Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ca.Stream Margin.A094-01 rl -v/ CASE NUMBER PARCEL ID # CASE NAME PROJECT ADDRESS PLANNER CASE TYPE OWNER/APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE DATE OF FINAL ACTION CITY COUNCIL ACTION PZ ACTION ADMIN ACTION BOA ACTION DATE CLOSED BY i.<_. ~ ," A094-01 Stream Margin Review Code Amendments James Lindt Code Amendment City of Aspen Community Development Department 12/17/01 Ordinance # 45-2001 Approved 12/19/01 J. Lindt ~, .t" .".-/ ~ -2J)O J '" '""' AFFIDA VIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: :5 f-{~O /IV\ M C! IfQjI'lA C6~~p(.~~ ~ ~1(;( SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: ) 2;/; ;;;/ () I ,200_ STATE OF COLORADO ), ) SS. County of Pitkin ) I, ~.-{ VVl <e- s Li 11/\ ('2 f- (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: X Publication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an ofTIcial 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, v.:~terproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide "apd twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed ofletters not less than ~6ne' 'inch in height. SiUd notice was posted at least ten (l0) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the _jaY of ',c" .',,','" . ",... ,200_, to and including the date and time oft!j.e public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached heretd. - NJC(i.li!,!~of~otice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community ['ii:\7elopment Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code, At least ten (10) 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, and, 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 any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service' district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns 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 appearechi'o'm5re 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. (continued on next page) f""\. ".::.~ n MEMORANDUM ~., I, ('_ V.i~i:..~, To: Mayor Klanderud and City Council Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director 9~ Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director THRU: FROM: James Lindt, Planning Technician JL RE: Proposed Amendments to the Stream Margin Review P;rocess and Review Standards, Section 26.435.040 - Code Amendment. Public Hearing, "2nd Reading" of Ordinance No. 45, Series of2001 DATE: December 17, 2001 ApPLICANT: City of Aspen Community Development Department PROPOSED AMENDMENT: The Community Development Staff proposes to amend the Stream Margin Review Process with the overall intent of clarifying and streamlining the review process. The proposed amendments to Section 26.435.040, Stream Margin Review, are intended to change the Stream Margin Review process for properties only on the Roaring Fork River from a Planning and Zoning Commission process to an administrative review process in order to handle what staff feels is a "technical" review more suited for staff review versus the more substantial, quasi-judicial reviews by the Planning and Zoning Commission. This change will also have a secondary benefit of freeing up agenda space and saving applicants the unnecessary time and money of going through a board review process. The Stream Margin Review Standards are also proposed to be changed to utilize a newly created map of the Roaring Fork River to determine top of slope and mean high water line for the properties along the Roaring Fork River. Other amendments in this section are proposed to update, reorganize and clarify the current review standards. SUMMARY: The Community Development Department Staff is proposing code amendments to Section 26.435.040, Stream Margin Review, to change the stream margin review from a Planning and Zoning Commission Review to an Administrative Review by the Community Development Director. The Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the proposed code amendments and unanimously recommended that City Council approve them. As a work program item, City Council directed staff to have the top of slope and high water line of the Roaring Fork River mapped from the eastern edge of the City limits to the Slaughter House Bridge on the western City limits. The aforementioned map is proposed to be adopted and utilized to determine the top of slope and the high water line on all Stream Margin Review Applications. A process to appeal the map determination of the top of slope is also put in place through the proposed 1""\ !I" n code amendments. The proposed amendments also inClude a reorganization of the existing review standards but not a substantial change to them, The Stream Margin Review Standards are mainly technical in their existing state and require an applicant to meet set requirements that are not subjective or discretionary. Because of the objective nature of the standards, staff believes that the Stream Margin Review Process for properties on the Roaring Fork River could be reviewed as effectively and accurately at an administrative level. Therefore, the Community Development staff proposes the following code amendments to the Stream Margin Review Section of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. Process: Amendment to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map ~ To determine if the application meets the standards for an amendment to the code text or official zone district map. ~ Planning Commission makes a recommendation to City Council. ~ City Council either approves, denies, or amends and approves the proposed text. Review In reviewing an amendment to the text of this Title or an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. ~ Staff Finding: o The changes regarding the proposed amendment would be made throughout Title 26 so as not to cause a conflict in how the text reads or what it means. Process changes will be made throughout the land use code, no conflict is created in that regard. The section will be reorganized to make it more user friendly and logically organized. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan, ~ Staff Finding: o Stafffeels that the proposed amendments will continue to yield as thorough of a review of the stream margin review as that currently in place. The protection of environmentally sensitive areas as desired by the Mep will still be accomplished. By cutting the number of steps in the stream margin review process for properties on the Roaring Fork River, staff feels that it will be more efficient for the applicant and will save money and time of going through a public review process. Staff also believes that by utilizing the new Stream Margin Review Map as the official top of slope and 2 1"""\ ~ high water determinations for propenies on the Roaring Fork Rivers, that much of the conflict and dispute between the City and the applicant over these determinations will be alleviated. Staff believes that the Stream Margin Review Map generated by Sopris Engineering is accurate and that substituting itfor a private surveyor's work will not compromise the quality of the review of the stream margin standards. C, Whether the proposed amendment is cOIJ?lpatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. ~ Stafr Findinf(: o Staff finds that the proposed amendment is compatible with the surrounding zone districts and land uses, and will not change the characteristics of the neighborhood. The land use pattern will not change, as the stream margin review standards for the zone districts will not be affected. The review process will be more efficient and streamlined with the same outcome as today's regulations would yield. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. ~ Staff Findinf(: o There will be no effect or negative impacts of these proposed amendments on traffic generation and road safety. E, Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not Limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. ~ Staff Findinf(: o The proposed amendments will not result in changed demands of public facilities. F Whether the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. ~ Staff Findinf(: o Staff finds the proposed amendments will not have a significant impact on the natural environment. Staff feels that the Stream Margin Review Standards are objective enough that there is not a lot of decision-making involved in the stream margin review process. There should be no difference in the impact on the environment if staff is reviewing an 3 o () application as opposed to the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewing the same application. Many of the conditions of approval on Stream Margin Reviews are asked for by the referral agencies and are standard conditions of approval. Staff still intends to refer Stream Margin Review Applications to the other pertinent City departments and place conditions on the administrative approvals of Stream Margin Reviews. The proposed code amendments shall have no impact on the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. >- Staff Findin~: o Staff finds that the proposed amendment will not effect the community character in the City of Aspen. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. >- Staff Findin~: o Staff finds that no specific subject parcel or specific neighborhood is the subject of this code amendment and therefore the criterion does not apply. 1. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with th(~ public interest and whether it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this Title. >- Staff Findin~: o Stafffinds that the proposed amendment will not conflict with the public interest. Staff feels that the proposed changes in the Stream Margin Review Process will be to the benefit of the public. An administrative process will be more efficient and save applicants time because it alleviates the need to wait to get on a Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda. The proposed amendment would also free up Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda time that can be used to review and handle other types of land use reviews. Staff believes that applicants will be more informed about their development potential in stream margin areas on the Roaring Fork River prior to going through the r,~view if the Stream Margin Map, generated by Sopris Engineering, is adopted as the official top of slope and high water lines for the Roaring Fork River. This will benefit the public interest. 4 f*"'" n Staff is proposing to amend all the sections in the Aspen Land Use Code that referenced the process of a Stream Margin Review. Staff proposes to repeal Section 26.435,040, Stream Margin Review, in it's entirety and replace it with the following Code Language. The following proposed language accomplishes the following four objectives, (1) reorganizes the Stream Margin Review Section into a logical sequence, (2) gives the Community Development Director Review Authority for Stream Margin Review on properties located on the Roaring Fork River, (3) adopts the Stream Margin Map as the top of slope for properties on the Roaring Fork River, and (4) sets up a process for the appeal of the Community Development Director's determination. Proposed new language is italicized and in bold. Language in the current Stream Margin Review Section that is not new but is being reorganized is not italicized in the following proposed code language, 26.435,040 Stream Margin Review. A. Applicability. The provisions. of the Stream Margin Review shall apply to all development within one hundred (100) feet, measured horizontally, from the high water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, and to all development within the 100- year flood plain. B. Exemptions. The Community Development Director may exempt the following types of development within the Stream Margin Review area: 1. Construction of pedestrian or automobile bridges, publk trails, or structures for irrigation, drainage, flood control or water diversion, or bank stabilization, provided plans and specifications are submitted to the City Engineer demonstrating that the structure is engineered to prevent blockage of drainage channels during peak flows and the Community Development Director determines the proposed structure complies, to the extent practical, with the Stream Margin Review Standards. 2. Construction of improvements essential for public health and safety which cannot be reasonably accommodated outside of the "no development area" prescribed by this Section including, but not limited to, potable water systems, sanitary sewer, utilities, and fire suppression systems provided the Community Development Director determines the development complies, to the extent practical, with the Stream Margin Review Standards. 