HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.sp.Youth Center.A390Aspen Youth Center Final SPA,
Rezoning & GMQS Exemp. A3-90
�'Gc-t� rt�clLor
S
A
I
ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303)920-5090
LAND USE APPLICATION
FEES
City
00113
-63250-134
GMP/CONCEPTUAL
-63270-136
GMP/FINAL
-63280-137
SUB/CONCEPTUAL / 0 .0-6
--��-63300-139
SUB/FINAL (! CC ✓ , c
-63310-140
ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS
-63320-141
ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS/
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
REFERRAL FEES:
00125
-63340-205
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
00123
-63340-190
HOUSING
00115
-63340-163
ENGINEERING r�?S
SUBTOTAL
County
00113
-63160-126
GMP/GENERAL
-63170-127
GMP/DETAILED
-63180-128
GMP/FINAL
-63190-129
SUB/GENERAL
-63200-130
SUB/DETAILED
-63210-131
SUB/FINAL
-63220-132
ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS
-63230-133
ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS/
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
-63450-146
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
REFERRAL FEES:
00125
-63340-205
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
00123
-63340-190
HOUSING
00113
-63360-143
ENGINEERING
PLANNING OFFICE SALES
00113
-63080-122
CITY/COUNTY CODE
-63090-123
COMP. PLAN
-63140-124
COPY FEES
-69000-145
OTHER
SUBTOTAL
TOTAL
Name!
IJ
Phone:
Address:
�' �o�/(�n,
Project
`�`c
Check # ��
.l `,
Date:
�;_�
Additional billing:
#otHodrs: iJ-
0
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
City of Aspen
DATE RECEIVED: 1 15 90
DATE COMPLETE: 9
PARCEL ID AND CASE NO.
A3-90
STAFF MEMBER -
PROJECT NAME: Aspen Youth Center Final SPA Rezoning and GMOS
Exemption
Project Address:
Legal Address:
APPLICANT: Youth Center Board
Applicant Address:
REPRESENTATIVE: Glenn HornDavis Horn Inc.
Representative Address/Phone:_300 East Hyman Avenue
Aspen, CO 81611 5-6587
PAID: YES NO AMOUNT: $2575 NO. OF COPIES RECEIVED: 23,E
TYPE OF APPLICATION: 1 STEP: 2 STEP:_
P&Z Meeting Date PUBLIC HEARING: NO
01�Es
VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO
CC Meeting Date PUBLIC HEARING: (YESES NO y�
VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO I
Planning Director Approval: Paid:
Insubstantial Amendment or Exemption: Date:
-------- -----__--__--=_----
REF LS:
City Attorney Mtn. Bell School District
City Engineer Parks Dept. Rocky Mtn Nat Gas
Housing Dir. �- Holy Cross State Hwy Dept(GW)
Aspen Water Fire Marshall State Hwy Dept(GJ)
City Electric Building Inspector
Envir. Hlth. Roaring Fork Other
Aspen Consol. Energy Center
S.D.
DATE REFERRED: �� C�o INITIALS:
f
FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: INITIAL:
City Atty City Engineer ZZoning 1�� Env. Health
Housing Other:
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION:
I
11
1
1
1
YOUTH CENTER
FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Prepared for
Youth Center Board
Aspen, Colorado
Prepared by
Glenn Horn
Davis Horn Incorporated
Planning, Appraising, Real Estate Consultants
300 East Hyman Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303) 925-6587
and
Caudill Gustafson Ross and Associates
234 East Hopkins Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303) 925-3383
0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
Page
INTRODUCTION
1
I.
SITE DESCRIPTION
3
II.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
7
III.
FINAL SPA REZONING APPROVAL
14
IV.
FINAL SPA DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL
19
V.
FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL
30
VI.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM EXEMPTION
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF ESSENTIAL PUBLIC
FACILITIES
42
VII.
REFUND OF LAND USE FEES
44
2
•
•
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure Page
A-1
SITE/UTILITIES/LANDSCAPING PLAN
6
A-2
UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
8
A-3
LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
9
A-4
NORTH AND WEST ELEVATIONS
11
A-5
EAST AND SOUTH ELEVATIONS
12
A-6
BUILDING SECTIONS
13
A-7
DRAINAGE PLAN
28
3
1 •
INTRODUCTION
During the winter of 1988, the Aspen Adult Advisory Board for a
' Youth Center was established. The Board which now refers to itself
as the Aspen Youth Center Board (hereinafter referred to as
"Board" OR "applicant") agreed upon the following mission
statement:
The mission of this board is
to establish
and operate a
permanent non-profit, non-alcoholic center
for youth
under 21 years of age. The
Youth Center
will provide
easily accessible, low-cost
opportunities
for positive
interaction, recreational
activities
and growth
potential.
The Board has surveyed youth in the community to determine their
needs and studied other youth centers in Colorado. A critical part
of the planning process for the Youth Center has been the
involvement of local youth. Local youth have shared in the
' planning, decision making and land use review process from the
beginning. Consequently, Aspen youth will feel a sense of
ownership toward the facility when it is operational.
The Board has searched the Aspen Area to find an affordable,
centrally located site, in proximity to public transportation,
outdoor recreation areas and local schools. As plans for the Rio
Grande parcel were being formulated and publicized, it became clear
1
'
•
0
'
to the Board that the Rio Grande parcel was
an excellent location
for the non-profit, facility.
The site is
easily accessible to
Youth by bus, vehicles and the
trail system
and proximate to the
'
places youth frequent in the
downtown. The Town of Vail has
1
already developed a successful
youth center
within the Lionshead
parking structure.
As the site vicinity map on the following page illustrates, the
' project site is located at the northeast corner of the pedestrian
plaza to be located on top of the Rio Grande parking structure. A
map in the conceptual application shows that the site ownership is
split between the City of Aspen and Pitkin County. The City Council
and the Board of County Commissioners have agreed to the use of the
site for the Youth Center.
On June 12, 1989 the Aspen City Council granted SPA designation /
rezoning and conceptual SPA approval subject to conditions. This
application requests:
1. Final SPA (Specially Planned Area) rezoning approval
(Sections 7-803 A. and 7-1102);
2. Final SPA Development Plan Approval (Section 7-804 D.);
3. Final Subdivision Approval (Section 7-1004);
4. Growth Management Quota System Exemption (GMQS) for
Construction of Essential Public Facilities (Section 8-
' 104) ;
VICINITY MAP
Ylelum—
N�
•
i
C• Y L
• j w C
p � ] • Q
C
or
c0
N
m
O
F—
fJ�
0
Opurep
w �.�..+
a%
/
3• � C
� eOM
e <<
silver Queen Gondola
Project Site
OJT,,
M
t O
Cy
r
•
•
5.
Refund the $ 1,980.00 land
use review fees submitted for
rthe
Conceptual Development
application; and
6.
Waiver of the $ 2,575 land
use review fee for the final
development application.
'
Portions
of the conceptual submission application are included
rwithin
this application in order to
simplify the land use review
process.
The application contains the following seven sections:
'
I.
Site Description;
rII.
Proposed Development;
III.
Final SPA Rezoning Approval;
rIV.
Final SPA Development Plan Approval;
V.
Final Subdivision Approval;
'
VI.
Growth Management Quota System Exemption for Construction
of Essential Public Facilities; and
rVII.
Refund of Land Use Review Fees.
r]
iJ
u
4
J
1 i •
r
SITE DESCRIPTION
' The subject site which is approximately 7,500 square feet in size
is located to the northeast of Galena Street extended to the west
I
of the Pitkin County Jail. As Figure A-1 shows, the site slopes
u
1
gradually down to the north, toward Spring Street. The northern
portion of the site is owned by the City of Aspen and zoned Public
(PUB) with an SPA overlay, while the southern portion of the site,
which is owned by Pitkin County, is zoned PUB, but lacks the SPA
overlay.
The existing vegetation on the site is characterized by bluegrass
in front of the jail entrance and native grasses to the northwest
below the jail entrance. The topographic information on Figure A-
1 shows that the site slopes from south to north and in some places
exceeds 20 percent. The historic grade of the site has been
considerably altered.
Existing utilities including water mains, sanitary and storm
sewers, electric telephone, natural gas and cable television lines
are located in Spring and Galena Streets and/or the alley to the
south of the Rio Grande property.
5
C
II.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The primary entrance to the Youth Center is from the northeast
corner of the Rio Grande Pedestrian Plaza (refer to Figure A-2:
Upper Level Plan and A-3 Lower Level Plan). The building will step
down the slope in two levels to Spring Street. The building will
be less than 6,500 square feet in size with a footprint not to
exceed 4,200 square feet. The architect, Gary Ross of Caudill
Gustafson Ross & Associates, is familiar with the site and
sensitive to its characteristics. Caudill, Gustafson and Ross
designed the Pitkin County Jail and has been retained to design the
new Pitkin County Library to be located on the west side of the Rio
Grande Pedestrian Plaza.
The applicant and architect have been particularly sensitive to
locating and designing the Youth Center Building to compliment the
library, the jail and particularly the Rio Grande Pedestrian Plaza.
Gary has met with Bob Braudis, Pitkin County Sheriff, to receive
Bob's comments regarding the relationship of the Youth Center
building to the jail. Based upon Bob's concerns, the proposed
structure has been located so that the south wall of the building
is located to the north of the jail's entrance. The building
footprint will preserve the lawn in front of the jail and maintain
a direct relationship between the jail's entrance and the proposed
Rio Grande Pedestrian Plaza.
7
0
TO PLAZA
A A a
V� �� ivy -
PING —POND
L08pY. CU
E _ `[YAM"- STA4E 1 DECK.' A I
r
• i _� ,-
(ROOF BELOW I
;+tee►. �' � I
STOR. STOR. _
B
UPPER LEVEL PLAN ,�
e - I
C
• -- - -- TO PARKING ----"1-
=pjj
/ 1
-- - - -
I
TO. "Ti .V.
PHONES
�7
I FOOSBALI
L
GAME ROOM ' �
_
VENDING -
1
MECH.
T.Y. LOUNGE OFFICE
L
i
VIDEO
GAME
i
0000
1 NAC � - - - I TO PLAY FI9LO
(i BAR ) LOUNGE
_ r
OFFICE j% 1J - . .- ,
i 71
TERRACES;
I �r
J
I �
\ -
LOWER LEVEL PLAN
UN ,
Na�
0 a
a
a
a"
Cif
Oho
N�9
� s
�a
3�z
I
a
cc
Figure A-4 and 5 depict elevations of the building from all four
sides. The applicant has prepared and submitted a model of the
building which conceptualizes the relationship of the Youth Center
to the existing and proposed surrounding land uses.
Figure A-5 depicts east and south building sections. The drawing
shows that the upper level of the Youth Center will access the
Pedestrian Plaza and the lower level will access Spring Street.
Figure A-6 depicts building sections.
The Planning Office, Planning and Zoning Commission and City
Council have been concerned about the potential for inactivity on
the Rio Grande Pedestrian Plaza. It is anticipated the Youth
Center will utilize the Plaza as a gathering place for passive
recreational activities and organized functions. The Youth Center
in combination with the courthouse, jail and library will encompass
the plaza and create a campus -like setting.
During the school year, it is anticipated that most activities at
the Youth Center will occur after 3 PM. However, due to the
flexible schedules at the Aspen Schools, there is the potential for
some activity during the school year prior to 3 PM. When local
schools are not in session organized use of the Youth Center may
occur on a more frequent basis.
The applicant is proposes construction by May 15, 1990.
10
AiL l�sf
1.1 1�p6{
pi-I]l
rLF)
_ f -
HA�N IENEL
NORTH ELEVATION
1b...ro'
L�LASE v9
-
J
ICV i1tM117! A
I
..OPlR ,.tvEL
_wJE¢ .Ev{L
tea. L.
fml
OEM-
a
n
N "
n
N Q °a
0
vU n
ti
O=
0
H
4. 9
J
W
u
2
nEg
o
13010
Z
U.
O
e
v
r
z
W
6
O
J
W
SO
�_ 1z.
Ors.T:
$hNl No.
Lk"
A4
+74 it. —
PARKING
1 a—. e i
A � T
O I
i
SKYLIGHT
TO PLAZA I i _ !! •� STAGE
TERRACE FOYER
DANCE FLOOR
-
Jf o
WOMEN STAIR
GAjMEIIRO I I ---
7T-
I.SNACK BAR FOYER
i
i SKYLIGHT .._
T.V. LOUNGE
BUILDING SECTION B '
BUILDING SECTION A
U'PEK BEVEL
TO PLAY FIELDL�-E—+
—6 'Ty �
_ l
UPPER LEVEL BEYOND
GAME ROOM
TO PARKING
-- — SNACK BAR -- --
TERRACE --- -- - —
BUILDING SECTION C
2111
dawn. Shsa� No.
Cneck.a
A A�
�: - J-
�.w,..._�..
I �
i
I �
,I I
IG �—------� — ------ L------- -r I
Iy � �
vim ' IL"T90.5, BY OTRE4f
WY-7i17L /
I 11
I \
C
r`
mQ DGAIU Z—Ar W 'D[E7F0. rUvQ=y
WTI GRATE. FRAME_
IZMM 7B9g1�-
uV 769b%
9"rf.K--?B 9 3 9-
II
----- \ 1C_---T--� r-------� - I \
\ 8i1+
\ \ \ C
w \ /
\ 2' DEE7 OETEp11O0.. Pr. pR.�
-9oa 1900
V194L DERf-
1
'iftE \
` / I
DRAINAGE GRADING SITE PLAN
SlorjoauCiUIW 1
W
ui
w
CL
Ch
Q
SITE �c^M lo'•o"
Dr.wn: 17
no
Apprortl - — -
A
�rLn�iH LEVLL
Y
FOYER s�EL
SOUTH ELEVATION
,6..,
,EAST ELEVATION"
Ch-k� A 5
A pprwe0
PITKIN-COUNTY COURTHOUSE
0 3!
PLANTING SCHEI* X:
-
I
CCMI4DN NAME
tI.ANr1TY
SIZE
-
-
l�-
TREES
r
Crab Apple
7
2 1/2"
i
- —
Aspen
10
2 1/2"
-i
SNRUAS
Red—er cog—ud
J
5 gal.
