HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.rz.Holy Cross Energy Property.A027-0027352735 A027-00
IF Holly Cross Electric Parcel
Rezoning, PUD
RI
ZI
�S b b '.'t
COMMUNITY DEVEi50PAr4NT DEPARTMENT
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 8161 1
(970) 920-5090
City of Aspen
Land Use:
1041
Deposit
1042
Flat Fee
1043
HPC
1046
Zoning and Sign
Referral Fees:
1163
City Engineer
1205
Environmental Health
1190
Housing
Building Fees:
1071
Board of Appeals
1072
Building Permit
1073
Electrical Permit
1074
Energy Code Review
1075
Mechanical Permit
1076
Plan Check
1077
Plumbing Permit
1078
Reinspection
Other Fees:
1006
Copy
1302
GIS Maps
1481
Housing Cash in Lieu
1383
Open Space Cash in Lieu
1383
Park Dedication
1468
Parking Cash in Lieu
Performance Deposit
1268
Public Right-of-way
1164
School District Land Ded.
TOTAL
NAME:
ADDRESS/PROJECT:
PHONE:
CHECK#
CASE/PERMIT#: # OF COPIES:
DATE: INITIAL:
HOLY CROSS ENERGY PROPERTY
APPLICATION FOR
REZONING
AND CONSOLIDATED PUD REVIEW
Ll
I
SUBMITTED BY
ALAN RICHMAN PLANNING SERVICES
BOX 3613
ASPEN, COLORADO 81612
920-1125
MARCH, 2000
P
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
I
i
1
1
1
1
A
1
1
1
1
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I. INTRODUCTION .............................................. 1
II. ANALYSIS OF ZONING CONSTRAINTS .......................... 3
III. REZONING TO R-30/PUD...................................... 6
IV. CONCEPTUAL/FINAL PUD REVIEW ............................ 10
V. VESTED RIGHTS ............................................ 21
EXHIBITS
# 1. Title Insurance Commitment
#2. Letter Authorizing Submission of Application
#3. Grant of Trail Easement
#4. Minutes of Holy Cross Electric Association - 11/13/74
#5. Pre -Application Conference Summary
#6. Environmental Site Assessment Letter from Waste Engineering Inc.
#7. List of Owners Within 300' of Subject Property
MAPSIDRAWINGS
Vicinity Map
Improvements Survey
Copy of Official City Zone District Map
Proposed Site Plan
Illustrative Elevations and Perspectives
1
' I. INTRODUCTION
This is an application to rezone a small parcel of land and to adopt a site specific PUD plan
for the development of a single-family residence on the property.
The application is being submitted by the Holy Cross Electric Association, the owner of the
property (hereinafter, "the Applicant"). A copy of the commitment for title insurance,
demonstrating that the Applicant owns the property, is attached hereto as Exhibit # 1.
Authorization for Alan Richman Planning Services to represent the Applicant for this
application is provided by Exhibit #2.
The subject property is a vacant parcel that contains approximately 32,456 sq. ft. of land.
As shown on the vicinity map, it is located just below State Highway 82, near the Castle
Creek Bridge. Access to the property is available from Power Plant Road.
The property currently has a split zoning designation, with
th the portion above Power Plant
Road being designated Conservation (C), while the portion below Power Plant Road is
designated Public (PUB).
An Improvement/Topographic Survey of the property has been prepared, and accompanies
this application. It shows that the property is a nearly rectangular -shaped piece of land that
is bisected by Power Plant Road. There is a formal easement and right-of-way in effect for
Power Plant Road, as documented in the title insurance commitment. The surveyor has
calculated that the area within the Power Plant Road right-of-way contains 5,860 sq. ft. of
land.
The Survey also shows that there are three (3) trails that cross the property. One trail is
located right along the highway frontage, and represents the pedestrian/bike path along the
side of the Castle Creek Bridge. A second trail emerges from underneath the Castle Creek
Bridge, and runs in an east/west direction, connecting areas along Cemetery Lane to the
Marolt Property and the Marolt Bridge. The third trail splits off from this second trail,
traversing the property down to Power Plant Road.
These trails are also subject to an easement, recorded November 27, 1974 in Book 293 at
Page 887, as documented in the title insurance commitment. A copy of this easement
document is attached as Exhibit #3. The trail easement states that it can be terminated at
any time by the property owner. The history of how this came to be is as follows.
In 1974, Pitkin County sent a letter to the Holy Cross Electric Association, requesting that
the Association grant "a perpetual and nonexclusive trail easement and right-of-way that may
be terminated by Grantor, its successors or assigns, for any reason at any time". Attached
as Exhibit #4 is a copy of the minutes of the meeting of the Board of the Holy Cross
Association at which time this request was unanimously approved. The minutes state that
Holy Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUD Review Page 1
1
Lam'
the request was approved because "the land of this Association involved is not at this time
needed for any use, and the further fact that the requested easement is on its face revocable
at any time".
Discussions we have held with persons who were involved in this transaction indicate that
the County made this request because residents along Cemetery Lane wanted to create a
safe path for their children to get from their homes to the schools without having to cross
Highway 82. The officials at that time believed that improvements to the Highway were
likely to be built within the next several years, so any trail they provided would be temporary
in nature. Therefore, they requested this trail from Holy Cross, which was to be in place
for a short period of time. Of course, in reality, the Highway improvements still have not
materialized, and the trail has remained in place for the last 25 years.
The Association still has no particular need to use the subject property for its operations,
and does not expect to need this property at any time in the foreseeable future. Therefore,
the Association has determined that it should dispose of this property, so that the proceeds
of the sale can be used for the benefit of the 45,000 members of the Association.
Representatives of the Association approached the City of Aspen, the Aspen/Pitkin County
Housing Authority, and the Pitkin County Open Space Board to determine whether they
were interested in purchasing the property for appropriate public purposes. Letters were
also sent to private property owners surrounding the property to determine whether they
wished to purchase the property. All of these parties decided not to pursue such a purchase.
The Applicant is submitting this land use application to ensure that there can be some
beneficial economic use made of this property, as a necessary precursor to sale of the
property. The Applicant believes this application provides the opportunity for a number of
outstanding zoning issues that face this property to be resolved, while at the same time
providing a way for the City to obtain permanent use of the trails without having to expend
any public funds.
A pre -application conference was held with City staff members on November 30, 1999 (see
Pre -Application Conference Summary, attached hereto as Exhibit #5) to discuss these issues
and opportunities. During that meeting, it was confirmed that the Applicant should request
the following land development approvals to accomplish this project:
• Rezoning of the property to R-30/PUD, pursuant to Chapter 26.310 of the Code.
• Consolidated PUD review, pursuant to Chapter 26.445 of the Land Use Code.
Sections III and IV of this application are organized to respond to the standards of the Land
Use Code for these review procedures. However, before addressing the standards, Section
II of this application provides some additional background analysis to illustrate the
difficulties associated with developing this property under its current zoning designation.
Holy Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUD Review Page 2
1
1
IH. ANALYSIS OF ZONING CONSTRAINTS
As noted above, this property contains 32,456 square feet of land. It is bisected by two
zoning designations, with the portion of the property above Power Plant Road being
designated "Conservation" (C), while the portion below Power Plant Road is designated
"Public" (PUB).
A single family house is a permitted use in the Conservation zone district, but is not
permitted in the Public zone district.
Section 26.710.022 of the Aspen Land Use Code provides rules for properties having more
than one underlying zone district designation. It states that when the proposed use is not
allowed in all of the underlying zone districts, then:
the use can only be developed on land on which it is a permitted use (that is, on the
portion of the property designated Conservation); and
• the allowable floor area for the use will only be based on the area of the lot in which
the use is permitted.
The minimum lot size in the Conservation zone district is 10 acres. Since the subject
property contains considerably less than 10 acres, it is a nonconforming lot of record.
Section 26.312.050 of the Aspen Land Use Code establishes the regulations for
nonconforming lots of record. It states that a detached single-family dwelling and customary
accessory uses may be developed on such a lot if:
• the lot is in separate ownership and is not contiguous to other lots in the same
ownership; and
• the dwelling is located on the lot to comply with the dimensional requirements
(setbacks, height, open space, and floor area) of the underlying zone district, or a
variance from those requirements is obtained.
Based on the above provisions, the owner of this property would be able to develop this
property with a single family dwelling if the dwelling were located on the portion of the
property designated Conservation and were located within the applicable property setbacks.
The minimum setbacks of the Conservation zone district are as follows:
front: 100'
side: 30'
rear: 30'
IHoly Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUD Review Page 3
1
1
The Land Use Code defines the front lot line as the lot line closest to, or dividing the lot
from, the nearest street. However, this property is bordered by Highway 82 and is bisected
by Power Plant Road and therefore, might be considered to have two front yards. Section
26.575.040 C. provides the rules for corner lots that are bordered on two (2) sides by
intersecting streets. It provides that in such cases, the owner shall have a choice as to which
yard shall be considered the front yard. The yard chosen as the front yard is required to
meet the setbacks for a front yard for that zone district, while the other yard that borders
a street may be reduced by 1/3 of the required front yard setback for the zone district.
Although this is not a property one would typically classify as a corner lot (since the second
street bisects rather than borders the property), these rules do seem to apply to the subject
situation. If the owner were to choose the lot line along SH 82 as the front yard, then its
required setback would be 100', and the setback from Power Plant Road would be 67'.
We have plotted the Conservation zone district setbacks onto the property. Assuming the
City determines that a 67' setback from Power Plant Road would be required, then there
is no area within the property that complies with these setbacks, which would make it
impossible for the owner to obtain any beneficial economic use of this property. In order
to obtain such a beneficial use, a land use application would need to be submitted for one
of the following two alternatives:
(a) Apply for a variance from the setback requirements of the Conservation zone district.
The variance would be intended to allow a single-family residence to be built on the
best suited portion of the property; or
(b) Apply to rezone the entire property to R-30/PUD. A single-family residence is a
permitted use in this zone. Also, since the minimum lot size in the R-30 zone district
is 30,000 square feet, the property would then be a conforming sized lot. If the
property were so zoned, its setbacks would be as follows:
front: 25' (from Highway 82)
front: 16.75' (from Power Plant Road)
side: 10'
rear: 15'
The proposed site plan illustrates these setbacks. It shows that there is an area that
complies with these setbacks and is predominantly flat. The rest of the area that complies
with the setbacks is a very steep hillside. The site plan identifies the flat area as the
proposed building envelope. It has been depicted as a triangular building envelope, within
which a residence could be built that steps into the hillside.
We believe that the rezoning alternative offers the best solution for both the Applicant and
the City for the following reasons:
Holy Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUD Review Page 4
1. By applying this designation, the City can obtain a site specific development plan for
the property that ensures development occurs in the appropriate location, and that
' appropriate dimensional standards are applied that protect the neighbors to this
property.
2. The rezoning approach provides the opportunity for the Applicant to offer the City
permanent easements to the most valuable and heavily utilized trails that cross this
property, without requiring the expenditure of public funds.
3. Rezoning the property provides an opportune to correct an error in the zoning ma
opportunity g P
that the Applicant has discovered in the course of preparing this application. The
nature of that error is described in Section III of this application.
The following sections of this application demonstrate how these benefits can be
accomplished in a manner that complies with all of the applicable standards of the Aspen
Land Use Code.
11
11
IHoly Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUD Review Page 5
LI
1 III. REZONING TO R-30/PUD
The Applicant proposes an amendment to the Official Zone District Map. The subject
property currently has two zoning designations, with the portion above Power Plant Road
being designated Conservation (C), while the portion below Power Plant Road is designated
Public (PUB). The history of how this property came to have this split zoning designation
is quite pertinent to this application. The Applicant has researched the City's records, as
found in the City Clerk's office, and has made the following determinations regarding this
history.
This property was annexed to the City in 1967 as part of the "Northside Annexation". This
annexation brought a considerable area of land into the City, including much of the
Cemetery Lane area. A City zoning map dated 1968 shows that the entire property was
zoned R-30 following its annexation.
' The next zoning map that is available in the City Clerk's office is dated 1975. This is the
map that the City issued following the adoption of its new zoning ordinance and the
comprehensive rezoning of properties throughout the City. It shows that the property had
been given two zoning designations, with Power Plant Road separating these districts. Below
Power Plant Road (on the side on which the City Shops are now located), the property was
still zoned R-30. Above Power Plant Road, the property had been rezoned to Conservation.
Because the City appears to have implemented this rezoning as part of a Citywide action,
there are no records available of how decisions were made for individual properties.
However, it does not seem to be coincidental that the Conservation designation for part of
the property appears to have been applied immediately after the 1974 Holy Cross action
that granted the County a trail easement through the property.
The next zoning map that is available is from the early 1990's. It shows that the property
still had two zoning designations, with Power Plant Road separating these districts. Above
Power Plant Road, the property was still zoned Conservation. However, below Power Plant
Road (on the City Shops side), the property had been designated Public. A review of the
City's records shows that this rezoning was accomplished pursuant to Ordinance 8 of 1992,
which rezoned the City Shops to Public.
This most recent zoning action appears to have been done in error, because the map was
changed for more than just the City's property. Although the exhibit that accompanied the
ordinance appears to have shown the City Shops property only, the zoning map was changed
for all of the land that had been designated R-30, including the property owned by Holy
Cross. A list of property owners that received notice of the 1992 zoning of this property
does not appear to have included the Holy Cross Electric Association, so the Association
was not on notice that this action was taking place. These are errors that need to be
corrected by re -designating that portion of the property below Power Plant Road as R-30.
IHoly Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUD Review Page 6
rThe Applicant proposes this rezoning, not just to correct this error, but to actually designate
the entire property R-30/PUD (Low Density Residential/Planned Unit Development).
The standards to evaluate this request are found in Section 26.92.020 of the Aspen Land
Use Regulations. The Applicant has the following responses to these standards.
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this
chapter.
Response: The proposed amendment would not be in conflict with any applicable portion
of the Aspen Land Use Code. Instead, it would eliminate an existing nonconformity by
making this lot conforming as to size.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area
' Comprehensive Plan.
Response: The Applicant is not aware of any element of the Aspen Area Comprehensive
Plan that addresses this particular property. However, since this rezoning application will
provide the opportunity for the Applicant to donate to the City permanent easements for
two of the trails that traverse this property, it is consistent with the following policy of the
Parks, Open space and Environment section of the Aspen Area Community Plan:
"Improve public access to parks and recreation facilities".
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land
uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics.
Response: A copy of the Official Zone District Map for properties in the vicinity of this
parcel is included in this application booklet. It shows that nearby lands along Cemetery
Lane, Castle Creek Drive, and Sneaky Lane are all zoned either R-15 or R-30/PUD. In fact,
as discussed above, this property was originally zoned R-30 when these other properties were
first designated as R-15 or R-30.
The amendment will permit a single-family residence to be built, a land use which will be
' compatible with the rest of the neighborhood, which contains primarily single-family and
duplex residences. It is important to recognize that a single family house could also be built
under the existing zoning, since the Conservation zone district lists single-family dwellings as
a permitted use. The amendment simply provides the most logical means of defining an
appropriate building envelope for the residence.
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety.
Response: The proposed change in the zone district map should not have any effect on
IHoly Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUD Review Page 7
traffic generation and road safety.
The proposed zoning will not result in a greater density of development or a different use
being developed than is allowed by the current zoning, since a single-family house is an
allowed use under the current zoning and is the proposed use for the property.
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: As noted above, the proposed amendment will not result in a greater density of
development or a different use being developed than is allowed by the current zoning.
Therefore, the proposed amendment will not cause a net increase in demand for public
facilities as compared to current zoning.
F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly
adverse impacts on the natural environment.
Response: As noted above, the proposed amendment will not result in a greater density of
development being produced than is allowed by the current zoning, nor will it allow a
different use than could occur under current zoning. Therefore, the proposed amendment
will not cause adverse impacts on the natural environment as compared to current zoning.
It should be pointed out that while this application was being prepared, the Applicant had
an existing tank removed from the property that had been in place for many years. This
tank had been used to store fuel when the City's Power Plant was located on the adjacent
property. The tank actually still belonged to the City, but the Applicant removed the tank,
at no expense to the City, with the City's permission.
The Applicant had the ground beneath the tank tested to make sure that no contaminants
leaked into the soil over the years. The environmental assessment completed for the
property found "no evidence of recognized environmental conditions existing at the site" (see
letter from Waste Engineering Inc., attached as Exhibit #6), and therefore, no remediation
of the property will be required.
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community
character in the City of Aspen.
' Response: The proposed amendment will be consistent and compatible with the character
of Aspen. As described above, this parcel is currently zoned for the development of a
single-family dwelling under existing zoning, and will be zoned for the same use under the
IHoly Cross Energy Application for Rezoning; and Consolidated PUD Review Page 8
proposed zoning. The Applicant proposes a site specific development plan in Section IV
of this application that will ensure that the proposed residence is compatible with
neighboring uses, can be properly accessed, and is suitably located on this property.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the
surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment.
Response: The property was incorrectly zoned in 1992, when the City amended its maps to
change the zoning from R-30/PUD to PUB on that portion of the site that is located below
Power Plant Road. The Applicant was not aware of this action until just recently, since it
appears that the Applicant was not given notice when this zoning action occurred. This
' proposed amendment seeks to correct that prior action, and to make this parcel a
conforming lot of record with a reasonable building envelope.
' L Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is
in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter.
Response: As demonstrated herein, the proposed amendment would further the public
interest by allowing the City to obtain permanent easements for valuable public trails. It is
also in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Aspen Land Use Code, by eliminating
an existing nonconformity with respect to lot size.
1
I
I
1-1
IHoly Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUD Review Page 9
IIV. CONCEPTUAL/FINAL PUD REVIEW
Development of a single family house in an area designated PUD is normally exempt from
PUD review (see Section 26.445.020 of the Land Use Code). Based on direction received
at the pre -application conference, the Applicant has voluntarily agreed to subject this
property to a consolidated review of the conceptual and final PUD plans, pursuant to
Section 26.445.030 B.2. of the Code. This is being done to allow dimensional standards to
be applied to this property that ensure it can be developed with a single-family residence in
the most sensitive manner, taking into account the legitimate concerns of neighbors. PUD
review also provides the opportunity for the City to evaluate the site specific plan for the
property, including the site plan, architecture, landscaping, and similar features.
The standards for PUD review are found in Section 26.445.040 of the Aspen Land Use
Code. The Applicant's response to each of these standards follows below.
' A. General Requirements.
1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan.
Response: Please see the response to this criterion in Section III of this application,
Rezoning.
2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in
the surrounding area.
Response: This property is surrounded by single-family and duplex uses, all of which have
been developed pursuant to their underlying R-15 or R-30 zone district designations. The
Applicant proposes to develop a single-family dwelling on the property, a use that is
currently permitted by its Conservation zone district designation.
3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the
surrounding area.
Response: This development will have not have a negative affect on the future development
of the surrounding area. In fact, we believe it will have a positive impact on the area due
to the following features of the project:
• The Applicant will dedicate to the City permanent easements for the trail along
Highway 82 and for the trail that connects Cemetery Lane to the Marolt property:
This will benefit residents of the surrounding area (and the entire Aspen area), who
' would otherwise lose access to these important trails.
• As described further in Section B. of this PUD application, the Applicant will agree
to limitations on the dimensions, design, and landscaping of the proposed residence,
IHoly Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUI) Review Page 10
to ensure it is compatible with its neighbors, does not block their views towards
Shadow Mountain. In fact, landscaping for the residence should act as a buffer for
those neighbors, reducing noise they experience from Highway 82. The residence has
also been located so it will not be excessively visible from Highway 82.
• As described above, in preparation for this application, the Applicant has already
removed the fuel tank from the property, which eliminated any potential
environmental hazards that this very old piece of equipment could have caused.
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 development plan review.
Response: The proposed single-family residence qualifies for an exemption from GMQS,
pursuant to Section 26.470.070 B of the Aspen Land Use Code. To obtain this exemption,
the Applicant hereby agrees that at the time a building permit application is submitted, the
Applicant will either provide an Accessory Dwelling Unit, will pay the applicable affordable
housing impact fee, or will deed restrict the unit to resident -occupancy.
B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements. The final PUD development plan 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
the review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses
and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. The proposed development 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.
Response: The project's proposed dimensional requirements are shown in Table 1, below.
Holy Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUD Review Page 11
INo variances from the dimensional requirements of the R-30 zone district are oronosed.
I
1
I
h
In fact, the proposed floor area of the house is below that which is allowed in the R-30 zone
district, while the proposed floor area and height are below that which would be allowed by
the underlying Conservation zone district (which has a 28' height limit).
TABLE I
R-30/PUD ZONE DISTRICT DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Requirement
Code Standard
Proposed Conditions
Minimum Lot Size
30,000 s.f.
32,456 s.f.
Minimum Lot Area Per Dwelling
30,000 sq. ft.
32,456 sq. ft.
Unit
Minimum Lot Width
100 feet
139 feet
Minimum Front Yard
25' (from SH 82)
25' (from SH 82)
16.75' (from Power
16.75' (from Power
Plant Road)
Plant Road)
Minimum Side Yard
10 feet
10 feet
Minimum Rear Yard
15 feet
144 feet
Maximum Height
25 feet
25 feet
Minimum Distance Between
10 feet
10 feet
Buildings on the Lot
Minimum Percent of Open Space
No requirement
35%
Maximum External Floor Area
3,581 sq. ft.
3,200 sq. ft.
Minimum Number of Off -Street
2 spaces
2 spaces
Parking Spaces
Note: Maximum allowable floor area has been calculated by first reducing lot area by
5,860 sq. ft., which is the land located within Power Plant Road, for an effective lot
size of 26,596 sq. ft. This would permit a floor area of 4,775 sq. ft. for a single-family
dwelling. This floor area must then be reduced by 25%, which is the maximum
reduction for steep slopes. This results in a maximum allowable floor area of 3,581
sq. ft. for a single-family dwelling on the property.
In proposing these dimensional requirements for the property, the Applicant has taken into
consideration the above -listed influences. In particular, the Applicant has planned the
property to be compatible with neighboring residences. The R-30 zone district would allow
IHoly Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUD Review Page 12
3,581 sq. ft. of floor area to be built on the property (the same as if just the zoning error
were corrected and the entire property were zoned Conservation). The Applicant agrees
to reduce the allowable floor area by 10%, to a maximum floor area of 3,200 sq. ft., as floor
area is currently calculated in the Land Use Code.
The R-30 zone district has a maximum height limitation of 25'. The Applicant agrees to
comply with this height limit. It should be noted that the Conservation zone district has a
height limit of 28', so rezoning of the property and agreeing to comply with the height limit
of the R-30 zone represents a significant concession by the Applicant with respect to height.
The Applicant also agrees that the portion of the property below Power Plant Road which
contains 11,585 sq. ft. (35% of the entire property) will remain as open space. Although it
would certainly be possible to cantilever improvements off this section of the property, the
Applicant recognizes that this would be quite controversial for residents of Sneaky Lane and
will place restrictions on the property to ensure that no future owner could propose such
development.
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 areas.
Response: The Applicant has proposed a building envelope in the most suitable location
' on the property for development and has agreed to keep the rest of the property
undeveloped. As described above, the floor area of the property has been reduced below
the maximum allowable to ensure the scale of the development is favorable to surrounding
areas. The site coverage for the property will be less than 10%. This is based on the
Applicant's anticipation that a two story house would be built within the building envelope,
with each story containing approximately 1,500 sq. ft., plus an added area for the garage.
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 non-residential land uses.
b. The varying time periods of use, when 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
P P P
activity centers in the City.
Holy Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUD Review Page 13
I
Response: The Applicant will provide two (2) parking spaces on -site within a garage, to
comply with the provisions of the Land Use Code. There has also been room provided
within the building envelope for guests to park in front of the garage, in a stacked
configuration that the City permits for single-family residences.
4. The maximum density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient
infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced
if..
a. There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to
service the proposed development.
1 b. There are not adequate roads to ensure pr
otection, rotection, snow removal, and road
maintenance to the proposed development.
' Response: Infrastructure is available at this in -town location to serve a single-family
p° g Y
residence. Water supply and sewage disposal facilities already serve this area. Power Plant
Road is an adequate public road that provides access to the property.
Reducing the density below one (1) residence would represent a taking of the economically
beneficial use of the property, and cannot be justified by the circumstances particular to this
property.
S. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural
hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density may be
' reduced if.•
a. The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground
instability or the possibility of mud flow, rockfalls, and avalanche dangers.
b. The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed
' due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion and consequent water pollution.
C. The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in the
' surrounding area and the City.
d. The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the
proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes disturbance
to critical natural features of the site.
Response: There are no natural hazards or critical natural site features that should cause
the density of the PUD to be reduced. The land proposed for development is not subject
to ground instability or the possibility of mud flow, rock falls, and avalanche dangers. The
IHoly Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUD Review Page 14
steep portion of the site will be left in its undeveloped state. The development has been
designed in a manner that is compatible with the terrain and will preserve the natural
features of the site.
Drainage from the property will be managed on -site, to avoid impacts on water quality.
' There should be positive impacts on the watershed from removal of the above -grade tank
on the property.
I
u
CI
Impacts on air quality will be minimal, since the project is well situated to promote residents'
use of transit, bicycles, and walking instead of driving automobiles, and since the unit will
not contain any wood burning devices.
Reducing the density below one (1) residence would represent a taking of the economically
beneficial use of the property and is not justified by the circumstances particular to this
property.
6. The maximum 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 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 S 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.
Response: The Applicant does not propose to increase the project's density through the
PUD.
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
Holy Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUD Review Page 15
interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are
preserved or enhanced in an appropriate mariner.
Response: This vacant in -town site does not contain any unique or historical features that
should be preserved. However, the Applicant hereby agrees that no development will be
' permitted to occur on the steep portion of the property, located below Power Plant Road,
which will preserve more than 35% of the property as open space. Development will be
confined to the proposed building envelope, which comprises less than 25% of the entire
' property. The actual footprint of the house will cover significantly less than the entire
envelope, and should result in a site coverage of less than 10% of the entire property.
' 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and
vistas.
' Response: Clustering does not apply to the development of one (1) single-family residence.
The house will be appropriately sited to preserve the open space below Power Plant Road.
' 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.
Response: The site plan illustrates that the house will be oriented toward Power Plant
' Road. The Applicant anticipates that landscaping will be used to buffer views toward the
property from Highway 82. As described below, a site specific landscape plan will be
submitted to the City for review at the time a building permit application is submitted.
4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service
vehicle access.
' 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided.
Response: Access is provided from Power Plant Road, a public street. The driveway has
been designed to enter the property at a grade of approximately 10%, as it gains
approximately 4' in elevation over a distance of 40'. A small turn -around area has been
provided in front of the garage, which will also serve as a guest parking area, ensuring that
vehicles will not need to park along Power Plant Road.
6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and.
reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties.
Response: The Applicant anticipates that site drainage from the development will be
accommodated through the use of a swale in the southeast corner of the property, and
drywells beneath the driveway, parking area, and swale. The Applicant agrees to submit a
Holy Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUD Review Page 16
site specific drainage plan at the time of the building permit application, so the Engineering
Department can confirm that proposed drainage complies with the applicable City standards.
7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to
accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use.
I
LE
11
IL�
11
L
Response: This standard does not apply to this proposed development.
D. Landscape Plan. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the 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 development plan shall comply with
the following:
1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designed 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.
Response: It is premature for the Applicant to prepare a detailed landscaping plan for the
property at this time, since Holy Cross Energy will not be the developer of the property but
instead expects to sell the property to someone who will build a house on it. The applicant
has, however, prepared several illustrations that depict the type of screening we would
anticipate the future owner to install to buffer the property from the Highway.
The Applicant would accept a condition placed upon the approval of this application which
would require the Applicant to submit a landscaping plan for the property at the time the
building permit is submitted, and would require the Community Development Department
to determine the plan meets these standards before the building permit could be issued.
E. Architectural Character. It is the purpose of this standard to encourage architectural
interest, variety, character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City
while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon the suitability
of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the building's proposed massing,
proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of materials, and other
attributes which may significantly represent the character of the proposed development. There
shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural character plan which
adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the
development shall.
I
Holy Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUD Review Page 17
' 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.