3. The expansion, remodeling, or reconstruction of an existiing development provided the following standards are met: a, The development does not add more than ten (10) percent to the floor area of the existing structure or increase the amount of building area exempt from floor area calculations by more than twenty-five (25) percent. All stream margin exemptions are cumulative, Once a development reaches these 5 f";, rl totals, a Stream Margin Review by the Community Development Director or the Planning and Zoning Commission is required; and, b. The development does not require the removal of any tree for which a permit would be required pursuant to Chapter 13.20 of the Municipal Code. c. The development is located such that no portion of the expansion, remodeling or reconstruction will be any closer to the high water lime than is the existing development; 1. The development does not fall outside of an approved building envelope if one has been designated through a prior review; and 11. The expansion, remodeling or reconstruction will cause no increase to the amount of ground coverage of structures within the 100 year flood plain, C. Stream Margin Review Standards. No development shall be permitted within the Stream Margin of the Roaring Fork River unless the Community Development Director makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements set forth below, No Development shall be permitted within the Stream Margin of the tributaries of the Roaring Fork River unless the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements set forth below. 1. It can be demonstrated that any proposed development which is in the Special Flood Hazard Area will not increase the base flood elevation on the parcel proposed for development. This shall be demonstrated by an engineering study prepared by a professional engineer registered to practice in the State of Colorado which shows that the base flood elevation will not be raised, including, but not limited to, proposing mitigation techniques on or off-site which compensate for any base flood elevation increase caused by the development; and 2. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan: Parks/Recreation/Open Space/Trails Plan and the Roaring Fork River Greenway PIan are implemented in the proposed plan for development, to the greatest extent practicable, Areas of historic public use or access shall be dedicated via a recorded easement for public use, A fisherman's easement granting public fishing access within the high water boundaries of the river courSe shall be granted to the greatest extent possible via a recorded "Fisherman's Easement;" and, 3. There is no vegetation removed or damaged or slope grade changes (cut or fill) made outside of a specifically defined building envelope. A building envelope shall be designated by this review and said envelope shall be recorded on a plat pursuant to Section 26.435.040(F)(1). 6 00 f""\ 4. The proposed development does not pollute or interfere vvith the natural changes of the river, stream or other tributary, including erosion and/or sedimentation during construction. Increased on-site drainage shall be accommodated within the parcel to prevent entry into the river or onto its banks. Pools or hot tubs cannot be drained outside of the designated building envelope; and 5. Written notice is given to the Colorado Water Conservation Board prior to any alteration or relocation of a water course, and a copy of said notice is submitted to the Federal Emergency Management Agency; and 6. A guarantee is provided in the event a water course is altered or relocated, that applies to the developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that ensures that the flood carrying capacity on the parcel is not diminished; and 7. Copies are provided of all necessary federal and state permits relating to work within the one-hundred-year floodplain; and 8. There is no development other than approved native vegetation planting within fifteen (15) feet back of the top of slope or the high waterline, whichever is most restrictive. This is an effort to protect the existing riparian vegetation and bank stability. New plantings (including trees, shrubs, flowers, and grasses) outside of the designated building envelope on the river side shall be native riparian vegetation as approved by the City. A landscape plan will be submitted with all development applications. The top of slope and 100 year flood plain elevation of the Roaring Fork River shall be determined by the Stream Margin Map located in the Community Development Department and filed at the City Engineering Department. 9. All development outside the fifteen (15) foot setback from the top of slope does not exceed a height delineated by a line drawn at a forty..five (45) degree angle from ground level at the top of slope. Height shall be measured and determined by the Community Development Director using the definition for height set forth at Section 26.04.100 and method of calculating height set forth at Section 26.575,020, as shown in Figure "A". Figure "A" 7 r; I} 10. All exterior lighting is low and downcast with no light(s) directed toward the river or located down the slope and shall be in compliance with section 26.575.150. A lighting plan will be submitted with all development applications; and 11. There has been accurate identification of wetlands and riparian zones. (Ord. No. 55-2000, 96, 7; Ord. No. 47-1999,93) D. Appeal of Director's Determination. An appeal of a determination in regards to a Stream Margin Application or in regards to the top of slope determination made by the Community Development Director, shall be reviewed as a Special Review pursuant to subsection E, below. In this case, the Community Development Director's finding shall be forwarded as a recommendation and a new application need not be filed. E. Special Review. An application requesting a variance from the Stream Margin Review Standards, or an appeal of the Stream Margin Map's top of slope determination, shall be processed as a Special Review in accordance with Common Llevelopment Review Procedure set forth in Section 26.304. The Special Review shall be considered at a public hearingfor which notice has been published, posted and mailed, pursuant to Section 26.304.060(E)(3)(a b, and c). Review is by the Planning and Zoning Commission. A Special Review from the Stream Margin Review Determination may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied based on conformance with the following review criteria: 1. An authorized survey from a Colorado Professionally Licensed Surveyor shows a different determination in regards to the top of slope and' 100 year flood plain than the Stream Margin Map located in the Community Development Department and filed in the City Engineering Department; and 2. The proposed development meets the Stream Margin Review Standard(s) upon which the Community Development Director had based the finding of denial. F. Building Permit Submittal Requirements Prior to receiving a building permitfor a property within the stream margin review area, the following mist be submitted: 1. The applicant shall record a site improvement plat with topography prepared by a Colorado licensed, professional surveyor showing the building envelope determined by the Community Development Director based on the Stream 8 ("'\ r'\ Margin Review Map located in the Community Development Department, 2. Site sections drawn by a registered architect, landscape architect, or engineer shall be submitted showing all existing and proposed site elements, the top of slope, and pertinent elevations above sea level. 