Alpine Current
4
5 C.I.
I
GALENA ST. SANK HOUSING CENTRAL SANK
UPGRADED ALLEY
y �I�
I � �
0� o°
CIVIC PLAZA
P-entlil. 23 -
on
.SI.NNNpN.YI...men
S.S
.�
ISM
i
S N SI
....w.ouuuun
SI.
M SI
SI....
N ■
SIS.PITKIN
COUNTY JAIL
BNI
L.SNSSSS\
■■.. ■■ I
•r
•IiL.NI FUTURE LISRARY
I
go
WHE
INYNN7S•
am
on
news
_
'g..■
�w��
w
_
0 ,
.
so
LIM.N■
CITY OF ASPEN —
PROPOSED
�40'Utm CA
� I TRANSPORTATION CENTER
mmBmv
�-
ee
-- — SPRING STREET
L—T'IGNCR LINE _ Ey`7l u iu ..INE A"
OIL— a..[plsM 1-4-1s
E5—
I � ✓ � - - � EI.ec7elo � �'�
IL ui
L�' - I ------ - - --- -- Y. VJ
r-� x
-- SITE PLAN
3110
CnKL•a A 1
A--
- _....__._......
rl
•
•
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC.
December 6, 1989
Mr. John Wheeler
Caudill Gustafson Ross
P.O. Box FF
Aspen, CO 81612
CONSULTING ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS
RE: Aspen Youth Center - Grading and Drainage
Dear John:
H.U. box 21o5
Aspen, Colorado 81612
(303) 925-6727
Per your request, we have completed a grading and drainage plan for the
Aspen Youth Center. This project lies between the new Aspen parking
structure and the Pitkin County Jail.
There are two drainage influences on site:
(a) Piped drainage, which originates on the site of the parking
structure. These drainage impacts were dealt with on that pro-
ject and only pass through this site. This project will need to
continue those drainage concepts by installing a catch basin and
+ 150 feet of 8" CMP.
(b) Surface drainage which is generated by this project is dealt with
in the following manner:
1. Rbof and patio drainage flows on the south, east and north
faces of the building flow around the exterior of the build-
ing to the north east corner and are collected in a drainage
detention swale.
2. Roof and patio drainage from the west face of the building
falls into planters. These planters have a 4" AIDS perforated
pipe at their base which carries water around the building to
the detention swale. The planters should not have a solid
bottom so as to aid in groundwaer recharge.
The drainage swale is designed to detain the hundred year event of 0.60
cfs and recharge the ten year event of 0.59 cfs. The theoretical out-
flow will be 0.01 cfs, which will combine with the outflow from the 8"
CMP, which has a 100-year event of 6.36 cfs, from the parking structure
site. This theroetical minimal release from the Aspen Youth Center is
easily accommodated in the parking structure drainage planning which
our firm also designed. Therefore, there should be no impact from this
project on historical drainage. The drainage will pass from the deten-
tion swale in a sidewalk trench out to the street curb and gutter.
1512 Grand Avenue, Suite 212 • Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 • (303) 945-1004
•
•
December 6, 1989
Mr. John Wheeler
Page two
We have included details for (a) catch basin, (b) sidewalk trench, and
(c) on -grade curb cut.
Should you have any questions regarding this plan, please do not hesi-
tate to call.
Sincerely,
SCHMUESER CORDON MEYER, INC.
XA
,3. Gordon, P.E.
ident
:lec/9279
f • •
L
III.
FINAL SPA REZONING APPROVAL
The proposed site is not entirely within the SPA overlay zone.
The south half of the site is zoned PUB, but lacks the SPA
designation. Therefore, the applicant requests the designation of
an SPA overlay over the south half of the site. Section 7-803 (A)
of the Municipal Code establishes standards for designation of a
SPA overlay zone, while Section 7-1102 establishes standards for
rezoning. The standards are identified and addressed below.
' Section 7-803 A. Standards for Designation:
Any land in the City may be designated SPA by the City council if,
because of its unique locational characteristics, it would be of
great public benefit to the City for that land to be allowed design
flexibility and to be planned and developed comprehensively as a
multiple use development. A parcel of land designated SPA shall
also be designated on the City's Official Zone District Map with
the underlying zone District designation which is determined the
most appropriate. The underlying Zone District designation shall
be used as a guide, but not an absolute limitation, to the uses and
development which may be considered during the development review
process.
A comparison of the zoning for the Rio Grande parcel with the
property ownership map indicates that the zoning follows property
ownerships. This is why the SPA designation overlays the City
portion of the Youth Center site, but not the County half of the
parcel. It would make more sense for the SPA overlay to be applied
based upon the future use of a site rather than ownership
Iboundaries.
1
14
1 0 0
As noted in the previous section, the applicant has selected the
i subject site for the Youth Center due to its relationship to the
■ Rio Grande Pedestrian Plaza. The entire area needs to be planned
comprehensively, as one site, to integrate the multiple activities
and buildings proposed for the site.
1
A review of the permitted uses in the PUB (Public) zone district
indicates that a youth center is not listed as a permitted use in
the zone district. The use which most approximates the concept for
a youth center is a community recreation facility. The SPA
Idesignation for the subject site would enable the zoning
flexibility for a youth center to be a permitted use.
Overall, the SPA designation of the County portion of the Youth
Center site seems is entirely consistent with the standards for
ISPA designation.
Section 7-1101 A.
Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable
portion of this chapter.
The proposed amendment to the official zone district map is not in
conflict with Chapter 7 of the City's Land Use Regulations.
Section 7-1101 B.
' whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of
the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
1
15
U
The most current Element of the Comprehensive Plan that addresses
the Rio Grande parcel is the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan:
Transportation Element. The Element calls for a parking structure
on the parcel and the development of a Conceptual SPA Plan for the
parcel. The Rio Grande Conceptual SPA plan calls for public and
quasi -public uses on the site. The use of the subject site as a
non-profit, youth center is consistent with other activities
proposed for the site. As mentioned previously, the activities
associated with the Youth Center will bring some needed life to the
proposed Rio Grande Pedestrian Plaza.
Section 7-1002 C.
Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding Zone
Districts and land uses, considering existing land uses and
neighborhood characteristics.
The proposed amendment to the Official Zoning District Map is
consistent with the surrounding zoning. Failure to rezone the
subject site as requested would be inconsistent with the
surrounding zoning.
Section 7-1102 D.
The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road
safety.
It is not anticipated that there will be any significant impacts
on the road system resulting form the proposed rezoning request.
Section 7-1102 E.
Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result
16
in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to
which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such
public facilities, including but not limited to transportation
facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage,
schools and emergency medical facilities.
It is not anticipated that the proposed rezoning will negatively
impact any of the community's public facilities. It is probable
that the Youth Center will have positive effects on the proposed
Rio Grande Pedestrian Plaza. Two of the Youth Center restrooms
will be available to the general public if the City of Aspen
maintains the restrooms.
Section 7-1102 F.
Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result
in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment.
Adverse impacts on the natural environment are not anticipated.
Section 7-1102 G.
Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with
the community character in the City of Aspen.
The rezoning of the subject site and the development of the Youth
Center will be consistent with the community character of Aspen by
creating a new major pedestrian center on the proposed parking
structure.
Section 7-1102 H.
Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject
parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed
amendment.
With the approval of the Rio Grande SPA plan and the initiation of
plans for the development of the parking structure, library and
17
Pedestrian Plaza major changes are anticipated for the
neighborhood. These changes will compliment the proposed Youth
Center and the requested amendment to the Official Zone District
Map.
Section 7-1102 I.
Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public
interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this
chapter.
The proposed amendment will be consistent with the public interest
and will provide for the construction of the Youth Center which
will be an asset to the local community.
18
[I
I
1
11
11
H
IV.
FINAL SPA DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL
Section 7-804 D. of the Municipal Code establishes the review
standards for final SPA review. The following section demonstrates
the compliance of the proposed Youth Center with the applicable
review standards.
Section 7-804 D.(1)(a)
The general application information required in Sec. 6-202.
All of the submission requirements of this section of the Code have
been included within the application.
Section 7-804 D.(1)(b)
A precise plan of the proposed development including but not
limited to proposed land uses, densities, landscaping, internal
traffic circulation, and accessways. The precise plan shall be in
sufficient detail to enable evaluation of the architectural,
landscaping, and design features of the proposed development. It
shall show the location and floor area of all existing and proposed
buildings and other improvements including heights, dwelling unit
types and non-residential facilities.
Refer to Figure A-1 for proposed land uses, traffic circulation
landscaping accessways and the relationship of the building to the
Rio Grande Plaza. Refer to Figures A-4 and A-5 for building
elevations.
Section 7-804 D.(1)(c)
A statement specifying the underlying Zone District on the parcel
and, if variations are proposed, a statement of how the variations
comply with the standards of Section 7-804 (B).
19
1 0 0
'
The underlying zone district for the parcel
P
is PUB Public .
(Public)
Within the PUB
zone district dimensional
requirements are
established pursuant
to the conceptual and final
development review
processes. The
imensional requirements are established on Figure
' Section 7-804 D.(1)(d)
A statement outlining a development schedule specifying the date
' construction is proposed to be initiated and completed.
Construction is to be initiated on May 15, 1990 with completion in
early 1991.
1
1
Section 7-804 D.(1)(e)
A statement specifying the public facilities that will be needed
to accommodate the proposed development, and what specific
assurances will be made to ensure that public facilities will be
available to accommodate the proposed development.
The Youth Center has been located adjacent to the Rio Grande Plaza
and will be accessible to the parking garage, library and
transportation center. The accessibility of these public
facilities will help make the Youth Center a success. Likewise,
the location of the Youth Center adjacent to the Plaza will attract
people to the plaza and youth to the library. In response to a
request from the City, the applicant will construct two public
restrooms on the Plaza level which will be accessible to the
general public (refer to Figure A-2).
20
1 0 0
1 7-804 D. (1) (f)
A statement of the reasonable conformance of the Final Development
Plan with the approval granted to the Conceptual Development Plan
and with the original intent of the City Council in designating the
parcel Specially Planned Area (SPA).
The final development plan reasonably conforms to the conceptual
development approval. As part of the conceptual approval the 10
' conditions of approval were imposed. Each of the conditions and
I
responses to the conditions are listed below.
1. The applicant shall minimize the size of the facility to the
greatest extent possible, not to exceed 6,500 square feet.
The facility will be less than`6-,75-aa--square feet in size. Th
1
building footprint shall not exceed 4,200 square feet.
2. The applicant shall demonstrate how the Youth Center will be
a success.
In the winter of 1988, a survey called "A New Hangout
Development Survey" was distributed to all of the Aspen area
schools, grades 5-12. This survey determined the use and
activities students wanted to see in the facility, its
location and design of the structure. In the Spring of 1988,
a Youth Advisory Board was formed to determine the feasibility
of establishing a Youth Center with social and recreation
opportunities. The Youth Center would also be an alternative
for youth by creating a substance free environment with
substance free entertainment. Therefore, a number of
committees were established with each committee comprised of
21
an equal number of adults and youth having equal input, which
is and will be essential to the success of the Aspen Youth
Center. A brief description of these ongoing committees is
as follows:
Governing Body/Operations: The committee met with potential
Board of Directors to invite them on the Aspen Youth Center
Board. The Board of Directors is made up of 8 adults and 8
youth (all from different grades and schools in the Aspen
area). The students with help from an adult mentor applied
for 501 (c) (3) tax exempt corporate status, drafted the
bylaws and articles of incorporation and applied for an
employer I.D. number.
Marketing Committee: During the 1988-89 school year, the
Aspen High School marketing class, with 2 adults assisting,
developed a marketing plan. The purpose of this committee was
to develop a Mission Statement, create awareness in the
community, involve youth in alcohol and drug free activities,
create radio advertisements and prepare a brochure.
Design Construction: Caudill, Gustafson & Ross worked with
the Aspen High School drafting class to incorporate the
student's design concepts. In addition, the design concepts
were taken from the survey mentioned earlier. The design
committee has been responsible for presenting the plan and
22
design concept to the Pitkin County Commissioners and Aspen
City Council for approval and did so in June, 1989 with
unanimous approval. Caudill Gustafson & Ross will continue
to pursue final SPA approval.
Program and Activities: The program and activities
committee's responsibilities were to visit other youth centers
over the summer of 1989 to give them a feel for a youth center
atmosphere and their successes and failures. A meeting was
scheduled with each Director of the youth center being visited
and a check list of questions as to how well their youth
center worked, what programs and activities were liked and
disliked and how they worked for a wide range of students
grades 5-12. This committee is also responsible for creating
their own programs and activities by incorporating student's
ideas and suggestions from all age levels utilizing the
center.
Although the Youth Center will be used inside for activities
such as dances, ping-pong, pool, fousball, television lounge,
snack bar, etc., the concept is to use the center as a
cleaning house to involve and engage the other outside
community facilities and functions by setting up programs
within the community (i.e. Tenth Mountain Hut Trips, nordic
skiing outings, camping an rafting and/or mountain climbing
trips, softball and volleyball activities, etc.).
23
1 0 0
Another strong factor which will assure success of the Youth
Center is the majority sentiment of the youth that the
' visiting and part-time youth, in addition to downvalley youth
from Basalt, Carbondale and Glenwood, should participate and
' utilize the Youth Center. The availbility of the center for
visiting youth will assist the resort and -,comfort parents
of visiting youth. The Aspen Skiing Company and the local
' resort associations can support the center through their
marketing efforts. --
The youth have been and will continue to be involved in the
decisions and on -going Youth Center programs. The feeling and
sense of ownership by the youth has been and will be the key
to the on -going success of the Youth Center. Additionally,
the Youth Center will have a full-time paid director.
' Fundraising: The Board of Directors has been selected as a
1
"fundraising" Board. As mentioned earlier, equal involvement
of youth and adults is represented on this Board. An
aggressive fund raising campaign is underway)
Location: The Rio Grande location for the Youth Center is
ideal and has been supported by most in the Aspen community.
