Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ca.0076.2015.ASLU0076.2015. ASLU 1tA LAND USE CODE RELIANCE CI d -7 0 6 PATH: G/DRIVE / MASTER FILES/ADMINISTRATIVE/ADMIN/LAND USE CASE DOCUMENTS THE CITY OF ASPEN City of Aspen Community Development Department CASE NUMBER 0076.2015.ASLU PARCEL ID NUMBERS 2737 073 31 851 PROJECT ADDRESS 130 S GALENA PLANNER JESSICA GARROW CASE DESCRIPTION LAND USE CODE RELIANCE REPRESENTATIVE DATE OF FINAL ACTION 07.27.15 CLOSED BY DEB PATTISON 06.15.16 0 ORDINANCE No. 27 (Series of 2015) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 26.304 — COMMON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES, OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE. WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 26.208 and 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the Community Development Department to prepare amendments related to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall begin with Public Outreach, a Policy Resolution reviewed and acted on by City Council, and then final action by City Council after reviewing and considering the recommendation from the Community Development; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to .Section 26.310.020(B)(1), the Community Development Department conducted Public Outreach regarding the code amendment; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(2), during a duly noticed public hearing on July 13, 2015, the City Council approved Resolution No. 72, Series of 2015, by a five to zero (5 — 0) vote, requesting code amendments to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or. when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development. Director has recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the City of Aspen Land Use Code Chapter 26.304 — Common Development Review Procedures; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed the proposed code amendments and finds that the amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310.050; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Chapter 26.304, Common Development Review Procedures, shall be amended as follows: [No Changes to Sections 26.304.010 through 26.304.060] Exhibit D: Proposed Code Language 26.304.070 Applicability of Land Use Code Amendments. Code Amendment — Land Use Code Reliance Ordinance 27, Series 2015 Page 1 of 4 Applications for a site -specific development plan shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application was determined by the City to be complete, pursuant to Section 26.304.050(A), Determination of completeness. The application shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. Applications for a site -specific development plan which require multiple steps, such as "conceptual review" and "final review" or "project review" and "detailed review," shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application for the initial step was determined by the City to be complete. The application shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. A. Amendments to Approved Site -Specific Development Plans. Amendments to an approved site -specific development plan shall be considered either minor in scope or major in scope, and shall be reviewed as follows: 1. Minor Amendments. During the period of pendency, minor amendments initiated by the applicant and amendments to an application proposed as a means to achieve compliance with city standards, review criteria, or requirements of reviewing agencies shall be reviewed under the original land use code in effect during the initial approval for the site specific development plan. Minor Amendments shall not cause a new submission date or interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, minor amendments to an approved site -specific development plan shall continue to be reviewed according to the land use code under which the plan was approved for the period of statutory vested rights, as may be extended. Approved .amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.13, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. 2. Major Amendments. During the period of pendency, major amendments to an application which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall be subject to the land use. code in effect upon amendment submission. The entirety of the application shall be subject to all aspects of the land use code in effect at the time of the amendment submission, not only the amended elements. No aspect of the application shall be considered immune from compliance. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, major amendments to an approved site -specific development plan shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.13, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. 3. Amendments after vesting. Amendments to an approved site -specific development plan accepted by the City after the period of statutory vested rights has expired shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the amendment application was determined by the City to'be complete, pursuant to Section 26.304.050(A), Determination of completeness.. . Code Amendment — Land Use Code Reliance Ordinance 27, Series 2015 Page 2 of 4 4. Major and Minor Amendments defined. For the purposes of this section, minor amendments are those which do not change the inherent nature, use, massing, character, dimensions, or design of the project or which changes these attributes in an inconsequential manner. All other amendments shall be considered major. 5. Appeals. Appeals shall be made pursuant to Chapter 26.316, Appeals. All appeals shall be heard by City Council. [Subsequent sections in the Chapter shall be renumbered as follows: 26.304.080 — Development Orders (no change to text of section) 26.304.090 — Building Permit (no change to text of section)] Section 2• Any scrivener's errors contained in the code amendments herein, including but not limited to mislabeled subsections or titles, may be corrected administratively following adoption of the Ordinance. Section 3: Effect Upon Existing Litigation. This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: Effective Date. In accordance with Section 4.9 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter, this ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final passage. Section 6• A public hearing on this ordinance was held on the 10t' day of August, at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 27th day of July, 2015. Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadro , Mayor Code Amendment — Land Use Code Reliance Ordinance 27, Series 2015 Page 3 of 4 ' 9 • FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 26th day of October 2015. Atr: 6I. II L da Manning, City Clerk Steven Ska6on, Mayor Approved as to form: dfames R. True, City Attorney Code Amendment — Land Use Code Reliance Ordinance 27, Series 2015 Page 4 of 4 • MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Skadron and City Council FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director RE: Land Use Code Reliance Code Amendment Ordinance 27, Series of 2015 DATE: October 26, 2015 SUMMARY: The attached Ordinance would amend the City's Land Use Code to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when either part of a multi -step review process or when amending a previously vested approval. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Ordinance on Second Reading. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: This is the second public hearing on the proposed code amendments that clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previously vested approval. Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.310, City Council is the final review authority for all code amendments. All code amendments are subject to a three -step process. This is the third step in the process: 1. Public Outreach 2. Policy Resolution by City Council indicating if an amendment should be pursued 3. Public Hearings on Ordinance outlining specific code amendments. BACKGROUND: The Community Development Department often receives inquiries from project applicants wondering which land use code applies to their project — the one they received initial approval under or the current code. These questions arise when projects are part of a multi -step process, such as a project requiring Conceptual HPC Review, and Final HPC Review, as well as when a vested project requests an amendment to the approval. Staff has a written policy addressing this issue (attached as Exhibit C), and proposes to formally incorporate it into the Land Use Code (attached as Exhibit D). A copy of the approved Policy Resolution is attached as Exhibit E. The proposed code change would ensure major project changes are reviewed under the current code, rather than a code that may be years old. The code amendment uses the term Site -Specific Development Plan, which is a term used in State Statute and in the City's land use code. The City's position has always been that an application Code Amendment - Land Use Code Reliance 10/26/2015 Page 1 of 4 0 • for an approval of a Site Specific Development Plan shall be reviewed based on the laws in effect at the time of the application for the first step, typically conceptual approval, and those laws apply throughout the process, unless there is a substantial amendment. There has been recent discussion of this practice, highlighting the need for clarity. OVERVIEW - Nearly all projects request some kind of amendment to their approvals due to changed ownership, refinements during building permit preparation, or due to changing economic or market conditions. This code change would clarify how to determine which land use code applies to an amendment. In addition, it would address which land use code is in effect when multi -step land use processes are required. Minor Amendments: Most amendments are simple, non -substantive changes that do not affect a project's original representations. The proposed code amendment would clarify that the vested land use code applies. For example, in 2014 the Aspen Club received an amendment approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission to amend a few retaining wall heights in a setback area along the back of the property. The City applied the vested land use code to the amendment. For the purposes of this code amendment, staff proposes that minor amendments are those which do not change the inherent nature, use, massing, character, dimensions, or design of the project or which change these attributes in such a subtle way as to be immaterial. All other amendments would be considered major. Manor Amendment: Other project amendments appear as completely new projects with nothing resembling the former project — different uses, new site plan, different massing and architecture, etc. Staff believes processing these types of "amendments" under an out-of-date code is inappropriate. This has also been a concern of the Planning and Zoning Commission, specifically during the reviews of the Aspen Townhomes amendment and the Boomerang amendment. Staff believes these "amendments" should be considered new projects and subject to the land use code in effect upon submission of the amendment. Staffs proposal would require these major amendments to be subject to the code in effect upon submission, and would prevent an applicant from using the vested code which can be decades old. Multi -Step Processes: Often a project is subject to multiple land use reviews. For instance, a project may be subject to a Conceptual Commercial Design Review and a Final Commercial Design Review. For these projects, existing City policy is to review them according to the land use code in effect on the date of the complete application for the first -step. For instance, a project requiring subsequent applications for Conceptual HPC Review and Final HPC Review, is reviewed according to the land use code in effect when the complete Conceptual HPC application is made. This process is typical for communities in Colorado. Multiple applications that are not part of a code required multi -step process would be subject to the land use code in effect for each individual submission. Updates Since Second Reading: Staff has refined the proposed code language since the August 10t' Council meeting. The language is broken into subsections in an effort to be clearer. In Code Amendment - Land Use Code Reliance 10/26/2015 Page 2 of 4 • 0 addition, the classification of amendments has been changed from Insubstantial/Substantial to Minor/Major. This change was made to ensure the section's terminology does not conflict with the various amendment processes in the code. Council had some questions at the last hearing regarding how the code amendment would impact the review of land use cases. It is important to note that this amendment does not change a review process per se, it only changes what code applies to a project's amendment. Staff has created a list of recent amendments to vested projects (attached as Exhibit F) to help illustrate how the code amendment would impact which land use code a project amendment is reviewed under. Staff believes the proposed code amendment strengthens the City's ability to ensure projects meet the most recent city standards. In some cases this could change the review body because various amendment processes have been updated over the last ten years. In other cases the review body would remain the same. Using the Aspen Club as an example, the project had a number of amendments after the final approval and granting of vested rights. Some were reviewed administratively, while others went to the Planning & Zoning Commission or City Council for review and approval. All were reviewed under the vested land use code (2008). Below is a summary of how this code amendment would have impacted those reviews. • Example of Major Amendment that does not change the final review body: The request to remove the sub -grade parking garage was processed as a Substantial Amendment to the Planned Development, requiring review and approval by the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council. Under the proposed code change, this project amendment would have been considered a Major Amendment and would be reviewed under today's land use code because it changed the nature of the project and a key representation of the project. Moving this amendment to today's code would have required review and approval by City Council. This means the process for the review would have been the same, but the review standards would be the current ones as opposed to the standards from seven (7) years ago. • Example of Major Amendment that does change the review body: The Aspen Club made two different requests related to lodge room count. First they requested to add lodge units, and then they requested to remove lodge units. These were both reviewed by the Planning & Zoning Commission. Under the proposed code change, these would be considered changes to the use mix and processed as a Major Amendment. This means today's code would apply and the review would be completed by City Council, not the Planning & Zoning Commission. Example of Minor Amendment: The Aspen Club received approval from the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council for an amendment to the building materials — the project was approved with a metal roof and the applicant requested a synthetic roofing material made to look like metal. Under the proposed code change this would be considered a Minor Amendment because it is a minor detail change and does not change the inherent nature or use of the project. Code Amendment - Land Use Code Reliance 10/26/2015 Page 3 of 4 0 Following the August 10"' public hearing, staff contacted the Town of Telluride to better understand their amendment process and their process for Site Specific Development Plan approvals. According to their Town Planner, their process is almost identical to the City of Aspen's. If a project applies for an initial design review, they are subject to the code in effect when that application was made for the entirety of their multi -step application process. They do not subject a land use application to "pending ordinances," as that would violate state law. Telluride has not amended their code, but recognizes that their pending ordinance provision conflicts with state law and does not enforce it. REFERRALS & OUTREACH: A meeting was held with the Planning and Zoning Commission to obtain feedback on the proposed code amendment. The Planning & Zoning Commission strongly supported the code amendment as proposed by staff to ensure a fairer and clearer review process. A copy of their meeting minutes is attached as Exhibit B. The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the suggested approach and supports staffs recommendation. In addition, copies of the existing policy were sent to land use planners when it was issued. Additional outreach through the Community Development Department's newsletter was also conducted. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE PROPOSED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No. 27, Series of 2015." