Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.gm.Cooper Original.19781g7$-c-,m- io cooper and riginal tq--Y� • • GROWTH MANAGEMENT ALLOTMENT APPLICATION RESIDENTIAL SECTION 1. Project Name: %��"� —/? (� V 2.. Location: 3. Parcel Size: Z 4. Current Zoning District: )" hj l- S. Zoning Under Which Application is Filed (Proposed): Li%i 6. Maximum Buildout Under Current Zoning: 11 nA"&- k 7. Total Number of Units Proposed: and Bedroom Mix:. 8. 9. 10. Size of Units: ,it- -Tz Price Range for Sale or Rent: io'-- / r��>F:.:/� -f `�._,�� ►tic"it �Iif��j I %'} �-7 G 1- ! rim % .i«"•'G n itt i� 1.. Program Narrative: A),.; F..'crlt��,�1'T{ cn' <�i �r i% �1�,Lr.< (?144 k_- illiL4il1,,s;i.7-7i i 1 %L , % J i f t'� t� 1 Y }. AL^litl T7"" 7 t.'F ls�l �c 2 �' i„ (.' k ' 171.. �h E C/Sri-;�!/` er�til�► �C`'�'-` ti-C•'�ry �',�'�'1('���1��' �in;�/'i�' (��• i �;,� :�.'Ti✓�.�.7�i�- . A. PUBLIC FACILITIES 1. Written Description of the Following: a. Type of Water system to be used including information on main size and pressure and, if public, the excess capacity available from such public system; the location of the nearest main; the estimated water demand of the development or building. J i b. Type of sewage treatment system to be used and, if public, the existing excess capacity available from such public system; the nearest location to the building site of a trunk or connecting sewer line; the expected demand of the development or building. 0 WI c. Type of drainage system proposed to handle surface, underground and runoff waters. d. Type of fire protection systems to be used, (such as hydrants, wet standpipes, etc.); distance to the nearest fire station and its average response time. } , Ft �'1' J j'►xl'T"Tc`° �'`� �- ,•><'fi f c' r� � l��'7.4 A '�7-- -�..41-114,14 A i t Z -- �� ��'#y-}i�;Jir-X-=^d—�- --_- �1�i�: •r— �'�.n�i.i i \ram e. Total development area --.t pe of housing or development proposed; -- - number of-omits-.ijic ddi-ng-employee housing; expected price range ,of- sale -oO-*i�ntal ;-ttm�w- di stance from the proposed development -..tom ear-est=elementary, middle and high school; the distance -tor --existing school.bus routes. 1"�'� '�yr:��L' r_�T,`�=� � .7'fJ.C'i•.� .c 1I`' .' i f. Estimated traTfic count increase on adjacent streets resultinq from the proposed development; description of type and condition of roads to serve such --development; total number of motor vehicles expected to use -or be stationed in such development; hours of principal daily usage of adjacent roads; on and off site parking to be supplied; location of alternate transit means (bus. -route, bike paths, etc.); any auto disincentive techniques incorporated in: -such proposed development. JW /�j I i .�_..I. 0)11, • ` r g. Location relative to proposed or existing parks, playground, hospitals, airports, mass transit systems and estimated increased usage of such facilities by reason of the proposed /development. /C-iIrk I' / i `i tt !, �ykc /- r h. Location relative to the proposed development of police facilities, and their average response time; estimate of additional police personnel needed by reason of the proposed development. 2.-�: if`ic'_`.t`� �il ra.���,!'� 1-, , /�JL� I�1.7�i7/Z"/C>it.�� � ._,`^ ��J" l�i�.l°/�•��`-=�; i. Location relative to proposed development of retail and service outlets and estimated increase demands on such outlets by reason of the proposed development. l` (.-( j. Effects of the proposed development on adjacent uses and land uses in the vicinity of the project. AQ k. The proposed construction schedule including, if applicable, a schedule for phasing construction. 3 - -> 2. A site utilization map shall be submitted to show the following: a. Preliminary architectural drawings in sufficient detail to show building size, height, materials, insulation, fireplaces, solar energy devices (demonstrating energy conservation or solar energy utilization features), type of units, and location of all buildings (existing and proposed) on the development site. b. Proposed landscaping, screening, attempts at preserving natural terrain and -open space, and undergrounding of utilities. c. Motor vehicle circulation, parking bus and transit stops and improvements proposed to insure privacy from such areas. d. Any major street or road links and school sites, pathways, foot, bicycle or equestrian trails, greenbelts. e. General description and location of surrounding existing land uses and identification of zoning district boundary lines, if any. SFti- 3. Additional Detailed Information: _- a. Description of potential for service of project by public transportation. b. Description of potential for service of project by the following miscellaneous public services. 