Mass transit is readily available and the site is in proximity
to the downtown and mall. In addition, the new library has
24
1
0 •
direct access across the plaza. The location of the
library
'
and youth center will bring needed life and activity
to the
adjacent plaza.
'
3.
The applicant shall provide to the satisfaction
of the
Engineering Department an SPA plat, a drainage plan
a trash
plan and a landscape plan.
'
The preparation of a final SPA plat for the Youth Center
is
dependent upon the preparation of the final plat
for the
entire Rio Grande parcel. During the conceptual SPA
review
it was agreed
that the Youth
Center Board would
pay a
equitable share
of the cost of
preparing a final SPA
plat.
The applicant suggests that an equitable share would be equal
to the proportional share of the entire Rio Grande site
utilized by the Youth Center.
Schmueser Gordon Meyer Inc. has prepared a drainage plan for
the site which is depicted in Figure A-7. A letter addressing
the drainage plan appears in the appendix.
Figure A-1 shows the proposed location of the enclosedtrash
area to the northeast of the building accessible to Spring
Street.
The landscaping plan is depicted in Figure A-1.
1
4. The Youth Center shall be sprinkled and have an adequate fire
alarm system.
The applicant commits to sprinkle the building and to install
25
I
I
C'
11
an adequate fire alarm system.
05. The applicant shall propose an acceptable maintenance
agreement for the site which is acceptable to the Director of
GLeisure Services.
The applicant commits to maintain the terrace on the south
side of the building and the on -site landscaping. During pre -
application discussions, this proposal was acceptable to the
l/ Director of Leisure Services, Bill Efting. Bill also agreed
that the City would maintain the public restrooms on the plaza
level, but would retain the option to transfer the maintenance
of the bathrooms to the Youth Center Board, if the restrooms
are used exclusively by youth visiting the Youth Center and
are not a benefit to the general public.
6. The applicant will agree to coordinate construction with the
Engineering Department.
The applicant commits to meet with the Engineering Department
prior to construction and coordinate the construction schedule
to avoid potential conflicts with other activities on the Rio
Grande site. While the building is being constructed the
applicant will coordinate activities with the Building
Department.
7. The applicant shall provide the Housing Office with adequate
information regarding employee impact mitigation.
It is projected that the Youth Center will operate with one
Full Time Equivalent Employee (FTE). Local youth will be
26
involved in the operations and management of the facility.
The sole employee will be a full-time Director. It is
anticipated that the Director will earn approximately $ 25,000
to $ 35,000 annually.
The Housing Office is requesting a one cash -in -lieu payment
of $ 30,000 to mitigate the affordable housing impacts of the
project. The applicant feels that just as housing is a
recognized community problems so is the need for a youth
center. In recognition of this problem and the non-profit
nature of the proposed facility, the Youth Center Board
requests the City Council to waive the affordable housing
mitigation requirement. The cash -in -lieu fee will result in
compromises in the quality of the Youth Center.
8. The applicant shall work with the County to determine if the
building design is appropriate for potential reuse.
The building has been designed so that it may be reused as an
office building in the event the Youth Center fails. The
interior space may be partitioned for offices.
9. The applicant shall demonstrate that agreement on conditions
of a lease for the site between the City/County and Youth
Center Board are likely.
The applicant has prepared a draft of the referenced lease
which has been submitted to the City and County for approval.
�k,
27
10. The applicant shall demonstrate that the bikeway between the
Youth Center and jail will have adequate grades and curves so
that the future option of the trolley is not compromised.
During the summer of 1989, Gary Ross of Caudill Gustafson Ross
and Associates held a meeting with Jon Busch and Roger Hunt
to discuss the possibility of a trolley routing between the
existing Pitkin County jail and the proposed Youth Center.
It was explained that the slope of the bike path (future
trolley route) is actually not a function of the Youth Center,
but is more related to difference between the fixed elevation
of the jail entry and parking structure roof plaza and the
elevation of the Spring street extension.
Using
the fixed elevations
noted
above
and
turning the
path
to the
east after it passes
north
of the
jail
in order to
gain
more length, a slope of approximately 8 per cent is achieved.
A slope of 8 per cent is acceptable for potential trolley use.
7-804 D. (1) (g)
A plat which depicts the applicable information required by section
7-1004 D. (1) (a) (3) and D. (2) (a) .
The preparation of a final SPA plat for the Youth Center is
dependent upon the preparation of the final plat for the entire Rio
Grande parcel. During the conceptual SPA review it was agreed that
the Youth Center Board would pay a equitable share of the cost of
preparing a final SPA plat. The applicant suggests that an
equitable share would be equal to the proportional share of the
entire Rio Grande SPA utilized by the Youth Center.
29
1 0 0
V.
FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL
Most of the Code subdivision standards are not relevant to the
Youth Center because they are intended to address larger land
' subdivisions. Nevertheless, this section of the application
addresses all of the Code subdivision standards and notes which
standards are not applicable to the Youth Center. During the pre -
application conference Tom Baker indicated that the applicant need
' not submit a final plat at this time, but must cooperate with other
' entities in the preparation of the final Rio Grande SPA plat.
7-1004 C.(1) General Requirements
t a. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen
Area Comprehensive Plan.
As noted within the text the Youth Center is consistent with
the 1973 Land Use Plan and Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan
' b. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the
character of existing land uses in the area.
' As established during the conceptual submission, the proposed
Youth Center is consistent with the surrounding land uses.
' C. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the
future development of surrounding areas.
The proposed development should not adversely affect the
future development of the surrounding areas.
d. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all
applicable requirements of this chapter.
' This application has demonstrated compliance with applicable
1
30
1 9 0
sections of the Municipal Code.
7-1004 C.(2) Suitability of Land for Subdivision
a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be
located on land unsuitable for development because of flooding,
drainage, rock or soil creep, mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or
snowslide, steep topography or any other natural hazard or other
condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or welfare
of the residents in the proposed subdivision.
b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not
' be designed to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies,
duplication or premature extension of public facilities and
unnecessary public costs.
' The proposed development is located near the commercial core
of Aspen. Environmental hazards affecting the suitability of land
for development do not impact the site. The proposed subdivision
is readily accessible to public facilities which are already in
existence. Refer to Figure A-1 for a map of utilities.
Section 7-1004 C.(3) Improvements.
a. Required improvements. The following improvements shall be
provided for the proposed subdivision.
(1) Permanent survey monuments, range points, and lot pins.
Permanent survey monuments will be located when the site is
surveyed for the final plat.
(2) Paved streets, not exceeding the requirements for paving and
improvements of a collector street.
There are no streets in the development.
(3) Curbs, gutters, and sidewalks.
Not applicable.
(4) Paved alleys.
Not applicable.
(5) Traffic -control signs, signals or devices.
31
I
a
Such devices are not necessary.
(6) Street lights.
There will be no street lights.
(7) Street name signs.
There are no new streets.
(8) Street trees or landscaping.
The landscaping plan is depicted in Figure A-1.
(9) Water lines and fire hydrants.
The building will be connected to the existing waterline in
Spring street. There will be no new fire hydrants installed.
(10) Sanitary sewer lines.
The building will be connected to the existing line in Spring
Street.
(11) Storm drainage improvements and storm sewers.
Historic drainage on the site will be maintained as noted in
the letter in the Appendix from Ron Thompson.
(12) Bridges or culverts.
Not applicable.
(13) Electrical lines.
All electrical lines will be placed underground.
(14) Telephone lines.
All telephone lines will be placed underground.
(15) Natural gas lines.
Natural gas lines will be placed underground.
(16) Cable television lines.
Cable television lines will be placed underground.
32
b. Approved plans. Construction shall not commence on any of the
improvements required by Sec. 7-1004 (C) (3) (a) until a plan,
profile, and specifications have been received and approved by the
City Engineer and, when appropriate, the relevant utility company.
The required plan, profiles and specifications shall be
submitted with the building permit application.
C. Oversized utilities. In the event oversized utilities are
required as a part of the improvements, arrangements for
reimbursement shall be made whereby the subdivider shall be allowed
to recover the cost of the utilities that have been provided beyond
the needs of the subdivision.
Utilities will not have to be oversized.
4. Design standards. The following design standards shall be
required for all subdivisions.
a. Streets and related improvements. The following standards
shall apply to streets regardless of type or size, unless the
street has been improved with paving, curb, gutter and sidewalk.
(1) Conform to plan for street extension. Streets shall conform
to approved plans for street extensions and shall bear a logical
relationship to the topography and to the location of existing or
planned streets on adjacent properties.
Streets shall not be extended to serve the development.
(2) Right-of-way dedication. Right-of-way shall be dedicated for
the entire width for all local, collector and arterial streets.
Not applicable.
(3) Right-of-way width. Street and alley right-of-way widths,
curves and grades shall meet the following standards.
Minimum
Street
Center Line
Right -of-
Maximum
Classifi-
Curve
Way Width
Per Cent
cation
Radius (ft. )
(ft. )
of Grade(%)
Local
100
60
10
Collector
250
80
6
Arterial
625
100
5
Alley
50
20
5
Not applicable.
33
0
I
1
11
(4) Half -street dedications. Half -street dedications shall be
prohibited unless they are for the purpose of increasing the width
of an inadequate existing right-of-way.
Not applicable.
(5) Street ends at subdivision. When a street is dedicated which
ends on the subdivision or is on the perimeter of the subdivision,
the last foot of the street on the terminal end or outside
perimeter of the subdivision shall be dedicated to the City of
Aspen in fee simple and shall be designated by using outlot(s).
The City shall use the dedicated land for public road and access
purposes.
Not applicable.
(6) Cul-de-sacs. Cul-de-sacs shall not exceed four hundred (4001)
feet in length and shall have a turnaround diameter of one hundred
(1001) feet. A Cul-de-sac of less than two hundred (2001) feet in
length in a single-family detached residential area does not
require a turnaround if the City Engineer determines a 'IT", fly$@ or
other design is adequate turnaround for the vehicles expected to
use the Cul-de-sac.
Not applicable.
(7) Dead end streets. Dead-end streets, except for cul-de-sacs,
shall be prohibited unless they are designed to connect with future
streets on adjacent lands that have not been platted. In cases
where these type of dead end streets are allowed, a temporary
turnaround of one hundred (1001) feet shall be constructed.
Not applicable.
(8) Centerline offset. Streets shall have a centerline offset of
at least one hundred twenty-five (1259) feet.
Not applicable.
(9) Reverse curves. Reverse curves on arterial and collectors
streets shall be jointed by a tangent of at least one hundred
(1001) feet in length.
Not applicable.
34
1
7
n
1
(10) Changes in street grades. All changes in street grades shall
be connected by vertical curves of a minimum length in feet
equivalent to the following appropriate "KII value multiplied by the
algebraic difference in the street grades.
Street
Classification Collector Local Arterial
"K" value for:
Crest vertical 28 16 55
curve
Sag vertical 35 24 55
curve
Not applicable.
(11) Alleys. Alleys shall be provided in //subdivisions
where commercial and industrial development is expected, except
when other provisions are made and approved for service access.
Not applicable.
(12) Intersections. Intersections shall approximate right
angles and have a minimum tangent of fifty (501) feet on each leg.
The subdivision design shall minimize the number of local streets
that intersect arterial streets.
There will be no intersections with City streets.
(13) Intersection grade. Intersection grades shall not exceed
four (4%) per cent for a minimum distance of one hundred (1001)
feet on each leg. Flatter grades are desirable.
Not applicable.
(14) Curb return radii. Curb return radii for local street
intersections shall be fifteen (151) feet. Curb return radii and
corner setbacks for all other types of intersections shall be based
upon the expected types of vehicle usage, traffic volumes and
traffic patterns using accepted engineering standards. In case of
streets which intersect at acute angles, appropriate increases in
curb return radii shall be made for the necessary turning move-
ments.
Not applicable.
(15) Turn by-passes and turn lanes. Right -turn by-passes or
left -turn lanes shall be required at the intersection of arterial
35
1
streets or the intersection of an arterial street with a collector
street if traffic conditions indicate they are needed. Sufficient
right-of-way shall be dedicated to accommodate such lanes when they
are required.
Not applicable.
(16) Street names and numbers. When streets are in alignment
with existing streets, any new streets shall be named according to
the streets with which they correspond. Streets which do not fit
into an established street -naming pattern shall be named in a
manner which will not duplicate or be confused with existing street
names within the City or its environs. Street numbers shall be
assigned by the City Building Inspector in accordance with the City
numbering system.
...,�N,ot applicable.
(11) Y Installation of curb, gutter, sidewalks, or driveways.
No ---finish paving, curb, gutter, sidewalks or driveways shall be
constructed until one (1) year after the installation of all
subsurface utilities and improvements.
The applicant will comply with this standard.
(18) Sidewalks. Sidewalks shall be eight (81) feet wide in
Commercial Core (CC), Commercial (Cl), Neighborhood Commercial
(NC), and Commercial Lodge (CL) Zone Districts and five (51) feet
wide in all other Zone Districts where sidewalks are required.
Consideration shall be given to existing and proposed landscaping
when establishing sidewalk locations.
The applicant will adhere to these standards.
(19) City specifications for streets. All streets and related
improvements shall be constructed in accordance with City
specifications which are on file in the office of the City
Engineer.
The applicant will adhere to the standards.
(20) Mange point monuments. Prior to paving any street,
permanent range point monuments meeting the standards of Sec. 7-
1004(C)(4)(d) shall be installed to approximately finished grade.
Permanent range point boxes shall be installed during or as soon
as practicable after paving.
f(21)
Not applicable.
Street name signs. Street name signs shall conform to
36
the type currently in use by the City.
Not applicable.
(22) Traffic control signs. Any required traffic -control
signs, signals or devices shall conform to the "Manual of Uniform
Traffic Control Devices."
Not applicable.
(23) Street lights. Street lights shall be placed at a
maximum spacing of three hundred (3001) feet. Ornamental street
lights are desirable.
Not applicable.
