HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.pu.New Hopkins PUD.A01702VJrrft c��wna
New West HopkinsExtension of Conceprm
PUD (Little Ajax) 600 Block of W. Hopi
0
CASE NUMBER
A017-02
PARCEL ID #
2735-124-00003
CASE NAME
New West Hopkins Conceptual PUD Extension
PROJECT ADDRESS
600 Block of W. Hopkins
PLANNER
Fred Jarman
CASE TYPE
Conceptual PUD Extension
OWNER/APPLICANT
Aspen GK LLC
REPRESENTATIVE
Joe Wells
DATE OF FINAL ACTION
4/3/02
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
PZ ACTION
ADMIN ACTION
Withdrawn
BOA ACTION
DATE CLOSED
5/1 /02
BY
J. Lindt
•
w
PARCEL ID: 2735-124-00003 DATE RCVD: I2/25/02 # COPIES:— CASE NO A017-02
CASE NAME: New West Hopkins Conceptual PUD Extension PLNR: _
PROJ ADDR: 600 Block of W Hopkins CASE TYP: JD Extension STEP Conceptual PS:
OWN/APP: Aspen GK LLC ADR C/S/Z: �� PHN:F—
REP: Joe Wells ADR: 602 Midland Park Plac C/S/Z:IAspen/CO/81611 PHN: 925-8080
FEES DUE: 500 D FEES RCVD:1 Need Fee STAT:
REFERRALS
REF:1 � BY�� DUE: f—
MTG DATE REV BODY PH
I
REMARKS
NOTICED
CLOSED: BY: I7 . /
PLAT SUB IT
PLAT BK,PG
1
DATE OF FINAL ACTION:
CITY COUNCIL:
PZ:
BOA: -
DRAC:I
ADMIN:1 i t
�ppl�c-ci-iovI� �,�1 {d�c�✓a�Jy�
oct W III
Oe-vi'a ,Qy Ow
•
M
Joseph Wells Land Planning
602 Midland Park Place
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone: 970.925.8080
Facsimile: 970.920.4378
e-mail Address: WellsAspen@aol.com
January 11, 2002
Ms. Julie Ann Woods
Director, Aspen Community Development Department
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Hand Delivered
Dear Julie Ann:
My letter is to request approval by the City Council of a thirty day extension in
time to file the Final PUD Plan for the proposed housing project on West
Hopkins which the owners have decided to re -name as the Little Ajax project.
As you will recall, the applicants are proposing to construct 4 freemarket units
and 11 deed -restricted units on the property under a proposed AH rezoning.
The AH zone district is a district in which PUD is a mandatory review
procedure. I believe that the one year deadline following Conceptual
approval to file the Final PUD application falls on February 12, 2001, although
it is my recollection that City Council insisted on having a site visit at some
later date following their action to approve the Conceptual PUD Application
on February 12. Council did not choose to reconsider its action taken on
February 12 following the later site visit.
Sec. 26.445.030 of the Code provides that City Council may grant an extension
of the deadline for filing the Final Plat Application, provided that a written
request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the
expiration date.
The applicants have undertaken a number of technical studies related to the
property, including a Phase I Environmental Assessment and various
geotechnical and engineering studies and it has taken longer than anticipated
to come to a resolution of the best way of dealing with some of the technical
issues raised by those studies. We are nearing completion of the application
but will need some additional time to finalize our responses to the extensive
list of review procedures which apply to the proposal. We are therefore
requesting an extension of thirty days, until March 14, 2002 to complete the
application, which would extend the filing deadline.
•
6
January 11, 2002
Ms. Julie Ann Woods
Page two of two
Please et me know if you need additional information in support of this
reauest for extension.
h Wells
0-
11
Joseph Wells Land Planning
602 Midland Park Place
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone: 970.925.8080
Facsimile: 970.920.4378 (Temporary)
e-mail Address: WellsAspen@aol.com
February 26, 2002
Ms. Julie Ann Woods
Director, Aspen Community Development Department
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Hand Delivered
Dear Julie Ann:
While you were away recently, the one-year deadline following the City's
conceptual PUD approval to file for final PUD approval for the Little Ajax
project on West Hopkins occurred on February 12, 2002. On February 11, I
drafted a letter to you and submitted it to Joyce Ohlson requesting that City
Council grant a 30 day extension in the deadline to file the final PUD
application.