' Response: The Applicant has prepared a series of elevations and perspectives to accompany
the proposed site plan. The purpose of the elevations and perspectives is not to make a
specific commitment as to the architectural style or design of the house that will be built on
the property. Rather, these drawings represent the Applicant's effort to depict one possible
form in which a house that contains approximately 3,000 sq. ft. of floor area plus a two car
garage could be developed on the property. It illustrates that there is more than enough
' room within the very small building envelope that we have identified to develop a house of
this size that would be compatible in character with neighboring structures and that would
not limit views from properties above this site toward Aspen Mountain.
' The Applicant recognizes that before a building permit could be issued for the proposed
development, the owner of the property will need to submit detailed plans to the City to
demonstrate the compliance of the proposed development with the City's residential design
standards. The Applicant would accept a condition placed upon the approval of this
application which would allow the Community Development Department staff to review the
' building plans to also determine that the design complies with this standard before the
building permit could be issued.
' 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.
' Response: As discussed above, this issue should be addressed at the time of residential
design review, when a site specific design is provided for the actual house that will be built
' on the property.
3. Accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice, and water in a safe and
' appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance.
Response: It is premature for the Applicant to address snow storage and shedding for the
residence at this time. The Applicant would accept a condition placed upon the approval
of this application which would allow the Community Development Department staff to
' review the building plans to determine that the design complies with this standard before the
building permit could be issued.
F. Lighting. The purpose of this standard is 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.
IIloly Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUD Review Page 18
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 be 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.
Response: All proposed lighting will comply with the City's new lighting standards.
' G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area. If the proposed development includes
a common parr open space, or recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the
proposed PUD, the following criteria shall be met:
' 1. The proposed amount location and design o the common ar open space, or
P P � f P� P
recreation area enhances the character of the proposed development, considering existing
and proposed structures and natural landscape features of the property, provides visual
relief to the property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various
land uses and property users of the PUD.
2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas is deeded
in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the
PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar manner.
3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through a legal instrument for the permanent
' care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together
with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development.
Response: There is not a common park or recreation area proposed as part of this small
project. However, as described above, more than 35% of the property will be restricted as
' open space.
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.
Holy Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUD Review Page 19
3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately where
the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement.
Response: As noted above, adequate facilities are present in the area to accommodate the
proposed development. However, any facility extensions or upgrades that are determined
I to be necessary to serve the project will be provided at the Applicant's expense, so there will
be no net cost to the public for providing these facilities.
L 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 trail facilities, and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and
circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria:
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.
Response: Access to the project will be provided from Power Plant Road, a public street.
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.
Response: A single-family residence at this in -town location can be expected to generate
between 5 and 10 trips per day, which will have a very minimal effect on the roads
surrounding the property. Therefore, there should be no need for any improvements to be
made to these roads as a result of this project.
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
Ifor appropriate improvements and maintenance.
Response: The Applicant will extinguish the revocable trail easement and will replace it with
a permanent easement for the trail along Highway 82 and the trail that connects the Marolt
property to Cemetery Lane. It appears to be necessary to relocate the latter trail by a few
feet, as shown on the site plan. This will require a retaining structure to be built into the
I embankment below Highway 82. The Applicant will be responsible for relocating and
rebuilding the trail. The Applicant agrees to work the City Parks Department when the site
plan for the house is being finalized, so the trail can be designed to meet City standards.
IThe trail that connects to Power Plant Road will have to be eliminated since it is located
within the proposed building envelope. However, persons who would use this trail will still
1
Holy Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUD Review Page 20
11
be able to get to Cemetery Lane using Power Plant Road, and then can get on the trail that
connects Cemetery Lane to the Highway 82 underpass.
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.
Response: No additional trail recommendations from the AACP affect this property.
S. 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.
Response: There are no streets planned within the project.
' 6. Security gates, guard posts, or other entryway expressions for the PUD, or for lots within
the PUD, are minimized to the extent practical.
1 Response: There will be no such gates or other entryway expressions.
' 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.
' 1. All phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as a complete
development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases.
' 2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating to the extent practical, occupants
of initial phases from the construction of later phases.
' 3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate improvements to public
facilities, payment of impact fees and fees -in -lieu, construction of any facilities to be used
' jointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing and any
mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated
with the phase.
' Response: A phased development is not proposed for this project.
V. VESTED RIGHTS
Pursuant to Section 26.52.080 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Applicant hereby requests
' that this development be granted vested rights status.
' Holy Cross Energy Application for Rezoning and Consolidated PUll Review Page 2t
EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT #1
COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
SCHEDULE A
L. Effective Date: 06/13/99 at 08:30 A.M.
Case No. PCT12821C2
2. Policy or Policies to be issued:
(a) ALTA Owner's Policy -Form 1992 Amount$ TBD
Premium$
Proposed Insured: Rate:STANDARD
PROFORMA
(b) ALTA Loan Policy -Form 1992 Amount$
Premium$
Proposed Insured: Rate:
�4
e
Tax Certificate: $10.00
Title to the FEE SIMPLE estate or interest in the land described or
referred to in this Commitment is at the effective date hereof
vested in:
HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION, INC.
The land referred to in this Commitment is situated in the County
of PITKIN State of COLORADO and is described as follows:
See Attached Exhibit "A"
PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC.
601 E. HOPKINS
ASPEN, CO. 81611
970-925-1766
970-925-6527 FAX
AUTHORIZED AGENT
Schedule A-PG.1
This Commitment is invalid
unless the Insuring
Provisions and Schedules
A and B are attached.
EXHIBIT A
That portion of
85 West of the
the NE1/4SW1/4 of Section 12,
6th P.M., described follows:
Township 10 South, Range
as
Commencing at Corner
No.
1 from which the West
quarter corner of said
Section 12 bears
N 80012148/1
W 1732.95 feet, being also a point which
bears N 8119' E
428 feet
from Corner No. 3 of
the Holden Tract;
thence S 75049'
E 139.64
feet to Corner No. 2;
thence N 04011'
E 288.38
feet to Corner No. 3;
thence N 75049'
W 89.56
feet to Corner No. 4;
thence S 14011'
W 284.00
feet to the point of
beginning.
1
I
I
I
1
1
I FNF
SCHEDULE B - SECTION 1
REQUIREMENTS
The following are the requirements to be complied with:
ITEM (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors
of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured.
ITEM (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be
insured must be executed and duly filed for record to -wit:
THIS COMMITMENT IS FURNISHED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY, IT IS
NOT A CONTRACT TO ISSUE TITLE INSURANCE AND SHALL NOT BE CONSTRUED AS
SUCH. IN THE EVENT A PROPOSED INSURED IS NAMED THE COMPANY HEREBY
RESERVES THE RIGHT TO MAKE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS AND/OR EXCEPTIONS
AS DEEMED NECESSARY. THE RECIPIENT OF THIS INFORMATIONAL REPORT
HEREBY AGREES THAT THE COMPANY HAS ISSUED THIS REPORT BY THEIR
REQUEST AND ALTHOUGH WE BELIEVE ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS
ACCURATE AND CORRECT, THE COMPANY SHALL NOT BE CHARGED WITH ANY
FINANCIAL LIABILITY SHOULD THAT PROVE TO BE INCORRECT AND THE COMPANY
IS NOT OBLIGATED TO ISSUE ANY POLICIES OF TITLE INSURANCE.
1
1
I FN
ISCHEDULE B SECTION 2
EXCEPTIONS
The
policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the
following
unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the
Company:
1.
Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records.
2.
Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records.
3.
Eiscrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments,
1
any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose
and which are not shown by the public records.
4.
Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or
hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records.
5.
Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any,
created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the
effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires
of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by
this Commitment.
6.
Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessment, charge or lien imposed
for water or sewer service or for any other special taxing district.
7.
Right of the proprietor of a vein or lode to extract or remove his
ore therefrom, should the same be found to penetrate or intersect the
premises hereby granted as reserved in United States Patent recorded
December 3, 1892 in Book 55 at Page 35.
8.
Terms, conditions, provisions and obligations as set forth in GRANT
OF EASEMENT recorded November 27, 1974 in Book 293 at Page 887.
9.
Easement and right of way for Power Plant road over and across the
subject property.
10.
Outstanding interests of the following named person: Henry T. Rogers,
Trustee.
NOTE: The above requirement is necessary because the above named
person acquired title to the subject property in Deed recorded
September 8, 1905 in Book 143 at Page 132.
11. Supplement Mortgage and Security Agreement granted to United States
of America, and recorded in Book 282 at Page 147, Supplements
thereto was recorded in Book 408 at Page 46 and Book 455 at Page 810.
1
FN,
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
AND DISCLOSURES
The Owner's Policy to be issued, if any shall contain the following
' items in addition to the ones set forth above:
(1) The Deed of Trust, if any, required under Schedule B-Section 1.
(2) Water rights, claims or title to water. (NOTE: THIS EXCEPTION
WILL APPEAR ON THE OWNER'S AND MORTGAGE POLICY TO BE ISSUED
' HEREUNDER)
Pursuant to Insurance Regulation 89-2;
NOTE: Each title entity shall notify in writing every prospective
insured in an owner's title insurance policy for a single family
residence (including a condominim or townhouse unit) (i) of
that title entity's general requirements for the deletion of an
exception or exclusion to coverage relating to unfiled mechanics
or materialmens liens, except when said coverage or insurance is
extended to the insured under the terms of the policy. A
' satisfactory affidavit and agreement indemnifying the Company
against unfiled mechanics' and/or Materialmen's Liens executed -
by the persons indicated in the attached copy of said affidavit
must be furnished to the Company. Upon receipt of these items
and any others requirements to be specified by the Company upon
request, Pre-printed Item Number 4 may be deleted from the
Owner's policy when issued. Please contact the Company for
further information. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing
contained in this Paragraph shall be deemed to impose any
requirement upon any title insurer to provide mechanics or
materialmens lien coverage.
NOTE: If the Company conducts the owners or loan closing under
circumstances where it is responsible for the recording or
filing of legal documents from said transaction, the Company
will be deemed to have provided "Gap Coverage".
Pursuant to Senate Bill 91-14 (CRS 10-11-122);
(a) The Subject Real Property may be located in a Special Taxing
District;
(b) A Certificate of Taxes Due listing each taxing jurisdiction
may be obtained form the County treasurer of the County
Treasurer's Authorized Agent;
(c) Information regarding Special Districts and the boundaries of
such districts may be obtained from the Board of County
Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County
Assessor.
NOTE: A tax Certificate will be ordered from the County Treasurer by
the Company and the costs thereof charged to the proposed insured
unless written instruction to the contrary are received by the
company prior to the issuance of the Title Policy anticipated by
this Commitment.
This commitment is invalid unless Schedule B-Section 2
' the Insuring Provisions and Schedules Commitment No. PCT12821C2
A and B are attached.
IEXHIBIT #2
'
Ms. Julie Woods
Community Development Director
City of Aspen
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: HOLY CROSS ENERGY PROPERTY REZONING AND PUD APPLICATION
Dear Ms. Woods:
We hereby authorize Alan Richman Planning Services to act as our designated
representative with respect to the land use application being submitted to your
office for our property, located near the Castle Creek Bridge. Alan Richman is
authorized to submit an application to rezone the property and to adopt a PUD
for its development with a single-family residence. He is also authorized to
represent us in meetings with City of Aspen staff, the Aspen Planning and
Zoning Commission, and the Aspen City Council.
Should you have any need to contact us during the course of your review of this
application, please do so through Alan Richman Planning Services, whose
address and telephone number are included in the land development
application.
Sincerely,
HOLY CROSS ENERGY
Robert H. Gardner,
General Manager - Support Services
' RHG:sdj
Pi
Igardner\w odzlet
rr-7.
LL.
atcoi.--.Jed At 4.,04 7X 15,. �cz 27, 7;44�
2AclLption NO :Ul-'I F.ADS
EXHIBIT #3
rnvQ' or
r "13 G.RMIT OF KA37_\V=, made and entered into this
day Q! 1974, by and between
Holy Cross Electric Association (hereinafter referred to as
"Grantor")' and the County of Pitkin, State of i'olcrddo (herein-
after referred to do *Grant",)
W I T N E 5 5 E T H
W117.RF.A-5j Grantor is the owner of certain real property
located in Section 12, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the
6th Principal Meridian, Pitkin County, Colorado; and
1ABEREAS, Grantor is desirous of granting to Grantee
a certain perpetual and nonexclusive trail easement and right-
of-way over and across said real property; and
WEZ-.Lv�5, Gzant-ee is desirous of accepting_ said trail
eaq=ent and right -of -Way.
"0
NOW T.ItZMYORS, for and in consideration of the aum of
'ten dollars and other good and valuable considerations,
2
the receipt and suf!iciency of which are hereby acknowledged,
Grantor hereby grants and conveys to Grantee, its 'successors and
for thre benefit of tha general public, tia following
d4h*c=ibed ,>erpe&u*1 and nonexclusive trail easement and right-
4.
to -Witt
A perpetual and nonexclusive trail easement
and right-of-way being 7.5 feet on both sides
of the line described in Exhibit A hereto,
which is hereb-y. ircorporAted 'herein, as said
line passe 'over .and across Graritorla real.-
prope='tj located in.said Sect-JoS 12, Township
7
,.
10 South, Range 95 Weat of the 6th,Princioal
Meridian, Pitkin County, ColorAdo, and a9
said line is indicated as pasaing ove= and
across- Grantor's. said real property on
Exhibit 8, attaahed hereto and inco;�orated
buare:n. '(intitled 'Right -of -Way Surrey for
Pitkin County", dated October 2, 19', r
PROVIDED HOWEVER, that said perpetual and nonexclusive
trail easement and right-of-way may be terminated by Grantor,
,its successors or assigns, for any reason at any time.
..
IN W17,14ESS WRZREOK, Grantor has executed and delivered
thia Grant of Easement to Grantee the day ar.
written.
' HOLY CROSS ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION
t .
i' C•ou-Ity a«
Subscribed and sworn to befo-e me t.!%_a r3M day of
197.47., by 7W-Z- ... _ ..
'N as fx'E�1ecz�" of Holy Cros: -ctric Ass _ ocia-
rc tilo i and by T ec� ,4 . 'p—Lda, ^ a s
r •' - Of Eroly Crosn Elactric A.ssocia-'_ion.
pees a1 hand and offl,pial seal.
;c. 7!y Coatisa3on axptro-a: h1cJ. 20 /977
-•>-,. •: T �s:9,-*^- -- •-"cr•-..:.�-yr � �c� spa. .c w -�-
The gogoing Grant• of IIa212=40t is heraby • aCcept2d
<i
aid at
pped, for they bonafit of general public, th38. --
"�`� dmy 0f > '1974.
�a
fs. County of Pitkin .
r State of Colorado
By
Cl=i-aa, .20s:3 of County
Cocia '� er County of Pitk n
Stata••of Colorado
,•,, r::CAttest:
••C19rk and Rzcorder
=� Daputy 'C er-I
:STATE OF 1
,County of as.
6scribed and sworn to before me this �� day of
, 1974, by Joseph E. Edvar`cs a3 Chnim—man
o: t, is satyr-- County Co-mmissioners of Pit;ein Co_.ty, CQZorAdo.
-Ritna22 my hand and official seal. /
- My Com iseion expireo: / 7 -1)' ,7
Pub i Cr
v;
I
Ag
. `•':
E-IMB- T A TO GRMT 0Y
TO PITXIN CaUN7Y
J' I
_ I Beginning at a point being 1656.66 ft. S78'25'L :tars the we
1/4 cor, Sec. 12 T108 R85W 6 P.M. a 1954 sur°au of Land
Maragement BrKas Gap,
tlsance 865004' 401E 69.10 ft.,
thence S53.42110"3 89.61 ft.,
thence s30136150 11.66 ft.,
thence NS8'05'30'S 16.50 ft.,
thence N33019'E 23.76 ft..,
thence 913'29'E $9.72 ft.,
z�
thence N-48012'30"W 31.33 Lt. to point
Y
L"- tfi=ce 'H79052, 50."W 58.60 ft.,
t4ance N65.52' 20"'4 18. 75 ft.,
s�►rsee N07014' 30'W 47.58 ft.,
* tlteace on a cu. a to the 1Q°t with a radius of 21.92 ft. u
w. � .,"nt►0 of.
66.44 ft. (chord bears S85055' 30—r? 43.77 ft.)
a po.i.nt in t.he. ri ht of way of the Caur:ty .road.
ALSO
9nginnin9 at Point "A" on previously described line,
them N53000' R 19 .00 `t. ,
a! }
1 thes±ce N03011200.00 ft. to the wocterly edge of pavement it
of rise Sontherly axtP1jaior. of COUn'ty Poad loading tc
&a s.lh.�. on plat of. Cantle Creek Subdivision I
B=k 2A, Naga .2llt Pitic{an CCunty Records,
•tha road to t1ie dedicated portion c
p14t Book 2A, Page 2A1.
] �l'i• �. 1. � {�•'.J✓ � J - r
_ rummomoMmm"M��Q �4,3 P. 6/6
AR. 18.
14 �' 9 i 11 P y i - � !i � �U V � " i [ ' L P ,n,: - ?- F .,,;,•• `:f ,,.R; ,,,�,� . .
woxr
Ladz ?�►�'
V
.
"�
N
y - 1,
.4 r
Z
�..�• m
da
OW
o0
Poe • r ��� � 1 .� I � .,
,x/IV
Ll
ur S-• '�Cb• t 7•'
.GJ•P6fI •
a,FT
��.yas� � Q W Fasw�•� ayt ? ,
�.• `� ,. �ja '1 Marry? -.
�� �. b•V f•� ~� �CcY rJ
�*�.,>r of c?,-pG/ p� \ �� �, r�y,�• � � 6 a�
W a,a 7,orp-4" AVGB 0S 30
p}„ A' w-
A& ys62
MIBIT B To GRANT OF
pASFjjZNT TO PITRIN COUNTY-
or KIAY Y
aT .
`�,�-�+� LNG 1 N F�•t.3 I�.0
EXHIBIT #4
9 1' 100 L*oVel
U ,�t�a,'. ;.e:� ,Y u U.� ?j, .)r'S,A�'41riiCli. /'i'1 1• i
u, cell b r
... ,... Y ePrea de a �g Spec : , .
Holy'Croa6lBlectric:Asaocfation'`. p ial'Meeting of the Board of Directors of
��:1301 Grand'Avenue, was SpringsC`Colos hedo, at I0;30 A
was held at the office of said Association at
1� November, 1974.
.M., on the 13t1i day of
The Secretary called the roll and reported that six of the seven Directors were
present, to -wit; Joe K. Corthell, Walter B. Lemon, Jr., George W. Loesch, Stanley Natal
Lied A. Rule and David Sage.
The Secretary stated that a Notice of the time, place and purpose of the special '
meeting had been mailed to all members of the Board of Directors, and submitted the
original of said Notice with proof of service thereof attached thereto.
directed that said original be attached to the minutes of this meeting, The YresldeLIc
The minutes of the. Regular meeting held October 9, 1974,,were read. A motion w,.-j
made that said minutes be approved as read. Said motion was seconded, put and carrl,j
by unanimous vote.
A list of accounts payable was presented to the Directors. Upon motion duly
seconded, put and unanimously carried, such list was a
items thereon was directed a
approved and the ctt:d that
uL rj1.i
list of accounts payable be identifiednbyrthefSecretalry asethatnactedeuton aC�L ,�j�1i
meeting, p thl.,
After discussion relating to the financial motion duly made, seconded, put and unanimously carried,l thetfollowingationresuliiLjolWus
adopted;
RESOLVED; .That pursuant to the policy adopted by resolution of
this board on September T, 1966, establishing a ten year revolvement
Of capital credit retirement, and, considering a subsequent resolution
adopted by this Board on May 16, 1973 whereby the Association agreed
that it will not retire capital credits earlier than allowed by R.E.A.
and the supplemental lender under the supplemental mortgage, and having
determined that the financial condition of the Association will not be
impaired thereby, capital credits for the year 1964, amounting to
$116,206.54, be retired by cash payments to those entitled thereto.
By letter, there was requested Eor Pitkin Count 11
perpet
easement and on a steep
It was noted that such is generallyual and situatenunderltilevCa9_Llel
Creek bridge on a steep slope, on land of this Association not presently in use. It
was further noted that such requested easement
"terminated by Grantor, its successors or assigns, for any ereasonlat anyly ttimeh"maAfter
discussion, and upon motion duly made, seconded, put and unanimously carried, the,follow-
ing resolution was adopted;
RESOLVED; That, in view of the fact that the land of this
Association involved is not at this time needed for any use,
and the further fact that the requested easement is on its
face ;revocable at any time, the Grant of Easement requested
' by Pitkin County, Colorado., in the form submitted to this
meeting, be, and the same is hereby, approved; and the officers
of this Association are authorized to execute Lhe Sault in
duplicate.
1 EXHIBIT #5
CITY OF ASPEN
PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
PLANNER: Chris Bendon, 920.5072 DATE: 11.30.99
' PROJECT: Holy Cross parcel Rezoning and Planned Unit Development
REPRESENTATIVE: Alan Richman
OWNER: Holy Cross.
TYPE OF APPLICATION: 2 Step. Planning and Zoning Commission, City Council.
DESCRIPTION: Property lies on both sides of Power Plant Road, north of Castle Creek Bridge. Three
revocable trail easements cross the parcel and the applicant is proposing to dedicate two of
' the easements for permanent public use and eliminate the thirdtrail which bisects the most -
developable area of the parcel.
Applicant is proposing to rezone this parcel to the R-30 Zone District and adopt a PUD for
a new single family residence. PUD should describe the architectural massing, building
envelope, setbacks, Floor Area of the development. Residential Design Standards should
' be considered during PUD Review to determine if any variances are necessary. PUD should
also consider any accommodation for an ADU.
Proposal requires the following approvals:
1. Rezoning to R-30-PUD
2. Planned Unit Development to establish dimensional requirements. Planner
recommends combining conceptual and final reviews.
3. Residential Design Standards Review. Planner recommends the applicant review the
Residential Design Standards prior to application and determine if any standards should
be varied to accommodate development on the site. RDS variances should be
considered as part of the PUD.
Land Use Code Sections:
26.710 R-30 Zone District
26.445 Planned Unit Development (Ordinance 35.99)
26.470.70 Growth Management Exemptions for single-family development
26.410 Residential Design Standards
26.304 Common Development Review Procedures.
26.520 Accessory Dwelling Unit Program (Ordinance 44.99)
Review by: Staff for completeness;
Development review committee (DRC) for technical considerations and referral comments;
Com. Dev. Director for recommendations;
Planning and Zoning Commission for PUD and Rezoning recommendation (PH)
City Council for PUD and Rezoning (PH);
Vesting is automatic and initiates after final approval.
Public Hearing: Yes, for meetings above noted by (PH). Applicant must post property and mail notice at least 10
days prior to hearing, or at least 15 days prior to the public hearing if any federal agency, state,
county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi -
governmental agency owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the
development application. Applicant will need to provide proof of posting and mailing with a
affidavit at the public hearing.
' Referral Agencies: Engineering, Parks, Fire Marshall, Water, ACSD, Streets, Building
Planning Fees: Planning Deposit, Major (9}I '- a31v
Referral Agency Fees: Engineering ($320) -`� ? �, .
' Total Deposit: S2;340-(additional hours are billed at a rate of $185/hour). Fee schedule is subject to change.
To apply, submit the following information:
' l . Proof of ownership.
2. Signed fee agreement.
3. Applicant's name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant which states the name,
address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant.
4. 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 owner's right to apply for the Development Application.
5. Total deposit for review of the application.
6. 25 Copies of the complete application packet and maps.
HPC = 12; PZ = 10; GMC = PZ+5; CC = 7; Referral Agencies = I/ea.; Planning Staff = 1
7. An 8 1/2" by I I" vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen.
8. Site improvement survey including topography and vegetation showing the current status, including all easements
and vacated rights of way, of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the state of Colorado.
9. A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed
development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. Please include existing
conditions as well as proposed.
10. List of adjacent property owners within 300' for public hearing.
H . Copies of prior approvals.
12. Additional application material as required for specific review. (See attached application packet.)
Notes:
l . New residence will require an exemption from GMQS. Applicant does not have to specify the manner in which an
exemption will be sought but the PUD should allow for an ADU to be provided on -site, unless the physical
constraints of the site are prohibitive.
2. Compliance with the Residential Design Standards should be considered and variance requests included in the PUD
application.
3. Applicant may want to consider a prohibition of highly reflective roof materials to minimize the effects of glare on
passing motorists.
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.
Waste Engineering, Inc. EXHIBIT #6
2430 Alcott Street
Denver, Colorado 80211
(303) 433-2788
(FAX) 303-480-1020
Mr. Ted Jessup
Holy Cross Energy
P.O. Box 2150
Glenwood Springs, CO 81602
December 29, 1999
Re: Environmental Site Assessment —Holy Cross Property —Aspen Lot, Aspen, Colorado
Dear Mr. Jessup:
This letter presents the results of the Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) conducted at the
referenced site (Site). The report has been prepared in general accordance with the American
Society of Testing Materials (ASTM) Standard E1527-97.
Based upon the foregoing assessment and data obtained, this ESA has provided no evidence of
recognized environmental conditions existing at the Site. An approximate 1000-gallon
aboveground storage tank (AST) was removed from the Site after completion of the field
reconnaissance portion of this ESA. Information on the AST removal is being provided under a
separate cover letter.
We appreciate the opportunity to perform these services. Please contact me if you have questions
regarding this information.
Very truly yours,
WASTE ENGINEERING, INC.
By: By:
Robin L. VerSchneider
Environmental Scientist
Enc.
C:\992194\0001a\L-Jessup.RVS.DOC
Hazardous Waste 0 Hydrocarbon Contamination 0
Water Quality Control 0 Waste Treatment Design
EXHIBIT #7
CITY OF ASPEN
130 S GALENA ST
ASPEN CO 81611
MASS ANN MD
400 W MAIN STE 200
' ASPEN CO 81611
1
'MADSEN GEORGE W JR
MADSEN CORNELIA G
931 W FRANCIS ST
ASPEN CO 81611
GREGORY KIRK
GREGORY PETRA
PO BOX 10055
ASPEN CO 81612
1
1
LIST OF OWNERS WITHIN 300' OF SUBJECT PROPERTY
WERNER SARAH R RESIDENCE TRUST CAMP ROBERT C
P O BOX 503 CURLEE CYNTHIA A AS TENANTS IN
BELLEVUE WA 98009-3884 COMMON
PO BOX 692
ASPEN CO 81612
MOSLE PAULA M
6125 WESTWICK
DALLAS TX 75205
FERNANDEZ ERIN L
315 E HYMAN AVE STE 305
ASPEN CO 81611
BEN HAMOO SHLOMO & PATRICE
CONYERS
PO BOX 2902
ASPEN CO 81612
STUART DONA
PO BOX 11733
ASPEN CO 81612
LOUD H MONTGOMERY & PAULA
PO BOX 11660
ASPEN CO 81612
KEILIN KIM MILLER
PO BOX 10064
ASPEN CO 81612
CRYSTAL PALACE CORPORATION
PO BOX 32
ASPEN CO 81612
ALDERFER JOHNNIE MAE
PO BOX 10880
ASPEN CO 81612
MAPS/DRAWINGS
1
11
5
3hoof
a
C. Lake
Prose Ps
t
0`
La'k�K (�
twnsts/nVlswOra�— -..._, 'q
Rd �
tinny Ct
�,.AsW
' : I Ins"Me
e
Music
5 Tent Wood ck Ln �<o
r R cn yy Hallamake
o
rf CI
0
Tftetre
10, q,E
, Tent
F
0 U� / �i Fr 182
v !
Aspen Mall
West 14
Summ 14
�J
ml
I
I
I
I
I
I
+ r i
I
I
Y
'Mb
8
Vine St
P
MR
il
It
All
IV,
0
.o E
r
W N Y
r W N
O
Z
—
c c
Q O
_
° i - G!
