Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20160517 AGENDA Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission REGULAR MEETING May 17, 2016 4:30 PM Sister Cities Meeting Room 130 S Galena Street, Aspen I. SITE VISIT A. Aspen Alps: Please meet at City Hall by 4pm. Transportation will be provided to and from the site. II. ROLL CALL III. COMMENTS A. Commissioners B. Planning Staff C. Public IV. MINUTES V. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Aspen Alps Planned Development Amendment Review VII. OTHER BUSINESS VIII. ADJOURN Next Resolution Number: Resolution 3, Series 2016 Typical Proceeding Format for All Public Hearings 1) Conflicts of Interest (handled at beginning of agenda) 2) Provide proof of legaJ notice (affi d avit of notice for PH) 3) Staff presentation 4) Board questions and clarifications of staff 5) Applicant presentation 6) Board questions and clari fications of applicant 7) Public comments 8) Board questions and clarifications relating to public comments 9) Close public comment portion of bearing 10) Staff rebuttal /clarification of evidence presented by applicant and public comment 1 1 ) Applicant rebuttal/clarification End of fact finding. Deliberation by the commission commences. No further interaction between commission and staff, applicant or public 12) Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed among commissioners. 13) Discussion between commissioners* 14) Motion* *Make sure the discussion and motion includes what criteria are met o r not met. Revised April 2, 2014 Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 1 of 20 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Hillary Seminick, Planner THRU: Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Community Development Director RE: 700 Ute Avenue, Building 300 of Aspen Alps Planned Development. Planned Development – Project Review, 8040 Greenline Review, Mountain View Plane Review, Growth Management Review, Residential Design Standard Review Resolution No.___, Series of 2016 MEETING DATE: May 17, 2016, continued from May 3, 2016 APPLICANT /OWNER: Aspen Alps Condominium Association, 700 Ute Avenue Aspen, CO 970.925.7820 REPRESENTATIVE: Alan Richman, Alan Richman Planning Services LOCATION: 700 Ute Avenue, Building 300, Aspen Alps Subdivision and Planned Development CURRENT ZONING: Lodge (L) Zone District with a Planned Development Overlay SUMMARY: The Aspen Alps Condominium Association request land use reviews to replace the structurally compromised 300 Building. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends continuation of the proposed design. Figure 1a. Building 300, looking west Figure 1b. Vicinity Map P1 VI.A. Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 2 of 20 MAY 17, 2016 UPDATE MAY 3, 2016 PUBLIC HEARING SUMMARY: The Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on May 3, 2016, considering the Applicant’s request to replace the 300 Building at Aspen Alps PD/Subdivision. The Commissioners were generally supportive of the project; however, unanimously voiced concern regarding the proposed 44’ height of the replacement structure. Specifically, the Commissioners were concerned that allowing for an increase in height from 35’ to 44’ would set a precedence as other buildings within the Alps redevelop. The Commission asked the Applicant revisit the design to bring the height closer to the currently allowed 35’. Given the location of the 300 Building, the Commission felt the glazing was appropriate; however, they would like a better understanding of the materials and light trespass at Detailed Review. Commissioners McNicolas and Goode agreed that employee housing mitigation method proposed by the Applicant, while perhaps suitable for the expansion of one building, is not appropriate for the overall Alps property. In light of the Commission concerns, it was unanimously decided to continue the public hearing to May 17, 2016. AMENDMENTS TO PROPOSAL: The Applicant provided a supplement to the Application on May 9, 2016 addressing the concerns of Staff and the Commission. This supplement has been included as Exhibit P to this memo. The Application outlines measures to address Residential Design Standards and has reduced the proposed height from 44 to 42 feet. Staff has provided an update to the May 3, 2016 memo based on the supplemental materials below. NOTE: All figures within the updated section of this memo are notated alphabetically rather than numerically to prevent confusion with figures from the May 3rd memo. Figures provided are not to scale and these updated exhibits can be found in Exhibit O. Supplement to Application. Only the following exhibits are included in this May 17, 2016 Memo: Exhibit O – May 2016 Supplement to Application. RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS: At the May 3 public hearing, the Application did not meet three RDS requirements; street-oriented entrance, the “no window zone” prohibiting windows between nine and 12 feet, and areaway location. A summary of the applicant response to these Standards are outlined below. 1. The project is required to have at least two street-oriented entrances. The project proposes one street-oriented entry. At the May 3 hearing, the dimensions were not provided and Staff could not verify the design met the standard. The Applicant has since provided dimensional details that confirms the entrance meets the standard as shown in Figures A and B. 2. At the May 3 hearing the design included windows that span into the “no window zone”, which is the area between nine and 12 feet above the finished first floor. The Applicant has revised the design to meet the standard as shown in Figure C. 3. There is an areaway forward of the front façade, which is accessed by a staircase. Lightwells and areaways are not permitted forward of the front façade of a building. The Applicant requests the Commission grant a variance to this standard. The retaining element of the areaway will be used in mud flow mitigation for the site. P2 VI.A. Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 3 of 20 Figure A. Detail of West Elevation Figure B. Detail of Porch Section Figure C. Updated West Elevation Staff Comments: Staff appreciates the additional information demonstrating the front entry dimensions meet the standard. The standard does require two entries for this project; however, there are site-specific constraints that make an additional street-oriented entry difficult to achieve. Staff recognizes this issue and finds including a street-oriented entry would be an improvement on existing conditions where there is little street presence. The Applicant has revised the design to eliminate windows in the “no window zone”, meeting the standard. Lastly, a second entrance is proposed on the western elevation that is accessed via an areaway forward of the front-most wall of the structure. The stairwell is utilizing an element that will be used in mudflow mitigation for the new structure. Staff is supportive of the feature given the site is located in a mud flow zone and the entry is appropriate given the grade changes found on the site. P3 VI.A. Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 4 of 20 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT: The Applicant has reduced the proposed height from 44 to 42 feet. The maximum height along the west elevation is 34’ 10” and the maximum height at the east elevation is 42’, as shown in Figure D, below. Figure D. Updated Height Detail In the May 3rd hearing, the Applicant attributed the increased height to the floor/ceiling assembly. The May 10th supplement included conceptual floor/ceiling assembly dimensions, a detail of the assembly is in Figure E. The depths of these features is 1.5 feet. The floor to ceiling dimensions are nine feet in height. The existing units have a floor to ceiling height of eight feet. [Continued on following page] P4 VI.A. Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 5 of 20 Figure E. Conceptual Floor/Ceiling Assembly Figure F. Floor/Ceiling Height Section Detail P5 VI.A. Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 6 of 20 Staff Comments: Staff acknowledges the Applicant’s efforts to reduce the height of the structure since the last meeting; however, Staff continues to have concerns about the proposed height and recommends additional study. During the May 3 public hearing, the Applicant referenced the Commercial Design Standard minimum floor to ceiling requirement of nine feet. The 300 Building is multi-family residential; therefore, the Commercial Design Standards do not apply to this project. Staff recognizes the requirements for adequate floor/ceiling assemblies have increased since the 1960s; however; Staff recommends additional study of construction techniques that could minimize the assemblies, and a reduction of the proposed interior floor to ceiling heights to 8’6”. Reducing the interior floor to ceiling heights alone from 9’ to 8’6” would result in a 40 foot maximum building height. This is in greater alignment with the underlying zone district requirements, as shown in Table A, below. This reconciles the need for the improved floor/ceiling assemblies without compromising the existing four story building configuration. Table A. Height Analysis Permitted in Lodge Zone District PD Approved/ Existing Height Proposed Height Multi-Family Residential Lodge 28’ 28-40’ 35’, 44’ chimney 42’ P6 VI.A. Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 7 of 20 The Applicant maintains the request for an increase of the approved dimensions to 17,574 sq. ft. of floor area with 8,495 sq. ft. of deck area. Staff is still concerned regarding the overall massing of the structure. The existing deck area is 3,131 sq. ft., which is 32% of the allowed floor area of the 300 Building, as shown in Table B, below. The proposed deck area of 8,495 sq. ft. is 48% of the requested floor area of the 300 Building. If the proposed deck area relied on the existing 300 Building deck/floor area ratios, that would result in a total of 5,624 sq. ft. of deck area. Staff recommends a restudy to reduce the proposed deck area. Table B. Deck Area Analysis PD Approved/Existing Proposed Recommended Floor Area Deck Area Deck Percentage of Floor Area Floor Area Deck Area Deck Percentage of Floor Area Deck Area Deck Percentage of Floor Area 9,942 sq. ft. 3,131 sq. ft. 32% 17,574 sq. ft. 8,495 48% 5,624 sq. ft. 32% The proposal involves increasing each unit in size by an average 377 sq. ft. While the increase of floor area is only 225 sq. ft. over the allowed floor area of Lot 3 for this use, as the site is redeveloped, the floor area increases may not be available to the 400 and 500 buildings. Staff has provided a comparison table on the following page of the three buildings on Lot 3 for the Commissions consideration. The additional floor area of the 300 Building would result in a much wider structure. The Applicant provided an overlay of the existing and proposed building footprints in A1.0, found in Exhibit J- Architectural Drawings. For the Commissions convenience, Staff has provided a markup demonstrating the approximate relationship of the roof lines as shown in Figure G on the following page. Table C. Existing Conditions, Lot 3 Building Existing Floor Area No. of Units Height 300 9,942 sq. ft. 7 35’, 44’ chimney 400 10,217 sq. ft. 7 35’1”, 43’8” chimney 500 10,292 sq. ft. 8 35’10”, 43’3” chimney Figure G: Detail of A1.0 with Staff Mark-Up P7 VI.A. Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 8 of 20 [Continued on following page] RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends continuation of the review to allow the applicant to make revisions to the building design. PROPOSED MOTION: “I move to continue the public hearing for 700 Ute Avenue, Building 300 of Aspen Alps Planned Development.” Or “I move to approve Resolution ____, Series 2016, recommending City Council grant approval for Residential Design Standard Variances, 8040 Greenline Review, Mountain View Plane Review, Planned Development Project Review and GMQS Review.” P8 VI.A. Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 9 of 20 MAY 3, 2016 STAFF MEMO TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION NOTE: The Application is subject to the 2015 Land Use Code. It was submitted prior to the effective date of Referendum 1 as well as the new Residential Design Standards, and is therefore not subject to either provision. REQUEST OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: The Applicant is requesting recommendation to City Council for the following land use approvals from the Planning and Zoning Commission. • Residential Design Standard Variance Review (Chapter 26.410) for variances to applicable multi-family residential standards. (City Council is the final review authority.) • 8040 Greenline Review (Chapter 26.435) to replace the existing 300 Building. (City Council is the final review authority.) • Mountain View Plane – Wheeler Opera House (Chapter 26.435) to replace the existing 300 Building. (City Council is the final review authority.) • A Planned Development Project Review Amendment (Chapter 26.445) to replace the 300 Building. (City Council is the final review authority.) • GMQS Reviews (Chapter 26.470) for residential multi-family development and allotments. (City Council is the final review authority.) EXISTING CONDITIONS AND HISTORY: The Aspen Alps, located at 700 Ute Avenue is comprised of 73 multi-family residential units, three (3) affordable housing units, and a parking garage. There are eight (8) different Alps parcels – two (2) are vacant and six (6) include improvements. A summary of the parcels and existing buildings are listed in Table 1, below: Table 1: Parcel and Development Descriptions Parcel No. Parcel Size (Gross Area) Building Number / Common Name 1 .612 acres; 26,668 sf 100 Building 2 .761 acres; 33,163 sf 200 Building 3 .971 acres; 42,286 sf 300, 400, 500 Buildings 4 .312 acres; 13,612 sf 700 Building 5 .514 acres; 22,939 sf 800 Building 6 3.402 acres; 148,182 sf Vacant Land 7 .122 acres; 35,314 sf Winter Building (Parking Garage, Affordable Housing) 8 .049 acres; 2,126 sf Vacant Land P9 VI.A. Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 10 of 20 The Aspen Alps were developed incrementally beginning in 1962. In fact, the Alps was the first condominium building in the State of Colorado. Building 100 was developed in 1962, Buildings 200 – 700 between 1965-1969, Building 800 in 1973, and the Winter Building in 2002. Note there is no 600 Building. The Alps units, like The Gant, are considered Free-Market Residential Dwelling Units with the ability to be rented on a short-term basis. The units have been occupied by owners, their guests, non-working residents, and vacationing tourists. No local working residents, as defined in the APCHA Guidelines, have lived in any units. The Alps is located in the Lodge (L) Zone District. In 2001 an application was approved by the City rezoning the portion of the Alps that was zoned R-15 PUD and Conservation to Lodge – other portions of the Alps were already in the Lodge zone district. It appears the intent of the application was to add a PUD Overlay to all parcels comprising the Aspen Alps, but the Ordinance was mistakenly written to only include some of those parcels. In 2013, the Alps submitted an application to establish a Planned Development over the entire Alps campus and establishing the existing buildings as the baseline for allowed development. That application also clarified lot lines. Figure 2 provides an overview of the Aspen Alps Subdivision and Planned Development. Only Building 300 of Lot 3 is the subject of this amendment. [Continued on following page] Figure 2 – Aspen Alps Site Map P10 VI.A. Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 11 of 20 The Applicant requests to amend the Planned Development in order to replace the existing 300 Building, which was originally constructed in the sixties and does not meet current building codes. The building is located on Lot 3, which also contains the 400 and 500 Buildings. The 300 Building needs to be replaced as it has become structurally distressed by lateral loading and is visibly out of alignment in some areas. Repairing the 300 Building, rather than replacing, was investigated. The repair would require placement of an exterior retaining wall. To further secure the structure, the building would be raised with hydraulic jacks, realigned, and then attached to micropiles. This avenue was not pursued due to its expense and because a more involved repair P11 VI.A. Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 12 of 20 could be required once work was underway. Additionally, there is no guarantee that the repair would work. The repaired structure would still not meet today’s building code or accessibility requirements. Given the options, the Applicant has elected to pursue an amendment to the development approvals to both replace and upgrade the existing 300 Building. PROPOSAL: The Applicant proposes to replace the existing 300 Building on Lot 3 with a new building. The proposed new building would change the height, floor area, setbacks, and number of units of the existing building. Tables 2 and 3, below, outline the dimensions proposed to change as part of this amendment. Table 2. Approved vs Proposed Dimensions Approved (Existing) Dimensions Proposed Dimensions Lodge Zone District Allowed Dimensions Minimum Gross Lot Area 42,286 sq. ft. 42,286 sq. ft. N/A Minimum Gross Lot Area per Dwelling Unit1 1,922 sq. ft./unit 22 units total 7 units in 300 Building 1,691 sq. ft./unit 25 units total 10 units in 300 Building N/A Minimum Front Yard Setback (Building 300) 19.5’ 21’9”, 0’ for retaining features 5’ Minimum Side Yard Setback (Building 300) 19’ 12’ 0’ for retaining features 5’ Minimum Rear Yard Setback (Building 300) 22’ 1’8” 0’ for retaining features 5’ Maximum Height 35’, 44’ to top of chimney 44’ 28’ Maximum Allowable Floor Area (Lot 3) 34,647 sq. ft. 42,511 sq. ft. 1:1 FAR 42,286 sq. ft. 300 Building 9,942 sq. ft. 3,131 sq. ft. deck area 17,574 sq. ft. 8,495 sq. ft. deck area 17,581 sq. ft.2 2,637 sq. ft. deck area3 Maximum Multi- Family Unit Size 1,122 sq. ft. min. 1,484 sq. ft. max. 1,337 sq. ft. avg.4 1,500 sq. ft., 9 units 4 1,875 sq. ft., 1 unit 4,5 1,500 sq. ft. net livable 5 Total Parking 8 spaces provided in garage on Parcel 7 (split between 300, 400, and 500 buildings) 12 total spaces • 4 spaces on-site • 8 spaces provided in garage on Parcel 7 (split between 300, 400, and 500 buildings) 11 spaces 1 Net lot area deductions were not calculated for this amendment. The gross lot area of Lot 3 does not consider other areas of the Aspen Alps Planned Development and Subdivision. 2 Based on allowed 42286 less the existing 400 and 500 building. [Table 2 footnotes continued on following page] P12 VI.A. Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 13 of 20 3 The vested code permits of an exemption of 15% of deck area. Deck calculations include exterior stairs and walkways. 4 See Table 2. 300 Building Unit Dimensions for precise dimensions. 5 The maximum unit size cap may be increased up to 2,000 sq. ft. by extinguishment of a Transferrable Development Right (TDR); however, a TDR cannot be used to increase the overall FAR of a parcel. Table 3. Aspen Alps 300 Building Floor Area Analysis Unit Number New Unit Letter1 Existing Net Livable Proposed Net Livable Net Increase 301 E 1123 sq. ft. 1500 sq. ft. 377 sq. ft. 302 & 306 F/H 2256 sq. ft. (Units 302&306) 3,000 sq. ft. total between two new units: • 1500 sq. ft. (Unit 302/F) • 1500 sq. ft. (Unit 302/F) 372 sq. ft. 303 D 1127 sq. ft. 1500 sq. ft. 373 sq. ft. 304 A 1126 sq. ft. 1500 sq. ft. 374 sq. ft. 305 J 1122 sq. ft. 1500 sq. ft. 378 sq. ft. 306 H 1128 sq. ft. 1500 sq. ft. 372 sq. ft. 307 G 1485 sq. ft. 1875 sq. ft. 390 sq. ft. 308 I 1122 sq. ft. 1500 sq. ft. 378 sq. ft. New 309 B 0 sq. ft. 1500 sq. ft. 1500 sq. ft. New 310 C 0 sq. ft. 1500 sq. ft. 1500 sq. ft. Total - - 15,375 sq. ft. 6,014 sq. ft. 1 In the Application update provided in 2016, the unit numbers were changed to unit letters. Currently the 300 Building has 7 units averaging 1,337 sq. ft. in size. Units 302 and 306, under single ownership, were combined a number of years ago. The Applicant wishes to increase the number of units from seven to ten. The new density will be achieved by separating two previously combined units and adding two new units. Design Changes: The applicant proposes changes to the overall architecture for the building. The basic form and scale of the buildings is maintained, while the treatment of the façade is amended to a more contemporary architecture. In addition, a green roof is proposed. Approved materials are stone and wood siding. The proposed design is a modern update with similarities in form. The design retains the wood siding and stone chimney elements while updating the building with metal clad windows. The glass railings, extensive glazing and green roof offer a departure from the existing design, which includes primarily wood and river stone materials. Egress to the units is currently provided on the exterior of the west elevation. The proposed replacement structure will provide egress via interior corridors, while creating private deck space for each unit. The updated design shows includes entrances to the building, one at grade and another subgrade entrance, both on the west elevation. Figures 4 & 5 illustrate the existing building’s architecture and Figures 6 & 7 illustrate the proposed architecture. Full architectural renderings are available in Exhibit J. Architectural Renderings. Materials are addressed in Detailed Review; however, conditions can be included in the Project Review. P13 VI.A. Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 14 of 20 Figure 4. Existing Building, looking west towards Aspen Mountain Figure 5. Existing Building, looking east towards Independence Pass Figure 6. Proposed Design, looking west towards Aspen Mountain P14 VI.A. Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 15 of 20 Figure 7. Proposed Design, looking east towards Independence Pass STAFF COMMENTS: Staff is supportive of replacing the structurally compromised 300 Building and is sensitive to the Applicant and property owner’s request. The proposal increases the overall floor area of the project and increases the height of the replacement structure. Staff recommends a reduction of height, glazing, massing, floor area and deck area. Staff comments on each required review is detailed below. RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS: The project is for a 100% free market multi-family residential building and therefore subject to the Residential Design Standards. To qualify for a variation to these standards, the Applicant must demonstrate how the project responds to the neighborhood context or site-specific design constraints. A detailed analysis of each applicable standards can be found in Exhibit A.1 of this memo. Of the applicable standards, the project did not meet the criteria for three: 4. The project is required to have at least two street-oriented entrances. Only one entrance, shown in Figure 8, callout “A”, is visible from South Alps Street. The entrance does not meet the minimum requirements to be considered a street-oriented entrance. Specifically, the dimensions of the porch were not provided and the height of the door is unknown. In addition, street facing principal windows are required for each unit. Principal windows are only included on 4 units. 5. The project also includes windows that span into the “no window zone”, which is the area between nine and 12 feet above the finished first floor (Figure 8, callout “B”) and a stairwell forward of the front-most wall of the building (Figure 9). 6. There is an areaway forward of the front façade, which is accessed by a staircase. Lightwells and areaways are not permitted forward of the front façade of a building. The proposed design does incorporate seven street-facing windows. The current structure does not have any street-facing windows and Staff feels this is an improvement on the existing condition that responds to the architecture of the neighboring buildings. Staff recommends the Applicant revise the design to meet the requirements for a street-oriented entrance, eliminate the projection into the “no window zone” and the stairwell forward of the front-most wall of the structure. P15 VI.A. Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 16 of 20 Figure 8. Proposed Design, RDS Variances Figure 9. Proposed Design, RDS Variances, Stairwell Location 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW: The project is within the 8040 Greenline Review Area. This review provides a heightened review to reduce impacts to the natural environment, ensure infrastructure and utility needs, and to provide transition from forest to urban uses. A comprehensive response to the criteria can be found in Exhibit A.2 of this memo. As previously noted, the 300 Building has been subject to lateral loading causing structural issues due to geotechnical issues. The need to mitigate for future potential geotechnical issues has been addressed in preliminary geohazard investigations. Mud and debris flow analysis will be required to determine the type, location and dimensions of retaining features. City Engineering has provided conditions of approval, all of which have been outlined in the Resolution. The majority of the 8040 Greenline Review Criteria are met with conditions; however, Staff is concerned with the amount of glazing proposed on the East Elevation and the potential for light pollution. While materials are not addressed in the Project Review, review boards may place expectations or conditions on the Detailed Review approval. MOUNTAIN VIEW PLANE | WHEELER OPERA HOUSE: The 300 Building is located in the Wheeler View Plane, approximately 2000’ from point of origin. The View Plan intercepts the top story of the proposed structure, as shown in Figure 10. Several other buildings are in the A t B t P16 VI.A. Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 17 of 20 foreground blocking the view of the structure, including the western corner of the Hyman Avenue Pedestrian Mall, Independence Square and North of Nell, as shown in Figure X. The current and proposed structure are not visible from the Wheeler Opera House View Plane. Figure 10. Wheeler View Plane at 300 Building Figure 11. View from Wheeler Opera House View Plane [Continued on following page] P17 VI.A. Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 18 of 20 Figure 12. View from Second Floor of the Wheeler Opera House As shown in Figure X, the existing and proposed buildings would not be visible from the second floor of the Wheeler Opera House. Staff finds that the proposed development has a minimal impact on the View Plane. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT: A Planned Development Amendment is required for the request to amend the approved dimensions. Staff has a number of concerns with the proposed amendment to the approved dimensions, which are summarized below and detailed in Exhibit A.4 Planned Development Review Criteria – Project Review. The Applicant has proposed a height increase from the established 35 feet with a 44 feet tall chimney to a maximum allowed height of 44 feet. The increased height is not consistent with underlying Lodge zone district, which limits height of free-market residential buildings to 28 feet. Staff does not support a height increase above the current 35 foot height limit established in the PD. The amendment requests an increase to the allowed floor area dimensions. Each unit will grow by an average of 377 sq. ft. net livable area, of which the Applicant represents that an additional 100-125 sq. ft. is required to replace the current units with building-code compliant units. Additionally, the two new units will increase the project size by 1,500 sq. ft. net livable area each. The approved dimensions of the 300 building include 9,942 sq. ft. of floor area with 3,131 sq. ft. of deck area. The Applicant requests an increase of the approved dimensions to 17,574 sq. ft. of floor area with 8,495 sq. ft. of deck area. The amendment would increase the floor area by 7,865 sq. ft., representing a 79% increase in overall floor area for the 300 building. The deck area would increase by 5,328 sq. ft., representing an overall deck area increase of 170% for the 300 Building. The 300, 400, and 500 Buildings were constructed in the same period and are approximately the same size. The Code allows residential projects a 15% deck exemption, which would equal to 2,637 sq. ft. of deck area. When looking at Lot 3 as a whole, the maximum free market floor area permitted for the lot is 42,286 sq. ft. The proposed floor area would increase the maximum allowed floor area of Lot 3 to 45,511 sq. ft, which represents an increase of 225 sq. P18 VI.A. Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 19 of 20 ft. or 0.5% over the existing maximum allowed floor area for the Lodge Zone District. Staff does not support the floor area amendment requests as increasing the massing and floor area by such drastic amounts is not consistent with the neighborhood context. Staff recommends that the Applicant revise the design to better align the deck area with the Code allowances and the adjacent buildings. Staff also has concerns over the decrease on the minimum rear yard setback. The approved setback is 22 feet and the Applicant has proposed a 1 foot 8 inch setback. The replacement 300 Building will be required to place retaining features to mitigate for potential future geotechnical issues. The final dimensions and locations shall be determined with additional geotechnical analysis provided in the Detailed Review. This presents a problem as the dimensions for the Planned Development are set in Project Review. To address this concern, Staff proposed a secondary setback requirement for the 300 Building. Staff feels that reducing the amount of deck area would eliminate the need to reduce the setback below underlying zoning. Staff recommends that the minimum setback be increased to 5 feet, which is consistent with the underlying zone district requirement. To allow flexibility in design of retaining features, staff recommends a 0’ setback will be permitted for only retaining features acceptable to City Engineering. In terms of design, the Project Review criteria requires the design to comply with applicable design standards. This development is subject to Residential Design Standards and staff analysis of the applicable review criteria can be found in Exhibit A.1 of this memo. Three of the Standards did not meet the criteria for a variation. Additionally, Staff is concerned with the proposed amount of glazing and glass railing detail and recommends the Applicant reduce the amount of glass as depicted in Figure 7. As previously mentioned, exterior materials are finalized in Detailed Review; however, review boards may set forth certain expectations or conditions relating to architecture and materials during Project Review. GROWTH MANAGEMENT: Growth Management Reviews are required for the new residential units. An allotment of three new residential units is requested. The project, as currently proposed, generates 4.51 FTEs. The Applicant proposes to mitigate these FTEs with Affordable Housing Certificates. This is a consolidated review; therefore, The Planning and Zoning Commission can make a recommendation for a required mitigation method by Resolution, after receiving a recommendation from the APCHA Board. The APCHA Board reviewed this application at a July 12, 2015 meeting when the application was first submitted. The APCHA board memo was updated April 7, 2016 based on the revised Application; however, the Board recommendation did not change. The APCHA Board prefers on-site mitigation; however, if the applicant can mitigate with some on-site housing and the balance through the use of the Housing Credit Certificate program, that would be the acceptable means to satisfy required employee housing mitigation. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE: A formal Development Review Committee (DRC) meeting was held on March 21, 2016. Full DRC comments can be found in Exhibit B. All comments from the referral departments have been incorporated into the Resolution. P19 VI.A. Aspen Alps PD - Project Review Amendment May 17, 2016 P&Z Memo Page 20 of 20 The Engineering Department had several concerns with the project including mudflow and slope stability, stormwater, and utilities. Zoning outlined concerns regarding height measurement, which is required to be verified prior to City Council review. Additionally, floor area calculations were not provided in the Application and will be required prior to City Council Review. Special review for the trash enclosure, which is slightly smaller in size than required by Environmental Health, will be required as part of the Detailed PD Review. Additional measures to protect existing site trees during construction will be required. In addition, the applicant is required to provide a plan showing the relationship of trees to the micropile walls prior to City Council Review/as part of the Detailed PD Review. The Transportation Impact Analysis is required to be updated and further detailed as part of the Detailed PD Review. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends continuation of the review to allow the applicant to make revisions to the building design. PROPOSED MOTION: “I move to continue the public hearing for 700 Ute Avenue, Building 300 of Aspen Alps Planned Development to May 17th, 2016.” Or “I move to approve Resolution ____, Series 2016, recommending City Council grant approval for Residential Design Standard Variances, 8040 Greenline Review, Mountain View Plane Review, Planned Development Project Review and GMQS Review.” Attachments: Only italicized exhibits are included in the May 17, 2016 Memo Exhibit A.1 – Residential Design Standards Review Criteria, Staff Findings Exhibit A.2 – 8040 Greenline Review Criteria, Staff Findings Exhibit A.3 – Mountain View Plane Review Criteria, Staff Findings Exhibit A.4 – Planned Development Project Review Criteria, Staff Findings Exhibit A.5 – GMQS Review Criteria, Staff Findings Exhibit B – Development Review Committee Comments Exhibit C – APCHA Memo Exhibit D – Vested Code Sections Exhibit E – Public Notice Exhibit F – 2015 Application Exhibit G – 2015 Application Graphics Exhibit H – 2015 View Plane Exhibit I – 2016 Application Update Summary Exhibit J - 2016 Architectural Drawings Exhibit K - 2016 Civil Drawings Exhibit L - 2016 Engineering Report Exhibit M - 2016 Transportation Impact Analysis Exhibit N - 2016 View Plane Exhibit O – May 2016 Supplement to Application P20 VI.A. Planning and Zoning Commission Reso No. __, Series 2016 Page 1 of 10 RESOLUTION NO. __ (SERIES OF 2016) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARIANCES, ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS – 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW, ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS – MOUNTAIN VIEW PLANE – WHEELER OPERA HOUSE, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - PROJECT REVIEW, GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEWS FOR THE PROPERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A TO THIS RESOLUTION, COMMONLY KNOWN AS 700 UTE AVENUE, BUILDING 300 OF THE ASPEN ALPS, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-182-95-800 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application for the Aspen Alps Subdivision and Planned Unit Development (the Application) from Aspen Alps Condominium Association (Applicant), represented by Alan Richman Planning Services for the following land use review approvals: • Residential Design Standards – Variance, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.410; and, • Environmentally Sensitive Areas - 8040 Greenline Review, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.435; and • Environmentally Sensitive Areas – Mountain View Plane – Wheeler Opera House, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.435; and, • Planned Development – Project Review Amendment, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.445; and, • Growth Management Review – Expansion of Free-Market Residential Units within a Multi-Family or Mixed-Use Project, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.470; and, • Growth Management Review – Affordable Housing, pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.470; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is zoned Lodge (L) with a Planned Development (PD) Overlay; and, WHEREAS, all code citation references are to the City of Aspen Land Use Code in effect on the day of initial application – May 4, 2015, as applicable to this Project; and, WHEREAS, the Application for the Aspen Alps Subdivision/PD proposes to replace the existing 300 Building located on Lot 3 due to structural issues; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.470.040.C.7, Affordable Housing, of the Land Use Code, a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority is required and a recommendation for approval by the board was provided at their July 12, 2015, regular meeting; and, WHEREAS, a Development Review Committee Meeting was held on June 24, 2015 and the Community Development Department received referral comments from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, City Engineering, Building Department, Environmental Health P21 VI.A. Planning and Zoning Commission Reso No. __, Series 2016 Page 2 of 10 Department, Parks Department, Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, and the Transportation Department as a result of the Development Review Committee meeting; and WHEREAS, an update to the Application was received on March 14, 2016 in response to referral comments; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.470.040.C.7, Affordable Housing, of the Land Use Code, a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority is required and a recommendation for approval by the board was provided at their July 12, 2015, regular meeting. The APCHA memo was then updated on April 7, 2016 based on the revised the Application; and, WHEREAS, a Development Review Committee Meeting was held on March 30, 2016 and the Community Development Department received referral comments from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, City Engineering, Building Department, Environmental Health Department, Parks Department, Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, and the Transportation Department as a result of the Development Review Committee meeting; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.410 of the Land Use Code, Residential Design Standard Variance approval may be granted by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.435 of the Land Use Code, Environmentally Sensitive Areas – 8040 Greenline Review approval may be granted by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.435 of the Land Use Code, Environmentally Sensitive Areas – Mountain View Plane – Wheeler Opera House approval may be granted by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.445 of the Land Use Code, Planned Development - Project Review approval may be granted by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.470 of the Land Use Code, Expansion of Free- Market Residential Units within a Multi-Family or Mixed-Use Project approval may be granted by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.470 of the Land Use Code, Affordable Housing approval may be granted by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.304, Common Development Review Procedures, and Section 26.304.060.B.4, Modification of Review Procedures, all other necessary land use P22 VI.A. Planning and Zoning Commission Reso No. __, Series 2016 Page 3 of 10 reviews, as identified herein, have been combined to be considered by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, such combination of review procedures was done to ensure clarity of review, was accomplished with all required public noticing provided as evidenced by an affidavit of public noticing submitted to the record, and the public was provided a thorough and full review of the proposed development; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the Application at a duly noticed public hearing on May 3, 2016, and continued to May 17, 2016; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on May 17, 2016, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution __, Series of 2016, by a ____ to ____ (__-__) vote recommending approval of the Aspen Alps Subdivision and Planned Development Application and all necessary land use reviews, as identified herein, with the recommended conditions of approval listed hereinafter. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1:Approvals Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends City Council grant the Aspen Alps Subdivision/Planned Development Residential Design Standard Variance approvals, Environmentally Sensitive Areas – 8040 Greenline approval, Environmentally Sensitive Areas – Mountain View Plane – Wheeler Opera House approvals, Planned Development - Project Review approval, and Growth Management approvals, for a Site Specific Development Plan for the Aspen Alps Subdivision/PD, subject to the recommended conditions of approval as listed herein. All conditions outlined in all previous approvals remain valid and in effect except as modified herein. Submittal of Planned Development – Project Review Documents to the Community Development Department is required within one (1) year of approval by City Council. Section 2: Subsequent Reviews Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Applicant is required to obtain Planned Development – Detail Review following approval of the reviews outlined herein. The application shall be made no later than one (1) year following City Council approval of the reviews outlined herein. P23 VI.A. Planning and Zoning Commission Reso No. __, Series 2016 Page 4 of 10 Section 2: Recommended