3. The building envelope shall be barricaded prior to issmillce of any demolition, excavation or building permits. The barricades shall remain in place until the issuance of Certificates of Occupancy, Section 26.435,020, Authority, must also be amended to be consistent in giving the Community Development Director the review authority in Stream Margin Reviews on the Roaring Fork River. The section is stated below with the old language having a "strike out" through it and the new language documented in bold and italics, as follows: Original Text: 26.435.020 Authority. Following the receipt of a recommendation from the Community Development Department, the Planning and Zoning Commission, in accordance with the procedures, standards and limitations of this Chapter, shall by resolution approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA). The Community Development Director, in accordance with the procedures, standards and limitations of this Chapter, shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for exempt development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA), New Text: 26.435.020 Authority. Following the receipt of a recommendation from the Community Development Department, the Planning and Zoning Commission, in accordance with the procedures, standards and limitations of this Chapter, shall by resolution approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA), with the exception of development within a stream margin of the Roaring Fork River. Development within a stream margin of the Roaring Fork River shall be reviewed by the Community Development Director. The Community Development Director, in accordance with procedut:e, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove an application for development in the stream margin. The Community Development Director, in accordance with the procedures, standards and limitations of this Chapter, shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for exempt development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA). 9 r\ f'""\ Staff concludes that the proposed code amendments to the Strearn Margin Review Process have been reviewed per Section 26.310.040 Standards of Review, Staff finds that the proposed amendments will make the review process more efficient for both applicants and the City of Aspen without compromising the thoroughness or importance of the Stream Margin Review. Staff feels that by adopting the Stream Margin Map as the official determination of top of slope and high water line, it will rid the stream margin review process of subjective determinations in regards to this matter. This will enable the review process to be approved at an administrative level because the review will be completely based on whether or not the applicant meets the standards much like the review of Accessory Dwelling Units are currently handled. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the proposed code amendments to the stream margin review section as proposed. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of the Proposed Code Amendments to Section 26.435, Stream Margin Review, that will allow for the Community Development Director to be the review authority on Roaring Fork River Stream Margin Review Applications and the adoption of the Stream Margin Map as the official determination of top of slope and high water line. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended by a 7 to 0 vote that City Council approve the Proposed Code Amendments to Section 26.435, Stream Margin Review. Recommended Motion: "I move to approve Ordinance No.45 Series of2001, approving Code Amendments to the City Land Use Code that will reorganize the Stream Margin Review Section, give the Community Development Director decision-making authority on Roaring Fork River Stream Margin Review Applications and the adoption of the Stream Margin Map as the official determination of top of slope and the high water line for properties on the Roaring Fork River. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A- Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 43, Series of2001, p 10 /,\, r1 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor Klanderud and City Council THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director FROM: James Lindt, Planning Technician RE: Proposed Amendments to the Stream Margin Review Pro,cess and Review Standards, Section 26.435.040 - Code Amendment. Public Hearing, "2nd Reading" of Ordinance No. 45, Series of2001 DATE: December 17,2001 ApPLICANT: City of Aspen Community Development Department PROPOSED AMENDMENT: The Community Development Staff proposes to amend the Stream Margin Review Process with the overall intent of clarifying and streamlining the review process" The proposed amendments to Section 26.435.040, Stream Margin Review, are intended to change the Stream Margin Review process for properties only on the Roaring Fork River from a Planning and Zoning Commission process to an administrative review process in order to handle what staff feels is a "technical" review more suited for staff review versus the more substantial, quasi-judicial reviews by the Planning and Zoning Commission, This change will also have a secondary benefit of freeing up agenda space and saving applicants the unnecessary time and money of going through a board review process. The Stream Margin Review Standards are also proposed to be changed to utilize a newly created map of the Roaring Fork River to determine top of slope and mean high water line for the properties along the Roaring Fork River, Other amendments in this section are proposed to update, reorganize and clarify the current review standards. SUMMARY: The Community Development Department Staff is proposing code amendments to Section 26.435.040, Stream Margin Review, to change the stream margin review from a Planning and Zoning Commission Review to an Administrative Review by the Community Development Director. The Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the proposed code amendments and unanimously recommended that City Council approve them. As a work program item, City Council directed staff to have the top of slope and high water line of the Roaring Fork River mapped from the eastern edge of the City limits to the Slaughter House Bridge on the western City limits. The aforementioned map is proposed to be adopted and utilized to determine the top of slope and the high water line on all Stream Margin Review Applications, A process to appeal the map determination of the top of slope is also put in place through the proposed A ("'\ . ,; code amendments. The proposed amendments