(24) Street tree. One (1) street tree of three-inch (311)
caliper for deciduous trees measured at the top of the ball or root
system, or a minimum of six-foot (61) height for conifers, shall
be provided in a subdivision in residential Zone Districts for each
lot of seventy foot (701) frontage or less, and at least two (2)
such trees shall be provided for every lot in excess of seventy
feet (701) frontage. Corner lots shall require at least one (1)
tree for each street. Trees shall be placed so as not to block
sight distances at driveways or corners. The City Parks and
Recreation Department shall furnish a list of acceptable trees.
Trees, foliage and landscaping shall be provided in subdivisions
in all other Zone Districts in the City in accordance with the
adopted street landscaping plan.
Not applicable.
d. Easements.
(1) "ttility easements. utility easements of ten (101) feet in
w' on each side of all rear lot lines and five (5 1 ) feet in
width on each side of lot lines shall be provided where necessary.
Where the rear or side lot lines abut property outside of the
subdivision on which there are no rear or side lot line easements
at least five (51) feet in width, the easements on the rear and
side lot lines in the subdivision shall be twenty (201) feet and
ten (101) feet in width, respectively.
In the event the City requests a utilit easement the
applicant will dedicate
(2) 'IT" intersections and cul-de-sacs. Easements twenty (201)
feet in width shall be provided in 'IT" intersections and cul-de-
sacs for the continuation of utilities or drainage improvements,..
if necessary.
Not applicable. CN
37
(3) Potable water and sewer easements. Water and sewer easements
shall be a minimum of twenty (201) feet in width.
The Water Department and Sanitation district do not need
easements.
' (4) Planned utility or drainage system. Whenever a subdivision
embraces any part of a planned utility or drainage system
designated on an adopted plan, an easement shall be provided to
accommodate the plan within the subdivision.
Not applicable.
(5) Irrigation ditch, channel, natural creek. Where an irrigation
ditch or channel, natural creek or stream traverses a subdivision,
an easement sufficient for drainage and to allow for maintenance
of the ditch shall be provided.
Not applicable.
(6) Fire lanes and emergency access easements. Fire lanes and
emergency access easements twenty (201) feet in width shall be
provided where required by the City Fire Marshal.
Fire lanes and emergency access easements are not needed on
the site.
(7) Planned street or transit alignment. Whenever a subdivision
embraces any part of an existing or planned street or transit
' alignment designated on an adopted plan, an easement shall be
provided to accommodate the plan within the subdivision.
Not applicable.
(8) Planned trail system. Whenever a subdivision embraces any part
of a bikeway, bridle path, cross country ski trail or hiking trail
designated on the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: Parks/Re-
creation/Open Space/Trails Plan Map, an easement shall be provided
to accommodate the plan within the subdivision.
The trail traversing the site will be reconstructed by the
City of Aspen in conjunction with the completion of the
parking structure.
v� -E
ce tits and blocks.
(1) General. Lots shall meet all applicable regulations of this
chapter.
1
38
1 0 0
INot applicable.
(2) Side lot lines. Side lot lines shall be substantially at
right angles or radial to street lines.
Not applicable.
(3) Reversed corner lots and through lots. Reversed corner lots
and through lots shall be prohibited except where essential to
' provide separation from arterial streets because of slope, or to
prevent the development of incompatible land uses.
Not applicable.
(4) Front on street. All lots shall front on a public or private
street.
Not applicable.
(5) State Highway 82. No lot shall front on, nor shall any
private driveway access to State Highway 82.
Not applicable.
(6) Block lengths. Block lengths shall normally be at least four
hundred (4001) feet in length and not more than one thousand four
hundred (1,4001) feet in length between street intersections.
Not applicable.
(7) Compatibility. Block lengths and widths shall be suitable for
the uses contemplated.
1 Not applicable.
(8) Mid -block pedestrian walkways. In blocks over five hundred
(5001) feet long, mid -block pedestrian walkways shall be provided.
Not applicable.
' e. Survey monuments.
(1) Location. The external boundaries of all subdivisions, blocks
and lots shall be monumented on the ground by reasonably permanent
monuments solidly embedded in the ground. These monuments shall
be set not more than fourteen hundred (1,4000) feet apart along any
straight boundary line, at all angle points, and at the beginning,
end and points of change of direction or change of radius of any
curved boundaries.
1 The applicant shall comply with this standard.
39
(2) C.R.S. 1973 38-51-101. All monuments shall be set in
accordance with the provisions of C.R.S. 1973 38-51-101, as amended
from time to time, unless otherwise provided for in this chapter.
The applicant shall comply with this standard.
(3) Range points and boxes. Range points and boxes meeting City
specifications shall be set on the centerline of the street right-
of-way unless designated otherwise.
Not applicable.
f. Utilities.
(1) Potable waterlines and appurtenances. All potable waterlines,
fire hydrants and appurtenances shall meet the City's standard
specifications on file in the City Engineer's office.
The applicant shall comply with this standard.
(2) Size of waterlines. All potable water lines shall be at least
eight (811) inches in size unless the length of the line is less
than two hundred (2001) feet. Where the potable waterline is less
than two hundred (2001) feet in length, its minimum size shall be
six ( 611 ) inches in width.
The applicant shall comply with this standard.
(3) Fire hydrants. Fire hydrants shall be spaced no farther apart
than five hundred (5001) feet in detached residential and duplex
subdivisions. Fire hydrants shall be no farther than three hundred
fifty (3501) feet apart in multi -family residential, business,
commercial, service and industrial subdivisions.
Not applicable.
(4) Sanitary sewer. Sanitary sewer facilities shall meet the
requirements of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District.
The applicant will meet the standards of the District to
connect to the line.
(5) Underground utilities. All utilities shall be placed under-
ground, except transformers, switching boxes, terminal boxes, meter
cabinets, pedestals, and ventilation ducts
The applicant shall comply with this standard.
(6) Other utilities. Other utilities not specifically mentioned
shall be provided in accordance with the standards and regulations
of the applicable Utility Department or company.
40
ril
Not applicable.
(7) utilities stubbed out. All utilities shall be stubbed out at
the property line of lots.
Not applicable.
g. Storm drainage.
(1) Drainage plan. The drainage plan for the proposed subdivision
shall comply with the criteria in the City's "Urban Runoff
Management Plan."
The historic drainage pattern on the site shall be maintained.
(2) Detention storage. Short-term on -site detention storage shall
be provided to maintain the historical rate of runoff for the 100-
year storm from the undeveloped site.
Refer to Appendix.
(3) Maintain historical drainage flow. In cases where storm
runoff from an upstream basin passes through the subdivision, the
drainage plan shall provide adequate means for maintaining the
historical drainage system.
The historic drainage pattern shall be maintained.
(4) Calculations and quantities of flow. The drainage plan shall
include calculations and quantities of flow at the points of
concentration.
Refer to the Appendix 2 for a copy of Ron Thompson's drainage
report.
h. Flood hazard areas. The following standards shall apply to
special flood hazard areas as defined in Sec. 7-504 of the
Municipal Code.
(1) The proposed subdivision design shall be consistent with the
need to minimize flood damage to public utilities and facilities
such as sewer, gas, electricity, and potable water systems;
(2) Base flood elevation data shall be provided for any proposed
subdivision of at least fifty (50) lots or five (5) acres,
whichever is less.
Not applicable.
41
1 0 0
VI.
' GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM EXEMPTION
FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES
Pursuant to Section 8-104 (C) (1) (b) of the Land Use Regulations, the
' construction of "essential public facilities" is exempt from growth
' management subject to the approval of the City Council. To be
eligible for such an exemption, the Regulations require that the
' Applicant demonstrate that the proposed development is an essential
public facility and that impacts attributable to the development
will be mitigated. The exemption criteria and repsonses to the
crtieria are addressed in this section.
All construction of essential public facilities other than housing.
Development shall be considered an essential public facility if it
' serves an essential public purpose, provides facilities in response
to the demands of growth, is not itself a growth generator, is
available for use by the general public, and serves the needs of
the City. It shall also be taken into consideration whether the
development is a not -for -profit venture. This exemption shall not
be applied to commercial or lodge development.
The applicant shall demonstrate that the impacts of the essential
public facility will be mitigated, including those associated with
the generation of additional employees, the demand for parking,
' road and transit services, and the need for basic services
including but not limited to water supply, sewage treatment,
drainage control, fire and police protection, and solid waste
disposal. It shall also be demonstrated that the proposed
' development has a negligible adverse impact on the City's air,
water, land and energy resources, and is visually compatible with
surrounding areas.
U I',
1
42
Essential Public Facility
A proposed development "shall be considered an essential public
facility if it serves an essential public purpose, provides
facilities in response to the demands of growth, is available for
use by the general public, and serves the needs of the City."
Consideration is also given to whether the development is a non-
profit venture.
The not -for -profit -venture Youth Center is being constructed in
response to a long-time community need. As demonstrated during the
conceptual review, youth in the community need a place in Aspen for
activities and hanging out. The Youth Center will be open to
resident youth as well as visiting youth.
Impact Mitigation
The facility can be easily served with utilities, public transit
and other services. The adjacent parking structure will provide
ample parking.
It is projected that the Youth Center will generate one full time
employee. The Housing Office is requesting a one cash -in -lieu
payment of $ 30,000 to mitigate the affordable housing impacts of
the project. The applicant feels that just as housing is a
recognized community problems so is the need for a youth center.
In recognition of this problem and the non-profit nature of the
proposed facility, the Youth Center Board requests the City Council
to waive the affordable housing mitigation requirement. The cash -
in -lieu fee will result in compromises in the quality of the Youth
Center.
43
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
VII.
REFUND OF LAND USE REVIEW FEES
During the conceptual review, the Youth Center Board requested the
waiver of the $ 1,980.00 review fee. The City Council never acted
upon the refund request. Once again the Board requests a refund
of the conceptual review fee. Additionally, the Board requests an
waiver of the $ 2,575 final development plan review fee and a
refund of the conceptual fee. The applicant request the Council
to act on these requests prior to consideration of the application.
89002.fin
44
DRAINAGE PLAN
Q = CIA (Rational Method of Runoff Estimation)
Where:
Q = Flow Rate (cfs)
C = Coefficient of Runoff
I = Rainfall Intensity
A = Area Tributary to Point of Obncentration
Table of Coefficient of Runoff Used
Impervious surface .98
Pervious surface .25
All coefficients of runoff are adjusted for antecedent precipitation
moisutre conditions.
Rainfall Intensity
1. 10-year = 3.00
2. 100-year = 4.38
Areas
Existing
Pervious - .28 Acre
Developed
Impervious = .18 Acre
Pervious = .10 Acre
Determination of CA Values
Existing: .18 Ac. x .25 = .07
Developed:
Impervious: .18 Ac. x .98 = .18
Pervious: .10 Ac. x .25 = .025
#9279
n
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
Proposed Developed Condition
Existing
100-year x 4.38 x .07 = .30
10-year x 3.00 x .07 = .02
Developed
Impervious:
100-year x 4.38 x .18 = .79
10-year x 3.00 x .18 = .54
Pervious:
100-year x 4.38 x .18 = .79
10-year x 3.00 x .025 = .075
Flow
Existing: 100-year = .30 cfs
Existing: 100-year = .79 + .11 = .90 cfs
Proposed: 10-year = .54 + .075 = .615 cfs
Detention: .60 cfs
Recharge: .59 cfs
#9279
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Council
THRU: Carol O'Dowd, City Manager
THRU: Amy Margerum, Planning Directo �u
FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planner
RE: Youth Center, Final SPA, Rezoning and GMQS Exemption
for Essential Public Services and Second Reading
Ordinance 27
DATE: May 14, 1990
SUMMARY: The applicants propose to construct a 6,500 square foot
Youth Center on a portion of the Rio Grande parcel. The
applicants request Final SPA, Rezoning, and a GMQS Exemption for
Essential Public Services. This is the last step of the four
step review process. This is second reading of Ordinance 27,
attachment A.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends Final SPA and
Rezoning of the parcel with conditions.
Staff recommends approval of the GMQS Exemption.
Pursuant to guidance from the Council during first reading, the
applicant has submitted an elevation of the east facade and a
drawing of the trash service area.
In addition, the applicant has asked the Council to waive the
employee mitigation fee which is approximately $15,000.
COUNCIL GOALS: This proposal is consistent with Council's goals
to support the role of the human services and to work together
with all people and organizations in the Roaring Fork Valley.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Council approved the Conceptual SPA
submission at their June 12, 1989 meeting. The Council required
10 conditions of approval which the applicant has addressed in
the final submission. Please see attached Planning and Zoning
Commission memo for a review of the conditions of approval,
attachment B.
Council adopted Ordinance 27 on First Reading at the April 23,
1990 meeting. At that meeting, the applicant committed to an
actual square footage of 6500 square feet and a floor area of
5500 square feet.
0
Council also discussed the relocation of the Center to a more
public location and wanted to further examine the issue.
Councilmen Tuite and Peters are working with the Savannah Limited
Partnership in an attempt to relocate the Center onto the .Ice
Rink Parcel.
BACKGROUND: The Council originally gave the Youth tinter Board
permission to go through the land use review pro with the
Center proposal. The Board engaged in the four step SPA review
process. The Board has also presented the propo,,%lal to the Board
of County Commissioners to procure their ;endorsement and
permission to use County land. j
-"he Board has received both Conceptual SPA approval from the
Planning and Zoning Commission and Council, and favorable review
regarding rezoning from Public to Public with SPA Overlay.
PROBLEM DISCUSSION: Rezoning is requred for the portion of the
site within the County and Final SPAY review is required for the
development of the Center. These /reviews are outlined in the
Commission memo Part A and Part/B, respectively, under Staff
Comments. /
The applicants also request a 11MQS Exemption for Essential Public
Services: /
1. Pursuant to Section ;8-104 C.(b) Council may consider a
development an essential' public facility if it serves an
essential public purpose,/provides facilities in response to the
demands of growth,, is not itself a growth generator, is available
for use by the general ublic, and serves the needs of the City.
RESPONSE: 1-.ccording% to the application, the not -for -profit -
venture Youth Center;' is being constructed in response to a long
time community need. As was demonstrated during Conceptual
review and by the/ response to the survey that was conducted,
youth believe str,.6ngly that they need their own place in Aspen
for activities and hanging out. The Center will be open to
resident youth at well as visiting youth.
