The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.CU.1201 Riverside Dr.A121-002737-181-00-024 A121-00 1201 Riverside Drive—�dW-er- C 4896 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 920-5090 City of Aspen Land Use: 1041 Deposit 1042 Flat Fee 1043 HPC 1046 Zoning and Sign Referral Fees: 1163 City Engineer 1205 Environmental Health -7 1 190 Housing Building Fees: 1071 Board of Appeals 1072 Building Permit 1073 Electrical Permit 1074 Energy Code Review 1075 Mechanical Permit 1076 Plan Check 1077 Plumbing Permit 1078 Reinspection 1079 Aspen Fire Other Fees: 1006 Copy 1302 GIS Maps 1303 GIS Fee 1481 Housing Cash in Lieu 1383 Open Space Cash in Lieu 1383 Park Dedication 1468 Parking Cash in Lieu Performance Deposit 1268 Public Right-of-way 1 164 School District Land Ded. TOTAL NAME: ADDRESS/PROJECT: PHONE: CHECK# l CASE/PERMIT#: # OF COPIES: DATE: INITIAL: I / - PARCEL ID: 12737 181-00024 1W, DATE RCVD 9/29/00 # C( CASE NAME: Hower ADU PROJ ADDR: 1 1201 Riverside Drive �, CASE TYP: Admin ADU OWN/APP: Dale Hower ADR 1201 Riverside Drive CIS/Z: r REP: Same ADR: C/S/Z: FEES DUE: 480 D 170 H FEES RCVD: 650 (Put it REFERRALS REF: REV BODY PH NOT CLOSED: PLAT SUBMITD: CASE NO A121-00 PLNR: TE OF FINAL ACTION: CITY COUNCIL PZ: BOA: DRAC: STEPS: 925-8775 DEVELOPMENT ORDER of the City of Aspen Community Development Department This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070, "Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a three-year vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement, or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. Dale Hower, 1201 Riverside Drive, Aspen, CO 81611 Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address and telephone number Lots 6-9, Block 24, Riverside Addition Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property ADU Approval Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan Administrative Decision, 10/13/00 Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) October 21 2000 Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) October 22, 2003 Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code.) Issued this 21 S` day of October, 2000, by the City of Aspen Community Develwment Director Julie A� Woods, Community Development Director PUBLIC NOTICE Of DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: Lots 6-9, Block 24, Riverside Addition, by Administrative Decision of the Community Development Director on October 13, 2000. For further information contact Julie Ann Woods, at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Dept. 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, Colorado (970) 920-5090. s/City of Aspen Account Publish in The Aspen Times on October 21, 2000 October 12, 2000 Julie Ann Woods Community Development Department Dear Julie Ann, Thank you for meeting with John Galambos and myself to discuss zoning for the property I own at 1285 Riverside Drive. Upon your advisement and per our discussion I am requesting a formal interpretation of the zoning map as pertains to this property. As I explained to you at our meeting I have owned this property for two years. Upon purchase I met with Mitch Haas. Mitch was a former planner in your office and was a very competent and experienced staff member for the city. He reviewed the zoning map in your office and informed me that any house built would be subject to R-6 zoning regulations. When I decided to proceed with designing a house on this property John Galambos meet with Fred Jarman who consulted the zoning map in your office and again gave the property R-6 status. We proceeded with the design work and on July 16`h `2000, John meet with Fred for a final interpretation on setbacks. Once again the planning office used the R-6 governing rules based on the zoning map. With the knowledge that we had met all the set back rules and design rules we then proceeded to complete a permit set of plans to submit to the city. After this was complete and we submitted for the first of our approvals I received a phone call (two days ago) from your office, informing me that the R-6 zoning was suppose to have been R-15 based on a neighbor finding an ordinance written in 1975. 1 was shocked at this information and proceeded to do some research of my own. After reviewing the Municipal CodeBook of Aspen Section 26 it is clearly stated in paragraph 26.710.030; "That a copy of the official zone district map shall be located in the office of the Community Development Department at all times for inspection by the general public during regular business hours. The official zone district map shall be the final authority as to the current zoning of land in the City of Aspen." This paragraph clearly states that the zoning map shall be considered to be correct in regards to zoning issues. The zoning map clearly refers to this property as in the R-6 zone. By reading the above paragraph this land is zoned R-6. I have relied on the information of the staff and this map for two years. The staff has relied on the information on this map for two years as well. I have designed a home based on this information and I have submitted for approval a home designed with the only information I was ever provided with. Re�e t6illy Submitted, owe C:\WINDOWS\Personal\October 12.doc CITY OF ASPEN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLAINER: T 41'J16hone- U SI0 DATE: PROJECT: k(ock/C-136 tvio., OW I ER: o Ey_ REPRESENTATIVE: Land Use Code Section(s) 26.520 Accessory Dwelling Units 26.304 Development Review Procedures Review by: Staff for complete application. Housing Authority for draft deed restriction, Community Development Director for final approval and development order Public Hearing: No. Referral Agencies: Housing Authority _ Review Fees: Planning Deposit (2.5 hours) $480. Housing: $170 flat fee Total Deposit: $650 (Additional hours are billed at S195 per hour.) i To apply, submit the following information: -1. Total Deposit for review of application. 2. Applicant's name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 3. The street address and legal description of the parcel on which, development is proposed to Occur. 4. A disclosure of ownership of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments. liens. easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Development Application. v r 5. An 8 1/2" x 1 1" vicinity map locating the subject parcel within the City of Aspen. 6. A site improvement survey including topography and vegetation showing the current status of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor. licensed in the State of Colorado. (This requirement. or any part thereof, may be waived by the Community Development Department if the project is determined not to warrant a survey document.) 7. A site plan depicting the proposed layout and the project's physical relationship to the land and it's surroundings. — 8. A written description of the proposal and a written explanation of how a proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. 9. Scaled floor plans and elevations for the proposed Accessory Dwelling Unit and relation to primary residence. 10. 3 Copies of the complete application packet (items 2-9) Process: Planner reviews case for completeness and sends to Housing for referral comments. Case Planner contacts applicant and sets up a site visit. Staff reviews application to determine if it meets design criteria for an Accessory Dwelling Unit. Housing Authority reviews a draft deed restriction with applicant and informs case planner when a finalized deed restriction is ready to be recorded. Case Planner makes recommendation of approval or denial to Community Development Director. If approved, applicant is notified and a development order is issued by the Community Development Department. The deed restriction must be recorded with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder prior to applying for a building permit. (See attached application packet.) City of Aspen Community Development Department Accessory Dwelling Unit Application Package Development Application package for an Accessory Dwelling Units includes the following: Development Application Fee Policy and Fee Schedule. 2. Application Form. 3. )escription of Minimum Contents for all Development Applications. 4. Description of Specific Contents for ADU Applications. 5. Copy of Review Standards for an ADU. 6. General Summary of ADU Review Process Generally. to submit a complete application, you should fill in the application form and attach to it that written and mapped information identified in Attachments 3 and 4. Please note that all applications require responses to the review standards for that particular development type. The standards for your application are listed in Attachment 5. We encourage all applicants to hold a pre -application conference ��-ith a Planner in the Community Development Department so that the requirements for submitting a complete application can be fully described to you. Please also recognize that review of these materials does not substitute for a complete review of the Aspen Land Use Regulations. `Chile this application package attempts to summarize the key provisions of the Code as they apply to Accessory Dwelling Units, it cannot possibly replicate the detail or the scope of the Code. If you have questions which are not answered by the materials in this package, we suggest that you contact the staff member assigned to your case or consult the applicable sections of the Aspen Land Use Regulations. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT LAND USE APPLICATION PROJECT: lamolmit%ii� APPLICANT: Name: T)ALe_ {t;,,yje4_ Address: y F_ D d AMI i�-✓� Phone #: !a O --do 06, REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Address: Phone T: TYPE C= APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): Accessory Dwelling Unit ❑ Conceptual PUD ❑ Conceptual Historic Devt ❑ Conditional Use ❑ Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) ❑ Final Historic Developme ❑ Special Review ❑ Conceptual SPA ❑ Minor Historic Deyt. ❑ Design Review Appeal ❑ Final SPA (R SPA Amendment) ❑ Historic Demolition ❑ GMQS AllotmendExemption ❑ Subdivision ❑ Historic Designation ❑ ESA - 8040 Greenline. Stream ❑ Subdivision Exemption (includes ❑ Small Lodge Conversion Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane ❑ Lot Split ❑ Temporary Use ❑ Other: ❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Text,Map Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) t,C PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) Have you attached the following? ❑ Pre -Application Conference Summary ❑ Attachment :l, Signed Fee Agreement ❑ Response to Attachment 42, Dimensional Requirements Form ❑ Response to Attachment 43, Minimum Submission Contents ❑ Response to Attachment n4, Specific Submission Contents ❑ Response to Attachment 45, Review Standards for Your Application FEES DUE: S650 ATTACHMENT ASPEN/PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT City of Aspen Development Application Fee Policy The City of Aspen, pursuant to Ordinance 45 (Series of 1999), has established a fee structure for the processing of land use applications. A flat fee or deposit is collected for land use applications based on the type of application submitted. Referral fees for other City departments reviewing the application will also be collected when necessary. One check including the deposit for Planning and referral agency fees must be submitted with each land use application, made payable to the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department. Applications will not be accepted for processing without the required application fee. A flat fee is collected by Community Development for Administrative Approvals which normally take a minimal and predictable amount of staff time to process. The fee is not refundable. A deposit is collected by Community Development when more extensive staff review is required, as hours are likely to vary substantially from one application to another. Actual staff time spent will be charged against the deposit. Several different staff members may charge their time spent on the case in addition to the case planner. Staff time is logged to the case and staff can provide a summary report of hours spent at the applicant's request. After the deposit has been expended, the applicant will be billed monthly based on actual staff hours. Applicants may accrue and be billed additional expenses for a planner's time spent on the case following any hearing or approvals. up until the applicant applies for a building permit. Current billings must be paid within 30 days or processing of the application will be suspended. If an applicant has previously failed to pay application fees as required, no new or additional applications will be accepted for processing until the outstanding fees are paid. In no case will Building Permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. When the case planner determines that the case is completed (whether approved or not approved), the case is considered closed and any remaining balance from the deposit will be refunded to the applicant. Applications which require a deposit must include an Agreement for Payment of Development Application Fees. The Agreement establishes the applicant as being responsible for payment of all costs associated with processing the application. The Agreement must be signed by the party responsible for payment and submitted with the application and fee in order for a land use case to be opened. The current complete fee schedule for land use applications is listed on the reverse side. ASPEN/PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 2000 LAND USE APPLICATION FEES CATEGORY HOURS DEPOSIT FLAT FEE major 12 2,310.00 Minor 6 1,155.00 Staff Approvals 480.00 Flat Fee 265.00 Exempt HPC 65.00 Minor HPC 480.00 Significant HPC <1000 sq. ft. 1155.00 Significant HPC >1000 sq. ft. 2310.00 Demolition, Partial Demolition, Relocation 2310.00 Referral Fees - Environmental Health Major 330.00 Minor 170.00 Referral Fees - Housing Major 330.00 Minor 170.00 Referral Fees - City Engineer Major 330.00 Minor 170.00 Hourly Rate 195.00 ASPEN/PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and _ (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOL 1. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for UIL,b Rato - M°( AVM SIDE DA (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 3 APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 45 (Series of 1999) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration,, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. ` 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of S "hich is for hours of Community Development staff time. and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit. APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. CITY OF ASPEN APPLICANT By: By: Date• Julie Ann Woods ' \ Community Development Director Printed name: Mailing Address: LAVf g:\support\forms\agrpayas.doc 12/27/99 10 Project: Applicant: Location: Zone District: Lot Size: Lot Area: ATTACHMENT 2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM !a o 1 7R(r/MQL)6D p4yg /4', /7 -7 5f- 141, /7 9 5 f. (for the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing: NA- Proposed: IJA Number of residential units: Existing: / Proposed: Z Number of bedrooms: Existing: / Proposed: S Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only):_ DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Existing:_Allowable: 1/ D. S Proposed-� Principal bldg. height: Existing: _Allowable: Proposed: Access. bldg. height: Existing: N/V Allowable: NfF Proposed: /V On -Site parking: Existing: ?i Required: 5- Proposed: _,5- % Site coverage: Existing: A* Required: Proposed: c22-S % Open Space: Existing: ;VA- Required: Proposed• Front Setback: Existing: _Required.- lb Proposed: Rear Setback: Existing ! ! Required: �b Proposed: (� Combined F/R: Existing: _Required: o Proposed: % o Side Setback: Existing. Required: /S ! Proposed: Side Setback: Existing: %IARequired: <s Proposed: a 5 r Combined Sides: Existing: _Required: �S � Proposed. Existing non -conformities or encroachments: YA Variations requested: ATTACHMENTS 3 & 4 MINIMUM SUBMISSION CONTENTS Applicant's name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 2. The street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur. A disclosure of ownership of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company. or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property. and all mortgages, judgments. liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Development Application. 4. An 3 1/2" x I F vicinity map locating the subject parcel within the City of Aspen. 5. A site improvement survey including topography and vegetation showing the current status of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the State of Colorado. (This requirement, or any part thereof, may be waived by the Community Development Department if the project is determined not to warrant a survey document.) 6. A site plan depicting the proposed layout and the project's physical relationship to the land and it's surroundings. 7. A written description of the proposal and a written explanation of how- a proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. Specific Submission Contents Accessory Dwelling Unit Review In addition to the above, an Accessory Dwelling Unit Application shall contain the following items: 1. Scaled floor plans and elevations for the proposed Accessory Dwelling Unit. ATTACHMENT 5 Review Standards: Development of an Accessory Dwelling Unit When considering a Development Application for an Accessory Dwelling Unit, the Community Development Director shall consider whether all of the following standards are met. The application must include a written response to each of these review standards. An Accessory Dwelling Unit must contain between 300 and 800 net livable square feet, with 10% of that being closet or storage area. 2. The Accessory Dwelling Unit must be able to function as a separate dwelling unit. Criteria for this is as follows: a. The Accessory Dwelling Unit must be separately accessible from the exterior. b. The Accessory Dwelling Unit must have separately accessible utilities. c. The Accessory Dwelling Unit must have a kitchen with an oven, stove with two burners, a sink, and a refrigerator with a freezer and a minimum capacity of six cubic feet. d. The Accessory Dwelling Unit must contain a bathroom with a sink toilet and shower. An Accessory- Dwelling Unit must have one on -site parking space for the ADU which can not be stacked with a space from the primary residence. 4. The Accessory Dwelling Unit must be within the dimensional requirements of the zone district in which it is located. 5. The roof design will prevent snow and ice from shedding upon an entrance to an Accessory Dwelling Unit. 6. If the Accessory Dwelling Unit is accessible via stairs, sufficient means of preventing snow and ice from accumulating in the stairs. 7. The Accessory Dwelling, Unit must be the Uniform Building Code requirements for natural light, ventilation, fire egress, lire suppression, and sound attenuation between living units. 8. The Accessory Dwelling Unit must be registered with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority and the property shall be deed restricted. Attachment 6 Staff Approval Development Review Procedure l . Attend pre -application conference. During this one-on-one meeting, staff will determine the review process which applies to your development proposal and will identify the materials necessary to review your application. ?. Submit Development Application. Based on your pre -application meeting, you should respond to the application package and submit the requested number of copies of the complete application and the appropriate processing fee to the Community Development Department. 