also include a reorganization of the existing review standards but not a substantial change to them. The Stream Margin Review Standards are mainly technical in their existing state and require an applicant to meet set requirements that are not subjective or discretionary. Because of the objective nature of the standards, staff believes that the Stream Margin Review Process for properties on the Roaring Fork River could be reviewed as effectively and accurately at an administrative level. Therefore, the Community Development staff proposes the following code amendments to the Stream Margin Review Section of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. Process: Amendment to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map >- To determine if the application meets the standards for an amendment to the code text or official zone district map, >- Planning Commission makes a recommendation to (::ity COlIDcil. >- City Council either approves, denies, or amends and approves the proposed text. Review In reviewing an amendment to the text ofthis Title or an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. >- Staff Findinf(: o The changes regarding the proposed amendment would be made throughout Title 26 so as not to cause a conflict in how the text reads or what it means. Process changes will be made throughout the land use code, no confll'ct is created in that regard. The section will be reorganized to make it more user friendly and logically organized. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan. >- Staff Findinf(: o Staff feels that the proposed amendments will continue to yield as thorough of a review of the stream margin review as that currently in place. The protection of environmentally sensitive areas as desired by the AA CP will still be accomplished. By cutting the number of steps in the stream margin review process for properties 011 the Roaring Fork River, staff feels that it will be more efficient for the applicant and will save money and time of going through a public review process. Staff also believes that by utilizing the new Stream Margin Review Map as the official top of slope and 2 r-. t} high water determinations for properties on the Roaring Fork Rivers, that much of the c6nflict and dispute between the City and the applicant over these determinations will bi! alleviated. Staff believes that the Stream Margin Review Map generated by Sopris Engineering is accurate and that substituting itfor a private surveyor's work will not compromise the quality of the review of the stream margin standards. C, Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics, ;.. Staff Findinf!: o Stafffinds that the proposed amendment is compatible with the surrounding zone districts and land uses, and will not change the characteristics of the neighborhood. The land use pattern will not change, as the stream margin review standards for the zone districts will not be affected. The review process will be more efficient and streamlined with the same outcome as today's regulations would yield. D, The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. ;.. Staff Findinf!: o There will be no effect or negative impacts of these proposed amendments on traffic generation and road safety. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. ;.. Staff Findinf!: o The proposed amendments will not result in changed demands of public facilities. F Whether the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. ;.. Staff Findinf!: o Stafffinds the proposed amendments will not have a significant impact on the natural environment. Staff feels that the Stream Margin Review Standards tire objective enough that there is not a lot of decision-making involved in the stream margin review process. There should be no difference in the impact on the environment if staff is reviewing an 3 f""'" 11 application as opposed to the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewing the same application. Many of the conditions of approval on Stream Margin Reviews are asked for by the referral agencies and are standard conditions of approval. Staff still intends to refer Stream Margin Review Applications to the other pertinent City departments and place conditions on the administrative approvals of Stream Margin Reviews. The proposed code amendments shall have no impact on the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. ).> Staff FindinJ!: o Staff finds that the proposed amendment will not effect the community character in the City of Asp,m. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. ).> Staff Findinf!: o Stafffinds that no specific subject parcel or specific neighborhood is the subject of this code amendment and therefore the criterion does not apply. 1. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest and whether it is in harmony with the purpose and intent ofthis Tide. ).> Staff Findinf!: o Staff finds that the proposed amendment will not conflict with the public interest. Stafffeels th~!t the proposed changes in the Stream Margin Review Process will be to the benefit of the public. An administrative process will be more efficient and save applicants time because it alleviates the need to wait to get on a Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda. The proposed amendment would also free up Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda time that can be used to review and handle other types of land use reviews. Staff believes that applicants will be more informed about their development potential in stream margin areas on the Roaring Fork River prior to going through the review if the Stream Margin Map, generated by Sopris Engineering, is adopted as the official top of slope and high water lines for the Roaring Fork River. This will benefit the public interest. 4 ~ r"'j , Staff is proposing to amend all the sections in the Aspen Land Use Code that referenced the process of a Stream Margin Review. Staff proposes to repeal Section 26.435.040, Stream Margin Review, in it's entirety and replace it with the following Code Language. The following proposed language accomplishes the following four objectives, (I) reorganizes the Stream. Margin Review Section into a logical sequence, (2) gives the Community Development Director Review Authority for Stream Margin Review on properties located on the R,oaring Fork River, (3) adopts the Stream Margin Map as the top of slope for properties on the Roaring Fork River, and (4) sets up a process for the appeal of the Community Development Director's determination. Proposed new language is italicized and in bold. Language in the current Stream Margin Review Section that is not neVI' but is being reorganized is not italicized in the following proposed code language. 