1.) Police Protection awkxs 2.) Child Care Facilities Ll '1 %LLD �4- 3.) Bicycle/Pedestrian paths (comment on relationship to city sidewalks) 4.) Recycling Facilities 5.) Design for the Handi-capped 6.) Proximity to Commercial Support B. PROVISION OF LOW, MODERATE AND MIDDLE INCOME HOUSING 1. Middle Income Housing a. Number of Units b. Bedroom mix C. Size of units d. Points anticipated for this section 2. Moderate Income Housing a. Number of Units b. Bedroom mix c . Size' of units d...Roints a ticipated for this section 3. Low Income Housing a. Number -of units b. Bedroom mix C. Size of units d. Points anticipated for this section .Total points; anticpated under_ the Housing Section and general comments: Additional Coanentsi r Recor.!mended Point Allocation Residential Proposals Pro ect / v�J`t` AJf�(� Date ! J � A. Purl ;c Facilities and Services (mdxiraum of 21 points - maximum of 3 points per review element). 1. !dater `-,service 2. Sewer Service ' 3. Storm Drainage •"' - � —� � � _— 4. Fire Protection 5. Parking Design B Social Facilities and Services (maxipiuvi of 1� points) 1. Public Transportation 2. Police Protection 3. Chi ldcdre Facilitips _ ��`�` _'_� _.__ 4. Bicycle Paths • 5. Recycl i ng Faci 1 i ties ---_^--_.____.��_______.__= ��+`.� 6. Handicapped Design Features 7. Commercial Support Proximity C. Housing (maximum of 30 points) 1. Middle Moderate 3. Low ' Sub Total Vf.Ab8Ve.P0int5 Bonus Points , TOTAL POINTS zs- � Narie C LA)4 _/ 0' ���� Po i W1. A] I On tj I S oor, r OJ Da Le C--4 PuOlic Fac, I itics tA :'11cl (:(q-\,i of 23 point�, I ) i 3 points per review e1r, 2. we t - Sc ry ce 3. Storio Praimqlle oil 1Y. fi. `�C)':I�;l f %`�.I ! 1j.1 ilii'� �'•(.'i�V�;) :� Y.I:I"!'I Of l� 3. CMI,3.care f=acilit-l'os __....Q..__.. 4. Bicycle Paths--- • S. Recycliny Fi.cJlities------------�----- --• _-.-.---� -�--. 6. 1!a,,ndi capp:_cl. /O A t. c n is + 44 TOTAL POINTS , a Pdae;c- Recommended Point Allocation Residential Proposals Project t Date .--- A. Public Facilities and Services (maximum of 21 points - MaximunI of 3 points per review element). 1. Uat Service 2. Sewe Service 3. Storm Drainage _-__- 4. Fire Protection, 5. Parking L'esign 6 R o/:ac't f Ze Iq Q. Social Faci1itie< and Service; (^iaximum of 1� Points) 1. -Pu W is Tr sp6rtation _ 2. Police Protection 3. Childcare Fac'litigs 4. B i cy c 1 e Porths 5. Re 1 i ng Fa-06Eci�-- AZ._,�.----- 6 . Handicapped Design Features T. Com rcial S pport Proximity 'gig C. Housing (maximum of 30 ooints) 1. i4iddle 2 , Moderate 3. Low - - - - - -- 0 f Sub Tatal of Above Points Bonus Points TOTAL POINTS flame Recommended Point Allocation Residential Proposals Project +t167i,✓AL Date A. Public Facilities and Services (maximum of 21 points - maximum of 3 points per review element). 1. !-later Service 2 2. Sewer Service 3. Storm Drainage 4. Fire Protection S. Parking Design 6. Roads 7. Energy _�____?L______ - i Q. Social Facilities and Services (maximum of 14 ooints) / 1. Public Transportation 2. Police Protection- -- 3. Childcare Facilities ----_ ---�-^ -- ~- -.- 4. bicycle Paths r - ---� 5. Recycling Facilities ___��---- 6. Handicapped Desi,gn Features 7. Commercial Support Proximity C. Housing (maximum of 30 points) 1. "ki do l e Hodera to--- 3. Low Recommended Point Allocation Residential Proposals Project d 1� Date A. Public Facilities and Services (maximum of 21 points - maximum of 3 points per review element). 1. !dater Service 2. Sewer Service 3. Storm Drainage 4. Fire Protection, 5. Parkinq Design 6. Roads 7. Energy---- i B. Social Facilities' and Services (^iax ii,wvi of 1� not nts ) 1. Fubl Ic Transportation 2. Police Protection�--_---- 3. Childcare Facilities 4. Bicycle Paths 5. Recycling Facilities 6. handicapped Design Features` 7. Commercial Support Proximity C. Housinn (maximum of 30 ooints) 1. diddle __--__—.