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A — Staff Findings Exhibit B — P&Z meeting minutes, May 19, 2015 Exhibit C — Administrative Policy on Land Use Code Reliance Exhibit D — Proposed Code Language Exhibit E — Approved Policy Resolution Code Amendment - Land Use Code Reliance 10/26/2015 Page 4 of 4 • • ORDINANCE No. 27 (Series of 2015) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 26.304 — COMMON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES, OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE. WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 26.208 and 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the Community Development Department to prepare amendments related to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall begin with Public Outreach, a Policy Resolution reviewed and acted on by City Council, and then fmal action by City Council after reviewing and considering the recommendation from the Community Development; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(1), the Community Development Department conducted Public Outreach regarding the code amendment; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(2), during a duly noticed public hearing on July 13, 2015, the City Council approved Resolution No. 72, Series of 2015, by a five to zero (5 — 0) vote, requesting code amendments to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the City of Aspen Land Use Code Chapter 26.304 — Common Development Review Procedures; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed the proposed code amendments and finds that the amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310.050; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council fmds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Chapter 26.304, Common Development Review Procedures, shall be amended as follows: [No Changes to Sections 26.304.010 through 26.304.060] Exhibit D: Proposed Code Language Code Amendment — Land Use Code Reliance Ordinance 27, Series 2015 Page 1 of 4 26.304.070 Applicability of Land Use Code Amendments. Applications for a site -specific development plan shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application was determined by the City to be complete, pursuant to Section 26.304.050(A), Determination of completeness. The application shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. Applications for a site -specific development plan which require multiple steps, such as "conceptual review" and "final review" or "project review" and "detailed review," shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application for the initial step was determined by the City to be complete. The application shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. A. Amendments to Approved Site -Specific Development Plans. Amendments to an approved site -specific development plan shall be considered either minor in scope or major in scope, and shall be reviewed as follows: 1. Minor Amendments. During the period of pendency, minor amendments initiated by the applicant and amendments to an application proposed as a means to achieve compliance with city standards, review criteria, or requirements of reviewing agencies shall be reviewed under the original land use code in effect during the initial approval for the site specific development plan. Minor Amendments shall not cause a new submission date or interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, minor amendments to an approved site - specific development plan shall continue to be reviewed according to the land use code under which the plan was approved for the period of statutory vested rights, as may be extended. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.13, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. 2. Major Amendments. During the period of pendency, major amendments to an application which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. The entirety of the application shall be subject to all aspects of the land use code in effect at the time of the amendment submission, not only the amended elements. No aspect of the application shall be considered immune from compliance. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, major amendments to an approved site - specific development plan shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.13, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Code Amendment — Land Use Code Reliance Ordinance 27, Series 2015 Page 2 of 4 3. Amendments after vesting. Amendments to an approved site -specific development plan accepted by the City after the period of statutory vested rights has expired shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the amendment application was determined by the City to be complete, pursuant to Section 26.304.050(A), Determination of completeness. 4. Major and Minor Amendments defined. For the purposes of this section, minor amendments are those which do not change the inherent nature, use, massing, character, dimensions, or design of the project or which changes these attributes in an inconsequential manner. All other amendments shall be considered major. 5. Appeals. An Applicant aggrieved by the administration of this section may appeal to City Council pursuant to Chapter 26.316, Appeals. [Subsequent sections in the Chapter shall be renumbered as follows: 26.304.080 — Development Orders (no change to text of section) 26.304.090 — Building Permit (no change to text of section)] Section 2: Any scrivener's errors contained in the code amendments herein, including but not limited to mislabeled subsections or titles, may be corrected administratively following adoption of the Ordinance. Section 3: Effect Upon Existing Litigation. This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: Effective Date. In accordance with Section 4.9 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter, this ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final passage. Section 6: A public hearing on this ordinance was held on the r11 day of , at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 27th day of July, 2015. Code Amendment — Land Use Code Reliance Ordinance 27, Series 2015 Page 3 of 4 0 Attest: Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2015. Attest: Linda Manning, City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorney Steven Skadron, Mayor Code Amendment — Land Use Code Reliance Ordinance 27, Series 2015 Page 4 of 4 Exhibit A: Staff Findings 26.310.050 Amendments to the Land Use Code Standards of review - Adoption. In reviewing an application to amend the text of this Title, per Section 26.310.020(B)(3), Step Three — Public Hearing before City Council, the City Council shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. Staff Findings: The proposed amendment is not in conflict with any applicable portion of Title 26. It clarifies how land use applications are reviewed by specifying when certain codes are used. Staff finds this criterion to be met. B. Whether the proposed amendment achieves the policy, community goal, or objective cited as reasons for the code amendment or achieves other public policy objectives. Staff Findings: The 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan includes a policy to "create certainty in zoning and the land use process." Updating the vested rights portion of the Code is in concert with this policy by clarifying how the land use code applies to various applications. Staff believes there is a community interest in updating the code to clarify how the land use code applies to project subject to a multi -step process, as well as approved projects requesting amendments. The proposed amendment implements existing City policy. Staff finds this criterion to be met. C. Whether the objectives of the proposed amendment are compatible with the community character of the City and in harmony with the public interest and the purpose and intent of this Title. Staff Findings: The intent of the proposed amendment is to ensure a predictable and clear zoning review. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Land Use Code Reliance Exhibit A 211 Reading, 10/26/2015 Page 1 of 1 C� Exhibit B Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 19, 2015 Mr. Walterscheid then closed the public comment portion of the meeting. Mr. Walterscheid asked Staff for rebuttal. Mr. Bendon stated Staff wants to focus on making the units conforming to stay with the intent of the ordinance. The owners have other mechanisms to utilize to pursue expansions or changes in use for the units. Mr. Walterscheid then asked for comments from the commissioners. Ms. Tygre does not like to change code that only affects one property but feels the ordinance was over- reaching. She feels it is best to keep the scope narrow at this point in time. Mr. Gibbs agreed. Mr. Mesirow asked if the intent of City Council was to cease development of larger penthouses. Mr. Bendon stated he doesn't expect the units to amortize away and feels at the time the ordinance was approved, the focus was on the impact the penthouses had on the commercial use of the buildings along with height, mass and scale. Mr. McNellis asked how the 10% cap was determined. Mr. Bendon stated it is an outdated percentage and Ms. Levy added that she found other cities are eliminating the cap altogether. Mr. Bendon stated Staff will present options to City Council to consider to move forward. Land Use Code Applicability Ms. Garrow described the proposed code amendments to address minor amendments, major amendments and multi -step processes. P&Z supports staff's recommendations. Mr. Walterscheid then adjourned the meeting. Cindy Klob City Clerk's Office, Records Manager Page 5 0 • Exhibit C CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY JURISDICTION: EFFECTIVE DATE: WRITTEN BY: APPROVED BY: COPIES TO: LAND USE CODE RELIANCE City of Aspen March 27, 2015 Jessica Garrow Long Range Planner Chris Bendon, Community Development Director James R Tiue, City Attorney Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Purpose: The purpose of this Administrative Policy is to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval. Applicability: This policy applies to all properties and land use applications in the City of Aspen. Background: The community Development Department often receives inquiries from project applicants wondering which land use code applies to their project. These questions arise when projects are part of a multi -step process, such as a project requiring Conceptual HPC Review, and Final HPC Review, as well as when a vested project requests an amendment to the approval. Policy: A. Determination of Completeness: Applications for land use approval shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date of the submission of a complete application. If the initial application submission is not deemed complete, the application shall be reviewed according to the code in effect at the time a complete application is submitted. In all cases, the application shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. For projects subject to a multi -step land use process, the project shall be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect on the date of the complete application for the first - step. For instance, a project requiring separate applications for Conceptual HPC Review and Final HPC Review, shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect when the complete Conceptual HPC application is made. Administrative Policy — Land Use Code Reliance Page 1 of 2 0 • Multiple applications that are not part of a code required multi -step process are subject to the land use code in effect for each individual submission. For instance, an application for a Subdivision does not vest an applicant in that code for a subsequent separate application for Commercial Design Review. B. Amendments: Insubstantial Amendments to a project during the period of pendency proposed as a means to achieve compliance with the land use code shall not interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. Insubstantial amendments to a project proposed during the period of pendency which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall not interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. Unless otherwise stated in a Development Order, insubstantial amendments to an approved project shall continue to be reviewed according to the land use code under which the project was approved for the period of statutory vested rights, as may be extended. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.13, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Substantial amendments to a project proposed during the period of pendency which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon the amendment submission. The entirety of the application shall be subject to all aspects of the land use code in effect at the time of the amendment submission, not just the amended elements of the project. No aspect of the project shall be considered immune from compliance. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, substantial amendments to an approved project shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.13, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Amendments to an approved project accepted by the City after the period of statutory vested rights has expired shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the complete application. For the purposes of this policy, insubstantial amendments are those which do not change the inherent nature, use, massing, character, dimensions, or design of the project or which change these attributes in such a subtle way as to be immaterial. All other amendments shall be considered substantial. Policy Effective Date: This Administrative Policy was provided on March 27, 2015, and shall become effective on March 27, 2015 and is valid until such time as the land use code are amended to implement this clarification or for other purposes. Administrative Policy —Land Use Code Reliance Page 2 of 2 • 0 Exhibit D: Proposed Code Language 26.304.070 Applicability of Land Use Code Amendments. Applications for a site -specific development plan shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application was determined by the City to be complete, pursuant to Section 26.304.050(A), Determination ofcompleteness. The application shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. Applications for a site -specific development plan which require multiple steps, such as "conceptual review" and "final review" or "project review" and "detailed review," shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application for the initial step was determined by the City to be complete. The application shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. A. Amendments to Approved Site -Specific Development Plans. Amendments to an approved site - specific development plan shall be considered either minor in scope or major in scope, and shall be reviewed as follows: 1. Minor Amendments. During the period of pendency, insubstantial minor amendments initiated by the applicant and amendments to an application proposed as a means to achieve compliance with city standards, review criteria, or requirements of reviewing agencies shall be reviewed under the original land use code in effect during the initial approval for the site specific development plan. Minor Amendments shall not cause a new submission date or interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. nless otherwise stated in the Development Order. minor amendments to an approved site - specific development plan shall continue to be reviewed according to the land use code under which the plan was approved for the period of statutory vested rights, as may be extended. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant o Section 26.304.070.B, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. 2. Major Amendments. During the period of pendencv, S�l-major amendments to an application proposed during the period of pendene- which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. The entirety of the application shall be subject to all aspects of the land use code in effect at the time of the amendment submission, not only the amended elements. No aspect of the application shall be considered immune from compliance. ------------ Bill .. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, major amendments to an approved site - specific development plan shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a Exhibit D, Proposed Code Language Land Use Code Reliance, 21 Reading 8/24/2015 Page 1 of 2 0 • revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.B, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. 3. Amendments after vesting. Amendments to an approved site -specific development plan accepted by the City after the period of statutory vested rights has expired shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the amendment application was determined by the City to be complete_ pursuant to Section 26.304.050(A), Determination ofcompleteness. 4. Maior and Minor Amendments defined. For the purposes of this section, iRslubstaRtie, minor amendments are those which do not change the inherent nature, use, massing, character, dimensions, or design of the project or which changes these attributes in an inconsequential manner. All other amendments shall be considered substantialmaior. 