Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ca.Historic Sign.A150-00 CASE NUMBER PARCEL ill # CASE NAME PROJECT ADDRESS PLANNER CASE TYPE OWNER/APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE DATE OF FINAL ACTION CITY COUNCIL ACTION PZ ACTION ADMIN ACTION BOA ACTION DATE CLOSED BY f'1 I) A150-00 Historic Sign Date Code Amendment Sarah Oates/Nick Lelack Code Amendment City of Aspen 3/26/01 Ord #11-2001 Approved 6/8/01 J. Lindt !""'\ ri <:,..- fV'rM-- N~ ~,",l " . >f)?>~ is 0--- ' ";\. ~ 0 ldv (j(/tP -" Y v"'"' ~ ~ "J-. I rM t-- " 'lJ\..OV> "Z ~ V-- \,~ ~ I.J--~ \~ r....\1Yc. rV"- O~ -VJ vvC'.c~ (w>vWlr ~~. ~k~~ ~ C) VI' a., MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Richards and City Council THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager John Worcester, City Attorney Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director...JA-O FROM: Nick Lelack, Planner RE: Historic Signs - Land Use Code Amendment DATE: March 26,2001 ,. ... .. REQUEST: Land Use Code Amendment to Section 26.510.040 (F), Prohibited Signs, Obsolete Signs. ApPLICANT: City of Aspen, Community Development Department PUBLIC HEARING: Yes PROCESS: PZ Recommendation to City Council to approve, approve with conditions or deny the amendment. The Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously recommended approval. City Council approved this Ordinance on First Reading. RECOMMENDATION: Approval SUMMARY: The Community Development Director is proposing a Land Use Code amendment in response to a request by the Historic Preservation Commission to provide an opportunity for the continuance of signage that is at least fifty (50) years old. The standards for historic preservation typically use fifty (50) years as a benchmark for designating a site, structure, land, etc. as historical. Currently, the code states that "historical signs are defined to be those signs erected prior to January 1, 1945." This means that signs erected since January 1, 1945, which are less than fifty-six (56) years old, are considered obsolete, and therefore illegal. However, there are several instances, such as the Golden Horn, where the Historic Preservation Commission believes it is in the interest of the City to legalize signs less than 56 years old. Hence, the Community Development Director is proposing to amend this section of the code. The proposed change is to Section 26.510.040 (F), Prohibited Signs, Obsolete Signs, of the Municipal Code. The proposed language to be deleted has a line through it and the new language is in bold: ^ 1"'\ , Obsolete Signs. A sign which identifies or advertises any activity, business, product, service or special event no longer produced, conducted, performed or sold on the premises upon which such sign is located. Such obsolete signs are hereby declared a nuisance and shall be taken down by the owner, agent or person having the beneficial use of such sign within ten (10) days after written notification from the Community Development Director, and upon failure to comply with such notice within the time specified in such order, the Community Development Director is hereby authorized to cause removal of such sign, and any expense incident thereto shall be paid by the owner of the property on which the sign was located. That an obsolete sign is nonconforming shall not modify the requirements of this paragraph. Signs of historical character shall not be subject to the provisions of this section. For the purpose of this section, historical signs are defined to be those signs erected prier te ~Tantlflry 1, 191fi at leastfifty (50) years in age or older. RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department staff recommends that City Council adopt the code amendment to Section 26.510.040 (F), Prohibited Signs, Obsolete Signs, as proposed herein. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance #11 , Series of 2001, approving the Land Use Code amendment to Section 26.51O.04'5(F), Prohibited Signs, Obsolete Signs." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Staff Findings Exhibit B - Photographs & Newspaper Article on the Golden Horn CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: 2 t"'\ ~ EXHIBIT A Land Use Code Amendment Section 26.310.020. Standards Applicable to Amendments to the Land Use Code In reviewing an amendment to the Land Use Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions ofthis title. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment would not be in conflict with any applicable portions of the Aspen Municipal Code. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding: None of the proposed amendment would be in conflict with any elements of the AACP. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land uses and neighbor hood characteristics. Staff Finding: The code amendment primarily impacts the commercial zone districts, in which maintain historic character is important. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Staff Finding: The proposed code amendment IS not anticipated to have any effect on traffic generation. or road safety. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Staff Finding: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have an effect on infrastructure or infrastructure capacities. 3 r"', <"""\ F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Finding; The proposed environment. code amendment is not anticipated to have an effect on the natural G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff Finding; Preserving historic signs is compatible with the community character. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff Finding; The ability to keep reminders of historic Aspen businesses is an important factor in the proposed amendment. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. Staff Finding; Staff believes the proposed amendment will not be in conflict with the public interest. 