3. Determination of Completeness. Within five working days of the date of your submission, staff will review the application, and will notify you in writing whether the - application is complete or if additional materials are required. Please be aware that the purpose of the completeness review is to determine whether or not the information you have submitted is adequate to review the request, and not whether the information is sufficient to obtain approval. 4. Staff Review of Development Application. Neat, a Planner is assigned to and reviews the case. The review process includes four steps. First, the Planner conducts a site visit. This may be done with the applicant or their representative. Second. the Planner refers the application to the Housing Authority. Third, the Planner determines whether the proposal meets the Accessory Dwelling Unit design criteria. As part of this step. the Housing Authority will review a draft deed restriction with the applicant and inform the case planner when a final deed restriction is ready to be recorded. Finally, if the Planner prepares a memorandum including a recommendation of approval or denial to Community Development Director. If approved, the applicant is notified and a development order is issued. The applicant must register the deed restriction with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder prior to applying for a building permit. 5. Building Permit Review. Once you have received a copy of the development order and have recorded the deed restriction for the ADU, you may proceed to building permit review. During this time, your project will be examined for its compliance with the Uniform Building Code. It will also be checked for compliance with applicable provisions of the Land Use Red=ulations which were not reviewed in detail during the one step review (this might include a check of floor area ratios, setbacks, parking, open space and the like). Fees for water, sewer, and parks will be collected if due. January 2, 2001 Ms. Dale Hower 730 East Durant Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Ms. Hower, ASPEN • PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT As you are aware, the Aspen City Council will hear an Appeal of my Interpretation of the Official Zone District Map from Mr. Lenny Oates on January 8`h, 2001, which was continued upon your request at a public hearing on December 18`h, 2000. The basis for this appeal was my finding that your property was zoned R-6. However, in light of recently submitted information regarding the zoning designation of your property (the zoning map for Ordinance ,#9, Series 1967), you are also aware that I have amended my Interpretation of the Official Zone District Map Concluding that your property located at 1201 Riverside Drive is zoned as R-15. This letter is to inform you that the City of Aspen Community Development Department, as a result , of the amended Interpretation finding your property to be zoned R-15, is holding your building permit until this matter can be fully resolved before City Council. The Community Development Department cannot issue this building permit for construction as if your property were zoned R-6. City Council will make a determination as to the correct zoning and further action to be taken by the Community Development Department regarding your property located at 1201 Riverside Drive. Feel free to call me if you have any question regarding this matter, 920.5100. Respectfully, -Julie Ann Woods, Director City of Aspen, Community Development Department 130 SOLTH GALENA STREET • ASPEN, COLORADO 81611-1975 - PHONE 970.920.5090 • FAX 970.920.5439 Pnneed m Re ded Paper MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager John Worcester, City Attorney FROM: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director RE: REQUEST FOR APPEAL OF A OFFICIAL ZONE DISTRICT MAP INTERPRETATION — PUBLIC HEARING DATE: December 18, 2000 APPLICANT Ms. Cherie Oates represented by David Kelly, Oates, Knezevich, & Gardenswartz P.C. INTRODUCTION Cherie G. Oates, owner of Lot 11, Block 24 of the Riverside Addition, formally requested an interpretation of the Official Zone District Map to determine the correct zoning of an adjacent property, owned by Dale Hower, located at 1201 Riverside Drive. While the current Zone District Map indicates the property is zoned as R-6 (Medium -Density Residential), Ms. Oates questions the validity of this R-6 zoning designation as depicted on the map. An older zone district map shows the subject property as R-15 (Moderate -Density Residential). Ms. Oates claims the subject property as indicated on the Official Zone District Map is the result of a mapping error on the zoning map and should be zoned R-15, as indicated on earlier Zone District Maps. The Community Development Director's interpretation found, pursuant to Section 26.710.030(A) of the Aspen Land Use Code, the Official Zone District Map shall be the final authority as to the current zoning of land in the City of Aspen. Subsequently, Ms. Oates submitted a letter to the Community Development Department requesting an Appeal of the Interpretation to City Council. STAFF COMMENTS At the time Staff rendered the Official Zone District Map interpretation to Ms. Oates, neither Staff nor Ms. Oates had been able to produce any ordinance (which would be the method for establishing a zone district for a specific section of land in the City of Aspen) that would have 1) originally established the zoning of the subject property as R-15 or 2) subsequently rezoned the property from R-15 to R-6 as currently shown on the map. However, on December 11, 2000, Mr. Oates provided Staff with a map of the South Annexation referred to in Ordinance No. 9, Series 1967, which initially established the zoning for the subject property as R-15. [It should be noted that Staff identified Ordinance No. 9, Series 1967 prior to the interpretation for Ms. Oates. The Ordinance referred to the initial zoning for the South Annexation as provided in an attached map. There was no attached map to the Ordinance from which Staff could determine the zoning for the subject property. It is this map that Mr. Oates located in the archives of the Aspen Times dated May 4, 1967 and provided to Staff on December 11, 2000. The zoning designation for a parcel or lot in the City of Aspen can only be achieved through a two-step public hearing process to the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council requiring the adoption of an ordinance which then formally applies or changes a zoning designation for a property. The Official Zone District Map is the graphic representation of these actions correlating City Council action to a colored parcel of land on the paper map. Therefore, every property in any given zone district is required to have an underlying ordinance justifying its zoning designation.] As a practical matter, after reviewing the 1967 South Annexation Map, which has been approved by City Council via Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1967, Staff agrees that, without any other ordinance proving a subsequent rezoning to another zone district, the current Official Zone District Map erroneously depicts the subject property as R-6. In the case of a proven map error, the Community Development Director has the authority to correct it administratively. Therefore, Staff finds reason to believe that the Official Zoning Map is, in fact, in error regarding the zoning designation of the subject property. Regarding the documents and maps Staff has found and analyzed, Staff has no evidence that the property was ever rezoned from R-15 to R-6 as currently shown on the map. In order to remedy this, Staff recommends that the City Council direct the Community Development Director to amend the Official Zoning Map pursuant to Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1967 to correctly reflect the known underlying zoning ordinance. In addition, Staff also feels that the authority provided in the Land Use Code, determining the Official Zone District Map to be the final authority on zoning of land in the City of Aspen should be secondary to the actual underlying ordinances approved by City Council which set the zoning or rezoning of property. These documents should be referred to if zoning is in question. Staff recommends City Council request the Community Development Director to initiate a code amendment to this effect. BACKGROUND INFORMATION There are many important events which Staff believes to be important in reviewing this appeal that Council know and understand the chain of events that have occurred regarding this appeal and interpretation. The chain of events in this case occurred as follows: ➢ Dale Hower, owner of the adjacent subject property located at 1201 Riverside Drive, submitted an application for an administrative review of an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) at 1201 Riverside Drive on September 29, 2000; ➢ Shortly thereafter, Mr. Oates, a neighbor of 1201 Riverside Drive, contested the zoning of the property located at 1201 Riverside Drive. Mr. Oates provided Staff with 1) a 1963 City of Aspen Zoning Map, 2) a 1967 City of Aspen Zoning Map, and 2 I 3) a 1975 City of Aspen Zoning Map that showed the subject parcel being zoned R- 15. The current City of Aspen Official Zone District Map indicates that the zoning of subject parcel is R-6. Mr. Oates requested staff research the zoning of the parcel of land located at 1201 Riverside Drive; ➢ Staff researched prior City of Aspen zoning ordinances and found no ordinance