CC
C�Z
ctiy cJtL f
W
QZQ0
_ _
LJJ
✓)
N c E
O
7
z
�d
}aim
=y c-`,
�
�/�
�/�
m
T
W
U(nN<®
Vi
V/
i
as
L
�v+JJ ' •J
m m w
¢ C
<LL Y O p dR 3cQ C I
Op =5 cOC�;oo2 3 Q
J O �CC
ZO c'ZyG`cay,'^ s"�vntoa`,'c� tv lip
JL 2 G p, M J O O
Z 7 dl—+�F
o a.0 Z cn $ Vol
° tg Ta.oL Ao� W
W __ W wz OcnN L'Ti .Syq G jai inG�
a W a }a]-T
,'t
Q <£ W a Q U(nN r-�e°c m C-
I
y81
_ O9S L
i
—088L
ObO�j -b7d �13MOd
C
m
Cl)r O� E 1
O�
CC
ZO C7Z `= 2_ �,L'�T, _�
O Z O__ f
Uo=; J Lijn c� 0 _1 G _--_- W Q
W a¢ Uc=r)cNi
Q
'l.
N(n E
W ' NN y
W O
C
v
�
U~ G
to
�/�
I
CO)
Cl)
W z _
t
�►
�¢¢
a
MM
1.1.E
<0
00ZO
m
0 Z
L r
yC
H U w
Q O
_ s E 5'
tJ-T.y.
LLI
IXK
aCL
-
W
i
W
d<
UCnN
-- _ -
--_�_
I:
Cn ► E
—
,^
r W tl n`
Cc cN
V/
w
U — L
cn
L� L _-
~
a p p -
li
T00
o
1=
c
V
a�
+ter
a/f
H uZ, 9p!
CC ass
O
LLI
w>w
0�o
mV
`
G
G
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
V/
W
N o 0 0
' + r^
u. i 2 i O Q
_ 1� <
O� tiCc cm.9�o'�a V
ai S �I Z O A G C
/� Q J O Z �) T2 vJ �S ,:i ,^
_ ZO =>g o-�a V+
cc � O .� M
U o Z °`-' W a U O O o 1yyO i c'a �_To g�.5 >°°� LL
IJ O7:0'�.5 �'�' 7 w
T N w O kk .� T � yy
Z W O� F m C' '2 y S �` yTyE.%R� cvIL
C
c�
w
E
0
a�
F.
W
'V
cn .
0
z
C
p�.
—0
W
t
4-0
0
z
E
0
a�
-
0
z
E
0
L
a�
J
== m m m= r m m = m = = = m m m m
CASE NUMBER
A027-00
PARCEL ID #
2735
CASE NAME
Holy Cross Energy Property
PROJECT ADDRESS
Power Plant Road
PLANNER
Nick Lelack
CASE TYPE
Rezoning, PUD
OWNER/APPLICANT
Holy Cross Energy/ C/o Robert Gardener
REPRESENTATIVE
Alan Richman
DATE OF FINAL ACTION
6/26/00
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
Ord. 21-2000
PZ ACTION
ADMIN ACTION
BOA ACTION
DATE CLOSED
8/2/00
BY
J. Lindt
0
PARCEL ID: 2735 DATE RCVD: 3/7/00 # COPIES:F CASE NO A027-00
CASE NAME: Holy Cross Energy Property PLNR:
PROJ ADDR: Power Plant Road CASE TYP: IRezoning. PUD STEPS:
�—
OWN/APP: Holy Cross Energy/ ADR Postal Drawer 2150 CIS/Z: lGlenwood Springs/C PHN:j—
REP: Alan Richman ADR: Box 3613 C/S/Z:' Aspen/CO/81612 r PHN: 920-1125
FEES DUE: 231 OD 330 E FEES RCVD: 2640 STAT: F
REFERRALS
REF:F— BY�� DUE:I�
MTG DATE REV BODY PH NOTICED
F F—_ I
REMARKS
CLOSED: z� BY:
PLAT SUBMITD: V " PLAT (BK,PG):
DATE OF FINAL ACTION:
CITY COUNCIL:
PZ:
BOA: r
DRAC:
ADMIN:)
•
DEVELOPMENT ORDER
of the
City of Aspen
Community Development Department
This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section
26.304.070, "Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights",
of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific
development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein.
The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a three-year vested
property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the third
anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building permit is approved
pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement, or a
revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of
vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any
growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject
to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order.
This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific
development plan as described below.
Holy Cross Energy, Postal Drawer 2150, Glenwood Springs, CO 81602
Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address and telephone number
Holy Cross Property Power Plant Road
Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property
Rezoning, PUD
Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan
City Council Ordinance # 21-2000, 6/26/00
Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions)
July 15, 2000
Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.)
July 16, 2003
Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration
and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen
Municipal Code.)
Issued this 151h day of July, 2000, by the City of Aspen Community
Dpv-qlopment Director.
Ann Woods, Community Development Director
PUBLIC NOTICE
Of
DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development
plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to the Land Use Code of the
City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the
following described property: Holy Cross Parcel, by Ordinance of the City Council
numbered 21, series of 2000. For further information contact Julie Ann Woods, at the
Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Dept. 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, Colorado (970)
920-5090.
s/City of Aspen Account
Publish in The Aspen Times on July 15, 2000
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager
John Worcester, City Attorney
Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director
Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director
FROM: Nick Lelack, Planner 0/-
RE: Holy Cross Energy: Rezoning to R-30/Planned Unit Development &
Consolidated PUD Review - 2"d Reading/Public Hearing
DATE: June 26, 2000
APPLICANT• Power Plant Road.
Holy Cross Energy ,
REPRESENTATIVE:"
Alan Richman Planning Services
LOCATION:.-`"-
Along Power Plant Rd., north of
Hwy 82 and Castle Creek Bridge
CURRENT ZONING:
ate, rr
Conservation & Public
PROPOSED ZONING: _ , n
R-30/PUD Overlay The arrow points to the proposed location for a single family
residence. The trail down to Power Plant Road would
become the driveway; utilities would be located beneath a
CURRENT LAND USE: rebuilt trail in the foreground parallel to Hwy 82. An aerial
Vacant ohotoaranh is included at the end of this memorandum.
PROPOSED LAND USE:
SUMMARY'
Residential
The purpose of this application is to gain approvals of a
rezoning and site specific Planned Unit Development
LOT SIZE:
(PUD) Plan for the development of a single family
32,456 sq. ft.
residence. Rezoning the property brings the parcel into
conformance with the land use code by creating a lot
FAR:
which is in compliance with its zone's lot size, and the
Under Current Zoning: 5000 sq. ft.
PUD establishes the building envelope and other
R-30/PUD Allowable: 3,581 sq. ft
dimensional requirements. In addition, the City will be
Proposed Allowable: 3,200 sq. ft.
Provided with a permanent trail easement across this lot.
The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4-1 to
recommend approval.
1
E
REVIEW PROCEDURE
• Rezoning &Consolidated Planned Unit Development Reviews: City Council shall
approve, approve with conditions, or deny a rezoning and/or Consolidated PUD
request after considering a recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
STAFF COMMENTS:
Holy Cross Energy Association (Applicant), represented by Alan Richman of Alan
Richman Planning Services, is requesting land use approvals to establish a building
envelope for the development of a single family residence on a lot located below and
north of Highway 82 and Castle Creek Bridge, east of Barnard Court and Park, and on
both sides of Power Plant Road above the Aspen City Shop. Holy Cross previously
offered the site for sale to the City of Aspen and Aspen/Pitkin County Housing
Authority, but both entities decided not to purchase the lot.
One request is to rezone the parcel. Currently, the parcel is split zoned, with the
Conservation Zone District on the west portion located above Power Plant Road and
the Public Zone District on the east portion located below Power Plant Road. The
photograph below shows the portion of the lot zoned Conservation. The Conservation
Zone District allows the construction of a single family residence, but the Public Zone
District does not. The request is to rezone the entire parcel to the R-30, Low Density
Residential Zone District with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay.
The second request is for Consolidated Planned Unit Development (PUD) Review to
create a site specific PUD Plan. The PUD would establish the building envelope on
the west portion of the parcel zoned Conservation.
In addition, the Applicant requested the development be granted vested rights status.
Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2000, automatically grants vested rights status for three
years for approved developments, so this request will be acknowledged if the project is
approved.
Rezoning to R-30/PUD
Rezoning the property achieves
two goals. First, the parcel is
currently a non -conforming lot
in the Conservation Zone
District because the minimum
lot size for a parcel in this
district is 10 acres. This parcel
is approximately 32,456 square
feet, or .75 acres. The
minimum lot size in the R-30
Zone District is 30,000 square
Public Zone
District
Conservation
Zone District
.,
`� -—-
Zone district
d
division line
a'
is Power
Plant Road
feet. Thus, the rezoned lot would conform to the land use code.
2
Second, although a single family residence is permitted in the Conservation Zone
District, the front-, rear-, and side -yard setbacks in this zone district - designed for 10
acre parcels - would overlap on this .75 acre lot, leaving no developable area for a
single family residence, which is a permitted use. Instead of requesting a setback
variance, Staff recommended the applicant apply to rezone the property to both bring
the lot into conformance with the Land Use Code as well as to establish the building
envelope in the best possible location on the site as part of the PUD. Staff supports the
rezoning request because it brings the lot into conformance with the code, and allows
for the minimum land use of the property of one single family dwelling.
Site Specific Planned Unit Development
The second request is for Consolidated Planned Unit Development (PUD) Review to
create a site specific PUD Plan to establish a building envelope and other dimensions
for a single-family house on the lot. A PUD would ensure that the location,
dimensions, and landscaping of the lot are site and neighborhood sensitive. The
following table shows the dimensional requirements for the Conservation Zone District,
R-30 Zone District, and proposed PUD.
Zone District
Front
Side
Rear
Height
Floor Area
Ratio
Conservation
100 feet
30 feet
30 feet
28 feet
3,750 sq. ft.*
R-30, Low Density Residential
25 feet
10 feet
10 feet
25 feet
3,581 sq. ft.*
Proposed PUD
16.75 feet
10 feet
15 feet
25 feet
3,200 sq. ft.
NOTE: These calculations include the maximum 25%, slope reduction requirement.
The table illustrates that the proposed PUD is more restrictive than the existing
Conservation Zone District for height and floor area ratio, but less restrictive for all
setbacks. The proposed dimensions establish a building envelope on the relatively flat
bench in the center of the portion of the lot located above Power Plant Road.
Staff believes this site provides challenges for the development of a single family
residence. It contains trails (discussed in the next section), slopes, mature native
vegetation, and is fairly difficult to access and connect to public utilities.
Nevertheless, Staff believes that the proposed PUD creates a building envelope, access,
and dimensional requirements that are site and neighborhood sensitive. The building
envelope is relatively flat and avoids most of the dense, mature native vegetation on the
site. It is for these reasons that Staff can support the site specific PUD.
Trails, Driveway & Utilities
Two (2) pedestrian/bike trails currently cross the property. One trail (Trail 1) runs
parallel to Highway 82 on the southern portion of the property and then continues
under the Castle Creek Bridge. This trail connects Cemetery Lane to the Marolt
property and the school trail. A portion of the trail that runs parallel to Highway 82 is
on both City and Holy Cross properties. A second trail (Trail 2) splits off from this
trail, crosses through the center of the property, and then connects the pedestrian/bike
trail to Power Plant Road. The photo below does not accurately reflect the survey line.
Holy Cross granted Pitkin County revocable trail easements for both trails on its
property in 1974 (Exhibit 3 of the application). The easements "may be terminated by
Grantor, its successors or assigns, for any reason at any time."
Holy Cross proposes to terminate the revocable easement for Trail 2 and convert the
trail into a driveway to access the building envelope. The Applicant also proposes to
grant the City of Aspen a permanent easement for the portion of Trail 1 located on its
property.
The utility plan for the property demonstrates that the necessary utilities are located
immediately west of the property (toward Barnard Court). Holy Cross is requesting a
utility easement from the City to locate the utilities beneath Trail 1, reducing
disturbance to the native vegetation on the slopes to the property. In exchange for the
utility easement, the Applicant agrees to rebuild Trail 1 that runs parallel to the
highway and continues on the Holy Cross property beneath Castle Creek Bridge.
Community Development and Parks Staff are disappointed about the prospect of losing
Trail 2, however, the owners are within their rights to do so. This link provides an
important connection from
Trail 1 to Power Plant Road
and neighbors have expressed
their desire to keep the trail.
Staff has explored a number
of options for maintaining
this connection, but the steep
slopes, retaining walls, and
dense vegetation do not make
another realignment or option
possible. Pedestrian and bike
traffic from Power Plant
Road can continue around the
bend in the road a little
further and connect to Trail 1
via Barnard Court or crossing
Cemetery Lane.
Staff recognizes that the existing easement is revocable and the trail provides the best
vehicular access to the property. The Applicant and Staff explored the possibility of
accessing the property from Barnard Court. But steep slopes and potential conflicts
with heavy pedestrian and bike traffic on Trail 1 make this a challenging option.
Staff supports placing the utilities under Trail 1 in exchange for a rebuilt trail. Parks
Department Staff and neighbors contend that this steep trail is dangerous and in need of
repair and re -grading to make it safer. Placing utilities under the trail would also
4
•
alleviate the need for imposing greater impacts on the site's slopes and native
vegetation.
Planning and Zoning Commission & City Council Action
The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4-1 to recommend City Council approve
the rezoning and Consolidated PUD. City Council approved the ordinance on First
Reading on June 6, 2000.
Planning and Zoning Commissioners generally agreed with Staff that the site is
challenging for the development of a single family residence, but also that existing
zoning prohibits any viable use of the land (the Conservation Zone District's permitted
and conditional uses are included as Exhibit Q. Some members also expressed
appreciation for the Applicant's willingness to further restrict FAR for the site as part
of the PUD. The Commissioner who voted against the application said he does not
believe the application meets several of the zoning and PUD criteria.
The Commission recommended two conditions of approval. The conditions are that the
Planning and Zoning Commission shall approve detailed landscape and architectural
plans for the property prior to an application for building permit. The reasons for the
conditions are that the PUD criteria addresses each of these development characteristics
for this prominent location near the entrance to town; however, the application contains
hypothetical landscape and architectural plans because Holy Cross does not plan to
develop the property. The Applicant agreed to the conditions.
A few neighbors voiced their opposition to the project, explaining that they bought
their properties with the understanding that the site would not be developed because the
Conservation Zone District's setback precluded development on the parcel. They also
argued that Trail 2 is important because it is regularly used by children going to
school.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends City Council approve of rezoning the Holy Cross Energy
Association parcel to R-30/PUD and creating a site specific PUD plan, with
conditions in the draft Ordinance.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Ordinance No. c�� , Series of 2000, approving rezoning the Holy Cross
Energy parcel to R-30/PUD and creating a site specific PUD."
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
5
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A --
Review Criteria and Staff Findings
Exhibit B --
Referral Agency Comments
Exhibit C --
Conservation Zone District
Exhibit D --
Development Application
n
N •
�s
i3 e a LF
•
EXHIBIT A
HOLY CROSS REZONING TO R-30/PUD & CONSOLIDATED PUD
REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS
Section_26.310.020, Standards Applicable to Amendments to the Official Zone District
Map
In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, the Planning and Zoning
Commission shall consider:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable
portions of this title.
Staff Finding:
Staff does not believe rezoning this parcel from Conservation and Public to R-30/PUD would
be in conflict with any portions of this title. Rezoning the property would bring it into
compliance with the Land Use Code because the 32,456 square foot lot would comply with
the minimum lot size for this zone district, which is 30,000 square feet. This parcel is
contiguous to land zoned R-30/PUD immediately to the south.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the
Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
Staff Finding:
Staff believes rezoning the parcel will not conflict with the AACP. The AACP's Growth
Philosophy states that the City of Aspen agrees to accept greater density within the Aspen
Community Growth Boundary, and the proposed development is located within this area. It
is specifically proposed for an undeveloped parcel situated below Castle Creek Bridge, above
Power Plant Road, and east of Barnard Court.
The AACP also encourages reducing automobile trips. This parcel is within walking and
biking distance to town, trails, bus stops, and recreation areas.
One of the goals of the AACP is to improve safety for pedestrians and bikes in the Aspen
area. The proposal is essentially a trade-off concerning this goal. One trail crossing the
property from Power Plant Road to the trail along Highway 82 and under Castle Creek
Bridge would be removed because the Applicant would revoke the trail easement to gain
access for the parcel. A trail easement granted by Holy Cross Energy Association to Pitkin
County in 1974 states that the easement "may be terminated by Grantor, its successors or
assigns, for any reason at any time."
However, the community gains from the dedication of a permanent easement for the trail that
connects Cemetery Lane to the Marolt property running along side Highway 82 and then
underneath the bridge (referred to as Trail I in the Staff memo). In addition, the Applicant
agrees to rebuild the path subject to the Parks Department's approval in exchange for a utility
7
easement from the City of Aspen to place utilities under the path. The trail is in need of
repair and contains fairly steep slopes that are not safe for all bicyclists and pedestrians; the
rebuilt trail would be made safer for all users.
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone
districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood
characteristics.
Staff Finding:
Rezoning the property would permit the development of one single family residence on the
site, which is also allowed under current zoning. Zoning in the Cemetery Lane area is either
zoned R-6, R-15, R-30/PUD, and Park (for the golf course). Staff believes the proposed
rezoning, R-30, is compatible with the character of existing land uses in the area. The
property is surrounded by single family and duplex units, Highway 82, a park, bike paths,
and the City maintenance shop. The proposed residence would be consistent with these uses.
According to the Applicant, the reason for the rezoning and PUD is to establish a building
envelope and dimensional requirements to situate the house in a location that minimizes its
impact on slopes and native vegetation. The location of the proposed building envelope is
currently zoned Conservation, which prescribes setbacks that would make situating a house
on the parcel impossible. The following table illustrates current and proposed setbacks,
height, and FAR. Although the property is proposed to be rezoned to R-30, the PUD
setbacks are the dimensions requested in the application.
Zone District
Front
Side
Rear
Height
Floor Area
Ratio
Conservation
100 feet
30 feet
30 feet
28 feet
3,750 sq. ft.*
R-30, Low Density Residential
25 feet
10 feet
10 feet
25 feet
3,581 sq. ft.*
Proposed PUD
16.75 feet
10 feet
15 feet
25 feet
3,200 sq. ft.
NOTE: These calculations include the maximum 25% slope reduction requirement.
The proposed PUD would establish setbacks less restrictive than the Conservation Zone
District, but the height and FAR dimensions are proposed to be more restrictive than
currently allowed. Staff believes the proposed dimensions to be suitable for the development
of a single family residence on this lot given its slope constraints and odd configuration
above Power Plant Road and below Highway 82.
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road
safety.
Staff Finding:
Rezoning the property should only have minimal impacts on traffic generation and road
safety. The application states that an average single family residence in Aspen generates five
(5) to ten (10) automobile trips per day. The residence would be located within walking
distance to downtown, bus stops, and recreation and employment areas. Staff does not
believe rezoning the property would adversely impact traffic generation and road safety.
E:3
E
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result
in demands on public facilities, and whether the extent to which the
proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such facilities,
including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities,
water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities.
Staff Finding:
All appropriate utility agencies and the City Engineer were referenced on this application
and reported the ability to serve this project. The Parks Department supports the proposal
to locate utilities under the trail in exchange for a rebuilt trail. A condition of approval
shall be that the owner(s) mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but
not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. School, park, water,
sanitation, and other impact fees will be due prior to the issuance of building permits.
F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in
significant adverse impacts on the natural environment.
Staff Finding:
Rezoning the property will not itself create adverse impacts on the natural environment
because current zoning and proposed zoning both permit the construction of a single family
residence. The main difference is that current zoning effectively prevents any development
on the property because of the setbacks in the Conservation Zone District. The PUD would
restrict height and FAR below what is currently allowed for the site, but adjust the setbacks
to create a building envelope on the most developable portion of the site. Steep slopes and
natural vegetation are preserved to the greatest extent possible. In addition, the Applicant has
removed a City -owned fuel storage tank from the site with permission from the City.
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the
community character in the City of Aspen.
Staff Finding:
Staff believes rezoning the property is consistent and compatible with the community
character in the City of Aspen, particularly because rezoning the parcel will not change its
expected land use — single family residential. The PUD review ensures that the dimensions
and character of the proposed development are consistent and compatible with the character
of Aspen, including surrounding uses, public facilities and utilities, access, architecture and
landscaping. Rezoning the parcel to a residential zone district is also consistent with
promoting higher densities of development inside the Aspen Community Growth Boundary.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel
or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed
amendment.
Staff Finding:
In 1992, the City rezoned the Aspen City Shop and portion of the Holy Cross parcel from R-
30/PUD to Public/PUD to bring the City Shop into compliance with the Land Use Code. The
we
Applicant had been unaware of this rezoning until recently. The request is to rezone the
entire parcel to this zone district.
I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public
interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title.
Staff Finding:
Staff does not believe the proposed rezoning would be in conflict with the public interest
and believes it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Land Use Code. Again,
rezoning the property would not change the expected use of the land, and the City benefits
from gaining a permanent easement for a highly used trail/bike path.
26.445.050 Review Standards: Consolidated PUD
A development application for Conceptual, Final, Consolidated Conceptual and Final, or
Minor PUD shall comply with the following standards and requirements. Due to the
limited issues associated with Conceptual Reviews and properties eligible for Minor
PUD Review, certain standards shall not be applied as noted. The burden shall rest upon
an applicant to show the reasonableness of the development application, and its
conformity to the standards and procedures of this Chapter and this title.
A. General requirements.
1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area
Community Plan.
Staff Finding
Staff believes the proposed site specific PUD will not conflict with the AACP. The AACP's
Growth Philosophy states that the City of Aspen agrees to accept greater density within the
Aspen Community Growth Boundary, and the proposed PUD establishes a building envelope
and other dimensions for a single family residence within this area.
The AACP also encourages reducing automobile trips. A residence on this lot would help
reduce automobile trips because of its close proximity to town, trails, bus stops, and
recreation and employment areas.
2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing
land uses in the surrounding area.
Staff Finding
A single family residence in an appropriate building envelope is consistent with the character
of existing land uses in the area. The property is surrounded by single family and duplex
units, Highway 82, a park, bike paths, and the Aspen City Shop. The proposed residence
would be consistent with these uses.
3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development
of the surrounding area.
10
Staff Finding
Staff does not believe the proposed development would adversely affect future development
of the surrounding area. The surrounding area is mostly built out with residences, the Aspen
City Shop, a park, or consists of undevelopable areas. A condition of approval is that the
applicant place a conservation easement over those portions of the property located across
Power Plant Road to the north/northeast to ensure that the steep slopes are not developed.
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
A condition of approval is that prior to the submission of a building permit application,
the property owners shall meet the then current growth management requirements for the
development of a new single family residence, which may include, but not be limited to,
applying for and obtaining a GMQS allotment or exemption, and providing affordable
housing mitigation requirements at the then current standards.
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 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
Staff believes the proposed dimensional requirements for the property are appropriate and
compatible with natural and man-made features on and surrounding the property. The
dimensional requirements are stricter than those allowed in the Conservation and R-15
Zone Districts. For example, the allowable floor area ratio for this lot size in the current
11
•
Conservation Zone District is approximately 5,000 square feet, and over 3,500 square feet
in the R-15 Zone District. The proposal is to limit FAR for the property to 3,200 square
feet in the PUD. Similarly, the Conservation Zone allows height limits of 28 feet, while
the R-15 Zone District and proposed PUD would limit height for this property to 25 feet.
The dimensions also restrict development to the only buildable portion of the parcel;
steep slopes and dense native vegetation are avoided. The proposed dimensions also
protect the existing bike path/trail connecting Cemetery Lane to the Marolt property
along Highway 82 and under Castle Creek Bridge (Trail 1). Unfortunately, the section of
the bike path/trail that branches off from this trail to Power Plant Road is proposed to be
eliminated because it provides the only possible access to the property.
Zone District
Front
Side
Rear
Height
Floor Area
Ratio
Conservation
100 feet
30 feet
30 feet
28 feet
3,750 sq. ft.*
R-30, Low Density Residential
25 feet
10 feet
10 feet
25 feet
3,581 sq. ft.*
Proposed PUD
16.75 feet
10 feet
15 feet
25 feet
3,200 sq. ft.
NOTE: These calculations include the maximum 25% slope reduction requirement.
Overall, Staff believes the proposed dimensions of this PUD to be appropriate and
compatible with the surrounding area.
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
Staff believes the Applicant has proposed a building envelope on the most suitable portion of
the site, avoiding steep slopes, native vegetation to the greatest extent possible, and a key
trail connecting Cemetery Lane to the Marolt property. Proposing more restrictive
dimensional requirements such as FAR and height than existing zoning and equal to or more
restrictive than the R-30 Zone District should permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open
space and site coverage favorable to the surrounding areas. Site coverage is proposed to be
less than 10 percent, and the PUD would establish a minimum of 35 percent of open space,
which Staff is recommending be made a condition of approval through the granting of a
conservation easement.
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 non-residential 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.
12
•
d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core
and general activity centers in the city.
Staff Finding
The Applicant is proposing to provide two (2) off-street parking spaces in a 2-car garage,
which is required by the Land Use Code. Guest parking would be provided in front of the
garage and on the driveway. If the future property owner decided to apply for an ADU, the
owner would be required to provide an additional parking space for that unit on site.
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:
a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other
utilities to service the proposed development.
b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal,
and road maintenance to the proposed development.
Staff Finding
There are no infrastructure capacity issues that would prohibit the amount of development
being considered. Staff does not recommend any reductions in the development being
proposed.
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.
a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of
ground instability or the possibility of mud flow, rock falls or
avalanche dangers.
b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the
natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and
consequent water pollution.
c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality
in the surrounding area and the City.
d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or
trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain
or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site.
Staff Finding
The Applicant is proposing to establish a building envelope for the development of one (1)
single family residence. There are no known natural hazard or site limitations that prohibit
the amount of development — the single residence — being considered. Staff does not
recommend any reductions to the proposed development based on this standard.
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
13
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
The applicant is not requesting an increase in density beyond what is allowed within the
PUD. In addition, the site's physical capabilities can accommodate the single family
residential use.
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.
Staff Finding
The proposed development complies with most of the man-made features on the site and does
not detract from the site's natural features or visual interest. It contributes to the town's
identity by preserving the existing trail connection between Cemetery Lane and the Marolt
property with a permanent easement. Unfortunately, it also proposes to terminate a revocable
trail easement for the portion of the trail that branches off to Power Plant Road. It must be
pointed out that this is an easement and not a public space. No historic structures or other
unique features exist on the property. Steep slopes and existing native vegetation outside the
building envelope will be preserved.
2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant
open spaces and vistas.
Staff Finding
Only one structure, a single family residence, is proposed for the parcel. The residence
would not block mountain views from neighboring parcels, and would be limited to
3,200 square feet of floor area. Open space on the parcel below Power Plant Road would
be preserved.
14
0
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.
Staff Finding
The proposed residence would be oriented toward Power Plant Road, and contribute to
the context of the surrounding area by preserving views, trails, and open space. The
City's Residential Design Standards will be applied to this property, ensuring that the
proposed development provides visual interest and engagement of vehicular and
pedestrian movement. A cursory review of the potential residence indicates compliance
with the standards and the applicant is not requesting any variances from these standards.
Holy Cross plans to gain land use approvals for the property and then sell the parcel. It
is for this reason that the applicant is not submitting final architectural drawings for the
single family residence. Any other proposed residence for this site will also be reviewed
for compliance with the design standards.
4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow
emergency and service vehicle access.
Staff Finding
Access to the property is proposed to be from Power Plant Road a branch of the existing
trail is located. The Aspen Fire Marshall has reserved comment on the access until a
building permit application has been received by the City. A condition of approval is
that the Aspen Fire Marshall shall approve emergency access to the property prior to the
issuance of a building permit. A second, related condition of approval is that the
building be sprinkled.
5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided.
Staff Finding
Pedestrian and handicapped access will be provided via the driveway from Power Plant
Road or the trail from Cemetery Lane.
6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a
practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact
surrounding properties.
Staff Finding
A condition of approval is that a drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared
by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer which maintains sediment and debris on -site during
and after construction, be approved by the City's Engineering Department prior to the
issuance of building permits. If a ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation
report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 2-year storm frequency should be used
in designing any drainage improvements. The City drainage criteria needs to be
implemented.