Approved Dimensions Dimensional Requirement Recommended Approved Dimensions Minimum Gross Lot Area 42,286 sq. ft./No Change Number of Units (300 Building) 10 Units Minimum Front Yard Setback (300 Building) 21’9”, 0’ for retaining features Minimum Side Yard Setback (300 Building) 12’ 0’ for retaining features Minimum Rear Yard Setback (300 Building) 1’8” 0’ for retaining features Maximum Height (300 Building) 42’ Maximum Allowable Floor Area (Lot 3) 42,511 sq. ft. 300 Building 17,574 sq. ft. 8,495 sq. ft. deck area Unit Number/Letter 1500 sq. ft. 301/E 1500 sq. ft. 302/F 1500 sq. ft. 303/D 1500 sq. ft. 304/A 1500 sq. ft. 305/J 1500 sq. ft. 306/H 1500 sq. ft. 307/G 1875 sq. ft. 308/I 1500 sq. ft. New 309/B 1500 sq. ft. New 310/C 1500 sq. ft. Parking 12 spaces • 4 spaces on-site • 8 spaces provided in garage on Parcel 7 (shared between Buildings 300, 400, and 500) Section 3: Growth Management 3.1 Reconstruction Credits. Based on the existing 300 Building of the Aspen Alps, the Applicant is entitled to the following reconstruction credits, pursuant to Land Use Chapter 26.470 a. A total of seven (7) free market residential units is credited towards the Applicant’s free market residential allotment request. 3.2 Growth Management Allotments The following growth management allotments are recommended to be granted to Building 300 of the Aspen Alps Subdivision/PD: a. Residential – Free Market – three new residential units. P24 VI.A. Planning and Zoning Commission Reso No. __, Series 2016 Page 5 of 10 Final floor area square footage and associated FTE generation shall be verified by the zoning officer and FTE mitigation requirements adjusted, as may be required, during building permit review. 3.3 Multi-Family Replacement The 300 Building is exempt from the requirements of Multi- Family Replacement, as no local working resident, meeting the definition of APCHA, has lived in the building. Section 4: Affordable Housing The project will increase the net livable area by 6,010 sq. ft. Affordable housing mitigation is required to be provided at 30% of the additional free-market net livable area. When an affordable housing mitigation requirement is required to be converted between a number-of-employees requirement and a square-footage requirement, regardless of direction, the following conversion factor shall be used: 1 employee = 400 square feet of net livable area. Free-Market Residential: 6,010 x 30% = 1803 ÷ 400 = 4.51 FTEs generated by the project The applicant has committed to providing Affordable Housing Certificates for 4.51 FTEs generated by this amendment. The mitigation method shall be represented at the time of building permit submittal. Section 5: Planned Development – Detail Review In addition to the general documents required as part of a Planned Development – Detail Review, the following items shall be required as part of the Application’s Planned Development – Detail Review: a. An Outdoor Lighting Plan, pursuant to section 26.575.150. b. An existing and proposed Landscaping Plan, identifying trees with diameters and values, as well as detail on the height and location of the proposed micro-pile walls. c. A draft Construction Management Plan. d. An updated and final Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA), including a monitoring plan, detail on We-Cylce participation, including number of memberships purchased additional information on the improvements for the so-called Ho Chi Min Trail, and a more detailed landscaping plan. e. Approval from the Aspen Fire Protection District indicating the existing 18 feet Aspen Alps Road is sufficient to serve the development with fire protection. Section 6: Subdivision/PD Plat and Agreement The Applicant shall submit a Subdivision/PD agreement (hereinafter “Agreement”) that meets the requirements of the Land Use Code within 180 days of final approval. The 180 days shall commence upon the granting of Planned Development – Detail Review approvals by the Planning & Zoning Commission. The recordation documents shall be submitted in accordance with the requirements of Section 26.490 Approval Documents of the Land Use Code. a. In accordance in Section 26.490.040, Approval Documents Content and Form, the following plans are required in the Approved Plan Set: 1. Final Architectural Character Plan. P25 VI.A. Planning and Zoning Commission Reso No. __, Series 2016 Page 6 of 10 2. Planned Development Project and Detail Review Plans. 3. Public Infrastructure Plan. 4. Final Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA). b. In accordance with Section 26.490.050, Development Agreements, a Development Agreement shall be entered into with the City. c. In accordance with Section 26.490.060, Financial and Site Protection Requirements, the applicant shall provide a site protection guarantee and a site enhancement guarantee. d. In accordance with Section 26.490.070, Performance Guarantees, the following guarantees are required in an amount equal to 150% of the current estimated cost of the improvement: 1. Landscape Guarantee. 2. Public Facilities and Public Infrastructure Guarantee. 3. Storm Water and Drainage Improvements Guarantee. e. A Condominium Map shall be competed for the development in accordance with Section 26.480.050(A), Condominiumization. Section 7: Engineering Department The Applicant’s design shall be compliant with all sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, Title 21 and all applicable standards published by the Engineering Department. 7.1 Public Improvements: 1. The width of South Alps Rd is 18 feet, which requires a variation from Engineering Standards. Confirmation and approval from the Aspen Fire Protection District for the existing 18 foot road is required at PD-Detail Review. 7.2 Drainage: 1. The Applicant shall coordinate with the Engineering Department to determine the best stormwater system for the property and surrounding area through all stages of the project. 2. Variance request for WQCV associated with the 400 and 500 buildings shall be submitted with the building permit. 3. Conceptual Master Drainage Plan and Report for the entire site will be required at Detailed Review. The report shall take into account uphill off site drainage. The report must demonstrate that no negative impacts to neighboring systems will occur. It must also provide evidence that the neighboring/City storm water system has the capacity to convey a 100 year storm event. The Plan shall consider, if any, future Alps properties that will tie in to the regional storm system and size the system accordingly. The Plan shall include any proposed curb and gutter, the phased regional system, and possible drainage pattern changes. The stormwater system located below the 300 building at 861 Ute Ave shall be taken in to account for the design of the 300 building. Any storm system must bypass the system at 861 Ute Ave, and the applicant must demonstrate there are no negative impacts to this system. The Plan shall provide further information on the volume P26 VI.A. Planning and Zoning Commission Reso No. __, Series 2016 Page 7 of 10 of runoff the curb and gutter/inlet system along South Alps Road. The Plan shall provide detailed information on drainage patterns and conveyance points and this information shall be incorporated into as is stated in the PUD/Subdivision Agreement dated April 22, 2015. Future development or redevelopment applications shall be required to memorialize existing drainage patterns through drainage easements. Drainage patterns shall allow upstream properties to drain through downstream properties through existing drainage patterns. The Plan shall depict where the inlet located west of the 300 Building is routed and any other existing onsite facilities. 