initially rezoning the property to R-15 or rezoning the property to R-6. Staff did find an approved Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1967 approving the South Annexation and the appropriate zoning designation; however the ordinance referred to an attached map indicating the actual zoning which was not attached; ➢ Dale Hower was notified that the zoning had been contested and subsequently requested an interpretation of the Official Zone District Map by the Community Development Director; ➢ The Community Development Director issued an interpretation on October 26, 2000 that upheld the R-6 zoning pursuant to Section 26.710.030 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code which states that the Official Zone District Map shall be the final authority as to the current zoning of land in the City of Aspen; ➢ A copy of the land use code interpretation for Ms. Hower was provided to Ms. Oates as an affected property owner. Ms. Oates then requested an interpretation of the Official Zone District Map from the Community Development Director so that Ms. Oates' right to appeal the Hower Interpretation to City Council was preserved; ➢ The Community Development Director issued an interpretation to Ms. Oates that also upheld the R-6 zoning based on Land Use Code Section 26.710.030. This interpretation was issued on November 22, 2000; ➢ The Community Development Director approved the ADU application for Ms. Hower's property because it met the review criteria for an administrative approval for an ADU; ➢ Subsequently, Ms. Hower submitted a building permit application for a duplex on the subject property (a 14,179 square foot lot). This request would be allowed in the R-6 zone district that was upheld by the Code Interpretations issued by the Community Development Director; ➢ Following this, Ms. Oates submitted a letter to the Community Development Department requesting an appeal to City Council of the Director's interpretation on November 27, 2000; ➢ On December 11, 2000, Mr. Oates provided Staff with the approved South Annexation Zoning Map, referred to in Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1967, which designated the subject property as R-15. 3 CITY COUNCIL ACTION After considering this appeal, City Council may reverse, affirm, or modify the Director's Interpretation. A decision to modify or reverse the finding of the Director requires a finding by the City Council that the Director 1) denied due process, 2) exceeded her jurisdiction, or 3) abused her authority based on the record of proceedings. The Director's initial interpretation of the subject property's zoning is attached along with the interpretation request and the appeal request. Staff believes that Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1967 with the attached map legally establishes the initial zoning for the parcel of 1201 Riverside Drive as R-15. Based on this new information, Staff believes that, unless Ms. Hower can produce an approved ordinance of the Aspen City Council rezoning the subject property (legally described as Lots 6-9, Block 24, City of Aspen) to R-6, this Ordinance No. 9, Series 1967 depicts the correct zoning of the subject property as R-15 . STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council take the following actions: ➢ Staff recommends City Council affirm this Resolution upholding Ms. Oates' request for appeal of an interpretation of the Official Zone District Map, finding that Ordinance No. 9, Series 1967 clearly establishes the correct zoning designation for a property known and described as Lots 6-9, Block 24, City of Aspen to be R-15 with the following conditions; 1. Staff recommends City Council direct the Community Development Director to issue a reinterpretation to Ms. Hower, owner of the subject property, finding that the zone district as indicated on the Official Zone District Map is incorrectly shown as R-6 and shall be changed to R-15 pursuant to Ordinance No. 9, Series 1967; 2. Staff recommends the City Council direct the Community Development Director to make the necessary changes to the Official Zone District Map to correctly reflect the zoning of the subject property as R-15 pursuant to Ordinance No. 9, Series 1967; and 3. Staff recommends City Council request the Community Development Director to initiate a code amendment that requires an underlying zoning ordinance to be the final authority on zoning of land in the City of Aspen and have the Official Zoning Map remain secondary to the actual underlying ordinances approved by City Council as a graphic representation of those ordinances. STAFF RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No.160, Series 2000." 4 ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A Applicant's Appeal Request Exhibit B Director's Interpretation dated Exhibit C Request for Interpretation Exhibit D Matrix of Staff Zoning Research Results Exhibit E 1963 City of Aspen Zone District Map (Shows Subject Parcel as County R-15) Exhibit F 1967-1968 City of Aspen Zone District Map Exhibit G 1975-1980 City of Aspen Zone District Map Exhibit H Ordinance 9, Series of 1967 (From Pikin County Library) Exhibit I 1982 Building Permit for GarageVI-0% Exhibit J 1984 Building Permit for Breakfast Nook�kv'� Exhibit K Riverside Drive Section of Current Official Zone District Map Exhibit L Resolution No. 160, Series 2000 Gount3r Attorney Robert 1. 13 acres, WoodV Creek—$16,500 with stream frontage. DelanW of Glenwood Springs won' 2. 40 acres, Castle Creek Valley • 80,000 with $20,000 re-election ]N@sday to the lower T - Roaring Fork Valley Board of down.HOMESIMB - �� — Education. He received 517 of the 1. white Horse. Springs,_from $12,360 for 7 plus aces up. arvM'So0•vows teat: .. 2. Pitkin Green — $22,2 The only contested seat was in 35— -.- the Carboy -area. Stephen a —3: iNovrrtairr - - - Strang, Jr. won ;with 364 votes. 4. 2 acres bo 0• - lncnmbent Earl 1&6 5. Rea MountExh i bit H andRonaldHogue received 90. Plus YOU - LEGAL �@ k� - f)BDIiVArtCE NO: 9 Marks of 1967 AND UPPER CQLORADA BOARD REAL?Of0 _ O AN aBnWANCEAMEMW GTMEX1.OF THE ClrTOFASPM, COLCRAD4 - - - -- - - ---- - -. _ - PEB1'AIDMVC 'r0 ZOhIIIHG, TO PBO VIDE ZO NM Fad THE AREA A1w HEXED TO THE CUT OF ASPEN, CID,atirAM BY a ffl=APXT-W 4. -- - - . - -- - - -- SERMS CW 1967, MW DE>CLAB= . AN EKB IGENCY TO EXUr. A (� HE 1T ®DAMM tertheClbComef] of the Ctty of Aspen, Colorado:- Seedon L• The Official- Code of fee CI* of Aeysq. Commdo6 Is herefar The area an eted to the CRY of Aspw% Coloraft By Qrdbmw W 4, Series of 1967, described as SoathSWID �t Amwxa im, Is hawbot Bch asb is - upon the attached map, - ` • made a part at this Cods." s eaaa2 DWAU96 afftmatcersat-- ---- -- — things bete%=above set forth, amCRY- Cowca of tree CiQr of Aspen. Col , hereft finds, determines and declares . that as exists, and that this ordinanceis �ssary for the im- s inediate preservation of the public • _Deace. health and s_af . _ ODiiCED, - _ iD1 - 1967. Robert Bunwd, mamor ' - Cr3FTI1P`feATE— -- ---- - - — — m STATE OF COLORADO. - - - - ss A*. o r M; COUNTY -OF PITM k- Lorraine, Graves, City Clerk of - Aspeo, Colorado, do hereby aertifjr tbat•the above and foregoing ordinance •o FJ'� S Y was introduced, read infiN,asdpaased on first reading at a regular meeting _ of the Cif of the City of Aspen on .April L967, and pub- lisbed in the Aspen Times a weeliV y ..•yy+��ip�nap+ex of general .dseulatiao. V b' s w- ---��.1+.fife - an Chi* of Aspen, COtAtak_ In Its IssuedAprii'20, 1967. and was -- - and aMiuved at a rqr- ular _ -meeifing At the C Cosncii an May 1.ranti ed ,orderVAUslr as Otdini96T, aueE rid . 9, Series 19671, of said City, as provided tw inn a - ► this 2nd - ti - Lorraim Graves,: City Clerk. WMay,1967. Wit'.. .�•� Y:••,. • �•- .• .. - ... � .. _ - yam-- -- - �._ . 1. 13 acres�jWoocty Creek—$16,500 with stream frontage. Is, 2. 40 acres, Castle Creek Valley — $80,r" with $20,000' _ OMESITES - 1. White Horse Springs, from $12,360 for 7 plus aces up. Interior & Exterior Painting & Decorating 2. Pitkin Green — $22,235._ Victorcan Specialists - Wallpaper Hanging 3. Mountain Valley — $9,000. 4. 2 acres bordering Roaring Fork — $13,000. _ cc__ 5. Red Mountain - 3 acres- y _ �NewOwner- Mike-.7chalkr 925. Plus many others which will interest ou. MEMBER-OF-THEASPEINUM _-_ ' - ----- AND UPPER COLORADO BOARD OF Wi JroRi ESTIMATES—---_ A. P. o • t - o '::.1❖:.'LY: 9— M Oates Appeal Notes RE: REQUEST FOR APPEAL OF A OFFICIAL ZONE DISTRICT MAP INTERPRETATION — PUBLIC HEARING This is a public hearing to consider Resolution # 160, Series 2000, which is a request for appeal of an Official Zone District Map Interpretation rendered by the Community Development Director that determined the zoning for a property located at 1201 Riverside Drive. INTRODUCTION ➢ Cherie G. Oates, represented by David Kelly, and owner of Lot 11, Block 24 of the Riverside Addition, formally requested an interpretation of the Official Zone District Map to determine the correct zoning of an adjacent property, owned by Dale Hower, located at 1201 Riverside Drive. ➢ While the current Zone District Map indicates the property is zoned as R-6 (Medium -Density Residential), Ms. Oates questions the validity of this R-6 zoning designation as depicted on the map. ➢ Older zone district maps show the subject property as R-15 (Moderate -Density Residential). Ms. Oates claims the subject property as indicated on the Official Zone District Map is the result of a mapping error on the zoning map and should be zoned R-15, as indicated on earlier Zone District Maps. ➢ The Community Development Director's interpretation found, as directed by the Land Use Code, that the Official Zone District Map shall be the final authority as to the current zoning of land in the City of Aspen. Subsequently, Ms. Oates submitted a letter to the Community Development