However, Sec. 26.445.030.D, Limitations (Regarding PUD Review Procedures),
includes the following language:
"Unless otherwise specified in the Resolution granting conceptual
approval, a development application for a final development plan shall be
submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of a conceptual
development plan. Failure to file such an application within this time
period shall render null and void the approval of a conceptual
development plan. The City Council may, at its sole discretion and for
good cause shown, grant an extension of the deadline, provided a written
request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the
expiration date."
Resolution No. 19, Series of 2001, granting conceptual approval to the project
does not include a date other than the one year time period by which the final
development plan is required to be submitted, so the one year deadline for
filing applies in this case. Resolution 19 / 2001 was approved by the City
Council on February 12, 2001. In order to comply with the strict language of
this Code section, it would have been necessary for me to request an
extension in writing no later than 30 days in advance of the deadline, or
January 11, 2002.
February 26, 2002
Ms. Julie Ann Woods
Page two of three
I have discussed the situation with the City Attorney, and I believe that he is
of the opinion that if the facts of the situation are explained to the City
Council, City Council has the authority to grant an extension if it wishes to do
so. So that there is no question about the validity of the approvals for the
project, however, I would prefer to also process a Consolidated conceptual
and final PUD Review for the project.
The conceptual PUD application for the project also included a
zoning/rezoning request for AH zoning. In fact, the AH zone designation
triggers the PUD requirement, since it is a mandatory PUD district. Even
though the request for AH zoning was included with the conceptual
application, the applicants expected that final action on the zoning request
would not occur until final action on the project and the review
requirements for the rezoning would be repeated in the final application,
regardless. The additional review requirements to be included with the final
PUD application, such as subdivision, 8040 greenline review and the
residential design standards, were not addressed previously in the conceptual
PUD application.
Therefore, it is only necessary to consolidate the conceptual and final PUD
requirements in order to address any concern about whether the Code allows
the City Council to extend the filing deadline in this case. In fact, there is no
difference between the required application materials for a final PUD
application and a consolidated PUD application. The application materials for
a consolidated PUD application are logically more extensive and more
detailed than those for conceptual but address all of the issues required for
conceptual PUD review.
The provisions of Sec. 26.445.030.B.2, Consolidated Conceptual and Final
Review (Two -Step Review), read as follows:
"An applicant may request and the Community Development Director
may determine that because of the limited extent of the issues involved in
a proposed PUD in relation to these review procedures and standards, or
because of a significant community interest which the project would
serve, it is appropriate to consolidate conceptual and final development
plan review. The Community Development Director shall consider
whether the full four step review would be redundant and serve no public
purpose and inform the applicant during the pre -application stage
whether consolidation will be permitted.
February 26, 2002
Ms. Julie Ann Woods
Page three of three
"An application which is determined to be eligible for consolidation shall
be processed pursuant to the terms and procedures of final development
plan review — steps three and four. The Planning and Zoning
Commission or the City Council may, during review, determine that the
application should be subject to both conceptual and final plan review, in
which case consolidated review shall not occur."
It is my position that, since we have already completed a full and separate
conceptual PUD review before both the P&Z and City Council for the project,
consolidated PUD review to address the issue of the deadline for requesting
an extension is appropriate because the conceptual level issues have already
been fully considered. The "extent" of the conceptual level issues requiring
further review is truly "limited". The project also serves "a significant
community interest" through the provision of a significant number of
affordable housing units. Finally, I believe that you should be able to
determine that a full four step review would, in fact, be "redundant", given
the fact that we have already completed the first two steps and that there have
been no significant changes in City policy or in the City's adopted regulations
to suggest that the conceptual review should be repeated independent of the
final review.