-- Moderate O 3. Low d---- Sub Tbtal of Above Points Bonus Points TOTAL POINTS Name I Sub Total of Above Points 2 �� Bonus Points TOTAL POINTS .. , Recommended Point- Allocation Residential Fro|w;ols Pru'oct DateC_ ./ .��-����'__'__' � V � A. PuhliC FdC�liti2S and Set -vices (0aXi0Wm of 21 VOiDtS NaXiQuxx Of ' 3 points per review element). - 1. �Iatpr SerVice ' ga 2. Sewer Service � 3. Storm Drainage '""y= �~ 4° Fire Protection ^^ � 5. Pa -,king Design 6. ROa ci's � »r ----- ----'—' --- 7. [oeryy • •' `.:sec i al Facilities and Services (mar, imuri of M points) 1. Public 1-ransPortati en- v ,- 2. Police Protection 3. Childcare Facilities / 4. Bicycle Paths 5. Recy ling Facilities v - 6. Handicapped Design Features A A i -Io 7. '!ft�ldis- �LK.v_w_scr�.oscrs.-w�'��...•.--..__..a__�.__._ . _.._..__.._... .... _...__... rcial—Support P;'o`:imiti.`j____---- C. Housing (maXimum of 30•roints) 1. Middle 2. Moderate 3. Low 7 G, �•TaT� [W► Sub Total of AbOe Points Bonus Points TOTAL POINTS Naple TO: FROM: R F : DATE: • REFERRAL Aspen Fire District aspen/ P-itl;-in Planning Oi i ic,• Analysis of Impact oil ti:e A-31-lee 1-;re Department February 5, 1978 The Asperi/Pi tki n Planning Office is rev i ^�:i ng a level opnient proposal , and requires an analysis of the proposal's impoict on the canLcit:y of the f-irc departs- ,n ;. facility by consid.,ri ng the ability of t,ie Fire De;dart;iiT-nt to N` uv i- e fire protection according to the estab i ishe resi;on r st.,!,,Jard—. of the appropriate district �-.ithout the necessity of es lai) i i E h i ng ')(*,ri Station or regoi rl n(, addition of rla jor equ i piw?rlt to an existing sto+Lion. The attached application fora identifies the locati(,-, size and type of development. Please review the application and indicate the category of impact below. Project: Cooper and Original (submitted by Jack Jenkins) Referral Submission Date: February 14, 1978 The proposed project will have the follo;qing type of impact on the capacityy of the Fire Department. PJec�li,ible impact - substantial excess capacity exists to ;provide fire protection according to the established response standards of the appropriate district without th,-� necessity of establishing a ne;,J station or requiring addition of major equipment (such as hydrants, wet standpipes, etc.) to an existing station. Moderate impact - only moderate capacity Exists to provide T�fire protection according io the established response standards of the appropriate district without the necessity of establishing a nev,, station or requiring addition of major equipment (such as hydrants, wet standpipes, etc.) to an existing station. Substantial imiLa_c_t_ -- this development will over- burden the capacity of the fire department :.o provide fire protection according to the established response standards of that ,,Ppropriate district without the necessity of establishin,i a new station or requiring addition of major equipment- (such as hydrants, wet standpipes, etc.) to an existing station. Comments: Ih - - sic�n,ltnt•c raff�r - atJa� 'M�w • • REFERRAL TO: FRO;',: Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office RE: Analysis of Impact on Sewage Treatment Capacity DA-i ;:: February 5, 1978 The Asper,/Pi tki n Planning Office is revi et•ri nq a devel opa.ent promo a 1 , and requires an analysis of thc, rrro;. o a.l ' S impact on the capaci ty of the sewrjor, treatment facility by cons i dc;,-i ng excess capacity of the syster,i, location of they nearest trunk: or connecting seller line. The attached application form identifies the location, size and ty,r�,? of devel of mrMt. Please review the application and indicate the ca t.enory of impact below. Project: Cooker and_ Original (submitted.-.by_-Jack_Jenkins)___..__ _. _ _. Referral Submission Date: February 14-, 1978.______. _. The proposed project will have the following type of impact on the capacity of the sewage treatment system. Neclll�gj. le irmLct - substantial excess capacity exists at the sP�:!age treatment plant and at the nearest trunk or connecting sewer line to accom:Tiodate this development:. Mode_ra_i:e_ i mnact_ - only moderate capacity exists a.t the SF-e tre�ite;,ient plant or along the nearer, trunk or connecting se,Ier line to accommodate this development. - Suhc, ian_ti al ir_pact - this devel opmsnt ;,rill over- burden i..he capacity of 'the sewer treate;;ent alant or the nearest trunk or coi-.i:(2: ti ng s^,;er line. CO!,Ments : �,� A v /r y - - S.