5. Appeals. An Applicant aggrieved by the administration of this section may ppeal to City Council pursuant to Chapter 26.316, Appeals. Subsequent sections in the Chapter shall be renumbered as follows: 26.304.080 — Development Orders (no change to text of section) 26.304.090 — Building Permit (no change to text of section) Exhibit D, Proposed Code Language Land Use Code Reliance, 2nd Reading 8/24/2015 Page 2 of 2 0 0 RESOLUTION NO. 72, (SERIES OF 2015) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REQUESTING AMENDMENTS TO CLARIFY WHICH CODE AN APPLICANT MAY RELY ON FOR VARIOUS LAND USE APPLICATIONS. WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(A), the Community Development Department received direction from City Council to explore code amendments to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommended changes to the Land Use Code and/or City Charter to implement City Council's direction; and, WHEREAS, City Council has reviewed the proposed code amendment policy direction, and finds it meets the criteria outlined in Section 26.310.040; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(2), during a duly noticed public hearing on July 13, 2015, the City Council approved Resolution No. 72, Series of 2015, by a five to zero (5 — 0) vote, requesting code amendments to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi- step process or when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, this Resolution does not amend the Land Use Code, but provides direction to staff for processing amendments to the Land Use Code; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Resolution implements the City's goals related to creating a clearer and more predictable land use review process, as articulated in the 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the 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 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Code Amendment Obiective and Direction City Council herby directs staff to process amendments to the City Land Use Code to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval, by: • Defining a "major amendment" and "minor amendment" to previously approved projects and outlining a process for each; and • Clarifying when and how multi -step land use requests are processed in relation to vesting in a particular land use code. Section 2: Resolution No. 72, Series 2015 Page 1 of 2 • This resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the resolutions or ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior resolutions or ordinances. Section 3• If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. FINALLY, adopted this 13" day of July, 2015. Steven Skadron, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Linda Manning, City Clerk ,lames R True, City Attorney Resolution No. 72, Series 2015 Page 2 of 2 Exhibit F: Land Use Code Reliance Amendment Types This chart details what land use code a project would be processed under (current code or vested/old code). It also lists how the amendment was processed under the vested/old code and how it would be processed if subject to the current code. All of the project amendments listed below were processed under their vested (old) code. The chart oultines which code the project amendments would be processed under if the proposed Code Amendment is passed. Project Minor Amendment (would be processed under old code) Major Amendment (would be processed under current code) Review Body Review Body under old Review Body under code current code Request to add retaining walls to setbacks P&Z Request to increase affordable housing buildingP&Z and Council Council height Aspen Club & Spa Request to change roof and building materials P&Z and Council Request to remove parking garage P&Z and Council Council Request to convert external stairs to elevator P&Z and Council Request to add lodging units P&Z Council Request to realign sidewalk / walking path Administrative Requet to remove lodge units lCouncil Request to convert from lodging to affordable p&Z and Council P&Z and Council Boomerang Lodge N/A housing Request to convert from affordable housing to P&Z and Council P&Z and Council lodge S. Aspen Townhomes Request to change building materials P&Z Request to amend project use mix; move P&Z Council affordable housing off -site The Gant Conference Request to corrent an incorrect basement floor Facility area calculation Administrative N/A Aspen Core I N/A IRequest to add 250 sq ft commercial space lAdministrative Administrative Request to reconfigure internal spaces Administrative Dancing Bear Creation of Tunnel P&Z and Council Council Request to change building materials and fenestration P&Z Mason Morse N/A Request to convert free-market residential unit to HPC and Council Council commercial space. Exhibit F 10/26/2015 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Skadron and City Council FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director RE: Land Use Code Reliance Code Amendment Ordinance 27, Series of 2015 DATE: October 12, 2015, Continue to October 26, 2015 Due to the number of agenda items on the October 12th Council meeting, staff requests a continuation of this item to October 26, 2015. RECOMMENDED MOTION "I move to continue Ordinance No. 27, Series of 2015, to October 26, 2015." U a 0 0 za� rWil E �y y o0 o N �U d y 0 ��d m 6 N m u v; CN N 0. Q a) a y N — b 0 w _ CU o 3 0 o w � b `= a`i 3 ° o ou '° ° �aoi Y ° cdi u° o G to •t•' o N 4-- c ��. C Cd v Y M m ld � ca C ¢ � o '� � •N •C 'H N coa Y 0 s U U aui c G oo a�i b o a N s� ° a, N o a N° 8 x E (U Nos 6 a T ' N -C b I- fC d O O ice+ N 'V '� m W °.0 y -U m s •N '0 o E aaj a N = N N Ej N 21 U A. a' .. �, c c�i o '[ 7 0. w o mEa�maU�� d 4 �v >o — 3 -00 B, (U °oo � .� Lbw aj oparY uc. vi aiZ, 1 0. myd ean Na 0 G cj Nby Nno p- � > $� aj -0 cz C c MtA° o c°i C> n o N' n 0 w' p y (D w y N p aJ 'b V] cO A Cl. o i, cz U cud U b '� b ."[. b m .. co) U • 0 v ' c 10 (u w p k �' n G o 'O U �O �•' N ^^" ' N C td -p N O Y i. ai N 0' 0 o ' °� Q. G C od o In.�, •o b o Q Y 3 co a 'v pub >, wA �� o 0 O-3 a ca O o P � a� .x.. to y. y •F, CO O4. O G y m ate+ .� N �, �«" o ti 0 ❑ N ca T' C. ��,,, cC 3 y, yd„ ..r". 7 O y b .pV- Q �, T N O .0 p 3 h M w N 0. y p p y ,n a c �_o pA°� aaO o �mo " aal bo y 80� P Nc 2 X t O p v sa, sp. cd O ° ° ` i0 bo axi o o ¢ -�+' d y U v O C G c�C U y X y .b d Q¢� c r, o ° � off. O 7 d 4) b 3 o ca w o o� ". 0 ° U w A o v 0° L co o ° c> bq b O is ; 3 _ ooAo OC e b 0. Qj E cd ow � Go a 3b A �,�� d (my N > c�°�' °' N b ca °°° a '> Q 04 v c a � �CC v ° -C a ° b > N co o O P. Q. 0. r +�'' %+ co3f7 U 'U O cC y 00""' N G tO' •�+-�- .� C y .�4 -6 N O m ,� N O y N N Y V O v, a3i cu '- y N o O o° a o 3 °� g G aCi �o O Y °' ai ° '� n cd a W y O i0. t4.., 00 7 id p ap+ -o a� 'b -6 7 .� N .0 r1 p W 7 N r. � 'L 7, �, N y in y^ �•. •> O Xe`d 't7 > .`�. N N :: O? N cm u y In m y' bpA .�.+ O� .2 O a cOd a' p h N N N N U O E E O ,p tp9 (O') .L-. `=• E U i d0 o cC ' fC a rr by in o U A ti ..+ ?.+� a °� y N �, U� °3 d ❑ y ca o 3 'v w o o 7 u) � w 3 c w to g E c N = oI-I N U o, a, bo 'b b 8 N O 00 �o 4 N c01 cn 0G U a v N O 00 �O d' N t.09 CA U N N 'b H> cQ •b W >' N b U U �U•, O o..N O y L4>>. 'n•a 04 •C� '� y °P. `b 'a b0 '0 a. O cO C T [3� m y C Oq W C W p c V] as " V b C c. ob axiom sp � c° Gov p U N If-i1 ti O •� i •� i� W iC Y A Cp .•. O «'p. N h Q O t,U"., y^ .� .� `n c �adi ac a N 00 a� haaG� w a�ci°'�'�r' ���'a�q vi a� pk°c❑d _'DKaC° oA`�° �oaO• 33G v^.cp-� bLo'°oa� zNCq c`C ':Oa. WbN �•bb0 ° o`° Uaoi 'nO° .cN U >acc0 .yYo QAc3a odE� ° o to to 0- .o �u. P. aE co b CD Nb?rO O C CO N �oM 00 by 0 oGo N � 0o i oN `° oo°° a ONO{aa o o oEn m .. to R 0 b p" a� a>i '" A O c a o > A to 'd coC O a .° .Eo� 'fl c0 ct N a cdCcC Oa •m co m > o 0 .5 o c > 0an a aa ° a Ij o 3 � N > a. QEN o . z O c U Gi O ; i i c3 u•' c6 0. OD i7 'b cn ti G U U O }" ti C C7 cd A F rp. N s wG > -0 co" oA 'D Oapn u 0 M W apo N _ U o � U U o Y y ca p ° >o o av>i o 0o .ay o o oEn 0 'n-0 bc, cc >� 0n P. E c c o o a d o`� Boa ° ca 0 a. °on ° a. c-) > 3 ca m > P ca y, m 0.p O cu ca ° 0 N .'�.. 0:+-4� O U ' � 'O • bC.,O a O � bqO•^c,. 0 d W �C 4 mcl, Ctl �m a n a G O Y OI y� U is G ti N r: o moo+ CLca as d C C C b' w r 'b 'O V G � cc G 3 3� �•o Y•N� a •� Z ° E;.14 ON y .d 0. U W .4i 'C! is . w N Cam'. � cGV w ca o p'dq •i14 r! q�a3i aG,^ G q� y0 v > 0 Q ° y .° R �� N �•�� v ta m O Ly a� a; 0 C O H U 'O V N G C? U W.o °yY m ~��wb�0 2 bo N m to U ti a..° 0 3 e a) b oO O q 3 o N^oo o o ca o o ^Q a 1 0 ° o �4U-,•o T ° a Gb � a� � o �b0 G ] a p° y a3 G 0� o ��.^� w 3 ca M Y o a) QQ > o a) «. :3 C)° p d) a�i o cap a? C F c,C o a' aa-i P H 0.) a,, o c o a�xi ��w•y:� �o Y E 3 a---� �v o• a� �, a�� wa q'^ y Cl,° a' �>a w ti oo oCa N 0Eavoo a 3o„a�c �o a w E a) a o N G o •=)' °° a. v -b' ywo� GE ab U o M0 t�a U `o T aroGC E c ai f1. >+ is o CL rM> o �? a) ai > ' .G .� Q a) U CUO -.G-. '—" O O C aa) m O > .0 0.-=: y 0. «� v G ("' vRi ° ° E a) E 'b C Ow j, C M �QQ b T 00.. m i 43 �F Y �� as ob a.°3 m a - a E > a) a m° a c� c v g a o 0 3 v" aai Y w 'n b o o '0 Cc! 'p- y 0 a) V U o aYU, c ) 3 a') > a ca 0 y a o a i K C o p �' � as 44)) a~ G 4) o `n�"'0cgo��a3y'�1o°�om� �° U ai�MGoo3n > "'m F" >L a° o o a a w ai E a O 'b 0 E O E 'O G a U X y p O T 0. 0 U 0. y to E m C O N N 43 C c ae�o °c U aw' a U +°. E A �0 U b � 'E C 3� v Ec�� o - n ai M a a of o ,n a"i o'" U `" o o-- O o.o a o coo a' M �- y as E o E E E 6. `° O o. N o o 7 3 aGi °_' a>i -- m F N E b °o o a b b E" a aGi a c° d m v C o �zz o n M a) o b 0 3= M o -o E N U C m m G Q caV 'U^ �•, y E •C 't7 a) «F1 .O w ^7. O 'Y y cd O O--a o A. •C O ° U ^O O to y U C .� O U C9 "" w _ \O x O C a LL O G O E E > E s a) Y a) q 2 C m 0 0 0 U U 'O �•" O in. ° cma a y i 0 W 0. a) to C M q a) U� c0 a) E O a) ° aai N O cOa . G 0. ¢ y" w O p, G w C ca 0. -'" b o �. O w = O w0 bA N .0 a ° a �U a) j a3 T a b p a ti 4j cd N � � w 0 0 cs o.Y b ga° 00 � a vU E N �^+- aa, axa� 1 m 0 m O OO N 73 a) > 0 ° .-omoGo V, F„Ya a°i w T� �To a 0 o c3am) oNd a 'yE sz UUU U U O> U 'O a. q. N� 0.0 b,aa w • a G Ma 6 po, N a)a.a, UaaE G -o.0 mUM m y an 0 0 } t k � 2e .2 §§\ ket •N=2 - a & » c 0 e \�\ )k\ e / « a 0 > erg« \\g \§\ 0 n02 >e (U o . ) ) / \ { `© ®®Q \ / \\ / /ƒ !!4 0.0 /0 \\\ Agar //CL ( em j§20. a ` @¥{ M ck as 2 2 kk& 1* 0 5� MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Skadron and City Council FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director RE: Land Use Code Reliance Code Amendment Second Reading, Ordinance 27, Series of 2015 DATE: August 24, 2015 SUMMARY: The attached Ordinance would amend City's Land Use Code to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Ordinance on Second Reading. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: This is the second reading of proposed code amendments related to which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval. Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.310, City Council is the final review authority for all code amendments. All code amendments are subject to a three -step process. This is the third step in the process: 1. Public Outreach 2. Policy Resolution by City Council indicating if an amendment should be pursued 3. Public Hearings on Ordinance outlining specific code amendments. BACKGROUND: The Community Development Department often receives inquiries from project applicants wondering which land use code applies to their project. These questions arise when projects are part of a multi -step process, such as a project requiring Conceptual HPC Review, and Final HPC Review, as well as when a vested project requests an amendment to the approval. Staff has a written policy addressing this issue (attached as Exhibit C), and proposes to formally incorporate it into the Land Use Code (attached as Exhibit D). A copy of the approved Policy Resolution is attached as Exhibit E. Since first reading, staff reworked language to use the term Site -Specific Development Plan. This is a term used in State Statute and in the City's land use code and its use here, instead of "project," is much clearer. Staff also included language regarding multiple step applications, such as "conceptual" and "final." The City's position has always been that an application for an approval of a site specific development plan shall be reviewed based on the laws in effect at the Code Amendment - Land Use Code Reliance Second Reading — 8/10/2015 Page 1 of 3 time of the application for the first step, typically conceptual approval, and those laws apply throughout the process, unless there is a substantial amendment. There has been recent discussion of this practice, highlighting the need for clarity. OVERVIEW: Nearly all projects require amendments to their approvals, and this code change would clarify how to determine which land use code an amendment is subject to. In addition, it would address which land use code is in effect when multi -step land use processes are required. Minor Amendments: Most amendments are simple, non -substantive changes that do not affect a project's original representations. For example, in 2014 the Aspen Club received an amendment approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission to amend a few retaining wall heights in a setback area along the back of the property. The City applied the same codes to the amendment as were in effect when the project originally received approval. The proposed code amendment would clarify that the vested land use code applies. For the purposes of this code amendment, staff proposes that minor amendments are those which do not change the inherent nature, use, massing, character, dimensions, or design of the project or which change these attributes in such a subtle way as to be immaterial. All other amendments would be considered major. Major Amendment: Other project amendments appear as completely new projects with nothing resembling the former project — different uses, new site plan, different massing and architecture, etc. Staff believes processing these types of "amendments" under an out-of-date code is inappropriate. This has also been a concern of the Planning and Zoning Commission, specifically during the reviews of the Aspen Townhomes amendment and the Boomerang amendment. Staff believes these "amendments" should be considered new projects and subject to the land use code in effect upon submission of the amendment. Staffs proposal would require these so-called major amendments to be subject to the code in effect upon submission, and would prevent an applicant from using a decades old land use code. Multi -Step Processes: Often a project is subject to multiple land use reviews. For instance, a project may be subject to a Conceptual Commercial Design Review and a Final Commercial Design Review. For these projects, existing department policy is to review them according to the land use code in effect on the date of the complete application for the first -step. For instance, a project requiring subsequent applications for Conceptual HPC Review and Final HPC Review, is reviewed according to the land use code in effect when the complete Conceptual HPC application is made. Multiple applications that are not part of a code required multi -step process would be subject to the land use code in effect for each individual submission. For instance, an application for a Subdivision would not be able to rely on the code in place at the time of the application for subdivision when it applied for a subsequent separate application for Commercial Design Review. REFERRALS & OUTREACH: Code Amendment - Land Use Code Reliance Second Reading — 8/10/2015 Page 2 of 3 0 • A meeting was held with the Planning and Zoning Commission to obtain feedback on the proposed code amendment. The Planning & Zoning Commission strongly supported the code amendment as proposed by staff to ensure a fairer and clearer review process. A copy of their meeting minutes is attached as Exhibit B. The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the suggested approach and supports staffs recommendation. In addition, copies of the existing policy were sent to land use planners when it was issued. Additional outreach through the Community Development Department's newsletter is also being conducted. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE PROPOSED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No. 27, Series of 2015." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A — Staff Findings Exhibit B — P&Z meeting minutes, May 19, 2015 Exhibit C — Administrative Policy on Land Use Code Reliance Exhibit D — Proposed Code Language Exhibit E — Approved Policy Resolution Code Amendment - Land Use Code Reliance Second Reading — 8/ 10/2015 Page 3 of 3 • • ORDINANCE No. 27 (Series of 2015) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 26.304 — COMMON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES, OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE. WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 26.208 and 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the Community Development Department to prepare amendments related to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall begin with Public Outreach, a Policy Resolution reviewed and acted on by City Council, and then final action by City Council after reviewing and considering the recommendation from the Community Development; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(1), the Community Development Department conducted Public Outreach regarding the code amendment; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(2), during a duly noticed public hearing on July 13, 2015, the City Council approved Resolution No. 72, Series of 2015, by a five to zero (5 — 0) vote, requesting code amendments to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the City of Aspen Land Use Code Chapter 26.304 — Common Development Review Procedures; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed the proposed code amendments and finds that the amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310.050; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Chapter 26.304, Common Development Review Procedures, shall be amended as follows: [No Changes to Sections 26.304.010 through 26.304.060] 26.304.070 Applicability of Land Use Code Amendments. Code Amendment — Land Use Code Reliance Ordinance 27, Series 2015 Page 1 of 4 Applications for a site -specific development plan shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application was determined by the City to be complete. The application shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. Applications for a site -specific development plan which require multiple steps, such as "conceptual review" and "final review" or "project review" and "detailed review," shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application for the initial step was determined by the City to be complete. The application shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. During the period of pendency, insubstantial amendments initiated by the applicant and amendments to an application proposed as a means to achieve compliance with city standards, review criteria, or requirements of reviewing agencies shall not cause a new submission date or interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. Substantial amendments to an application proposed during the period of pendency which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. The entirety of the application shall be subject to all aspects of the land use code in effect at the time of the amendment submission, not only the amended elements. No aspect of the application shall be considered immune from compliance. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, insubstantial amendments to an approved site -specific development plan shall continue to be reviewed according to the land use code under which the plan was approved for the period of statutory vested rights, as may be extended. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.13, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, substantial amendments to an approved site - specific development plan shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.B, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Amendments to an approved site -specific development plan accepted by the City after the period of statutory vested rights has expired shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application was determined by the City to be complete. For the purposes of this section, insubstantial amendments are those which do not change the inherent nature, use, massing, character, dimensions, or design of the project or which change these attributes in an inconsequential manner. All other amendments shall be considered substantial. [Subsequent sections in the Chapter shall be renumbered as follows: Code Amendment — Land Use Code Reliance Ordinance 27, Series 2015 Page 2 of 4 0 0 26.304.080 — Development Orders (no change to text of section) 26.304.090 — Building Permit (no change to text of section)] Section 2: Any scrivener's errors contained in the code amendments herein, including but not limited to mislabeled subsections or titles, may be corrected administratively following adoption of the Ordinance. Section 3: Effect Upon Existing Litigation. This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: Effective Date. In accordance with Section 4.9 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter, this ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final passage. Section 6: A public hearing on this ordinance was held on the _d' day of , at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 27th day of July, 2015. Attest: Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this Attest: Linda Manning, City Clerk Approved as to form: day of , 2015. Steven Skadron, Mayor Code Amendment — Land Use Code Reliance Ordinance 27, Series 2015 Page 3 of 4 • 0 City Attorney Code Amendment — Land Use Code Reliance Ordinance 27, Series 2015 Page 4 of 4 Exhibit A: Staff Findings 26.310.050 Amendments to the Land Use Code Standards of review - Adoption. In reviewing an application to amend the text of this Title, per Section 26.310.020(B)(3), Step Three — Public Hearing before City Council, the City Council shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. Staff Findings: The proposed amendment is not in conflict with any applicable portion of Title 26. It clarifies how land use applications are reviewed by specifying when certain codes are used. Staff finds this criterion to be met. B. Whether the proposed amendment achieves the policy, community goal, or objective cited as reasons for the code amendment or achieves other public policy objectives. Staff Findings: The 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan includes a policy to "create certainty in zoning and the land use process." Updating the vested rights portion of the Code is in concert with this policy by clarifying how the land use code applies to various applications. Staff believes there is a community interest in updating the code to clarify how the land use code applies to project subject to a multi -step process, as well as approved projects requesting amendments. The proposed amendment implements existing City policy. Staff finds this criterion to be met. C. Whether the objectives of the proposed amendment are compatible with the community character of the City and in harmony with the public interest and the purpose and intent of this Title. Staff Findings: The intent of the proposed amendment is to ensure a predictable and clear zoning review. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Land Use Code Reliance Exhibit A 2na Reading, 8/17/2015 Page 1 of 1 E • IlExhibit B Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 19, 2015 Mr. Walterscheid then closed the public comment portion of the meeting. Mr. Walterscheid asked Staff for rebuttal. Mr. Bendon stated Staff wants to focus on making the units conforming to stay with the intent of the ordinance. The owners have other mechanisms to utilize to pursue expansions or changes in use for the units. Mr. Walterscheid then asked for comments from the commissioners. Ms. Tygre does not like to change code that only affects one property but feels the ordinance was over- reaching. She feels it is best to keep the scope narrow at this point in time. Mr. Gibbs agreed. Mr. Mesirow asked if the intent of City Council was to cease development of larger penthouses. Mr. Bendon stated he doesn't expect the units to amortize away and feels at the time the ordinance was approved, the focus was on the impact the penthouses had on the commercial use of the buildings along with height, mass and scale. Mr. McNellis asked how the 10% cap was determined. Mr. Bendon stated it is an outdated percentage and Ms. Levy added that she found other cities are eliminating the cap altogether. Mr. Bendon stated Staff will present options to City Council to consider to move forward. Land Use Code Applicability Ms. Garrow described the proposed code amendments to address minor amendments, major amendments and multi -step processes. P&Z supports staffs recommendations. Mr. Walterscheid then adjourned the meeting. Cindy Klob City Clerk's Office, Records Manager Page 5 0 . Exhibit D: Proposed Code Language 26.304.070 Applicability of Land Use Code Amendments. Applications for a site -specific development plan shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application was determined by the City to be complete. The application shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. Applications for a site -specific development plan which require multiple steps, such as "conceptual review" and "final review" or "project review" and "detailed review," shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application for the initial step was determined by the City to be complete. The application shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. During the period of pendency, insubstantial amendments initiated by the applicant and amendments to an application proposed as a means to achieve compliance with city standards, review criteria, or requirements of reviewing agencies shall not cause a new submission date or interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. Substantial amendments to an application proposed during the period of pendency which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. The entirety of the application shall be subject to all aspects of the land use code in effect at the time of the amendment submission, not only the amended elements. No aspect of the application shall be considered immune from compliance. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, insubstantial amendments to an approved site - specific development plan shall continue to be reviewed according to the land use code under which the plan was approved for the period of statutory vested rights, as may be extended. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.13, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, substantial amendments to an approved site -specific development plan shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.13, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Amendments to an approved site -specific development plan accepted by the City after the period of statutory vested rights has expired shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application was determined by the City to be complete. For the purposes of this section, insubstantial amendments are those which do not change the inherent nature, use, massing, character, dimensions, or design of the project or which change these attributes in an inconsequential manner. All other amendments shall be considered substantial. Subsequent sections in the Chapter shall be renumbered as follows: Exhibit D, Proposed Code Language Land Use Code Reliance, 21 Reading 8/24/2015 Page 1 of 2 0 • 26.304.080 — Development Orders (no change to text of section) 26.304.090 — Building Permit (no change to text of section) Exhibit D, Proposed Code Language Land Use Code Reliance, 2°d Reading 8/24/2015 Page 2 of 2 0 • RESOLUTION NO. 72, (SERIES OF 2015) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REQUESTING AMENDMENTS TO CLARIFY WHICH CODE AN APPLICANT MAY RELY ON FOR VARIOUS LAND USE APPLICATIONS. WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(A), the Community Development Department received direction from City Council to explore code amendments to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommended changes to the Land Use Code and/or City Charter to implement City Council's direction; and, WHEREAS, City Council has reviewed the proposed code amendment policy direction, and finds it meets the criteria outlined in Section 26.310.040; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(2), during a duly noticed public hearing on July 13, 2015, the City Council approved Resolution No. 72, Series of 2015, by a five to zero (5 — 0) vote, requesting code amendments to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi- step process or when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, this Resolution does not amend the Land Use Code, but provides direction to staff for processing amendments to the Land Use Code; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Resolution implements the City's goals related to creating a clearer and more predictable land use review process, as articulated in the 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the 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 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Code Amendment Obiective and Direction City Council herby directs staff to process amendments to the City Land Use Code to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval, by: • Defining a "major amendment" and "minor amendment" to previously approved projects and outlining a process for each; and • Clarifying when and how multi -step land use requests are processed in relation to vesting in a particular land use code. Section 2: Resolution No. 72, Series 2015 Page 1 of 2 • • This resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the resolutions or ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior resolutions or ordinances. Section 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. FINALLY, adopted this 13"' day of July, 2015. Steven Skadron, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Linda Manning, City Clerk James R True, City Attorney Resolution No. 72, Series 2015 Page 2 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Skadron and City Council FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director RE: Land Use Code Reliance Code Amendment Ordinance 27, Series of 2015 DATE: August 10, 2015 SUMMARY: The attached Ordinance would amend City's Land Use Code to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Ordinance on First Reading. LAND USE RF.OUESTS AND REviEw PROCEDURES: This is the second reading of proposed code amendments related to which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval. Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.310, City Council is the final review authority for all code amendments. All code amendments are subject to a three -step process. This is the third step in the process: 1. Public Outreach 2. Policy Resolution by City Council indicating if an amendment should be pursued 3. Public Hearings on Ordinance outlining specific code amendments. BACKGROUND: The Community Development Department often receives inquiries from project applicants wondering which land use code applies to their project. These questions arise when projects are part of a multi -step process, such as a project requiring Conceptual HPC Review, and Final HPC Review, as well as when a vested project requests an amendment to the approval. Staff has a written policy addressing this issue (attached as Exhibit C), and proposes to formally incorporate it into the Land Use Code (attached as Exhibit D). A copy of the approved Policy Resolution is attached as Exhibit E. Since first reading, staff reworked language to use the term Site -Specific Development Plan. This is a term used in State Statute and in the City's land use code and its use here, instead of "project," is much clearer. Staff also included language regarding multiple step applications, such as "conceptual" and "final." The City's position has always been that an application for Code Amendment - Land Use Code Reliance Second Reading - 8/10/2015 Page 1 of 3 • 0 an approval of a site specific development plan shall be reviewed based on the laws in effect at the time of the application for the first step, typically conceptual approval and those laws apply throughout the process, unless there is a substantial amendment. There has been recent discussion of this practice, highlighting the need for clarity. OVERVIEW Nearly all projects require amendments to their approvals, and this code change would clarify how to determine which land use code an amendment is subject to. In addition, it would address which land use code is in effect when multi -step land use processes are required. Minor Amendments: Most amendments are simple, non -substantive changes that do not affect a project's original representations. For example, in 2014 the Aspen Club received an amendment approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission to amend a few retaining wall heights in a setback area along the back of the property. The City applied the same codes to the amendment as were in effect when the project originally received approval. The proposed code amendment would clarify that the vested land use code applies. For the purposes of this code amendment, staff proposes that minor amendments are those which do not change the inherent nature, use, massing, character, dimensions, or design of the project or which change these attributes in such a subtle way as to be immaterial. All other amendments would be considered major. major Amendment: Other project amendments appear as completely new projects with nothing resembling the former project — different uses, new site plan, different massing and architecture, etc. Staff believes processing these types of "amendments" under an out-of-date code is inappropriate. This has also been a concern of the