15
•
The Applicant is proposing to accommodate drainage on site through the use of a swale in the
southeastern corner of the property and drywells under the driveway, parking area (in front of
the garage), and under the swale. The City Engineer recommends that the dry wells be at
least 10 feet deep.
7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately
designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with
the use.
Staff Finding
This application is for a residential land use, so this criteria does not apply.
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
A condition of approval is that, prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant
shall submit a detailed landscape plan to the Community Development Department and
Parks Department showing the size, species, quantity, and location of all existing and
planned native and non-native vegetation on the portion of the portion of the site located
above Power Plant Road. The final landscape plan shall be approved by the Community
Development Director after considering a recommendation by the Parks Department.
E. Architectural Character.
It is the purpose of this standard is to encourage architectural interest, variety,
character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City
while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon
the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the
building's proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and
other buildings, use of materials, and other attributes which may significantly
represent the character of the proposed development. There shall be approved
16
as part of the final development plan an architectural character plan, which
adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed
architecture of the development shall:
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
The Applicant is applying for land use approvals for the property; if approved, the Applicant
plans to sell the property. It is expected that a buyer would develop a single family residence
on the site. The application contains architectural drawings for one potential residence on
site. Staff does not believe it is appropriate or worthwhile to comment on a residence that
may or may not be built because the drawings may not be an accurate representation of the
proposed single family residence. Instead, staff can only confirm that any residence on this
site must conform to the City's Residential Design Standards, building codes for energy
standards, etc.
F. Lighting.
The purpose of this standard is 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 be 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
All new lighting for the proposed residence must be in compliance with the City's lighting
code adopted in November 1999 and Uniform Building Code for safety. The new lighting
shall be designed to minimize glare onto adjacent properties, Highway 82 and Power Plant
Road.
17
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:
1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open
space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed
development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural
landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the property's
built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses
and property users of the PUD.
2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation
areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or
dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar
manner.
3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through a legal instrument for
the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas,
and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future
residential, commercial, or industrial development.
Staff Finding
No common park or open space is included in this application for this lot. However, open
space on the lot below Power Plant Road will be preserved and a trail easement shall be
deeded in perpetuity to the City for the Cemetery Lane to Marolt property connection.
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.
Staff Finding
All appropriate utility agencies and the City Engineer were referenced on this application and
reported the ability to serve this project.
2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be
mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer.
Staff Finding
Staff recommends a condition of approval be that the owner(s) mitigate any public impacts
that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and
water lines. Another condition of approval is that the Applicant shall provide an
unconditional easement to the City of Aspen for maintenance of the retaining walls and
structures below and around Castle Creek Bridge. The easement, which shall be designated
18
on the PUD plans and approved by the City Engineer, shall be from approximately 15 feet
above and adjacent to the retaining walls down to Power Plant Road.
3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided
appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the
additional improvement.
Staff Finding
No oversized utility stubs were requested to be installed with this development.
L Access and Circulation. (Only standards 1 &2 apply to Minor PUD applications)
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:
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.
Staff Finding
Access to the building envelope is proposed to be from Power Plant Road, a public street,
where the current trail/bike path exists.
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.
Staff Finding
Staff does not believe the development of a single family residence on this parcel will require
improvements to Power Plant Road. Parking will be accommodated on site for residents and
visitors. Accessing the property from Power Plant Road should not cause a significant
increase in traffic congestion on Power Plant Road, Cemetery Lane, or Highway 82.
According to the application, a single family residence in town can be expected to generate
between 5 and 10 vehicular trips per day, which is a small number of trips occurring on the
surrounding roads, particularly Highway 82.
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.
19
Staff Finding
Holy Cross plans to revoke a trail easement across the property. This trail does not provide
access to significant public lands or a river. Pedestrians and bicyclists may continue to
access the trail, Cemetery Lane and Highway 82 along Power Plant Road. It should be noted
that the road is not particularly safe for pedestrians or bikes because of the curves and grade
of the road.
The Applicant has also proposed to deed the trail along Highway 82 and under Castle Creek
Bridge to the City in perpetuity, and to rebuild it to make it significantly safer. This is an
important connection in the City's trail system; it provides safe pedestrian and bike access to
and from Aspen off of Highway 82.
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.
Staff Finding
The AACP does not propose additional trails for this parcel.
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.
Staff Finding
This is a site specific PUD that does not include streets.
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
Gates, guard posts, or other entryway expressions are not proposed for the PUD.
J. Phasing of Development Plan. (does not apply to Conceptual PUD
applications)
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:
1. All phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as
a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent
phases.
2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent
practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later
phases.
20
3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate
improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees -
in -lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents
of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and
any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the
respective impacts associated with the phase.
Staff Finding
Although no phased development is proposed, Holy Cross plans to install utilities
under the trail along Highway 82 and rebuild the trail prior to selling the property,
which is also included as a condition of approval.
21
•
•
MEMORANDUM
To: Nick Lelack, Planner
From: Ben Ludlow, Project Engineer
Reference DRC Caseload Coordinator
Date: April 3, 2000
Re: Holy Cross Rezoning and PUD
EXHIBIT B
REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS
The Development Review Committee has reviewed the Holy Cross Rezoning and PUD
application at their March 29, 2000 meeting, and has compiled the following comments:
General
1. Sufficiency of Submittal: DRC comments are based on the fact that we believe
that the submitted site plan is accurate, that it shows all site features, and that it is feasible.
The wording must be carried forward exactly as written unless prior consent is received from
the Engineering Department. This is to alleviate problems related to approvals tied to
"issuance of building permit."
2. R.O.W. Impacts: If there are any encroachments into the public rights -of -way,
the encroachment must either be removed or be subject to current encroachment license
requirements.
Site Review
1. Site Drainage — Requirement — A drainage report was not submitted with the
application. The site development approvals must include the requirement meeting runoff
design standards of the Land Use Code at Sec. 26.580.020.A.6.a and a requirement that, prior
to the building permit application, a drainage mitigation plan (24"06" size plan sheet or on
the lot grading plan) must meet the requirements of the Engineering Department Interim
Design Standards and must be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering
Department. The mitigation plan must also address the temporary sediment control and
containment plan for the construction phase. If drywells are an acceptable solution for site
drainage, a soils report must be provided with a percolation test to verify the feasibility of
this type of system. Drywells have depths well below depth of frost (10' minimum) to
function in cold weather. The drainage plan must contain a statement specifying the routine
maintenance required by property owner(s) to ensure continued and proper performance.
Drywells may not be placed within public right of way or utility easements. The foundation
22
drainage system should be separate from storm drainage, must be detained and routed on site,
and must be shown on drainage plans prior to application for building permit. The drainage
may be conveyed to existing landscaped areas if the drainage report demonstrates that the
percolation rate and the detention volume meet the design storm.
Information — The City drainage criteria needs to be implemented. This
includes but is not limited to erosion control, soil stabilization, and vegetation disturbance.
Also, there needs to be an analysis of where the drainage will flow and what adverse affects
may arise from potential mud and debris flow.
2. Community Development — Information — The following request was provided
by the Planning Department:
a. The applicant may needs to look at a landscaping plan that that would provide
vegetation between the two remaining bike paths.
b. It would be beneficial to allow a trail on the top of the slope between the house
and Power Plant Road.
c. It may be useful to take vacated Cemetery Lane as the driveway instead of the
proposed area.
a. Fire Protection District — Information — ALL COMMENTS ARE
RESERVED AT THIS TIME
3. Streets Department — Requirement - As of the request of the Streets Department
revisions need to be made as follows:
a. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed
rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction.
4. Parks — Requirement — The following information has been provided by the
Parks Department:
a. It would be beneficial if a trail easement could be maintained east-northeast of the
house along the toe of the slope.
b. Easements need to be shown on the plat.
c. The parks department needs more information about plans for water for the house.
d. There may need to be sagebrush mitigation at the project location. It would also
be most beneficial to keep the native vegetation on the slopes.
e. The idea of planting Spruce trees may not work in the project location due to the
soil characteristics.
5. Engineering — Requirement — The following requirements have been provided by
the Engineering Department:
a. ROW permits and Encroachment licenses will be required during construction
if applicable.
23
b. A Fugitive dust control permit will be required during construction.
C. A 15 ft. easement at the toe of slope at Power Plant Rd would need to be
granted for the purpose of the retaining wall removal and repair in the future.
d. Slope stabilization, erosion control, and sediment control measures need to be
implemented before, during and after construction.
e. The building access via the planned drive is geometrically challenging from
the standpoint of traffic control. Other options need to be looked at for the
driveway.
f. A geotechnical study is very important to learn the characteristics of the soil in
the location to see what, if any, adverse affects may result.
6. Utilities: A utility plan needs to be submitted before any real comments and conclusions
can be drawn by the utility companies.
- Water:
City Water Department - Requirement — The following information was given by
the City of Aspen Water Department:
a. All uses and construction will comply with the City of Aspen Water
System Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8
(Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen
Municipal code as they pertain to utilities.
b. The nearest water service would have to come from either Power Plant
Road or through Barnard Park. This may also then require an easement
through adjacent property owner's property.
c. The closest fire hydrant is located at the intersection of Power Plant Rd.
and Cemetery Lane, or at the ground elevation of the City Shop.
d. There is an old pemstock easement through the property that goes to the
City Shop. This easement needs to be shown and the proposed building
needs to avoid the easement.
- Wastewater:
Aspen Consolidated Waste District - Information — As a request of the
Consolidated Waste District, revisions need to be made as follows:
a. A set of drainage plans needs to be provided to Peg at ACSD so that an
estimate of fees can be processed.
b. There is a manhole near the southwest corner of the property that is not
shown on the improvement survey. This needs to be shown because it
may be close to the planned structure.
c. The best source of service would be the aforementioned manhole that
would require the use of a pump.
- Construction:
24
Work in the Public Right of Way - Requirement — Given the continuous problems
of unapproved work and development in public rights -of -way adjacent to private
property, we advise the applicant as follows:
Approvals
1. Engineering: The applicant receives approval from the City Engineering Department
(920-5080) for design of improvements, including grading, drainage,
transportation/streets, landscaping, and encroachments within public
right of way.
2. Parks: The applicant receives approval from the Parks Department (920-
5120) for vegetation species and for public trail disturbance.
3. Streets: The applicant receives approval from the Streets department (920-
5130) for mailboxes, finished pavement, surface materials on streets,
and alleyways.
4. Permits: Obtain R.O.W. permits for any work or development, involving street
cuts and landscaping from the Engineering Department.
DRC Attendees
Staff. Mark O'Meara Applicant's Representative: Alan Richmond
Ed Van Walraven
Ben Ludlow
Nick Adeh
John Krueger
Joyce Ohlson
Tom Bracewell
Nick Lelack
Scott Chism
Julie Ann Woods
Tom Bracewell
25
11
EXHIBIT C
CONSERVATION ZONE DISTRICT
26.710.220 Conservation (C).
A. Purpose. The purpose of the Conservation (C) zone district is to provide areas of low
density development to enhance public recreation, conserve natural resources, encourage the
production of crops and animals, and to contain urban development.
B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Conservation (C)
zone district:
1. Detached residential dwelling;
2. Park, playfield, playground and golf course;
3. Riding stable;
4. Cemetery;
5. Crop production, orchards, nurseries, flower production and forest land;
6. Pasture and grazing land;
7. Dairy;
8. Fishery;
9. Animal production;
10. Husbandry services (not including commercial feed lots) and other farm and
agricultural uses;
11. Railroad right-of-way but not a railroad yard;
12. Home occupations;
13. Accessory buildings and uses; and
14. Accessory dwelling units meeting the provisions of Section 26.520.040.
C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the
Conservation (C) district, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter
26.425.
1. Guest ranches;
2. Recreational uses including a riding academy, stable, club, country club and
golf course;
3. Ski lift and other ski facilities;
4. Sewage disposal area;
5. Water treatment plant and storage reservoir; and
6. Electric substations and gas regulator stations (not including business or
administration offices).
D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to
all permitted and conditional uses in the Conservation (C) zone district.
1. Minimum lot size (acres): 10.
2. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit (acres): 10.
3. Minimum lot width (feet): 400.
►� .
4. Minimum front yard setback (feet): 100.
5. Minimum side yard setback (feet): 30.
6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): 30.
7. Maximum height (feet): 28.
8. Minimum distance between principal and accessory buildings (feet): No
requirement.
9. Percent of open space required_ for building site: No requirement.
10. External Floor Area: (Applies to conforming and nonconforming lots of
record):
Lot Size Detached Residential Allowable Square Feet
Dwellings (Square Feet)
0-3,000 80 square feet of floor area for each 100
square feet in lot area, up to a maximum
of 2,400 square feet of floor area.
3,000-9,000 2,4000 square feet of floor area, plus 28
square feet of floor area for each
additional 100 square feet in lot area, up
to a maximum of 4,080 square feet of
floor area
9,000-15,000 4,080 square feet of floor area, plus 7
square feet of floor area for each
additional 100 square feet in lot area, up
to a maximum of 4,500 square feet of
floor area.
15,000-50,000 4,500 square feet of floor area, plus 6
square feet of floor area for each
additional 100 square feet in lot area, up
to a maximum of 5,000 square feet of
floor area.
50,000+ 5,000 square feet of floor area
maximum.
27
ORDINANCE N0.
(SERIES OF 2000)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE HOLY
CROSS ENERGY CONSOLIDATED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND
REZONING TO R-30, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, WITH A PUD OVERLAY
ZONE DISTRICT, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO.
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application
from Holy Cross Energy, represented by Alan Richman of Alan Richman Planning
Services, for a Consolidated Planned Unit Development (PUD), and Rezoning to R-
30/PUD, Low -Density Residential, for a rectangular shaped property located above the
Aspen City Shop; and,
WHEREAS, the Holy Cross Energy property is approximately 32,456 square
feet, is located in the Conservation and Public Zone Districts; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.310 of the Land Use Code, the City Council
may approve Amendments to the Official Zone District Map, during a duly noticed
public hearing after considering comments from the general public, and
recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission, Community Development
Director, and relevant referral agencies; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445, the City Council may approve a
Planned Unit Development, during a duly noticed public hearing after considering
comments from the general public, and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning
Commission, Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and,
WHEREAS, the Fire Marshall, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, the City
Water Department, City Engineering, City Parks Department, and the Community
Development Department reviewed the Project and recommended approval with
conditions; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on May 30, 2000, the Planning
and Zoning Commission recommended, by a four to one (4-1) vote, to recommend City
Council approve of the Holy Cross Energy Rezoning to R-30, Low Density Residential,
and Consolidated Planned Unit Development, with conditions contained herein; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development
proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has
reviewed and considered the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission,
the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and
considered public comment at a public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council 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 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
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code,
the Holy Cross Energy Association property, which is a rectangular configuration and
located above the Aspen City Shop, shall be rezoned from Conservation and Public to R-
30, Low Density Residential, with a Planned Unit Development Overlay.
Section 2
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in. Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code,
the Holy Cross Energy Planned Unit Development is approved subject to the conditions of
approval described hereinafter.
1. A PUD Agreement shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval by City
Council and shall include the following:
a. The information required to be included in a PUD Agreement, pursuant to Section
26.445.070(C).
2. A Final PUD Plan shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval granted by
City Council and shall include:
a. A final plat meeting the requirements of the City Engineer and showing
easements, encroachment agreements and licenses with reception numbers for
physical improvements and parking spaces within City rights -of -way, and
location of utility pedestals.
b. An illustrative site plan of the project showing the proposed improvements,
landscaping, parking, and the dimensional requirements as approved.
c. A drawing representing the project's architectural character.
d. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado
licensed Civil Engineer which maintains sediment and debris on -site during and
after construction. If a ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation
report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 2-year storm frequency
should be used in designing any drainage improvements.
3. Prior to an application for a building permit:
a. The PUD Agreement and the Final PUD Plans shall be recorded with the Pitkin
County Clerk and Recorder.
b. A public utility easement shall be approved by the Parks Department and, if
approved, utilities shall be installed and the trail along Highway 82 and under
Castle Creek Bridge on the subject property shall be rebuilt in a manner approved
by the Parks Department.
c. A permaxent and non -revocable trail easement shall be granted by Holy Cross
Energy Association to the City of Aspen for the trail parallel to and under
Highway 82 and Castle Creek Bridge.
d. A conservation easement, deed restriction, or other similar mechanism acceptable
to the City's Attorney's Office shall be placed on the portion of the property
located below Power Plant Road to ensure that this area remains open space and
undeveloped in perpetuity.
e. The applicant shall grant a permanent easement to the City of Aspen for the
maintenance of the retaining walls and support structures below and around
Castle Creek Bridge. The easement shall be approximately 15 feet to the sides
and above the retaining walls and structures, and continuing to Power Plant Road.
The easement shall be approved by the City Engineer.
f. The Applicant shall meet the then current growth management requirements for
the development of a new single family residence, which may include, but not be
limited to, applying for and obtaining a GMQS allotment or exemption, and
providing affordable housing mitigation requirements at the then current
standards.
g. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall approve at a public hearing a detailed
landscape plan showing the size, species, quantity, and location of all existing and
planned native vegetation on the portion of the parcel located above Power Plant
Road. The review criteria for the landscape plan shall be the following (the
existing PUD landscape review criteria in the Land Use Code):
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.
h. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall approve at a public hearing detailed
architectural character plans for the development of any structure on this site. It is
the purpose of the architectural character plans to demonstrate how the
development will encourage architectural interest, variety, character, and visual
identity in the proposed development and within the City while promoting
efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a
building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the building's proposed
massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of
materials, and other attributes which may significantly represent the character of
the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the final
development plan an architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the
character of the proposed development.
The review criteria for the architecture plans shall be the following (the
existing PUD architectural character plans review criteria in the Land Use
Code):
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.
4. The building permit application shall include:
a. A copy of the final Ordinance and recorded P&Z Resolution.
b. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set.
c. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation
District.
d. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval
from the Parks Department Director for off -site replacement or mitigation of
removed trees.
e. A completed curb, gutter, and sidewalk agreement, if necessary.
f. A completed agreement to join any future improvement districts formed for the
purpose of constructing improvements in adjacent public rights -of -way.
g. Copies of the public utility, trail, conservation, and retaining walls and structures
maintenance easements.
5. Prior to issuance of a building permit:
a. The primary contractor shall submit a letter to the Community Development
Director stating that the conditions of approval have been read and understood.
b. All tap fees, impacts fees, and building permit fees shall be paid. If an alternative
agreement to delay payment of the Water Tap and/or Parks Impact fee is finalized,
those fees shall be payable according to the agreement.
6. No excavation or storage of dirt or material shall occur within tree driplines or outside of
the approved building envelope and access envelope.
7. All construction vehicles, materials, and debris shall be maintained on -site and not
within public rights -of -way unless specifically approved by the Director of the Streets
Department. All vehicle parking, including contractors' and their employees', shall
abide by the 2 hour residential parking limitation of the area. The applicant shall
inform the contractor of this condition.
8. The applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is limited to
the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m.
9. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed
rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction.
10. All uses and construction shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System
Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8 (Water Conservation
and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code as they pertain to
utilities.
11. The Applicant or owner shall mitigate any public impacts that this project causes,
including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines.
12. The building plans shall demonstrate an adequate fire sprinkler system and alarm
system for the entire structure. The Aspen Fire Marshal shall also approve access to
the property.
13. A fugitive dust control permit will be required during construction.
14. Slope stabilization, erosion control, and sediment control measures need to be
implemented before, during, and after construction.
15. The proposed building shall not be placed on the Pemstock easement traversing
through the property to the Aspen City Shop.
16. No other landscape improvements or changes to the parcel, except those approved by
the Community Development Director, are approved outside the established building
and access envelopes, excluding all necessary trail and retaining wall work.
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 Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement
of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or
amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such
prior ordinances.
Section 5•
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.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law,
by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 12th day of June, 2000.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Rachel Richards, Mayor
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 26"' day of .tune, 2000.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
.John Worcestor, City Attorney
Rachel Richards, Mayor
Attachment 8
Q�tm_&Zt
=50
County of Pitkin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT
} ss. TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATIONS
State of Colorado } SECTION 26.52.060(E)
being or representing an
Applicant to the City of Aspen, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice
requirements pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E) of the Aspen Municipal Code in the following
manner:
I . By mailing of notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, by first-class postage prepaid U.S.
Mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property, as indicated
po0
on the attached list, on the \'o day of `�`"`^� , 1339- (which is \3 days prior to the public
hearing date of b l 1- 6 k o o )
2. By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from
the nearest public way) and that the said sign was posted and visible continuously from the S day
1A o0
of �- V-'L , 14 , to the �6 day of S ~� ,199- . (Must be posted for at least
ten (10) full days before the hearing date). A photograph of the posted sign is attached hereto.
(Attach photograph here)
, 'A' 'e'J
Signature
Signed before me this \ '1 ay of ,
1,W by —
a�o
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
My Commission expires: \\_ ay _ moo \
1� I-,—
Notary Public U
•
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: HOLY CROSS PROPERTY CONSOLIDATED PLANNED UNIT
DEVELOPMENT (PUD), AND REZONING TO R-30/PUD
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday, June 26,
2000 at a meeting to begin at 5:00 p.m. before the Aspen City Council, Council
Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by
Holy Cross Energy requesting approval to rezone to R-30/PUD, and to create a Planned
Unit Development (PUD) for a single-family house. The property is commonly known
as the Holy Cross Parcel and is located just below State Highway 82, near the Castle
Creek Bridge on Power Plant Road. For further information, contact Nick Lelack at the
Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970)
920-5095, or by email at nickl(Dci.aspen.co.us.
s/Rachel E. Richards, Mayor
Aspen City Council
Published in the Aspen Times on June 10, 2000.
City of Aspen Account
g:/plann ing/aspen/notices/bavinnpz. doc
•
•
CITY OF ASPEN WERNER SARAH R RESIDENCE TRUST CAMP ROBERT C
130 S GALENA ST P 0 BOX 503 CURLEE CYNTHIA A AS TENANTS IN
ASPEN CO 81611 BELLEVUE WA 98009-3884 COMMON
PO BOX 692
ASPEN CO 81612
MASS ANN MD MOSLE PAULA M LOUD H MONTGOMERY & PAULA
400 W MAIN STE 200 6125 WESTWICK PO BOX 11660
ASPEN CO 81611 DALLAS TX 75205 ASPEN CO 81612
FERNANDEZ ERIN L
315 E HYMAN AVE S7E 305
ASPEN CO 81611
MADSEN GEORGE W JR BEN HAMOO SHLOMO & PATRICE
MADSEN CORNELIA G CONYERS
931 W ERANCIS ST PO BOX 2902
ASPEN CD B1611 ASPEN CO 81612
GREGORY KIRK
GREGORY PETRA STUARTDONA
BOX
PO BOX
PO BOX 10055 11733
ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CD 81612
KEILIN KIM MILLER
PO SOX 10064
ASPEN CO 81612
CRYSTAL PALACE CORPORATION
PO BOX 32
ASPEN CO 81612
ALDERREER JOHNNIE MAE
PO BOX 10880
ASPEN CD 81612
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director
Joyce Ohlson, Deputy DirectomiA0
FROM: Nick Lelack, Plannert1\\V,(i
RE: Holy Cross Energy: Rezoning to R-30/Planned Unit Development &
Consolidated PUD Review — Public Hearing
DATE: May 30, 2000
APPLICANT:
Holy Cross Energy Association Power Plant Road.
REPRESENTATIVE:
Alan Richman Planning Services
LOCATION: w
Along Power Plant Rd., north of
Hwy 82 and Castle Creek Bridge
CURRENT ZONING:
Conservation & Public
PROPOSED ZONING: - �+•,
R-30/PUD Overlay
The arrow points to the proposed location for a single family
CURRENT LAND USE: residence. The trail down to Power Plant Road would
become the driveway; utilities would be located beneath a
Vacant rebuilt trail in the foreground parallel to Hwy 82. The house
would be oriented toward Power Plant Road. This
PROPOSED LAND USE: photograph was taken from Highway 82. An aerial
Residential nhotojzraah is included at the end of this memorandum.
LOT SIZE:
SUMMARY:
32,456 sq. ft.
The purpose of this application is to gain approvals of a
rezoning and site specific Planned Unit Development
FAR:
(PUD) Plan for the development of a single family
Under Current Zoning: 5000 sq. ft.
residence. Rezoning the property brings the parcel into
R-30/PUD Allowable: 3,581 sq. ft.
conformance with the land use code by creating a lot
Proposed Allowable: 3,200 sq. ft.
Which is in compliance with its zone's lot size, and the
PUD establishes the building envelope and other
dimensional requirements. Holy Cross plans to sell the
property with land use approvals.
1
•
REVIEW PROCEDURE
Rezoning &Consolidated Planned Unit Development Reviews: The Planning and Zoning
Commission shall by resolution recommend City Council approve, approve with
conditions, or deny both the rezoning and/or Consolidated Planned Unit Development
requests.
STAFF COMMENTS:
Holy Cross Energy Association (Applicant), represented by Alan Richman of Alan
Richman Planning Services, is requesting land use approvals to establish a building
envelope for the development of a single family residence on a lot located below and
north of Highway 82 and Castle Creek Bridge, east of Barnard Court and Park, and on
both sides of Power Plant Road above the Aspen City Shop. Holy Cross previously
offered the site for sale to the City of Aspen and Aspen/Pitkin County Housing
Authority, but both entities decided not to purchase the lot.
One request is to rezone the parcel. Currently, the parcel is split zoned, with the
Conservation Zone District on the west portion located above Power Plant Road and
the Public Zone District on the east portion located below Power Plant Road. The
photograph below shows the portion of the lot zoned Conservation. The Conservation
Zone District allows the construction of a single family residence, but the Public Zone
District does not. The request is to rezone the entire parcel to the R-30, Low Density
Residential Zone District with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay.
The second request is for Consolidated Planned Unit Development (PUD) Review to
create a site specific PUD Plan. The PUD would establish the building envelope on
the west portion of the parcel zoned Conservation.
In addition, the Applicant requested the development be granted vested rights status.
Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2000, automatically grants vested rights status for three
years for approved developments, so this request will be acknowledged if the project is
approved.
Rezoning to R-30/PUD
Rezoning the property achieves
two goals. First, the parcel is
currently a non -conforming lot
in the Conservation Zone
District because the minimum
lot size for a parcel in this
district is 10 acres. This parcel
is approximately 32,456 square
feet, or .75 acres. The
minimum lot size in the R-30
Zone District is 30,000 square
2
•
feet. Thus, the rezoned lot would conform to the land use code.
Second, although a single family residence is permitted in the Conservation Zone
District, the front-, rear-, and side -yard setbacks in this zone district - designed for 10
acre parcels - would overlap on this .75 acre lot, leaving no developable area for a
single family residence, which is a permitted use. Instead of requesting a setback
variance, Staff recommended the applicant apply to rezone the property to both bring
the lot into conformance with the Land Use Code as well as to establish the building
envelope in the best possible location on the site as part of the PUD. Staff supports the
rezoning request because it brings the lot into conformance with the code, and allows
for the minimum land use of the property of one single family dwelling.
Site Specific Planned Unit Development
The second request is for Consolidated Planned Unit Development (PUD) Review to
create a site specific PUD Plan to establish a building envelope and other dimensions
for a single-family house on the lot. A PUD would ensure that the location,
dimensions, and landscaping of the lot are site and neighborhood sensitive. The
following table shows the dimensional requirements for the Conservation Zone District,
R-30 Zone District, and proposed PUD.
Zone District
Front
Side
Rear
Height
Floor Area
Ratio
Conservation
100 feet
30 feet
30 feet
28 feet
5,000 sq. ft.
R-30, Low Density Residential
25 feet
10 feet
10 feet
25 feet
3,581 sq. ft.
Proposed PUD
16.75 feet
10 feet
15 feet
25 feet
3,200 sq. ft.
The table illustrates that the proposed PUD is more restrictive than the existing
Conservation Zone District for height and floor area ratio, but less restrictive for all
setbacks. The proposed dimensions establish a building envelope on the relatively flat
bench in the center of the portion of the lot located above Power Plant Road.