2. The applicant shall demonstrate that the impacts of the
essential public facility will be mitigated, including those
associated with the generation of additional employees, the
demand for parking, road and transit services, and the need for
basic services including but not limited to water supply, sewage
treatment, drainage control, fire and police protection, and
solid waste disposal.
RESPONSE: The facility can be easily served by public utilities
and the adjacent parking structure. The applicants are
requesting a waiver from Council of the Employee mitigation fee.
The fee would be approximately $15,000 for one middle income full
2
JI,
C
11 el
'7—
C,
41
4DEVELOPMENT 11/1/89.
Caudill Gustaf sM07HOon -Rc
Z� zz�mmcMMDZZ01mm Z2��= M-Tag
PLO. BOX FF P-34 E. HOPKINS ICL&DVPU r1r,11 fnm�m— wa = - nm—
IIASPEN
SOUTH ELEVATION
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning And Zoning Commission
FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planner
RE: Youth Center Final SPA Approval/Subdivision, Rezoning
DATE: March 6, 1990
SUMMARY: The Youth Center Board has submitted an application for
rezoning and final SPA development plan/subdivision for the
development of an approximately 6,500 square foot Youth Center on
the Rio Grande parcel. A GMQS Exemption for essential services
has also been applied for and requires review by Council. Staff
recommends approval with conditions.
APPLICANT: Youth Center Board as represented by Glenn Horn,
Davis Horn Inc.
LOCATION: Rio Grande Parcel
ZONING: City: Public, Public with SPA overlay
APPLICANT'S REQ1TEST: Rezoning of the County's portion of the
site to SPA Overlay and recommendation of final SPA
plan/subdivision approval for the development of the Youth Center
PROJECT HISTORY: In 1988, the Aspen Adult Advisory Board for a
Youth Center was established. The Youth Center Board began
exploring potential sites and programs for a Youth Center.
May of 1989, the P&Z recommended approval of the requested
rezoning from Public to Public with SPA overlay and approval of
Conceptual SPA with conditions.
On June 12, 198"9 the City Council granted conceptual rezoning and
conceptual SPA plan approval subject to conditions.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The site is approximately 7,500 square feet
and located between the parking garage and the jail. The
northern portion of the site is owned by the City of Aspen and
zoned Public with an SPA overlay, while the southern portion of
the site, owned by Pitkin County, is zoned public but does not
have an SPA overlay.
Existing utilities include water mains, sanitary and storm
sewers, electric, telephone, natural gas and cable television
lines.
C
MESSAGE DISPLAY
TO Leslie Lamont CC AMY MARGERUM
From: Robert Gish
Postmark: Nov 20,90 4:39 PM
Status: Previously read
Subject: Reply to: Youth Center
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply text:
From Robert Gish:
MY ANSWER WOULD BE NO FOR SEVERAL REASONS. WE DO NOT HAVE A MECHANISM
UNDER WHICH STAFF CAN APPROVE SUCH A REQUEST. WE SHOULD REMAIN
CONSISTENT WITH OUR PRIOR DENIAL OF HADID AND OTHERS. OUR PROPOSED
ORDINANCE FOR AMENDING LAND USE CODES TO ALLOW FOR OFFSITE STORAGE OF
CONSTRUCTION STORAGE IS IN THE FINAL STAGES OF COUNCIL APPROVAL. I
HAVE DENIED THIS REQUEST IN THE PAST. JEDS LEASE IS VERY RESTRICTIVE
AS TO ACCESS TO THE JOBSITE, INSURANCE, DISTANCE TO JAIL ETC. AS
ALWAYS I AM WILLING TO DISCUSS IF OTHERS HAVE A DIFFERING OPINION.
Preceding message:
From Leslie Lamont:
Rudd construction has requested to use the recycling site as a
storage spot for tools materials and possibly a construction
trailer. Bill Drueding has said that it is up to the City since it
is City property and it is an SPA. Jim Duke has indicated (at least
to Rudd but I would follow up) that their intentions will not
interfere with his operation. We need to be careful that a trailer
(if allowed) will only be used for construction purposes NOT for
youth center office activities!!! As they have requested in the
past. Please rsvp asap as I will call Rudd back and direct them.
August 24, 1990
Pitkin County Planning & Zoning Department
130 South Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Attn: Bill Drueding
RE: Aspen Youth Center Floor Area
BILL - The following floor areas have been calculated for the As n Youth Center.
GROSS AREA F.A.R.
MAIN LEVEL -2500-
LOWER LEVEL
4015 SF 2495*
SUB BASEMENT 450 SF ----
� TAL F.A.R. 4995 SF
* Note floor at 91'-0' level is counted at 50% as calculated by Aspen Land Us de Section OD" Page
3.8. Floor is 100% below grade at Grid A and at natural grade at Grid E. Aver is 50% below grade.
Please contact me if I can be of further assistance. 1
Sincerely,
C
CAUDILL GUSTAFSON ROSS & ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, P.C. /
John Wheeler
lip
O � � v✓ ra�z�
September 19, 1990(303)
John Wheeler
Caudill Gustafson Ross and Associates
234 East Hopkins Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear John:
n
.ing Office
Street
41611
920-5197
Per our conversation today on the phone, I wanted to follow with
a letter outlining what we had discussed.
I understand that the excess gross floor area (520 square feet),
which is represented as a subgrade basement, shall be included in
the development plan through the insubstantial amendment process.
I have attached the review criteria for an insubstantial
amendment and an application form. Please respond to those
criteria and submit your application for review by the Planning
Director. Because the Council waived your original development
application fee, no fee will be required for this application.
As I related to you on the telephone, we will not process any
other building permit applications until an insubstantial
amendment has been reviewed and approved by the Planning
Director. But your excavation and foundation permits are, of
course, still valid.
Please do not hesitate to call if you have questions regarding
the amendment procedure or application.
Sincerely,
Leslie Lamont, Planner
enc.
cc: Amy Margerum
Bill Drueding
youth.insub
recycled paper
•
•
September 13, 1990
Aspen Planning and Zoning Department
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Attn: Amy Margerum
RE: Aspen Youth Center/Rio Grande SPA
MS MARGERUM - On May 14, 1990 the Aspen Youth Center was given final SPA approval by resolution
#27,1990. During the approval process the floor area of the building was discussed and addressed as
a concern. Resolution 27 Condition #1 states area limits would be 5500 S.F. with an overall square
footage of 6500 S.F. The actual floor area calculated is 5065 S.F.
During the final construction drawing phase it was determined that a small area, totally sub -grade, would
be required for purposes of mechanical areas and storage area for the purposed snack bar. This area
accounts for approximately 450 S.F.
We feel this change may be dealt with under the attachment for review standards: Development
application for amendment to approved PUD or SPA plan.
The concern by the City Council basically dealt with the area build out of the building areas above grade.
The area in question is totally below the structure. The gross area of the main levels of the building have
remained at the 6500 S.F. (Except for the additional 70 S.F. required for the elevator shaft.) See letter
to Planning Office dated August 24, 1990.
The Aspen Youth Center Board is willing to do whatever is necessary to approve this area. We are aware
that to process an insubstantial amendment will take time. Therefore, we would like to ask that the
foundation excavation permit be processed and we can address this issue before issuance of a final
building permit.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
CAU ' L �XGSTAFSO OSS &ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, P.C.
ohn Wheeler
Project Architect
Aspen Youth Center
cc Tom Baker
Bill Drueding
Enclosures: Letter dated 8/24/90
Plan: Sub -grade area
Revised per meeting with Tom Baker, Bill Drueding, and John Wheeler 9/13/90.
:AUOILL GUSTAFSON ROSS 6 ASSOCIATES ARCHITE: TE�P.O. BOX FF OLORAOO F31612 303-925-3383
TO: Amy Margerum, Planning Director
FROM: Leslie Lamont
RE: Aspen Youth Center/Rio Grande SPA Amendment
DATE: October 22, 1990
SUMMARY: The Youth Center seeks to amend their Final SPA Plan
approval to add 520 square feet to the overall 6500 square
footage approved by the City Council.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: During the approval process the floor area
of the building was set at 5500 square feet with an overall
square footage of 6500 square feet. According to the application
the actual floor area is calculated as 5065 square feet.
According to the architects, during the final construction
drawing phase it was determined that a small area, totally sub -
grade, would be required for purposes of mechanical and storage
area for the proposed snack bar, approximately 450 square feet.
An additional 70 square feet is required for the elevator shaft.
FINDINGS: Pursuant to Section 7-804 E., an insubstantial
amendment to an approved Final Development Plan may be authorized
by the Planning Director. An insubstantial amendment shall be
limited to technical or engineering considerations first
discovered during actual development which could not reasonably
be anticipated during the approval process. The additional
square footage does not:
a. change the use or character of the development
b. increase by greater than three percent the overall coverage of
structures on the land
c. substantially increase trip generation rates
d. reduce by greater than three percent approved open space
e. reduce by greater than one percent off-street parking and
loading space
f. reduce required pavement widths or rights -of -way for streets
and easements
g. increase greater than two percent the approved gross leasable
floor area
h. increase by greater than one percent approved residential
density
i. is inconsistent with a condition or representation of the
project's original approval or requires granting of a further
variation from the project's approved use or dimensional
requirements.
Therefore the amendment is insubstantial as it does not violate
these review criteria.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of this insubstantial
amendment to the Final SPA plan with the condition that the
additional 520 square feet is contained within the
mechanical/storage area and elevator shaft and does not increase
the above grade square footage of the Center.
I hereby approve this
insubstantial amendment to the
Final SPA Plan pursuant to
Section 7-804 E. of the Aspen
Land Use Code.
C
Amy argerum, Tanning Director
2
August 24, 1990
Pitkin County Planning & Zoning Department
130 South Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Attn: Bill Drueding
RE: Aspen Youth Center Floor Area
BILL - The following floor areas have been calculated for the Aspen Youth Center.
GROSS AREA F.A.R.
MAIN LEVEL 2500 SF -2500-
LOWER LEVEL 4015 SF 2495*
SUB BASEMENT 450 SF ----
TOTAL F.A.R. 4995 SF
* Note floor at 91'-0" level is counted at 50% as calculated by Aspen Land Use Code Section "D" Page
3.8. Floor is 100% below grade at Grid A and at natural grade at Grid E. Average is 50% below grade.
Please contact me if I can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
CAUDILL GUSTAFSON ROSS & ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, P.C.
John Wheeler
0
� •�� � ����'�-cry
\ Pitkin County
September 10, 1990
Aspen Youth Center Board of Directors
P. O. Box 8266
Aspen, Colorado 81612
RE: Construction of Rio Grande Youth Center
To the Members of the Board:
This letter will confirm for you the intent of the Board of
County Commissioners to approve and enter into a long term lease
with your Board for the Commissioners' land which lies in the Rio
Grande SPA between the Pitkin County Jail and the Aspen Municipal
Parking Garage, as is more particularly depicted upon the
attached map. This land will be leased for the purpose of
construction and the ongoing operation of a Youth Center in this
location.
The Commissioners do hereby further consent to the immediate
occupation of the referenced lands by the Youth Center and its
agents and the commencement of construction thereon in advance of
the formal approval and execution of the referenced lease from
the Commissioners.
It is understood and acknowledged between the parties, in
consideration for the Commissioners consent to the use of this
land, that if the contemplated facility is not completed for any
reason whatsoever, or if, at any time during the term of the
lease of the referenced lands, the facility ceases to operate as
a Youth Center, then all rights and interest in these lands by
the Youth Center Board shall terminate, and possession shall
revert to the Commissioners. In the event of such termination
prior to completion of the facility, the Youth Center Board shall
bear the full cost and responsibility of restoring the referenced
lands to their original and undisturbed condition.
Administration
530 E. Main, 3rd Floor
Aspen, CO 81611
(303)920-5200
FAX 920-5198
printed on recycled paper
County Commissioners
Suite B
506 E. Main Street
Aspen, CO 81611
(303)920-5150
County Attorney
Suite 1
530 E. Main Street
Aspen, CO 81611
(303)920-5190
Personnel and Finance
Suite F
530 E. Main Street
Aspen, CO 81611
(303)920-5220
Road and Bridge
Fleet Management
20210 W. Highway 82
Aspen, CO 81611
(303)920-5390
Aspen Youth Center Board of Directors
September 10, 1990
Page 2
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
0
L
By:
Herschel Ross
Chairman
The above stated terms are acknowledged and agreed to this
day of September, 1990.
ASPEN YOUTH CENTER BOARD OF
DIRECTO �-
: BY
Title
tew.yc.intent
•
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Council
THRU: Bill Efting, Interim City Manager- j f
FROM: Amy Margerum, Planning DirectorJd Leslie Lamont
RE: Youth Center, Final SPA, Rezoning and GMQS Exemption
for Essential Public Services and First Reading
Ordinance
DATE: April 23, 1990
SUMMARY: The applicants propose to construct an approximately
6,500 square foot Youth Center on a portion of the Rio Grande
parcel. The applicants request Final SPA, Rezoning, and a GMQS
Exemption for Essential Public Services. This is the last step
of the four step review process. This is also the first reading
of Ordinance 4--, A.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends Final SPA and
Rezoning of the parcel with conditions.
Staff recommends approval of the GMQS Exemption.
COUNCIL GOALS: This proposal is consistent with Council's goals
to support the role of the human services and to work together
with all people and organizations in the Roaring Fork Valley.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Council approved the Conceptual SPA
submission at their June 12, 1989 meeting, The Council
required 10 conditions of approval which the applicant has
addressed in the final submission. Please see attached Planning
and Zoning Commission memo for a review of the conditions of
approval, B.
BACKGROUND: The Council originally gave the Youth Center Board
permission to go through the land use review process with the
Center proposal. The Board engaged in the four step SPA review
process. The Board has also presented the proposal to the Board
of County Commissioners to procure their endorsement and
permission to use County land.
The Board has received both Conceptual SPA approval from the
Planning and Zoning Commission and Council, and favorable review
regarding rezoning from Public to Public with SPA Overlay.
