Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ca.130 S Galena HPC Jurisdiction.0013.2009 AO THE CITY OF ASPEN City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NUMBER 0013.2009.ASLU PARCEL ID NUMBERS 2735 12 4 46 801 PROJECTS ADDRESS 130 S GALENA ST PLANNER SARA ADAMS CASE DESCRIPTION HPC JURISDICTION CODE AMENDMENT REPRESENTATIVE DOUGLAS PRATTE DATE OF FINAL ACTION 3/24/09 CLOSED BY ANGELA SCOREY ON: 3.28.13 2Z35�-12" col3 .2009 -As L_V( I 3 File Edit Record Navigate Form Reports Format Tab Help JMTValuation Custom Fields Actions Fees Parcel Fee Summary Sub Permits Attachments I Routing Status Routing History a Permit Type aslu -.Aspen Land Use Permit +0013.2009.A5LU H Address 130 5 GALENA 5T Z- AptJSuite o I City ASPEN State CO . zip 81611 2 °x Permit Information --- - -- Master Permit I ] Routing Queue aslu07 Applied 02]24/2009 J Project c Status pending Approved F—J Description HPC JURISDICTION-CODE AMENDMENT Issued F--El Final I �J Submitted CITY OF ASPEN Clock Running Days F0 Expires /19/2010 J ner — Last Name CITY OF ASPEN ] First Name CITY HALL 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN CO 81611 Phone ry Owner Is Applicant? Applicant ------- Last Name ICITY OF ASPEN First Name ICITY HALL 130 5 GALENA 5T ASPEN COB 1611 Phone Cost� 28514 Lender Last Name First Name Phone Permit lenders full address AspenG App4azhw, J0 0 ORDINANCE No. 33 (Series of 2012) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 26.415—HISTORIC PRESERVATION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 26.208 and 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the Community Development Department to explore code amendments related to the applicability of Land Use Code Chapter 26.415 to properties within a designated Historic District; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall begin with Public Outreach, a Policy Resolution reviewed and acted on by City Council, and then final action by City Council after reviewing and considering the recommendation from the Community Development; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(1), the Community Development Department conducted Public Outreach, including three small group meetings, an Open City Hall Forum, an on-line survey, and individual letters from members of the public, to gain feedback from the community on potential code changes to the Commercial Core Historic District; and, WHEREAS, more than 200 individuals were engaged in the Public Outreach process; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on August 27, 2012, the City Council approved a Policy Resolution, Resolution 82, Series of 2012, directing staff to process code amendments related to heights and land uses in the downtown, by a three - two (3 - 2) vote; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the City of Aspen Land Use Code Sections 26.415 — Historic Preservation; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed the proposed code amendments and finds that the amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310.050; and, WHEREAS,the Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,COLORADO THAT: Section 1: 26.415.015—Applicability, shall be added to Chapter 26.415 follows: City Council Ord.433 of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 1 of 7 26.415.015 Applicability. This Chapter applies to all properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures and to all properties located within the boundaries of a Historic District, including rights-of-way within Historic Districts as specified in Section 26.415.060. Section 2: 26.415.020—Definitions, shall be amended as follows: 26.415.020. Definitions. The following definitions are specific to the terms as used in this Chapter and in the field of historic preservation: Alteration. A change to an existing building, structure or feature that modifies its original appearance or construction. Certificate of appropriateness. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed work on a designated historic property is compatible with its historic and architectural character and, therefore, the work may be completed as specified in the certificate and the City may issue any permits needed to do the work specified in the certificate. Certificate of demolition approval. An official form issued by the City authorizing the issuance of a demolition permit for a designated historic property or for a building or structure located in a designated Historic District. Certificate of economic hardship. An official form issued by the City, in connection with a certificate of demolition approval, that allows the demolition of a designated historic property as the owner has demonstrated that maintaining it will impose an economic hardship. Certificate of no negative effect. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed work will have no detrimental effect on the character-defining features of a designated property and, therefore, the work may proceed as specified in the certificate without obtaining further approvals under this Chapter and the City may issue any permits needed to do the work in the specified certificate. Contributing resource. A building, site, structure or object that adds to the historic associations, historic architectural qualities or archaeological values for which a property is considered significant. Designated property. An individual property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. Historic District. A collection, concentration, linkage or continuity of buildings, structures, sites or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development that is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures including designated properties, contributing resources, and noncontributing resources located within the boundaries of a Historic District pursuant to the Official Gone District Map. City Council Ord.#33 of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 2 of 7 Historic context paper. Research papers that define Aspen's architectural and cultural patterns in the context of local and national history. Historic context papers are used to guide staff, the Historic Preservation Commission and City Council in determining the historic significance of structures and properties in the City of Aspen. Integrity. The ability of a property to convey its significance relative to the aspects of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association. Monitoring committee. A subcommittee appointed by the Historic Preservation Commission of up to two (2) Commission members and the Historic Preservation Officer to provide oversight in the implementation of rehabilitation. Noncontributing resource. A building, structure, site or object that does not add to the historic architectural qualities or historic associations for which a property is significant because it was not present during the period of significance or does not relate to the documented significance; or due to alterations, additions, disturbances or other changes, it no longer possesses historic integrity. Object. A term used to distinguish buildings and structures from those constructions that are primarily artistic in nature or small in scale and simply constructed. It may be by nature or design movable, but it is associated with a specific setting and environment. Rehabilitation. Making a building or structure sound and usable without attempting to restore it to a particular period appearance, while retaining the character-defining features. Relocation. Moving a building or structure from its original, historically significant or existing location to another location. Repair. To restore to a sound or good state after decay, dilapidation or partial destruction. Restore. The repair or recreation of the original architectural elements or features of an historic property so that it resembles an appearance it had at some previous point in time. Significance. The documented importance of a property for its contribution to or representation of broad patterns of national, regional or local history, architecture, engineering, archaeology and culture. Site. The location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity or a building or structure, whether standing, ruined or vanished, where the location itself possesses historic, cultural or archaeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure. Structure. A term used to distinguish from buildings those functional constructions made for purposes other than creating human shelter. (Ord. 1-2002, §7 [part]; Ord.No. 28 -2010, §1) City Council Ord.#33 of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 3 of 7 Section 3: 26.415.060 - Effect of designation, shall be amended as follows: 26.415.060. Effect of designation or inclusion within a Historic District. A. Approvals required. Any development involving properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, as an individual property or located within the boundaries of a Historic District, unless determined exempt, requires the approval of a development order and either a certificate of no negative effect or a certificate of appropriateness before a building permit or any other work authorization will be issued by the City. HPC shall provide referral comments for major projects to rights-of-way located within the boundaries of a Historic District. Section 4: 26.415.070 — Development involving designated historic property, shall be amended as follows: 26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property or property within a Historic District. No building, structure or landscape shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or a property located within a Historic District until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a development order. 1. (Ord. No. 1-2002, § 7 [part]; Ord. 43, 2004, § 3; Ord.No. 28 -2010, §1; Ord. No. 3-2012, §22 & 23) Section 5: 26.415.080 - Demolition of designated historic properties, shall be amended as follows: 26.415.080 Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a Historic District. It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently no demolition of properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards set forth in this Section.-- - A. Procedures for considering requests for demolition of designated properties or properties within a Historic District. 1. An application for a demolition permit for designated properties or properties within a Historic District will be filed with or referred to the Community Development Director by the Chief Building Official. The applicant will be provided a written response within City Council Ord.#33 of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 4 of 7 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - fourteen (14) days of the request for a demolition permit describing the submittal materials needed for consideration. 2. An application for demolition approval shall include: a) The general application information requested in Section 26.304.030 and written documentation that the Chief Building Official has determined the building an imminent hazard or b) Narrative text, graphic illustrations or other exhibits that provide evidence that the building, structure or object is of no historic or architectural value or importance. 3.- When complete application materials areorr file, a-public-hearing before the HPC shall be scheduled. Notice for the hearing will include publication, mailing and posting pursuant to Section 26.304.060.E.3 Paragraphs a, b and c. The staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a staff report that analyzes the request relative to the criteria for approval. 4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or Historic District in which it is located and -b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. 5. The HPC shall approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to consider the demolition request. 6. If the HPC approves the demolition request then a resolution of the HPC action will be forwarded to the City Council in accordance with Section 26.415.120 and no demolition City Council Ord.#33 of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 5 of 7 permit will be issued until the thirty (30) day "call up" period by City Council has expired. 7. If the demolition request is denied because it does not meet the aforementioned standards, the applicant may request demolition approval based upon a finding of "economic hardship," as set forth below. 8. Before a demolition permit will be issued, a certificate of appropriateness for the redevelopment or reuse plan, as provided for in Subsection 26.415.070.D, must be approved. When a demolition permit must be issued because the building, structure or object is an imminent hazard or because of the issuance of a certificate of economic hardship, the permit may be received prior to the approval of an acceptable reuse plan. Section 6: 26.415.110—Benefits, shall be amended as follows: 26.415.110. Benefits. - - - - - - - The City is committed to providing support to property owners to assist their efforts to maintain, preserve and enhance their historic properties. Recognizing that these properties are valuable community assets is the basic premise underlying the provision of special procedures and programs for designated historic properties and districts. Benefits to encourage good historic preservation practices by the owners of historic properties are an important aspect of Aspen's historic preservation program. Historic resources are a valuable community asset and their continued protection is the basic premise supporting the creation of an innovative package of preservation tools that are unlike any other in the country. Aspen's preservation benefits are in response to tight historic preservation controls that have been legislated by the City since 1972. The Community Development Department and Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) are dedicated to assisting property owners in renovating and maintaining their property. Aspen is unique. Its historic resources and spirit of community have not been duplicated anywhere else in the world. It is this basic character that has helped make the City both economically vital and cherished by many. Only designated properties may be eligible for the following benefits. Section 7: 26.415.110.1)—Benefits- Parking, shall be amended as follows. D. Parking. Parking reductions are permitted for designated historic properties on sites unable to contain the number of on-site parking spaces required by the underlying zoning. Commercial designated historic properties may receive waivers of payment-in-lieu fees for parking reductions. In addition to the review criteria listed in Chapter 26.515, the parking reduction and waiver of payment-in-lieu fees may be approved upon a finding by the HPC that it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural character of a designated historic property, an adjoining designated property or a historic district. City Council Ord.#33 of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 6 of 7 Section 8• The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance,to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 9• A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 10`h day of December, 2012, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED,READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 26th day of November,2012. Attest: athryn S. ch,City Clerk Michael C. Ireland,Nfayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 10th day of December,2012. Attest: 4�4 Kathryn S.,- och,City Clerk Michael . Ireland,Mayor Approved as to form: ames R. True,City Attorney City Council Ord. 433 of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 7 of 7 Ad Name: 8642050A LEGAL NOTICE ORDINANCE M33 2012 PUBLIC HEARING Ordinance#33,Series of 2012,was adopted on Customer: Aspen (LEGALS) City of first reading at the City Council meeting November 26,2012. This ordinance,if adopted,will approve Your account number: 1013028 a code amendment to clean up language stating that all properties within historic districts shall meet requirements in Chapter 26.415 Historic Preserva- tion. The public hearing on this ordinance is PROOF OF PUBLICATION hall,e 30 South Galenaher 10,2012 at 5 PM,City To see the entire text,go to the city's legal notice website hftn:llwww.asoenoi[kin.com/Deoartments/Clerk/ Legal-Notices/ If you would like a copy FAXed,mailed or e-mailed to you,call the city clerk's office,429-2686. Published in the Aspen Times Weekly on Novem- ber 29,2012. [8642050] STATE OF COLORADO, COUNTY OF PITKIN I,Jim Morgan,do solemnly swear that I am General Manager of the ASPEN TIMES WEEKLY, that the same weekly newspaper printed, in whole or in part and published in the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, and has a general circulation therein;that said newspaper has been published continuously and uninterruptedly in said County of Pitkin for a period of more than fifty-two consecutive weeks next prior to the first publication of the annexed legal notice or advertisement. The Aspen Times is an accepted legal advertising medium, only for jurisdictions operating under Colorado's Home Rule provision. That the annexed legal notice or advertisement was published in the regular and entire issue of every number of said daily newspaper for the period of 1 consecutive insertions;and that the first publication of said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated 11/29/2012 and that the last publication of said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated 11/29/2012. In witness whereof,I have here unto set my hand this 12/06/2012. Jim Morgan,General Manager Subscribed and sworn to before me,a notary public in and for the County of Garfield,State of Colorado this 12/06/2012. Mary E.Borkenhagen,Notary Public Commission expires:September 12,2015 a NP��:p01gRr,y�Z% �• A(/BLIC '�j,!p0.F COLO�P;;mob /r? V7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: �jV . 20 t Z STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) � ( me, please print) I, �&F3f being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. _ Posting of notice: By posting of notice,which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the_day of , 20_,to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing.. A copy of the o ii,ners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (Continued on next page) Rezoning or text amendment: Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However,the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Sign Th f geg�oing Notice" was acknowledged before me this day , 20/Z, by .. WeA,L/ii�_YA) I PUBLIC NOTICE RE: Code Amendments to the City of Aspen WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL , Land nd Use Code(Title 26),related to the Historic Preservation Chapter 26.415. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday,December Cit2012,to My commission expires. begin at 5:00 p.m.before the Aspen City Council, V 19 Council Chambers.C tv Nall,130 S.Galena St.. Aspen,to consider a code amendment to Title 2C, :he City of Aspen Land Use sery .c c!a na he ae- pllcabildty of the Historic PreservationC�ape, e- P040d1iA)'.°y ated to non-iandmarked bu doing within des gnat- eo Hd .Sar Districts.d a For urtner�en Co ion. Notary Public contact Sarz Adams ,�.e t�c-Aspen CJmme- nity CevcToomenl'epartment. a0 S.Galena St.. Aspen,CC 970.429277 0.for by email saraad- ams's-awotaspen-court. - sivfichaei Breland Nlavor Aspen Clty Council ubiisned in the Aspen Tlmes on November12 � .,95132551 ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: • COPY OF THE PUBLICATION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENT AGENGIES NOTIED BY MAIL * APPLICANT CERTICICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Aspen City Council FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director 36 RE: Code Amendment — Chapter 26.415 Historic Preservation — Second Reading of Ordinance#33, Series of 2012—public hearing MEETING DATE: December 10, 2012 SUMMARY: The attached Ordinance includes proposed code amendment clarifying the applicability of non- designated properties within Historic Districts based on Council direction provided as part of the Policy Resolution passed August 27, 2012. The objective of the proposed code amendment is to clean up language stating that all properties within the Historic Districts shall meet the requirements in Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation. A redline version of the proposed changes are included as Exhibit B. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Ordinance. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: This is the second reading on proposed code amendments for Historic Districts. Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.310, City Council is the final review authority for all code amendments. All code amendments are subject to a three-step process. This is the third step in the process: 1. Public Outreach 2. Policy Resolution by City Council indicating if an amendment should the pursued 3. Public Hearings on Ordinance outlining specific code amendments. BACKGROUND& OVERVIEW: Questions regarding the applicability of non-designated properties related to Land Use Code Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation, were raised in 2011 during the Benton Building/Little Annie's development application (517 and 521 E. Hyman Avenue). The applicant challenged whether non-designated properties are included on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures and as such are subject to demolition review by the Historic Preservation Commission. This discussion pointed out areas in the Code that could be simplified and clarified. Staff Memo, 12/10/12 Code Amendment—Historic Districts Page 1 of 3 A Historic District is a collection of buildings that are related historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development. Aspen's Historic Districts are comprised of individually designated properties, properties that contribute to the significance of the Historic District, and properties that are considered noncontributing resources to the Historic District. These buildings all play a role in the integrity of the District and all require review by the HPC to ensure consistency with traditional development patterns. Since the inception of the Commercial Core Historic District in 1972, all properties within the District have been subject to design and demolition review by the Historic Preservation Commission, which is consistent with historic preservation programs throughout the county on local, state and national levels. There are many examples of HPC exercising its jurisdiction to review applications for Demolition of structures located within a Historic District, but not individually designated properties. The most recent reviews include: 435 W. Main (Aspen Jewish Community Center) 2005 434 E. Cooper (Bidwell) 2006 308 E. Hopkins (La Cocina), 2006 508 E. Cooper Avenue (Cooper Street Pier), 2006 420/422 E. Hopkins (Fire Station), 2007 517 E. Hyman (Little Annie's), 2012 521 E. Hyman (Benton Buiding), 2012 Council directed Staff to clarify the language regarding Historic District review concurrent with changes to the Commercial Core Historic District. The proposed amendment does not change HPC's jurisdiction; rather it clarifies the Code language to better reflect the applicability of the Historic Preservation Chapter to non-designated properties within Historic Districts. PROPOSED AMENDMENT(A REDLINE VERSION IS ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT B): Section 1: This is a new section that clarifies the applicability of the Chapter to both properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures and all properties, including rights of way, within a Historic District. Section 2: Changes include clarifications to the definitions of the following terms: contributing resource, designated property, historic district, and noncontributing resource. Section 3: This section addresses the effect of being designated, which already includes properties located in historic districts. The proposed change adds Historic District to the heading for clarity. It also clarifies that major projects involving rights-of-way within Historic District boundaries require referral comments from HPC, which is consistent with current practice. Section 4: This section addresses review process and criteria for development involving historic properties. The proposed change clarifies that this section applies to properties Staff Memo, 12/10/12 Code Amendment—Historic Districts Page 2 of 3 within historic districts. It also clarifies that development involving landscapes on historic properties or properties within a Historic District is under HPC's purview. Landscapes are considered part of the property designation and have always been reviewed by Staff or HPC pursuant to the adopted Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. Section 5: This section addresses review criteria for demolition. The proposed change clarifies that this section applies to properties within historic districts. Section 6: This section outlines all incentives available to historic properties. The proposed change clarifies that the benefits do not apply to non-designated properties within historic districts. Section 7: This section cleans up and clarifies the applicable review criteria regarding parking reductions on landmark properties. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes that the project is consistent with the applicable review standards in the City Land Use Code. Staff recommends approval of the code amendment. RECOMMENDED MOTION(ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No. 33, Series of 2012, approving the proposed Code Amendment on second reading." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Ordinance # 33, Series of 2012 ATTACHMENTS: EXHIBIT A— Review criteria Exhibit B—Redline version of Code changes. Staff Memo, 12/10/12 Code Amendment—Historic Districts Page 3 of 3 Exhibit A: Staff Findings 26.310.050 Amendments to the Land Use Code Standards of review - Adoption. In reviewing an application to amend the text of this Title, per Section 26.310.020(B)(3), Step Three—Public Hearing before City Council, the City Council shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. Staff Findings: The proposed code amendment is consistent with the Land Use Code. The amendment proposes to clarify the HPC's jurisdiction over properties located within designated Historic Districts. -These changes are-consistent with city policy and the Land Use Code. Staff finds this criterion to be met. B. Whether the proposed amendment achieves the policy, community goal, or objective cited as reasons for the code amendment or achieves other public policy objectives. Staff Findings: The stated reason for the code amendment is to clarify HPC's jurisdiction over properties located within Historic Districts in order to ensure that all development within Districts is consistent with the historic pattern established downtown. The AACP calls for code amendments that "ensure that City codes support the historic integrity of designated structures and ensure compatibility with the surrounding context in terms of site coverage, mass, scale, height and form." (Historic Preservation Chapter Part II.1.) Clarifying HPC purview over all properties within Historic Districts in an effort to protect contributing and designated buildings within Districts furthers this goal. Staff finds this criterion to be met. C. Whether the objectives of the proposed amendment are compatible with the community character of the City and in harmony with the public interest and the purpose and intent of this Title. Staff Findings: The intent of the proposed amendment is to ensure that all properties within Historic Districts are reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission to protect the integrity of the Districts. Staff finds that this is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Historic Preservation Chapter of the Land Use Code and is in harmony with the public interest. Exhibit A Historic Districts—Second Reading 12.10.2012 Page 1 of 1 Exhibit B—Redline changes to 26.415, Historic Preservation Section 1 26.415.015 Applicability. This Chapter applies to all properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures and to all properties located within the boundaries of a Historic District, including rights-of-way within Historic Districts as specified in Section 26.415.060. Section 2: 26.415.020. Definitions. The following_definition_s are specific to the terms as used in this Chapter and in the field of historic preservation: Alteration. A change to an existing building, structure or feature that modifies its original appearance or construction. Certificate of appropriateness. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed work on a designated historic property is compatible with its historic and architectural character and, therefore, the work may be completed as specified in the certificate and the City may issue any permits needed to do the work specified in the certificate. Certificate of demolition approval. An official form issued by the City authorizing the issuance of a demolition permit for a designated historic property or for a building or structure located in a designated Hhistoric dDistrict. Certificate of economic hardship. An official form issued by the City, in connection with a certificate of demolition approval, that allows the demolition of a designated historic property as the owner has demonstrated that maintaining it will impose an economic hardship. Certificate of no negative effect. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed work will have no detrimental effect on the character-defining features of a designated property and, therefore, the work may proceed as specified in the certificate without obtaining further approvals under this Chapter and the City may issue any permits needed to do the work in the specified certificate. Contributing resource. A building, site, structure or object that adds to the historic associations, historic architectural qualities or archaeological values for which a property of diAfiet-is considered significant. Designated property. An individual property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. Historic District. A collection, concentration, linkage or continuity of buildings, structures, sites or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development that is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures including designated ated properties contributing resources and noncontributing resources located within the boundaries of a Historic District pursuant to the Official Zone District Map. Exhibit B—redline version Historic Districts, Second Reading 12.10.2012 Page 1 of 5 Historic context paper. Research papers that define Aspen's architectural and cultural patterns in the context of local and national history. Historic context papers are used to guide staff, the Historic Preservation Commission and City Council in determining the historic significance of structures and properties in the City of Aspen. Integrity. The ability of a property to convey its significance relative to the aspects of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association. Monitoring committee. A subcommittee appointed by the Historic Preservation Commission of up to two (2) Commission members and the Historic Preservation Officer to provide oversight in the implementation of rehabilitation. Noncontributing resource. A building, structure, site or object that does not add to the historic architectural qualities or historic associations for which a property ef distfiet is significant because it was not present during the period of significance or does not relate to the documented significance; or due to alterations, additions, disturbances or other changes, it no longer possesses historic integrity. Object. A term used to distinguish buildings and structures from those constructions that are primarily artistic in nature or small in scale and simply constructed. It may be by nature or design movable,but it is associated with a specific setting and environment. Rehabilitation. Making a building or structure sound and usable without attempting to restore it to a particular period appearance, while retaining the character-defining features. Relocation. Moving a building or structure from its original, historically significant or existing location to another location. Repair. To restore to a sound or good state after decay, dilapidation or partial destruction. Restore. The repair or recreation of the original architectural elements or features of an historic property so that it resembles an appearance it had at some previous point in time. Significance. The documented importance of a property for its contribution to or representation of broad patterns of national, regional or local history, architecture;engineering, archaeology and culture. Site. The location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity or a building or structure, whether standing, ruined or vanished, where the location itself possesses historic, cultural or archaeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure. Structure. A term used to distinguish from buildings those functional constructions made for purposes other than creating human shelter. (Ord. 1-2002, §7 [part]; Ord. No. 28 -2010, §1) Exhibit B—redline version Historic Districts, Second Reading 12.10.2012 Page 2 of 5 Section 3: 26.415.060. Effect of designation or inclusion within a Historic District. A. Approvals required. Any development involving properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, as an individual building-property or located within the boundaries ofm an hHistoric dDistrict, unless determined exempt, requires the approval of a development order and either a certificate of no negative effect or a certificate of appropriateness before a building permit or any other work authorization will be issued by the City. HPC shall provide referral comments for major projects to rights-of-way located within the boundaries of a Historic District. Section 4: 26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property or property within a Historic District. No building.,-estructure, or landscape shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or a property located within a Historic dDistrict until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a development order. (Ord. No. 1-2002, § 7 [part]; Ord. 43, 2004, § 3; Ord. No. 28 -2010, §1; Ord. No. 3-2012, §22 & 23) Section 5: 26.415.080. Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a Historic District. It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently no demolition of properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards set forth in this Section. A. Procedures for considering requests for demolition of designated properties or properties within a Historic District. 1. An application for a demolition permit for designated properties or properties within a Historic District will be filed with or referred to the Community Development Director by the Chief Building Official. The applicant will be provided a written response within fourteen (14) days of the request for a demolition permit describing the submittal materials needed for consideration. 2. An application for demolition approval shall include: a) The general application information requested in Section 26.304.030 and written documentation that the Chief Building Official has determined the building an imminent hazard or Exhibit B—redline version Historic Districts,Second Reading 12.10.2012 Page 3 of 5 b) Narrative text, graphic illustrations or other exhibits that provide evidence that the building, structure or object is of no historic or architectural value or importance. 3. When complete application materials are on file, a public hearing before the HPC shall be scheduled. Notice for the hearing will include publication, mailing and posting pursuant to Section 26.304.060.E.3 Paragraphs a, b and c. The staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a staff report that analyzes the request relative to the criteria for approval. 4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or hHistoric dDistrict in which it is located and b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the 13Historic dDistrict or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. 5. The HPC shall approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to consider the demolition request. 6. If the HPC approves the demolition request then a resolution of the HPC action will be forwarded to the City Council in accordance with Section 26.415.120 and no demolition permit will be issued until the thirty (30) day "call up" period by City Council has expired. 7. If the demolition request is denied because it does not meet the aforementioned standards, the applicant may request demolition approval based upon a finding of "economic hardship," as set forth below. Exhibit B—redline version Historic Districts,Second Reading 12.10.2012 Page 4 of 5 8. Before a demolition permit will be issued, a certificate of appropriateness for the redevelopment or reuse plan, as provided for in Subsection 26.415.070.D, must be approved. When a demolition permit must be issued because the building, structure or object is an imminent hazard or because of the issuance of a certificate of economic hardship, the permit may be received prior to the approval of an acceptable reuse plan. Section 6: 26.415.110. Benefits. The City is committed to providing support to property owners to assist their efforts to maintain, preserve and enhance their historic properties. Recognizing that these properties are valuable community assets is the basic premise underlying the provision of special procedures and programs for designated historic properties and districts. Benefits to encourage good historic preservation practices by the owners of historic properties are an important aspect of Aspen's historic preservation program. Historic resources are a valuable community asset and their continued protection is the basic premise supporting the creation of an innovative package of preservation tools that are unlike any other in the country. Aspen's preservation benefits are in response to tight historic preservation controls that have been legislated by the City since 1972. The Community Development Department and Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) are dedicated to assisting property owners in renovating and maintaining their property. Aspen is unique. Its historic resources and spirit of community have not been duplicated anywhere else in the world. It is this basic character that has helped make the City both economically vital and cherished by many. All pfepeAies listed on the Aspen inventer-y of Hister-ie handmar-k Site and Only designated properties may be eligible for the following benefits. Section 7: D. Parking. Parking reductions are permitted for designated historic properties on sites unable to contain the number of on-site parking spaces required by the underlying zoning. Commercial designated historic properties may receive waivers of payment-in-lieu fees for parking reductions. In addition to the review criteria listed in Chapter 26.515, Tthe parking reduction and waiver of payment-in-lieu fees may be approved upon a finding by the HPC that it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural character of a designated historic property, an adjoining designated property or a historic district. Refefte—Chapter- 26.515 fffl4,o..;of ffflfiffl Exhibit B—redline version Historic Districts, Second Reading 12.10.2012 Page 5 of 5 ORDINANCE No. 33 (Series of 2012) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 26.415—HISTORIC PRESERVATION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 26.208 and 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the Community Development Department to explore code amendments related to the applicability of Land Use Code Chapter 26.415 to properties within a designated Historic District; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall begin with Public Outreach, a Policy Resolution reviewed and acted on by City Council, and then final action by City Council after reviewing and considering the recommendation from the Community Development; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(1), the Community Development Department conducted Public Outreach, including three small group meetings, an Open City Hall Forum, an on-line survey, and individual letters from members of the public, to gain feedback from the community on potential code changes to the Commercial Core Historic District; and, WHEREAS, more than 200 individuals were engaged in the Public Outreach process; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on August 27, 2012, the City Council approved a Policy Resolution, Resolution 82, Series of 2012, directing staff to process code amendments related to heights and land uses in the downtown, by a three - two (3 - 2) vote; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the City of Aspen Land Use Code Sections 26.415 — Historic Preservation; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed the proposed code amendments and finds that the amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310.050; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: 26.415.015 —Applicability, shall be added to Chapter 26.415 follows: City Council Ord. 433 of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 1 of 7 26.415.015 Applicability. This Chapter applies to all properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures and to all properties located within the boundaries of a Historic District, including rights-of-way within Historic Districts as specified in Section 26.415.060. Section 2: 26.415.020—Definitions, shall be amended as follows: 26.415.020. Definitions. The following definitions are specific to the terms as used in this Chapter and in the field of historic preservation: Alteration. A change to an existing building, structure or feature that modifies its original appearance or construction. Certificate of appropriateness. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed work on a designated historic property is compatible with its historic and architectural character and, therefore, the work may be completed as specified in the certificate and the City may issue any permits needed to do the work specified in the certificate. Certificate of demolition approval. An official form issued by the City authorizing the issuance of a demolition permit for a designated historic property or for a building or structure located in a designated Historic District. Certificate of economic hardship. An official form issued by the City, in connection with a certificate of demolition approval, that allows the demolition of a designated historic property as the owner has demonstrated that maintaining it will impose an economic hardship. Certificate of no negative effect. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed work will have no detrimental effect on the character-defining features of a designated property and, therefore, the work may proceed as specified in the certificate without obtaining further approvals under this Chapter and the City may issue any permits needed to do the work in the specified certificate. Contributing resource. A building, site, structure or object that adds to the historic associations, historic architectural qualities or archaeological values for which a property is considered significant. Designated property. An individual property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. Historic District. A collection, concentration, linkage or continuity of buildings, structures, sites or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development that is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures including designated properties, contributing resources, and noncontributing resources located within the boundaries of a Historic District pursuant to the Official Zone District Map. City Council Ord. #33 of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 2 of 7 Historic context paper. Research papers that define Aspen's architectural and cultural patterns in the context of local and national history. Historic context papers are used to guide staff, the Historic Preservation Commission and City Council in determining the historic significance of structures and properties in the City of Aspen. Integrity. The ability of a property to convey its significance relative to the aspects of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association. Monitoring committee. A subcommittee appointed by the Historic Preservation Commission of up to two (2) Commission members and the Historic Preservation Officer to provide oversight in the implementation of rehabilitation. Noncontributing resource. A building, structure, site or object that does not add to the historic architectural qualities or historic associations for which a property is significant because it was not present during the period of significance or does not relate to the documented significance; or due to alterations, additions, disturbances or other changes, it no longer possesses historic integrity. Object. A term used to distinguish buildings and structures from those constructions that are primarily artistic in nature or small in scale and simply constructed. It may be by nature or design movable, but it is associated with a specific setting and environment. Rehabilitation. Making a building or structure sound and usable without attempting to restore it to a particular period appearance, while retaining the character-defining features. Relocation. Moving a building or structure from its original, historically significant or existing location to another location. Repair. To restore to a sound or good state after decay, dilapidation or partial destruction. Restore. The repair or recreation of the original architectural elements or features of an historic property so that it resembles an appearance it had at some previous point in time. Significance. The documented importance of a property for its contribution to or representation of broad patterns of national, regional or local history, architecture, engineering, archaeology and culture. Site. The location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity or a building or structure, whether standing, ruined or vanished, where the location itself possesses historic, cultural or archaeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure. Structure. A term used to distinguish from buildings those functional constructions made for purposes other than creating human shelter. (Ord. 1-2002, §7 [part]; Ord. No. 28 -2010, §1) City Council Ord. 433 of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 3 of 7 Section 3: 26.415.060 - Effect of designation, shall be amended as follows: 26.415.060. Effect of designation or inclusion within a Historic District. A. Approvals required. Any development involving properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, as an individual property or located within the boundaries of a Historic District, unless determined exempt, requires the approval of a development order and either a certificate of no negative effect or a certificate of appropriateness before a building permit or any other work authorization will be issued by the City. HPC shall provide referral comments for major projects to rights-of-way located within the boundaries of a Historic District. Section 4: 26.415.070 — Development involving designated historic property, shall be amended as follows: 26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property or property within a Historic District. No building, structure or landscape shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or a property located within a Historic District until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a development order. 1. (Ord. No. 1-2002, § 7 [part]; Ord. 43, 2004, § 3; Ord. No. 28 -2010, §1; Ord. No. 3-2012, §22 & 23) Section 5: 26.415.080 - Demolition of designated historic properties, shall be amended as follows: 26.415.080 Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a Historic District. It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently no demolition of properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards set forth in this Section. A. Procedures for considering requests for demolition of designated properties or properties within a Historic District. 1. An application for a demolition permit for designated properties or properties within a Historic District will be filed with or referred to the Community Development Director by the Chief Building Official. The applicant will be provided a written response within City Council Ord.#33 of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 4 of 7 fourteen (14) days of the request for a demolition permit describing the submittal materials needed for consideration. 2. An application for demolition approval shall include: a) The general application information requested in Section 26.304.030 and written documentation that the Chief Building Official has determined the building an imminent hazard or b) Narrative text, graphic illustrations or other exhibits that provide evidence that the building, structure or object is of no historic or architectural value or importance. 3. When complete application materials are on file, a public hearing before the HPC shall be scheduled. Notice for the hearing will include publication, mailing and posting pursuant to Section 26.304.060.E.3 Paragraphs a, b and c. The staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a staff report that analyzes the request relative to the criteria for approval. 4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or Historic District in which it is located and b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. 5. The HPC shall approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to consider the demolition request. 6. If the HPC approves the demolition request then a resolution of the HPC action will be forwarded to the City Council in accordance with Section 26.415.120 and no demolition City Council Ord. #33 of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 5 of 7 permit will be issued until the thirty (30) day "call up" period by City Council has expired. 