Planning and Zoning Commission, specifically during the reviews of the Aspen Townhomes amendment and the Boomerang amendment. Staff believes these "amendments" should be considered new projects and subject to the land use code in effect upon submission of the amendment. Staff s proposal would require these so-called major amendments to be subject to the code in effect upon submission, and would prevent an applicant from using a decades old land use code. Multi -Step Processes: Often a project is subject to multiple land use reviews. For instance, a project may be subject to a Conceptual Commercial Design Review and a Final Commercial Design Review. For these projects, existing department policy is to review them according to the land use code in effect on the date of the complete application for the first -step. For instance, a project requiring subsequent applications for Conceptual HPC Review and Final HPC Review, is reviewed according to the land use code in effect when the complete Conceptual HPC application is made. Multiple applications that are not part of a code required multi -step process would be subject to the land use code in effect for each individual submission. For instance, an application for a Subdivision would not be able to rely on the code in place at the time of the application for subdivision when it applied for a subsequent separate application for Commercial Design Review. Code Amendment - Land Use Code Reliance Second Reading — 8/ 10/2015 Page 2 of 3 i REFERRALS & OUTREACH: A meeting was held with the Planning and Zoning Commission to obtain feedback on the proposed code amendment. The Planning & Zoning Commission strongly supported the code Code Amendment - Land Use Code Reliance Second Reading — 8/ 10/2015 Page 3 of 3 0 0 Exhibit C CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY LAND USE CODE RELIANCE JURISDICTION: EFFECTIVE DATE: WRITTEN BY: r' APPROVED BY: COPIES TO: City of Aspen March 27, 2015 Jessica Garrow Long Range Planner Chris Bendon, Community Development Director James R True, City Attorney Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Purpose: The purpose of this Administrative Policy is to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval. Applicability: This policy applies to all properties and land use applications in the City of Aspen. Background: The community Development Department often receives inquiries from project applicants wondering which land use code applies to their project. These questions arise when projects are part of a multi -step process, such as a project requiring Conceptual HPC Review, and Final HPC Review, as well as when a vested project requests an amendment to the approval. Policy: A. Determination of Completeness: Applications for land use approval shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date of the submission of a complete application. If the initial application submission is not deemed complete, the application shall be reviewed according to the code in effect at the time a complete application is submitted. in all cases, the application shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. For projects subject to a multi -step land use process, the project shall be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect on the date of the complete application for the first - step. For instance, a project requiring separate applications for Conceptual HPC Review and Final HPC Review, shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect when the complete Conceptual HPC application is made. Administrative Policy — Land Use Code Reliance Page 1 of 2 Multiple applications that are not part of a code required multi -step process are subject to the land use code in effect for each individual submission. For instance, an application for a Subdivision does not vest an applicant in that code for a subsequent separate application for Commercial Design Review. B. Amendments: Insubstantial Amendments to a project during the period of pendency proposed as a means to achieve compliance with the land use code shall not interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. Insubstantial amendments to a project proposed during the period of pendency which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall not interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. Unless otherwise stated in a Development Order, insubstantial amendments to an approved project shall continue to be reviewed according to the land use code under which the project was approved for the period of statutory vested rights, as may be extended. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.B, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Substantial amendments to a project proposed during the period of pendency which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon the amendment submission. The entirety of the application shall be subject to all aspects of the land use code in effect at the time of the amendment submission, not just the amended elements of the project. No aspect of the project shall be considered immune from compliance. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, substantial amendments to an approved project shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.13, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Amendments to an approved project accepted by the City after the period of statutory vested rights has expired shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the complete application. For the purposes of this policy, insubstantial amendments are those which do not change the inherent nature, use, massing, character, dimensions; or design of the project or which change these attributes in such a subtle way as to be immaterial. All other amendments shall be considered substantial. Policy Effective Date: This Administrative Policy was provided on March 27, 2015, and shall become effective on March 27, 2015 and is valid until such time as the land use code are amended to implement this clarification or for other purposes. Administrative Policy — Land Use Code Reliance Page 2 of 2 amendment as proposed by staff to ensure a fairer and clearer review process. A copy of their meeting minutes is attached as Exhibit B. The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the suggested approach and supports staff s recommendation. In addition, copies of the existing policy were sent to land use planners when it was issued. Additional outreach through the Community Development Department's newsletter is also being conducted. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE PROPOSED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No. 27, Series of 2015." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A — Staff Findings Exhibit B — P&Z meeting minutes, May 19, 2015 Exhibit C — Administrative Policy on Land Use Code Reliance Exhibit D — Proposed Code Language Exhibit E — Approved Policy Resolution Code Amendment - Land Use Code Reliance Second Reading— 8/10/2015 Page 4 of 3 0 0 ORDINANCE No. 27 (Series of 2015) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 26.304 — COMMON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES, OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE. WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 26.208 and 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the Community Development Department to prepare amendments related to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall begin with Public Outreach, a Policy Resolution reviewed and acted on by City Council, and then final action by City Council after reviewing and considering the recommendation from the Community Development; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(1), the Community Development Department conducted Public Outreach regarding the code amendment; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(2), during a duly noticed public hearing on July 13, 2015, the City Council approved Resolution No. 72, Series of 2015, by a five to zero (5 — 0) vote, requesting code amendments to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the City of Aspen Land Use Code Chapter 26.304 — Common Development Review Procedures; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed the proposed code amendments and finds that the amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310.050; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Chapter 26.304, Common Development Review Procedures, shall be amended as follows: [No Changes to Sections 26.304.010 through 26.304.060] 26.304.070 Applicability of Land Use Code Amendments. Applications for a site -specific development plan shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application was determined by the City to be complete. The application Code Amendment — Land Use Code Reliance First Reading Ordinance 27, Series 2015 Page 1 of 3 0 0 shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. Applications for a site -specific development plan which require multiple steps, such as "conceptual review" and "final review" or "project review" and "detailed review," shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application for the initial step was determined by the City to be complete. The application shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. During the period of pendency, insubstantial amendments initiated by the applicant and amendments to an application proposed as a means to achieve compliance with city standards, review criteria, or requirements of reviewing agencies shall not cause a new submission date or interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. Substantial amendments to an application proposed during the period of pendency which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. The entirety of the application shall be subject to all aspects of the land use code in effect at the time of the amendment submission, not only the amended elements. No aspect of the application shall be considered immune from compliance. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, insubstantial amendments to an approved site - specific development plan shall continue to be reviewed according to the land use code under which the plan was approved for the period of statutory vested rights, as may be extended. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.B, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, substantial amendments to an approved site - specific development plan shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.B, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Amendments to an approved site -specific development plan accepted by the City after the period of statutory vested rights has expired shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application was determined by the City to be complete. For the purposes of this section, insubstantial amendments are those which do not change the inherent nature, use, massing, character, dimensions, or design of the project or which change these attributes in an inconsequential manner. All other amendments shall be considered substantial. [Subsequent sections in the Chapter shall be renumbered as follows: 26.304.080 — Development Orders (no change to text of section) 26.304.090 — Building Permit (no change to text of section)] Section 2• Code Amendment — Land Use Code Reliance First Reading Ordinance 27, Series 2015 Page 2 of 3 Any scrivener's errors contained in the code amendments herein, including but not limited to mislabeled subsections or titles, may be corrected administratively following adoption of the Ordinance. Section 3: Effect Upon Existing Litigation. This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: Effective Date. In accordance with Section 4.9 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter, this ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final passage. Section 6: A public hearing on this ordinance was held on the _U' day of , at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of , 2014. Attest: Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2015. Attest: Linda Manning, City Clerk Approved as to form: Cite AttorneN Steven Skadron, Mayor Code Amendment — Land Use Code Reliance First Reading Ordinance 27, Series 2015 Page 3 of 3 Exhibit A: Staff Findings 26.310.050 Amendments to the Land Use Code Standards of review - Adoption. In reviewing an application to amend the text of this Title, per Section 26.310.020(B)(3), Step Three — Public Hearing before City Council, the City Council shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. Staff Findings: The proposed amendment is not in conflict with any applicable portion of Title 26. It clarifies how land use applications are reviewed by specifying when certain codes are used. Staff finds this criterion to be met. B. Whether the proposed amendment achieves the policy, community goal, or objective cited as reasons for the code amendment or achieves other public policy objectives. Staff Findings: The 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan includes a policy to "create certainty in zoning and the land use process." Updating the vested rights portion of the Code is in concert with this policy by clarifying how the land use code applies to various applications. Staff believes there is a community interest in updating the code to clarify how the land use code applies to project subject to a multi -step process, as well as approved projects requesting amendments. The proposed amendment implements existing City policy. Staff finds this criterion to be met. C. Whether the objectives of the proposed amendment are compatible with the community character of the City and in harmony with the public interest and the purpose and intent of this Title. Staff Findings: The intent of the proposed amendment is to ensure a predictable and clear zoning review. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Land Use Code Reliance Exhibit A 2°d Reading, 8/10/2015 Page 1 of 1 • • lExhibit B Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 19, 2015 Mr. Walterscheid then closed the public comment portion of the meeting. Mr. Walterscheid asked Staff for rebuttal. Mr. Bendon stated Staff wants to focus on making the units conforming to stay with the intent of the ordinance. The owners have other mechanisms to utilize to pursue expansions or changes in use for the units. Mr. Walterscheid then asked for comments from the commissioners. Ms. Tygre does not like to change code that only affects one property but feels the ordinance was over- reaching. She feels it is best to keep the scope narrow at this point in time. Mr. Gibbs agreed. Mr. Mesirow asked if the intent of City Council was to cease development of larger penthouses. Mr. Bendon stated he doesn't expect the units to amortize away and feels at the time the ordinance was approved, the focus was on the impact the penthouses had on the commercial use of the buildings along with height, mass and scale. Mr. McNellis asked how the 10% cap was determined. Mr. Bendon stated it is an outdated percentage and Ms. Levy added that she found other cities are eliminating the cap altogether. Mr. Bendon stated Staff will present options to City Council to consider to move forward. Land Use Code Applicability Ms. Garrow described the proposed code amendments to address minor amendments, major amendments and multi -step processes. P&Z supports staff's recommendations. Mr. Walterscheid then adjourned the meeting. Cindy Klob City Clerk's Office, Records Manager Page 5 .0 . • Exhibit C CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY LAND USE CODE RELIANCE JURISDICTION: EFFECTIVE DATE: WRITTEN BY: r' l APPROVED BY: COPIES TO: City of Aspen March 27, 2015 Jessica Garrow Long Range Planner Chris Bendon, Community Development Director James R True, City Attorney Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Purpose: The purpose of this Administrative Policy is to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval. Applicability: This policy applies to all properties and land use applications in the City of Aspen. Background: The community Development Department often receives inquiries from project applicants wondering which land use code applies to their project. These questions arise when projects are part of a multi -step process, such as a project requiring Conceptual HPC Review, and Final HPC Review, as well as when a vested project requests an amendment to the approval. Policy: A. Determination of Completeness: Applications for land use approval shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date of the submission of a complete application. If the initial application submission is not deemed complete, the application shall be reviewed according to the code in effect at the time a complete application is submitted. In all cases, the application shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. For projects subject to a multi -step land use process, the project shall be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect on the date of the complete application for the first - step. For instance, a project requiring separate applications for Conceptual HPC Review and Final HPC Review, shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect when the complete Conceptual HPC application is made. Administrative Policy — Land Use Code Reliance Page 1 of 2 0 • Multiple applications that are not part of a code required multi -step process are subject to the land use code in effect for each individual submission. For instance, an application for a Subdivision does not vest an applicant in that code for a subsequent separate application for Commercial Design Review. B. Amendments: Insubstantial Amendments to a project during the period of pendency proposed as a means to achieve compliance with the land use code shall not interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. ' Insubstantial amendments to a project proposed during the period of pendency which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall not interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. Unless otherwise stated in a Development Order, insubstantial amendments tp an approved project shall continue to be reviewed according to the land use code under which the project was approved for the period of statutory vested rights, as may be extended. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.B, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Substantial amendments to a project proposed during the period of pendency which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon the amendment submission. The entirety of the application shall be subject to all aspects of the land use code in effect at the time of the amendment submission, not just the amended elements of the project. No aspect of the project shall be considered immune from compliance. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, substantial amendments to an approved project shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.B, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Amendments to an approved project accepted by the City after the period of statutory vested rights has expired shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the complete application. For the purposes of this policy, insubstantial amendments are those which do not change the inherent nature, use, massing, character, dimensions, or design of the project or which change these attributes in such a subtle way as to be immaterial. All other amendments shall be considered substantial. Policy Effective Date: This Administrative Policy was provided on March 27, 2015, and shall become effective on March 27, 2015 and is valid until such time as the land use code are amended to implement this clarification or for other purposes. Administrative Policy — Land Use Code Reliance Page 2 of 2 Exhibit D: Proposed Code Language 26.304.070 Applicability of Land Use Code Amendments. Applications for land use approval shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application was determined by the City to be complete. The application shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. Amendments to a project during the period of pendency proposed as a means to achieve compliance with the land use code shall not interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. Insubstantial amendments to a project proposed during the period of pendency which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall not interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. Substantial amendments to a project proposed during the period of pendency which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. The entirety of the application shall be subject to all aspects of the land use code in effect at the time of the amendment submission, not only the amended elements of the project. No aspect of the project shall be considered immune from compliance. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, insubstantial amendments to an approved project shall continue to be reviewed according to the land use code under which the project was approved for the period of statutory vested rights, as may be extended. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.13, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, substantial amendments to an approved project shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.13, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Amendments to an approved project accepted by the City after the period of statutory vested rights has expired shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application was determined by the City to be complete. For the purposes of this section, insubstantial amendments are those which do not change the inherent nature, use, massing, character, dimensions, or design of the project or which change these attributes in such a subtle way as to be immaterial. All other amendments shall be considered substantial. Subsequent sections in the Chapter shall be renumbered as follows: 26.304.080 — Development Orders (no change to text of section) 26.304.090 — Building Permit (no change to text of section) Exhibit D, Proposed Code Language Land Use Code Reliance, I" Reading 7/27/2015 Page 1 of 1 RESOLUTION NO. 72, (SERIES OF 2015) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REQUESTING AMENDMENTS TO CLARIFY WHICH CODE AN APPLICANT MAY RELY ON FOR VARIOUS LAND USE APPLICATIONS. WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(A), the Community Development Department received direction from City Council to explore code amendments to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommended changes to the Land Use Code and/or City Charter to implement City Council's direction; and, WHEREAS, City Council has reviewed the proposed code amendment policy direction, and finds it meets the criteria outlined in Section 26.310.040; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(2), during a duly noticed public hearing on July 13, 2015, the City Council approved Resolution No. 72, Series of 2015, by a five to zero (5 — 0) vote, requesting code amendments to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi- step process or when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, this Resolution does not amend the Land Use Code, but provides direction to staff for processing amendments to the Land Use Code; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Resolution implements the City's goals related to creating a clearer and more predictable land use review process, as articulated in the 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the 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 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Code Amendment Obiective and Direction City Council herby directs staff to process amendments to the City Land Use Code to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval, by: • Defining a "major amendment" and "minor amendment" to previously approved projects and outlining a process for each; and • Clarifying when and how multi -step land use requests are processed in relation to vesting in a particular land use code. Section 2: Resolution No. 72, Series 2015 Page 1 of 2 • • This resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the resolutions or ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior resolutions or ordinances. Section 3• If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. FINALLY, adopted this 13d' day of July, 2015. Steven Skadron, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Linda Manning, City Clerk James R True, City Attorney Resolution No. 72, Series 2015 Page 2 of 2 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS PROPERTY- 'd SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: cu7 t J- 104-- , 20y STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) I, , An6-d� (name, please print) being ro repr senting an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on the day of , 20, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing,.. notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid.U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, PDs that create more than one lot, and new Planned Developments are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signat The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this / 0 day of S T , 20L,--r, by PUBLIC NOTICE RE:AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF ASPEN WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL LAND USE CODE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday August 10, 2015, at a meeting to begin ci 5: ha p.m. before the Aspen M commission expires: 1�5 1 C 2 City Council, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Y p Galena St., Aspen, to consider an amendment to the text of the Land Use Code that would address land use code reliance for land use applications. For further information, contact Jessica Garrow at �LgA��p the City of Aspen Community Development De- 429-2780, Jessica.Garrow•cityofaspen.com (970) Notary Public s/stevens�ron.Ma- KAREN REED PATTERSON Aspen city CIL,p11 Published in the Aspen Times on July 23. 2015 NOTARY PUBLIC 11379002) STATE OF COLORADO NOTARY ID #19964002767 ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABU tmaouw E*m February 15, 201s • COPYOFTHEPUBLICATION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BYMAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 • • MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Skadron and City Council FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director RE: Land Use Code Reliance Code Amendment 111 Reading of Ordinance 27, Series of 2015 DATE: July 27, 2015 (PH August 10, 2015) SUMMARY: The attached Ordinance would amend City's Land Use Code to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Ordinance on First Reading. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: This meeting is to review potential changes to the City's Land Use Code. Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.310, City Council is the final review authority for all code amendments. All code amendments are subject to a three -step process. This is the third step in the process: 1. Public Outreach 2. Policy Resolution by City Council indicating if an amendment should be pursued 3. Public Hearings on Ordinance outlining specific code amendments. BACKGROUND: The Community Development Department often receives inquiries from project applicants wondering which land use code applies to their project. These questions arise when projects are part of a multi -step process, such as a project requiring Conceptual HPC Review, and Final HPC Review, as well as when a vested project requests an amendment to the approval. Staff has a written policy addressing this issue (attached as Exhibit C), and proposes to formally incorporate it into the Land Use Code (attached as Exhibit D). A copy of the approved Policy Resolution is attached as Exhibit E. OVERVIEW: Nearly all projects require amendments to their approvals, and this code change would clarify how to determine which land use code an amendment is subject to. In addition, it would address which land use code is in effect when multi -step land use processes are required. Code Amendment - Land Use Code Reliance First Reading — 7/27/2015 Page 1 of 3 Minor Amendments: Most amendments are simple, non -substantive changes that do not affect a project's original representations. For example, in 2014 the Aspen Club received an amendment approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission to amend a few retaining wall heights in a setback area along the back of the property. The City applied the same codes to the amendment as were in effect when the project originally received approval. The proposed code amendment would clarify that the vested land use code applies. For the purposes of this code amendment, staff proposes that minor amendments are those which do not change the inherent nature, use, massing, character, dimensions, or design of the project or which change these attributes in such a subtle way as to be immaterial. All other amendments would be considered major. Manor Amendment: Other project amendments appear as completely new projects with nothing resembling the former project — different uses, new site plan, different massing and architecture, etc. Staff believes processing these types of "amendments" under an out-of-date code is inappropriate. This has also been a concern of the Planning and Zoning Commission, specifically during the reviews of the Aspen Townhomes amendment and the Boomerang amendment. Staff believes these "amendments" should be considered new projects and subject to the land use code in effect upon submission of the amendment. Staff s proposal would require these so-called major amendments to be subject to the code in effect upon submission, and would prevent an applicant from using a decades old land use code. Multi -Step Processes: Often a project is subject to multiple land use reviews. For instance, a project may be subject to a Conceptual Commercial Design Review and a Final Commercial Design Review. For these projects, existing department policy is to review them according to the land use code in effect on the date of the complete application for the first -step. For instance, a project requiring subsequent applications for Conceptual HPC Review and Final HPC Review, is reviewed according to the land use code in effect when the complete Conceptual HPC application is made. Multiple applications that are not part of a code required multi -step process would be subject to the land use code in effect for each individual submission. For instance, an application for a Subdivision would not vest an applicant in that code for a subsequent separate application for Commercial Design Review. REFERRALS & OUTREACH: A meeting was held with the Planning and Zoning Commission to obtain feedback on the proposed code amendment. The Planning & Zoning Commission strongly supported the code amendment as proposed by staff to ensure a fairer and clearer review process. A copy of their meeting minutes is attached as Exhibit B. The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the suggested approach and supports staff s recommendation. In addition, copies of the existing policy were sent to land use planners when it was issued. Additional outreach through the Community Development Department's newsletter is also being conducted. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance, on First Reading. Code Amendment - Land Use Code Reliance First Reading — 7/27/2015 Page 2 of 3 • RECOMMENDED MOTION ALL MOTIONS ARE PROPOSED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No. 27, Series of 2015, on First Reading." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A — Staff Findings Exhibit B — P&Z meeting minutes, May 19, 2015 Exhibit C — Administrative Policy on Land Use Code Reliance Exhibit D — Proposed Code Language Exhibit E — Approved Policy Resolution Code Amendment - Land Use Code Reliance First Reading — 7/27/2015 Page 3 of 3 ORDINANCE No. 27 (Series of 2015) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL ADOPTING AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 26.304 — COMMON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES, OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE. WHEREAS, in accordance with Sections 26.208 and 26.310 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the Community Development Department to prepare amendments related to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall begin with Public Outreach, a Policy Resolution reviewed and acted on by City Council, and then final action by City Council after reviewing and considering the recommendation from the Community Development; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(1), the Community Development Department conducted Public Outreach regarding the code amendment; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(2), during a duly noticed public hearing on July 13, 2015, the City Council approved Resolution No. 72, Series of 2015, by a five to zero (5 — 0) vote, requesting code amendments to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has recommended approval of the proposed amendments to the City of Aspen Land Use Code Chapter 26.304 — Common Development Review Procedures; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed the proposed code amendments and finds that the amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310.050; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare; and NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Chapter 26.304, Common Development Review Procedures, shall be amended as follows: [No Changes to Sections 26.304.010 through 26.304.060] 26.304.070 Applicability of Land Use Code Amendments. Code Amendment — Land Use Code Reliance First Reading Ordinance 27, Series 2015 Page 1 of 3 Applications for a site -specific development plan shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application was determined by the City to be complete. The application shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. During the period of pendency, insubstantial amendments initiated by the applicant and amendments to an application proposed as a means to achieve compliance with city standards, review criteria, or requirements of reviewing agencies shall not cause a new submission date or interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. Substantial amendments to an application proposed during the period of pendency which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. The entirety of the application shall be subject to all aspects of the land use code in effect at the time of the amendment submission, not only the amended elements. No aspect of the application shall be considered immune from compliance. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, insubstantial amendments to an approved site -specific development plan shall continue to be reviewed according to the land use code under which the plan was approved for the period of statutory vested rights, as may be extended. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.B, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, substantial amendments to an approved site - specific development plan shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.B, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Amendments to an approved site -specific development plan accepted by the City after the period of statutory vested rights has expired shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application was determined by the City to be complete. For the purposes of this section, insubstantial amendments are those which do not change the inherent nature, use, massing, character, dimensions, or design of the project or which change these attributes in an inconsequential manner. All other amendments shall be considered substantial. [Subsequent sections in the Chapter shall be renumbered as follows: 26.304.080 — Development Orders (no change to text of section) 26.304.090 — Building Permit (no change to text of section)] Section 2: Any scrivener's errors contained in the code amendments herein, including but not limited to mislabeled subsections or titles, may be corrected administratively following adoption of the Ordinance. Code Amendment — Land Use Code Reliance First Reading Ordinance 27, Series 2015 Page 2 of 3 • Section 3: Effect Upon Existing Litigation. This ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: Effective Date. In accordance with Section 4.9 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter, this ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final passage. Section 6: A public hearing on this ordinance was held on the _d' day of , at a meeting of the Aspen City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, a minimum of fifteen days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of 92014. Attest: Linda Manning, City Clerk Steven Skadron, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2015. Attest: Linda Manning, City Clerk Approved as to form: City Attorney Steven Skadron, Mayor Code Amendment — Land Use Code Reliance First Reading Ordinance 27, Series 2015 Page 3 of 3 Exhibit A: Staff Findings 26.310.050 Amendments to the Land Use Code Standards of review - Adoption. In reviewing an application to amend the text of this Title, per Section 26.310.020(B)(3), Step Three — Public Hearing before City Council, the City Council shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. Staff Findings: The proposed amendment is not in conflict with any applicable portion of Title 26. It clarifies how land use applications are reviewed by specifying when certain codes are used. Staff finds this criterion to be met. B. Whether the proposed amendment achieves the policy, community goal, or objective cited as reasons for the code amendment or achieves other public policy objectives. Staff Findings: The 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan includes a policy to "create certainty in zoning and the land use process." Updating the vested rights portion of the Code is in concert with this policy by clarifying how the land use code applies to various applications. Staff believes there is a community interest in updating the code to clarify how the land use code applies to project subject to a multi -step process, as well as approved projects requesting amendments. The proposed amendment implements existing City policy. Staff finds this criterion to be met. C. Whether the objectives of the proposed amendment are compatible with the community character of the City and in harmony with the public interest and the purpose and intent of this Title. Staff Findings: The intent of the proposed amendment is to ensure a predictable and clear zoning review. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Land Use Code Reliance Policy Direction; Exhibit A Page 1 of 1 • lExhibit B Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 19, 2015 Mr. Walterscheid then closed the public comment portion of the meeting. Mr. Walterscheid asked Staff for rebuttal. Mr. Bendon stated Staff wants to focus on making the units conforming to stay with the intent of the ordinance. The owners have other mechanisms to utilize to pursue expansions or changes in use for the u n its. Mr. Walterscheid then asked for comments from the commissioners. Ms. Tygre does not like to change code that only affects one property but feels the ordinance was over- reaching. She feels it is best to keep the scope narrow at this point in time. Mr. Gibbs agreed. Mr. Mesirow asked if the intent of City Council was to cease development of larger penthouses. Mr. Bendon stated he doesn't expect the units to amortize away and feels at the time the ordinance was approved, the focus was on the impact the penthouses had on the commercial use of the buildings along with height, mass and scale. Mr. McNellis asked how the 10% cap was determined. Mr. Bendon stated it is an outdated percentage and Ms. Levy added that she found other cities are eliminating the cap altogether. Mr. Bendon stated Staff will present options to City Council to consider to move forward. Land Use Code Applicability Ms. Garrow described the proposed code amendments to address minor amendments, major amendments and multi -step processes. P&Z supports staff's recommendations. Mr. Walterscheid then adjourned the meeting. Cindy Klob City Clerk's Office, Records Manager Page 5 • Exhibit C CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY JURISDICTION: EFFECTIVE DATE: WRITTEN BY: APPROVED BY: COPIES TO: LAND USE CODE RELIANCE City of Aspen March 27, 201 S Jessica Garrow Long Range Planner Chris Bendon, Community Development Director James R True, City Attorney Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Purpose: The purpose of this Administrative Policy is to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval. Applicability: This policy applies to all properties and land use applications in the City of Aspen. Background: The community Development Department often receives inquiries from project applicants wondering which land use code applies to their project. These questions arise when projects are part of a multi -step process, such as a project requiring Conceptual HPC Review, and Final HPC Review, as well as wheD a vested project requests an amendment to the approval. Policy: A. Determination of Completeness: Applications for land use approval shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date of the submission of a complete application. If the initial application submission is not deemed complete, the application shall be reviewed according to the code in effect at the time a complete application is submitted. In all cases, the application shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. For projects subject to a multi -step land use process, the project shall be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect on the date of the complete application for the first - step. For instance, a project requiring separate applications for Conceptual HPC Review and Final HPC Review, shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect when the complete Conceptual HPC application is made. Administrative Policy — Land Use Code Reliance Page 1 of 2 • Multiple applications that are not part of a code required multi -step process are subject to the land use code in effect for each individual submission. For instance, an application for a Subdivision does not vest an applicant in that code for a subsequent separate application for Commercial Design Review. B. Amendments: Insubstantial Amendments to a project during the period of pendency proposed as a means to achieve compliance with the land use code shall not interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. Insubstantial amendments to a project proposed during the period of pendency which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall not interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. Unless otherwise stated in a Development Order, insubstantial amendments to an approved project shall continue to be reviewed according to the land use code under which the project was approved for the period of statutory vested rights, as may be extended. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.13, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Substantial amendments to a project proposed during the period of pendency which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon the amendment submission. The entirety of the application shall be subject to all aspects of the land use code in effect at the time of the amendment submission, not just the amended elements of the project. No aspect of the project shall be considered immune from compliance. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, substantial amendments to an approved project shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.B, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Amendments to an approved project accepted by the City after the period of statutory vested rights has expired shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the complete application. For the purposes of this policy, insubstantial amendments are those which do not change the inherent nature, use, massing, character, dimensions, or design of the project or which change these attributes in such a subtle way as to be immaterial. All other amendments shall be considered substantial. Policy Effective Date: This Administrative Policy was provided on March 27, 2015, and shall become effective on March 27, 2015 and is valid until such time as the land use code are amended to implement this clarification or for other purposes. Administrative Policy — Land Use Code Reliance Page 2 of 2 • 0 Exhibit D: Proposed Code Language 26.304.070 Applicability of Land Use Code Amendments. Applications for land use approval shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application was determined by the City to be complete. The application shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. Amendments to a project during the period of pendency proposed as a means to achieve compliance with the land use code shall not interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. Insubstantial amendments to a project proposed during the period of pendency which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall not interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. Substantial amendments to a project proposed during the period of pendency which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. The entirety of the application shall be subject to all aspects of the land use code in effect at the time of the amendment submission, not only the amended elements of the project. No aspect of the project shall be considered immune from compliance. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, insubstantial amendments to an approved project shall continue to be reviewed according to the land use code under which the project was approved for the period of statutory vested rights, as may be extended. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.13, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, substantial amendments to an approved project shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.B, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Amendments to an approved project accepted by the City after the period of statutory vested rights has expired shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the application was determined by the City to be complete. For the purposes of this section, insubstantial amendments are those which do not change the inherent nature, use, massing, character, dimensions, or design of the project or which change these attributes in such a subtle way as to be immaterial. All other amendments shall be considered substantial. Subsequent sections in the Chapter shall be renumbered as follows: 26.304.080 — Development Orders (no change to text of section) 26.304.090 — Building Permit (no change to text of section) Exhibit D, Proposed Code Language Land Use Code Reliance, I" Reading 7/27/2015 Page 1 of 1 RESOLUTION NO. 72, (SERIES OF 2015) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REQUESTING AMENDMENTS TO CLARIFY WHICH CODE AN APPLICANT MAY RELY ON FOR VARIOUS LAND USE APPLICATIONS. WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(A), the Community Development Department received direction from City Council to explore code amendments to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommended changes to the Land Use Code and/or City Charter to implement City Council's direction; and, WHEREAS, City Council has reviewed the proposed code amendment policy direction, and finds it meets the criteria outlined in Section 26.310.040; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(2), during a duly noticed public hearing on July 13, 2015, the City Council approved Resolution No. 72, Series of 2015, by a five to zero (5 — 0) vote, requesting code amendments to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi- step process or when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, this Resolution does not amend the Land Use Code, but provides direction to staff for processing amendments to the Land Use Code; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Resolution implements the City's goals related to creating a clearer and more predictable land use review process, as articulated in the 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the 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 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Code Amendment Obiective and Direction City Council herby directs staff to process amendments to the City Land Use Code to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval, by: • Defining a "major amendment" and "minor amendment" to previously approved projects and outlining a process for each; and • Clarifying when and how multi -step land use requests are processed in relation to vesting in a particular land use code. Section 2• Resolution No. 72, Series 2015 Page 1 of 2 0 This resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the resolutions or ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior resolutions or ordinances. Section 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. FINALLY, adopted this 13t' day of July, 2015. Steven Skadron, Mayor ATTEST: Linda Manning, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: James R True, City Attorney Resolution No. 72, Series 2015 Page 2 of 2 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: AWag,aft%7� 1A., 4tod L , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PU LIC HEARING DATE: %A 5:Corm ,20j IS' STATE OF COLORADO ) ss. County of Pitkin ) (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: A,"'�Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on the day of , 20_, to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to Y r�t3N;Isr --the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid-U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. Neighborhood Outreach: Applicant attests that neighborhood outreach, summarized and attached, was conducted prior to the first public hearing as required in Section 26.304.035, Neighborhood Outreach. A copy of the neighborhood outreach summary, including the method of public notification and a copy of any documentation that was presented to the public is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Mineral Estate Owner Notice. By the certified mailing of notice, return receipt requested, to affected mineral estate owners by at least thirty (30) days prior to the date scheduled for the initial public hearing on the application of development. The names and addresses of mineral estate owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County. At a minimum, Subdivisions, PDs that create more than one lot, and new Planned Developments are subject to this notice requirement. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this Z I day of Ay",wsz , 20157 , by i�� ac PUBLIC NOTICE RE:AMENDMENT TO THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Monday July. 13, 2015 at a meet- ing to begin at 5.00 p.m. before the Aspen City Council, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Gale- Aspen, determine if to the -� My commission expires: St., to amendments text of the Dann Use Code should pursued. The ress land use potential amendments would address code reliance for land use applications. For further information, contact Jessica Garrow at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO, (970) 429-2780, Jessi- ca.Garrow® cityofaspen.com Notary PUb11C s/ Steven Skadron. Mayor NICOLE EUZABETH KENNING NOTARY PUBL C - STATE OF C �' ORADO Aspen City Council Notary Identification #201' 2-.;50 Published in the Aspen Times on June 25, 2015 ub95ees) My Commission Expires ? "-' 19 ATTACHMENTS AS APPLICABLE: • COPY OF THE PUBLICATION • PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) • LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BYMAIL • APPLICANT CERTIFICATION OF MINERAL ESTATE OWNERS NOTICE AS REQUIRED BY C.R.S. §24-65.5-103.3 MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Skadron and City Council FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director RE: Policy Resolution: Land Use Code Reliance Code Amendment Resolution 72, Series of 2015 DATE: July 13, 2015 SUMMARY: The attached Resolution outlines policy direction for amendments to the City's Land Use Code to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval. If the Policy Resolution is approved, Staff will bring an Ordinance to City Council that amends the Land Use Code. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Resolution. LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: This meeting is to review potential changes to the City's Land Use Code. Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.310, City Council is the final review authority for all code amendments. All code amendments are subject to a three -step process. This is the second step in the process: 1. Public Outreach 2. Policy Resolution by City Council indicating if an amendment should be pursued 3. Public Hearings on Ordinance outlining specific code amendments. BACKGROUND: The Community Development Department often receives inquiries from project applicants wondering which land use code applies to their project. These questions arise when projects are part of a multi -step process, such as a project requiring Conceptual HPC Review, and Final HPC Review, as well as when a vested project requests an amendment to the approval. Staff has a written policy addressing this issue (attached as Exhibit C), and proposes to formally incorporate it into the Land Use Code. OVERVIEW: Nearly all projects require amendments to their approvals, and this code change would clarify how to determine which land use code an amendment is subject to. In addition, it would address which land use code is in effect when multi -step land use processes are required. Code Amendment - Land Use Code Reliance Policy Direction — 7/13/2015 Page 1 of 3 • 0 Minor Amendments: Most amendments are simple, non -substantive changes that do not affect a project's original representations. For example, in 2014 the Aspen Club received an amendment approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission to amend a few retaining wall heights in a setback area along the back of the property. The City applied the same codes to the amendment as were in effect when the project originally received approval. The proposed code amendment would clarify that the vested land use code applies. For the purposes of this code amendment, staff proposes that minor amendments are those which do not change the inherent nature, use, massing, character, dimensions, or design of the project or which change these attributes in such a subtle way as to be immaterial. All other amendments would be considered major. Major Amendment: Other project amendments appear as completely new projects with nothing resembling the former project — different uses, new site plan, different massing and architecture, etc. Staff believes processing these types of "amendments" under an out-of-date code is inappropriate. This has also been a concern of the Planning and Zoning Commission, specifically during the reviews of the Aspen Townhomes amendment and the Boomerang amendment. Staff believes these "amendments" should be considered new projects and subject to the land use code in effect upon submission of the amendment. Staffs proposal would require these so-called major amendments to be subject to the code in effect upon submission, and would prevent an applicant from using a decades old land use code. Multi -Step Processes: Often a project is subject to multiple land use reviews. For instance, a project may be subject to a Conceptual Commercial Design Review and a Final Commercial Design Review. For these projects, existing department policy is to review them according to the land use code in effect on the date of the complete application for the first -step. For instance, a project requiring subsequent applications for Conceptual HPC Review and Final HPC Review, is reviewed according to the land use code in effect when the complete Conceptual HPC application is made. Multiple applications that are not part of a code required multi -step process would be subject to the land use code in effect for each individual submission. For instance, an application for a Subdivision would not vest an applicant in that code for a subsequent separate application for Commercial Design Review. REFERRALS & OUTREACH: A meeting was held with the Planning and Zoning Commission to obtain feedback on the proposed code amendment. The Planning & Zoning Commission supported the code amendment as proposed by staff. The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the suggested approach and supports staff s recommendation. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the attached Policy Resolution. Code Amendment - Land Use Code Reliance Policy Direction — 7/13/2015 Page 2 of 3 • • RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE PROPOSED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to approve Resolution No. 72, Series of 2015." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A — Staff Findings Exhibit B — P&Z meeting minutes, May 19, 2015 Exhibit C — Administrative Policy on Land Use Code Reliance Code Amendment - Land Use Code Reliance Policy Direction — 7/13/2015 Page 3 of 3 RESOLUTION NO. 72, (SERIES OF 2015) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REQUESTING AMENDMENTS TO CLARIFY WHICH CODE AN APPLICANT MAY RELY ON FOR VARIOUS LAND USE APPLICATIONS. WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(A), the Community Development Department received direction from City Council to explore code amendments to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommended changes to the Land Use Code and/or City Charter to implement City Council's direction; and, WHEREAS, City Council has reviewed the proposed code amendment policy direction, and finds it meets the criteria outlined in Section 26.310.040; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(2), during a duly noticed public hearing on July 13, 2015, the City Council approved Resolution No. 72, Series of 2015, by a five to zero (5 — 0) vote, requesting code amendments to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi- step process or when amending a previous approval; and, WHEREAS, this Resolution does not amend the Land Use Code, but provides direction to staff for processing amendments to the Land Use Code; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Resolution implements the City's goals related to creating a clearer and more predictable land use review process, as articulated in the 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the 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 COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Code Amendment Objective and Direction City Council herby directs staff to process amendments to the City Land Use Code to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval, by: • Defining a "major amendment" and "minor amendment" to previously approved projects and outlining a process for each; and • Clarifying when and how multi -step land use requests are processed in relation to vesting in a particular land use code. Section 2: Resolution No. 72, Series 2015 Pagel of 2 0 • This resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the resolutions or ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior resolutions or ordinances. Section 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. FINALLY, adopted this 13d' day of July, 2015. Steven Skadron, Mayor ATTEST: Linda Manning, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: James R True, City Attorney Resolution No. 72, Series 2015 Page 2 of 2 • • Exhibit A: Staff Findings 26.310.040. Amendments to the Land Use Code standards of review — Initiation In reviewing a request to pursue an amendment to the text of this Title, per Section 26.310.020(B)(2), Step Two — Public Hearing before City Council, the City Council shall consider: A. Whether there exists a community interest to pursue the amendment. Staff Findings: Staff believes there is a community interest in updating the code to clarify how the land use code applies to project subject to a multi -step process, as well as approved projects requesting amendments. The proposed amendment implements existing City policy. Staff finds this criterion to be met. B. Whether the objectives of the proposed amendment furthers an adopted policy, community goal, or objective of the City including, but not limited to, those stated in the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Findings: The 2012 Aspen Area Community Plan includes a policy to "create certainty in zoning and the land use process." Updating the vested rights portion of the Code is in concert with this policy by clarifying how the land use code applies to various applications. Staff finds this criterion to be met. C. Whether the objectives of the proposed amendment are compatible with the community character of the City and in harmony with the public interest and the purpose and intent of this Title. Staff Findings: The intent of the proposed amendment is to ensure a predictable and clear zoning review. Staff finds this criterion to be met. Land Use Code Reliance Policy Direction; Exhibit A Page 1 of 1 �J Exhibit B Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 19, 2015 Mr. Walterscheid then closed the public comment portion of the meeting. Mr. Walterscheid asked Staff for rebuttal. Mr. Bendon stated Staff wants to focus on making the units conforming to stay with the intent of the ordinance. The owners have other mechanisms to utilize to pursue expansions or changes in use for the u nits. Mr. Walterscheid then asked for comments from the commissioners. Ms. Tygre does not like to change code that only affects one property but feels the ordinance was over- reaching. She feels it is best to keep the scope narrow at this point in time. Mr. Gibbs agreed. Mr. Mesirow asked if the intent of City Council was to cease development of larger penthouses. Mr. Bendon stated he doesn't expect the units to amortize away and feels at the time the ordinance was approved, the focus was on the impact the penthouses had on the commercial use of the buildings along with height, mass and scale. Mr. McNellis asked how the 10% cap was determined. Mr. Bendon stated it is an outdated percentage and Ms. Levy added that she found other cities are eliminating the cap altogether. Mr. Bendon stated Staff will present options to City Council to consider to move forward. Land Use Code Applicability Ms. Garrow described the proposed code amendments to address minor amendments, major amendments and multi -step processes. P&Z supports staff's recommendations. Mr. Walterscheid then adjourned the meeting. Cindy Klob City Clerk's Office, Records Manager Page 5 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY JURISDICTION: EFFECTIVE DATE: WRITTEN BY: % APPROVED BY: COPIES TO: LAND USE CODE RELIANCE City of Aspen March 27, 2015 Jessica Garrow Long Range Planner Chris Bendon, Community Development Director James R True, City Attorney Debbie Quinn, Assistant City Attorney Purpose: The purpose of this Administrative Policy is to clarify which land use code a project may rely on when part of a multi -step process or when amending a previous approval. Applicability: This policy applies to all properties and land use applications in the City of Aspen. Background: The community Development Department often receives inquiries from project applicants wondering which land use code applies to their project. These questions arise when projects are part of a multi -step process, such as a project requiring Conceptual HPC Review, and Final HPC Review, as well as when a vested project requests an amendment to the approval. Policy: A. Determination of Completeness: Applications for land use approval shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date of the submission of a complete application. If the initial application submission is not deemed complete, the application shall be reviewed according to the code in effect at the time a complete application is submitted. In all cases, the application shall continue to be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect upon such date throughout the application's period of pendency. For projects subject to a multi -step land use process, the project shall be reviewed according to the provisions of the land use code in effect on the date of the complete application for the first - step. For instance, a project requiring separate applications for Conceptual HPC Review and Final HPC Review, shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect when the complete Conceptual HPC application is made. Administrative Policy — Land Use Code Reliance Page 1 of 2 Multiple applications that are not part of a code required multi -step process are subject to the land use code in effect for each individual submission. For instance, an application for a Subdivision does not vest an applicant in that code for a subsequent separate application for Commercial Design Review. B. Amendments: Insubstantial Amendments to a project during the period of pendency proposed as a means to achieve compliance with the land use code shall not interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. Insubstantial amendments to a project proposed during the period of pendency which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall not interrupt the applicability of the land use code to the project. Unless otherwise stated in a Development Order, insubstantial amendments to an approved project shall continue to be reviewed according to the land use code under which the project was approved for the period of statutory vested rights, as may be extended. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.13, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Substantial amendments to a project proposed during the period of pendency which are initiated by the applicant independent of a code requirement shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon the amendment submission. The entirety of the application shall be subject to all aspects of the land use code in effect at the time of the amendment submission, not just the amended elements of the project. No aspect of the project shall be considered immune from compliance. Unless otherwise stated in the Development Order, substantial amendments to an approved project shall be subject to the land use code in effect upon amendment submission. Approved amendments to a previously issued Development Order shall cause issuance of a revised Development Order pursuant to Section 26.304.070.13, but shall not effect a new expiration date of the Development Order. Amendments to an approved project accepted by the City after the period of statutory vested rights has expired shall be reviewed according to the land use code in effect on the date the complete application. For the purposes of this policy, insubstantial amendments are those which do not change the inherent nature, use, massing, character, dimensions, or design of the project or which change these attributes in such a subtle way as to be immaterial. All other amendments shall be considered substantial. Policy Effective Date: This Administrative Policy was provided on March 27, 2015, and shall become effective on March 27, 2015 and is valid until such time as the land use code are amended to implement this clarification or for other purposes. Administrative Policy — Land Use Code Reliance Page 2 of 2 00--l�,•20IS P Permits ' File Edit Record Navgate Form Reports Format Tab Help hh Lj Jz_— lump i Main Custom Fields Routing Status Fee Summary Arians Routing History a Permittype aslu Aspen Land Use pert # �076 2015 ASLU Address 130 S GALENA ApVSuite Cqy ASPEN State CO Zip 8161 Permit Information Master permit Routing queue aslul5 Applied 08i21+'2015 Project Status pending Apprwed Description LAIID USE CODE RELIANCE - NO BILLING Issued CbsedjFinal Submitted JJESSICAGARROW Clods Running Days F70 Eiires 08i15+'2016 Submitted Q Owner Last name Cp HALL First name 801 CASTLE CRK PEN CO 81611 Phone {) Address Applicant 0 Owner is applicant? 0 Contrador is applicant? Last name C[ Y HALL First name 801 CASTLE CRK SPEN CO 81611 Phone () Oust # 12727 —� Address Email Lander Last name First name Phone () Address 'd5 �n trj as,geias .1 at 1