26.435.040 Stream Margin Review. A. Applicability. The provisions of the Stream Margin Review shall apply to all development within one hundred (100) feet, measured horizontally, from the high water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, and to all development within the 100- year flood plain. B. Exemptions. The Community Development Director may exempt the following types of development within the Stream Margin Review area: I. Construction of pedestrian or automobile bridges, public trails, or structures for irrigation, drainage, flood control or water diversion, 01' bank stabilization, provided plans and specifications are submitted to the City Engineer demonstrating that the structure is engineered to prevent blockage of drainage channels during peak flows and the Community Development Director determines the proposed structure complies, to the extent practical, with the Stream Margin Review Standards. 2. Construction of improvements essential for public health and safety which cannot be reasonably accommodated outside of the "no development area" prescribed by this Section including, but not limited to, potable water systems, sanitary sewer, utilities, and fire suppression systems provided the Community Development Director determines the development complies, to the extent practical, with the Stream Margin Review Standards. 3. The expansion, remodeling, or reconstruction of an existing development provided the following standards are met: a. The development does not add more than ten (10) percent to the floor area of the existing structure or increase the amount of building area exempt from floor area calculations by more than twenty-five (25) percent. All stream margin exemptions are cumulative. Once a development reaches these 5 ~ t""""l totals, a Stream Margin Review by the Community Development Director or the Planning and Zoning Commission is required; and, b. The development does not require the removal of any tree for which a permit would be required pursuant to Chapter 13.20 of the Municipal Code. c. The development is located such that no portion of the expansion, remodeling or reconstruction will be any closer to the high water line than is the existing development; 1. The development does not fall outside of an approved building envelope if one has been designated through a prior review; and ii. The expansion, remodeling or reconstruction will cause no increase to the amount of ground coverage of structures within the 100 year flood plain. C. Stream Margin Review Standards. No development shall be pelmitted within the Stream Margin of the Roaring Fork River unless the Community Development Director makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements set forth below. No Development shall be permitted within the Stream Margin of the tributaries of the Roaring Fork River unless the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements setforth below. I. It can be demonstrated that any proposed development which is in the Special Flood Hazard Area will not increase the base flood eJ,evation on the parcel proposed for development. This shall be demonstrated by an engineering study prepared by a professional engineer registered to practice in the State of Colorado which shows that the base flood elevation will not be raised, including, but not limited to, proposing mitigation techniques on or off-site which compensate for any base flood elevation increase caused by the development; and 2. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan: Parks/Recreation/Open Space/Trails Plan and the Roaring Fork River Greenway Plan are implemented in the proposed plan for development, to the greatest extent practicable. Areas of historic public use or access shall be dedicated via a recorded easement for public use. A fisherman's easement granting public fishing access within the high water boundaries of the river course shall be granted to the greatest extent possible via a recorded "Fisherman's Easement;" and, 3. There is no vegetation removed or damaged or slope grade changes (cut or fill) made outside of a specifically defined building envelope. A building envelope shall be designated by this review and said envelope shall be recorded on a plat pursuant to Section 26.435.040(F)(1}. 6 ~ f") 4. The proposed development does not pollute or interfere with the natural changes of the river, stream or other tributary, including erosion and/or sedimentation during construction. Increased on-site drainage shall be accommodated within the parcel to prevent entry into the river or onto its banks. Pools or hot tubs cannot be drained outside of the designated building envelope; and 5. Written notice is given to the Colorado Water Conservation Board prior to any alteration or relocation of a water course, and a copy of said notice is submitted to the Federal Emergency Management Agency; and 6. A guarantee is provided in the event a water course is altered or relocated, that applies to the developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that ensures that the flood carrying capacity on the parcel is not diminished; and 7. Copies are provided of all necessary federal and state permits relating to work within the one-hundred-year floodplain; and 8. There is no development other than approved native vegetation planting within fifteen (15) feet back of the top of slope or the high waterline, whichever is most restrictive. This is an effort to protect the existing riparian vegetation and bank stability. New plantings (including trees, shrubs, flowers, and grasses) outside of the designated building envelope on the river side shall be native riparian vegetation as approved by the City. A landscape plan will be submitted with all development applications. The top of slope and 100 year jlood plain elevation of the Roaring Fork River shall be determined by the Stream Margin Map located in the Community Development Department and filed at the City Engineering Department. 