7. If the demolition request is denied because it does not meet the aforementioned standards, the applicant may request demolition approval based upon a finding of "economic hardship," as set forth below. 8. Before a demolition permit will be issued, a certificate of appropriateness for the redevelopment or reuse plan, as provided for in Subsection 26.415.070.D, must be approved. When a demolition permit must be issued because the building, structure or object is an imminent hazard or because of the issuance of a certificate of economic hardship, the permit may be received prior to the approval of an acceptable reuse plan. Section 6: 26.415.110—Benefits, shall be amended as follows: 26.415.110. Benefits. The City is committed to providing support to property owners to assist their efforts to maintain, preserve and enhance their historic properties. Recognizing that these properties are valuable community assets is the basic premise underlying the provision of special procedures and programs for designated historic properties and districts. Benefits to encourage good historic preservation practices by the owners of historic properties are an important aspect of Aspen's historic preservation program. Historic resources are a valuable community asset and their continued protection is the basic premise supporting the creation of an innovative package of preservation tools that are unlike any other in the country. Aspen's preservation benefits are in response to tight historic preservation controls that have been legislated by the City since 1972. The Community Development Department and Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) are dedicated to assisting property owners in renovating and maintaining their property. Aspen is unique. Its historic resources and spirit of community have not been duplicated anywhere else in the world. It is this basic character that has helped make the City both economically vital and cherished by many. Only designated properties may be eligible for the following benefits. Section 7: 26.415.110.D —Benefits- Parking, shall be amended as follows. D. Parking. Parking reductions are permitted for designated historic properties on sites unable to contain the number of on-site parking spaces required by the underlying zoning. Commercial designated historic properties may receive waivers of payment-in-lieu fees for parking reductions. In addition to the review criteria listed in Chapter 26.515, the parking reduction and waiver of payment-in-lieu fees may be approved upon a finding by the HPC that it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural character of a designated historic property, an adjoining designated property or a historic district. City Council Ord. #33 of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 6 of 7 Section 8• The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 9• A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 10`h day of December, 2012, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 26h day of November, 2012. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland,Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this_day of 2012. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland,Mayor Approved as to form: James R. True, City Attorney City Council Ord. #33 of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 7 of 7 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and Aspen City Council FROM: Sara Adams, Senior Planner 9*A- THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director RE: Code Amendment — Chapter 26.415 Historic Preservation— First Reading of Ordinance # , Series of 2012 - Second Reading is scheduled for December 10, 2012, MEETING DATE: November 26, 2012 SUMMARY: The attached Ordinance includes proposed code amendment clarifying the applicability of non- designated properties within Historic Districts based on Council direction provided as part of the Policy Resolution passed August 27, 2012. The objective of the proposed code amendment is to clean up language stating that all properties within the Historic Districts shall meet the requirements in Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation. A redline version of the proposed changes are included as Exhibit B. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Ordinance. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: This is the I" reading on proposed code amendments for Historic Districts. Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.310, City Council is the final review authority for all code amendments. All code amendments are subject to a three-step process. This is the third step in the process: 1. Public Outreach 2. Policy Resolution by City Council indicating if an amendment should the pursued 3. Public Hearings on Ordinance outlining specific code amendments. BACKGROUND& OVERVIEW: Questions regarding the applicability of non-designated properties related to Land Use Code Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation, were raised in 2011 during the Benton Building/Little Annie's development application (517 and 521 E. Hyman Avenue). The applicant challenged whether non-designated properties are included on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures and as such are subject to demolition review by the Historic Preservation Commission. This discussion pointed out areas in the Code that could be simplified and clarified. A Historic District is a collection of buildings that are related historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development. Aspen's Historic Districts are comprised of individually designated properties, properties that contribute to the significance of the Historic District, and properties that are considered noncontributing resources to the Historic District. These buildings all play a role in the integrity of the District and all require review by the HPC to ensure consistency with traditional development patterns. Since the inception of the Commercial Core Historic District in 1972, all properties within the District have been subject to design and demolition review by the Historic Preservation Commission, which is consistent with historic preservation programs throughout the county on local, state and national levels. There are many examples of HPC exercising its jurisdiction to review applications for Demolition of structures located within a Historic District, but not individually designated properties. The most recent reviews include: 435 W. Main (Aspen Jewish Community Center) 2005 434 E. Cooper(Bidwell) 2006 308 E. Hopkins (La Cocina), 2006 508 E. Cooper Avenue (Cooper Street Pier), 2006 420/422 E. Hopkins (Fire Station), 2007 517 E. Hyman (Little Annie's), 2012 521 E. Hyman (Benton Buiding), 2012 Council directed Staff to clarify the language regarding Historic District review concurrent with changes to the Commercial Core Historic District. The proposed amendment does not change HPC's jurisdiction; rather it clarifies the Code language to better reflect the applicability of the Historic Preservation Chapter to non-designated properties within Historic Districts. PROPOSED AMENDMENT(A REDLINE VERSION IS ATTACHED AS EXHIBIT B): Section 1: This is a new section that clarifies the applicability of the Chapter to both properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures and all properties, including rights of way, within a Historic District. Section 2: Changes include clarifications to the definitions of the following terms: contributing resource, designated property, historic district, and noncontributing resource. Section 3: This section addresses the effect of being designated, which already includes properties located in historic districts. The proposed change adds Historic District to the heading for clarity. It also clarifies that major projects involving rights-of-way within Historic District boundaries require referral comments from HPC, which is consistent with current practice. Section 4: This section addresses review process and criteria for development involving historic properties. The proposed change clarifies that this section applies to properties, within historic districts. It also clarifies that development involving landscapes on historic properties or properties within a Historic District is under HPC's purview. Landscapes are considered part of the property designation and have always been reviewed by Staff or HPC pursuant to the adopted Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. Section 5: This section addresses review criteria for demolition. The proposed change clarifies that this section applies to properties within historic districts. Section 6: This section outlines all incentives available to historic properties. The proposed change clarifies that the benefits do not apply to non-designated properties within historic districts. Section 7: This section cleans up and clarifies the applicable review criteria regarding parking reductions on landmark properties. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes that the project is consistent with the applicable review standards in the City Land Use Code. Staff recommends approval of the code amendment. RECOMMENDED MOTION(ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No. , Series of 2012, approving the proposed Code Amendment on first reading." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Ordinance # , Series of 2012 ATTACHMENTS: EXHIBIT A— Review criteria Exhibit B-Redline version of Code changes. ORDINANCE No._ (Series of 2012) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO THE FOLLOWING CHAPTER OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE: 26.415—HISTORIC PRESERVATION WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 26.208 and 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the Community Development Department to explore code amendments related to the applicability of Land Use Code Chapter 26.415 to properties within a designated Historic District; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall begin with Public Outreach, a Policy Resolution reviewed and acted on by City Council, and then final action by City Council after reviewing and considering the recommendation from the Community Development; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(1), the Community Development Department conducted Public Outreach, including three small group meetings, an Open City Hall Forum, an on-line survey, and individual letters from members of the public, to gain feedback from the community on potential code changes to the Commercial Core Historic District; and, WHEREAS, the more than 200 individuals were engaged in the Public Outreach process; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on August 27, 2012, the City Council approved a Policy Resolution, Resolution 82, Series of 2012, directing staff to process code amendments related to heights and land uses in the downtown, by a three - two (3 - 2) vote; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the City of Aspen Land Use Code Sections 26.415 — Historic Preservation; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed the proposed code amendments and finds that the amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310.050; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: 26.415.015 —Applicability, shall be added to Chapter 26.415 follows: City Council Ord #_of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 1 of 7 26.415.015 Applicability. This Chapter applies to all properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures and to all properties located within the boundaries of a Historic District, including rights-of-way within Historic Districts as specified in Section 26.415.060. Section 2: 26.415.020—Definitions, shall be amended as follows: 26.415.020. Definitions. The following definitions are specific to the terms as used in this Chapter and in the field of historic preservation: Alteration. A change to an existing building, structure or feature that modifies its original appearance or construction. Certificate of appropriateness. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed work on a designated historic property is compatible with its historic and architectural character and, therefore, the work may be completed as specified in the certificate and the City may issue any permits needed to do the work specified in the certificate. Certificate of demolition approval. An official form issued by the City authorizing the issuance of a demolition permit for a designated historic property or for a building or structure located in a designated Historic District. Certificate of economic hardship. An official form issued by the City, in connection with a certificate of demolition approval, that allows the demolition of a designated historic property as the owner has demonstrated that maintaining it will impose an economic hardship. Certificate of no negative effect. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed work will have no detrimental effect on the character-defining features of a designated property and, therefore, the work may proceed as specified in the certificate without obtaining further approvals under this Chapter and the City may issue any permits needed to do the work in the specified certificate. Contributing resource. A building, site, structure or object that adds to the historic associations, historic architectural qualities or archaeological values for which a property is considered significant. Designated property. An individual property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. Historic District. A collection, concentration, linkage or continuity of buildings, structures, sites or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development that is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures including designated properties, contributing resources, and noncontributing resources located within the boundaries of a Historic District pursuant to the Official Zone District Map, City Council Ord# of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 2 of 7 Historic context paper. Research papers that define Aspen's architectural and cultural patterns in the context of local and national history. Historic context papers are used to guide staff, the Historic Preservation Commission and City Council in determining the historic significance of structures and properties in the City of Aspen. Integrity. The ability of a property to convey its significance relative to the aspects of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association. Monitoring committee. A subcommittee appointed by the Historic Preservation Commission of up to two (2) Commission members and the Historic Preservation Officer to provide oversight in the implementation of rehabilitation. Noncontributing resource. A building, structure, site or object that does not add to the historic architectural qualities or historic associations for which a property is significant because it was not present during the period of significance or does not relate to the documented significance; or due to alterations, additions, disturbances or other changes, it no longer possesses historic integrity. Object. A term used to distinguish buildings and structures from those constructions that are primarily artistic in nature or small in scale and simply constructed. It may be by nature or design movable, but it is associated with a specific setting and environment. Rehabilitation. Making a building or structure sound and usable without attempting to restore it to a particular period appearance, while retaining the character-defining features. Relocation. Moving a building or structure from its original, historically significant or existing location to another location. Repair. To restore to a sound or good state after decay, dilapidation or partial destruction. Restore. The repair or recreation of the original architectural elements or features of an historic property so that it resembles an appearance it had at some previous point in time. Significance. The documented importance of a property for its contribution to or representation of broad patterns of national, regional or local history, architecture, engineering, archaeology and culture. Site. The location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity or a building or structure, whether standing, ruined or vanished, where the location itself possesses historic, cultural or archaeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure. Structure. A term used to distinguish from buildings those functional constructions made for purposes other than creating human shelter. (Ord. 1-2002, §7 [part]; Ord. No. 28 -2010, §1) Section 3: 26.415.060 - Effect of designation, shall be amended as follows: City Council Ord#_of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 3 of 7 26.415.060. Effect of designation or inclusion within a Historic District. A. Approvals required. Any development involving properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, as an individual property or located within the boundaries of a Historic District, unless determined exempt, requires the approval of a development order and either a certificate of no negative effect or a certificate of appropriateness before a building permit or any other work authorization will be issued by the City. HPC shall provide referral comments for major projects to rights-of-way located within the boundaries of a Historic District. Section 4: 26.415.070 — Development involving designated historic property, shall be amended as follows: 26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property or property within a Historic District. No building, structure or landscape shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or a property located within a Historic District until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a development order. 1. (Ord. No. 1-2002, § 7 [part]; Ord. 43, 2004, § 3; Ord. No. 28 -2010, §1; Ord. No. 3-2012, §22 & 23) Section 5: 26.415.080 - Demolition of designated historic properties, shall be amended as follows: 26.415.080 Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a Historic District. It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently no demolition of properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards set forth in this Section. A. Procedures for considering requests for demolition of designated properties or properties within a Historic District. 1. An application for a demolition permit for designated properties or properties within a Historic District will be filed with or referred to the Community Development Director by the Chief Building Official. The applicant will be provided a written response within fourteen (14) days of the request for a demolition permit describing the submittal materials needed for consideration. City Council Ord # of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 4 of 7 2. An application for demolition approval shall include: a) The general application information requested in Section 26.304.030 and written documentation that the Chief Building Official has determined the building an imminent hazard or b) Narrative text, graphic illustrations or other exhibits that provide evidence that the building, structure or object is of no historic or architectural value or importance. 3. When complete application materials are on file, a public hearing before the HPC shall be scheduled. Notice for the hearing will include publication, mailing and posting pursuant to Section 26.304.060.E.3 Paragraphs a, b and c. The staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a staff report that analyzes the request relative to the criteria for approval. 4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or Historic District in which it is located and b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the Historic District or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. 5. The HPC shall approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to consider the demolition request. 6. If the HPC approves the demolition request then a resolution of the HPC action will be forwarded to the City Council in accordance with Section 26.415.120 and no demolition permit will be issued until the thirty (30) day "call up" period by City Council has expired. City Council Ord #_of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 5 of 7 7. If the demolition request is denied because it does not meet the aforementioned standards, the applicant may request demolition approval based upon a finding of "economic hardship," as set forth below. 8. Before a demolition permit will be issued, a certificate of appropriateness for the redevelopment or reuse plan, as provided for in Subsection 26.415.070.D, must be approved. When a demolition permit must be issued because the building, structure or object is an imminent hazard or because of the issuance of a certificate of economic hardship, the permit may be received prior to the approval of an acceptable reuse plan. Section 6: 26.415.110—Benefits, shall be amended as follows: 26.415.110. Benefits. The City is committed to providing support to property owners to assist their efforts to maintain, preserve and enhance their historic properties. Recognizing that these properties are valuable community assets is the basic premise underlying the provision of special procedures and programs for designated historic properties and districts. Benefits to encourage good historic preservation practices by the owners of historic properties are an important aspect of Aspen's historic preservation program. Historic resources are a valuable community asset and their continued protection is the basic premise supporting the creation of an innovative package of preservation tools that are unlike any other in the country. Aspen's preservation benefits are in response to tight historic preservation controls that have been legislated by the City since 1972. The Community Development Department and Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) are dedicated to assisting property owners in renovating and maintaining their property. Aspen is unique. Its historic resources and spirit of community have not been duplicated anywhere else in the world. It is this basic character that has helped make the City both economically vital and cherished by many. Only designated properties may be eligible for the following benefits. Section 7: 26.415.110.13—Benefits- Parking, shall be amended as follows. D. Parking. Parking reductions are permitted for designated historic properties on sites unable to contain the number of on-site parking spaces required by the underlying zoning. Commercial designated historic properties may receive waivers of payment-in-lieu fees for parking reductions. In addition to the review criteria listed in Chapter 26.515, the parking reduction and waiver of payment-in-lieu fees may be approved upon a finding by the HPC that it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural character of a designated historic property, an adjoining designated property or a historic district. City Council Ord#_of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 6 of 7 Section 8• The City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 9• A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 10th day of December, 2012, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of , 2012. [signatures on following page] Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland,Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this_day of ,2012. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Michael C. Ireland, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney City Council Ord # of 2012 Historic Districts Code Amendments Page 7 of 7 Exhibit A: Staff Findings 26.310.050 Amendments to the Land Use Code Standards of review - Adoption. In reviewing an application to amend the text of this Title, per Section 26.310.020(B)(3), Step Three —Public Hearing before City Council, the City Council shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. Staff Findings: The proposed code amendment is consistent with the Land Use Code. The amendment proposes to clarify the HPC's jurisdiction over properties located within designated Historic Districts. These changes are consistent with city policy and the Land Use Code. Staff finds this criterion to be met. B. Whether the proposed amendment achieves the policy, community goal, or objective cited as reasons for the code amendment or achieves other public policy objectives. Staff Findings: The stated reason for the code amendment is to clarify HPC's jurisdiction over properties located within Historic Districts in order to ensure that all development within Districts is consistent with the historic pattern established downtown. The AACP calls for code amendments that "ensure that City codes support the historic integrity of designated structures and ensure compatibility with the surrounding context in terms of site coverage, mass, scale, height and form." (Historic Preservation Chapter Part 11.1.) Clarifying HPC purview over all properties within Historic Districts in an effort to protect contributing and designated buildings within Districts furthers this goal. Staff finds this criterion to be met. C. Whether the objectives of the proposed amendment are compatible with the community character of the City and in harmony with the public interest and the purpose and intent of this Title. Staff Findings: The intent of the proposed amendment is to ensure that all properties within Historic Districts are reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission to protect the integrity of the Districts. Staff finds that this is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Historic Preservation Chapter of the Land Use Code and is in harmony with the public interest. Exhibit A Historic Districts—First Reading 11.26.2012 Page 1 of 1 Exhibit B—Redline changes to 26.415, Historic Preservation 26.415.015 Applicability. This Chapter applies to all properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures and to all properties located within the boundaries of a Historic District, including rights-of-way within Historic Districts as specified in Section 26.415.060. 