from which the Northwest Corner of said Section 2 bears NO3 °54'00 "E thence N54 °23'15 "E, 1167.08 feet to the Westerly line of that tract of land as described in deed recorded in Book 351 at Page 144 of the records of Pitkin County and the TRUE POINT 07 BEGsaaJNG. The following courses and distances are along the Westerly and Southwesterly line of the tract of land as described in said Book 351 at Page 144: Thence 802 °19'31 "W, 172.74 feet; Thence S00 °09'12 "E, 57.52 feat; ThenCe S24 °33'30 "E, 90.25 feet; Thence 523 °06'36 "E, 294.29 feet; Thence S19 °00'16 "E, 80.14 feet; Thence S01 °13'45 "E, 243.16 feet; Thence S02 °09'17 "W, 165.45 feet to the North line of that tract of land as described in deed recorded in Book 181 at Page 320 of the records of Pitkin County, Colorado; Thence leaving the Westerly line of that tract of land as described in said Book 351 at.Page 144, N87 °13'00 "W, 324.69 feat along the Northerly line of that tract of land as described in said Book 181 at page 320 to the Northwest corner thereof; (S. Pulling - 5665 -5C - 5028L3.SP) 1111111111111111 511111131111111011111110 437982 11/23/1999 09:558 ORDINRNC DAVIS SILVI 5 of 9 R 45.00 0 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO .+un- ;da -en tb:33 rteuf:u,css au• ()In JJ r..t.n ai e Legal Description (Continued) Page 2 Thence S01 °46'00 "E, 233.55 feet along the West line of that tract of land as described in said Book 181 at Page 320; Thence Northwesterly, 127.83 feat along the are of a curve concave Northerly said arc having a radius of 646.68 feet, a central angle of 11 °19'34" and being subtended by a chord that bears N76 °31'01 "W, 127.63 feet; Thence N29 °07'50 "W, 26.29 feet; Thence Northwesterly, 74.84 feet along the arc of a curve concave Southwesterly said arc having a radius of 1226.18 feet, a central angle of 03 °29'50" and being subtended by a chord that bears N30 °52'45 "W, 74.83 feet; Thence Northwesterly, 217.44 feet along the arc of a curve concave southwesterly said arc having a radius of 615.87 feet, a central angle of 20 °13'43" and being subtended by a chord that bears N47 °39'27"W, 216.31 feet; Thence Northwesterly, 17.24 feet along the arc of a curve concave Southwesterly said arc having a radius of 36.57 feet, a central angle of 27 °01'00" and being subtended by a chord that bears N65°54'20 "W, 17.09 feet; Thence Northwesterly, 181.80 feat along the are of a curve concave Northeasterly said arc having a radius of 110.00 feet, a central angle of 94 °41'39" and being subtended by a chord that bears N26 °57'02 "W, 161.80 feet; Thence Northerly, 78.93 feet along the arc of a curve concave Northwesterly said arc having a radius of 215.00 feet, a central angle of 21 °02'02" and being subtended by a chord that bears N04°36'17 "E, 78.49 feet; Thence Northeasterly, 107.96 feet along the are of a curve concave Easterly said arc having a radius of 100.00 feet, a central angle of 61°51'26" and being subtended by a chord that bears N22 °05'39 "E, 102.79 feat; Thence N32 °46'23 "E, 253.93 feet; Thence Northerly, 93.73 feet along the arc of a curve concave westerly said arc having a radius of 77.03 feet, a central angle of 69 °42'58" and being subtended by a chord that bears N06 °14'58 "E, 88.05 feet; Thence Northeasterly, 178.74 feet along the are of a curve (S.Pulling - 5665 -5C - 5028L3.SP) 11111111111111111 It 11111111111111111 437982 11/23/1999 09:55A ORDINRNC DRVIS SILVI 6 of 9 R 45.00 0 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO �..__ 7 JUN 75.34 EKUS:U1( gL. �y41 1�/ LY.3tl;sgq q:S 4tl emu& p/b K Legal Description (Continued) June 21, 1999 Page 3 concave Southeasterly said arc having a radius of 99.38 feet, a central angle of 103 °02'59" and being subtended by a chord that bears N29 0 51'34 "E, 155.60 feet; Thence Northerly, 62.83 feet along the arc of a curve concave Southwesterly said are having a radius of 20.00 feet, a central angle of 180 °00'00" and being subtended by a chord that bears x11 0 20'50 "W, 40.00 feet; Thence 578 °39'10 "W, 108.72 feet; Thence Northwesterly, 70.00 feet along the arc of a curve concave Northeasterly said arc having a radius of 35.00 feet, a central angle of 114 °35'30" and being subtended by a chord that bears N44 °03'08 "W, 58.90 feet; Thence Northeasterly, 238.21 feet along the arc of a curve concave Southeasterly said are having a radius of 207.35 feet, a central angle of 65 ° 49'23" and being subtended by a chord that bears N45 °17'23 "E, 225.32 feet; Thence Easterly, 301.60 feet along the are of a curve concave Southerly said arc having a radius of 646.68 feet, a central angle of 26 °43'18" and being subtended by a chord that bears N81 °46'22 "E, 298.87 feet; Area mi 14.231 acres more or less Legal Description Prepared By: Scott A. Pulling, PLS #27936 Drexel Darrell & Company 4840 Pearl East Circle, Suite 114 Boulder, Colorado 80301 -2475 (303) 442 -4338 111111 11111 ION 1111 111111111111111 111111111111 437962 11/23/1999 09:55A ORDINRNC DAVIS SILVI 7 of 9 R 45.