-�_ v� c,—K---1?.-- _�(°°�_S c_[3�i--- 4 -.?_ � _ !�•r . --f^ 1�li F A2__7 ----- T�e9�-s 7-HIS Signature L•�`—�-_! -, — S'�-- H�.-_�k.--_ _ (IL'rtf'Frs h.N Ic-r4 A t*PCAKa I-o I%r A r r-c- Pee a ll-a -rs TH A rASSCS 7'/1Ra_,c_/+ T-14M� -7R.vF^rA. - 13Y Tt4C r0 /!"✓cSTi<Air.'_ % Nis (-,Trl %JJSS�I��—� SOs ai�D�S r3.r7,1-e -F<<e 0 FEB 6 1978 REFEkkAL tt% ENGINEER ` O \ CO LC,�1.. TO: Aspen City Enrji neer FROM: Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office RE: Analysis of Impact on Storm Dr•ainaye, Parking Design, and Roads DATE: February 5, 1978 The Aspen/P-iti;in Planning Office is reviewing a development proposal, and requires an analysis of.the proposal's impact on the capacity of storm drainage, harking design, and roads by considering the capacity of the drainage facilities to adequately dispose of the surface runoff; con,,ioiering the desirability of the design of off-street parking areas; and considering the capacity of major street linkage. The attached application form identifies the.location, size and type of development. Please review the application and indicate the category of impact below. Project: Cooper and Original _ (submitted by Jack Jenkins)__ _ Referral Submission Date: February 14, 1978 TF,.- proposed project will have the following type of impact on the capacity of: STORM DRAINAGE Negli ihle inIpact -- substantial excess capacity exists Tbr drainage facilities to adequately dispose of the surface runoff of the proposed levelopment wiViout system ext-nsions beyond those normally installed by the developer. / Moderate impact, - only moderate capacity exists for drai hacae facilities to adequately dispose of the surface runoff of the proposed development without system extensions beyond those normally installed by the developer. Substantial impact_ -- this development will over- burden the capacity of the drainage facilities to adequately dispose of the surface runoff of the proposed development without: system extensions beyond those normally installed by the developer. i 0 '0 t_APY:TI G DEST .(1 / - t�r�gli!lil,ic _in�j�_ ct - suf,,tant.ial excess capacity exists for the des igri oI off -,I root parkin; areas with to visual ir!'Poct, aciour,t. of paved surf«ce, corrvelii('nce and safety exits. tiodor i t_e in,pict - only moderate capacity exists for tfw design of off-street parking areas frith respect to visual impact, amount of paved surface, convenience and safety exits. Substantial imr,<act - this development trill over- burden tiie capacity for the design of off-street parking areas with respect to visual impact, amount of paved surface, convenience and safety exits. ROADS Negli P-.-le impact - substantial excess capacity exists to provide for the needs of the proposed development without substantially altering existing Traffic patterns or overloading the existing street system or the necessity of providing increased road mileage and/or maintenance. Moderate impact - moderate capacity exists for, the needs of the proposed development without substantially altering existing traffic patterns or overloading the existing street system or the necessity of providing increased road mileage and/or ir:aintenance. Substantial impact burden the capacity or the overloading or the necessity of and/or maintenance. Comments: �/ � Fog - this development will over - of the existing traffic patterns, of the existing street system, providing increased road mileage I pa_.. 01 Si gnature �Yy.7,1q1_10 f -2- 0 • RF.FLRRAi_ TO: Asp(�i, Police D,.-,partment FRUM:. Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office RE: Analysis of Impact on the Aspen Pdlice Department DATE: February 5, 1978 The Aspen/Pitkin Planning Off-ic , is i ,.