Please let me know if you need additional information regarding this matter.
•
0
Joseph Wells Land Planning
602 Midland Park Place
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone: 970.925.8080
Facsimile: 970.920.4378 (Temporary)
e-mail Address: WellsAspen@aol.com
TRANSMITTA
TO:
FAX NUMBER:
FROM: ;/.v e
DATE:
RE: `G GC?e_7_
COMMENTS:
'&
M
Jrr
Al
•
C7
Joseph Wells Land Planning
602 Midland Park Place
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone: 970.925.8080
Facsimile: 970.920.4378
e-mail Address: WellsAspenCaol.com
February 11, 2002
Ms. Julie Ann Woods
Director, Aspen Community Development Department
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Hand Delivered
Dear Julie Ann:
My letter is to request approval by the City Council of a thirty day extension in
time to file the Final PUD Plan for the proposed housing project on West
Hopkins which the owners have decided to re -name as the Little Ajax project.
As you will recall, the applicants are proposing to construct 4 freemarket units
and 11 deed -restricted units on the property under a proposed AH rezoning.
The AH zone district is a district in which PUD is a mandatory review
procedure. I believe that the one year deadline following Conceptual
approval to file the Final PUD application falls on February 12, 2001, although
it is my recollection that City Council insisted on having a site visit at some
later date following their action to approve the Conceptual PUD Application
on February 12. Council did not choose to reconsider its action taken on
February 12 following the later site visit.
Sec. 26.445.030 of the Code provides that City Council may grant an extension
of the deadline for filing the Final Plat Application, provided that a written
request for extension is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the
expiration date.
The applicants have undertaken a number of technical studies related to the
property, including a Phase I Environmental Assessment and various
geotechnical and engineering studies and it has taken longer than anticipated
to come to a resolution of the best way of dealing with some of the technical
issues raised by those studies. We are nearing completion of the application
but will need some additional time to finalize our responses to the extensive
list of review procedures which apply to the proposal. We are therefore
requesting an extension of thirty days, until March 14, 2002 to complete the
application, which would extend the filing deadline.
•
•
February 11, 2002
Ms. Julie Ann Woods
Page two of two
Please let me know if you need additional information in support of this
request for extension.
rely,
Joseph Wells
RESOLUTION NO. 19
(SERIES OF 2001)
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING OF THE NEW
WEST HOPKINS CONCEPTUAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, CITY OF
ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO.
Parcel No. 2735-124-00-003
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application
from Aspen GK, LLC, owner, represented by Joe Wells, for Conceptual Planned Unit
Development approval for an affordable housing project at the 600 block of West
Hopkins Avenue, City of Aspen; and,
WHEREAS, the subject property is approximately 53,187 square feet, is located
partially in the City of Aspen and partially in Pitkin County, and is located in the R-15
Zone District in both jurisdictions; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445, the City Council may approve a
Conceptual Planned Unit Development, during a duly noticed public meeting after
considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission made at a
duly noticed public hearing, comments from the general public, a recommendation from
the Community Development Director, and recommendations from relevant referral
agencies; and,
WHEREAS, during a public meeting on January 2, 2001, the Planning and
Zoning Commission voted, by a six to zero (6-0) vote, to recommend City Council
approve the New West Hopkins Affordable Housing Conceptual PUD; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission also voted by a six to zero (6-
0) vote to recommend the Applicant pursue the possibility for shared access to this site
with the 3oomerang Lodge along the east property boundary; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority voted unanimously on
December 6, 2000, to find that the project meets the requirements for an exceptional
project as set forth in the 2000 Affordable Housing Guidelines; and,
WHEREAS, City Council finds that the project meets the requirements for an
exceptional project as set forth in the 2000 Affordable Housing Guidelines; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development
proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has
reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission,
Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, Community Development Director, the applicable
referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and.