Department requesting an Appeal of the Interpretation to City Council. STAFF COMMENTS ➢ At the time Staff rendered the Official Zone District Map interpretation to Ms. Oates, neither Staff nor Ms. Oates had been able to produce any ordinance (which would be the method for establishing a zone district for a specific section of land in the City of Aspen) that would have: 1) Originally established the zoning of the subject property as R-15 or 2) Subsequently rezoned the property from R-15 to R-6 as currently shown on the map. ➢ However, on December 11, 2000, Mr. Oates provided Staff with a map of the South Annexation referred to in Ordinance No. 9, Series 1967, which initially established the zoning for the subject property as R-15. ➢ It should be noted that Staff identified Ordinance No. 9, Series 1967 prior to the interpretation for Ms. Oates. The Ordinance referred to the initial zoning for the South Annexation as provided in an attached map. There was no attached map to the Ordinance from which Staff could determine the zoning for the subject property. It is this map that Mr. Oates located in the archives of the Aspen Times dated May 4, 1967 and provided to Staff on December 11, 2000. ➢ The zoning designation for a parcel or lot in the City of Aspen can only be achieved through a two-step public hearing process to the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council requiring the adoption of an ordinance which then formally applies or changes a zoning designation for a property. ➢ The Official Zone District Map is the graphic representation of these actions correlating City Council action to a colored parcel of land on the paper map. Therefore, every property in any given zone district is required to have an underlying ordinance justifying its zoning designation. BACKGROUND INFORMATION There are many important events which Staff believes to be important in reviewing this appeal that Council know and understand the chain of events that have occurred regarding this appeal and interpretation. The chain of events in this case occurred as follows: ➢ Dale Hower, owner of the adjacent subject property located at 1201 Riverside Drive, submitted an application for an administrative review of an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) at 1201 Riverside Drive on September 29, 2000; ➢ Shortly thereafter, Mr. Oates, a neighbor of 1201 Riverside Drive, contested the property's zoning. Mr. Oates provided Staff with 1) a 1963 City of Aspen Zoning Map, 2) a 1967 City of Aspen Zoning Map, and 3) a 1975 City of Aspen Zoning Map that showed the subject parcel being zoned R-15. The current City of Aspen Official Zone District Map indicates that the zoning of subject parcel is R-6. Mr. Oates requested staff research the zoning of the subject parcel; ➢ Staff researched prior City of Aspen zoning ordinances and found no ordinance initially rezoning the property to R-15 or rezoning the property to R-6. Staff did find an approved Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1967 approving the South Annexation and the appropriate zoning designation; however the ordinance referred to an attached map indicating the actual zoning which was not attached; ➢ Dale Hower was notified that the zoning had been contested and subsequently requested an interpretation of the Official Zone District Map by the Community Development Director; ➢ The Community Development Director issued an interpretation on October 26, 2000 that upheld the R-6 zoning pursuant to Section 26.710.030 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code which states that the Official Zone District Map shall be the final authority as to the current zoning of land in the City of Aspen; 2 ➢ A copy of the land use code interpretation for Ms. Hower was provided to Ms. Oates as an affected property owner. Ms. Oates then requested an interpretation of the Official Zone District Map from the Community Development Director so that Ms. Oates' right to appeal the Hower Interpretation to City Council was preserved; ➢ The Community Development Director issued an interpretation to Ms. Oates that also upheld the R-6 zoning based on Land Use Code Section 26.710.030. This interpretation was issued on November 22, 2000; ➢ The Community Development Director approved the ADU application for Ms. Hower's property because it met the review criteria for an administrative approval for an ADU; ➢ Subsequently, Ms. Hower submitted a building permit application for a duplex on the subject property (a 14,179 square foot lot). This request would be allowed in the R-6 zone district that was upheld by the Code Interpretations issued by the Community Development Director; ➢ Following this, Ms. Oates submitted a letter to the Community Development Department requesting an appeal to City Council of the Director's interpretation on November 27, 2000; ➢ On December 11, 2000, Mr. Oates provided Staff with the approved South Annexation Zoning Map, referred to in Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1967, which designated the subject property as R-15. CITY COUNCIL ACTION After considering this appeal, City Council may reverse, affirm, or modify the Director's Interpretation. A decision to modify or reverse the finding of the Director requires a finding by the City Council that the Director 1) denied due process, 2) exceeded her jurisdiction, or abused her authority based on the record of proceedings. Staff believes that Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1967 with the attached map legally establishes the initial zoning for the parcel of 1201 Riverside Drive as R-15. Based on this new information, Staff believes that, unless Ms. Hower can produce an approved ordinance of the Aspen City Council rezoning the subject property (legally described as Lots 6-9, Block 24, City of Aspen) to R-6, this Ordinance No. 9, Series 1967 depicts the correct zoning of the subject property as R-15. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the City Council take the following actions: ➢ Affirm this Resolution upholding Ms. Oates' request for appeal of an interpretation of the Official Zone District Map, finding that Ordinance No. 9, Series 1967 clearly establishes the correct zoning designation for a property known and described as Lots 6-9, Block 24, City of Aspen to be R-15 with the following conditions; 3 1. That Council direct the Community Development Director to issue a reinterpretation to Ms. Hower, finding that the zone district as indicated on the Official Zone District Map is incorrectly shown as R-6 and shall be changed to R-15 pursuant to Ordinance No. 9, Series 1967; 2. That Council direct the Community Development Director to make the necessary changes to the Official Zone District Map to correctly reflect the zoning of the subject property as R-15 pursuant to Ordinance No. 9, Series 1967; and That Council request the Community Development Director to initiate a code amendment that requires an underlying zoning ordinance to be the final authority on zoning of land in the City of Aspen and have the Official Zoning Map remain secondary to the actual underlying ordinances approved by City Council as a graphic representation of those ordinances. Ott- 1C ' 0W UZ>; *Dl"'I WL5 I I"IHiN 5 I KLL I LHW OF f ICL5 LAW OFFICES OF vC/ PAUL J. TADDUNE, P.C. t PAULj.TADDUNE 32-1 WEST MAIN STREET, SUITE 301 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE (970) 925-9190 TELEFAX (970) 925-9199 INTERNLr: taddunegcompuserve.com WILLIAM GUEST, OF COUNSEL ANDREW H. BUSCHER, OF COUNSEL December 18, 2000 Mayor Richards and Members of the City Council City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 P.2 /z-1k-4t) AFFILIATED OFFICE FOWLER, SCHIMPERG $ FLANAGAN, P.C. 1640 GRANT STREET, SUITE 300 DENVER, COLORADO 80'.03 TELEPHONE (303) 298-8603 TELEFAX (303) 298-8748 Re: Appeal of Official Zone District Map Interpretation - Public Hearing: Dale Hower, 1201 Riverside Drive,, Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Mayor Richards and Members of the City Council: I am writing this letter on behalf of Dale Hower, 1201 Riverside Drive, Aspen, Colorado 81611. I understand that the zoning of Ms. Hower's property is an your agenda for this evening by way of an appeal of a zone district map interpretation. Ms. Hower should be deemed to be a necessary and essential party- to the extent that any determination rendered by you would have an adverse affect on Ms. Hower's existing rights and ability to utilize her property in a manner consistent with the existing Official Zone District Map. Ms. Hower is represented by my affiliated firm, Fowler, Schimberg & Flanagan, P.C., 1640 Grant Street, Suite 200, Denver, Colorado 80203, (tel. no. 303- 298-8603) which, in view of the short period of time in which Ms Hower became aware that this matter would be on tonight's agenda and the press of the holiday- season, cannot provide representation at tonight's meeting. For similar reasons, I also am not available. Late last Friday, December 18, Ms. Hower was presented with a copy of a memorandum from Community Development Director, Julie Ann woods, dated December 18, 2000, that has been placed in your packet for consideration at tonight's meeting. There may be inaccuracies in Ms. Wood's analysis. Therefore, I hereby request that the matter be continued to afford Ms. Hower the opportunity to investigate the matters raised in the memorandum and provide additional input. The following may be a basis for error: LCI. 10 ' ✓JVJ r1J- JGr'PI Wtb I I'IHiI`1 5 I Kt L I LHW I-r r iCLS P. 4 Mayor Richards Members of the Aspen City Council December 18, 2000 Page 2 Mr. Woods refers to Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1967, as a reason that Ms. Hower's property should be zoned R-15. Ms. Woods' analysis, however, fails to recognize that several city -vide