26.415.020. Definitions. The following definitions are specific to the terms as used in this Chapter and in the field of historic preservation: Alteration. A change to an existing building, structure or feature that modifies its original appearance or construction. Certificate of appropriateness. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed work on a designated historic property is compatible with its historic and architectural character and, therefore, the work may be completed as specified in the certificate and the City may issue any permits needed to do the work specified in the certificate. Certificate of demolition approval. An official form issued by the City authorizing the issuance of a demolition permit for a designated historic property or for a building or structure located in a designated Hhistoric dDistrict. Certificate of economic hardship. An official form issued by the City, in connection with a certificate of demolition approval, that allows the demolition of a designated historic property as the owner has demonstrated that maintaining it will impose an economic hardship. Certificate of no negative effect. An official form issued by the City stating that the proposed work will have no detrimental effect on the character-defining features of a designated property and, therefore, the work may proceed as specified in the certificate without obtaining further approvals under this Chapter and the City may issue any permits needed to do the work in the specified certificate. Contributing resource. A building, site, structure or object that adds to the historic associations, historic architectural qualities or archaeological values for which a property of dot is considered significant. Designated property. An individual property listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. Historic District. A collection, concentration, linkage or continuity of buildings, structures, sites or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development that is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures including designated properties, contributing resources, and noncontributing resources located within the boundaries of a Historic District pursuant to the Official Zone District Map. Exhibit B—redline version Historic Districts,First Reading 11.26.2012 Page 1 of 5 Historic context paper. Research papers that define Aspen's architectural and cultural patterns in the context of local and national history. Historic context papers are used to guide staff, the Historic Preservation Commission and City Council in determining the historic significance of structures and properties in the City of Aspen. Integrity. The ability of a property to convey its significance relative to the aspects of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and association. Monitoring committee. A subcommittee appointed by the Historic Preservation Commission of up to two (2) Commission members and the Historic Preservation Officer to provide oversight in the implementation of rehabilitation. Noncontributing resource. A building, structure, site or object that does not add to the historic architectural qualities or historic associations for which a property et is significant because it was not present during the period of significance or does not relate to the documented significance; or due to alterations, additions, disturbances or other changes, it no longer possesses historic integrity. Object. A term used to distinguish buildings and structures from those constructions that are primarily artistic in nature or small in scale and simply constructed. It may be by nature or design movable,but it is associated with a specific setting and environment. Rehabilitation. Making a building or structure sound and usable without attempting to restore it to a particular period appearance, while retaining the character-defining features. Relocation. Moving a building or structure from its original, historically significant or existing location to another location. Repair. To restore to a sound or good state after decay, dilapidation or partial destruction. Restore. The repair or recreation of the original architectural elements or features of an historic property so that it resembles an appearance it had at some previous point in time. Significance. The documented importance of a property for its contribution to or representation of broad patterns of national, regional or local history, architecture, engineering, archaeology and culture. Site. The location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity or a building or structure, whether standing, ruined or vanished, where the location itself possesses historic, cultural or archaeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure. Structure. A term used to distinguish from buildings those functional constructions made for purposes other than creating human shelter. (Ord. 1-2002, §7 [part]; Ord. No. 28 -2010, §1) 26.415.060. Effect of designation or inclusion within a Historic District. Exhibit B—redline version Historic Districts,First Reading 11.26.2012 Page 2 of 5 A. Approvals required. Any development involving properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, as an individual bui1dia,—,-p1operty or located within the boundaries oft an hHistoric dDistrict, unless determined exempt, requires the approval of a development order and either a certificate of no negative effect or a certificate of appropriateness before a building permit or any other work authorization will be issued by the City. HPC shall provide referral comments for major projects to rights-of-way located within the boundaries of a Historic District. 26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property or property within a Historic District. No building.,-af-structure, or landscape shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or a property located within a Historic dDistrict until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a development order. (Ord. No. 1-2002, § 7 [part]; Ord. 43, 2004, § 3; Ord. No. 28 -2010, §1; Ord. No. 3-2012, §22 & 23) 26.415.080. Demolition of designated historic properties or properties within a Historic District. It is the intent of this Chapter to preserve the historic and architectural resources that have demonstrated significance to the community. Consequently no demolition of properties designated on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures or properties within a Historic District will be allowed unless approved by the HPC in accordance with the standards set forth in this Section. A. Procedures for considering requests for demolition of designated properties or properties within a Historic District. 1. An application for a demolition permit for designated properties or properties within a Historic District will be filed with or referred to the Community Development Director by the Chief Building Official. The applicant will be provided a written response within fourteen (14) days of the request for a demolition permit describing the submittal materials needed for consideration. 2. An application for demolition approval shall include: a) The general application information requested in Section 26.304.030 and written documentation that the Chief Building Official has determined the building an imminent hazard or b) Narrative text, graphic illustrations or other exhibits that provide evidence that the building, structure or object is of no historic or architectural value or importance. 3. When complete application materials are on file, a public hearing before the HPC shall be scheduled. Notice for the hearing will include publication, mailing and posting pursuant Exhibit B—redline version Historic Districts,First Reading 11.26.2012 Page 3 of 5 to Section 26.304.060.E.3 Paragraphs a, b and c. The staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a staff report that analyzes the request relative to the criteria for approval. 4. The HPC shall review the application, the staff report and hear evidence presented by the property owners, parties of interest and members of the general public to determine if the standards for demolition approval have been met. Demolition shall be approved if it is demonstrated that the application meets any one of the following criteria: a) The property has been determined by the City to be an imminent hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed repairs in a timely manner, b) The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure, c) The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate location in Aspen or d) No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural significance and Additionally, for approval to demolish, all of the following criteria must be met: a) The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or hHistoric dDistrict in which it is located and b) The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect the integrity of the hHistoric dDistrict or its historic, architectural or aesthetic relationship to adjacent designated properties and c) Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic preservation needs of the area. 5. The HPC shall approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to consider the demolition request. 6. If the HPC approves the demolition request then a resolution of the HPC action will be forwarded to the City Council in accordance with Section 26.415.120 and no demolition permit will be issued until the thirty (30) day "call up" period by City Council has expired. 7. If the demolition request is denied because it does not meet the aforementioned standards, the applicant may request demolition approval based upon a finding of "economic hardship," as set forth below. 8. Before a demolition permit will be issued, a certificate of appropriateness for the redevelopment or reuse plan, as provided for in Subsection 26.415.070.D, must be approved. When a demolition permit must be issued because the building, structure or object is an imminent hazard or because of the issuance of a certificate of economic hardship, the permit may be received prior to the approval of an acceptable reuse plan. Exhibit B—redline version Historic Districts,First Reading 11.26.2012 Page 4 of 5 26.415.110. Benefits. The City is committed to providing support to property owners to assist their efforts to maintain, preserve and enhance their historic properties. Recognizing that these properties are valuable community assets is the basic premise underlying the provision of special procedures and programs for designated historic properties and districts. Benefits to encourage good historic preservation practices by the owners of historic properties are an important aspect of Aspen's historic preservation program. Historic resources are a valuable community asset and their continued protection is the basic premise supporting the creation of an innovative package of preservation tools that are unlike any other in the country. Aspen's preservation benefits are in response to tight historic preservation controls that have been legislated by the City since 1972. The Community Development Department and Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) are dedicated to assisting property owners in renovating and maintaining their property. Aspen is unique. Its historic resources and spirit of community have not been duplicated anywhere else in the world. It is this basic character that has helped make the City both economically vital and cherished by many. All pr-epei4ies listed en the Aspen laventefy of Histarie Landmafk Site and Only designated properties may be eligible for the following benefits. D. Parking. Parking reductions are permitted for designated historic properties on sites unable to contain the number of on-site parking spaces required by the underlying zoning. Commercial designated historic properties may receive waivers of payment-in-lieu fees for parking reductions. In addition to the review criteria listed in Chapter 26.515, Tthe parking reduction and waiver of payment-in-lieu fees may be approved upon a finding by the HPC that it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural character of a designated historic property, an adjoining designated property or a historic district. not r to Chaptef 26.515 fef Exhibit B—redline version Historic Districts,First Reading 11.26.2012 Page 5 of 5 Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning April 21,2009 was a 5 foot setback on the 222 E Hallam property. Garrow said they were trying to make this PUD as consistent with the R-6 Zone District. Staff doesn't support any specific setbacks other than combined 15 with a minimum of 5 on each side for future development or addition. Weiss said that it was not spelled out that the property was getting an additional 633 square feet and the map was not current. Weiss stated that he did not want to see a structure within 5 foot of that setback; he wanted a 15 foot setback. Mike Wampler voiced concern over the size of the house in the PUD; they currently have 3,233 square feet and want an increase to 3,866 square feet. Wampler said he did not want to see the house expanded. Weiss asked the distance from the current existing house to the top of slope. Rawley replied the rear of the garage was 60 feet from the top of slope and the rear setback would be 31 feet from the property line. Clauson said there was no intent to deceive and the application clearly states that the gain of the applicant is 633 square feet of floor area. Clauson said the trail ran along almost the entire back portion of the property and the Parks Department likes to have a proper easement for any trails with an additional amount of width for maintenance work. Clauson said that a 5 foot setback from the top of slope would be acceptable. Gibbs said that if the setback were 10 feet from top of slope he would be willing to allow the side yard setbacks as proposed. MOTION: Cliff Weiss moved to approve Resolution 007-09approving the PUD, rezoning and removing the SPA for 222 E Hallam with the following changes in conditions from 10 feet from the top of slope or 42 feet from the rear property line; seconded by Mike Wampler. Roll call: Gibbs, yes; Wampler, no; Weiss, yes; Erspamer, yes; APPROVED 3-1. PUBLIC HEARING: CODE AMENDMENT - HISTORIC DISTRICTS— HPC PURVIEW IN THE RIGHT OF WAY U Erspamer opened the public hearing. Sara Adams provided Special Counsel with the approval of public notice. Adams explained there were 2 historic districts in town: the Main Street and Commercial Core that were established in the mid 1970's. Adams looked into the review process for decisions in the right of way in these historic districts and realized that it was not that clear. 7 Regular Meeting As en Planninz and Zoning__ Aril 21 2009 Adams described a historic district was a pattern of development, a collection of buildings, something that is continuous so when you visit this place you get a sense of what it was like back in that era; you are looking for a cohesive whole for the most part. Adams said the first 2 sections of the proposed code amendment clarify the language and do not expand the boundaries but include the spaces between the blocks and lots that were listed in the 1970s. HPC has about 4 levels of review for landmarks or development in a historic district: exempt development that don't have an impact on the historic character of the district; certificate of no negative effect, which is a staff approval that will change the appearance of something but not negatively; minor development review, which is a one step review; the major development, which is a conceptual and final review. Adams asked the other city departments (Parks, Engineering, Parking, Streets, Water, Utilities) affected by these code amendments for a check list of work performed in these right of ways to make the review process fair. HPC approved this code language change unanimously (6-0) and Planning & Zoning is asked to make a recommendation to City Council. Adams said all the standards of review for the code amendment are met especially the AACP that says "we must continue building on what we have by authentically preserving historic structures and creating thoughtful new buildings that encourage and shape that feeling of historical continuity" and consistent with our broader community goals" and to "work to improve HPC review process." MOTION: Cliff Weiss moved to extend the meeting by 10 minutes; Stan Gibbs seconded; all in favor, Approved. MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to approve Resolution 008-09 to include the back half of the Jerome (down Bleeker to Monarch and the east side of Mill, curb to curb); Mike Wampler seconded. Roll call: Weiss, yes; Gibbs, yes; Wampler, yes; Myrin, yes; Erspamer, yes; all in favor, Approved 5-0. PUBLIC HEARING: CODE AMENDMENT HPC DESIGN CALL-UP LJ Erspamer opened the public hearing. MOTION. Cliff Weiss moved to continue the public hearing for the HPC design call up to June 16, 2009; seconded by Mike Wampler. All in favor, Approved. Adjourn 7:10 pm. #ckie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 8 Y AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROP RTY: ,/ziq ,Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 7::�' r�r� A2Yi l 2.1 67gE 44�34 ,tif,200 STATE OF COLORADO } ss. County of Pitkin ) I, A yt� �GUS (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of 7zotice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproc,f materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the_day of , 200_, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty(60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A CO py of the owners and G'OVernmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested,to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions that create more than one lot, Planned Unit Developments, Specially Planned Areas, and COWAPs are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However,the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen(1 S) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signa e The foregoing"Affidavit of Notice"was acknowledged before day of ja/� '' ems , 200 , by ��(Nlri�-�� '— FU�TF�TpMEUSE' p1TY 1N1T1 T11f�1.PN0 tv- SR28415OY1"'310)NENlba,ZPUt` A PIGE.S HEaEBue PP beWITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL eld°n at P.m S"111 be b ba Zonin Galenme��C. meebn9ggt an Hall,130 peve�n9 hfstof Flaomnclty fnUN1Y fd t My commission expires: Aonsidev ofd9oance'a' to SPePlr three 9 Amy 110 S,,StandOveA( "p La °H° tact Sava Hl sV elopment In as Ion,°pP nl ty ,) FFof Un%,-A,,e p Gale a st"AsPen Notary Public C tY °t t 130 S; s en.co.us. gap 2 78 saraa�ci.a ,n is: C.-:- L .a. QJ Ers a�^eny ctalf and Zoning pOWe kIY.penpla Times d In t^ Aspen PObUs 8781 2009. ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE:• COPYOFTHEPUBLICATION OF• PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGl� ` • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES"NOEb "?`1 '12010 BY MAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. X24-65.5-103.3 �6:a MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director (AWA FROM: Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner 94( RE: Historic Districts code amendment/HPC purview in the right of way DATE: April 21, 2009 HPC's purview over changes in the right of ways of Aspen's two historic districts was questioned recently during the proposed improvements to the Main Street corridor. Staff analyzed the Code and the designation ordinances for the Main Street (1976) and Commercial Core Historic Districts (1974) and discovered that not only is the review process for changes to Historic District right of ways confusing and unclear, but the defined boundaries of the Historic Districts are inaccurate. One of the Historic Preservation goals listed in the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan is to "work to improve the Historic Preservation Commission review process." The Community Development Director has initiated this code amendment to correct past clerical errors in the ordinances designating the Main Street and Commercial Core Historic Districts and to clarify review processes for development within the designated Historic District right of ways. The Historic Preservation Commission found that the review criteria were met and unanimously supported the proposed amendment during their regular April 8, 2009 meeting. The Land Use Code does not require a recommendation from the HPC for amendments to the Code; however, Staff determined that HPC need to provide feedback because the proposed amendments directly involve HPC's jurisdiction. BACKGROUND: As defined in code section 26.415.020, Historic Districts are "a collection, Charleston Historic District Map concentration, linkage or continuity of buildings, structures, sites or - - objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development." The first Historic District in the United States was created in Charleston, South Carolina in 1931. Patterns of architecture, repetition of historic uses and/or concentration of development are important tangible and understandable pieces of -� �I - `� '.: our history that create a sense of place for present and more importantly future generations. The majority of historic districts w � w around the county have defined boundaries that encompass propert ies containing buildings that contribute to a sense of place h and specific period of significance important to a town's history. The image to the left illustrates the boundaries of Charleston's historic district, which includes all property, right of ways and public domain within the defined boundaries. ROWHDmemopz.doc Page - 1 - of 3 Aspen's ordinances designating the historic districts describe lots and blocks in the area, but are unclear as to how the adjacent public spaces are to be treated. Mapping of the districts over the years has indicated that the blocks and the streets within them are part of the district but clarification is needed to ensure a cohesive, uninterrupted district that portrays Aspen's history (please see Exhibit B for maps.) Staff met with the following departments to discuss work that is typically done in the right of ways to help figure out appropriate and realistic review processes for different types of development: Parks, Engineering, Parking, Streets, Water and Utilities. PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS: Staff proposes adoption of code amendments that establish a better process for work that should qualify as exempt, administrative review or HPC review. The following narrative is to provide P&Z background on the amendments included in the attached resolution. Sections 1 and 2: These sections propose amended language to the existing Ordinances (number 49, series of 1974 and number 60 series of 1976) that designated the Main Street and Commercial Core Historic Districts. There were a few clerical errors that need to be corrected, and more importantly the boundaries of the district are defined such that they include all areas between the alleyways to the north and south of Main Street for the Main Street Historic District and between Mill Street, Durant Street, Hunter Street and the north alleyway behind Main Street for the Commercial Core Historic District. It was always assumed that the Historic Districts were a contiguous area with a defined exterior border that included all areas within, both public and private. This amendment clearly defines the boundaries as illustrated in Exhibit A to the proposed Resolution. Section 3: The proposed amendment to Section 3 proposes to include objects and landscapes among the items that are under HPC's purview. Section 4: Section 4 proposes development in the right of ways that does not require review by the Historic Preservation Commission. Any work that has no permanent and/or adverse impact on the historic character of the district is exempt; for example: temporary signage, seasonal lighting and regular repairs. Section 5: Administrative approvals are currently granted through a Certificate of No Negative Effect. Section 5 proposes that any work that will have a minimal impact on the historic district b approved administratively; for example, the installation of some street furniture, solar panels, replacement of ditches or streetscapes that are minimal in nature. Section 6: Section 6 proposes language that would qualify for a minor review at the HPC. This is a one step review process that involves a public hearing. Basically, any work in the right of ways of historic districts of a magnitude that does not meet the criteria for an administrative approval qualifies as a Minor Development review. Section 7: Section 7 proposes that any work that has a significant impact on the historic district, for example a master plan, qualifies for a Major Development review at the HPC, which includes a two step process and public hearings. ROWHDmemopz.doc Page - 2 - of3 NEXT STEPS: The Planning and Zoning Commission makes a recommendation to City Council. First and Second Readings of the proposed code amendments are not currently scheduled at Council. REQUEST OF THE P & Z: Planning and Zoning is asked to make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the proposed code amendments in the attached draft resolution. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Planning and Zoning recommend approval of the proposed code amendments. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution#09 , Series of 2009 Exhibit A— Section 26.310.040 Standards of Review Exhibit B—Maps of Historic Districts Exhibit C —"What is a Historic District" chapter of the Guide to Nominating Historic Districts, published by the Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Colorado Historical Society, 2006. ROWHDmemopz.doc Page - 3 - of3 RESOLUTION No. � (Series of 2009) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, ASPEN,COLORADO,DETERMINING THAT AMENDMENTS TO ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NUMBERED 49,SERIES OF 1974 AND ORINDANCE NUMBERED 60 SERIES OF 1976 MEET THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS OF REVIEW,AND DETERMINING THAT THE FOLLOWING CHAPTERS AND SECTIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE MEET APPLICABLE STANDARDS OF REVIEW: 26.415.070-DEVELOPMENT INVOLVING DESIGNATED HISTORIC PROPERTY;26.415.070.A-EXEMPT DEVELOPMENT; 26.415.070.B- CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT;26.415.070.0-CERTIFICAET OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT; 26.415.070.D- CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT. WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 26.210 and 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, the Director of the Community Development Department initiated amendments to Ordinance numbered 49, Series of 1974 and Ordinance numbered 60, Series of 1976 related to the boundaries of the Commercial Core and Main Street Historic Districts; and initiated amendments to the Land Use Code related to the Historic Preservation Commission's (HPC)purview in the right of ways within designated historic districts;and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the official zone district map and to amend text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or denial by the Community Development Director and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. Final action shall be by City Council after reviewing and considering these recommendations;and, WHEREAS, Ordinance numbered 49, Series of 1974 defined the Commercial Core Historic District as "all of lots 80, 81, 82, 93, 87, 88, 89, 90, 93, 94, 95, 96, and the south half of blocks 79, 86 and 92 of the City and Original Townsite of Aspen; and the south half of Block 19 East Aspen Addition to the City of Aspen,"which did not include the right of ways;and, WHEREAS, Ordinance numbered 60, Series of 1976 defined the Main Street Historic District as" all of those properties abutting(on the north and south)Main Street between Monarch and Seventh Streets, and all of Paepcke Park within the City of Aspen, Colorado: which area is more particularly described as lots K, L, M,N, O, P, Q, R and S of blocks 18,24,30,37,44, 51,58,66,73;lots A, B,C, D,E,F,G,H and J of Blocks 19, 25, 31, 38, 45, 52, 59, 74; and all of Block 67 of the Original Aspen Townsite," which did not include the right of ways;and, WHEREAS, the Community_ Development Director has recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the Aspen City Council Ordinance numbered 49 Series of PZ proposed code amendment Page 1 of 12 1974 and Ordinance numbered 60 Series of 1976„and has recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the City of Aspen Land Use Code Sections 26.415.070 — Development Involving Designated Historic Property; 26.415.070.A - Exempt Development; 26.415.070.13 — Certificate of No Negative Effect; 26.415.070.0 — Certificate of Appropriateness for Minor Development; 26.415.070.D — Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development;and, WHEREAS, pursuant to the City of Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.415.020- Definitions, the definition of a historic district is "a collection, concentration, linkage or continuity of buildings, structures, sites or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development," which, in part, necessitates the inclusion of the right of ways within the established boundaries to be a cohesive historic district;and, WHEREAS, the amendments proposed herein are consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan which, in part, calls to"work to improve the Historic Preservation Commission (HPQ review process" and to "ensure that the rules and regulations regarding development and historic preservation in our community create projects that are consistent with our broader community goals;"and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on April 21, 2009, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that City Council approve amendments to Aspen City Council Ordinance numbered 49 Series of 1974 and Ordinance numbered 60 Series of 1976; and approve amendment to the text of Sections 26.415.070 — Development Involving Designated Historic Property; 26.415.070.A - Exempt Development; 26.415.070.13 — Certificate of No Negative Effect; 26.415.070.0 — Certificate of Appropriateness for Minor Development; 26.415.070.D — Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development as described herein,by a vote;and WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310 and that the approval of the amendments is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan;and, WHEREAS,the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health,safety,and welfare. WHEREAS, the amendments to the Land Use Code are delineated as follows: Text unaffected is black and in standard print and looks like this. Text being added to the Deleted:Text bung removed is yea code is blue with underline and looks like this. with strikethron h and looks like this. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: Section l: Aspen City Council Ordinance numbered 49, Series of 1974 that defines the boundaries of the Commercial Core Historic District is hereby amended to include the right of ways within the existing outlying historic district boundaries and to correct existing clerical errors. Ordinance 49, Series of 1974. Section 1. PZ proposed code amendment Page 2 of 12 That the following described property located within Pitkin County, Colorado, be and herby is placed within an H,Historic Overlay District and designated an historic site: 11 of locks 80 81, 82 93, 87, 88, 89, 90,93, 94,95,96, and lots K, L, M,N,O, Deleted:A - '- -----' P, Q, R, S of blocks 79 86, and lots K, L, M, N, O, P, O, R of block_92 of the Deleted:lots City and Original Townsite of Aspen together with all sidewalks, alleyways Deleted:the south half streets or public area of any nature within or immediately adjacent to the above Deleted: and mentioned propertied Deleted,;and the south half of lock 19 All as is set forth in the map attached hereto as Exhibit"A". East Aspen Addition to the City of Aspen Deleted:. Further that the Official Zoning District Map of the City of Aspen is further amended by Deleted:,dated April 7,1967,as the designation of the above-described areas as an H Historic Overlay District. amended Deleted:prece Deleted:e Section 2: Aspen City Council Ordinance numbered 60, Series of 1976 that defines the Deleted:ding boundaries of the Main Street Historic District is hereby amended to include the right of ways within the existing outlying historic district boundaries and to correct clerical errors. Ordinance 60, Series of 1976. Section 1. That Main Street between Monarch and Seventh Streets is determined to have historic significance and that Main Street, the sidewalks adjacent thereto and the following described property located in Pitkin County, Colorado, be designated as an H historic Overlay District pursuant to the provisions of Article IX of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code All of lots K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R and S of blocks 18, 24, 30, 37, 44, 51, 58, 66, Deleted:. 73 of the Original Aspen Townsite;and, ,gll_of lots-A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H and Hof Blocks 19, 25,_31, 38,45,_52, 59,-74 of ----- Deleted:A the Original Aspen Townsite;and, Deleted:J 11 of Block 67 of the Ori inal As en Townsite and Deleted:. g p - = - - - - Deleted:A The side streets between the above-described blocks within one-half block of Main Street. All as is set forth in the map attached hereto as Exhibit"A". Further that the Official Zoning District Map of the City of Aspen is further amended by the designation of the above-described areas as an H,Historic Overlay District. Section 3: Section 26.415.070 - Development involving designated historic property, which section describes the procedure for designated historic property, shall be amended as follows: Sec.26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property. PZ proposed code amendment Page 3 of 12 No building.-structure- T99 terary structure, object, or landscape shall_be erected, _._ Deleted: or constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a development order. Section 4: Section 26.415.070.A—Exempt development,which section defines development that is exempt from staff or HPC review be amended as follows: Section 26.415.070.A. Exempt development. 1. Selected activities are exempted from the development review procedures including interior remodeling,paint color selection,exterior repainting or replastering similar to the existing finish or routine maintenance such as caulking,replacement of fasteners,repair of window glazing or other such minimally intrusive work. 2. Selected activities within a designated historic district right of way are exempted from the development review procedures including regular repair cleaning,snow removal, installation of utilities not visible within the historic district, seasonal lighting,temporary signage or other such minimally intrusive work. , . If there_is_any_question if a work activity qualifies as exempt,the -- Deleted:2 Community Development Director shall make the determination as to its eligibility. Section 5: Section 26.415.070.13—Certificate of No Negative Effect,which section defines development that qualifies for administrative review and approval shall be amended as follows: Section 26.415.070.B. Certificate of no negative effect. 1. An application for a certificate of no negative effect may be made to the Community Development Director for approval of work that has no adverse effect on the physical appearance or character-defining features of a designated property or historic district. An application for a certificate of no effect may be approved by the Community Development Director with no further review if it meets the requirements set forth in the following Subsection 26.415.070.B.2: 2. The Community Development Director shall issue a development order based upon a certificate of no negative effect within fourteen (14) days after receipt of a complete application if: a. It is determined that the activity is an eligible work item and meets the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines;and, PZ proposed code amendment Page 4 of 12 b. Any modifications to the proposed work requested by the Community Development Director are agreed to by the owner/applicant; and, c. The proposed work will not diminish, eliminate or adversely affect the significant historic and/or architectural character of the subject property or Historic District in which it is located. 3. An application for a certificate of no negative effect shall include the following: a. The general application information required in Section 26.304.030. b. Elevations or drawings of the proposed work. c. Photographs, building material samples and other exhibits, as needed,to accurately depict location,extent and design of proposed work. d. Verification that the proposal complies with Chapter 26.410, Residential design standards. 4.The following work shall be considered for a Certificate of No Negative Effect: a. Replacement or repair of architectural features which creates no change to the exterior physical appearance of the building or structure. b. Replacement or repair of architectural features that restores the building or structure to its historic appearance. c. Installation of awnings or similar attachments provided no significant feature is damaged,removed or obscured by the installation. d. Fencing that has no adverse effect on the historic or architectural character of the property or historic district. e. Mechanical equipment or accessory features that have no impact on Deleted: o� the character-defining features of the buildin structure or historic district. g gx- - ------- - f. Signs which have no effect on the character-defining features of the historic property or historic district. g. Alterations to noncontributing buildings within historic districts that have no adverse effect on its historic or architectural character. h. Alterations to no more than two(2)elements of nonprimary fagades of a designated building. i. Installation of site improvements, such as walkways,patios,pools or hot tubs,or similar significant features. PZ proposed code amendment Page 5 of 12 i. Repair or replacement of ditches, streetscape and/or landscaping such that there is a minimal impact on the historic character of the historic district. k. Installation of street furniture(i.e.benches,playgrounds,trashcans, bike racks) such that there is a minimal impact on the historic character of the historic district. 1. Installation of general roadway si nage, visible mechanical equipment or utilities (i.e. solar panels) such that there is minimal impact on the historic character of the historic district. 5. The development order and associated certificate of no negative effect shall expire and become null and void after three (3) years from the date of issuance by the Community Development Director unless a building permit is issued within that time. 6. In the event that the Community Development Director determines that the issuance of a certificate of no negative effect is not appropriate, the owner may apply for a certificate of appropriateness from the HPC. Section 6: Section 26.415.070.0—Certificate of appropriateness for minor development, which section defines development that qualifies for a one step review and public hearing before the HPC shall be amended as follows: Section 26.415.070.C. Certificate of appropriateness for a minor development. 1. The review and decision on the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness for minor development shall begin with a determination by the Community Development Director that the proposed project constitutes a minor development. Minor development work includes: a. Expansion or erection of a structure wherein the increase of the floor area of the structure is two hundred and fifty(250)square feet or less or b. Alterations to a building fagade, windows, doors, roof planes or material, exterior wall materials, dormer porch, exterior staircase, balcony or ornamental trim when three (3) or fewer elements are affected and the work does not qualify for a certificate of no negative effect or c. Erection or installation of a combination or multiples of awning, canopies,mechanical equipment, fencing,signs,accessory features and other attachments to designated properties or within a historic district such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the issuance of a certificate of no negative effect or PZ proposed code amendment Page 6 of 12 d.Alterations that are made to nonhistoric portions of a designated historic property or historic district that do not qualify for a certificate of no negative effect or e. The erection of street furniture, signs,public art,bus stops and other visible improvements within designated historic districts of a magnitude or in numbers such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the Heisted:. issuance of a certificate of no negative effector -------- ------------------------- f Installation of new safety improvement§,to-right of way within the - ----------------- historic districts of a magnitude or in numbers such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the issuance of a certificate of no negative effect. The Community Development Director may determine that an application for work on a designated historic property or within a designated historic district involving multiple categories of minor development may result in the cumulative impact such that it is considered a major development. In such cases, the applicant shall apply for a major development review in accordance with Subsection 26.415.07.D. 2.An application for minor development shall include the following: a. The general application information required in Section 26.304.030. b. Scaled elevations and/or drawings of the proposed work and its relationship to the designated historic buildings, structures, sites and features within its vicinity. c. An accurate representation of all building materials and finishes to be used in the development. d. Photographs and other exhibits, as needed, to accurately depict location, extent and design of proposed work. e. Verification that the proposal complies with Chapter 26.410, Residential design standards or a written request for a variance from any standard that is not being met. 3. The procedures for the review of minor development projects are as follows: a. The Community Development Director will review the application materials and if they are determined to be complete, schedule a public hearing before the HPC. The subject property shall be posted pursuant to Paragraph 26.304.060.E.3.b. b. Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code sections. This report will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a PZ proposed code amendment Page 7 of 12 recommendation to approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. c. The HPC shall approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a certificate of appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a development order. d. The HPC decision shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 26.316. Section 7: Section 26.415.070.D—Certificate of appropriateness for major development, which section defines development that qualifies for a two step review(conceptual and final)and two public hearings(conceptual and final)before the HPC shall be amended as follows: Section 26.415.070.D.Certificate of appropriateness for major development. 1. The review and decision on the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness for major development shall begin with a determination by the Community Development Director that the proposed project constitutes a major development. A major development includes one or more of the following activities: a. The construction of a new structure within a historic district;and/or b. Alterations to more than three (3) elements of a building fagade including its windows, doors, roof planes or materials, exterior wall material, dormers,porches, exterior staircase, balcony or ornamental trim; and/or c. The expansion of a building increasing the floor area by more than two hundred and fifty(250)square feet;and/or d. Any new development that has not been determined to be minor development. 2. The procedures for the review of major development projects include a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a conceptual development plan and then a final development plan. If a major development project involves additional City Land Use approvals, the Community Development Director may consolidate or modify the review process accordingly, pursuant to Subsection 26.304.060.B. 3. Conceptual development plan review. PZ proposed code amendment Page 8 of 12 a. An application for a conceptual development plan shall include the following: (1) The general application information required in Section 26.304.030. (2)A site plan and survey showing property boundaries, the location and orientation of existing and proposed improvements and predominant site characteristics. (3) Scaled drawings of all proposed structure(s) or addition(s) depicting their form, including their height, massing, scale, proportions and roof plan; and the primary features of all elevations. (4)Preliminary selection of primary building materials to be used in construction represented by samples and/or photographs. (5) Supplemental materials to provide a visual description of the context surrounding the designated historic property or historic district including at least one (1) of the following: diagrams,maps,photographs,models or streetscape elevations. (6) Verification that the proposal complies with Chapter 26.410, Residential design standards or a written request for a variance from any standard that is not being met. b. The procedures for the review of conceptual development plans for major development projects are as follows: (1) The Community Development Director shall review the application materials submitted for conceptual or final development plan approval. If they are determined to be complete, the applicant will be notified in writing of this and a public hearing before the HPC shall be scheduled. Notice of the hearing shall be provided pursuant to Section 26.304.060.E.3 Paragraphs a,b and c. (2) Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code sections. This report will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. PZ proposed code amendment Page 9 of 12 (3) The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. c. The effect of approval of a conceptual development plan is as follows: (1) Approval of a conceptual development plan shall not constitute final approval of a major development project or permission to proceed with the development. Such authorization shall only constitute authorization to proceed with the preparation of an application for a final development plan. (2) Approval of a conceptual development plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the conceptual plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the final development plan unless agreed to by the applicant. If the applicant chooses to makes substantial amendments to the conceptual design after it has been approved, a new conceptual development plan hearing shall be required. (3) Unless otherwise specified in the resolution granting conceptual development plan approval, a development application for a final development plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a conceptual development plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the conceptual development plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may,at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a conceptual development plan approval for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. 4. Final development plan review. a.An application for a final development plan shall include: (1) The general application information required in Section 26.304.030. (2) Final drawings of all proposed structures(s) and/or addition(s) included as part of the development at 1/4" = 1.0' scale. PZ proposed code amendment Page 10 of 12 3) An accurate representation of all major building materials to be used in the development, depicted through samples or photographs. (4) A statement, including narrative text or graphics, indicating how the final development plan conforms to representations made or stipulations placed as a condition of the approval of the conceptual development plan. b. The procedures for the review of final development plans for major development projects are as follows: (1)The Community Development Director shall review the application materials submitted for final development plan approval. If they are determined to be complete,the applicant will be notified in writing of this and a public hearing before the HPC shall be scheduled.Notice of the hearing shall be provided pursuant to Paragraphs 26.304.060.E.3.a,b and c. (2) Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code sections. This report will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. (3) The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a certificate of appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a development order. (4) A resolution of the HPC action will be forwarded to the City Council in accordance with Section 26.415.130 and no permit will be issued for construction of the project until the thirty(30)day"call up"period by City Council has expired. (5) Before an application for a building permit can be submitted, a final set of plans reflecting any or all required changes by the HPC or City Council must be on file with the City. Any conditions of approval or outstanding issues which must be addressed in the field or at a later time shall be noted on the plans. PZ proposed code amendment Page I I of 12 Section 8• A public hearing on the Resolution was held on the 21St day of April, 2009, at 4:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. FINALLY,adopted,passed and approved this day of 2009. LJ Erspamer,Chair Attest: Jackie, Lothian,City Clerk Approved as to form: James R.True,Special Counsel PZ proposed code amendment Page 12 of 12 ao ��g7,dP °pova�iA 1 w� ! �a p£k� 4aobQ tt °p od'v° i - -- 9. ¢ r r 4�ta, - i �¢�r �d4' Rd ''` ~ �ii g'9�� °( — `•� .