Staff believes this site is far from ideal for the development of a single family
residence. It contains trails (discussed in the next section), slopes, mature native
vegetation, and is fairly difficult to access and connect to public utilities.
Nevertheless, Staff believes that the proposed PUD creates a building envelope, access,
and dimensional requirements that are site and neighborhood sensitive. The building
envelope is relatively flat and avoids most of the dense, mature native vegetation on the
site. It is for these reasons that Staff can support the site specific PUD.
Trails, Driveway & Utilities
Two (2) pedestrian/bike trails cross the property. One trail (Trail 1) runs parallel to
Highway 82 on the southern portion of the property and then continues under the
Castle Creek Bridge. This trail connects Cemetery Lane to the Marolt property. The
portion of the property that runs parallel to Highway 82 is on City property, and the
3
portion that runs under Castle Creek Bridge is on Holy Cross property. A second trail
(Trail 2) splits off from this trail, crosses through the center of the 'property, and then
connects the pedestrian/bike trail to Power Plant Road.
Holy Cross granted Pitkin County revocable trail easements for both trails on its
property in 1974 (Exhibit 3 of the application). The easements "may be terminated by
Grantor, its successors or assigns, for any reason at any time."
Holy Cross proposes to terminate the revocable easement for Trail 2 and convert the
trail into a driveway to access the building envelope. The Applicant also proposes to
grant the City of Aspen a permanent easement for the portion of Trail 1 located on its
property.
The utility plan for the property demonstrates that the necessary utilities are located
immediately west of the
Power Plant
property (toward Barnard 4
Road
Court). Holy Cross is
requesting a utility Trail 2
easement from the City to Barnard
Court
locate the utilities beneath
Trail 1, reducing
disturbance to the native
vegetation on the slopes to
the property. In exchange y Frail I
for the utility easement, the .r 'Wit, Holy Cross
Applicant agrees to rebuild - Property
Trail 1 that runs parallel to Hwy s2
Trail I d
the highway and continues CityProperty
on the Holy Cross property p
beneath Castle Creek
Bridge.
Community Development and Parks Staff are disappointed about the prospect of losing
Trail 2, however, the owners are within their rights to do so. This link provides an
important connection from Trail 1 to Power Plant Road and neighbors have expressed
their desire to keep the trail. Staff has explored a number of options for maintaining
this connection, but the steep slopes, retaining walls, and dense vegetation do not make
another other realignment or option possible. Pedestrian and bike traffic from Power
Plant Road can continue around the bend in the road a little further and connect to Trail
2 via Barnard Court or crossing Cemetery Lane.
Staff recognizes that the easement is revocable and the trail provides the best vehicular
access to the property. The Applicant and Staff explored the possibility of accessing
the property from Barnard Court. But, steep slopes and potential conflicts with heavy
pedestrian and bike traffic on Trail 1 make this a challenging option.
C!
•
Staff supports placing the utilities under Trail 1 in exchange for a rebuilt trail. Parks
Department Staff and neighbors contend that this steep trail is dangerous and in need of
repair and re -grading to make it safer. Placing utilities under the trail would also
alleviate the need for imposing greater impacts on the site's slopes and native
vegetation.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend approval of
rezoning the Holy Cross Energy Association parcel to R-30/PUD and creating a site
specific PUD plan, with conditions in the draft Resolution.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Resolution Noa', Series of 2000, recommending City Council approve
rezoning the Holy Cross Energy Association parcel to R-30/PUD and creating a site specific
PUD."
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings
Exhibit B -- Referral Agency Comments
Exhibit C -- Development Application
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager
John Worcester, City Attorney
Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director
Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director
FROM: Nick Lelack, Planner
RE: Holy Cross Energy: Rezoning to R-30/Planned Unit Development &
Consolidated PUD Review — 2"d Reading/Public Hearing
DATE: June 26, 2000
APPLICANT:
Holy Cross Energy
REPRESENTATIVE:
Alan Richman Planning Services
LOCATION:
Along Power Plant Rd., north of
Hwy 82 and Castle Creek Bridge
CURRENT ZONING:
Conservation & Public
PROPOSED ZONING:
R-30/PUD Overlay
CURRENT LAND USE:
Vacant
PROPOSED LAND USE:
Residential
LOT SIZE:
32,456 sq. ft.
FAR:
Under Current Zoning: 5000 sq. ft.
R-30/PUD Allowable: 3,581 sq. ft.
Proposed Allowable: 3,200 sq. ft.
Power Plant Road.
. 9
The arrow points to the proposed location for a single famil
residence. The trail down to Power Plant Road would
become the driveway; utilities would be located beneath a
rebuilt trail in the foreground parallel to Hwy 82. An aerial
ohotoeranh is included at the end of this memorandum.
SUMMARY:
The purpose of this application is to gain approvals of a
rezoning and site specific Planned Unit Development
(PUD) Plan for the development of a single family
residence. Rezoning the property brings the parcel into
conformance with the land use code by creating a lot
which is in compliance with its zone's lot size, and the
PUD establishes the building envelope and other
dimensional requirements. In addition, the City will be
provided with a permanent trail easement across this lot.
The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4-1 to
recommend approval.
1
•
REVIEW PROCEDURE
• Rezoning &Consolidated Planned Unit Development Reviews: City Council shall
approve, approve with conditions, or deny a rezoning and/or Consolidated PUD
request after considering a recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
STAFF COMMENTS:
Holy Cross Energy Association (Applicant), represented by Alan Richman of Alan
Richman Planning Services, is requesting land use approvals to establish a building
envelope for the development of a single family residence on a lot located below and
north of Highway 82 and Castle Creek Bridge, east of Barnard Court and Park, and on
both sides of Power Plant Road above the Aspen City Shop. Holy Cross previously
offered the site for sale to the City of Aspen and Aspen/Pitkin County Housing
Authority, but both entities decided not to purchase the lot.
One request is to rezone the parcel. Currently, the parcel is split zoned, with the
Conservation Zone District on the west portion located above Power Plant Road and
the Public Zone District on the east portion located below Power Plant Road. The
photograph below shows the portion of the lot zoned Conservation. The Conservation
Zone District allows the construction of a single family residence, but the Public Zone
District does not. The request is to rezone the entire parcel to the R-30, Low Density
Residential Zone District with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay.
The second request is for Consolidated Planned Unit Development (PUD) Review to
create a site specific PUD Plan. The PUD would establish the building envelope on
the west portion of the parcel zoned Conservation.
In addition, the Applicant requested the development be granted vested rights status.
Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2000, automatically grants vested rights status for three
years for approved developments, so this request will be acknowledged if the project is
approved.
Rezoning to R-30/PUD
Rezoning the property achieves
two goals. First, the parcel is
currently a non -conforming lot
in the Conservation Zone
District because the minimum
lot size for a parcel in this
district is 10 acres. This parcel
is approximately 32,456 square
feet, or .75 acres. The
minimum lot size in the R-30
Zone District is 30 000 square
N
Public Zone
District
Conservation L. .
Zone District z
Zone district
w y division line
&2 • '`"�` is Power
Plant Road
4'
feet. Thus, the rezoned lot would conform to the land use code.
2
Second, although a single family residence is permitted in the Conservation Zone
District, the front-, rear-, and side -yard setbacks in this zone district - designed for 10
acre parcels - would overlap on this .75 acre lot, leaving no developable area for a
single family residence, which is a permitted use. Instead of requesting a setback
variance, Staff recommended the applicant apply to rezone the property to both bring
the lot into conformance with the Land Use Code as well as to establish the building
envelope in the best possible location on the site as part of the PUD. Staff supports the
rezoning request because it brings the lot into conformance with the code, and allows
for the minimum land use of the property of one single family dwelling.
Site Specific Planned Unit Development
The second request is for Consolidated Planned Unit Development (PUD) Review to
create a site specific PUD Plan to establish a building envelope and other dimensions
for a single-family house on the lot. A PUD would ensure that the location,
dimensions, and landscaping of the lot are site and neighborhood sensitive. The
following table shows the dimensional requirements for the Conservation Zone District,
R-30 Zone District, and proposed PUD.
Zone District
Front
Side
Rear
Height
Floor Area
Ratio
Conservation
100 feet
30 feet
30 feet
28 feet
3,750 sq. ft.*
R-30, Low Density Residential
25 feet
10 feet
10 feet
25 feet
3,581 sq. ft.*
Proposed PUD
16.75 feet
10 feet
15 feet
25 feet
3,200 sq. ft.
NOTE: These calculations include the maximum 25% slope reduction requirement.
The table illustrates that the proposed PUD is more restrictive than the existing
Conservation Zone District for height and floor area ratio, but less restrictive for all
setbacks. The proposed dimensions establish a building envelope on the relatively flat
bench in the center of the portion of the lot located above Power Plant Road.
Staff believes this site provides challenges for the development of a single family
residence. It contains trails (discussed in the next section), slopes, mature native
vegetation, and is fairly difficult to access and connect to public utilities.
Nevertheless, Staff believes that the proposed PUD creates a building envelope, access,
and dimensional requirements that are site and neighborhood sensitive. The building
envelope is relatively flat and avoids most of the dense, mature native vegetation on the
site. It is for these reasons that Staff can support the site specific PUD.
Trails, Driveway & Utilities
Two (2) pedestrian/bike trails currently cross the property. One trail (Trail 1) runs
parallel to Highway 82 on the southern portion of the property and then continues
under the Castle Creek Bridge. This trail connects Cemetery Lane to the Marolt
property and the school trail. A portion of the trail that runs parallel to Highway 82 is
on both City and Holy Cross properties. A second trail (Trail 2) splits off from this
3
trail, crosses through the center of the property, and then connects the pedestrian/bike
trail to Power Plant Road. The photo below does not accurately reflect the survey line.
Holy Cross granted Pitkin County revocable trail easements for both trails on its
property in 1974 (Exhibit 3 of the application). The easements "may be terminated by
Grantor, its successors or assigns, for any reason at any time."
Holy Cross proposes to terminate the revocable easement for Trail 2 and convert the
trail into a driveway to access the building envelope. The Applicant also proposes to
grant the City of Aspen a permanent easement for the portion of Trail 1 located on its
property.
The utility plan for the property demonstrates that the necessary utilities are located
immediately west of the property (toward Barnard Court). Holy Cross is requesting a
utility easement from the City to locate the utilities beneath Trail 1, reducing
disturbance to the native vegetation on the slopes to the property. In exchange for the
utility easement, the Applicant agrees to rebuild Trail 1 that runs parallel to the
highway and continues on the Holy Cross property beneath Castle Creek Bridge.
Community Development and Parks Staff are disappointed about the prospect of losing
Trail 2, however, the owners are within their rights to do so. This link provides an
important connection from
Trail 1 to Power Plant Road
and neighbors have expressed
their desire to keep the trail.
Staff has explored a number
of options for maintaining
this connection, but the steep
slopes, retaining walls, and
dense vegetation do not make
another realignment or option
possible. Pedestrian and bike
traffic from Power Plant
Road can continue around the
bend in the road a little
further and connect to Trail 1
via Barnard Court or crossing
Cemetery Lane.
Staff recognizes that the existing easement is revocable and the trail provides the best
vehicular access to the property. The Applicant and Staff explored the possibility of
accessing the property from Barnard Court. But steep slopes and potential conflicts
with heavy pedestrian and bike traffic on Trail 1 make this a challenging option.
Staff supports placing the utilities under Trail 1 in exchange for a rebuilt trail. Parks
Department Staff and neighbors contend that this steep trail is dangerous and in need of
repair and re -grading to make it safer. Placing utilities under the trail would also
4
alleviate the need for imposing greater impacts on the site's slopes and native
vegetation.
Planning and Zoning Commission & City Council Action
The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4-1 to recommend City Council approve
the rezoning and Consolidated PUD. City Council approved the ordinance on First
Reading on June 6, 2000.
Planning and Zoning Commissioners generally agreed with Staff that the site is
challenging for the development of a single family residence, but also that existing
zoning prohibits any viable use of the land (the Conservation Zone District's permitted
and conditional uses are included as Exhibit Q. Some members also expressed
appreciation for the Applicant's willingness to further restrict FAR for the site as part
of the PUD. The Commissioner who voted against the application said he does not
believe the application meets several of the zoning and PUD criteria.
The Commission recommended two conditions of approval. The conditions are that the
Planning and Zoning Commission shall approve detailed landscape and architectural
plans for the property prior to an application for building permit. The reasons for the
conditions are that the PUD criteria addresses each of these development characteristics
for this prominent location near the entrance to town; however, the application contains
hypothetical landscape and architectural plans because Holy Cross does not plan to
develop the property. The Applicant agreed to the conditions.
A few neighbors voiced their opposition to the project, explaining that they bought
their properties with the understanding that the site would not be developed because the
Conservation Zone District's setback precluded development on the parcel. They also
argued that Trail 2 is important because it is regularly used by children going to
school.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends City Council approve of rezoning the Holy Cross Energy
Association parcel to R-30/PUD and creating a site specific PUD plan, with
conditions in the draft Ordinance.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Ordinance No. _, Series of 2000, approving rezoning the Holy Cross
Energy parcel to R-30/PUD and creating a site specific PUD."
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
•
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A --
Review Criteria and Staff Findings
Exhibit B --
Referral Agency Comments
Exhibit C --
Conservation Zone District
Exhibit D --
Development Application
10
EXHIBIT A
HOLY CROSS REZONING TO R-30/PUD & CONSOLIDATED PUD
REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS
Section 26.310.020, Standards Applicable to Amendments to the Official Zone District
Map
In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, the Planning and Zoning
Commission shall consider:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable
portions of this title.
Staff Finding:
Staff does not believe rezoning this parcel from Conservation and Public to R-30/PUD would
be in conflict with any portions of this title. Rezoning the property would bring it into
compliance with the Land Use Code because the 32,456 square foot lot would comply with
the minimum lot size for this zone district, which is 30,000 square feet. This parcel is
contiguous to land zoned R-30/PUD immediately to the south.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the
Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
Staff Finding:
Staff believes rezoning the parcel will not conflict with the AACP. The AACP's Growth
Philosophy states that the City of Aspen agrees to accept greater density within the Aspen
Community Growth Boundary, and the proposed development is located within this area. It
is specifically proposed for an undeveloped parcel situated below Castle Creek Bridge, above
Power Plant Road, and east of Barnard Court.
The AACP also encourages reducing automobile trips. This parcel is within walking and
biking distance to town, trails, bus stops, and recreation areas.
One of the goals of the AACP is to improve safety for pedestrians and bikes in the Aspen
area. The proposal is essentially a trade-off concerning this goal. One trail crossing the
property from Power Plant Road to the trail along Highway 82 and under Castle Creek
Bridge would be removed because the Applicant would revoke the trail easement to gain
access for the parcel. A trail easement granted by Holy Cross Energy Association to Pitkin
County in 1974 states that the easement "may be terminated by Grantor, its successors or
assigns, for any reason at any time."
However, the community gains from the dedication of a permanent easement for the trail that
connects Cemetery Lane to the Marolt property running along side Highway 82 and then
underneath the bridge (referred to as Trail 1 in the Staff memo). In addition, the Applicant
agrees to rebuild the path subject to the Parks Department's approval in exchange for a utility
7
easement from the City of Aspen to place utilities under the path. The trail is in need of
repair and contains fairly steep slopes that are not safe for all bicyclists and pedestrians; the
rebuilt trail would be made safer for all users.
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone
districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood
characteristics.
Staff Finding:
Rezoning the property would permit the development of one single family residence on the
site, which is also allowed under current zoning. Zoning in the Cemetery Lane area is either
zoned R-6, R-15, R-30/PUD, and Park (for the golf course). Staff believes the proposed
rezoning, R-30, is compatible with the character of existing land uses in the area. The
property is surrounded by single family and duplex units, Highway 82, a park, bike paths,
and the City maintenance shop. The proposed residence would be consistent with these uses.
According to the Applicant, the reason for the rezoning and PUD is to establish a building
envelope and dimensional requirements to situate the house in a location that minimizes its
impact on slopes and native vegetation. The location of the proposed building envelope is
currently zoned Conservation, which prescribes setbacks that would make situating a house
on the parcel impossible. The following table illustrates current and proposed setbacks,
height, and FAR. Although the property is proposed to be rezoned to R-30, the PUD
setbacks are the dimensions requested in the application.
Zone District
Front
Side
Rear
Height
Floor Area
Ratio
Conservation
100 feet
30 feet
30 feet
28 feet
3,750 sq. ft.*
R-30, Low Density Residential
25 feet
10 feet
10 feet
25 feet
3,581 sq. ft.*
Proposed PUD
16.75 feet
10 feet
15 feet
25 feet
3,200 sq. ft.
NOTE: These calculations include the maximum 25% slope reduction requirement.
The proposed PUD would establish setbacks less restrictive than the Conservation Zone
District, but the height and FAR dimensions are proposed to be more restrictive than
currently allowed. Staff believes the proposed dimensions to be suitable for the development
of a single family residence on this lot given its slope constraints and odd configuration
above Power Plant Road and below Highway 82.
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road
safety.
Staff Finding:
Rezoning the property should only have minimal impacts on traffic generation and road
safety. The application states that an average single family residence in Aspen generates five
(5) to ten (10) automobile trips per day. The residence would be located within walking
distance to downtown, bus stops, and recreation and employment areas. Staff does not
believe rezoning the property would adversely impact traffic generation and road safety.
8
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result
in demands on public facilities, and whether the extent to which the
proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such facilities,
including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities,
water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities.
Staff Finding:
All appropriate utility agencies and the City Engineer were referenced on this application
and reported the ability to serve this project. The Parks Department supports the proposal
to locate utilities under the trail in exchange for a rebuilt trail. A condition of approval
shall be that the owner(s) mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but
not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. School, park, water,
sanitation, and other impact fees will be due prior to the issuance of building permits.
F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in
significant adverse impacts on the natural environment.
Staff Finding:
Rezoning the property will not itself create adverse impacts on the natural environment
because current zoning and proposed zoning both permit the construction of a single family
residence. The main difference is that current zoning effectively prevents any development
on the property because of the setbacks in the Conservation Zone District. The PUD would
restrict height and FAR below what is currently allowed for the site, but adjust the setbacks
to create a building envelope on the most developable portion of the site. Steep slopes and
natural vegetation are preserved to the greatest extent possible. In addition, the Applicant has
removed a City -owned fuel storage tank from the site with permission from the City.
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the
community character in the City of Aspen.
Staff Finding:
Staff believes rezoning the property is consistent and compatible with the community
character in the City of Aspen, particularly because rezoning the parcel will not change its
expected land use — single family residential. The PUD review ensures that the dimensions
and character of the proposed development are consistent and compatible with the character
of Aspen, including surrounding uses, public facilities and utilities, access, architecture and
landscaping. Rezoning the parcel to a residential zone district is also consistent with
promoting higher densities of development inside the Aspen Community Growth Boundary.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel
or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed
amendment.
Staff Finding:
In 1992, the City rezoned the Aspen City Shop and portion of the Holy Cross parcel from R-
30/PUD to Public/PUD to bring the City Shop into compliance with the Land Use Code. The
I
Applicant had been unaware of this rezoning until recently. The request is to rezone the
entire parcel to this zone district.
I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public
interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title.
Staff Finding:
Staff does not believe the proposed rezoning would be in conflict with the public interest
and believes it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Land Use Code. Again,
rezoning the property would not change the expected use of the land, and the City benefits
from gaining a permanent easement for a highly used trail/bike path.
26.445.050 Review Standards: Consolidated
A development application for Conceptual, Final, Consolidated Conceptual and Final, or
Minor PUD shall comply with the following standards and requirements. Due to the
limited issues associated with Conceptual Reviews and properties eligible for Minor
PUD Review, certain standards shall not be applied as noted. The burden shall rest upon
an applicant to show the reasonableness of the development application, and its
conformity to the standards and procedures of this Chapter and this title.
A. General requirements.
1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area
Community Plan.
Staff Finding
Staff believes the proposed site specific PUD will not conflict with the AACP. The AACP's
Growth Philosophy states that the City of Aspen agrees to accept greater density within the
Aspen Community Growth Boundary, and the proposed PUD establishes a building envelope
and other dimensions for a single family residence within this area.
The AACP also encourages reducing automobile trips. A residence on this lot would help
reduce automobile trips because of its close proximity to town, trails, bus stops, and
recreation and employment areas.
2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing
land uses in the surrounding area.
Staff Finding
A single family residence in an appropriate building envelope is consistent with the character
of existing land uses in the area. The property is surrounded by single family and duplex
units, Highway 82, a park, bike paths, and the Aspen City Shop. The proposed residence
would be consistent with these uses.
3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development
of the surrounding area.
Staff Finding
Staff does not believe the proposed development would adversely affect future development
of the surrounding area. The surrounding area is mostly built out with residences, the Aspen
City Shop, a park, or consists of undevelopable areas. A condition of approval is that the
applicant place a conservation easement over those portions of the property located across
Power Plant Road to the north/northeast to ensure that the steep slopes are not developed.
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
A condition of approval is that prior to the submission of a building permit application,
the property owners shall meet the then current growth management requirements for the
development of a new single family residence, which may include, but not be limited to,
applying for and obtaining a GMQS allotment or exemption, and providing affordable
housing mitigation requirements at the then current standards.
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 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
Staff believes the proposed dimensional requirements for the property are appropriate and
compatible with natural and man-made features on and surrounding the property. The
dimensional requirements are stricter than those allowed in the Conservation and R-15
Zone Districts. For example, the allowable floor area ratio for this lot size in the current
11
Conservation Zone District is approximately 5,000 square feet, and over 3,500 square feet
in the R-15 Zone District. The proposal is to limit FAR for the property to 3,200 square
feet in the PUD. Similarly, the Conservation Zone allows height limits of 28 feet, while
the R-15 Zone District and proposed PUD would limit height for this property to 25 feet.
The dimensions also restrict development to the only buildable portion of the parcel;
steep slopes and dense native vegetation are avoided. The proposed dimensions also
protect the existing bike path/trail connecting Cemetery Lane to the Marolt property
along Highway 82 and under Castle Creek Bridge (Trail 1). Unfortunately, the section of
the bike path/trail that branches off from this trail to Power Plant Road is proposed to be
eliminated because it provides the only possible access to the property.
Zone District
Front
Side
Rear
Height
Floor Area
Ratio
Conservation
100 feet
30 feet
30 feet
28 feet
3,750 sq. ft.*
R-30, Low Density Residential
25 feet
10 feet
10 feet
25 feet
3,581 sq. ft.*
Proposed PUD
16.75 feet
10 feet
15 feet
25 feet
3,200 sq. ft.
NOTE: These calculations include the maximum 25% slope reduction requirement.
Overall, Staff believes the proposed dimensions of this PUD to be appropriate and
compatible with the surrounding area.
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
Staff believes the Applicant has proposed a building envelope on the most suitable portion of
the site, avoiding steep slopes, native vegetation to the greatest extent possible, and a key
trail connecting Cemetery Lane to the Marolt property. Proposing more restrictive
dimensional requirements such as FAR and height than existing zoning and equal to or more
restrictive than the R-30 Zone District should permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open
space and site coverage favorable to the surrounding areas. Site coverage is proposed to be
less than 10 percent, and the PUD would establish a minimum of 35 percent of open space,
which Staff is recommending be made a condition of approval through the granting of a
conservation easement.
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 non-residential 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.
12
d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core
and general activity centers in the city.
Staff Finding
The Applicant is proposing to provide two (2) off-street parking spaces in a 2-car garage,
which is required by the Land Use Code. Guest parking would be provided in front of the
garage and on the driveway. If the future property owner decided to apply for an ADU, the
owner would be required to provide an additional parking space for that unit on site.
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:
a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other
utilities to service the proposed development.
b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal,
and road maintenance to the proposed development.
Staff Finding
There are no infrastructure capacity issues that would prohibit the amount of development
being considered. Staff does not recommend any reductions in the development being
proposed.
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:
a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of
ground instability or the possibility of mud flow, rock falls or
avalanche dangers.
b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the
natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and
consequent water pollution.
c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality
in the surrounding area and the City.
d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or
trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain
or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site.
Staff Finding
The Applicant is proposing to establish a building envelope for the development of one (1)
single family residence. There are no known natural hazard or site limitations that prohibit
the amount of development — the single residence — being considered. Staff does not
recommend any reductions to the proposed development based on this standard.
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
13
L-]
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
The applicant is not requesting an increase in density beyond what is allowed within the
PUD. In addition, the site's physical capabilities can accommodate the single family
residential use.
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.
Staff Finding
The proposed development complies with most of the man-made features on the site and does
not detract from the site's natural features or visual interest. It contributes to the town's
identity by preserving the existing trail connection between Cemetery Lane and the Marolt
property with a permanent easement. Unfortunately, it also proposes to terminate a revocable
trail easement for the portion of the trail that branches off to Power Plant Road. It must be
pointed out that this is an easement and not a public space. No historic structures or other
unique features exist on the property. Steep slopes and existing native vegetation outside the
building envelope will be preserved.
2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant
open spaces and vistas.
Staff Finding
Only one structure, a single family residence, is proposed for the parcel. The residence
would not block mountain views from neighboring parcels, and would be limited to
3,200 square feet of floor area. Open space on the parcel below Power Plant Road would
be preserved.
14
•
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.
Staff Finding
The proposed residence would be oriented toward Power Plant Road, and contribute to
the context of the surrounding area by preserving views, trails, and open space. The
City's Residential Design Standards will be applied to this property, ensuring that the
proposed development provides visual interest and engagement of vehicular and
pedestrian movement. A cursory review of the potential residence indicates compliance
with the standards and the applicant is not requesting any variances from these standards.
Holy Cross plans to gain land use approvals for the property and then sell the parcel. It
is for this reason that the applicant is not submitting final architectural drawings for the
single family residence. Any other proposed residence for this site will also be reviewed
for compliance with the design standards.
4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow
emergency and service vehicle access.
Staff Finding
Access to the property is proposed to be from Power Plant Road a branch of the existing
trail is located. The Aspen Fire Marshall has reserved comment on the access until a
building permit application has been received by the City. A condition of approval is
that the Aspen Fire Marshall shall approve emergency access to the property prior to the
issuance of a building permit. A second, related condition of approval is that the
building be sprinkled.
5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided.
Staff Finding
Pedestrian and handicapped access will be provided via the driveway from Power Plant
Road or the trail from Cemetery Lane.
6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a
practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact
surrounding properties.
Staff Finding
A condition of approval is that a drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared
by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer which maintains sediment and debris on -site during
and after construction, be approved by the City's Engineering Department prior to the
issuance of building permits. If a ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation
report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 2-year storm frequency should be used
in designing any drainage improvements. The City drainage criteria needs to be
implemented.
15
The Applicant is proposing to accommodate drainage on site through the use of a swale in the
southeastern corner of the property and drywells under the driveway, parking area (in front of
the garage), and under the swale. The City Engineer recommends that the dry wells be at
least 10 feet deep.
7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately
designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with
the use.
Staff Finding
This application is for a residential land use, so this criteria does not apply.
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
A condition of approval is that, prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant
shall submit a detailed landscape plan to the Community Development Department and
Parks Department showing the size, species, quantity, and location of all existing and
planned native and non-native vegetation on the portion of the portion of the site located
above Power Plant Road. The final landscape plan shall be approved by the Community
Development Director after considering a recommendation by the Parks Department.
E. Architectural Character.
It is the purpose of this standard is to encourage architectural interest, variety,
character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City
while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon
the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the
building's proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and
other buildings, use of materials, and other attributes which may significantly
represent the character of the proposed development. There shall be approved
16
as part of the final development plan an architectural character plan, which
adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed
architecture of the development shall:
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
The Applicant is applying for land use approvals for the property; if approved, the Applicant
plans to sell the property. It is expected that a buyer would develop a single family residence
on the site. The application contains architectural drawings for one potential residence on
site. Staff does not believe it is appropriate or worthwhile to comment on a residence that
may or may not be built because the drawings may not be an accurate representation of the
proposed single family residence. Instead, staff can only confirm that any residence on this
site must conform to the City's Residential Design Standards, building codes for energy
standards, etc.