zoning ordinances have amended and superceded prior ordinances, including those in effect in 1967. One such ordinance was enacted in 1988 and completely revised the land use code, incorporating by reference the then existing zone district map. Of significance in this regard is the editor's note that appears on page 435 of the current land use code. The editor's note indicates that Ordinance No. 5, 1988, repealed former Chapter 24 relative to zoning and enacted a new Chapter 24, now Title 26. The absence of a history notation following a particular section indicates that the provisions have derived unamended from Ordinance No. 5, 1988. Moreover, the editor's note on Page 436 indicates that the L� land use regulations were also amended in their entirety by Ordinance No. 10-1999. These are just two ordinances that most probably amended and superceded the 1967 ordinance referred to in Ms. Woods' memorandum. As City Attorney throughout the entire 1980s, I believe that a closer review of the history of the zoning regulations might reflect other citvwid.e zoning ordinances enacted in the late 1970s. i also know from my City Attorney experience that the 1967 ordinance may be unreliable due to faulty or incomplete record keeping and that the legislative history must be thoroughly scrutinized. This will take additional time. Section 26.710.030 of the existing Aspen Land Use Code (dated April 2000) pertains to the Official Zone District Map (see Page 710-44). This section provides as follows: "A. Establishment of zone district map. The location and boundaries of the zone districts established in this Title shall be set forth on the Official Zone District Map of the City of Aspen which is incorporated herein by reference into this Title as if fully described and set forth herein. A copy of the Official Zone District Map shall be located in the office of the Community- Development Department at all times for inspection by the general public during regular business hours. The Official Zone District Map shall be the final authority as to the current zoning of land in the City of Aspen. (Emphasis added). From a very brief review it appears that there are at least two citywide ordinances by which the Official Zone District Map was adopted which ULU Id ' 016 b7; Z)IM I Wt5I MHiN 5 I Ktt I LHW Uh h 1C:t'm P. 3 Mayor Richards Members of the Aspen City Council December 18, 2000 Page 3 depicted Ms. Hower's property in the R-6 zone. This being the case, another ordinance would be required before any further amendment or alteration to the Official Zone District Map can be accomplished. I have also briefly reviewed the zoning district map effective as of November 11, 1983. It appears that an argument can be made that the zoning district map in 1983 also establishes the property in the R-6 zone. I am aware that Ms. Hower and her architect have had numerous communications over a two and one half year period with the City Community Development Department, both prior to and following Ms. Hower's purchase of the property. Ms. Hower was repeatedly assured that her property is in the R-6 zone. Ms. Hower relied upon this representation and spent substantial sums from her life savings to purchase the property and commission. building plans. The most recent interpretation confirming that the property is in the R-6 zone was issued by the Community Development Director on October 26, 2000. A second interpretation was issued to the adjacent property owner on November 22, 2000, also confirming the R-6 zoning. In the section of Ms. Woods' memorandum titled "City Council Action", Ms. Woods states that staff believes that Ordinance No. 9, Series of 1967, legally establishes the initial zoning for the parcel as R-15. Ms. Woods further states that staff believes that unless Ms. Hower can produce an approved ordinance of the Aspen City Council re -zoning the :subject property, the correct zoning should be R- 15. I have pointed above to at least two ordinances, which most likely amended and superceded the 1967 ordinance. Adequate time should be given to Ms. Hower to review the history of the zoning on her parcel. One day advance notice is simply not enough time. Because neither I nor any member of my affiliated firm can be present this evening, I suggest and request on behalf of Ms. Hower that this matter be continued until January 8, 2001 at the earliest and preferably to January 22, 2001. Lastly, item no. 3 of the staff recommendation is for the City Council to initiate an amendment which requires the underlying zoning ordinances to be the final authority on zoning of land in the City of Aspen and that the Official Zoning Map remain secondary to the actual zoning ordinances. I suspect that if this recommendation is implemented such an approach would be contrary to the Wes' io Uri WG51 I IHII'I b I KLL I LHW Ut F iLEb P.5 Mayor Richards Members of the Aspen City Council December 18, 2000 Page 4 customary practice throughout the country concerning reliance on official zoning maps and would further complicate any effort by the average citizen to ascertain ' zoning throughout the City. Very truly yours, PAUL J. TADDUNE, P.C. Paul J. Taddune PJ'T:kc pc: Dale Hower John Worcester Julie Ann Woods aAwPI%P.TLw\M@y"R.eh.r& I I 18.00.wpd ORDINANCE NO. \!�- (Series of 1988) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING REVISIONS TO THE OFFICIAL CITY OF ASPEN ZONING MAPS WHEREAS, Ordinance 5, Series of 1988 re-establishes the list of zone districts in the City of Aspen, including repealing the L-1, L-2, R-40 and R-30 zone districts, creating the LjTR zone district, and renaming the L-3 zone district as the LP zone district; and WHEREAS, in order to ensure the conformance of the Official City of Aspen Zoning Maps with the revised Land Use Regulations, it is necessary to make revisions to the Official City of Aspen Zoning Maps; and WHEREAS, in the course of reviewing the maps, the Planning Office has also identified various additional changes which should be made, involving zone district changes to publicly owned lands, to certain lands presently designated with an SPA overlay and to correct several minor designation errors; and WHEREAS, at a public meeting held on April 5, 1988, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that the Aspen City Council adopt revisions to the Official City of Aspen Zoning Maps. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN. Section 1 That the Official City of Aspen Zoning Maps, be and hereby are revised to incorporate the changes identified on the maps which are attached hereto as Exhibit A. Section 2 That the City Engineer be and hereby is directed to amend the Official Zone District Maps to reflect the revisions shown on Exhibit A. Section 3 That the City Clerk be and hereby 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 4 If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5 Nothing in this ordinance shall be construed to affect any right, duty or liability under any ordinance in effect prior to the effective date of this ordinance, and the same shall be continued and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 6 A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the day of , 1988, at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen 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 on the day of 1988. William L. Stirling, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S' Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of 1988. William L. Stirling, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn f Koch, City Clerk AR.ZONINGMAPSORD ORDINANCE NO. ID (Series of t999) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, REPEALING TITLE 20, RESIDENT MULTI -FAMILY HOUSING REPLACEMENT PROGRAM, AMENDING TITLE 26. LAND USE REGULATIONS. OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE, PROVIDING FOR PENALTIES FOR THE VIOLATION THEREOF. AND REPEALING ALL OTHER ORDINANCES AND PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT THEREWITH. WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend Title 26, Land Use Regulations. of the Aspen Municipal Code to incorporate Title 20 of the existing Municipal Code within the land use regulations and to re -codify the entire land use code to simplify its format and content: and WHEREAS. the City_ Council desires to make certain substantive amendments to the land use code. NOW. THEREFORE. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF .ASPEN. COLORADO. AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That Title 20 of the Aspen Municipal Code is hereby repealed in its entirety. Section 2. That a certain document entitled Land Use Code. three (31) copies of which are on file and open for inspection by the public in the office of the City Clerk. be and the same is hereby adopted as Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code and the same is hereby referenced, and made a part hereof as if fully set forth in this ordinance. Section 3. That all other ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. Section 4. That nothing in this Ordinance shall be construed to affect any right. duty or liability under any ordinance in effect prior to the effective date of this ordinance. and in the same shall be continued and concluded under such prior ordinances. Furthermore. the provisions of this ordinance shall not apply in the following specific circumstances: a) To the development of any property for which a vested right, as defined by Colorado law, has been obtained prior to the effective date herof. r b) To the construction of anv dwelling unit pursuant to any building permit which was applied for prior to or on April 6, 1999. c) If, however, subsequent to and in reliance upon development reviews of a project by City staff or other review bodies, an applicant has so substantially changed his or her position or incurred extensive obligations and expenses that it would be highly inequitable and unjust to amend such plans. then the Community Development Director may issue such permit. Any person aggrieved by a decision in this regard by the Community Development Director may appeal to the City Council pursuant to Section 26.316 of the newly enacted Land Use Code. Section 5. That any person violating the provisions of this re-enacted Chapter 26 of the ,aspen Municipal Code shall be subject to prosecution in the Municipal Court and upon conviction may be subject to the general penalty provisions set forth at Section 1.04.080 of the Municipal Code (a fine not exceeding S 1,000.00 or imprisonment for a period of up to one 11► year, or both at the discretion of the Court). Each day that a violation occurs or continues shall constitute a separate offense and nothing herein shall preclude the City from instituting such necessary proceedings to enjoin, abate, or correct any violation. Section 6. This ordinance ,hall not have any effect on existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of any ordinance repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 7. If anv section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase. or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 8. A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the A day of 1999. at 5:00 o'clock pm in the City Council Chambers. Aspen City Hall. 130 S. Galena . Prior to such hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM 5G C. F. KOECKEL B. B. 6 L. CO. -------------------------- ORDINANCE NO. (Series of 1967) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE XI, CHAPTER 1, OF THE ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, PERTAINING TO ZONING, TO PROVIDE ZONING FOR. TTIF AREA ANNEXED TO THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, BY ORDINANCE NO. 4, SERIES OF 1967, AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY TO EXIST. Colorado: BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Section 1: The Official Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, Is hereby amended by adding a section, to be numbered 11-1-2(e), which section shall read as follows: "11-1-2: DISTRICTS: (e ) Zoning Map Amended: The area annexed to the City of Aspen, Colorado, By Ordinance No. 4, Series of 1967, described as South Side Annexation, is hereby zoned as shown upon the attached map, which map is made a part of this Code." Section 2: Because of the matters and things herein - above set forth, the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby finds, determines and declares that an emergency exists, and that this ordinance is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and safety. i� INTRODUCED, READ, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED THIS DAY OF 13pi, 1967. � r ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk FINALLY ADOPTED AND APPROVED THIS "`=� DAY OF 1967. % ATTEST: Mayor Pro em City C e STATE OF COLOREIDO ) ss COUNTY OF PITKIN ) CERTIFICATE I, Lorraine Graves, City Clerk of Aspen, Colorado, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing ordinance was introducaed, read in full, and passed on st reading at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Aspen on April 17 ,196_.L, 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 April 20 ,196Z, and was finally adopted and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council on May 1 ,196 7 , and ordered published as Ordinance No. 9 , Series 1961, 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 2nd .1 ny of --,May_ berfafne Graves, City Clerk r 1. 13 acres, Woody Creek—$16,500 with stream frontage. 2. 40 acres, Castle Creek Valley — " 1,000 with $20,000 own. OMESITES 1. White arse Springs, from $12,360 for 7 plus acres uP. , Interior & Exterior Painting & Decorating 2. Pitkin Green — $22,235. Victorian Specialists - Wallpaper Hanging 3. Mountain Valley — $9,000. 4. 2 acres bordering Roaring Fork — $13,000. 5. Red Mountain - 3 acres. New ®wrrw- Mike Stlull" 92� Plus many others which will interest you. 'ic>ti �7 L MEMBER OF THE ASPEN MULTIPLE -LISTING -SERVICE_ - - - - - -- - - FRFE EST NI[ATES AND UPPER CO.LORADO BOARD OF REALTORS — — �iiwi®�®�i ��... O • CD y • a��` i 2 ~ CJ pNJ _ iy- 1 L1 O$ 3-105 N .. .} _ _. - _ __ _ ...,. -•vl l )_ ate. ISPA " . ,; " . •sue_ `' �":.,.- � -�' ' ,- - - -- - - - - _ - - — Pitkin County Attorney Pf' ?rt - 1. 13 acres, Woody Creek- `i,500 with stream frontage. IN Delaney, of Glenwood Sprig on 2, 40 acres, Castle Creek V.- -'Y - $80,000 with $20,000 _ fte+�t ction Tuesday to the lower - - - - y> > �R'oafring Fork Valley Hoard of - HOMESITES Education, He received 517 of the " ' I. White Horse Springs,.from $12,360 for 7 plus acres up. over • GoO Votes Last. ' ' _ The only contested seat was in 2. Pitkin Green - $22,235._: = - -3: Mountain Valley-- $9,000. the Carbondale- -area. Stephen B• Strang, Jr. won with 364 votes. 4. 2 acres bordering Roaring Fork - $13,000. Incumbent Earl Mosbarger got 186 5. Red Mountain_-_3 acre'-... �® New and Ronald Bogue received 90. Plus many -others which will interest. you. 4GV�NOTICE,. - --- MEMBER OF THE-ASPE14MULTIPIE'.---- �lG SERVICE----- AND UPPER COLORADO BOARD OF REALTORS ()RDINANCE NO. 9 CSeries of 1967 AN ORDINANCEAMENDINGTITLEXI, -chajrbei *, pi`-1W_CRDlNANCES --- OF 111E CITTOF ASPEN, COLMAD06- PERTAINING TO ZONING, TO PRO- k VWE ZONING FOR THE AREA AN- NEXED TO THE CITY OF ASJ'EN, COLCHADO, BY ORDINANCE NO. 4. SERIES OF 1967, AND DECLARING1` AN EMERGENCY TO EXIST. -� BE IT CHDAINED bytheCityCoundl � of the City of Aspen, Colorado �p R. Section 1: The O�iclal Code of the City of Aspen. Colorador is hereby amended_ bpr- adding a- sew: to be -� `which - _ _ �. numbered 11=i-Z(e eectico �p o o "11-1-2.1 DISIws:1tICT3 — -- - -- — - - (e) Zoning Map Amended:• The area annexed to the CItY of Aspen, Colorado, By Ordinance No. 4, Series of 1967, described as SouthSide rrte - - Annexatioty to hereby zoned as shown -- - upon the attached map, which niap is Code." Q ,n made a part of this Section Ze Beeause of the matters and things ftrefwwabove set forth the Cif Council of the City of Aspen,Norado, - hereby finds, determines and declares Z that an emergency exists, and that this ordinance is necessary for the Im- > �. mediate preservation of the public e ace, health and safe '1'RODU - - --- ED 11 DAY OF April; Barnard, 1dalyor ' ... _ � 1967. Rob rrt --- _ .. - --- A'1'T�+ir orrsTne craves; Ci�Clerh- . -: ' m STATE OF COLORADO as � COUNTY -OF PITM lu Lorraine- Graves, City Clerk of Aspen, Colorado, do hereby certify -the A , that above and foregoing ordinance Vn .tS Y .. �! . was Introduced, read in fdU, and passed on first reading at a regular meeting f:�1\�� eQ et t`"('SL�gp . - of the City Council of the- City at 3los Aspen on .April 17, 1967, and pub- lished in the Aspen Times a weekly T 1 - . newspaper of general drewlation, pub- .r lashed in -tam- - -- - - -- _ - in its Issue pf April 20, 1967, and was finally adoptej and approved at a reg- ular meeting of the City Council on May 1,.-1967, and ordered published r as Ordinancd No' 9- Series 1967. of ' law. said City, as provider; by . . n11 MNFSS• WHEREOF, f have here- ;ertlo ae� ui brand j6d a seal at this 2nd da bf -Maly. 1967. .Lorraine Graves.: CRY Clerk. IWO- . �''• `' /�'- • "-__-) ., _ . - .9 1. • � • -.. --... - _- � _ -_ --�_ City of Aspen To: John Galambos From: Fred Jarman Fax: 429-1296 Pages: 4 including cover Phone: Date: 10/26/00 Re: Interpretation CC: ❑ Urgent ❑ For Review ❑ Please Comment ❑ Please Reply ❑ Please Recycle • Comments: As promised, here is the interpretation. Let me know if you have any questions, Thanks, Fred i / 2 /7 L "I c -7 / 6 / 2 c./O0 ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ZONE DISTRICT MAP INTERPRETATION JURISDICTION: APPLICABLE CODE SECTION: EFFECTIVE DATE: WRITTEN BY: City of Aspen Section 26.710.030(A): Official Zone District Map October 26, 2000 Fred Jarman, City Planner APPROVED BY: ,VV Div —�Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director COPIES TO: SUMMARY: Dale Hower, John Worcester, This interpretation of the Official Zone District Map pursuant to Section 26.306 determines that property owned by Dale Hower, located at 1201 Riverside Drive and legally described as Lots 6-9, Block 24, Riverside Addition is zoned as R-6 (Medium -Density Residential) as indicated on the Official Zone District Map. Further, pursuant to Section 26.710.030(A) Official Zone District Map, the official zone district map shall be the final authority as to the current zoning of land in the City of Aspen. BACKGROUND: Dale Hower formally requested an interpretation of the Official Zone District Map to determine if property she owns located at 1201 Riverside Drive and legally described as Lots 6-9, Block 24, Riverside Addition, Parcel ID # 2737-181-00-024 is zoned as R-6 (Medium -Density Residential) as indicated on the Official Zone District Map. She purchased the property in 1998. At that time, she inquired to the Community Development Department as to her zoning designation, which was determined to be R-6. Subsequently, the owner retained architect John Galambos to design a house on the property under the assumption the lot was zoned R-6. DISCUSSION OF EVENTS: The owner's architect, John Galambos, met with Community Development Staff to determine the development potential for the 14,179 sq. ft. lot and inquired about its zoning designation. Staff indicated to the applicant that her property is located in the R-6 zone district after referring to the Official Zone District Map last revised in 4/15/98, 12/15/99, and 5/9/00. Staff further directed the applicant that any proposed plans for development on this lot shall be required to conform to the provisions of this zone