�_ _�_0 125 250 ©bo�,� onop� ! na r KtI , tl6pJ.a` �DO� # ' �DQQ Opo Feet t �4 laa,n1,°per ,rRdd� t� � n!` o��t° t p7�`o v° ofthe features depicted and is note legal f4 representation.The accuracy may change 60Q eo ! �! `�vc y 'Syt, (i depending on the enlargement or reduction. ,r ..t ©Da „• r...,.. ! •` w,:,�� �''�; II •cr j�o + 9�_ p ��f �,S�c,,,�^ 'a-'� G p. �"'`�,�4 V u � �" 'r �'�.._._.',` u. t � o J Mho ti aq.�. , , a ICC , ::77� — 'I, � . ED t _ 1155 / n r 4 3 i 1 ,. i a �4 ! �"`� •.J+ � � �'�t"�. � cQD4©� /r A ' '`� ��-,r/ f�r�r/ ' i;'' F' r � �� `�,.. - -� ,�. �- .:. ,b �� ���! � � � 7 Qb ��� pb © /s A�:y� rsr ��� I "av ,.. "` •` p1 �aopav �;�o- r coq r rises f ✓� ��, rt�� 3c� Ink Ar (� y Q q „ / O Yr. ti 11 -`� 1.k � •, r �, � ��Q'.�m I ! r F,r� fin w�..'-jy�t. N - "`�•: o '^tea ED ©a090 Om01 t ., ,ti 4 /� E7 / ' r r Pr' .!• + 1», -' t o �.+ e° ID mm D°44fo �; rR / ri " 1F x � fl w ' omW sY Qa© ©fl I 19"' oaei� `1 £fl :x- OCT-- Exhibit A Standards of Review Historic Districts Code Amendment Sec. 26.310.040. Standards of review. In reviewing an amendment to the text of this Title or an amendment to the Official Zone District Map, the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. Staff Response: The proposed amendments are not in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title; rather they meet the purpose of Land Use Code Chapter 26.415 Development Involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures or Development in an "H" Historic Overlay District, which is to "promote the public health, safety and welfare through the protection, enhancement and preservation of those properties, areas and sites, which represent the distinctive elements of Aspen's cultural, educational, social, economic, political and architectural history." Furthermore, the amendment reflects the common practice of review that has been in place for years. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Response: The Historic Preservation chapter of the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) states that "we must continue to build on what we have by authentically preserving historic structures and creating thoughtful new buildings that encourage and shape that feeling of historical continuity." Cohesive historic districts that include right of ways and public areas within its boundaries are paramount to a preserving historic continuity and a defined sense of place. One of the policies in the AACP is to "ensure that the rules and regulations regarding development and historic preservation in our community create projects that are consistent with our broader community goals." The AACP seeks to "work to improve the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) review process." Clarifying the boundaries of Aspen's two Historic Districts and HPC's purview over certain actions within the Districts will improve the efficiency of the review process and will ensure compatibility of new projects in the right of way with the character defining features of the Districts. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Response: The proposed amendments are compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses. It will maintain the character defining features of Aspen's Page 1 of 3 Exhibit A Standards of Review Historic Districts Code Amendment Historic District by clarifying the review process for specific additions and alterations within the right of ways of Historic Districts. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Staff Response: No traffic will be generated with the proposed amendments. Road safety within the Historic Districts is imperative for the community to be able to enjoy and experience the period of significance that is preserved along Main Street and in the downtown Core. The proposed code amendment requires a written recommendation from the Colorado Department of Transportation for Major Development applications that involve Highway 82. Further, national safety regulations regarding road safety, accessibility, etc. are not compromised by this code amendment. HPC will be charged to work with other departments to find a compatible solution that meets national standards and historic preservation goals. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools and emergency medical facilities. Staff Response: The proposed amendment will not impact public facilities. Relevant departments have been consulted regarding the proposed amendments (i.e. Engineering, Parks, Streets, Water, Utilities, Parking.) F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Response: The proposed amendment will not result in significantly adverse impact on the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City. Staff Response: The proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in Aspen and seeks to maintain a defined sense of place within the local Historic Districts by clearly outlining the process for alterations and addition within the right of way in Historic Districts. Page 2 of 3 Exhibit A Standards of Review Historic Districts Code Amendment H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff Response: The recent Main Street corridor project brought the question of HPC's purview in the right of ways of Historic Districts to the forefront. Staff analyzed the code and historic district ordinances and discovered that not only was the review process unclear, but the boundaries of the two Historic Districts were inaccurate. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest and whether it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this Title. Staff Response: The proposed amendment supports the purpose and intent of the Land Use Code in that it will "recognize, protect and promote the retention and continued utility of the historic buildings and districts in the City" and it will "retain the historic, architectural and cultural resource attractions that support tourism and the economic welfare of the community." Staff finds that all of the Standards of review are met. Page 3 of 3 mW IF • Historic Parcels in Downtown Core r Y Y 9 A ,/,d � ,z t 7i Uqt , ..;ft,�,r 0, �'• nY Sr: 'i r` j' 250 125 0 250 500 750 1,000 Feet Legend N Historic Distric Boundary Historic Parcels=��I I vU�t ' J Main Street Historic Parcels `NIJ-51W f +''yN 041 J S' � i e) "�`i.f'' ., * R•%�,t .lei �, YY ""' • 1 r r r `'Y. > 4 ��s�' �4y�� e e PP 4 �. ���, �' � �"'eY°ft C�.r'� yv a �t fir f t �,'�A`r•Kx�f p' S� �! a 4�If�'�I ', � ;�� < i . :�`,�#*,�1(sp i. � .1" � `'- ,t .,F r� y •.:'rjk . _ro 1. � 1: f �I I/' fi ��Y��''%' ref � F.y: � e 'P � I ) 4 l 'i'>•t.:_ I 0 250 500 1 ,000 1,500 2,000 Legend Feet Main St. Boundary= mW Wic, C5�C," N MainSt. Hist. Parcels= W4T� t,�4c+ What %s at Wstona Dnstrtot? A historic district possesses a significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of sites, buildings, structures, or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development. Concentration, Linkage, & Continuity of Features A district derives its importance from being a unified entity, even though it is often composed of a wide variety of resources. The identity of a district results from the interrelationship of its resources, which convey a visual sense of the overall historic environment or form an arrangement of historically or functionally related properties. For example, a district can reflect one principal activity, such as a mill or a ranch, or it can encompass several interrelated activities, such as an area that includes industrial, residential, or commercial buildings, sites, structures, or objects. Significance A district must be significant, as well as being an identifiable entity. It must be important for historical, architectural, archeological, engineering, or cultural values. Districts are often significant for more than one reason. For example, a business district may be significant for its commercial history as well as its architecture. Types of Features A district can comprise both features that lack individual distinction and individually distinctive features that serve as focal points. It may even be considered eligible if all of the components lack individual distinction, provided that the grouping achieves significance as a whole within its historic context. In either case, the majority of the components that add to the district's historic character, even if they are individually undistinguished, must possess integrity, as must the district as a whole. A district can contain buildings, structures, sites, objects, or open spaces that do not contribute to the significance of the district. The number of noncontributing properties a district can contain yet still convey its sense of time and place and historical development depends on how these properties affect the district's integrity. '?'/ �r�,yp'a• ��J 'I v .s" KV � 4 2 Guide to Nominating Historic Districts The most numerous types of National Register historic districts are those for residential and commercial properties. A good way to learn about what constitutes a National Register historic district is to read one or more district nominations. Recently listed districts provide the best examples of current standards for a complete and well-documented nomination. Copies of all National Register district nominations may be obtained from the Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. See the section on Special District Types for information on other National Register district types. Examples of National Register residential and commercial districts Residential neighborhoods Year Listed ➢ Park Hill, Denver................... .............................................................................2004 ➢ Sherman Street Historic District, Denver.................................................................2004 ➢ Louviers, Louviers.....................................................................................................1999 ➢ Reno Park Addition, Arvada ..............................................................................1999 Stocke-Walter Addition, Arvada.........................................................................1999 > Arapahoe Acres, Englewood....................................................................................1998 ➢ Boulder Crescent Place Historic District, Colorado Springs ...................................1987 ➢ Sherman Street Historic Residential District, Fort Morgan......................................1987 ➢ West Side Historic District, Longmont......................................................................1987 ➢ East Side Historic District, Longmont.......................................................................1986 ➢ North Weber Street-Wahsatch Avenue Residential District, Colorado Springs.....1985 North 7`" St. Historic Residential District, Grand Junction..................................1984 ➢ East Third Avenue Historic Residential District, Durango..................................1984 ➢ Twelfth Street Historic Residential District, Golden...........................................1983 ➢ North End Historic District, Colorado Springs....................................................1982 ➢ San Juan Avenue Historic District, La Junta......................................................1980 Laurel School Historic District, Fort Collins........................................................1980 ➢ Pitkin Place Historic District, Pueblo..................................................................1978 ➢ Auraria 9t' Street Historic District, Denver.........................................................1973 Commercial districts ➢ Littleton Main Street, Littleton............................................................................1998 ➢ Arvada Downtown, Arvada................................................................................1998 ➢ Monte Vista Downtown Historic District, Monte Vista........................................1991 ➢ Idaho Springs Downtown Commercial District, Idaho Springs ..........................1984 ➢ Salida Downtown Historic District, Salida..........................................................1984 ➢ Cation City Downtown Historic District, Canon City ..........................................1983 ➢ Ouray Historic District, Ouray............................................................................1983 ➢ Old Colorado City Historic Commercial District.................................................1982 ➢ Union Avenue Historic Commercial District, Pueblo..........................................1982 ➢ Boulder Downtown Historic District, Boul der.....................................................1980 ➢ Durango Main Avenue Historic District, Durango..............................................1980 ➢ Old Town Historic District, Fort Collins..............................................................1978 ➢ Corazon de Trinidad District, Trinidad...............................................................1973 National Register of Historic Places in Colorado 3 ` r �^S c 4 1 \ >z 2'.a r � ,yy ! xx'fy�'IN t p s h( • r r - AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E),ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: I f eG :7S__t L7 , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 5 S.'lb ,a,00 STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, 1�G -�a) C cSJ'�-�`� (name,please print) being, representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado,hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached he7•eto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch ill height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the_day of , 200_, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty(60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and go>>ernmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued 077 next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested,to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (3 0) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions that create more than one lot, Planned Unit Developments, Specially Planned Areas, and COWAPs are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen(15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. ignature The foregoing"Affidavit of Notice"was acknowled ed before me this Z3 day of "a r� , 200_2, by SQL, P(,RUC NOTICE RE: CITY fNOFTDAMENDMENTS TO WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL CHAPTER 26.6'75 5 OF THE LAND USE CODE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Wednesday April 8,2009,at a meeting to begin 5:00 p.m.before the Aspen My co ission expires: 0�( (I Historic Preservation Commission,Council Chambers,City Hall,130 S.Galena St.,Aspen,to consider a Community Development Department initiated ordinance regarding historic districts through an amendment to Chapter 26.415 "Development Involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures or y Development in an"H"Historic Overlay District". NOtary Pub11C �. For further information,contact Sara Adams at the City of Aspen Community Development ,, ?;' Ry P�� Department,130 S.Galena St.,Aspen,CO,(970) b, •••••.•••• �! 429 2778,saraa@ci.asl)en-co.us. _ ,N•• •••ate s/Michael Hoffman.Chair I ` Aspen Historic Preservation Commission L^Ub A Published in The Aspen Times Weekly on March MEYER 22,2009. (3160803) !? q ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: •..., • COPYOFTHEPUBLICATION °P ° • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE(SIGN) Pf: rnmissit9n Ez ±)es 0811012010 • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTAE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. X24-65.5-103.3 r ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 8 2009 Michael said he is comfortable with staff and monitor reviewing the landscape plan. In terms of the residential design variances the window size is broken up by the railing on the balcony. Jay and Nora thanked the owners for compromising the roof height. Sarah said a looser grouping of conifers would be well suited for the context of the neighborhood. MOTION.- Brian moved to approve Resolution #11 for 1291 Riverside Drive Lot B of Lot 20 of 1295 Riverside Drive Subdivision as drafted by staff with the condition that the residential design standard is approved; motion second by Jay. All in favor, motion carried 6-0. Roll call vote: Brian, yes; Ann, yes; Nora, yes; Jay,yes; Sarah, yes; Michael, yes. Brian—monitor on the project. Wheeler Opera House addition —work session with Planning & Zoning — no minutes Planning and Zoning members present: Stan Gibbs, L. J. Erspamer, Michael Wampler Code amendments— HPC jurisdiction in rights-of-ways Code amendment DeNovo review by Council on appeals of HPC decisions Sara said staff feels the purview over changes in the right of ways in the historic districts could be clearer. The Community Development Department thought the best way to address it was to do a code amendment clarifying the language. The code amendment would clarify the boundaries of the historic district and the second thing would be to clarify the review process so that everyone in the City is on the same page as to what is exempt and what goes to HPC. Our overall goal is to ensure a cohesive uninterrupted historic district that really conveys a sense of space of the defined significant time periods that we have for the two historic districts. Many meetings were arranged with the Parks, Parking, Engineering, Water, Utilities etc. and they all have seen the proposed amendments and all seem to be supportive. 3 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 8 2009 Boundaries: Sara said the first part clears up the 1970's language. In all the research done historic districts are one cohesive district. We aren't adding any properties we are just clarifying that HPC has jurisdiction as to what happens between the parameters identified. Brian asked if the historic district would go out to the center of the right-of- way. It would be better if it spanned across the street. Sara said the map can be changed. HPC suggested a map be attached to the ordinance as an exhibit. Amy said we need to discuss what the outside boundaries are of these districts such as alleys. Jim True said in the historic district it is different, we did not include the alleyways behind. Sara said it was defined within one half block of Main Street which would terminate at the end of the parcel. Amy asked why in the core it goes halfway into the surrounding right-of- way. Chris said the street is the formal public street and you could do a street furniture design. Sara said for Main Street the district is a half block off Main Street into the side street so it doesn't include the alley, it terminates at the end of the parcel. Brian said maybe there are issues that might come up in the future such as alley life etc. Maybe we should include the alleys on Main Street. Michael said he feels Main Street should include the alleys. There are structures that extend up to the alley. Jay inquired about the past if UPC was ever interested in the alleys. Ann said alleys contribute to the character of historic resources. 4 r J ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 8-, 200 Brian said maybe in future proposals from Engineering or Streets they might want to pave the alleys and we as a commission might not want to see that. HPC unanimously requested that alleys be added in the historic boundaries. Sara said the rest of the code amendment talks about the review processes. We will follow the existing types of review that HPC already has and then we would add subsections for within the right-of-way. Section #3 was amended to add object or landscape. Ann requested that temporary structures be added to the language. HPC members all agreed. Section #4 new paragraph added indicating what is exempt from review by staff or HPC. Section #5 is for Certificate of no negative effect. Three sections are added. j. Alterations of ditches, streetscape and/or landscaping such that there is a minimal impact on the historic character of the historic district. k. Installation of street furniture (i.e. benches, playgrounds, trash cans, bike racks) such that there is a minimal impact on the historic character of the historic district. L Installation of general roadway signage not including safety signage required by MUTCD, installation of visible mechanical equipment or utilities (i.e. solar panels) such that there is minimal impact of the historic character of the historic district. Section 6 minor development. Section f added. Installation of new safety improvements to right of way within the historic district of a magnitude or ion numbers such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the issuance of a certificate of no negative effect. Sara said basically there are tiers of reviews. Michael inquired if the code amendment captured all of the things that might happen in the right of way. Sara said all of the departments gave her lists of everything that they do in the right-of-way. Section 7 major development. Sara pointed out that major development is anything that doesn't qualify as minor development. The main street corridor would be considered major. Section (7) added. A proposal involving State owned or controlled property requires a written consent from the Colo. Dept. of Transportation. Main Street is a state highway, 5 ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES OF APRIL 8 2009 Jay asked if CDOT wanted to make major changes would they come before the HPC. Jim True, Special Counsel said theoretically the state highway would be the applicant and if they came before the HPC requesting median strips for a safety issue and UPC said no we would have somewhat of a dilemma. Chances are they would have the power to go ahead and do it when it involves a safety issue but in general the State would defer to local governments. Sara said in general HPC made two changes; to include alleys in the Main Street Historic District and to add the term temporary structure to Section 3. Chairperson, Michael Hoffman opened the public hearing. There were no public comments. The public hearing section of the agenda item was closed. MOTION: Ann made the motion to accept the changes proposed by HPC as Sara has documented; second by Brian. All in favor, motion carried. De Novo Review by Council on Appeals of HPC Decision. Sara said this code amendment has to deal with the call up procedures that we currently have. Right now City Council can call up design decisions by HPC or P&Z such as major development and commercial design review. Right now when it is called up it is based on the record. They would be looking for a finding as to whether the review board denied due process, exceeded its jurisdiction or abused its discretion. Council directed staff to propose a code amendment that would change the type of review that council can use when they call up a design project. They want to change it to be a content based review which we call a De Novo review. De Novo means basically that you would start from the beginning; such as what is the height, what type of windows etc. They would not be just looking at whether or not the correct proceeding was followed in the hearing. Boulder and Telluride use this system. On one hand it provides another layer of checks and balances but on the other hand the Community Development staff feels it creates just another level of uncertainty to applicants such as is my project going to get called up and will I have to change all the work that I did with HPC already. We are concerned how that conflicts with the goals 6 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Historic Preservation Commission THRU: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer FROM: Sara Adams, Historic Preservation Planner RE: Historic Districts code amendment/ HPC purview in the right of way DATE: April 8, 2009 HPC's purview over changes in the right of ways of Aspen's two historic districts was questioned recently during the proposed improvements to the Main Street corridor. Staff analyzed the Code and the designation ordinances for the Main Street (1976) and Commercial Core Historic Districts (1974) and discovered