4. A Stormwater Model, provided at Detailed Review, shall demonstrate no rise of the flooded water surface elevation caused by the development. 5. The Final Master Drainage Plan shall be submitted at Building Permit. 6. Storm System design, provided at Building Permit, shall take in to account hydraulic gradelines. If the storm system is designed for the 10 year storm, the applicant must show a 100 year storm is safely routed to the city system. 7.3 Mudflow and Slope Stability: 1. A letter signed and stamped by a Colorado Licensed Engineer stating the design, building footprint and mudflow mitigation measures will not negatively impact downhill neighbors will be required at the detailed review. 2. A FLO-2D model of the area surrounding the building shall be submitted to the City of Aspen Engineering Department with the building permit. The model shall meet all requirements laid out in Chapter 7 of the URMP. Any changes to the building footprint and design which result from the mudflow model must be accounted for within the PD Amendment. The Building Permit will not be approved without appropriate mud flow mitigation incorporated into the plan. 3. A slope stability analysis, to be provided at Building Permit, shall be performed and ensure adequate stabilization of the south side of S. Alps Road. The stability of gabion walls shall be further investigated, and adjustments made as necessary. 7.3 Durant Mine Ditch: 1. As the ditch is piped through a portion of the property an analysis shall be performed which shows either the pipe size is adequate and overtopping flows are routed appropriately, or the pipe shall be resized correctly and replaced. If applicable, provide 404 permit from the Army Corp of Engineers. 2. The ditch culvert below S. Alps Rd. shall be replaced at Building Permit. 7.4 Utilities 1. Calculations shall be provided at Building Permit to confirm the current water main located in S. Alps Rd. is necessary. 2. Detailed water plans will be required at Building Permit. 3. At Building Permit, verify the S. Alps Rd. fire hydrant is outside the 100 year flood inundated area. The hydrant shall be relocated if it falls within the area. The hydrant and pipes shall be assessed and repaired if necessary. P27 VI.A. Planning and Zoning Commission Reso No. __, Series 2016 Page 8 of 10 Section 8: Fire Mitigation 1. All codes adopted by the Aspen Fire Protection District shall be met. This includes but is not limited to access (International Fire Code (IFC), 2003 Edition, Section 503), approved fire sprinkler and fire alarm systems (IFC, as amended, Section 903 and 907). Section 9: Parks Department 1. Tree removal permits are required prior to issuance of a building permit for any demolition or significant site work. Applicable mitigation shall be provided pursuant to Chapter 13.20 of the City Municipal Code. 2. Tree protection fencing required at the driplines of all remaining trees. There is no activity permitted within this protective fence. A tree protection plan indicating the drip lines of each individual tree or groupings of trees remaining on site shall be included in the building permit application for any demolition or significant site work. 3. If the culvert was removed in the ditch that runs along South Alps Road, the City would consider it an improvement. Any other activity around the ditch would require its protection. The Water Department is the final authority on any ditch improvements. Section 10: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Requirements Service is contingent upon compliance with the District’s rules, regulations, and specifications, which are on file at the District office. Section 11: Environmental Health Department 1. This space is subject to Special Review due to the lack of alley access, recycling being separate from the trash and lack of access to recycling by tenants (Municipal Code 12.10.040 C, F, G). 2. The dimensions required for a lodge with 60+ rooms, and no food service, are 200 square feet (20’l x 10’w with 10’ height clearance) Municipal code 12.10.040 A(b). The current trash is approximately 16’x16’ (clear to the sky), but does not have space for recycling and is not enclosed to prevent wildlife access. 3. Environmental Health will require some adjustments to grant Special Review approval to the proposed project. Section 12: Outdoor Lighting and Signage All outdoor lighting and all signage shall meet the requirements of the Aspen Municipal Code. Section 13: Building Department The Applicant shall meet all applicable building and accessibility codes in place at the time of building permit. Section 14: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation P28 VI.A. Planning and Zoning Commission Reso No. __, Series 2016 Page 9 of 10 presented before the Community Development Department, the Planning and Zoning Commission, or the Aspen City Council are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions or an authorized authority. Section 15: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 16: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution 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. FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 3rd day of March, 2016. Approved as to form: Approved as to content: __________________________ ______________________________ Deborah Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Keith Goode, Chair Attest: _______________________________ Cindy Klob, Records Manager Attachments: Exhibit A: Legal Description Exhibit B: Recommended Approved Drawings P29 VI.A. Planning and Zoning Commission Reso No. __, Series 2016 Page 10 of 10 Exhibit A, Legal Description BUILDING 300, 400 AND 500, ASPEN ALPS SOUTH CONDOMINIUMS, ACCORDING TO THE CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION FOR ASPEN ALPS SOUTH RECORDED DECEMBER 1, 1965 IN BOOK 217 AT PAGE 189, AND THE FIRST SUPPLEMENT RECORDED JANUARY 6, 1969 IN BOOK 238 AT PAGE 804, AND ACCORDING TO THE CONDOMINIUM MAP RECORDED DECEMBER 10, 1965 IN PLAT BOOK 3 AT PAGE 54, AND FIRST SUPPLEMENT RECORDED DECEMBER 10, 1969 IN PLAT BOOK 3 AT PAGE 373, SECOND SUPPLEMENT RECODED APRIL 14, 2005 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 508992, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. P30 VI.A. P31 VI.A. P32 VI.A. P33 VI.A. P34 VI.A. P35 VI.A. P36 VI.A. P37VI.A. P38VI.A.