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO (S. Pulling - 5665 -SC - 5028L3.SP) .e", Drexel Barrell & co. 'Ex (Cont.) Engineers/Surveyors 1 0 • June 10, 1999 Boulder. Cotorado5prugs A legal description of a tract of land located in Creei*• the NE1 /4 of Section 3, T10S, RBSW of the 6th 440Peut =ucCirne P.K., Pitkin County, Colorado to be rezoned Suitt I,- described as follows: Soulcer. Colorado 80301-2475 - - PalecEL c p • M3=24333 303 42 43'3 Fa Commencing at the Northeast corner of said Section 3 thence S03 °54'00 "E, 60-83 feet along the East line of the NE1 /4 of said Section 3 to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNINQ. Thence S03 °54'00 "W, 628.59 feet along the East line of the NE1/4 of said Section 3; Thence S34 °10'31 "W, /04.09 feet; Thence 546 °43'48 "W, 171.11 feet; Thence 831 °07'15 "W, 28.33 feet; Thence S16 °45'45 "W, 50.87 feet; Thence S12 °34'30 "W, 57.66 feet; Thence Southwesterly, 229.84 feet along the are of a curve concave to the Northwest said arc having a radius of 793.11, a central angle of ' 16 °36'14" being subtended by a chord that bears S27 °50'56 "W, 229 ..03 feat; Thence S41 0 21'17 "W 196.41 feet; Thence Southwesterly, 196.02 feet along the arc of a curve concave to the Southeast said and having a radius of 660.85, a central angle of 16 °59'43" being subtended by a chord bears S36 °00'46"W,`195.30 feet; xW ,. (S.Pulling - 5 -5C - 5033L.SP) 1111111 IMO 111111 1111111111 111111111111111111111 111 ° 437902 11/23/1080 09:55R ORDENANC DAVIS SILVI 8 of 9 R 45.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO Legal Description (Continued) 14ay 31, 1999 Page 2 Thence N89 °57'53 "W, 232.36 feet to the East right -of -way line of Colorado state Highway No. 82 as described in deed recorded in Book 157 Page 53S of the records of Pitkin County, Colorado; Thence NO3 °14'00 "E, 512.82 feet along the East right -of -way line of said Colorado State Highway No. 82 to the South line Of a tract of land as described in deed recorded in Book 243 at Page 773 of the records of Pitkin County, Colorado; Thence along the South and Southeasterly line of that deed recorded in said Book 243 at Page 773, the following (4)courses: Thence S86 °46'04 "E, 356.35 feet; Thence N21 0 32'23 "E, 711.89 feet; Thence N28 °46'07 "E, 201.45 feet; Thence N38 °25'48 "E, 174.73 feet to the East line of the NE1 /4 of said Section 3 and the TRUE POINT OP BEGINNZHG. Area 8.818 acres more or less Legal al Description Prepar9 By: 6 Drexel Harrell & Company 4840 Pearl East Circle, Suite 1114 Boulder, CO 80301 -2475 (303) 442 -4338 11111111110111111111111110110111111 BI um IIII INI 437902 11/23/1999 09:556 ORDINRNC DAVIS SKY' 9 of 9 R 45.00 D 0,00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO (S.Pulling 5665 -5C - '5033L.SP) a 735 b 3(O(3 01 cf- 273S03I01Soz o0 G14.• Z.o0 cf'AsLU ,`,--�� ��IJ JJJL. Y � File Edit Record Navigate Form Reports Format Tab Help i .J `)<, ► ► J - � i 1 E f y - ; J i : - A J. I i i ' _ 7 A 9`i, lump 1 : *1i ®I o 6 A 42.) A J 2] _, Sgt %■ _ g J J E Main Valuation !Custom Fields Actions !Feel !Parcels !Fee Summary !Sub eermits j Attachments Routing Status Routing ► v Permit Type laslu Aspen Land Use Permit # 10064.2009,ASLU N Address 38005 STATE HIGHWAY 82 Apt /Suite o 000 City 'ASPEN State NCO J Zip 81611 R Permit InFormation Master Permit I J Routing Queue Iaslu07 Applied 110/06/2009 J Project) — J Status 'pending Approved 1 J Description TEXT MAP AMENDENT - ANNEXATION REQUEST (FORMER BMC WEST PROPERTY) Issued 1 =-'1 Final 1 3 i Submitted ISTEVE BARWICK 920 5000 Clock Running Days 1 Expires 110 /0112010 i Owner Last Name (CITY OF ASPEN J 1 First Name 130 5 GALENA ST ASPEN CO 81611 Phone ((970) 920 -5000 Owner Is Applicant? Applicant Last Name (CITY OF ASPEN J First Name (CITY HALL 130 5 GALENA ST Phone I Cust it 128426 ASPEN CO $1611 Lender Last Name [ z First Name I Phone ( i - -- - -- - C.,mr rho n. .4 lanrro.o fiat ..ama . Ae.,onf;.,lrifhl —.- .1 Par—.r1. 1 .,f 1 WO (1624j6 G 1 /fn 612' ct Elk 514 ,,4,-, twi„,-,, cb 1__ odit