that not only is the review process for changes to Historic District right of ways confusing and unclear, but the defined boundaries of the Historic Districts are inaccurate. One of the Historic Preservation goals listed in the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan is to "work to improve the Historic Preservation Commission review process." The Community Development Director has initiated this code amendment to correct past clerical errors in the ordinances designating the Main Street and Commercial Core Historic Districts and to clarify review processes for development within the designated Historic District right of ways. BACKGROUND: As defined in code section 26.415.020, Historic Districts are "a collection, concentration, linkage or continuity of buildings,structures, sites or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development." The first Historic District in the United States was created in Charleston, South Carolina in 1931. Patterns of architecture, repetition of historic uses and/or concentration of development are important tangible and understandable pieces of our history that create a sense of place for present and more Charleston Historic District Map importantly future generations. The majority of historic districts around the county have defined boundaries that encompass - � properties containing buildings that contribute to a sense of place a 'k - and specific period of significance important to a town's history. The image to the left illustrates the boundaries of Charleston's historic district, which includes all property, right of ways and - public domain within the defined boundaries. Aspen's ordinances designating the historic districts describe lots and blocks in the area, but are unclear as to how the adjacent public spaces are to be treated. Mapping of the districts over the years has indicated that the blocks and the streets within them are part of the � district but clarification is needed to ensure a cohesive, uninterrupted district that portrays Aspen's history (please see Exhibit B for maps.) ROWHDmemoHPC.doc Page - 1 - of 3 Staff met with the following departments to discuss work that is typically done in the right of ways to help figure out appropriate and realistic review processes for different types of development: Parks, Engineering, Parking, Streets, Water and Utilities. PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS: Staff proposes adoption of code amendments that establish a better process for work that should qualify as exempt, administrative review or HPC review. The following narrative is to provide HPC background on the amendments included in the attached resolution. Sections 1 and 2: These sections propose amended language to the existing Ordinances (number 49, series of 1974 and number 60 series of 1976) that designated the Main Street and Commercial Core Historic Districts. There were a few clerical errors that need to be corrected, and more importantly the boundaries of the district are defined such that they include all areas between the alleyways to the north and south of Main Street for the Main Street Historic District and between Mill Street, Durant Street, Hunter Street and the north alleyway behind Main Street for the Commercial Core Historic District. It was always assumed that the Historic Districts were a contiguous area with a defined exterior border that included all areas within, both public and private. This amendment clearly defines the boundaries as illustrated in Exhibit A to the proposed Resolution. Section 3: The proposed amendment to Section 3 proposes to include objects and landscapes among the items that are under HPC's purview. Section 4: Section 4 proposes development in the right of ways that does not require review by the Historic Preservation Commission. Any work that has no permanent and/or adverse impact on the historic character of the district is exempt; for example: temporary signage, seasonal lighting and regular repairs. Section 5: Administrative approvals are currently granted through a Certificate of No Negative Effect. Section 5 proposes that any work that will have a minimal impact on the historic district b approved administratively; for example, the installation of some street furniture, solar panels, replacement of ditches or streetscapes that are minimal in nature. Section 6: Section 6 proposes language that would qualify for a minor review at the HPC. This is a one step review process that involves a public hearing. Basically, any work in the right of ways of historic districts of a magnitude that does not meet the criteria for an administrative approval qualifies as a Minor Development review. A written referral from CDOT is proposed as an additional application requirement for work involving State Highway 82. Section 7: Section 7 proposes that any work that has a significant impact on the historic district, for example a master plan, qualifies for a Major Development review at the HPC, which includes a two step process and public hearings. Similar to a Minor Development application, a written referral from CDOT is included as a requirement for work involving State Highway 82. ROWHDmemoHPC.doc Page - 2 - of3 NEXT STEPS: Staff is scheduled to present the proposed code amendments to the Planning and Zoning Commission on April 21, 2009. The Planning and Zoning Commission makes a recommendation to City Council. First and Second Readings of the proposed code amendments are scheduled for May 11th and May 26`h respectively. The Land Use Code does not require a recommendation from the HPC for amendments to the Code; however, Staff determined that HPC need to provide feedback because the proposed amendments directly involve HPC's jurisdiction. REQUEST OF THE HPC: HPC is asked to make a recommendation to the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council regarding the proposed code amendments in the attached draft resolution. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that HPC recommend approval of the proposed code amendments. ATTACHMENTS: Resolution # , Series of 2009 Exhibit A— Section 26.310.040 Standards of Review Exhibit B—Maps of Historic Districts Exhibit C—"What is a Historic District" chapter of the Guide to Nominating Historic Districts, published by the Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Colorado Historical Society, 2006. ROWHDmemoHPC.doc Page - 3 - of 3 _RESOLUTION No._ (Series of 2009) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION, ASPEN,COLORADO,DETERMINING THAT AMENDMENTS TO ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE NUMBERED 49,SERIES OF 1974 AND ORINDANCE NUMBERED 60 SERIES OF 1976 MEET THE APPLICABLE STANDARDS OF REVIEW,AND DETERMINING THAT THE FOLLOWING CHAPTERS AND SECTIONS OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE MEET APPLICABLE STANDARDS OF REVIEW: 26.415.070-DEVELOPMENT INVOLVING DESIGNATED HISTORIC PROPERTY;26.415.070.A-EXEMPT DEVELOPMENT; 26.415.070.B- CERTIFICATE OF NO NEGATIVE EFFECT;26.415.070.0-CERTIFICAET OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR MINOR DEVELOPMENT; 26.415.070.D- CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT. WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 26.210 and 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, the Director of the Community Development Department initiated amendments to Ordinance numbered 49, Series of 1974 and Ordinance numbered 60, Series of 1976 related to the boundaries of the Commercial Core and Main Street Historic Districts; and initiated amendments to the Land Use Code related to the Historic Preservation Commission's (HPC) purview in the right of ways within designated historic districts;and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the official zone district map and to amend text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or denial by the Community Development Director and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. Final action shall be by City Council after reviewing and considering these recommendations;and, WHEREAS, Ordinance numbered 49, Series of 1974 defined the Commercial Core Historic District as"all of lots 80, 81, 82, 93, 87, 88, 89, 90, 93, 94, 95, 96, and the south half of blocks 79, 86 and 92 of the City and Original Townsite of Aspen; and the south half of Block 19 East Aspen Addition to the City of Aspen,"which did not include the right of ways;and, WHEREAS, Ordinance numbered 60, Series of 1976 defined the Main Street Historic District as" all of those properties abutting(on the north and south) Main Street between Monarch and Seventh Streets, and all of Paepcke Park within the City of Aspen, Colorado: which area is more particularly described as lots K, L, M,N, O, P, Q, R and S of blocks 18,24,30,37,44, 51, 58,66,73; lots A, B,C,D,E,F, G,H and J of Blocks 19, 25, 31, 38, 45, 52, 59, 74; and all of Block 67 of the Original Aspen Townsite," which did not include the right of ways;and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the Aspen City Council Ordinance numbered 49 Series of HPC jurisdiction code amendment Page 1 of 12 1974 and Ordinance numbered 60 Series of 1976, and has recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the City of Aspen Land Use Code Sections 26.415.070 — Development Involving Designated Historic Property; 26.415.070.A - Exempt Development; 26.415.070.13 — Certificate of No Negative Effect; 26.415.070.0 — Certificate of Appropriateness for Minor Development; 26.415.070.1) — Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development;and, WHEREAS, pursuant to the City of Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.415.020- Definitions, the definition of a historic district is "a collection, concentration, linkage or continuity of buildings, structures, sites or objects united historically or aesthetically by plan or physical development," which, in part, necessitates the inclusion of the right of ways within the established boundaries to be a cohesive historic district;and, WHEREAS, the amendments proposed herein are consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan which, in part, calls to"work to improve the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) review process" and to "ensure that the rules and regulations regarding development and historic preservation in our community create projects that are consistent with our broader community goals;"and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on April 8, 2009, the Historic Preservation Commission recommended that City Council approve amendments to Aspen City Council Ordinance numbered 49 Series of 1974 and Ordinance numbered 60 Series of 1976; and approve amendment to the text of Sections 26.415.070 — Development Involving Designated Historic Property; 26.415.070.A - Exempt Development; 26.415.070.13 — Certificate of No Negative Effect; 26.415.070.0 — Certificate of Appropriateness for Minor Development; 26.415.070.D —Certificate of Appropriateness for Major Development as described herein,by a vote;and WHEREAS, the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission finds that the amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310 and that the approval of the amendments is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan;and, WHEREAS,the Aspen Historic Preservation Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health,safety,and welfare. WHEREAS, the amendments to the Land Use Code are delineated as follows: Text unaffected is black and in standard print and looks like this. Text being added to the code is blue with underline and looks like this. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION as follows: Section 1: Aspen City Council Ordinance numbered 49, Series of 1974 that defines the boundaries of the Commercial Core Historic District is hereby amended to include the right of ways within the existing outlying historic district boundaries and to correct existing clerical errors. Ordinance 49, Series of 1974. Section 1. HPC jurisdiction code amendment Page 2 of 12 That the following described property located within Pitkin County, Colorado, be and herby is placed within an H,Historic Overlay District and designated an historic site: 11 of locks 80 81 82, 93 87 88 89,90 93 94,95, 96 and lots K, L, M,N,O, - - Deleted:A - ---- --- - '- - - - ---' --'- ----- ------ ---- ---- - P, Q, R, S�pf_blocks 79,_86_and-92_of_the City and_Original_Townsite_of Aspen_ Deleted: together with all sidewalks, alleyways, streets or public area of any nature within - Deleted:the south half or immediately adjacent to the above mentioned properties................................... Deleted.;and the south half oflock 19 East Aspen Addition to the City of Aspen All as is set forth in the map attached hereto as Exhibit"A". Deleted:. Further that the Official Zoning District Map of the City of Asper is further amended by Deleted:,dated April 7,1967,as the designation of the above-described areas_as an H,Historic Overlay District. amended -- Deleted:prece Deleted:e Section 2: Aspen City Council Ordinance numbered 60, Series of 1976 that defines the Deleted:ding boundaries of the Main Street Historic District is hereby amended to include the right of ways within the existing outlying historic district boundaries and to correct clerical errors. Ordinance 60, Series of 1976. Section 1. That Main Street between Monarch and Seventh Streets is determined to have historic significance and that Main Street, the sidewalks adjacent thereto and the following described property located in Pitkin County, Colorado, be designated as an H historic Overlay District pursuant to the provisions of Article IX of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code All of lots K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R and S of blocks 18, 24, 30, 37, 44, 51, 58, 66, Deleted:. 73 of the Original Aspen Townsite;ands ,q�1_of lots_A, B C, D, E, F, G, H and Hof Blocks 19, 25,_31,_38, 45, 52, 59,_74 of Deleted:A the Original Aspen Townsite;and,-___ ----------_______ Deleted:J 11 of Block 67 of the Original Aspen Townsite and Deleted`_ g p --------------------------------- Deleted:A The side streets between the above-described blocks within one-half block of Main Street. All as is set forth in the map attached hereto as Exhibit"B". Further that the Official Zoning District Map of the City of Aspen is further amended by the designation of the above-described areas as an H,Historic Overlay District. Section 3: Section 26.415.070 - Development involving designated historic property, which section describes the procedure for designated historic property, shall be amended as follows: Sec. 26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property. HPC jurisdiction code amendment Page 3 of 12 No building.,-structure,--o-bject,-or Ian dsca- p- - e shall- --be- -erected- - -,-cons- -tructed- , enlarged, - Deleted: or - - - - ---- - - ---- --- - --- - ---- --------------- altered, repaired, relocated o impoved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An application for a building permit cannot be submitted without a development order. Section 4: Section 26.415.070.A—Exempt development,which section defines development that is exempt from staff or HPC review be amended as follows: Section 26.415.070.A. Exempt development. 1. Selected activities are exempted from the development review procedures including interior remodeling,paint color selection,exterior repainting or replastering similar to the existing finish or routine maintenance such as caulking,replacement of fasteners,repair of window glazing or other such minimally intrusive work. 2. Selected activities within a designated historic district right of way are exempted from the development review procedures including regular repair, cleaning,snow removal,installation of utilities not visible within the historic district,seasonal lighting temporary signage,or other such minimally intrusive work. J.If there_is_any_question if a-work activity qualifies as exempt,-the--- ------ ------ Deleted:2 Community Development Director shall make the determination as to its eligibility. Section 5: Section 26.415.070.13—Certificate of No Negative Effect,which section defines development that qualifies for administrative review and approval shall be amended as follows: Section 26.415.070.B. Certificate of no negative effect. 1. An application for a certificate of no negative effect may be made to the Community Development Director for approval of work that has no adverse effect on the physical appearance or character-defining features of a designated property or historic district. An application for a certificate of no effect may be approved by the Community Development Director with no further review if it meets the requirements set forth in the following Subsection 26.415.070.B.2: 2. The Community Development Director shall issue a development order based upon a certificate of no negative effect within fourteen (14) days after receipt of a complete application if: a. It is determined that the activity is an eligible work item and meets the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines;and, HPC jurisdiction code amendment Page 4 of 12 b. Any modifications to the proposed work requested by the Community Development Director are agreed to by the owner/applicant; and, c. The proposed work will not diminish, eliminate or adversely affect the significant historic and/or architectural character of the subject property or Historic District in which it is located. 3. An application for a certificate of no negative effect shall include the following: a. The general application information required in Section 26.304.030. b. Elevations or drawings of the proposed work. c. Photographs, building material samples and other exhibits, as needed,to accurately depict location,extent and design of proposed work. d. Verification that the proposal complies with Chapter 26.410, Residential design standards. 4.The following work shall be considered for a Certificate of No Negative Effect: a. Replacement or repair of architectural features which creates no change to the exterior physical appearance of the building or structure. b. Replacement or repair of architectural features that restores the building or structure to its historic appearance. c. Installation of awnings or similar attachments provided no significant feature is damaged,removed or obscured by the installation. d. Fencing that has no adverse effect on the historic or architectural character of the property or historic district. e. Mechanical equipment or accessory features that have no impact on Deleted: or the character-defining features of the building,,structure or historic district. f. Signs which have no effect on the character-defining features of the historic property or historic district. g. Alterations to noncontributing buildings within historic districts that have no adverse effect on its historic or architectural character. h. Alterations to no more than two(2)elements of nonprimary fayades of a designated building. i. Installation of site improvements, such as walkways,patios,pools or hot tubs,or similar significant features. HPC jurisdiction code amendment Page 5 of 12 i. Alterations of ditches, streetscape and/or landscaping such that there is a minimal impact on the historic character of the historic district. k. Installation of street furniture i.e. benches playgrounds,,p yg ounds,trashcans, bike racks)such that there is a minimal impact on the historic character of the historic district. 1. Instal eneral roadway si a e not including safe si a e required MUT 'installation of visible mechanical equipment or utilities i.e. is minimal im act on the historic character of the historic district. 5. The development order and associated certificate of no negative effec shall expire and become null and void after three (3) years from the date of 1 issuance by the Community Development Director unless a building permit is issued within that time. 6. In the event that the Community Development Director determines that the issuance of a certificate of no negative effect is not appropriate,the owner may apply for a certificate of appropriateness from the HPC. Section 6: Section 26.415.070.0—Certificate of appropriateness for minor development, which section defines development that qualifies for a one step review and public hearing before the HPC shall be amended as follows: Section 26.415.070.C. Certificate of appropriateness for a minor development. 1. The review and decision on the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness for minor development shall begin with a determination by the Community Development Director that the proposed project constitutes a minor development.Minor development work includes: a. Expansion or erection of a structure wherein the increase of the floor area of the structure is two hundred and fifty(250)square feet or less or b. Alterations to a building fagade, windows, doors, roof planes or material, exterior wall materials, dormer porch, exterior staircase, balcony or ornamental trim when three (3) or fewer elements are affected and the work does not qualify for a certificate of no negative effect or c.Erection or installation of a combination or multiples of awning, canopies,mechanical equipment,fencing,signs,accessory features and other attachments to designated properties or within a historic district such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the issuance of a certificate of no negative effect or HPC jurisdiction code amendment Page 6 of 12 o � d.Alterations that are made to nonhistoric portions of a designated historic property or historic district that do not qualify for a certificate of no negative effect or e. The erection of street furniture,signs,public art,bus stops and other visible improvements within designated historic districts of a magnitude or in numbers such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the Deleted, issuance of a certificate of no negative effect a --------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- -- f. Installation of new safely improvemegAto ri"ht of _M within the " . - Deleted: historic districts of a magnitude or in numbers such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the issuance of a certificate of no negative, effect. The Community Development Director may determine that an application for work on a designated historic property or within a designated historic district involving multiple categories of minor development may result in the cumulative impact such that it is considered a major development. In such cases, the applicant shall apply for a major development review in accordance with Subsection 26.415.07.D. 2.An application for minor development shall include the following: a.The general application information required in Section 26.304.030. b. Scaled elevations and/or drawings of the proposed work and its relationship to the designated historic buildings, structures, sites and features within its vicinity. c. An accurate representation of all building materials and finishes to be used in the development. d. Photographs and other exhibits, as needed, to accurately depict location,extent and design of proposed work. e. Verification that the proposal complies with Chapter 26.410, Residential design standards or a written request for a variance from any standard that is not being met. f A proposal involving,state owned or controlled property requires a Deleted:recommendation written consent from the Colorado De artment of Transportation.----- -- --------- - - - - - -----�--- ---r-- - ----- ------- - -----'—�p".-�" l gyp, 3. The proceduresyfo e review of minor vd6 elopement projects, follows: a. The Community Development Director will review the application materials and if they are determined to be complete, schedule a public hearing before the HPC. The subject property shall be posted pursuant to Paragraph 26.304.060.E.3.b. HPC jurisdiction code amendment Page 7 of 12 b. Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code sections. This report will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. c. The HPC shall approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a certificate of appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a development order. d. The HPC decision shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a landowner within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 26.316. Section 7: Section 26.415.070.D—Certificate of appropriateness for major development, which section defines development that qualifies for a two step review(conceptual and final)and two public hearings(conceptual and final)before the HPC shall be amended as follows: Section 26.415.070.D.Certificate of appropriateness for major development. 1. The review and decision on the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness for major development shall begin with a determination by the Community Development Director that the proposed project constitutes a major development. A major development includes one or more of the following activities: a. The construction of a new structure within a historic district;and/or b. Alterations to more than three (3) elements of a building fagade including its windows, doors, roof planes or materials, exterior wall material, dormers,porches, exterior staircase, balcony or ornamental trim; and/or c. The expansion of a building increasing the floor area by more than two hundred and fifty(250)square feet;and/or d. Any new development that has not been determined to be minor development. 