PROBLEM DISCUSSION: Rezoning is required for the portion of the
site within the County and Final SPA review is required for the
development of the Center. These reviews are outlined in the
Commission memo Part A and Part B, respectively, under Staff
Comments.
The applicants also request a GMQS Exemption for Essential Public
Services:
1. Pursuant to Section 8-104 C.(b) Council may consider a
development an essential public facility if it serves an
essential public purpose, provides facilities in response to the
demands of growth, is not itself a growth generator, is available
for use by the general public, and serves the needs of the City.
RESPONSE: According to the application, the not -for -profit -
venture Youth Center is being constructed in response to a long
time community need. As was demonstrated during Conceptual
review and by the response to the survey that was conducted,
youth believe strongly that they need their own place in Aspen
for activities and hanging out. The Center will be open to
resident youth as well as visiting youth.
2. The applicant shall demonstrate that the impacts of the
essential public facility will be mitigated, including those
associated with the generation of additional employees, the
demand for parking, road and transit services, and the need for
basic services including but not limited to water supply, sewage
treatment, drainage control, fire and police protection, and
solid waste disposal.
RESPONSE: The facility can be easily served by public utilities
and the adjacent parking structure. The applicants are
requesting a waiver from Council of the Employee mitigation fee.
The fee would be approximately $15,000 for one middle income full
time employee.
3. It shall also be demonstrated that the proposed development
has a negligible adverse impact on the City's air, water, land
and energy resources, and is visually compatible with surrounding
areas.
RESPONSE: The Center should have negligible impacts upon the
City's environmental and energy resources. The Planning and
Zoning Commission, as a condition of approval for Final SPA,
asked the applicants to re -study the east facade of the building
attempting to make the Center less imposing and more pedestrian
friendly for users of the bike path between the Jail and Youth
Center.
The applicants have redesigned the east facade and shifted the
main entrance to focus more on the plaza. They have also
eliminated the public restrooms (as suggested by the Commission,
seconded by the City Manager/Director of Leisure Services), have
added more windows on the east facade and have increased the
width between the Jail and the Center at the southeast corner.
Please see attached revised building plan, C. The Commission
2
reviewed the changes at their April 17 meeting commenting that
the changes are an improvement but the applicant should have
submitted an elevation for a better review of the east facade.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION VOTE: 5 FOR 1 AGAINST
KEY ISSUES:
1. The Commission wanted a re -study of the east facade and
possible increase in the width between the Jail and Center, as
was discussed previously in this memo.
2. The applicants have agreed to snow -melt the sidewalks in
front of the Youth Center but believe it onerous to provide snow -
melt for the rest of the pedestrian walkways as is mentioned in
Condition # 4c.
3. The applicant has requested a waiver of the employee
mitigation fee. The Commission recommends waiving the fee.
4. The Commission agreed with the applicants to amend the
conditions and require the Center to pay only it's proportional
share (the land that is developed for the Center) of the cost for
the final plat.
5. Staff has recommended, before final approval by Council, the
applicant establish the floor area. This has not yet been done.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommend
Council to approve, with the amended conditions as outlined in
Ordinance , of the Youth Center Final SPA, and Rezoning.
The Planning staff recommends approval of the GMQS Exemption for
the construction of Essential Public Services.
ALTERNATIVES: 1) deny Final SPA requiring a new site/building
plan; 2) require payment of the employee mitigation fee.
PROPOSED MOTION: I move to approve the Final SPA, Rezoning, and
GMQS Exemption for the Youth Center with conditions as outlined
in Ordinance o?%.
I move to read Ordinance,�'1 , Series of 1990. I move to approve
Ordinance, Series of 1990, on first reading.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Ordinance
B. Planning and Zoning Commission memo, March 6
C. Revised Building Plan
3
•
ATTACHMENT B
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning And Zoning Commission
FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planner
RE: Youth Center Final SPA Approval/Subdivision, Rezoning
DATE: March 6, 1990
SUMMARY: The Youth Center Board has submitted an application for
rezoning and final SPA development plan/subdivision for the
development of an approximately 6,500 square foot Youth Center on
the Rio Grande parcel. A GMQS Exemption for essential services
has also been applied for and requires review by Council. Staff
recommends approval with conditions.
APPLICANT: Youth Center Board as represented by Glenn Horn,
Davis Horn Inc.
LOCATION: Rio Grande Parcel
ZONING: City: Public, Public with SPA overlay
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: Rezoning of the County's portion of the
site to SPA Overlay and recommendation of final SPA
plan/subdivision approval for the development of the Youth Center
PROJECT HISTORY: In 1988, the Aspen Adult Advisory Board for a
Youth Center was established. The Youth Center Board began
exploring potential sites and programs for a Youth Center.
May of 1989, the P&Z recommended approval of the requested
rezoning from Public to Public with SPA overlay and approval of
Conceptual SPA with conditions.
On June 12, 1989 the City Council granted conceptual rezoning and
conceptual SPA plan approval subject to conditions.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The site is approximately 7,500 square feet
and located between the parking garage and the jail. The
northern portion of the site is owned by the City of Aspen and
zoned Public with an SPA overlay, while the southern portion of
the site, owned by Pitkin County, is zoned public but does not
have an SPA overlay.
Existing utilities include water mains, sanitary and storm
sewers, electric, telephone, natural gas and cable television
lines.
REFERRAL COMMENTS:
Engineering: The Engineering Department has reviewed the
application and has the following comments:
1. Ventilation - the exhaust vents for the Parking Garage are
located on the north-east corner of the Garage. The Youth Center
should be designed so that the intake air does not come from the
garage's exhaust.
2. Transformer - the existing transformer that is on top of the
Parking Garage is not large enough to provide the electrical
needs of the Youth Center. Consequently, the Youth Center must
supply its own transformer. It appears that the Youth Center can
assess the primary power either in Spring Street or in the alley
to the south. The electric connections have to be completed
before the contractors for the Parking Garage finish the alley
improvements or reconstruct Spring Street. Both will be complete
by mid -summer.
3. Restrooms - the application states that two restrooms will be
available to the general public if the City maintains the
restrooms. I suggest that you check with Bill Efting to see if
he wants to take on this responsibility. Bear in mind that the
Parking Garage will have restrooms available to the general
public.
4. Plat - We had suggested that the Youth Center share the costs
of the Rio Grande final SPA plat equally with the Parking Garage
and Library. In this case, each entity would pay 1/3 of the
cost. The applicants are instead proposing that it would pay a
proportional share equal to its proportional area of the Rio
Grande that is used by the Youth Center. In this scenario, the
Youth Center would pay a much smaller fraction of the cost of the
plat. We think that it is more fair if all three users of the
Rio Grande equally split the cost of the plat.
5. Parking Garage - the Parking Garage will be open until April
15, it will then close for the completion of construction and
landscaping and will reopen in late June or early July. The
Youth Center should let us know it's construction schedule and
how it will impact these items: waterproof membrane on the
Garage, backfill, footings, landscaping, "new" Spring Street
extension, new bike path, snow -melt system and all utilities (the
Youth Center must install all utilities that access from the
alley or Spring Street before they are paved this summer).
Also, the exit of the Parking Garage will be next to the
construction for the Youth Center. The Youth Center must be
careful not to interrupt the traffic flow of the exiting
vehicles.
2
•
0
6. Drainage - the drainage plan that was submitted is
acceptable. There is an existing drainage pipe that the Youth
Center proposes to extend, it is very important that this occurs.
7. Trash - the application does not exactly address the trash
provisions, such as the size and accessibility to Spring Street.
Will the dumpster have to be pushed up the stairs?
8. Landscaping - the plan that was submitted for landscaping is
very vague. Will the Youth Center provide all the landscaping as
shown on Figure A-1, or will they look to the Parking Garage to
supply it? The Youth Center has to have drip irrigation for the
landscaping that they are providing.
9. Snowmelt - the Youth Center should provide a snowmelt system
for all pedestrian walkways. The Library and Parking garage are
also providing this.
10. Street Improvements - the application addresses these types
of improvements on page 36 and replies "The applicants will
comply with this standard". Does this mean that the applicants
are going to install any of these improvements?
11. As -built Drawings - the applicants must supply to the City
one copy of as -built drawings, including all new utilities.
Environmental Health: The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health
Department has reviewed the above referenced land use submittal.
SEWAGE TREATMENT AND COLLECTION:
The provision of service to this area by the Aspen Consolidated
Sanitation District meets the requirements of this department.
ADEQUATE PROVISIONS FOR WATER NEEDS:
The provision of potable water from the City of Aspen water
system is consistent with the area service plan and should
provide a satisfactory quantity of water meeting all standards of
the Colorado Department of Health for drinking water quality.
AIR QUALITY:
No fireplace or woodstove is shown on the plans. The applicants
are to be commended for not installing such devices. It should
be made a condition of approval that no such devices be installed
in the future.
Adequate provision should be made for sufficient bicycle racks to
encourage bicycle transportation to the facility, instead of
having guests arrive by car. This is especially important due to
the location adjacent to a bike path.
3
Prior to starting construction, a fugitive dust control plan must
be approved by the Colorado Air Pollution Control Division and
the Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department. This plan must
contain sufficient measures to prevent windblown dust from
blowing onto such areas as the jail, courthouse, playing field,
and parking garage/transportation facility during construction
and until revegetation is complete. The fugitive dust control
plan should include sufficient wetting, treatment with dust
suppressant, daily scraping of adjacent streets, fencing, and/or
any other measures which may be necessary to prevent windblown
dust from the site affecting adjacent properties.
OTHER MATTERS OF CONCERN TO ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH:
The applicants propose to have a snack bar located within the
facility. Prior to construction of this snack bar, the
applicants must have a Food Establishment Plans and
Specifications Review done by this department.
CONTAMINATED SOILS:
The applicants are advised to contact this office for comment
should mine waste, waste rock or mine dumps be encountered during
the excavation phase of the project. Disposal of such materials
off -site is discouraged due to the possibility of excessive heavy
metals being present in the soil.
This is not a requirement, but simply a request based on past
experience in dealing with mine waste and possible negative
impacts to humans.
In addition, it is the Department's recommendation that the
applicants hire a professional engineer to evaluate the
ventilation system for the Youth Center due to its proximity to
the parking garage. Exhaust from the parking garage ventilation
system will contain significant concentrations of carbon monoxide
and the ventilation system for the Youth Center should take this
into account and ensure that worst -case carbon monoxide levels do
not cause health problems at the Youth Center. Windows that
open, instead of relying on mechanical ventilation should be
strongly considered, in addition to any other measures
recommended by the engineer.
STAFF COMMENTS: This section will address the review criteria
for rezoning and final SPA approval/subdivision. A summary of
outstanding issues is at the end of this section.
A. Rezoning
The Youth Center site is not entirely within the SPA overlay
zone. The south half of the site is zoned PUB without the SPA
designation. The applicants seek to designate the south half of
in
the site SPA.
1. Pursuant to Section 7-803 A. the standards for designation
are:
Standards for Designation. Any land in the City may b
designated Specially Planned Area (SPA) by the City Council
if, because of its unique historic, natural, physical, or
locational characteristics, it would be of great public
benefit to the City for that land to be allowed design
flexibility and to be planned and developed comprehensively
as a multiple use development. A parcel of land designated
Specially Planned Area (SPA) shall also be designated on the
City's Official Zone District Map with the underlying Zone
District designation which is determined the most
appropriate. The underlying Zone District designation shall
be used as a guide, but not an absolute limitation, to the
uses and development which may be considered during the
development review process.
RESPONSE: The SPA designation of the County portion of the Youth
Center site is consistent with the zoning on the rest of the
portion which is owned by the City. The whole Rio Grande parcel
has been apart of a comprehensive multi -use planning effort. The
future use of the site, as approved conceptually, compliments the
uses that exist and are planned for the site. A SPA designation
for the County portion to facilitate the integration of the
planning effort for that site.
2. Pursuant to Section 7-1102 the following review criteria
shall apply:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any
applicable portions of this chapter.
RESPONSE: There is no conflict with the Land Use Regulations.
In fact rezoning the rest of the parcel SPA will bring the parcel
in conformity with the rest of the Rio Grande Parcel.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all
elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
RESPONSE: The Comprehensive Plan: Transportation Element
identifies a parking structure for the parcel and the development
of a conceptual SPA Plan for the parcel. The SPA plan recommends
public and quasi -public uses for the site. The non-profit Youth
Center is consistent with the other land uses on the site.
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with
surrounding Zone Districts and land uses, considering
existing land use and neighborhood characteristics.
5
RESPONSE: The proposed amendment to the map will bring this
small "out parcel" into compliance with the predominant zoning of
the area. Failure to rezone the site would create an
inconsistency with surrounding zoning.
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation
and road safety.
RESPONSE: The road system on the Rio Grande Parcel is being
developed to handle the traffic for the parking garage. It is
not anticipated that the Youth Center will have a significant
impact on this infrastructure.
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the
extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the
capacity of such public facilities, including but not
limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities,
water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency
medical facilities.
RESPONSE: The Youth Center restrooms will be available to the
general public. It is not anticipated that the Youth Center will
have an increase demand on the public facilities. Staff strongly
recommends that installation of bike racks as part of the Center
as an auto disincentive.
F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural
environment.
RESPONSE: The natural grade of the site has been considerably
altered. Adverse impacts on the natural environment are not
anticipated.
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible
with the community character in the City of Aspen.
RESPONSE: The proposed Youth Center is consistent with the
community character of Aspen because of the encouragement to
bring the youth into the downtown life and activity in the center
of the town.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the
subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support
the proposed amendment.
RESPONSE: The new parking structure, the library and the
pedestrian plaza have created a new focus for this area. The
Youth Center is anticipated to compliment that new focus and will
add yet another element to the activities on that site.
G
u
I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the
public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and
intent of this chapter.
RESPONSE: The construction of the Youth Center will be an asset
to the community.
B. Final SPA Development Plan and Subdivision
1. Pursuant to Section 7-804 D. of the Code the following are
the review criteria for final SPA review:
A. The general application information required in Sec. 6-202.
RESPONSE: All the submission requirement of this section have
been included in the application.