9. All development outside the fifteen (15) foot setback from the top of slope does not exceed a height delineated by a line drawn at a forty-five (45) degree angle from ground level at the top of slope. Height shall be measured and determined by the Community Development Director using the definition for height set forth at Section 26.04.1 00 and method of calculating height set forth at Section 26.575.020, as shown in Figure "A". Figure uA," 7 r", ~ 10. All exterior lighting is low and downcast with no light(s) directed toward the river or located down the slope and shall be in compliance with section 26.575.150. A lighting plan will be submitted with all development applications; and I I. There has been accurate identification of wetlands and riparian zones. (Ord. No. 55-2000, S6, 7; Ord. No. 47-1999, S3) D. Appeal of Director's Determination. An appeal of a determination in regards to a Stream Margin Application or in regards to the top of slope determination made by the Community Development Director, shall be reviewed as a Special Review pursuant to subsection E, below. In this case, the Community Development Director's finding shall be forwarded as a recommendation and a new application need not be filed. E. Special Review. An application requesting a variance from the Stream Margin Review Standards, or an appeal of the Stream Margin Map's top of slope determination, shall be processed as a Special Review in accordance with Common Development Review Procedure setforth in Section 26.304. The Special Review shall be considered at a public hearing for which notice has been published, posted and mailed, pursuant to Section 26.304.060(E)(3)(a b, and c}. Review is by the Planning and Zoning Commission. A Special Review from the Stream Margin Review Determination may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied based on conformance with the following review criteria: I. An authorized survey from a Colorado Professionally Licensed Surveyor shows a different determination in regards to the top of slope and 100 year flood plain than the Stream Margin Map located in the Community Development Department andfiled in the City Engineering Department; and 2. The proposed development meets the Stream Margin Review Standard(s} upon which the Community Development Director had based thefinding of denial. F. Building Permit Submittal Requirements Prior to receiving a building permitfor a property within the stream margin review area, the following mist be submitted: 1. The applicant shall record a site improvement plat with topography prepared by a Colorado licensed, professional surveyor showing the building envelope determined by the Community Development Director based on the Stream 8 ~ r"\ Margin Review Map located in the Community Development Department. 2. Site sections drawn by a registered architect, landscape architect, or engineer shall be submitted showing all existing and proposed site elements, the top of slope, and pertinent elevations above sea level. 3. The building envelope shall be barricaded prior to issuance of any demolition, excavation or building permits. The barricades shall remain in place until the issuance of Certificates of Occupancy. Section 26.435.020, Authority, must also be amended to be consistent in giving the Community Development Director the review authority in Stream Margin Reviews on the Roaring Fork River. The section is stated below with the old language having a "strike out" through it and the new language documented in bold and italics, as follows: Original Text: 26.435.020 Authority. Following the receipt of a recommendation from the Community Development Department, the Planning and Zoning Commission, in accordance with the procedures, standards and limitations of this Chapter, shall by resolution approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA). The Community Development Director, in accordance with the procedures, standards and limitations of this Chapter, shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for exempt development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA). New Text: 26.435.020 Authority. Following the receipt of a recommendation from the Community Development Department, the Planning and Zoning Commission, in accordance with the procedures, standards and limitations of this Chapter, shall by resolution approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA), with the exception of development within a stream margin of the Roaring Fork River. Development within a stream margin of the Roaring Fork River shall be reviewed by the Community Development Director. The Community Development Director, in accordance with procedure, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove an application for development in the stream margin. The Community Development Director, in accordance with the procedures, standards and limitations of this Chapter, shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for exempt development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA). 9 ".-.., f"") Staff concludes that the proposed code amendments to the Streanl Margin Review Process have been reviewed per Section 26.3 I 0.040 Standards of Review. Staff finds that the proposed amendments will make the review process more efficient for both applicants and the City of Aspen without compromising the thoroughness or importance of the Stream Margin Review. Staff feels that by adopting the Stream Margin Map as the official determination of top of slope and high water line, it will rid the stream margin review process of subjective determinations in regards to this matter. This will enable the review process to be approved at an administrative level because the review will be completely based on whether or not the applicant meets the standards much like the review of Accessory Dwelling Units are currently handled. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the City Council approve the proposed code amendments to the stream margin review section as proposed. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of the Proposed Code Amendments to Section 26.435, Stream Margin Review, that will allow for the Community Development Director to be the review authority on Roaring Fork River Stream Margin Review Applications and the adoption of the Stream Margin Map as the official determination of top of slope and high water line. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended by a 7 to 0 vote that City Council approve the Proposed Code Amendments to Section 26.435, Stream Margin Review. Recommended Motion: "I move to approve Ordinance No.45 Series of2001, approving Code Amendments to the City Land Use Code that will reorganize the Stream Margin Review Section, give the Community Development Director decision-making authority on Roaring Fork River Stream Margin Review Applications and the adoption of the Stream Margin Map as the official determination of top of slope and the high water line for properties on the Roaring Fork River. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A- Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 43, Series of2001. 