2. The procedures for the review of major development projects include a two-step process requiring approval by the HPC of a conceptual development plan and then a final development plan. If a major development project involves additional City Land Use approvals, the Community Development HPC jurisdiction code amendment Page 8 of 12 Director may consolidate or modify the review process accordingly, pursuant to Subsection 26.304.060.B. 3. Conceptual development plan review. a. An application for a conceptual development plan shall include the following: (l) The general application information required in Section 26.304.030. (2) A site plan and survey showing property boundaries, the location and orientation of existing and proposed improvements and predominant site characteristics. (3) Scaled drawings of all proposed structure(s) or addition(s) depicting their form, including their height, massing, scale, proportions and roof plan; and the primary features of all elevations. (4) Preliminary selection of primary building materials to be used in construction represented by samples and/or photographs. (5) Supplemental materials to provide a visual description of the context surrounding the designated historic property or historic district including at least one (1) of the following: diagrams,maps,photographs,models or streetscape elevations. (6) Verification that the proposal complies with Chapter 26.410, Residential design standards or a written request for a variance from any standard that is not being met. (7) A proposal involving State owned or controlled property requires a written consent from the Colorado Department of Transportation. b. The procedures for the review of conceptual development plans for major development projects are as follows: (1) The Community Development Director shall review the application materials submitted for conceptual or final development plan approval. If they are determined to be complete, the applicant will be notified in writing of this and a public hearing before the HPC shall be scheduled. Notice of the hearing shall be provided pursuant to Section 26.304.060.E.3 Paragraphs a,b and c. (2) Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design HPC jurisdiction code amendment Page 9 of 12 guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code sections. This report will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. (3) The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. c. The effect of approval of a conceptual development plan is as follows: (1) Approval of a conceptual development plan shall not constitute final approval of a major development project or permission to proceed with the development. Such authorization shall only constitute authorization to proceed with the preparation of an application for a final development plan. (2) Approval of a conceptual development plan shall be binding upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the conceptual plan application including its height, scale, massing and proportions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed development by the HPC as part of their review of the final development plan unless agreed to by the applicant. If the applicant chooses to makes substantial amendments to the conceptual design after it has been approved, a new conceptual development plan hearing shall be required. (3) Unless otherwise specified in the resolution granting conceptual development plan approval, a development application for a final development plan shall be submitted within one (1)year of the date of approval of a conceptual development plan. Failure to file such an application within this time period shall render null and void the approval of the conceptual development plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may,at its sole discretion and for good cause shown, grant a one-time extension of the expiration date for a conceptual development plan approval for up to six(6) months provided a written request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration date. 4. Final development plan review. HPC jurisdiction code amendment Page 10 of 12 a.An application for a final development plan shall include: (1) The general application information required in Section 26.304.030. (2) Final drawings of all proposed structures(s) and/or addition(s) included as part of the development at 1/4" = 1.0' scale. 3) An accurate representation of all major building materials to be used in the development, depicted through samples or photographs. (4) A statement, including narrative text or graphics, indicating how the final development plan conforms to representations made or stipulations placed as a condition of the - - - - - - -approval of the conceptual development plan. b. The procedures for the review of final development plans for major development projects are as follows: (1)The Community Development Director shall review the application materials submitted for final development plan approval. If they are determined to be complete,the applicant will be notified in writing of this and a public hearing before the HPC shall be scheduled.Notice of the hearing shall be provided pursuant to Paragraphs 26.304.060.E.3.a,b and c. (2) Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applicable Land Use Code sections. This report will be transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. (3) The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall issue a certificate of appropriateness and the Community Development Director shall issue a development order. (4) A resolution of the HPC action will be forwarded to the City Council in accordance with Section 26.415.130 and no HPC jurisdiction code amendment Page 11 of 12 permit will be issued for construction of the project until the thirty(30)day "call up"period by City Council has expired. (5) Before an application for a building permit can be submitted, a final set of plans reflecting any or all required changes by the HPC or City Council must be on file with the City. Any conditions of approval or outstanding issues which must be addressed in the field or at a later time shall be noted on the plans. Section 8: A public hearing on the Resolution was held on the 8th day of April, 2009, at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. FINALLY,adopted,passed and approved this day of 12009. Michael Hoffman,Chair Attest: City Clerk Approved as to form: James R.True,Special Counsel HPC jurisdiction code amendment Page 12 of 12 Page 1 of 2 Chris Bendon From: Sara Adams Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 10:23 AM To: Chris Bendon Subject: FW: right of way draft language From: Brian Flynn Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2009 4:08 PM To: Sara Adams Subject: RE: right of way draft language Stephen and I went through your edits (in blue) in detail. We both like what you wrote and appreciate that you let us review the document. We are good to go, let me know if there is anything else. Brian Flynn Open Space and Special Projects Manager (P)970-429-2035 (F)970-920-5128 10 PARKS & RECREATION From: Sara Adams Sent: Friday, March 20, 2009 12:32 PM To: Tricia Aragon; Tyler Christoff; Brian Flynn; Jeff Woods; Stephen Ellsperman; John Hines; Phil Overeynder; Jerry Nye Subject: right of way draft language Hi all, I attached a DRAFT of the right of way review process code amendment for some exciting reading over the weekend. This is a work in progress. It will be reviewed by HPC, P and Z and City Council starting in the beginning of April. Please let me know if there are any major red flags in the procedural stuff. You will probably notice that I need to clarify the boundaries of the two historic districts. In my research I noticed that the legal descriptions in the 1970s Ordinances were inconsistent with the Historic Districts. (fun!) I am looking for any feedback(good or bad) regarding the procedural stuff. I tried to be fair and encompass everyone's goals. Thanks for sending me your checklists; they definitely helped get the ball rolling. Please give me a call if you want to sit down and go over the proposed changes with me Best, Sara 7/15/2009 Page 2 of 2 O Sara Adams I Historic Preservation Planner City of Aspen 130 S. Galena St.1 Aspen, CO 81611 t: (970) 429.2778 f: (970) 920.5439 www.asspenpitkin.com www.aspenhistoricpreservation.com 7/15/2009 Historical Structures Map ma F AL w 6yr/n�n�+�. ferny o , nw�w c.b.a. isxws n..-s sn..s General Aspects located in all ROWs in HD Arboriculture: Tree Planting A"K �jmjq)(�� 2. Tree Trimming Tree Removal '=4Af F j WVY&��, 4. Tree Maintenance: fertilization, insect & disease control, watering Raw Water System: 1. Modifications and improvements to the ditch system 2. General Maintenance: cleaning, clearing for flows and closing and redirecting flows Irrigation Systems: 1. Installation ti 2. General Maintenance: repairs nd upgrades Noxious Vegetation: 1. Control and removal Site Specific aspects in HD (includes everything above) Downtown Pedestrian Mall 1. Snow Storage 2. Snow removal 3. Bench maintenance 4. Bench replacement/installation!4r 5. Floral arrangements 6. Trash can/recycling maintenance 7. Trash can/recycling installation WuV"��� 8. Fountain maintenance \ 9. Brick maintenance tv�A W d � Wv� 10. Bike Racks ' 11. Playgrounds*. " o • COW 12. Bathroom mainte ce 13. Signs �b-r ' , 14. Art managemen 15. Art location.— -4 N all light matnten ce 18. Lighting Fixtures de 19. Seasonal Lighting Neighborhood Parks in HDs (includes everything in the General Aspects list) 1. Turf maintenance: fertilization, insect& disease control, watering, mowing, and trimming. Main Street (includes everything in the General Aspects list) 1. Installation of approved special event street flags 2. Seasonal/Holiday lighting and decorations • Page 1 of 2 Sara Adams From: John Hines Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 11:52 AM To: Sara Adams Cc: Phil Overeynder Subject: RE: HPC purview in historic districts Sara, After conferring with Phil, we came up with these tasks. Exempt Development: Below ground: Installation of underground utilities Above ground: transformer placement, raw water ditch maintenance and headgate placement. Street light maintenance, street light pole replacement, and banner hanging. Issues to be addressed: Renewable energy utility installation i.e. geothermal, geo-exchange, hydrogen fuel cell installation in replacement of generators or batteries for back-up power supply.-7, Solar panels (PV and thermal) installation John L. Hines Renewable Energy Utilities Manager City of Aspen 970-429-1999 johnhi @ci.aspen.co.us From: Sara Adams Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 9:12 AM To: Tyler Christoff; Tricia Aragon; Stephen Ellsperman; Brian Flynn; Jeff Woods; John Hines Subject: HPC purview in historic districts Importance: High Hi all, I attached a recap of the February 23,d meeting. Please send me your lists of tasks that you typically do in the right of way so that I can figure out which "bucket/ review" the task will fall into. I want to make sure that the review process (if any) for specific tasks is clear AND I want to make sure that you are not over-burdened with another review step if it isn't absolutely necessary. If you could send your list to me by March 11th (Wednesday) that would be awesome! Thanks!! sa ra Sara Adams I Historic Preservation Planner City of Aspen 3/9/2009 • Page 1 of 1 Sara Adams From: Amy Guthrie Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 11:58 AM To: Sara Adams Subject: landscape code amendment When you work on this code amendment, let's not forget that outside agencies, like CDOT or RFTA, might propose work in the HD that we don't want to lose purview over. For instance, RFTA is working on new bus stops over the next few years. I don't think they are proposing these in the City at the moment, but they would be new structures with kiosks, electronic display signs, etc. Amy Guthrie City of Aspen Historic Preservation Officer 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 (p) 970-429-2758 (f) 970-920-5439 www.aspenpitkin.com xi LK Vvv' Skl 1 VNIIII 3/9/2009 • • Page 1 of 1 Sara Adams From: Tyler Christoff Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 12:00 PM To: Sara Adams Cc: Tricia Aragon Subject: FW: HPC review of ROW improvements Sara, Below are the Engineering Departments comments. Please let me know if we can be of further assistance. HPC reviewed ROW improvements -Major geometric/alignment changes to curb and gutter or sidewalk (HPC's review scope would be limited to; materials, finishes, fit with general aesthetic) -Finishes of retaining walls or other structures in ROW(not sure of a specific example, I'm sure it will come up at some point) -Way-finding signage (previously selected by HPC) -Changes to existing ditches (any realignment, piping of, etc) HPC exempt ROW improvements -Pavement restoration (patching or resurfacing projects) -Utility work in the ROW(installation of new, maintenance of old, emergency repairs) -General roadway signage (stop signs, school signs, etc -- must meet MUTCD standards) ' ? -Pavement markings (striping, ped crossing, etc) -Installation of new drainage infrastructure (new inlets, piping, maintenance and replacement of existing) -Minor grade changes (for positive drainage or sight distance requirements),rK�1� 4. -Installation of crossings or ADA ramp -New pedestrian safety improvements (speed humps, shcanes, bulb outs) -Changes to lane width, turning movements, traffic patterns Sl -Replacement or maintenance or sidewalk or curb and gutter Fes' I S VW L n tivf yivi aY Tyler A. Christoff Project Manager Engineering/Asset Management Department City of Aspen tylerc @ci.aspen.co.us (970) 544-3143 3/9/2009 • • Page 1 of 1 Sara Adams From: Jerry Nye Sent: Monday, March 09, 2009 7:42 AM To: Sara Adams Sara: Street department work performed in`right of way would include all of these: I will list as many as I can and you can use what you need. ( -.4%&2b Sign Maintenance and installin signsdering ro cleaning, drainage ditch cleaning, gravel installing and grading of gravel. Snow removal and snow storing, storm drain and dry well maintenance. Roto milling asphalt and repaving with asphalt. Jerry L. Nye Superintendent of Street Dept. Fleet Manager. City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Aspen Co. 81611 Office 970 920 5133 Fax 970 920 5178 3/9/2009 VVI Recap of February 23, 2009 meetinq with: AG JW CB TC SE BF SA: . DRAFT language and clear definitions for the following "buckets"of review: •���(,� Vt�� 1. Master Plan/Program/ Major Projects • Probably a worksession with HPC • Some sort of review by the full HPC board and maybe Council has final authority? 2. Minor Changes • Changes are inconsistent with the character of the HD but not big enough to be a major project. • One HPC review, HPC has final authority with Council appeal? 3. Administrative approval • Generally consistent with character of HD but does have a higher degree of impact than maintenance/day to day stuff • Trash cans, street signs, mailbox locations... 4. Exempt development • Maintenance/day to day stuff, non-permanent, easily reversible, consistent with the HD.... • Light bulb replacement, planting a flower bed, tree removal that doesn't change the HD character(i.e. removing 1 or 2 trees rather than removing all of the trees on Main Street)...... Stuff to address: • Appeal process- internal? City Council? • Other Board Reviews/recommendations (i.e, Open Space & Trails) ■ Joint reviews? • Federal Regulations ■ ADA ■ Safety requirements • In the future develop design guidelines specific to this type of development to add another layer of understanding about what HPC thinks is appropriate RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS app Leaves rw • c.r. occaa,.c.a�ca ORDINANCE NO. (Series of 1974) AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING THE COMMERCIAL CORE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, MORE PARTICULARLY BLOCKS 80,81, ,82, 83, 87, 88, 89, 90, 93, 94, 95, 96, AND THE SOUTH HALF OF BLOCKS 79, 86, 92 OF THE ORIGINAL TOWNSITE AND SOUTH HALF OF BLOCK 19 OF THE EAST ASPEN ADDITION THERETOrAS AN H, HISTORIC DISTRICT WHEREAS, The Aspen Historic Preservation Committee has studied the commercial core of the City of Aspen and such investigation demonstrates, and the Committee has concluded, that the commercial core of the City has character, interest and value as a part of the development, heritage and cultural characteristics of the City; exemplifies the cultural, political, economic, social and historical heritage of the community; includes many structures which portray the environment of a group of people in an era of history characterized by a distinctive architectural style; and which structures, in addition, contain elements of design, detail, material and craftsmanship representing a significant architectural style; and WHEREAS, the City Council has found that designa- tion of the commercial core as an historic district will promote the health, safety and welfare of the present and future inhabitants of the community, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That the following described property located within Pitkin County, Colorado, be and hereby is placed within an H, Historic Overlay District and designated an IP Onk • RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves IdIM Y C.f.MOC EL t.L\L cn historic site: All of lot 80, 81, 82 a8e, 87 88 89 + I I I 90, 93('1-0W' 95, 96, and sou th half of blocks 79, 86 and 92 of the City and f As en; and the sou h I_ M nl alf 19 East Aspen Addition to�S ,� the City of A n- and further that the Zoning District Map of the City of Aspen, dated April 7, 1967, as amended, is further amended by the designation of the preceeding as an H, ilistoric Overlay District. Section 2 If any provisions of this ordinance, or applications thereof, shall be declared invalid, such invalidity shall not affect any other provisions or applications, and for this purpose the provisions and applications of this ordinance are declared to be severable. Section 3 A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on 11c-C-c! -.x_t- L' n)3 , 1974, at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing there shall have been published notice of the same in a newspaper of general circulation of the City. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED published all as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at its regular meeting held 1974. Stacy tandley III ATTEST: Kathryn 5. liauter City Clerk RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves IqN y C.I.•OLCRCL t,R\L,t0. FINALLY PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED this day of LLni 1974. Stacy S an ley III ATTEST: f Kathryn:S. Hauter City Clerk STATE OF COLORADO ) CERTIFICATE ss COUNTY OF PITKIN ) I, Kathryn S. Hauter, City Clerk of Aspen, Colorado, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing ordinance was introduced, read in full, and passed on first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Aspen on December 9 P 1974 , and publish- ed in the Aspen Times a weekly newspaper of general circul- ation, published in the City of Aspen, Colorado, in its issue of December 12 , 197 4 , and was finally adopted and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council on- December 23 , 197 4 , and ordered published as Ordinance No. 49 Series of 197 4 , of said City, as provided by law. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of said City of Aspen, Colorado, this 24 day of December 197 4 Kathryn 5 allauter, City Clerk f MN I\ RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves a ORDINANCE N0. r Q (Series of 1976) AN ORDINANCE DESIGNATING AS AN I:ISTORIC DISTRICT ALL OF THOSE PROPERTIES ABUTTING (ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH) MAIN STREET BETWEEN MONARCH AND SEVENTH STREETS, AND ALL OF PAEPCKE PARK, WITHIN THE CITY OF ASPEN: WHICH AREA IS MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS K, L, M, N, 0, P, Q, R AND S OF BLOCKS 18, 24, 30, 37, 44, 51, 58, 66, 73; LOTS A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H AND J OF BLOCKS 19, 25, 31, 38, 45, 32, 59, 74; AND ALL OF BLOCK 67 OF THE ORIGINAL ASPEN TOWNSITE WHEREAS, Article IX of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Muni- cipal Code establishes procedures for the designation, within the City of Aspen, of historic districts when such areas meet the criteria for and purposes of historic designation, and WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission (P and Z) and Aspen Historic Preservation Committee (HPC) have been presented with evidence supportive of the designation of the following areas of the city as historic all of those properties abutting (on the north and south) Main Street between Monarch and Seventh Streets, and all of Paepcke Park within the City of Aspen, Colorado, which proposed district has been denominated the "gain Street Historic District", and '.,HEREAS, the HPC has, in its resolution dated July 13, 1976, reported that its preliminary investigation of the Main Street Historic District has shown that Main Street (a) has character, interest and value as part of the development, heritage and cultural charac- teristics of the city; (b) exemplifies the cultural, political, economic, social and historical heritage of the community; ,j RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FMY &,.M ZLLL\LC& (c) includes many structures which portray the environment of a group of people in an era characterized by distinctive architectural styles; and (d) contains structures which, in addition, con- tain elements of design, detail, material, and craftsmanship representing significant architectural styles, and WHEREAS, on receipt of the HPC resolution the P and Z, at its meeting held July 20, 1976, did give preliminary approval to the proposed designation and set a joint HPC and P and z public hearing on the matter for August 17, 1976, and WHEREAS, the announced joint public hearing was con- ducted and subsequent thereto the HPC reaffirmed its findings I itemized in its Resolution dated July 13, 1976, and the P and Z, in a Resolution dated August 24, 1976, recommended establishment of the Main Street Historic District, finding it compatible with the Aspen Area General Plan, and, in addition, that (a) The Main Street Historic District will enhance a recently stated policy of the P and Z to preserve historic buildings and sites within the City; (b) The Main Street Historic District will also reinforce another recently stated policy of the Commission, .that is, by insuring the retention of historic buildings the district will strengthen the city's economic base by enhancing the tourist experience; (c) The Main Street District will complement the recently enacted (then pending) amendments to the I -2- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves O - Office District and insure that new developments are visually compatible with Main Street's historic appearance, and (d) The Main Street Historic District will comple- ment the residential districts north and south of Main Street and offer a comfortable transition between the more intense activities on Main Street and the adjacent residential districts, and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to pursue the HPC and P and Z recommendations and complete the designation process, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL N OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, Section 1 That Main Street between Monarch and Seventh Streets is determined to have historic significance and that the following described property located in Pitkin County, Colorado, be designated as an H Historic Overlay District pursuant to the provisions of Article IX of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code All of Lots K, L, M, N, 0, P, Q, R and S of Blocks 18, 24, 30, 37, 44, 51, 58, 66 and 73 of the Original Aspen Townsite. All of Lots A, 3, C, D, E, F, G, E3 and J of Blocks 19, 25, 31, 38, 45, 52, 59 and of the Original Aspen Townsite. All of Block 67 of the Original Aspen Townsite. ? 4�1� Section 2 C If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications I -3- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves .OA w C.f,xOEIXEI 1.E. 1.c0. of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are declared to be severable. Section 3 That a public hearing on this ordinance be held on 1976, at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing notice of the same shall be published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED published as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at its regular meeting held at the City of Aspen on the day of ��rG�� ' 1976. i tacy tarYdley III Mayor C _ t ATTEST: Kathryn Tauter City Clerk FINALLY adopted, passed and approved on the day of 1976. - -:-2 Stacy S andley III Mayor 1 Syr` ATTEST: r Kathryn :Iauter City Clerk -4-