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that the development proposal meets or
exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development
proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area
Community Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is
necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY
COUNCIL as follows:
Section 1
The New West Hopkins Affordable Housing Conceptual Planned Unit Development is
approved, with the following conditions:
1. The Final Application shall include detailed descriptions of two (2) trails across the
property to be dedicated public trail easements. One trail shall be across the lower
portion of the property connecting the existing trail to West Hopkins Avenue and the
other across the upper portion of the property. The Parks Department shall approve
the trail easements.
2. The Final Application shall show a shared access along the east property boundary
between this property at the Boomerang Lodge expansion property.
The Final Application shall demonstrate how the project will implement Green
Development Strategies as required by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority.
a. Use of gas log appliances. Pollution reduction and energy conservation.
b. Occupant recycling. Areas for glass, metal, plastic and newspaper.
c. Waste management. Identify ways to recycle materials where possible, and
minimize tries to the landfill, including separate dump containers for wood and
pot.,.;al recyclables.
d. Destratification fan systems. Fans recycle hot air at roof and recirculate to living
areas to decrease heating loads.
e. Attic fan systems. Naturally ventilate building, reducing the need for air
conditioning from solar gain.
f. Comply or exceed energy code requirements.
g. Landscaping. Utilize native vegetation to reduce water use.
h. Bike storage areas.
i. Trail. To be made permanent fixture of town system by way of easement.
j. Erosion control. Measured specified by licensed geotechnical engineer to
minimize damage to vegetation and ground stability.
k. Site preservation and restoration. Topsoil to be preserved for re -use in areas of
disturbance. Site disturbance limited. Intensive restoration plan to ensure proper
re -growth and stabilization of disturbed areas.
4. The Final Application shall address the Housing Authority's requirement to
investigate additional Green Development Strategies, including:
a. Building Commissioning.
b. Asbestos -free building.
c. CFC-free building products, including refrigeration systems and carpeting.
d. Recycled materials.
e. Building materials.
f. Water conservation.
g. Certified wood products.
h. Human comfort.
i. , Energy efficient lighting.
j. Light pollution.
k. Indoor air quality.
I. Construction air quality plan.
5. The Final Application shall include a long-term hazard mitigation and containment
plan to protect the development from rock falls, snow slides, and other natural
hazards. The plan shall be approved by the City Engineer.
6. The site contains an old abandoned septic system. The Applicant shall comply with
Pitkin County Environmental Health Department requirements for abandonment of
the system and properly disposing of waste material.
7. The Applicant shall develop traffic reduction measures for the project prior to final
submission in order to comply with the City's Municipal Code requirements. The
traffic reduction measures shall be approved by the City's Environmental Health
Department.
8. The landscape plan shall indicate that the native areas will be treated with the Parks
Department's recommended seed mix.
9. A 5-foot buffer to accommodate snow storage and removal on each side of sidewalks
and trails shall be indicated on the final site plan.
10. Fhe final site plan shall show the areas of the dedicated public trail easements,
approved by the Parks Department.
11. The buildings shall include an adequate fire sprinkler system and alarm system,
approved by the Aspen Fire Marshall.
12. No excavation or storage of dirt or material shall occur within tree driplines or outside of
the approved building envelope and access envelope.
13. All construction vehicles, materials, and debris shall be maintained on -site and not
within public rights -of -way unless specifically approved by the Director of the Streets
Department.
14. The applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is limited to
the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m.
15. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed
rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction.
16. All uses and construction shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System
Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8 (Water Conservation
and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code as they pertain to
utilities.
17. The Applicant or owner shall mitigate any public impacts that this project causes,
including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines.
Section 2
All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the
development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or
documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Cour,c"!. are
hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied
with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity.
Section 3
This Resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement
of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repeal.- r
amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such
prior ordinances.
Section 4•
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for anv
reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion
shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions thereof.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Vch, dity Clerk
a/!A/6—1