B. A precise plan of the proposed development including but not
limited to proposed land uses, densities, landscaping,
internal traffic circulation, and accessways. The precise
plan shall be in sufficient detail to enable evaluation of
the architectural, landscaping, and design features of the
proposed development. It shall show the location and floor
area of all existing and proposed buildings and other
improvements including heights, dwelling unit types and non-
residential facilities.
RESPONSE: Please see attached site plan and building elevations.
C. A statement specifying the underlying Zone District on the
parcel and, if variations are proposed, a statement of how
the variations comply with the standards of Section 7-804
(B) .
RESPONSE: The underlying zone district is Public. The
dimensional requirements are established by conceptual and final
review.
D. A statement outlining a development schedule specifying the
date construction is proposed to be initiated and completed.
RESPONSE: Construction is to be initiated on May 15, 1990 with
completion in early 1991.
E. A statement specifying the public facilities that will be
needed to accommodate the proposed development, and what
specific assurances will be made to ensure that public
facilities will be available to accommodate the proposed
development.
RESPONSE: Because of its location the Center will have access to
7
L�
0
the library, transportation center, parking garage and Rio
Grande playing field. The applicants believe strongly that
access to these particular facilities will enhance the successful
of the center and the Center will lend an active feeling to the
plaza. In response to a request from the City, the applicants
will construct two public restrooms on the Plaza which will be
accessible to the general public.
F. A statement of the reasonable conformance of the Final
Development Plan with the approval granted to the Conceptual
Development Plan and with the original intent of the City
Council in designating the parcel Specially Planned Area
(SPA) .
RESPONSE: The final application conforms reasonably well with
the conceptual development approval. There were 10 conditions of
approval with conceptual approval. The conditions and responses
are listed below.
1. The applicants shall minimize the size of the facility
to the greatest extent possible, not to exceed 6,500 square feet.
The facility will be less than 6,500 square feet in size. The
building foot print shall not exceed 4,200 square feet.
2. The applicants shall demonstrate how the Youth Center
will be a success.
In 1988 a survey identified the use and activities that Aspen
youth desire. A Youth Advisory Board was formed to determine the
feasibility of establishing a Youth Center with social and
recreational opportunities. The Youth Center would also be an
alternative for youth by creating a substance free environment
with substance free entertainment. Therefore, a number of
committees were established comprised of an equal number of
adults and youth having equal input. A brief description of the
committees is as follows:
Governing Body/Operations: The Board of Directors is made
up of 8 adults and 8 youth (different grades and schools in the
Aspen area). The students, with help from an adult mentor,
applied for 501 (c) (3) tax exempt corporate status, drafted the
bylaws and articles of incorporation and applied for an employee
I.D. number.
Marketing Committee: During the 1988-89 school year, the
Aspen High School marketing class, with 2 adults assisting,
developed a marketing plan. The purpose of this committee was to
develop a Mission Statement, create awareness in the community,
involve youth in alcohol and drug free activities, create radio
advertisements and prepare a brochure.
Design Construction: The architects have worked with the
Aspen High School drafting class to incorporate the student's
design concepts. The design concepts were taken from the 1988
•
E
survey. The Design Committee
and Council in June 1989.
Program and Activities:
centers. The committee met
the committee created their
incorporating student's ideas
utilizing the center.
presented the concept to the BOCC
This committee visited other youth
with the Directors of the centers.
own programs and activities by
and suggestions from all age levels
The Center will have a full-time paid director.
The Center will be used for activities such as dances, ping-pong,
fousball, television lounge, snack bar, etc. The Center will
also be used as a clearing house to involve and engage the other
outside community facilities and functions by setting up programs
within the community (i.e. Tenth Mountain Hut Trips, nordic
skiing outings, camping and rafting and/or mountain climbing
trips, softball and volleyball activities, etc.).
The committee strongly believes that visiting and part-time youth
in Aspen as well as downvalley youth should participate and
utilize the Youth Center.
Fundraising: the Board of Directors as been selected as a
"fundraising" Board. Equal involvement of adults and youth
represent the Board. An aggressive fund raising campaign is
underway.
3. The applicants shall provide to the satisfaction of the
Engineering Department an SPA plat, a drainage plan, a trash plan
and a landscape plan.
A final plat shall incorporate the entire Rio Grande parcel. The
Center Board agreed to pay an equitable share of the cost of
preparing a final SPA plat. The applicants suggest that an
equitable share would be equal to the proportional share of the
entire Rio Grande site utilized by the Youth Center.
A drainage plan for the site is attached with a letter addressing
the drainage plan.
4. The Youth Center shall be sprinkled and have an adequate
fire alarm system.
The applicants commit to sprinkle the building and install an
adequate fire alarm system.
5. The applicants shall propose an acceptable maintenance
agreement for the site which is acceptable to the Director of
Leisure Services.
The applicants commit to maintain the terrace on the south side
of the building and the on -site landscaping. During pre -
application discussions, this proposal was acceptable to the
E
Director of Leisure Services. The City will maintain the public
restrooms on the plaza level, but would retain the option to
transfer the maintenance of the bathrooms to the Youth Center
Board, if the restrooms are used exclusively by youth visiting
the Youth Center and are not a benefit to the general public.
6. The applicants will agree to coordinate construction
with the Engineering Department.
The applicants commit to meet with the Engineering Department
prior to construction and coordinate the construction schedule to
avoid potential conflicts with other activities on the Rio Grande
site. While the building is being constructed the applicants
will coordinate activities with the Building Department.
7. The applicants shall provide the Housing Office with
adequate information regarding employee impact mitigation.
It is projected that the Center will operate with one full-time
equivalent employee.
The Housing Office is requesting a one cash -in -lieu payment of
$30,000 to mitigate the affordable housing impacts of the
project. The applicants feel that just as housing is a
recognized community problem so is the need for a Youth Center.
In recognition of this problem and the non-profit nature of the
proposed facility, the Youth Center Board requests the City
Council to waive the affordable housing mitigation requirement.
The cash -in -lieu fee will result in compromises in the quality of
the Youth Center.
8. The applicants shall work with the County to determine
if the building design is appropriate for potential reuse.
The building has been designed so that it may be reused as an
office building in the event the Youth Center fails. The
interior space may be partitioned for offices.
9. The applicants shall demonstrate that agreement on
conditions of a lease for the site between the City/County and
Youth Center Board are likely.
Attorneys, Fred Gannett and Fred Pierce are preparing the lease.
10. The applicants shall demonstrate that the bikeway
between the Youth Center and Jail will have adequate grades and
curves so that the future option of the trolley is not
compromised.
The architects met with Jon Busch and Roger Hunt in the summer of
1989 to discuss the possibility of a trolley routing between the
existing Pitkin County jail and the proposed Center. The slope
10
of the bike path is actually not a function of the Center, but is
more related to difference between the fixed elevation of the
jail entry and parking structure roof plaza and the elevation of
the Spring street extension.
Using the fixed elevations noted above and turning the path to
the east after it passes north of the jail in order to gain more
length, a slope of approximately 8 per cent is achieved. A slope
of 8 per cent is acceptable for potential trolley use.
G. A plat which depicts the applicable information required by
Sec. 7-1004 (D) (1) (a) (3) and (D) (2) (a) .
RESPONSE: A final plat will be prepared for all three activities
occurring on the SPA site: Library, parking garage, and Youth
Center.
2. Section 7-1004 outlined the review standards for final
subdivision. Many of the review criteria are not applicable for
this type of subdivision. The appropriate following review
criteria are outlined below.
Section 7-1004 C. 1 General Requirements
A. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen
Area Comprehensive Plan.
RESPONSE: The Center is consistent with the Land Use Plan.
B. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the
character of existing land uses in the area.
RESPONSE: As was established during conceptual the center is
consistent with surrounding land uses.
Staff recommends that the architects continue to work on the
design of the east elevation. The bike path alignment will run
along the east side of the building and the facade is
predominantly blank and the landscape treatment is sparse. All
four sides of this building are highly visible and should be
presented as such.
C. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the
future development of surrounding areas.
RESPONSE: The development should not adversely affect the future
development of the surrounding areas. The applicants believe
that the trolley alignment has not been compromised.
D. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all
applicable requirements of this chapter.
11
RESPONSE: The application demonstrates that the project is in
compliance with sections of the Municipal Code.
Section 7-1004 C. 2 Suitability of Land for Subdivision
a. & b. Land suitability and spatial pattern efficiency.
RESPONSE: The proposed development is located near the
commercial core of Aspen. Environmental hazards affecting the
suitability of land for redevelopment do not impact the site.
The proposed subdivision is readily accessible to public
facilities which are already in existence.
Section 7-1004 C. 3 Improvements
A. Following is a list of the Improvements provided for the
proposed subdivision:
Permanent survey monuments; the landscaping plan is depicted on
the site plan; the building will be connected to the existing
water and sewer lines in Spring street, there will be no new fire
hydrants installed; all electrical, telephone, natural gas, and
cable television lines will be placed underground.
B. Approved Plans shall be submitted with the building permit
application.
C. Utilities will not have to be oversized.
D. Regarding subdivision design standards, the applicants will
not install curb, gutters, sidewalks or driveways until one year
after the installation of all subsurface utilities and
improvements. The applicants will also adhere to the sidewalk
and street specifications that apply.
E. Easements: If the City requests a utility easement it will be
dedicated and shown on the final plat. The trail traversing the
site will be reconstructed by the City of Aspen in conjunction
with the completion of the parking structure. The applicants
should provide more of a vegetative buffer between the building
and the bike path.
F. The applicants will comply with all applicable standards
regarding survey monuments.
G. The applicants agree to comply with City standards regarding
the provision of utilities on site.
H. The historic drainage pattern will be maintained on site.
12
SUMMARY:
A summary of staff comments regarding the conceptual conditions
of approval are as follows:
1. Staff recommends that the exact floor area be established
before final approval and that a chart of the dimensional
requirements be included on the site plan for easy reference.
2. Staff recommends that documentation of the non-profit status
be presented to the P&Z and Council and a financial report
specifically identifying available long-term funding.
3. Preparation of the final plat should be split equally by the
three activities occurring on the site.
4. Building and on -site landscaping maintenance language should
be included in the lease.
5. The location of the trash service area is inappropriate. It
should be located closer to the building and not in such a
visible site near the bike path. The application should address
the size of the trash service area and indicate if an enclosure
is planned.
6. The housing mitigation fee should not be waived.
Comments regarding final SPA and Subdivision:
1. Bike racks should be installed on -site.
2. The east elevation needs more work and should be as well
defined as its visibility dictates using landscaping and more
facade treatment.
3. Although the applicants agree to comply with the City's
standards regarding street improvements, do the applicants commit
to install any of these improvements?
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the rezoning and
final SPA development plan and subdivision with the following
conditions:
1. Staff recommends that a chart of the dimensional requirements
be included on the site plan for easy reference. The floor area
shall be established before final approval by City Council.
2. The Youth Center must supply its own transformer. The
electric connections have to be completed before the contractors
for the Parking Garage finish the alley improvements or
reconstruct Spring Street.
13
3. The location of the trash service area is inappropriate and
should be located closer to the building. The size of the trash
service area and an enclosure (if planned) should be identified
on the final site plan.
4. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy:
a. the Youth Center shall share the costs of the Rio Grande
final SPA plat proportionally based on the land area with the
other applicants in the SPA.
b. the Youth Center shall provide drip irrigation for the
landscaping that they are providing.
C. the Youth Center shall provide a snowmelt system for all
pedestrian walkways. (only entrances major pedestrian walkways)
d. the applicants shall have a Food Establishment Plans and
Specifications Review done by this department.
e. a housing mitigation fee shall be exempted.
f. bike racks shall be installed on -site.
5. No fireplace or woodstove shall be installed in the future.
6. Prior to an excavation permit, a fugitive dust control plan
must be approved by the Colorado Air Pollution Control Division
and the Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department.
7. The Youth Center shall be designed so that the intake air
does not come from the garage's exhaust. It is the Environmental
Health Department's recommendation that the applicants hire a
professional engineer to evaluate the ventilation system for the
Youth Center due to its proximity to the parking garage. Windows
that open, instead of relying on mechanical ventilation should be
strongly considered, in addition to any other measures
recommended by the engineer.
8. Prior to adoption of the lease, building and on -site
landscaping maintenance language should be included in the lease.
9. Approval is conditioned on further re -study of the placement
of the public bathrooms elsewhere in the building and re -study
the pedestrian/trolley corner between the jail and the Youth
Center. The re -study should attempt to improve the space between
the opening and the pedestrian scale of the east facade.
14
H
H
9
C']
tr7
C7
—.L---.TO PLAZA
I I
TORAGE A 0 ( I
PING—PONG
-
�, I D)EC.K
DECK ` JUKE' STAGE _� A _
• I I
TO ETS _L_a . i ROOF BELOW
-- -
I
• •
__1 tq
MEMORANDUM
To: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office /
From: Elyse Elliott, Engineering Department��
Date: February 14, 1990
Re: Aspen Youth Center - Final SPA/Subdivision, Rezoning and
GMQS Exemption
The Engineering Department has reviewed the above application and
has the following comments:
1. Ventilation - the exhaust vents for the Parking Garage are
located on the north-east corner of the Garage. The Youth Center
should be designed so that the intake air does not come from the
garage's exhaust.
2. Transformer - the existing transformer that is on top of the
Parking Garage is not large enough to provide the electrical
needs of the Youth Center. Consequently, the Youth Center must
supply its own transformer. It appears that the Youth Center can
assess the primary power either in Spring Street or in the alley
to the south. The electric connections have to be completed
before the contractors for the Parking Garage finish the alley
improvements or reconstruct Spring Street. Both will be complete
by mid -summer.
3. Restrooms - the application states that two restrooms will be
available to the general public if the City maintains the
restrooms. I suggest that you check with Bill Efting to see if
he wants to take on this responsibility. Bear in mind that the
Parking Garage will have restrooms available to the general
public.