district. Subsequently, the applicant pursued development plans (which included two single-family dwellings and an ADU which are permitted uses in the R-6 zone district) for the subject lot according to direction received from Com Dev Staff as indicated above. An adjacent property owner, concerned with potential development on the neighboring property, provided Staff with an earlier 1979 Official Zoning Map indicating that the subject property was zoned R-15 rather than R-6 as currently shown on the current Official Zone District Map. In doing this, the neighbor claims that the current Official Zone District Map is incorrect; the subject property should be zoned R-15 (Moderate -Density Residential) as developed according to R-15 provisions in the Land Use Code. As a result, this potential discrepancy on the Official Zone District Map is significant for the applicant in her ability to develop her property. At present, Staff has been unable to produce any ordinance (which would be the method for establishing a zone district for a specific section of land in the City of Aspen) that would have 1) established the property as R-15 or 2) rezoned the property from R-15 to R-6 as currently shown on the map; Staff has produced a series of former zoning maps that are shown in the matrix below. The zoning designation for a parcel or lot in the City of Aspen can only be achieved through a two-step public hearing process to Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council requiring the adoption of an ordinance which then formally applies or changes a zoning designation for a property. The Official Zone District Map is the graphic representation of these actions correlating City Council action to a colored parcel of land on the paper map. Therefore, every property in any given zone district should have an underlying Ordinance justifying its zoning designation. What we have t ; . P Date � Property Zane City Zoning Map 1963 Riverside Addition as R-15 City Zoning Map 1967 Riverside Addition as R-15 City Zoning Map 1979 Lots 6, 7, 8. & 9, Block 24 Riverside Addition as R-15 City Zoning Map 1983-1988 R-15 GIS Zoning Layers 1996 —1999 R-6 Current Official Zone District Map 4/15/98 12/15/99 5/9/00 R-6 As a result of this claim by the adjacent neighbor challenging the validity of the current Official Zone District Map, the applicant requested an interpretation of Official Zone District Map. As a result of the lack of any ordinance justifying the property as R-15 or R-6, the Community Development Director must rely on the only immediate recourse provided by the provisions of the Aspen Land Use Code pursuant to Section 26.710.030(A), which directs any question as to the current zoning for a property: The official zone district map shall be the final authority as to the current zoning of land in the City of Aspen. The current Land Use Map indicates that the property is zoned R-6. Therefore, it is the Community Development Director's Interpretation that the subject property, Lots 6-9, Riverside Addition, is zoned R-6. Staff informed the neighbor that an interpretation was pending and suggested that the neighbor also request an interpretation in order to allow either party to appeal this decision to City Council. It should be noted that as of the issuance of this interpretation by the Community Development Director requested by Dale Hower, no formal request for interpretation has been received by the neighbor. Appeal of Decision As with any interpretation of the land use code by the Community Development Director, an applicant has the ability to appeal this decision to the Aspen City Council. This can be done in conjunction with a land use request before City Council or as a separate agenda item. In this case, there is no land use case proposed by the applicant, therefore an appeal would require separate action by City Council. 26.316.030(A) Appeal Procedures Any person with a right to appeal an adverse decision or determination shall initiate an appeal by filing a notice of appeal on a form prescribed by the Community Development Director. The notice of appeal shall be filed with the Communitv Development Director and with the City office or department rendering the decision or determination within fourteen (1.1) days of the date of the decision or determination being appealed. Failure to file such notice of appeal within the prescribed time shall constitute a waiver of any rights under this Title to appeal any decision or determination. cc: John Worcester, City Attorney Fred Jarman, City Planner XZ LL 7- 0 a LL . W C= 0 b S)F, cx� 4 ---------------- g:- AWAT-k SEE .-.- LOCAIAV i C -QA%A;E 0 ke FLt� vg, -r- / (--OR /0- 1, ov FROM : FAX NO. : Oct. 03 2000 04:37PM P1 Date: October 3, 2000 To: James Undt Aspen Community Development From: Rich Pavicek Galambos/Muir ArchitectsS, LLC Projcct" Wild Rose 1201 Riverside Dr. Re: ADU Parking Via: Fax (3 pages) James, Attached is a copy of the revised Site Plan *for 1201 Rivet -side Drive. I have added the parking space or the ADU per our discussion. If there are any questions or you need further information please call me. - Thank you, Rich Pavicek Ga(anibos/Muir Architects 0 208 MAIM STRUT. CAR60NDALE. C0I,0RAD0 81623 • (970)704-9730 • FAX: (970)704-0207 • t-MAIL: r—MARCRO-SOf2I5.NHT BLOC 300 D, AABC. AspeN. CC)LORAnq 81611 • (970)429.1286 • FAX: (970)429-1296 • F-MAII r. �i a.•,�ia .. _._ Report Date: 09/29/2000 10:29AM PITKIN COUNTY TREASURER Page: 1 STATEMENT OF TAXES DUE SCHEDULE NO: R004877 ASSESSED 'TO: HOWER DALE 1024 E HOPKINS #17 ASPEN, CO 81611 LEGAL DESCRIPTION: DESC: LOTS 6, 7, 8 AND 9, BLOCK 24 RIVERSIDE ADDITION AND A PORTION OF THE ALLEY OF BLK. 24, RIV. ADD. RIVERSIDE PLACER USMS NO. 3905, BEING FULLY DESC. BY M/B AND A TRACT OF LAND BY M/B CONTAINING 2500 SQ. FT. M/L. SEE DEED BOOK 569, PAGE 156 PITKIN COUNTY RECORDS. SUB:RIVERSIDE ADDITION BLK:24 LOT:6 - LOT:9 DESC: SEE M&B PARCEL: 273718100024 SITUS ADD: 1201 RIVERSIDE DR ASPEN TAX YEAR CHARGE TAX AMOUNT INTEREST FEES PAID TOTAL DUE 1999 TAX 2,347.12 70.41 0.00 2,417.53 0.00 TOTAL TAXES 0.00 GRAND TOTAL DUE GOOD THROUGH 09/29/2000 0.00 ORIGINAL TAX BILLING FOR 1999 TAX DISTRICT 056 - 1-AFSEA Authority Mill Lev Amount Values Actual Assessed CITY OF ASPEN 5.401 450.27 Land 850,000 82,790 PITKIN COUNTY 3.101 258.53 Exempt 0 0 OPEN SPACE & TRAILS 2.514 209.59 Improve 6,000 580 COUNTY HOUSING DEBT 0.372 31.01------------------- ---------------- ASPEN FIRE PROTECTION 1.261 105.13 Total 856,000 83,370 ASPEN SANITATION DISTRICT 0.234 19.51 ASPEN SCHOOL DISTRICT 8.265 689.06 COLORADO MTN COLLEGE 3.655 304.72 COLORADO RIVER WATER CONS 0.282 23.51 ASPEN VALLEY HOSPITAL 1.500 125.06 ASPEN AMBULANCE DISTRICT 0.230 19.18 EAST ASPEN METRO DISTRICT 0.180 15.01 PITKIN COUNTY LIBRARY 1.158 96.54 28.153 2,347.12 - TAXES FOR 1999 ALL TAX LIEN SALE AMOUNTS ARE SUBJECT TO CHANGE DUE TO ENDORSEMENT OF CURRENT TAXES BY THE LIENHOLDER OR TO ADVERTISING AND DISTRAINT WARRANT FEES. CHANGES MAY OCCUR AND THE TREASURER'S OFFICE WILL NEED TO BE CONTACTED PRIOR TO REMITTANCE AFTER THE FOLLOWING DATES: PERSONAL PROPERTY AND MOBILE HOMES - SEPTEMBER 1, REAL PROPERTY - SEPTEMBER 1. TAX LIEN SALE REDEMPTION AMOUNTS MUST BE PAID BY CASH OR CASHIERS CHECK. 506 E. Main St. - Ste 201 Aspen, Co 81611 (970) 920-5170 -T c6tte To INMmoD oPP55 vlcl r MI DESCRIPTION OF DESIGN STANDARDS 1. This ADU contains 415 S.F. net livable and 10% of it is closet area. 2. This ADU functions as a separate dwelling unit. Including the following: A. It has a separate exterior entrance. B. It has separate utilities accessed near the entry. C. It contains a kitchen containing the minimum requirements. D. It contains a bathroom containing the minimum requirements. 3. There is one parking space located on site for the ADU unit. 4. The ADU is located within the dimensional requirements of the zone district. 5. The entrance stairs to the ADU shall be snowmelted to melt snow and the roof above shall have snow cleats to prevent snow from accumulating in the stairway. 6. The ADU is in accordance with the requirements of residential development in general. This including natural light, ventilation, fire egress, fire suppression, and sound attenuation between living units. 7. This ADU shall be registered with the Housing Authority and deed restricted in accordance with Section 26.520.070. Deed Restrictions. MEMORANDUM TO: Plans ere routed to those departments checked -off below: V........ City Engineer O ........... Zoning Officer O ........... Housing O ........... Parks Department O ........... Aspen Fire Marshal O ........... City Water O ........... Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District O ........... Building Department O ........... Environmental Health O ........... Electric Department O ........... Holy Cross Electric O ........... City Attorney O ........... Streets Department O ........... Historic Preservation Officer O ........... Pitkin County Planning TO: Cindy Christensen, Housing Authority FROM: James Lindt, Planning Technician Community Development Department 130 So. Galena St.; Aspen, CO 81611 Phone-920.5104 Fax-920.5439 RE: 1201 Riverside Drive ADU Parcel ID #2737-181-00-024 DATE: October 3, 2000 COMMENTS: Cindy, Please find attached an application for Administrative ADU Approval. The application appears to meet all of the design standards. The application is for two detached dwellings with one subgrade ADU proposed for the larger primary residence. The applicant does not have to mitigate for both of the detached units because the second detached dwelling is smaller than the existing house on the parcel. They will be registering their draft deed - restriction with you soon. Please let me know when they have registered the deed restriction so that we may issue them a development order. Please return comments to me by October 16, 2000. Thanks, James