4 r"1 MEMORANDUM AVlb TO: Mayor Richards and City Council THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager John Worcester, City Attorney Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director f:f: ~ ;:).4. '0. FROM: Nick Lelack, Planner RE: Historic Signs - Land Use Code Amendment DATE: March 12, 2001 REQUEST: Land Use Code Amendment to Section 26.510.040 (F), Prohibited Signs, Obsolete Signs. ApPLICANT: City of Aspen, Community Development Department PUBLIC HEARING: Yes PROCESS: PZ Recommendation to City Council to approve, approve with conditions or deny the amendment. The Planning and Zoning Commission unanimouslv recommended annroval. RECOMMENDATION: Approval SUMMARY: The Community Development Director is proposing a Land Use Code amendment in response to a request by the Historic Preservation Commission fo provicle an oppoi'tunlty~for .thecontinuance.o(slgnage.tr:rii'fisa[reasHHty(50) years'olcr:..' The standards for historic preservation typically use fifty (50) years as a benchmark for designating a site, structure, land, etc. as historical. Currently, theeode states that historiCal signs (that Clre no longer in use) are.cl~fined to bethos~sign~e~~ctedpri?r to January 1, 1945. This means that signs erected sInce JanuaryCI945, which are less than fifty-six (56) years old, are considered obsolete, and therefore illegal. However, there are several il'lsta.iide~:'such as the Geldel'l II?rn, whef()th~Historic Preservation Commission believes it is in the interest of the City to legalize signs less than 56 years old. Hence, the Community Development Director is proposing to amend this section of the code. The proposed change is to Section 26.510.040 (F), Prohibited Signs, Obsolete Signs, of the Municipal Code. The proposed language to be deleted has a line through it and the new language is in bold: . Joo. v.P"( o'fPlA-t ~ 0."'1 b~.... . s'15t.'J' <ioe ~ 'lI'\}t p~ ~ J e,.s~Vlt-'h"'1-- ~ \Sli' ~ q..j l.,..71 /-f-...-:-L 1""""\ fI: Obsolete Signs. A sign which identifies or advertises any activity, business, product, service or special event no longer produced, conducted, performed or sold on the premises upon which such sign is located. Such obsolete signs are hereby declared a nuisance and shall be taken down by the owner, agent or person having the beneficial use of such sign within ten (10) days after written notification from the Community Development Director, and upon failure to comply with such notice within the time specified in such order, the Community Development Director is hereby authorized to cause removal of such sign, and any expense incident thereto shall be paid by the owner of the property on which the sign was located. That an obsolete sign is nonconforming shall not modify the requirements of this paragraph. Signs of historical character shall not be subject to the provisions of this section. For the purpose of this section, historical signs are defined to be those signs ereeted prier te January 1, 191& at least fifty (50) years in age or older. RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department staff recommends that City Council adopt the code amendment to Section 26.510.040 (F), Prohibited Signs, Obsolete Signs, as proposed herein. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance #_, Series of 2001, approving the Land Use Code amendment to Section 26.51O.040(F), Prohibited Signs, Obsolete Signs." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Staff Findings Exhibit B - Photographs & Newspaper Article on the Golden Horn CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: 2 r') t) EXHIBIT A Land Use Code Amendment Section 26.310.020. Standards Applicable to Amendments to the Land Use Code In reviewing an amendment to the Land Use Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment would not be in conflict with any applicable portions of the Aspen Municipal Code. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding: None of the proposed amendment would be in conflict with any elements of the AACP. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land uses and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Finding: The code amendment primarily impacts the commercial zone districts, m which maintain historic character is important. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Staff Finding: The proposed code amendment IS not anticipated to have any effect on traffic generation or road safety. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Staff Finding: The proposed code amendment is not anticipated to have an effect on infrastructure or infrastructure capacities. 3 r'\ ~ F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Finding: The proposed environment. code amendment is not anticipated to have an effect on the natural G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff Finding: Preserving historic signs is compatible with the community character. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff Finding: The ability to keep reminders of historic Aspen businesses is an important factor in the proposed amendment. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. Staff Finding: Staff believes the proposed amendment will not be in conflict with the public interest. 4 ~::kl.J4 f1 F-# 2.. r'1 ~ \ ..~ 00 -CJ Jl. N ~ -r) :If- N d' ~ ':h II:. -. 1 dl. ..jJ +1 r-.. .