— iewing a devel opiment promo -'al, and requires an analysis of the proposal's iripact on the capacity of the Aspen Police Department by considering the ability of current police security services to provide protect -ion according to reasonable response standards kJ thout the necessity of additional facilities, parsonnel or equi pr-nent The attached application form identifies the location, size and type of devel opi ,lent. Please review the application and indicate the category of impact below. Project: _ Cooper and _Ori4inal __(s_u_bmitted _by_Jack_Jenkins) Referral Suhmi s si on Date: February _ 14, 1978____ The proposed project will have the following type of impact on the capacity of the Aspen Police Department: Neq igihle impact - substantial excess capacity exists considering the ability of current police security services to provide protection according to reasonable response standards witho►,t the necessity of addi- tional facilities, personnel or equipment. Moderate fi,,inact - only moderate capacity exists con- sidering the ability of current police security services to provide protection according to reasonable response standards without the necessity of addi- tional facilities, personnel or equipment. Substantial impact - this development will over- burden the ability of current police security services to provide protection according to reasonable response standards without the necessity of additional facilities, personnel or equipment. , G n Comn►tints : Q Q�! (�I oS► �,�oti 1� �� `p b,ti Zuk4' 4�(M io L�q 41 Signature--- Date - 1 - E REFERRAL 10: City 01 As!)en FE?O'i: Aspc,n/rlitkin -PIb..rulinr; ,1 f i"c_e RE: Ar,r►f Inip��ct onthe er.ist-ing water systemm and capacity DATE: February 5, 1978 The Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office is reviewing a development proposal and requires an analysis of the proposal's impact on the overall capacity of available water and impact on water pressuV-e and the nearest water main or connecting 1 "i rie . The attached applicatier) form identifies the location, size and type of development. Please review the application and indicate the category of impact below. Project: Cooper and Original`(submitted by Jack Jenkins) Referral Submission Date: February 14, 1978 The proposed project will have the following type of impact on the capacity of the sewage treatment system: / - le 21iaible impLct - substantial excess water capacity exists and will not adversl,y affect watery pressure in the vicinity of the nearest water main or connecting water line. Moderate impact - only limited water capacity exists and r',ater pressure vri l l be affected "in the nearest water main or connecting water line. Subst:in f i al impact: - this development �,J l l raw X00, --�4— +­4 .-;cn+ niseriously reduce the pressure in the nearest main or connecting water lire. Comments: See attached memo. Signature _11__---_` Date TO: Planning Dept. FROM: Marky DATE: February 10, 1978 SUBJECT: Cooper and Original Project Submitted by Jack Jenkins This project as submitted to us indicates that the only access to a water main is on Cooper Street. Our records show that the water main fronting this property consists of a 52" O.D. - 4.2111 I.D. steel invasion pipe. We know from experience that this main is in poor condition and has a nominal pipe diameter of less than 4" due to tuberculation. The existing main is seriously overloaded at present and any additional connections of this size will only aggravate the problem. S'ncerely, Jim Idarkalunas JM:jmr Am > Rim Lu < w e. ui j,,j_a. wr. gij'-to m 00 llJtx4_ATtrA_J We-, &-rT' CCO-0 (9Aq 05r-r-) -17) tom_ vtw. \'Ay' 0 1 *,, ep. \v16t_rr-wt-7j;_- A fV_ xot-rlv Njr.7 FAu, 2'oC- gwo?"/) A llorr-�;' -ro FN-0 allev A-r 6w-,k-ra;AL_ A"�; 6crT-;ram F0474 ,%v 6'?r_uE4e' c;r I -CT *Vwf;;, ro-Tr 1414AI fAr�ezio_ WrH zz'-o'( t4 r Pq Plor* Zool-11 UNIT A UWT A DECK %*Tw A BEDROOM LLWPER T C_ UPPER LEVEL _T 15C%ArPANELA 4190'4F_ 1;4 KITCHEN Al UNIT A f Ai t A U� - 11 - a jp�z' '4M M A! '41 V6 'j II Lkvlw� Zoom 41 R 4—A t li _T B LIVttiGe en r-4,,Tio 4 ft- FlAn U 1\1 4- 4NiT'A- Z X44-, ?.4&wr-T. , LINI TC - IG XA, TWO�tOR'?98W"r II -ro-rAL. JUrr-1 ALL� 1-�4 N f TS TO- e E :50LAK H EAT EP A�. LjNIT,5 TO W_Z FeEWA'l EA_ Al-l- uNrr5 ro u5z. rvo w44.4 s,�Aiz f A LWEK LEVEL r MIDDLE LEVEL wt WJAU 6orAf,45- DUTH 'LE-VATION VI\ z IUU U-) to os w00 Ca (C/r) E 0 Ow . i z zz s 8 5 Z caw 0 Ix 8 _j ZLu w z w Cl) 5 R s a , , 0.. . � , . '.• . � ?'A> :.k M,.*s' '#.Yda ... �k a 3iF' , n, 2' G tiw� s. , 4 Y. v e. 44 x, y x Y.