4. Plat - We had suggested that the Youth Center share the costs
of the Rio Grande final SPA plat equally with the Parking Garage
and Library. In this case, each entity would pay 1/3 of the
cost. The applicant is instead proposing that it would pay a
proportional share equal to its proportional area of the Rio
Grande that is used by the Youth Center. In this scenario, the
Youth Center would pay a much smaller fraction of the cost of the
plat. We think that it is more fair if all three users of the
Rio Grande equally split the cost of the plat.
5. Parking Garage - the Parking Garage will be open until April
15, it will then close for the completion of construction and
landscaping and will reopen in late June or early July. The
Youth Center should let us know it's construction schedule and
how it will impact these items: waterproof membrane on the
Garage, backfill, footings, landscaping, "new" Spring Street
extension, new bike path, snow -melt system and all utilities (the
Youth Center must install all utilities that access from the
alley or Spring Street before they are paved this summer).
Also, the exit of the Parking Garage will be next to the
construction for the Youth Center. The Youth Center must be
careful not to interrupt the traffic flow of the exiting
vehicles.
6. Drainage - the drainage plan that was submitted is
acceptable. There is an existing drainage pipe that the Youth
Center proposes to extend, it is very important that this occurs.
7. Trash - the application does not exactly address the trash
provisions, such as the size and accessibility to Spring Street.
Will the dumpster have to be pushed up the stairs?
8. Landscaping - the plan that was submitted for landscaping is
very vague. Will the Youth Center provide all the landscaping as
shown on Figure A-1, or will they look to the Parking Garage to
supply it? The Youth Center has to have drip irrigation for the
landscaping that they are providing.
9. Snowmelt - the Youth Center should provide a snowmelt system
for all pedestrian walkways. The Library and Parking garage are
also providing this.
10. Street Improvements - the application addresses these types
of improvements on page 36 and replies "The applicant will comply
with this standard". Does this mean that the applicant is going
to install any of these improvements?
11. As -built Drawings - the applicant must supply to the City
one copy of as -built drawings, including all new utilities.
cc: Chuck Roth
0 ASPEN/PITKI*
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Leslie Lamont
FROM: Lee Cassin, Environmental Health Xf c
DATE: February 5, 1990
RE: Youth Center
Please make this an addendum to our department's review comments
on the proposed Youth Center facility located near the parking
garage.
It is our recommendation that the applicant hire a professional
engineer to evaluate the ventilation system for the youth center
due to its proximity to the parking garage. Exhaust from the
parking garage ventilation system will contain significant
concentrations of carbon monoxide and the ventilation system for
the youth center should take this into account and ensure that
worst -case carbon monoxide levels do not cause health problems at
the youth center. Windows that open, instead of relying on
mechanical ventilation should be strongly considered, in addition
to any other measures recommended by the engineer.
130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 303/920-5070
• ASPEN#PITKIN •
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT
To: Leslie Lamont
Planning Office
From: Environmental Health Department-j�;n
Date: February 1, 1990
Re: Aspen Youth Center Final SPA/Subdivision, Rezoning and
GMQS Exemption
The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department has reviewed the
above referenced land use submittal in order to determine
compliance with Colorado Department of Health regulations, local
regulations and those requirements of the Pitkin County Land Use
Code that are under our jurisdiction. The authority for this
review is granted to this office by the Aspen/Pitkin Planning
Office as stated in Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code.
SEWAGE TREATMENT AND COLLECTION:
The provision of service to this area by the Aspen Consolidated
Sanitation District meets the requirements of this department.
This conforms with Section 1-2.3 of the Pitkin County Regulations
On Individual Sewage Disposal Systems policy to "require the use
of public sewer systems wherever and whenever feasible, and to
limit the installation of individual sewage disposal systems only
to areas that are not feasible for public sewers".
ADEQUATE PROVISIONS FOR WATER NEEDS:
The provision of potable water from the City of Aspen water
system is consistent with the area service plan and should
provide a satisfactory quantity of water meeting all standards of
the Colorado Department of Health for drinking water quality.
This conforms with Section 23-55 of the Aspen Municipal Code
requiring such projects "which use water shall be connected to
the municipal water utility system."
AIR QUALITY•
No fireplace or woodstove is shown on the plans. The applicant
is to be commended for not installing such devices. It should be
made a condition of approval that no such devices be installed in
the future.
130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 303/920-5070
• ASPEN*PITKIN 0
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OEPARTMENT
Aspen Youth Center
February 1, 1990
Page 2
Adequate provision should be made for sufficient bicycle racks to
encourage bicycle transportation to the facility, instead of
having guests arrive by car. This is especially important due to
the location adjacent to a bike path.
Prior to starting construction, a fugitive dust control plan must
be approved by the Colorado Air Pollution Control Division and
the Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department. This plan must
contain sufficient measures to prevent windblown dust from
blowing onto such areas as the jail, courthouse, playing field,
and parking garage/transportation facility during construction
and until revegetation is complete. The fugitive dust control
plan should include sufficient wetting, treatment with dust
suppressant, daily scraping of adjacent streets, fencing, and/or
any other measures which may be necessary to prevent windblown
dust from the site affecting adjacent properties.
OTHER MATTERS OF CONCERN TO ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH:
The applicant is proposing to have a snack bar located within the
facility. Prior to construction of this snack bar, the applicant
must have a Food Establishment Plans and Specifications Review
done by this department, to ensure that this facility is in
compliance with Title 12, Article 44, Part 2, C.R.S. 1973 - Food
Service Establishments, and with the Rules and Regulations
Governing the Sanitation of Food Service Establishments in the
State of Colorado, dated July 1, 1978.
CONTAMINATED SOILS:
The applicant is advised to contact this office for comment
should mine waste, waste rock or mine dumps be encountered during
the excavation phase of the project. Disposal of such materials
off -site is discouraged due to the possibility of excessive heavy
metals being present in the soil.
This is not a requirement, but simply a request based on past
experience in dealing with mine waste and possible negative
impacts to humans.
130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 303/920-5070
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Attorney
City Engineer
Environmental Health
i -FRapr: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office
/v RE: Aspen Youth Center Final SPA/Subdivision, Rezoning and
GMQS Exemption
DATE: January 22, 1990
Attached is an application submitted by Glenn Horn on behalf of
the Youth Center Board requesting final approval for the Aspen
Youth Center.
Please review this material and return your comments to me no
later than February 14, 1990. Thank you.
6
rcMEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning - Attn: Leslie cc. Glen Horn, Skip Berhorst
FROM: Gary Ross
DATE: 3/13/90
RE: Aspen Youth Center
kv l 3 j,%u
LESLIE - Enclosed is a revised floor plan sketch of the Youth Center which responds to several of the
comments that we heard at the Public Project Review Meeting and the Planning and Zoning
Commission hearing.
Specifically we have addressed the following:
The exterior access toilets have been deleted allowing us to pull the southeast corner of the
building away from the bike path/trolley route. Previously the roof was within 3 feet of the edge
of the path and we have pulled the roof back to approximately 9 feet at that point with the
revision.
We have relocated the interior storage function from the east wall which will allow us to have
more glazing in the east elevation and should alleviate the concern about that elevation's
appearance.
We have re -designed the entry and focused it directly to the roof plaza of the parking structure.
We have eliminated the second set of steps to the jail entry porch and are proposing to angle
off the slab at that location to improve the perceived distance between the buildings as one
travels down the bike path.
I hope that this is the information you require in order to schedule a council hearing. If not, please give
me a call.
CAUOILL GUSTAFSON ROSS 5 ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS, P.C. P.O. BOX FF ASPEN. L OLURAOO B1612 303-925-3383
Amok
0µ rDN I I J
I �0.1•0' I �-o" � I
}-
TORAGE
I D C-K
JUKE'. STAGE J A
i t i t l BOX
n ! I
TO ETS -4-4 ROOF BELOW
i
I I
I I
_ G
I •�
f
E
1 .
TO: City Attorney
City Engineer
Environmental Health
Fire Marshal
FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office
RE: Aspen Youth Center Final SPA/Subdivision, Rezoning and
GMQS Exemption
DATE: January 22, 1990
Attached is an application submitted by Glenn Horn on behalf of
the Youth Center Board requesting final approval for the Aspen
Youth Center.
Please review this material and return your comments to me no
later than February 14, 1990. Thank you.
f
0
ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303) 920-5090
January 22, 1990
Glenn Horn
Davis Horn, Inc.
300 East Hyman Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: Aspen Youth Center
Dear Glenn
This is to inform you that the Planning Office has completed its
preliminary review of the captioned application. We have
determined that this application is complete with the exception
of 3 sets of full size, scale drawings needed for review
purposes. We also request that a model of the project be
submitted similar to the one done for the new Pitkin County
Library.
We have scheduled this application for review by the Aspen
Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing on Tuesday,
March 6, 1990 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 pm. The Friday
before the meeting date, we will call to inform you that a copy
of the memo pertaining to your application is available at the
Planning Office.
This project is being referred to the Public Projects Review
Group. They will meet sometime in February and we will notify
you of that meeting.
If you have any questions, please call Leslie Lamont, the planner
assigned to your case.
Sincerely,
Debbie Skehan
Administrative Assistant
tF.�6 Epp
`tt
i K>e, -4 rZ 6!'vr
I K 15 C
4'-01 O.G. p 1 &-X.
O54j6- -t G r_r_.r. 1.4,
Vj(�K
JAIL Moa+? e I K e PATi-I I'1 R n1 Yo 11-f H G�►a TE f=
PaI�N I yea, ~f��� �QEA -rer�eracE
I
i
{ JAIL EOTgy I
-,PIL �NT�Ri T6
7°I o1,
7 -w --
'2LANTF-tZ F- 7
1.11N 2-O" t.11 c
13FL-OW FIµ 60CAnE
SEE oBT Ll--,4 i
� EG"f I o � � �+-�►�T E �2
�p l
1
El
a' -al
I�
BEIMP-_,
2 -�-? 51/11-r10d
tro115 W �qo0
F�-.4r17�D RrPBA II
I 1
4-1
tom'- i HIM
Cpt, vt��v <vw c. 2E; 5:;TI2 uGT veT,
F LA,4Tr LEVA710r1-
—
Jo� ` UP
fold I- 3 -ro u.93-
.G I I I I SI.oPL \ I Tom. W t
w Tt —$
— - I To. W . llv!t I -r o of �- o I
i I _ a¢�l 61,
\�
�Is� TER6 GFt-Errc 1 ��Ta_Av3ia.ExI4T'4 bw0wor'r
\ i 1 To� GTE veLETjdo
i I
84c"�
I
fr i.�t9 }►=Avnµ vu ri S•3
I
>q _
o py
.o.k,
l
oPE w -1
�,. F4,n9Qot
2 al
I of E, lIArT4 blALK —
I
I•—
-JAIL 9-: WTe-f
If
�^ W
I� \4 \7-0
1
r � LEt N YJL�C•APE �oU EiC-
I / � a� p -r�+ 15 A�A
-791
7142 Moo
i
1�x - I O KAX
I
0
CC
LU
W
oN
U
�CO
0
~
O�
D
UU
O
-w
W 0
0
Z
0-CC
U) CL
W
Q
a.
Q
a
0
rn
th V.
z
U
Q
s
p u�J
~
X
v Lu
j
o zO
'I=- g
Qz
\ll w
cc
0
z0N
IZ(5
LLu
c
� 0
Z
d:Drawn: Sheet No.
0=:�VOU
Checke J. W A 7.1
Approved:
ra iZ .
copyright, caudill gustats— roes & associates, p.c.
1J lrf/ t --
-7 �F '14- GI 2
i
h
W
0
PARKING STRUCTURE
00000
f
G /2" CURB STOP
I
At�Ju�✓T �oVnlvAR'(
Eo8 con6 rf IN. ��EaFzAN
` 7880
EB'D �— EB'D — —�-# 7BB0.28sX.
■
,7903.48' 7903 49' � ��"
.. -
. X .; X. 78X.63 90.7X _
78$j.40' 7g 788/ 70' I
1C/ /
EXIST. SEWER
Et4-r CLEAN OUT
ESSMANHOLE
■ I /J / RIM EL. 7880.32'
� INV. EL. 7873.20
ESS
DEPTH
59
\ I , EXISTING /RR/GAT/QN.5Y9TEM
I l \ LIrl-I- of PIE;,PE1-I :YoLLTH
\ � I 1 1 \ GEf:ITEk go�.1rJ`r�,41zY
\ \NATIVE \ I
GRASS \ \ \ \ I
co
EX/S T. DRAIN INLET \ \ \ \ \ \
. NV. EL. 7897700' �ift'aftft
�fa�.. 1 I \ \ \ \
wwwwwww
7902.73 7902
�lft 1
i I
❑ l
--- o13
I
0 / NATIVE
l I
❑ GRASS
° \., (1�EXIST. SEWER
_,to �� u ❑ MANHOLE
_ ❑ / I . ` RIM EL. 7883, 72'
,o
JAILEl
I /
❑
of LiKiC c^F GorJ5T2ucTlo�-1 1 `
° STAG,InIc/ ArzEA e, 1LJQr�AFZ
El
❑ - Fot2�GoNST\ �A C-e!!?'5
❑
[r❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑❑°c❑❑❑o❑❑❑°❑❑❑❑ofl❑❑o❑o❑o❑lodt3noaoo❑❑� ❑o❑da❑❑°❑❑ -__
5
l , DEAN W, GORDON, BEING A REGISTERED 112E HYI�RArI'r
PROFESS/QNAL ENGINEER dN THE STATE OF COLORADO , •�
DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT T a EX/STNVG CONDITIONS
MAP WAY PREPARED BY ME AND UNDER MY
THE G
SUPERVISION AND THAT E MAP IS TRUE AND
ACCURATE TO TLE BEST OF MY KN0W2EDGE AND BELIEF.
�\\ ,/(\0
PE Na /4507
NO.
REVISIONS
DESCRIPTION DATE BY CHK
/y
SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER INC.
ENGINEERS & SURVEYORS
M 1512 GRAND AVENUE, SUITE 212
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81601
(3031 945 - 1 004
EXISTING CONDITIONS
SURVEY A 0.1
FOR CONSTRUCTION 9-5-90
JOB NO- I DATE I BY I SCALE I APPR. BY I DR
9279 .9-30-90 RC I /" = /0' 1 DWG I / of /