F. Lighting.
The purpose of this standard is 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 be 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
All new lighting for the proposed residence must be in compliance with the City's lighting
code adopted in November 1999 and Uniform Building Code for safety. The new lighting
shall be designed to minimize glare onto adjacent properties, Highway 82 and Power Plant
Road.
17
•
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:
1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open
space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed
development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural
landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the property's
built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses
and property users of the PUD.
2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation
areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or
dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar
manner.
3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through a legal instrument for
the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas,
and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future
residential, commercial, or industrial development.
Staff Finding
No common park or open space is included in this application for this lot. However, open
space on the lot below Power Plant Road will be preserved and a trail easement shall be
deeded in perpetuity to the City for the Cemetery Lane to Marolt property connection.
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:
Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the
development.
Staff Finding
All appropriate utility agencies and the City Engineer were referenced on this application and
reported the ability to serve this project.
2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be
mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer.
Staff Finding
Staff recommends a condition of approval be that the owner(s) mitigate any public impacts
that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and
water lines. Another condition of approval is that the Applicant shall provide an
unconditional easement to the City of Aspen for maintenance of the retaining walls and
structures below and around Castle Creek Bridge. The easement, which shall be designated
18
•
on the PUD plans and approved by the City Engineer, shall be from approximately 15 feet
above and adjacent to the retaining walls down to Power Plant Road.
3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided
appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the
additional improvement.
Staff Finding
No oversized utility stubs were requested to be installed with this development.
L Access and Circulation. (Only standards 1 &2 apply to Minor PUD applications)
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:
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.
Staff Finding
Access to the building envelope is proposed to be from Power Plant Road, a public street,
where the current trail/bike path exists.
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.
Staff Finding
Staff does not believe the development of a single family residence on this parcel will require
improvements to Power Plant Road. Parking will be accommodated on site for residents and
visitors. Accessing the property from Power Plant Road should not cause a significant
increase in traffic congestion on Power Plant Road, Cemetery Lane, or Highway 82.
According to the application, a single family residence in town can be expected to generate
between 5 and 10 vehicular trips per day, which is a small number of trips occurring on the
surrounding roads, particularly Highway 82.
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.
19
Staff Finding
Holy Cross plans to revoke a trail easement across the property. This trail does not provide
access to significant public lands or a river. Pedestrians and bicyclists may continue to
access the trail, Cemetery Lane and Highway 82 along Power Plant Road. It should be noted
that the road is not particularly safe for pedestrians or bikes because of the curves and grade
of the road.
The Applicant has also proposed to deed the trail along Highway 82 and under Castle Creek
Bridge to the City in perpetuity, and to rebuild it to make it significantly safer. This is an
important connection in the City's trail system; it provides safe pedestrian and bike access to
and from Aspen off of Highway 82.
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
Staff Finding
The AACP does not propose additional trails for this parcel.
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.
Staff Finding
This is a site specific PUD that does not include streets.
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
Gates, guard posts, or other entryway expressions are not proposed for the PUD.
J. Phasing of Development Plan. (does not apply to Conceptual PUD
applications)
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:
1. All phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as
a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent
phases.
2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent
practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later
phases.
IM
0
3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate
improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees -
in -lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents
of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and
any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the
respective impacts associated with the phase.
Staff Finding
Although no phased development is proposed, Holy Cross plans to install utilities
under the trail along Highway 82 and rebuild the trail prior to selling the property,
which is also included as a condition of approval.
21
•
EXHIBIT B
REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS
0 I WOV-11W41 W1110
To: Nick Lelack, Planner
From: Ben Ludlow, Project Engineer
Reference DRC Caseload Coordinator
Date: April 3, 2000
Re: Holy Cross Rezoning and PUD
The Development Review Committee has reviewed the Holy Cross Rezoning and PUD
application at their March 29, 2000 meeting, and has compiled the following comments:
General
1. Sufficiency of Submittal: DRC comments are based on the fact that we believe
that the submitted site plan is accurate, that it shows all site features, and that it is feasible.
The wording must be carried forward exactly as written unless prior consent is received from
the Engineering Department. This is to alleviate problems related to approvals tied to
"issuance of building permit."
2. R.O.W. Impacts: If there are any encroachments into the public rights -of -way,
the encroachment must either be removed or be subject to current encroachment license
requirements.
Site Review
1. Site Drainage — Requirement — A drainage report was not submitted with the
application. The site development approvals must include the requirement meeting runoff
design standards of the Land Use Code at Sec. 26.580.020.A.6.a and a requirement that, prior
to the building permit application, a drainage mitigation plan (24"06" size plan sheet or on
the lot grading plan) must meet the requirements of the Engineering Department Interim
Design Standards and must be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering
Department. The mitigation plan must also address the temporary sediment control and
containment plan for the construction phase. If drywells are an acceptable solution for site
drainage, a soils report must be provided with a percolation test to verify the feasibility of
this type of system. Drywells have depths well below depth of frost (10' minimum) to
function in cold weather. The drainage plan must contain a statement specifying the routine
maintenance required by property owner(s) to ensure continued and proper performance.
Drywells may not be placed within public right of way or utility easements. The foundation
22
drainage system should be separate from storm drainage, must be detained and routed on site,
and must be shown on drainage plans prior to application for building permit. The drainage
may be conveyed to existing landscaped areas if the drainage report demonstrates that the
percolation rate and the detention volume meet the design storm.
Information — The City drainage criteria needs to be implemented. This
includes but is not limited to erosion control, soil stabilization, and vegetation disturbance.
Also, there needs to be an analysis of where the drainage will flow and what adverse affects
may arise from potential mud and debris flow.
2. Community Development — Information — The following request was provided
by the Planning Department:
a. The applicant may needs to look at a landscaping plan that that would provide
vegetation between the two remaining bike paths.
b. It would be beneficial to allow a trail on the top of the slope between the house
and Power Plant Road.
c. It may be useful to take vacated Cemetery Lane as the driveway instead of the
proposed area.
a. Fire Protection District — Information — ALL COMMENTS ARE
RESERVED AT THIS TIME
3. Streets Department — Requirement - As of the request of the Streets Department
revisions need to be made as follows:
a. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed
rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction.
4. Parks — Requirement — The following information has been provided by the
Parks Department:
a. It would be beneficial if a trail easement could be maintained east-northeast of the
house along the toe of the slope.
b. Easements need to be shown on the plat.
c. The parks department needs more information about plans for water for the house.
d. There may need to be sagebrush mitigation at the project location. It would also
be most beneficial to keep the native vegetation on the slopes.
e. The idea of planting Spruce trees may not work in the project location due to the
soil characteristics.
5. Engineering — Requirement — The following requirements have been provided by
the Engineering Department:
a. ROW permits and Encroachment licenses will be required during construction
if applicable.
23
•
b. A Fugitive dust control permit will be required during construction.
C. A 15 ft. easement at the toe of slope at Power Plant Rd would need to be
granted for the purpose of the retaining wall removal and repair in the future.
d. Slope stabilization, erosion control, and sediment control measures need to be
implemented before, during and after construction.
e. The building access via the planned drive is geometrically challenging from
the standpoint of traffic control. Other options need to be looked at for the
driveway.
f. A geotechnical study is very important to learn the characteristics of the soil in
the location to see what, if any, adverse affects may result.
6. Utilities: A utility plan needs to be submitted before any real comments and conclusions
can be drawn by the utility companies.
- Water:
City Water Department - Requirement — The following information was given by
the City of Aspen Water Department:
a. All uses and construction will comply with the City of Aspen Water
System Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8
(Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen
Municipal code as they pertain to utilities.
b. The nearest water service would have to come from either Power Plant
Road or through Barnard Park. This may also then require an easement
through adjacent property owner's property.
c. The closest fire hydrant is located at the intersection of Power Plant Rd.
and Cemetery Lane, or at the ground elevation of the City Shop.
d. There is an old pemstock easement through the property that goes to the
City Shop. This easement needs to be shown and the proposed building
needs to avoid the easement.
Wastewater:
Aspen Consolidated Waste District - Information — As a request of the
Consolidated Waste District, revisions need to be made as follows:
a. A set of drainage plans needs to be provided to Peg at ACSD so that an
estimate of fees can be processed.
b. There is a manhole near the southwest corner of the property that is not
shown on the improvement survey. This needs to be shown because it
may be close to the planned structure.
c. The best source of service would be the aforementioned manhole that
would require the use of a pump.
- Construction:
24
Work in the Public Right of Way - Requirement — Given the continuous problems
of unapproved work and development in public rights -of -way adjacent to private
property, we advise the applicant as follows:
Approvals
1. Engineering: The applicant receives approval from the City Engineering Department
(920-5080) for design of improvements, including grading, drainage,
transportation/streets, landscaping, and encroachments within public
right of way.
2. Parks: The applicant receives approval from the Parks Department (920-
5120) for vegetation species and for public trail disturbance.
3. Streets: The applicant receives approval from the Streets department (920-
5130) for mailboxes, finished pavement, surface materials on streets,
and alleyways.
4. Permits: Obtain R.O.W. permits for any work or development, involving street
cuts and landscaping from the Engineering Department.
DRC Attendees
Staff: Mark O'Meara Applicant's Representative: Alan Richmond
Ed Van Walraven
Ben Ludlow
Nick Adeh
John Krueger
Joyce Ohlson
Tom Bracewell
Nick Lelack
Scott Chism
Julie Ann Woods
Tom Bracewell
25
0
Q � � ie � �_ `c� ;t7 •� .� >' p a� � w wo a�i +••C a`"i u ^= � p � -=
�C?aaia R ag $
o_: I � yU o,c� o c c 3•pc onrJ.., � � o
° s 3
POMO LID
40
• o o ��— a� �" Boa o °
ED
3 E
N O LUw E�a�v3 > t �c �._���„ 2U
O
»
_ a c •d a� wo b c
�U3�°.�v Uwcoa�i earo�v v0°4'O�'
o�
-6 Ec
c tou U a% > — a
pomm
OCL U6 E
o v._U o.� n *� R O O 0 3
U c 3 >, >, 0 Co > > o >y c
� C L O oCc•v�a�
�oU$.8�� O C Gaa,o�
co c°wa C ��o'-S
6-0
�t
O ��� cE�
�U0N0 �. a`.))U O > N a C,
HE
� 13 S O c
>
o� oA °° ° o gam.:?" aL >
O w uu °E�0 2pU
ate, oo ao c�o� —0—
c ' oar
O C U $ v- U o a 7'
oU�E`cd yaNw��at
coo
Inc. ts
L. h E a)IZu
H �,' c 00 t�'A •� ' 'per' o
ACC
.ti ga °-E" o c d v "ccGO
Kathryn Koch, 08:37 AM 7/1360600, Re: Holy Cross • Page 1 of 1
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 08:37.45 -0600 (MDT)
X-Sender: kathrynk@commons
X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.1.2
To: Nick Lelack <nickl@ci.aspen.co.us>
From: Kathryn Koch <kathrynk@ci.aspen.co.us>
Subject: Re: Holy Cross
I do have the minutes. here is excerpt:
Mayor Richards suggested adding a section to the ordinance, "applicant has
represented an old storage tank has been removed from the site and that
soils test has been done which shows no contamination of the site and that
no future liability would accrue to the city" and also appendix that soils
report.
Richman requested that Section 2 condition #2 requires a PUD plan be filed
within 180 days. Richman said the applicant has to come back to P & Z with
landscaping and architectural plans. Richman said it will take more than
180 days for someone to return with those requirements. The applicants
suggested once the new owner goes through P & Z with their landscape and
architecture plans, these be made amendments to the PUD and be made of
record. Richman noted (d) in 2 should be a condition in #3 rather than #2;
the drainage plan should come in at time of building permit. Richman noted
condition #15 regarding the Pemstock easement, this easement does not cross
this property
Mayor Richards asked about the development rights on the southern portion of
the parcel. Richman said this will be deed restricted as open space and is
not a separate parcel. Richman told Council they are willing to do the
trail work and to install the utilities rather than wait for a developer.
Councilman Hershey moved to adopt Ordinance #21, Series of 2000, on second
reading, amending it to add the section on the storage tank, changing #2 in
Section 2 to 360 days for the plat; move Section 2(d) into #3; and to
eliminate the Pemstock easement with verification there is not easement on
the property; seconded by Councilman McCabe. Roll call vote; Councilmembers
Paulson, yes; Hershey, yes; McCabe, yes; Markalunas, yes; Mayor Richards,
yes. Motion carried.
At 08:39 AM 7/13/00 -0500, you wrote:
>Hi Kathryn,
>Do you have the minutes or the tapes from the Holy Cross public hearing a
>couple of weeks ago? I need to get the language Rachel included as one of
>the new conditions of approval before completing that Ordinance.
>Thanks.
>Nick Lelack
>Planner, City of Aspen
>(970) 920-5095
Printed for Nick Lelack <nickl@ci.aspen.co.us> 7/18/00
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager
John Worcester, City Attorney
Julie Ann Woods Community Development Director
V1 t;p
J
eK
Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director
FROM: Nick Lelack, Planner
RE: Holy Cross Energy: Rezoning to R-30/Planned Unit Development &
Consolidated PUD Review —1" Reading
DATE: June 12, 2000
APPLICANT:
Holy Cross Energy Association
REPRESENTATIVE:
Alan Richman Planning Services
LOCATION:
Along Power Plant Rd., north of
Hwy 82 and Castle Creek Bridge
CURRENT ZONING:
Conservation & Public
PROPOSED ZONING:
R-30/PUD Overlay
CURRENT LAND USE:
Vacant
PROPOSED LAND USE:
Residential
LOT SIZE:
32,456 sq. ft.
FAR:
Under Current Zoning: 5000 sq. ft.
R-30/PUD Allowable: 3,581 sq. ft.
Proposed Allowable: 3,200 sq. ft.
SUMMARY:
The purpose of this application is to gain approvals of a
rezoning and site specific Planned Unit Development
(PUD) Plan for the development of a single family
residence. Rezoning the property brings the parcel into
conformance with the land use code by creating a lot
which is in compliance with its zone's lot size, and the
PUD establishes the building envelope and other
dimensional requirements. In addition, the City will be
provided with a permanent trail easement across this lot.
The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4-1 to
recommend approval.
1
•
REVIEW PROCEDURE
• Rezoning &Consolidated Planned Unit Development Reviews: City Council shall
approve, approve with conditions, or deny a rezoning and/or Consolidated PUD
request after considering a recommendation by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
STAFF COMMENTS:
Holy Cross Energy Association (Applicant), represented by Alan Richman of Alan
Richman Planning Services, is requesting land use approvals to establish a building
envelope for the development of a single family residence on a lot located below and
north of Highway 82 and Castle Creek Bridge, east of Barnard Court and Park, and on
both sides of Power Plant Road above the Aspen City Shop. Holy Cross previously
offered the site for sale to the City of Aspen and Aspen/Pitkin County Housing
Authority, but both entities decided not to purchase the lot.
One request is to rezone the parcel. Currently, the parcel is split zoned, with the
Conservation Zone District on the west portion located above Power Plant Road and
the Public Zone District on the east portion located below Power Plant Road. The
photograph below shows the portion of the lot zoned Conservation. The Conservation
Zone District allows the construction of a single family residence, but the Public Zone
District does not. The request is to rezone the entire parcel to the R-30, Low Density
Residential Zone District with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay.
The second request is for Consolidated Planned Unit Development (PUD) Review to
create a site specific PUD Plan. The PUD would establish the building envelope on
the west portion of the parcel zoned Conservation.
In addition, the Applicant requested the development be granted vested rights status.
Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2000, automatically grants vested rights status for three
years for approved developments, so this request will be acknowledged if the project is
approved.
Rezoning to R-30/PUD
Rezoning the property achieves
two goals. First, the parcel is
currently a non -conforming lot
in the Conservation Zone
District because the minimum
lot size for a parcel in this
district is 10 acres. This parcel
is approximately 32,456 square
feet, or .75 acres. The
minimum lot size in the R-30
Zone District is 30 000 square
s
Public Zone
District
Conservation
Zone District"
Zone district
t
division line
82
is Power
`
Plant Road
feet. Thus, the rezoned lot would conform to the land use code.
2
Second, although a single family residence is permitted in the Conservation Zone
District, the front-, rear-, and side -yard setbacks in this zone district - designed for 10
acre parcels - would overlap on this .75 acre lot, leaving no developable area for a
single family residence, which is a permitted use. Instead of requesting a setback
variance, Staff recommended the applicant apply to rezone the property to both bring
the lot into conformance with the Land Use Code as well as to establish the building
envelope in the best possible location on the site as part of the PUD. Staff supports the
rezoning request because it brings the lot into conformance with the code, and allows
for the minimum land use of the property of one single family dwelling.
Site Specific Planned Unit Development
The second request is for Consolidated Planned Unit Development (PUD) Review to
create a site specific PUD Plan to establish a building envelope and other dimensions
for a single-family house on the lot. A PUD would ensure that the location,
dimensions, and landscaping of the lot are site and neighborhood sensitive. The
following table shows the dimensional requirements for the Conservation Zone District,
R-30 Zone District, and proposed PUD.
Zone District
Front
Side
Rear
Height
Floor Area
Ratio
Conservation
100 feet
30 feet
30 feet
28 feet
3,750 sq. ft.*
R-30, Low Density Residential
25 feet
10 feet
10 feet
25 feet
3,581 sq. ft.*
Proposed PUD
16.75 feet
10 feet
15 feet
25 feet
3,200 sq. ft.
NOTE: These calculations include the maximum 25% slope reduction requirement.
The table illustrates that the proposed PUD is more restrictive than the existing
Conservation Zone District for height and floor area ratio, but less restrictive for all
setbacks. The proposed dimensions establish a building envelope on the relatively flat
bench in the center of the portion of the lot located above Power Plant Road.
Staff believes this site provides challenges for the development of a single family
residence. It contains trails (discussed in the next section), slopes, mature native
vegetation, and is fairly difficult to access and connect to public utilities.
Nevertheless, Staff believes that the proposed PUD creates a building envelope, access,
and dimensional requirements that are site and neighborhood sensitive. The building
envelope is relatively flat and avoids most of the dense, mature native vegetation on the
site. It is for these reasons that Staff can support the site specific PUD.
Trails, Driveway & Utilities
Two (2) pedestrian/bike trails currently cross the property. One trail (Trail 1) runs
parallel to Highway 82 on the southern portion of the property and then continues
under the Castle Creek Bridge. This trail connects Cemetery Lane to the Marolt
property and the school trail. A portion of the trail that runs parallel to Highway 82 is
on both City and Holy Cross properties. A second trail (Trail 2) splits off from this
trail, crosses through the center of the property, and then connects the pedestrian/bike
trail to Power Plant Road. The photo below does not accurately reflect the survey line.
Holy Cross granted Pitkin County revocable trail easements for both trails on its
property in 1974 (Exhibit 3 of the application). The easements "may be terminated by
Grantor, its successors or assigns, for any reason at any time."
Holy Cross proposes to terminate the revocable easement for Trail 2 and convert the
trail into a driveway to access the building envelope. The Applicant also proposes to
grant the City of Aspen a permanent easement for the portion of Trail 1 located on its
property.
The utility plan for the property demonstrates that the necessary utilities are located
immediately west of the property (toward Barnard Court). Holy Cross is requesting a
utility easement from the City to locate the utilities beneath Trail 1, reducing
disturbance to the native vegetation on the slopes to the property. In exchange for the
utility easement, the Applicant agrees to rebuild Trail 1 that runs parallel to the
highway and continues on the Holy Cross property beneath Castle Creek Bridge.
Community Development and Parks Staff are disappointed about the prospect of losing
Trail 2, however, the owners are within their rights to do so. This link provides an
important connection from
Trail 1 to Power Plant Road
and neighbors have expressed
their desire to keep the trail.
Staff has explored a number
of options for maintaining
this connection, but the steep
slopes, retaining walls, and
dense vegetation do not make
another realignment or option
possible. Pedestrian and bike
traffic from Power Plant
Road can continue around the
bend in the road a little
further and connect to Trail 1
via Barnard Court or crossing
Cemetery Lane.
Staff recognizes that the existing easement is revocable and the trail provides the best
vehicular access to the property. The Applicant and Staff explored the possibility of
accessing the property from Barnard Court. But steep slopes and potential conflicts
with heavy pedestrian and bike traffic on Trail 1 make this a challenging option.
Staff supports placing the utilities under Trail 1 in exchange for a rebuilt trail. Parks
Department Staff and neighbors contend that this steep trail is dangerous and in need of
repair and re -grading to make it safer. Placing utilities under the trail would also
4
C,
alleviate the need for imposing greater impacts on the site's slopes and native
vegetation.
Planning and Zoning Commission Action
The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 4-1 to recommend City Council approve
the rezoning and Consolidated PUD. Commissioners generally agreed with Staff that
the site is not ideal for the development of a single family residence, but also that
existing zoning prohibits any viable use of the land (the Conservation Zone District's
permitted and conditional uses are included as Exhibit Q. Some members also
expressed appreciation for the Applicant's willingness to further restrict FAR for the
site as part of the PUD. The Commissioner who voted against the application said he
does not believe the application meets several of the zoning and PUD criteria.
The Commission recommended two conditions of approval. The conditions are that the
Planning and Zoning Commission shall approve detailed landscape and architectural
plans for the property prior to an application for building permit. The reasons for the
conditions are that the PUD criteria addresses each of these development characteristics
for this prominent location near the entrance to town; however, the application contains
hypothetical landscape and architectural plans because Holy Cross does not plan to
develop the property. The Applicant agreed to the conditions.
A few neighbors voiced their opposition to the project, explaining that they bought
their properties with the understanding that the site would not be developed because the
Conservation Zone District's setback precluded development on the parcel. They also
argued that Trail 2 is important because it is regularly used by children going to
school.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends City Council approve of rezoning the Holy Cross Energy
Association parcel to R-30/PUD and creating a site specific PUD plan, with
conditions in the draft Ordinance.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
I move to approve Ordinance No. a'1�, Series of 2000, approving rezoning the Holy Cross
Energy parcel to R-30/PUD and creating a site specific PUD."
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A --
Review Criteria and Staff Findings
Exhibit B --
Referral Agency Comments
Exhibit C --
Conservation Zone District
Exhibit D --
Development Application
5
ORDINANCE NO.4Z
(SERIES OF 2000)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE HOLY
CROSS ENERGY CONSOLIDATED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND
REZONING TO R-30, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, WITH A PUD OVERLAY
ZONE DISTRICT, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO.
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application
from Holy Cross Energy, represented by Alan Richman of Alan Richman Planning
Services, for a Consolidated Planned Unit Development (PUD), and Rezoning to R-
30/PUD, Low -Density Residential, for a rectangular shaped property located above the
Aspen City Shop; and,
WHEREAS, the Holy Cross Energy property is approximately 32,456 square
feet, is located in the Conservation and Public Zone Districts; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.310 of the Land Use Code, the City Council
may approve Amendments to the Official Zone District Map, during a duly noticed
public hearing after considering comments from the general public, and
recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission, Community Development
Director, and relevant referral agencies; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445, the City Council may approve a
Planned Unit Development, during a duly noticed public hearing after considering
comments from the general public, and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning
Commission, Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and,
WHEREAS, the Fire Marshall, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, the City
Water Department, City Engineering, City Parks Department, and the Community
Development Department reviewed the Project and recommended approval with
conditions; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on May 30, 2000, the Planning
and Zoning Commission recommended, by a four to one (4-1) vote, to recommend City
Council approve of the Holy Cross Energy Rezoning to R-30, Low Density Residential,
and Consolidated Planned Unit Development, with conditions contained herein; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development
proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has
reviewed and considered the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission,
the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and
considered public comment at a public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council 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 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
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code,
the Holy Cross Energy Association property, which is a rectangular configuration and
located above the Aspen City Shop, shall be rezoned from Conservation and Public to R-
30, Low Density Residential, with a Planned Unit Development Overlay.
Section 2
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code,
the Holy Cross Energy Planned Unit Development is approved subject to the conditions of
approval described hereinafter.
1. A PUD Agreement shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval by City
Council and shall include the following:
a. The information required to be included in a PUD Agreement, pursuant to Section
26.445.070(C).
2. A Final PUD Plan shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval granted by
City Council and shall include:
a. A final plat meeting the requirements of the City Engineer and showing
easements, encroachment agreements and licenses with reception numbers for
physical improvements and parking spaces within City rights -of -way, and
location of utility pedestals.
b. An illustrative site plan of the project showing the proposed improvements,
landscaping, parking, and the dimensional requirements as approved.
c. A drawing representing the project's architectural character.
d. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado
licensed Civil Engineer which maintains sediment and debris on -site during and
after construction. If a ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation
report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 2-year storm frequency
should be used in designing any drainage improvements.
3. Prior to an application for a building permit:
a. The PUD Agreement and the Final PUD Plans shall be recorded with the Pitkin
County Clerk and Recorder.
b. A public utility easement shall be approved by the Parks Department and, if
approved, utilities shall be installed and the trail along Highway 82 and under
Castle Creek Bridge on the subject property shall be rebuilt in a manner approved
by the Parks Department.
•
c. A permanent and non -revocable trail easement shall be granted by Holy Cross
Energy Association to the City of Aspen for the trail parallel to and under
Highway 82 and Castle Creek Bridge.
d. A conservation easement, deed restriction, or other similar mechanism acceptable
to the City's Attorney's Office shall be placed on the portion of the property
located below Power Plant Road to ensure that this area remains open space and
undeveloped in perpetuity.
e. The applicant shall grant a permanent easement to the City of Aspen for the
maintenance of the retaining walls and support structures below and around
Castle Creek Bridge. The easement shall be approximately 15 feet to the sides
and above the retaining walls and structures, and continuing to Power Plant Road.
The easement shall be approved by the City Engineer.
f. The Applicant shall meet the then current growth management requirements for
the development of a new single family residence, which may include, but not be
limited to, applying for and obtaining a GMQS allotment or exemption, and
providing affordable housing mitigation requirements at the then current
standards.
g. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall approve at a public hearing a detailed
landscape plan showing the size, species, quantity, and location of all existing and
planned native vegetation on the portion of the parcel located above Power Plant
Road.
h. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall approve at a public hearing detailed
architectural plans for the development of any structure on this site.
4. The building permit application shall include:
a. A copy of the final Ordinance and recorded P&Z Resolution.
b. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set.
c. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation
District.
d. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval
from the Parks Department Director for off -site replacement or mitigation of
removed trees.
e. A completed curb, gutter, and sidewalk agreement, if necessary.
f. A completed agreement to join any future improvement districts formed for the
purpose of constructing improvements in adjacent public rights -of -way.
g. Copies of the public utility, trail, conservation, and retaining walls and structures
maintenance easements.
5. Prior to issuance of a building permit:
a. The primary contractor shall submit a letter to the Community Development
Director stating that the conditions of approval have been read and understood.
b. All tap fees, impacts fees, and building permit fees shall be paid. If an alternative
agreement to delay payment of the Water Tap and/or Parks Impact fee is finalized,
those fees shall be payable according to the agreement.
6. No excavation or storage of dirt or material shall occur within tree driplines or outside of
the approved building envelope and access envelope.
7. All construction vehicles, materials, and debris shall be maintained on -site and not
within public rights -of -way unless specifically approved by the Director of the Streets
Department. All vehicle parking, including contractors' and their employees', shall
abide by the 2 hour residential parking limitation of the area. The applicant shall
inform the contractor of this condition.
8. The applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is limited to
the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m.
9. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed
rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction.
10. All uses and construction shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System
Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8 (Water Conservation
and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code as they pertain to
utilities.
11. The Applicant or owner shall mitigate any public impacts that this project causes,
including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines.
12. The building plans shall demonstrate an adequate fire sprinkler system and alarm
system for the entire structure. The Aspen Fire Marshal shall also approve access to
the property.
13. A fugitive dust control permit will be required during construction.
14. Slope stabilization, erosion control, and sediment control measures need to be
implemented before, during, and after construction.
15. The proposed building shall not be placed on the Pemstock easement traversing
through the property to the Aspen City Shop.
16. No other landscape improvements or changes to the parcel, except those approved by
the Community Development Director, are approved outside the established building
and access envelopes, excluding all necessary trail and retaining wall work.