~ Friday, October 2, /998. The Aspen Times 3-A An Aspen skiing . . pioneer passes on ..Steve.Knowlton dies in Denver By Mary Eshbaugh Hayes Aspen Times Staff Writer Steve Knowlton, the man who personified the early ski days of Aspen, died Oct. I at Swedish Hospital in Denver from complications after openheaJt surgery. A memb~rof the 10th Mountain Division during World War II and an Olympic skier, Knowlton was one of the young people who came to Aspen after the War and created the town of today. Knowlton owned The Golden Horn during its carefree and high-spirited years of 1949-1958 and, though he moved to Denver. for years he was always on call to return to Aspen to be mas- ter of ceremonies for community events. He was born in 1922 in Belleview. Penn.. (near Pittsburgh). Knowiton's family soon moved to upstate New York and then to New England where he received his first pair of skis at the age of seven. In New England, he attended Holderness Prep School, which had a strong ski program. He then went on to race with the University of New Hampshire Ski Team. When World War II started, Knowlton was one of the first to enter the ski troops, joining the 10th Mountain Division in 1941. Sent to Camp Hale near Leadville, he taught rock climbing in summer and skiing in the winter. He often came to Aspen to ski and, when he did, he stayed at the Hotel Jerome. He was part of the ski troop contingent that fought in the Italian campaign. In 1945, after the war. Knowlton moved to Aspen in order to train. with famed Austrian skier Friedl Pfeifer who had come here to build the ski lifts and start the ski school. Knowlton skied in the 1946 Nationals and made the Olympic team in 1948. In the 1948 Olympics in St. Moritz, Knowlton came in s~cond among'the American racers in the combined and the special slalom. Returning to Aspen after the Olympics, Knowlton bought land for $1.000 at the corner Steve Knowlton, who died Oct.1ln Denver, helped create the thriving "new' Aspen. of Cooper and Monarch and built the Golden Horn ski shop, bar and restaurant. The Horn became famous for its boisterous floor shows, which drew in not only members of the band and wait staff, but also members of the com- munity. He sold the Horn in 1958 and moved to Den- ver where he went into public relations and pub- licity work with Ski Country USA. He also became a part owner of the famed Buckhorn Restaurant on Osage Street. He owned and oper- ated another ski restaurant called The Kandahar in Denver for several years. He also started Golf USA. In January 1997, as one of Aspen's ski pio- neers. he was named to the Aspen Hall of Fame. Survivors include his wife, Virginia; daugh- ters Ducky Coombs and Katherine Stroh; and sons Hogan, Jamie. Charlie, Peter and Reid. The Knowlton family greatly appreciates condolences and best wishes. To respect Steve's last wishes. the family has asked that in lieu of memorial services, donations to your favorire charity arc preferred. ~ '{~~ t '"'~. if\: ~ .A~ t.,'U\ -. ~1 A MEMORANDUM C-/O TO: The Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Directot--~ FROM: Nick Lelack, Planner DATE: February 20, 2001 - '. '. .. REQUEST: Land Use Code Amendment to Section 26.510.040 (F), Prohibited Signs, Obsolete Signs. ApPLICANT: City of Aspen, Community Development Department PUBLIC HEARING: Yes PROCESS: PZ Recommendation to City Council to approve, approve with conditions or deny the amendment. -- RECOMMENDATION: Approval SUMMARY: The Community Development Director is proposing a Land Use Code amendment in respop.setoa request by the Historic Preservation Commissiorft9provide a.n opportunity fOLtheC9!Itinuanceof signage that is.lltJell.~.t fifty (50) years old. }/ ifr(The standards for historic preservation typically use fifty (50) years as ~bep.~hIJ:l~~k ~ . fo r..d. eSig. n..a t.i.n..g. a...S..i.t. e.,....s..t.r..uctur..e.....,....I. a.n..d..,...e..t...c............a.....s....h... 1....S .t....o.r. ical...c..u..r.. r.e.n t..I.Y., the code 81; a.t es d\." L(,; that "~ist9riqaJ.~igns ar~.aefi~~~,~~,~~-'t~Q~!!~igns erected prior to ,January 1, r;S'. ~ I., 1945. ThIS meansthatslgns erecteCl smce January 1, 194..5, w.hi.. 'ch are less than f/J'f Ci fifty-six (56) years old, are considered obsolete, and therefore illegal. f <...( However, there are several instances, such as the Golden Horn, where the Historic .J.... Preservation Commission believes it is in the interest of the City to legalize signs ~,.;J less than 56 years old. Hence, the Community Development Director is proposing to ~ amend this section of the code. The proposed change is to Section 26.510.040 (F), ~ Prohibited Signs, Obsolete Signs, of the Municipal Code. The proposed language to be deleted has a line through it and the new language is in bold: ~ ~Z<jJ -,-~ if Obsolete Signs. A sign which identifies or advertises any activity, business, product, service or special event no longer produced, conducted, performed or sold on the premises upon which such sign is located. Such obsolete signs are hereby declared a nuisance and shall be taken down by the owner, agent or person having the beneficial use of such sign within ten (10) days after written notification from the Community Development Director, and upon failure to comply with such notice within the time specified in such order, the -~.'" ,-' , f""\, ;:j Community Development Director is hereby authorized to cause removal of such sign, and any expense incident thereto shall be paid by the owner of the property on which the sign was located. That an obsolete sign is nonconforming shall not modify the requirements of this paragraph. Signs of historical character shall not be subject to the provisions of this section. For the purpose of this section, historical signs are defined to be those signs ereeted prier te JanMf1ry 1, 1918 at least fifty (50) years in age or older. The Community Development Department staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission forward to City Council a recommendation to adopt the code amendment to Section 26.510.040 (F), Prohibited Signs, Obsolete Signs, as proposed herein. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission forward to City Council a recommendation to approve the amendments to Section 26.51O.040(F), Prohibited Signs, Obsolete Signs, as proposed herein. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution #_, Series of 2001, recommending City Council approve the Land Use Code amendment to Section 26.510.040(F), Prohibited Signs, Obsolete Signs." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A - Staff Findings Exhibit B - Photographs & Newspaper Article on the Golden Horn 2