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 Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement
of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or
amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such
prior ordinances.
Section 5•
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.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law,
by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 12'h day of June, 2000.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Rachel Richards, Mayor
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 26`h day of June, 2000.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
.John Worcestor, City Attorney
Rachel Richards, Mayor
•
EXHIBIT A
HOLY CROSS REZONING TO R-30/PUD & CONSOLIDATED PUD
REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS
Section 26.310.020, Standards Applicable to Amendments to the Official Zone District
Map
In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, the Planning and Zoning
Commission shall consider:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable
portions of this title.
Staff Finding:
Staff does not believe rezoning this parcel from Conservation and Public to R-30/PUD would
be in conflict with any portions of this title. Rezoning the property would bring it into
compliance with the Land Use Code because the 32,456 square foot lot would comply with
the minimum lot size for this zone district, which is 30,000 square feet. This parcel is
contiguous to land zoned R-30/PUD immediately to the south.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the
Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
Staff Finding:
Staff believes rezoning the parcel will not conflict with the AACP. The AACP's Growth
Philosophy states that the City of Aspen agrees to accept greater density within the Aspen
Community Growth Boundary, and the proposed development is located within this area. It
is specifically proposed for an undeveloped parcel situated below Castle Creek Bridge, above
Power Plant Road, and east of Barnard Court.
The AACP also encourages reducing automobile trips. This parcel is within walking and
biking distance to town, trails, bus stops, and recreation areas.
One of the goals of the AACP is to improve safety for pedestrians and bikes in the Aspen
area. The proposal is essentially a trade-off concerning this goal. One trail crossing the
property from Power Plant Road to the trail along Highway 82 and under Castle Creek
Bridge would be removed because the Applicant would revoke the trail easement to gain
access for the parcel. A trail easement granted by Holy Cross Energy Association to Pitkin
County in 1974 states that the easement "may be terminated by Grantor, its successors or
assigns, for any reason at any time.
However, the community gains from the dedication of a permanent easement for the trail that
connects Cemetery Lane to the Marolt property running along side Highway 82 and then
underneath the bridge (referred to as Trail 1 in the Staff memo). In addition, the Applicant
agrees to rebuild the path subject to the Parks Department's approval in exchange for a utility
R
easement from the City of Aspen to place utilities under the path. The trail is in need of
repair and contains fairly steep slopes that are not safe for all bicyclists and pedestrians; the
rebuilt trail would be made safer for all users.
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone
districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood
characteristics.
Staff Finding:
Rezoning the property would permit the development of one single family residence on the
site, which is also allowed under current zoning. Zoning in the Cemetery Lane area is either
zoned R-6, R-15, R-30/PUD, and Park (for the golf course). Staff believes the proposed
rezoning, R-30, is compatible with the character of existing land uses in the area. The
property is surrounded by single family and duplex units, Highway 82, a park, bike paths,
and the City maintenance shop. The proposed residence would be consistent with these uses.
According to the Applicant, the reason for the rezoning and PUD is to establish a building
envelope and dimensional requirements to situate the house in a location that minimizes its
impact on slopes and native vegetation. The location of the proposed building envelope is
currently zoned Conservation, which prescribes setbacks that would make situating a house
on the parcel impossible. The following table illustrates current and proposed setbacks,
height, and FAR. Although the property is proposed to be rezoned to R-30, the PUD
setbacks are the dimensions requested in the application.
Zone District
Front
Side
Rear
Height
Floor Area
Ratio
Conservation
100 feet
30 feet
30 feet
28 feet
3,750 sq. ft.*
R-30, Low Density Residential
25 feet
10 feet
10 feet
25 feet
3,581 sq. ft.*
Proposed PUD
16.75 feet
10 feet
15 feet
25 feet
3,200 sq. ft.
NOTE: These calculations include the maximum 25% slope reduction requirement.
The proposed PUD would establish setbacks less restrictive than the Conservation Zone
District, but the height and FAR dimensions are proposed to be more restrictive than
currently allowed. Staff believes the proposed dimensions to be suitable for the development
of a single family residence on this lot given its slope constraints and odd configuration
above Power Plant Road and below Highway 82.
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road
safety.
Staff Finding:
Rezoning the property should only have minimal impacts on traffic generation and road
safety. The application states that an average single family residence in Aspen generates five
(5) to ten (10) automobile trips per day. The residence would be located within walking
distance to downtown, bus stops, and recreation and employment areas. Staff does not
believe rezoning the property would adversely impact traffic generation and road safety.
7
•
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result
in demands on public facilities, and whether the extent to which the
proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such facilities,
including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities,
water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities.
Staff Finding:
All appropriate utility agencies and the City Engineer were referenced on this application
and reported the ability to serve this project. The Parks Department supports the proposal
to locate utilities under the trail in exchange for a rebuilt trail. A condition of approval
shall be that the owner(s) mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but
not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. School, park, water,
sanitation, and other impact fees will be due prior to the issuance of building permits.
F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in
significant adverse impacts on the natural environment.
Staff Finding:
Rezoning the property will not itself create adverse impacts on the natural environment
because current zoning and proposed zoning both permit the construction of a single family
residence. The main difference is that current zoning effectively prevents any development
on the property because of the setbacks in the Conservation Zone District. The PUD would
restrict height and FAR below what is currently allowed for the site, but adjust the setbacks
to create a building envelope on the most developable portion of the site. Steep slopes and
natural vegetation are preserved to the greatest extent possible. In addition, the Applicant has
removed a City -owned fuel storage tank from the site with permission from the City.
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the
community character in the City of Aspen.
Staff Finding:
Staff believes rezoning the property is consistent and compatible with the community
character in the City of Aspen, particularly because rezoning the parcel will not change its
expected land use — single family residential. The PUD review ensures that the dimensions
and character of the proposed development are consistent and compatible with the character
of Aspen, including surrounding uses, public facilities and utilities, access, architecture and
landscaping. Rezoning the parcel to a residential zone district is also consistent with
promoting higher densities of development inside the Aspen Community Growth Boundary.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel
or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed
amendment.
Staff Finding:
In 1992, the City rezoned the Aspen City Shop and portion of the Holy Cross parcel from R-
30/PUD to Public/PUD to bring the City Shop into compliance with the Land Use Code. The
Applicant had been unaware of this rezoning until recently. The request is to rezone the
entire parcel to this zone district.
I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public
interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title.
Staff Finding:
Staff does not believe the proposed rezoning would be in conflict with the public interest
and believes it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Land Use Code. Again,
rezoning the property would not change the expected use of the land, and the City benefits
from gaining a permanent easement for a highly used trail/bike path.
26.445.050 Review Standards: Consolidated PUD
A development application for Conceptual, Final, Consolidated Conceptual and Final, or
Minor PUD shall comply with the following standards and requirements. Due to the
limited issues associated with Conceptual Reviews and properties eligible for Minor
PUD Review, certain standards shall not be applied as noted. The burden shall rest upon
an applicant to show the reasonableness of the development application, and its
conformity to the standards and procedures of this Chapter and this title.
A. General requirements.
1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area
Community Plan.
Staff Finding
Staff believes the proposed site specific PUD will not conflict with the AACP. The AACP's
Growth Philosophy states that the City of Aspen agrees to accept greater density within the
Aspen Community Growth Boundary, and the proposed PUD establishes a building envelope
and other dimensions for a single family residence within this area.
The AACP also encourages reducing automobile trips. A residence on this lot would help
reduce automobile trips because of its close proximity to town, trails, bus stops, and
recreation and employment areas.
2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing
land uses in the surrounding area.
Staff Finding
A single family residence in an appropriate building envelope is consistent with the character
of existing land uses in the area. The property is surrounded by single family and duplex
units, Highway 82, a park, bike paths, and the Aspen City Shop. The proposed residence
would be consistent with these uses.
3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development
of the surrounding area.
0
•
Staff Finding
Staff does not believe the proposed development would adversely affect future development
of the surrounding area. The surrounding area is mostly built out with residences, the Aspen
City Shop, a park, or consists of undevelopable areas. A condition of approval is that the
applicant place a conservation easement over those portions of the property located across
Power Plant Road to the north/northeast to ensure that the steep slopes are not developed.
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
A condition of approval is that prior to the submission of a building permit application,
the property owners shall meet the then current growth management requirements for the
development of a new single family residence, which may include, but not be limited to,
applying for and obtaining a GMQS allotment or exemption, and providing affordable
housing mitigation requirements at the then current standards.
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 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
Staff believes the proposed dimensional requirements for the property are appropriate and
compatible with natural and man-made features on and surrounding the property. The
dimensional requirements are stricter than those allowed in the Conservation and R-15
Zone Districts. For example, the allowable floor area ratio for this lot size in the current
10
•
Conservation Zone District is approximately 5,000 square feet, and over 3,500 square feet
in the R-15 Zone District. The proposal is to limit FAR for the property to 3,200 square
feet in the PUD. Similarly, the Conservation Zone allows height limits of 28 feet, while
the R-15 Zone District and proposed PUD would limit height for this property to 25 feet.
The dimensions also restrict development to the only buildable portion of the parcel;
steep slopes and dense native vegetation are avoided. The proposed dimensions also
protect the existing bike path/trail connecting Cemetery Lane to the Marolt property
along Highway 82 and under Castle Creek Bridge (Trail 1). Unfortunately, the section of
the bike path/trail that branches off from this trail to Power Plant Road is proposed to be
eliminated because it provides the only possible access to the property.
Zone District
Front
Side
Rear
Height
Floor Area
Ratio
Conservation
100 feet
30 feet
30 feet
28 feet
3,750 sq. ft.*
R-30, Low Density Residential
25 feet
10 feet
10 feet
25 feet
3,581 sq. ft.*
Proposed PUD
16.75 feet
10 feet
15 feet
25 feet
3,200 sq. ft.
NOTE: These calculations include the maximum 25% slope reduction requirement.
Overall, Staff believes the proposed dimensions of this PUD to be appropriate and
compatible with the surrounding area.
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
Staff believes the Applicant has proposed a building envelope on the most suitable portion of
the site, avoiding steep slopes, native vegetation to the greatest extent possible, and a key
trail connecting Cemetery Lane to the Marolt property. Proposing more restrictive
dimensional requirements such as FAR and height than existing zoning and equal to or more
restrictive than the R-30 Zone District should permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open
space and site coverage favorable to the surrounding areas. Site coverage is proposed to be
less than 10 percent, and the PUD would establish a minimum of 35 percent of open space,
which Staff is recommending be made a condition of approval through the granting of a
conservation easement.
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 non-residential 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.
11
•
•
d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core
and general activity centers in the city.
Staff Finding
The Applicant is proposing to provide two (2) off-street parking spaces in a 2-car garage,
which is required by the Land Use Code. Guest parking would be provided in front of the
garage and on the driveway. If the future property owner decided to apply for an ADU, the
owner would be required to provide an additional parking space for that unit on site.
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:
a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other
utilities to service the proposed development.
b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal,
and road maintenance to the proposed development.
Staff Finding
There are no infrastructure capacity issues that would prohibit the amount of development
being considered. Staff does not recommend any reductions in the development being
proposed.
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:
a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of
ground instability or the possibility of mud flow, rock falls or
avalanche dangers.
b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the
natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and
consequent water pollution.
c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality
in the surrounding area and the City.
d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or
trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain
or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site.
Staff Finding
The Applicant is proposing to establish a building envelope for the development of one (1)
single family residence. There are no known natural hazard or site limitations that prohibit
the amount of development — the single residence — being considered. Staff does not
recommend any reductions to the proposed development based on this standard.
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
12
•
E
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
The applicant is not requesting an increase in density beyond what is allowed within the
PUD. In addition, the site's physical capabilities can accommodate the single family
residential use.
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.
Staff Finding
The proposed development complies with most of the man-made features on the site and does
not detract from the site's natural features or visual interest. It contributes to the town's
identity by preserving the existing trail connection between Cemetery Lane and the Marolt
property with a permanent easement. Unfortunately, it also proposes to terminate a revocable
trail easement for the portion of the trail that branches off to Power Plant Road. It must be
pointed out that this is an easement and not a public space. No historic structures or other
unique features exist on the property. Steep slopes and existing native vegetation outside the
building envelope will be preserved.
2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant
open spaces and vistas.
Staff Finding
Only one structure, a single family residence, is proposed for the parcel. The residence
would not block mountain views from neighboring parcels, and would be limited to
3,200 square feet of floor area. Open space on the parcel below Power Plant Road would
be preserved.
13
0
r-I
L_j
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.
Staff Finding
The proposed residence would be oriented toward Power Plant Road, and contribute to
the context of the surrounding area by preserving views, trails, and open space. The
City's Residential Design Standards will be applied to this property, ensuring that the
proposed development provides visual interest and engagement of vehicular and
pedestrian movement. A cursory review of the potential residence indicates compliance
with the standards and the applicant is not requesting any variances from these standards.
Holy Cross plans to gain land use approvals for the property and then sell the parcel. It
is for this reason that the applicant is not submitting final architectural drawings for the
single family residence. Any other proposed residence for this site will also be reviewed
for compliance with the design standards.
4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow
emergency and service vehicle access.
Staff Finding
Access to the property is proposed to be from Power Plant Road a branch of the existing
trail is located. The Aspen Fire Marshall has reserved comment on the access until a
building permit application has been received by the City. A condition of approval is
that the Aspen Fire Marshall shall approve emergency access to the property prior to the
issuance of a building permit. A second, related condition of approval is that the
building be sprinkled.
5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided.
Staff Finding
Pedestrian and handicapped access will be provided via the driveway from Power Plant
Road or the trail from Cemetery Lane.
6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a
practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact
surrounding properties.
Staff Finding
A condition of approval is that a drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared
by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer which maintains sediment and debris on -site during
and after construction, be approved by the City's Engineering Department prior to the
issuance of building permits. If a ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation
report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 2-year storm frequency should be used
in designing any drainage improvements. The City drainage criteria needs to be
implemented.
14
The Applicant is proposing to accommodate drainage on site through the use of a swale in the
southeastern corner of the property and drywells under the driveway, parking area (in front of
the garage), and under the swale. The City Engineer recommends that the dry wells be at
least 10 feet deep.
7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately
designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with
the use.
Staff Finding
This application is for a residential land use, so this criteria does not apply.
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
A condition of approval is that, prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant
shall submit a detailed landscape plan to the Community Development Department and
Parks Department showing the size, species, quantity, and location of all existing and
planned native and non-native vegetation on the portion of the portion of the site located
above Power Plant Road. The final landscape plan shall be approved by the Community
Development Director after considering a recommendation by the Parks Department.
E. Architectural Character.
It is the purpose of this standard is to encourage architectural interest, variety,
character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City
while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon
the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the
building's proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and
other buildings, use of materials, and other attributes which may significantly
represent the character of the proposed development. There shall be approved
15
as part of the final development plan an architectural character plan, which
adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed
architecture of the development shall:
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
The Applicant is applying for land use approvals for the property; if approved, the Applicant
plans to sell the property. It is expected that a buyer would develop a single family residence
on the site. The application contains architectural drawings for one potential residence on
site. Staff does not believe it is appropriate or worthwhile to comment on a residence that
may or may not be built because the drawings may not be an accurate representation of the
proposed single family residence. Instead, staff can only confirm that any residence on this
site must conform to the City's Residential Design Standards, building codes for energy
standards, etc.
F. Lighting.
The purpose of this standard is 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 be 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
All new lighting for the proposed residence must be in compliance with the City's lighting
code adopted in November 1999 and Uniform Building Code for safety. The new lighting
shall be designed to minimize glare onto adjacent properties, Highway 82 and Power Plant
Road.
16
•
•
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:
1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open
space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed
development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural
landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the property's
built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses
and property users of the PUD.
2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation
areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or
dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar
manner.
3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through a legal instrument for
the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas,
and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future
residential, commercial, or industrial development.
Staff Finding
No common park or open space is included in this application for this lot. However, open
space on the lot below Power Plant Road will be preserved and a trail easement shall be
deeded in perpetuity to the City for the Cemetery Lane to Marolt property connection.
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.
Staff Finding
All appropriate utility agencies and the City Engineer were referenced on this application and
reported the ability to serve this project.
2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be
mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer.
Staff Finding
Staff recommends a condition of approval be that the owner(s) mitigate any public impacts
that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and
water lines. Another condition of approval is that the Applicant shall provide an
unconditional easement to the City of Aspen for maintenance of the retaining walls and
structures below and around Castle Creek Bridge. The easement, which shall be designated
17
on the PUD plans and approved by the City Engineer, shall be from approximately 15 feet
above and adjacent to the retaining walls down to Power Plant Road.
3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided
appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the
additional improvement.
Staff Finding
No oversized utility stubs were requested to be installed with this development.
L Access and Circulation. (Only standards 1 &2 apply to Minor PUD applications)
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:
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.
Staff Finding
Access to the building envelope is proposed to be from Power Plant Road, a public street,
where the current trail/bike path exists.
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.
Staff Finding
Staff does not believe the development of a single family residence on this parcel will require
improvements to Power Plant Road. Parking will be accommodated on site for residents and
visitors. Accessing the property from Power Plant Road should not cause a significant
increase in traffic congestion on Power Plant Road, Cemetery Lane, or Highway 82.
According to the application, a single family residence in town can be expected to generate
between 5 and 10 vehicular trips per day, which is a small number of trips occurring on the
surrounding roads, particularly Highway 82.
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.
18
Staff Finding
Holy Cross plans to revoke a trail easement across the property. This trail does not provide
access to significant public lands or a river. Pedestrians and bicyclists may continue to
access the trail, Cemetery Lane and Highway 82 along Power Plant Road. It should be noted
that the road is not particularly safe for pedestrians or bikes because of the curves and grade
of the road.
The Applicant has also proposed to deed the trail along Highway 82 and under Castle Creek
Bridge to the City in perpetuity, and to rebuild it to make it significantly safer. This is an
important connection in the City's trail system; it provides safe pedestrian and bike access to
and from Aspen off of Highway 82.
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.
Staff Finding
The AACP does not propose additional trails for this parcel.
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.
Staff Finding
This is a site specific PUD that does not include streets.
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
Gates, guard posts, or other entryway expressions are not proposed for the PUD.
J. Phasing of Development Plan. (does not apply to Conceptual PUD
applications)
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:
1. All phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as
a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent
phases.
2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent
practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later
phases.
19
•
•
3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate
improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees -
in -lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents
of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and
any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the
respective impacts associated with the phase.
Staff Finding
Although no phased development is proposed, Holy Cross plans to install utilities
under the trail along Highway 82 and rebuild the trail prior to selling the property,
which is also included as a condition of approval.
all
•
EXHIBIT B
REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS
MEMORANDUM
To: Nick Lelack, Planner
From: Ben Ludlow, Project Engineer
Reference DRC Caseload Coordinator
Date: April 3, 2000
Re: Holy Cross Rezoning and PUD
The Development Review Committee has reviewed the Holy Cross Rezoning and PUD
application at their March 29, 2000 meeting, and has compiled the following comments:
General
1. Sufficiency of Submittal: DRC comments are based on the fact that we believe
that the submitted site plan is accurate, that it shows all site features, and that it is feasible.
The wording must be carried forward exactly as written unless prior consent is received from
the Engineering Department. This is to alleviate problems related to approvals tied to
"issuance of building permit."
2. R.O.W. Impacts: If there are any encroachments into the public rights -of -way,
the encroachment must either be removed or be subject to current encroachment license
requirements.
Rite RPv1Pw
1. Site Drainage — Requirement — A drainage report was not submitted with the
application. The site development approvals must include the requirement meeting runoff
design standards of the Land Use Code at Sec. 26.580.020.A.6.a and a requirement that, prior
to the building permit application, a drainage mitigation plan (24"06" size plan sheet or on
the lot grading plan) must meet the requirements of the Engineering Department Interim
Design Standards and must be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering
Department. The mitigation plan must also address the temporary sediment control and
containment plan for the construction phase. If drywells are an acceptable solution for site
drainage, a soils report must be provided with a percolation test to verify the feasibility of
this type of system. Drywells have depths well below depth of frost (10' minimum) to
function in cold weather. The drainage plan must contain a statement specifying the routine
maintenance required by property owner(s) to ensure continued and proper performance.
Drywells may not be placed within public right of way or utility easements. The foundation
21
drainage system should be separate from storm drainage, must be detained and routed on site,
and must be shown on drainage plans prior to application for building permit. The drainage
may be conveyed to existing landscaped areas if the drainage report demonstrates that the
percolation rate and the detention volume meet the design storm.
Information — The City drainage criteria needs to be implemented. This
includes.but is not limited to erosion control, soil stabilization, and vegetation disturbance.
Also, there needs to be an analysis of where the drainage will flow and what adverse affects
may arise from potential mud and debris flow.
2. Community Development — Information — The following request was provided
by the Planning Department:
a. The applicant may needs to look at a landscaping plan that that would provide
vegetation between the two remaining bike paths.
b. It would be beneficial to allow a trail on the top of the slope between the house
and Power Plant Road.
c. It may be useful to take vacated Cemetery Lane as the driveway instead of the
proposed area.
a. Fire Protection District — Information — ALL COMMENTS ARE
RESERVED AT THIS TIME
3. Streets Department — Requirement - As of the request of the Streets Department
revisions need to be made as follows:
a. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed
rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction.
4. Parks — Requirement — The following information has been provided by the
Parks Department:
a. It would be beneficial if a trail easement could be maintained east-northeast of the
house along the toe of the slope.
b. Easements need to be shown on the plat.
c. The parks department needs more information about plans for water for the house.
d. There may need to be sagebrush mitigation at the project location. It would also
be most beneficial to keep the native vegetation on the slopes.
e. The idea of planting Spruce trees may not work in the project location due to the
soil characteristics.
5. Engineering — Requirement — The following requirements have been provided by
the Engineering Department:
a. ROW permits and Encroachment licenses will be required during construction
if applicable.
22
•
•
b. A Fugitive dust control permit will be required during construction.
C. A 15 ft. easement at the toe of slope at Power Plant Rd would need to be
granted for the purpose of the retaining wall removal and repair in the future.
d. Slope stabilization, erosion control, and sediment control measures need to be
implemented before, during and after construction.
e. The building access via the planned drive is geometrically challenging from
the standpoint of traffic control. Other options need to be looked at for the
driveway.
f. A geotechnical study is very important to learn the characteristics of the soil in
the location to see what, if any, adverse affects may result.
6. Utilities: A utility plan needs to be submitted before any real comments and conclusions
can be drawn by the utility companies.
- Water:
City Water Department - Requirement — The following information was given by
the City of Aspen Water Department:
a. All uses and construction will comply with the City of Aspen Water
System Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8
(Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen
Municipal code as they pertain to utilities.
b. The nearest water service would have to come from either Power Plant
Road or through Barnard Park. This may also then require an easement
through adjacent property owner's property.
c. The closest fire hydrant is located at the intersection of Power Plant Rd.
and Cemetery Lane, or at the ground elevation of the City Shop.
d. There is an old pemstock easement through the property that goes to the
City Shop. This easement needs to be shown and the proposed building
needs to avoid the easement.
Wastewater:
Aspen Consolidated Waste District - Information — As a request of the
Consolidated Waste District, revisions need to be made as follows:
a. A set of drainage plans needs to be provided to Peg at ACSD so that an
estimate of fees can be processed.
b. There is a manhole near the southwest corner of the property that is not
shown on the improvement survey. This needs to be shown because it
may be close to the planned structure.
c. The best source of service would be the aforementioned manhole that
would require the use of a pump.
Construction:
23
Work in the Public Right of Way - Requirement — Given the continuous problems
of unapproved work and development in public rights -of -way adjacent to private
property, we advise the applicant as follows:
Approvals
1. Engineering: The applicant receives approval from the City Engineering Department
(920-5080) for design of improvements, including grading, drainage,
transportation/streets, landscaping, and encroachments within public
right of way.
2. Parks: The applicant receives approval from the Parks Department (920-
5120) for vegetation species and for public trail disturbance.
3. Streets: The applicant receives approval from the Streets department (920-
5130) for mailboxes, finished pavement, surface materials on streets,
and alleyways.
4. Permits: Obtain R.O.W. permits for any work or development, involving street
cuts and landscaping from the Engineering Department.
DRC Attendees
Staff. Mark O'Meara Applicant's Representative: Alan Richmond
Ed Van Walraven
Ben Ludlow
Nick Adeh
John Krueger
Joyce Ohlson
Tom Bracewell
Nick Lelack
Scott Chism
Julie Ann Woods
Tom Bracewell
24
•
•
26.710.220 Conservation (C).
EXHIBIT C
CONSERVATION ZONE DISTRICT
A. Purpose. The purpose of the Conservation (C) zone district is to provide areas of low
density development to enhance public recreation, conserve natural resources, encourage the
production of crops and animals, and to contain urban development.
B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Conservation (C)
zone district:
1. Detached residential dwelling;
2. Park, playfield, playground and golf course;
3. Riding stable;
4. Cemetery;
5. Crop production, orchards, nurseries, flower production and forest land;
6. Pasture and grazing land;
7. Dairy;
8. Fishery;
9. Animal production;
10. Husbandry services (not including commercial feed lots) and other farm and
agricultural uses;
11. Railroad right-of-way but not a railroad yard;
12. Home occupations;
13. Accessory buildings and uses; and
14. Accessory dwelling units meeting the provisions of Section 26.520.040.
C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the
Conservation (C) district, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter
26.425.
1. Guest ranches;
2. Recreational uses including a riding academy, stable, club, country club and
golf course;
3. Ski lift and other ski facilities;
4. Sewage disposal area;
5. Water treatment plant and storage reservoir; and
6. Electric substations and gas regulator stations (not including business or
administration offices).
D. Dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements shall apply to
all permitted and conditional uses in the Conservation (C) zone district.
1. Minimum lot size (acres): 10.
2. Minimum lot area per dwelling unit (acres): 10.
3. Minimum lot width (feet): 400.
25
•
•
4. Minimum front yard setback (feet): 100.
5. Minimum side yard setback (feet): 30.
6. Minimum rear yard setback (feet): 30.
7. Maximum height (feet): 28.
8. Minimum distance between principal and accessory buildings (feet): No
requirement.
9. Percent of open space required for building site: No requirement.
10. External Floor Area: (Applies to conforming and nonconforming lots of
record):
Lot Size Detached Residential Allowable Square Feet
Dwellings (Square Feet)
0-3,000 80 square feet of floor area for each 100
square feet in lot area, up to a maximum
of 2,400 square feet of floor area.
3,000-9,000 2,4000 square feet of floor area, plus 28
square feet of floor area for each
additional 100 square feet in lot area, up
to a maximum of 4,080 square feet of
floor area
9,000-15,000 4,080 square feet of floor area, plus 7
square feet of floor area for each
additional 100 square feet in lot area, up
to a maximum of 4,500 square feet of
floor area.
15,00050,000 4,500 square feet of floor area, plus 6
square feet of floor area for each
additional 100 square feet in lot area, up
to a maximum of 5,000 square feet of
floor area.
50,000+ 5,000 square feet of floor area
maximum.
Ove
ORDINANCE NO. _
(SERIES OF 2000)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE HOLY
CROSS ENERGY CONSOLIDATED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND
REZONING TO R-30, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, WITH A PUD OVERLAY
ZONE DISTRICT, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO.
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application
from Holy Cross Energy, represented by Alan Richman of Alan Richman Planning
Services, for a Consolidated Planned Unit Development (PUD), and Rezoning to R-
30/PUD, Low -Density Residential, for a rectangular shaped property located above the
Aspen City Shop; and,
WHEREAS, the Holy Cross Energy property is approximately 32,456 square
feet, is located in the Conservation and Public Zone Districts; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.310 of the Land Use Code, the City Council
may approve Amendments to the Official Zone District Map, during a duly noticed
public hearing after considering comments from the general public, and
recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission, Community Development
Director, and relevant referral agencies; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445, the City Council may approve a
Planned Unit Development, during a duly noticed public hearing after considering
comments from the general public, and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning
Commission, Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and,
WHEREAS, the Fire Marshall, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, the City
Water Department, City Engineering, City Parks Department, and the Community
Development Department reviewed the Project and recommended approval with
conditions; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on May 30, 2000, the Planning
and Zoning Commission recommended, by a four to one (4-1) vote, to recommend City
Council approve of the Holy Cross Energy Rezoning to R-30, Low Density Residential,
and Consolidated Planned Unit Development, with conditions contained herein; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development
proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has
reviewed and considered the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission,
the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and
considered public comment at a public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council 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 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
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code,
the Holy Cross Energy Association property, which is a rectangular configuration and
located above the Aspen City Shop, shall be rezoned from Conservation and Public to R-
30, Low Density Residential, with a Planned Unit Development Overlay.
Section 2
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code,
the Holy Cross Energy Planned Unit Development is approved subject to the conditions of
approval described hereinafter.
1. A PUD Agreement shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval by City
Council and shall include the following:
a. The information required to be included in a PUD Agreement, pursuant to Section
26.445.070(C). ``�1 )
2. A Final PUD Plan shall be recorded withinli days of the final approval granted by
City Council and shall include:
I a A final plat meeting the requirements of the City Engineer and showing
easements, encroachment agreements and licenses with reception numbers for
physical improvements and parking spaces within City rights -of -way, and
\ r location of utility pedestals.
An illustrative site plan of the project showing the proposed improvements,
�• landscaping, parking, and the dimensional requirements as approved.
c� A drawing representing the project's architectural character.
d. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado
licensed Civil Engineer which maintains sediment and debris on -site during and
after construction. If a ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation
report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 2-year storm frequency
should be used in designing any drainage improvements.
3 Prior to an application for a building permit:
a. The PUD Agreement and the Final PUD Plans shall be recorded with the Pitkin
County Clerk and Recorder.
b. A public utility easement shall be approved by the Parks Department and, if
approved, utilities shall be installed and the trail along Highway 82 and under
Castle Creek Bridge on the subject property shall be rebuilt in a manner approved
by the Parks Department.
c. A permanent and non -revocable trail easement shall be granted by Holy Cross
Energy Association to the City of Aspen for the trail parallel to and under
Highway 82 and Castle Creek Bridge.
d. A conservation easement, deed restriction, or other similar mechanism acceptable
to the City's Attorney's Office shall be placed on the portion of the property
located below Power Plant Road to ensure that this area remains open space and
undeveloped in perpetuity.
The applicant shall grant a permanent easement to the City of Aspen for the
maintenance of the retaining walls and support structures below and around
Castle Creek Bridge. The easement shall be approximately 15 feet to the sides
and above the retaining walls and structures, and continuing to Power Plant Road.
The easement shall be approved by the City Engineer.
f. The Applicant shall meet the then current growth management requirements
for the development of a new single family residence, which may include, but not
be limited to, applying for and obtaining a GMQS allotment or exemption, and
providing affordable housing mitigation requirements at the then current
standards.
g. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall approve at a public hearing a
detailed landscape plan showing the size, species, quantity, and location of all
existing and planned native vegetation on the portion of the parcel located above
Power Plant Road. The review criteria for the landscape plan shall be the
following (the existing PUD landscape review criteria in the Land Use Code):
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.
h. The Planning and Zoning Commission shall approve at a public hearing
detailed architectural character plans for the development of any structure on this
site. It is the purpose of the architectural character plans to demonstrate how the
development will encourage architectural interest, variety, character, and visual
identity in the proposed development and within the City while promoting
efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a
building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the building's proposed
massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of
materials, and other attributes which may significantly represent the character of
the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the final
development plan an architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the
character of the proposed development.
The review criteria for the architecture plans shall be the following (the
existing PUD architectural character plans review criteria in the Land Use
Code):
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.
4. The building permit application shall include:
a. A copy of the final Ordinance and recorded P&Z Resolution.
b. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set.
c. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation
District.
d. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval
from the Parks Department Director for off -site replacement or mitigation of
removed trees.
e. A completed curb, gutter, and sidewalk agreement, if necessary.
f. A completed agreement to join any future improvement districts formed for the
purpose of constructing improvements in adjacent public rights -of -way.
g. Copies of the public utility, trail, conservation, and retaining walls and structures
maintenance easements.
5. Prior to issuance of a building permit:
a. The primary contractor shall submit a letter to the Community Development
Director stating that the conditions of approval have been read and understood.
b. All tap fees, impacts fees, and building permit fees shall be paid. If an alternative
agreement to delay payment of the Water Tap and/or Parks Impact fee is finalized,
those fees shall be payable according to the agreement.
6. No excavation or storage of dirt or material shall occur within tree driplines or outside of
the approved building envelope and access envelope.
7. All construction vehicles, materials, and debris shall be maintained on -site and not
within public rights -of -way unless specifically approved by the Director of the Streets
Department. All vehicle parking, including contractors' and their employees', shall
abide by the 2 hour residential parking limitation of the area. The applicant shall
inform the contractor of this condition.
8. The applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is limited to
the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m.
9. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed
rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction.
10. All uses and construction shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System
Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8 (Water Conservation
and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code as they pertain to
utilities.
11. The Applicant or owner shall mitigate any public impacts that this project causes,
including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines.
12. The building plans shall demonstrate an adequate fire sprinkler system and alarm
system for the entire structure. The Aspen Fire Marshal shall also approve access to
the property.
13. A fugitive dust control permit will be required during construction.
14. Slope stabilization, erosion control, and sediment control measures need to be
implemented before, during, and after construction.
15 The proposed building shall not be placed on the Pemstock easement traversing
through the property to the Aspen City Shop. �f
16. No other landscape improvements or changes to the parcel, except those approved by
the Community Development Director, are approved outside the established building
and access envelopes, excluding all necessary trail and retaining wall work.
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 Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement
of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or
amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such
prior ordinances.
Section 5•
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.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law,
by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 12t' day of June, 2000.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Rachel Richards, Mayor
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 26t' day of June, 2000.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
John Worcestor, City Attorney
Rachel Richards, Mayor
„ v„Q
�7-
- - f + .fir .. :'_�. - • = =
f: Via, aa
't'c: i'h.i1 C)•,�t:rtail;lcr
AL"') Richlll,!tl
D,-i'N:: 6 `1 4:'(',10
Pas.-R,; Fax tote 7671
Datc--
P 0�:F,t.
To _.
From
CO20i:W1
Co.
L
4
Fax
Ike: Ho;;, Cross Energy Residenlia1 Property (Castle Creek)
111,au•.[,:J %\iLh l':!is niclilo is th:: sketch Cor tlic proposed location of the set,,ices for the above
l.'.atai,Uitcd p1'01)e,•ly. At this phase 1,,'c are Tosolv)ng where the sctl'tce call lxitetltially come from.
illti exact tic in location and size of semice will be coordUiated 1t71h the involved utility compatues
�� L 1�tLc l it is actually d:.vt:lolwa, which at this point is not yet detennined.
As 1'.e d;_cu».-d b: fo:c. the city planner involved has a concern with the pen stock lines possibly
bO,1; � luc.ZIIL �d Withill the propci-ty. Per otir conversation and the on -site mectin with a
represcutralive of the Asp;n Wawr Dept., the pen stock lines are not located within the properly.
wou!:d you please qive dick l,elack, city planner, a call at 920-5095 to clarify this issue so that tiny
condititrls in11:osed on this project rclaled to the Pell stock lines may be removed accordingly, I
jm.it rttCriti,III to this ltiattcr.
If yo!J have Liny furikher please gire nic a dill at 9 15-80r(i.
933 r(vi-Kr A.r_rur_.. 14 Invem;is Drivc F-i,t Suite D-144
C!.Spring:;, t:U S1601 Fnelt wrxx!, CO Sol12
l r?. ;d;o,.: (970) 51.3-S676 - 1' K (97C) 9-t5-2555 Tc:ephnnc (303) 92-5-044 • Fax (303) 925.0547
It
PH to consider Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2000
This application was submitted by Holy Cross Energy, represented by Alan
Richman. Other HC reps are here to discuss the history of the property. The
application is to rezone the property and to create a site specific planned unit
development. The Applicant plans to gain land use approvals and then sell
the property.
Last month, the PZ Commission voted 4-1 to recommend City Council vet —
approve the application. �V rG
1. Lot Features
a. Trails (revocable easements)
b. Slopes
c. Split Zoning
d. 32,000 square feet
2. Application Request
a. Rezone to R-30 with a PUD Overlay
�p 1. Conservation Zone District's setbacks are designed for
'a 10-acre lot — the minimum size in the zone district —
(��b ` overlap on this .75 acre lot, leaving virtually no use of
the property.
p 2. Bring the lot into conformance with the LUC.
3. Uses allowed in Conservation Zone District are ...,
detached single family residence —also allowed in R-
30.
Staff suggested this approach rather going to BOA for
setback variances so the City could require a
permanent, non -revokable easement for the trail, and
maintenance of the retaining walls and support
structures for Castle Creek Bridge.
b. Site Specific PUD
1. The PUD allows the applicant and City to create a
building envelope in the best location available through
establishing setbacks, etc.
2. The proposed dimensions for the PUD are more
restrictive than the Conservation Zone District in terms
Ben Ludlow, 03:32 PM 5/18/01000, Holy Moly Property • Page 1 of 1
X-Sender: benl@comdev
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58
Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 15:32:34 -0600
To: nick)@ci.aspen. co. us
From: Ben Ludlow <benl@ci.aspen.co.us>
Subject: Holy Moly Property
Nick,
Being the hardworking individual that I am (better stop laughing 'cause I can here it from my
desk), I have reviewed the letter form Alan Richman about the Utility plan for the Holy Moly
(Cross) Energy with the Nick Adeh. There are a few things that Engineering would like to
clarify. First of all, the proposed area for the Utility Easement is subject to approval by the
Parks Department and the Engineering Department will support them either way they
decide. Secondly, we would like to see in writing a mention of the proposed Unconditional
Easement for the Retaining Walls along Power Plant Road. This is not mentioned and
needs to be addressed per the agreement that was achieved by the site visit that was made
around the beginning of May. Also, we as spokes persons for HPC would like Holy Moly to
understand that the rock that is currently located at 34.75682 ft due North and 15.74643 ft
due West of the Extreme Northern edge of the existing retaining wall not be disturbed as
we have found from old pictures on record that the subject rock was indeed in place during
the original townsite survey and is duly noted so. This rock is approximately 4.344565 cm
in diameter and kind of looks like a funny shaped football that has been ran over by a car
leaving it inflated but with a huge goiter -like obtrusion on the extreme tip. If you have any
further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me unless it involves anything about
that rock. In this matter you will need to go to HPC for approval.
later,
ben
Printed for Nick Lelack <nickl@ci.aspen.co.us> 5/22/00
ASPEN/PITKIN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Agreement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees
CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and���►
(hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for &Zo �r-, -,� `' n
v
(hereinafter, THE PROJECT).
APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 49 (Series of 1998)
establishes a 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 Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning
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 1p a determination of application completeness. APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the
amount of $041-0 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. 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
A0\.1 CK,o55 �...e2
G>�
By : �- By:
: --
ie Ann Woods ar
ommunity Development Director Date: ( Z'10—�%
Mailing Address:
ter,:�5 ,-CD- t��a
MEMORANDUM
To: Chris Bendon, Planner
From: Ben Ludlow, Project Engineer
Reference DRC Caseload Coordinator
Date: April 7, 2000
Re: Holy Cross Rezoning and PUD
The Development Review Committee has reviewed the Holy Cross Rezoning and PUD
application at their March 29, 2000 meeting, and has compiled the following comments:
General
1. Sufficiency of Submittal: DRC comments are based on the fact that we believe
that the submitted site plan is accurate, that it shows all site features, and that it is
feasible. The wording must be carried forward exactly as written unless prior consent is
received from the Engineering Department. This is to alleviate problems related to
approvals tied to "issuance of building permit."
2. R.O.W. Impacts: If there are any encroachments into the public rights -of -way,
the encroachment must either be removed or be subject to current encroachment
license requirements.
Site Review
1. Site Drainage — Requirement — A drainage report was not submitted with the
application. The site development approvals must include the requirement meeting
runoff design standards of the Land Use Code at Sec. 26.580.020.A.6.a and a
requirement that, prior to the building permit application, a drainage mitigation plan
(24"x36" size plan sheet or on the lot grading plan) must meet the requirements of the
Engineering Department Interim Design Standards and must be submitted for review
and approval by the Engineering Department. The mitigation plan must also address the
temporary sediment control and containment plan for the construction phase. If drywells
are an acceptable solution for site drainage, a soils report must be provided with a
percolation test to verify the feasibility of this type of system. Drywells have depths well
below depth of frost (10' minimum) to function in cold weather. The drainage plan must
contain a statement specifying the routine maintenance required by property owner(s) to
ensure continued and proper performance. Drywells may not be placed within public
right of way or utility easements. The foundation drainage system should be separate
from storm drainage, must be detained and routed on site, and must be shown on
drainage plans prior to application for building permit. The drainage may be conveyed to
existing landscaped areas if the drainage report demonstrates that the percolation rate
and the detention volume meet the design storm.
Page 2 of 4
04/07/00
Holy Cross Energy Property
Information — The City drainage criteria needs to be implemented. This
includes but is not limited to erosion control, soil stabilization, and vegetation
disturbance. Also, there needs to be an analysis of where the drainage will flow and
what adverse affects may arise from potential mud and debris flow.
2. Community Development — Information — The following request was provided
by the Planning Department:
a. The applicant may needs to look at a landscaping plan that that would
provide vegetation between the two remaining bike paths.
b. It would be beneficial to allow a trail on the top of the slope between the
house and Power Plant Road.
c. It may be useful to take vacated Cemetery Lane as the driveway instead of
the proposed area.
3. Fire Protection District — Information — The following information has been
provided by the Aspen Fire Protection District:
a. Due to the distance of the proposed structure from any fire hydrants, it may
be required that the structure be equipped with a full residential sprinkler
system.
4. Streets Department — Requirement - As of the request of the Streets
Department revisions need to be made as follows:
a. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A
washed rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction.
5. Parks — Requirement — The following information has been provided by the
Parks Department:
a. It would be beneficial if a trail easement could be maintained east-northeast
of the house along the toe of the slope.
b. Easements need to be shown on the plat.
c. The parks department needs more information about plans for water for the
house.
d. There may need to be sagebrush mitigation at the project location. It would
also be most beneficial to keep the native vegetation on the slopes.
e. The idea of planting Spruce trees may not work in the project location due to
the soil characteristics.
6. Engineering — Requirement — The following requirements have been provided by
the Engineering Department:
a. ROW permits and Encroachment licenses will be required during
construction if applicable.
b. A Fugitive dust control permit will be required during construction.
• •
Page 3 of 4
04/07/00
Holy Cross Energy Property
C. A 15 ft. easement at the toe of slope at Power Plant Rd would need to be
granted for the purpose of the retaining wall removal and repair in the
future.
d. Slope stabilization, erosion control, and sediment control measures need
to be implemented before, during and after construction.
e. The building access via the planned drive is geometrically challenging
from the standpoint of traffic control. Other options need to be looked at
for the driveway.
f. A geotechnical study is very important to learn the characteristics of the
soil in the location to see what, if any, adverse affects may result.
7. Utilities: A utility plan needs to be submitted before any real comments and
conclusions can be drawn by the utility companies.
- Water:
City Water Department - Requirement — The following information was given
by the City of Aspen Water Department:
a. All uses and construction will comply with the City of Aspen Water
System Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8
(Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen
Municipal code as they pertain to utilities.
b. The nearest water service would have to come through Bugsy
Barnard Park. This may also then require an easement through
adjacent property owner's property.
c. The closest fire hydrant is located at the intersection of Power Plant
Rd. and Cemetery Lane, or at the ground elevation of the City Shop.
d. There is an old penstock easement, which may pass through the
property, which goes to the City Shop. This easement needs to be
shown and the proposed building needs to avoid the easement.
- Wastewater:
Aspen Consolidated Waste District - Information — As a request of the
Consolidated Waste District, revisions need to be made as follows:
a. A set of drainage plans needs to be provided to Peg at ACSD so that
an estimate of fees can be processed.
b. There is a manhole near the southwest corner of the property that is
not shown on the improvement survey. This needs to be shown
because it may be close to the planned structure.
c. The best source of service would be the aforementioned manhole that
would require the use of a pump.
- Construction:
Work in the Public Right of Way - Requirement — Given the continuous
problems of unapproved work and development in public rights -of -way adjacent
to private property, we advise the applicant as follows:
Page 4 of 4
04/07/00
Holy Cross Energy Property
Approvals
1. Engineering: The applicant receives approval from the City Engineering
Department (920-5080) for design of improvements, including
grading, drainage, transportation/streets, landscaping, and
encroachments within public right of way.
2. Parks: The applicant receives approval from the Parks Department (920-
5120) for vegetation species and for public trail disturbance.
3. Streets: The applicant receives approval from the Streets department
(920-5130) for mailboxes, finished pavement, surface materials on
streets, and alleyways.
4. Permits: Obtain R.O.W. permits for any work or development, involving
street cuts and landscaping from the Engineering Department.
DRC Attendees
Staff: Mark O'Meara Applicant's Representative: Alan Richmond
Ed Van Walraven
Ben Ludlow
Nick Adeh
John Krueger
Joyce Ohlson
Tom Bracewell
Nick Lelack
Scott Chism
Julie Ann Woods
Tom Bracewell
0
ril" R<oft"
Tex 3613 ,044AC c, eelenad Y1612
May 3, 2000
Mr. Nick Lelack, Planner
City of Aspen
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
;VfaKcsur y Senvie"
P4weI94x (970) 920-1125
RE: UTILITY PLAN FOR HOLY CROSS ENERGY PROPERTY
Dear Nick,
Attached please find a letter prepared by Charlie Berger of High Country Engineering,
providing a utility plan for the Holy Cross Energy property located near the Castle Creek
Bridge. In preparing this plan, Mr. Berger has made contacts with the applicable utility
providers, reviewed pertinent maps, and inspected the property in the field. A title search
was also conducted, to see if there are any utility easements crossing surrounding properties
that could serve this property.
Mr. Berger determined that the necessary utilities are located within property owned by the
City, located just to the west of the subject property. The most logical alignment for these
utilities would be to place them under or alongside the existing biking/running trail that runs
through the City's property, as shown in the attached sketch.
:ioly Cross Energy is hereby requesting that as part of its land use application, the City
consider granting, a utility easement to Holy Cross Energy in the most appropriate alignment
beneath or alongside the trail. In exchange for obtaining this easement, Holy Cross Energy
would agree that following the installation of utilities, it would fully reconstruct the section
of the trail that it disturbs on the City's property. Moreover, Holy Cross will also agree to
rebuild the relatively steeply sloping section of the trail on Holy Cross' property that is
parallel to/beneath Highway 82, to create a more gradual grade.
You will recall that during our Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting on March
29, a representative of the Parks Department stated that it would be desirable for this
section of the trail to be rebuilt, to improve safety in what is now a narrow, steep section
iced by bikes and pedestrians. Holy Cross would agree to accomplish this improvement at
its cost as a condition of receiving this easement, and would work with the Parks
Department to build the trail to meet reasonable City standards with respect to materials,
width, and grade:
Mr. Nick Lelack
May 3, 2000
Page Two
As you know, Holy Cross Energy does not plan to develop the proposed residence on this
property. Instead, its plans are to sell the property to a third party for development.
However, as a condition of obtaining this easement, Holy Cross Energy will commit to being
the entity that installs the utilities and rebuilds the trail, and it will complete these
improvements before a building permit is issued for the residence. Moreover, Holy Cross
Energy agrees to complete the improvements at a time during the year when the City
determines this construction would minimize impacts on trail users. Since Holy Cross
Energy has extensive experience installing utilities, we believe this is a commitment that
should have considerable meaning for the City, and is an important assurance that Holy
Cross is committed to delivering this trail to the public for their continued use in perpetuity.
I believe this provides you all of the information that was requested at the DRC meeting.
Please let me know if you require anything else as you review this application.
Very truly yours,
Alan Richman, AICP
•
April 28, 2000
Alan Richman
P.O. Box 3613
Aspen, Colorado 81612
Re: Holy Cross Energy Residential Property
HCE File Number 2000019.01
Dear Alan:
High Country Engineering, Inc. (HCE) has completed a preliminary investigation of the
availability of water, sewer, and shallow utilities for the Holy Cross Energy residential property
located at the northwest corner of the Castle Creek Bridge.
Based on field investigation and conversations with the respective utility departments, HCE has
determined that the most practical and economical location to tie into the existing utilities is at
the southwest corner of the property. All of the necessary utilities are located within City of
Aspen property to the west of the subject property, running in a north/south direction. A
privately owned residential lot separates the city property and subject property. The title
company found no recorded utility easements in place that would allow legal access to all of the
necessary utilities. We did not find any available utilities within the Power Plant road right-of-
way on the east side of the subject property.
An agreement with the City of Aspen and the adjacent lot owner for a utility easement would
allow for the most practical resolution, allowing for a direct connection to the existing utilities. A
second alternative is to reach an agreement with the City of Aspen for the utility easement and
run the services to the south of the private lot through Highway 82 right-of-way and apply for a
utility permit from the State. We recommend that either the trail or the area to the east of the
trail within the City of Aspen property be followed to allow for minimal impact to park land
vegetation as well as minimize conflict with other existing utilities.
The water department has indicated that the water tap should be placed on the downstream side
of the pressure -reducing valve (prv) located within the City of Aspen property. This means a tie-
in within the Highway 82 right-of-way is not possible. Therefore, we propose a tie-in on the City
of Aspen property and running the service down the proposed easement following the trail
923 Cooper Avenue 141nverness Drive East, Ste B-144
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Englewood, CO 80112
phone 970 945-8676 • far 970 945-2555 phone 303 925-0544 • fax 303 925-0547
•
•
Alan Richman
Page 2
April 28, 2000
alignment. For sewer, a pump will be required to lift the sewer service to the existing sewer line
and can tie in at a location within the Highway 82 right-of-way. Electric and telephone is
available at the end of Barnard Park Court and can follow the same alignment as the water
service within or next to the trail. Gas service parallels the sewer alignment on its east side and a
tie-in should be possible within the Hwy 82 right-of-way.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact us.
Sincerely,
HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC.
R 1 4- .. -
Charlie R. Berger, E.I.
Project Engineer
CRB/blf
1,
r
N 3 4
S' OF CORNER
FL 700.3. 1
\vy
> CAR
PQRI
HOUSt:
(D
C-1
CALCULATED AREA
Al.
Aippo-CoX.
WA-TE eUtjE
Lb LA -T
A�PRoX
Locpmov,1 A
AM
we?_ i,_ttz c
LS 9 8 N
0. 7 F C
EL. 905.
PE'CK 7903.5
Y�
II� :�
Gj
l�
j 1 .�
LS 9018
0. 8, OF
----H8IGH2-
WAY
HOLY CROSS ENERGY PROPERTY
TRAIL' S REFERRAL COMMENTS
The Castle Creek Bridge pedestrian underpass and trails are critical connections in Aspen's trail
system. We appreciate the applicant working with the City of Aspen to maintain them in a
permanent manner. If there were an opportunity, the City of Aspen would like to keep all trails
and easements on the property as they provide important trail links. If there is a creative way for
the applicant in the design of the lot and building to maintain or relocate the trail link to Power
Plant Road, the City of Aspen would prefer this option.
The Parks Department would like to be consulted in the design of the trail, retaining wall, and
landscape screening for the trail parallel to HWY 82. It is important for the trail to meet the City
of Aspen standards in design and construction to make this trail a safe and pleasant trail
experience for all users. Landscape screening between the house and trail would be preferable.
The Parks Department also, recommends that the current trail easement agreement and the new
trail easement agreement be reviewed by the City Attorney for appropriate language and form. A
legal description of the trail easement must be part of the trail easement agreement and shown on
the final plat
C:\home\attach\HOLY CROSS ENERGY PROPERTY.doc
•
•
April 28, 2000
Alan Richman
P.O. Box 3613
Aspen, Colorado 81612
Re: Holy Cross Energy Residential Property
HCE File Number 2000019.01
Dear Alan:
High Country Engineering, Inc. (HCE) has completed a preliminary investigation of the
availability of water, sewer, and shallow utilities for the Holy Cross Energy residential property
located at the northwest corner of the Castle Creek Bridge.
Based on field investigation and conversations with the respective utility departments, HCE has
determined that the most practical and economical location to tie into the existing utilities is at
the southwest corner of the property. All of the necessary utilities are located within City of
Aspen property to the west of the subject property, running in a north/south direction. A
privately owned residential lot separates the city property and subject property. The title
company found no recorded utility easements in place that would allow legal access to all of the
necessary utilities. We did not find any available utilities within the Power Plant road right-of-
way on the east side of the subject property.
An agreement with the City of Aspen and the adjacent lot owner for a utility easement would
allow for the most practical resolution, allowing for a direct connection to the existing utilities. A
second alternative is to reach an agreement with the City of Aspen for the utility easement and
run the services to the south of the private lot through Highway 82 right-of-way and apply for a
utility permit from the State. We recommend that either the trail or the area to the east of the
trail within the City of Aspen property be followed to allow for minimal impact to park land
vegetation as well as minimize conflict with other existing utilities.
The water department has indicated that the water tap should be placed on the downstream side
of the pressure -reducing valve (prv) located within the City of Aspen property. This means a tie-
in within the Highway 82 right-of-way is not possible. Therefore, we propose a tie-in on the City
of Aspen property and running the service down the proposed easement following the trail
923 Cooper Avenue 141nverness Drive East, Ste B-144
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601 Englewood, CO 80112
phone 970 94-5-8676 • fax 970 945-255.5 phone 303 925-0544 • far 303 925-0547
0
•
Alan Richman
Page 2
April 28, 2000
alignment. For sewer, a pump will be required to lift the sewer service to the existing sewer line
and can tie in at a location within the Highway 82 right-of-way. Electric and telephone is
available at the end of Barnard Park Court and can follow the same alignment as the water
service within or next to the trail. Gas service parallels the sewer alignment on its east side and a
tie-in should be possible within the Hwy 82 right-of-way.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact us.
Sincerely,
HIGH COUNTRY ENGINEERING, INC.
R 1 4- .. -
Charlie R. Berger, E.I.
Project Engineer
CRB/blf
•
Aspen Consolidated sanitation District
Sy Kelly * Chairman
Paul Smith * Treas
Michael Kelly * Secy
April 4, 2000
Nick Lelack
Community Development
130 S. Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: Holy Cross Energy Property
Dear Nick:
John Keleher
Frank Loushin
Bruce Matherly, Mgr
The property being considered lies within our service area and service would be available by
pumping up to the District line that is located in Barnard Park Court. A manhole is located near
the proposed southwest corner of the building envelope. A map is attached which shows the
location of the public line relative to the proposed building envelope.
A utility plan for the parcel should be developed prior to approval of the application since the
development approval is being sought to make the parcel most marketable. The location and
depth of our line will probably affect future building decisions.
As usual, service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and
specifications, which are on file at the District office. System impacts will be evaluated at the time
that building is about to occur. All connection fees must be paid prior to the issuance of a building
permit. We currently have capacity to serve the project.
Please call if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
l
Bruce Matherly
District Manager
565 N. Mill St.,Aspen, CO 81611 / (970)925-3601 / FAX (970) 925-2537
MY
4
J
HOLY CROSS ENERGY PROPERTY
A R C H I T E C T S
119 SOUTH SPRING STREET
A S P E N, COLORADO 8 1 6 1 1
( Phone) (970) 925-2100 (Fax) (970) 925-2258
(e-mail) sba@9trykerbrown.com
HOLY CROSS
ENERGY
POWER PLANT ROAD
ASPEN, COLORADO
CITY ZONING
SUBMISSION
2.24.2000
These illustrations are
intended to give a
general idea of the potential
for this site. These drawings
are not intended for
construction. They are for
demonstration only.
These documents have been prepared
specifically for this zoning approval
for the Holy Cross Project.
They are not suitable for use for building
permits submission, on other
projects or in other locations without
the approval and participation of the
Architect. Reproduction is prohibited.
(0 2000 Stryker /brown ARCHITECTS
SITE PLAN
SCALE: 1 "=40'
Aml