10 // '., ../ -' A n 'Vn b MEMORANDUM To: Mayor Klanderud and City Council THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Directo~ FROM: James Lindt, Planning Technician JL RE: Proposed Amendments to the Stream Margin Review Process and Review Standards, Section 26.435.040 - Code Amendment. "1" Reading" of Ordinance No. +s-; Series of 2001 DATE: November 26,2001 ApPLICANT: City of Aspen Community Development Department PROPOSED AMENDMENT: The Community Development Staff proposes to amend the Stream Margin Review Process with the overall intent of clarifying and streamlining the review process. The proposed amendments to Section 26.435.040, Stream Margin Review, are intended to change the Stream Margin Review process for properties only on the Roaring Fork River from a Planning and Zoning Commission process to an administrative review process in order to handle what staff feels is a "technical" review more suited for staff review versus the more substantial, quasi-judicial reviews by the Planning and Zoning Commission. This change will also have a secondary benefit of freeing up agenda space and saving applicants the unnecessary time and money of going through a board review process. The Stream Margin Review Standards are also proposed to be changed to utilize a newly created map of the Roaring Fork River to determine top of slope and mean high water line for the properties along the Roaring Fork River. Other amendments in this section are proposed to update, reorganize and clarify the current review standards. SUMMARY: The Community Development Department Staff is proposing code amendments to Section 26.435.040, Stream Margin Review, to change the stream margin review from a Planning and Zoning Commission Review to an Administrative Review by the Community D(~velopment Director. The Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed the proposed code amendments and unanimously recommended that City Council approve them. As a work program item, City Council directed staff to have the top of slope and high water line of the Roaring Fork River mapped from the eastern edge of the City limits to the Slaughter House Bridge on the western City limits. The aforementioned map is proposed to be adopted and utilized to determine the top of slope and the high water line on all Stream Margin Review Applications. A process to appeal the map determination of the top of slope is also put in place through the proposed r\ f) code amendments. The proposed amendments also include a reorganization of the existing review standards but not a substantial change to them. The Stream Margin Review Standards are mainly technical in their existing state and require an applicant to meet set requirements that are not subjective of discretionalY. Because of the objective nature of the standards, staff believes that the Stream Margin Review Process for properties on the Roaring Fork River could be reviewed as effectively and accurately at an administrative level. Therefore, the Community Development staff proposes the following code amendments to the Stream Margin Review Section of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. Process: Amendment to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map ~ To determine if the application meets the standards for an amendment to the code text or official zone district map. ~ Planning Commission makes a recommendation to City Council. ~ City Council either approves, denies, or amends and approves the proposed text. Review In reviewing an amendment to the text of this Title or an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. ~ Staff Finding: o The changes regarding the proposed amendment would be made throughout Title 26 so as not to muse a conflict in how the text reads or what it means. Process changes will be made throughout the land use code, no conflict is created in that regard. The section will be reorganized to make it more user friendly and logically organized. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan. ~ Staff Finding: o Stafffeels that the proposed amendments will continue to yield as thorough of a review of the stream margin review as that currently in place. The protection of environmentally sensitive areas as desired by the AACP will still be accomplished. By cutting the number of steps in the stream margin review process for properties on the Roaring Fork River, staff feels that it will be more effident for the applicant and will save money and time of going through a public review process. Staff also believes that by utilizing the new Stream Margin Review Map as the official top of slope and 2 !"""\ 1"""\ . J high water determlnaiibns for propertles on the Roaring Fork Rivers, that much of the conflict and dispute between the City and the applicant over these determin~rtions will be alleviated. Staff believes that the Stream Margin Review Map generated by Sopris Engineering is accurate and that substituting it for a private surveyor's work will not compromise the quality of the review of the stream margin standards. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. J.- Staff Findinf!: o Stafffinds that the proposed amendment is compatible with the surrounding zone districts and land uses, and will not change the characteristics of the neighborhood. The land use pattern will not change, as the stream margin review standards for the zone districts will not be affected. The review process will be more efficient and streamlined with the same outcome as today's regulations would yield. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. J.- Staff Findinf!: o There will be no effect or negative impacts of these proposed amendments on traffic generation and road safety. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. J.- Staff Findinf!: o The proposed amendments will not result in changed to the demands of public facilities. F Whether the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. J.- Staff Findinf!: o Stafffinds the proposed amendments will not have a significant impact on the natural environment. Stafffeels that the Stream Margin Review Standards are objective enough that there is not a lot of decision-making involved in the stream margin review process. There should be no difference in the impact on the environment if staffis reviewing an 3 1""'\ f") application as opposed to the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewing the same application. Many of the conditions of approval on Stream Ma~gin Reviews are asked for by the referral agencies and are st~'ndard conditions of approval. Staff still intends to refer Stream Margin Review Applications to the other pertinent City departments and place conditions on the administrative approvals of Stream Margin Reviews. The proposed code amendments shall have no impact on the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. ~ Staff FindinJ(: o Staff finds that the proposed amendment will not effect the community character in the City of Aspen. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. ~ Staff FindinJ(: o Stafffinds that no specific subject parcel or specific neighborhood is the subject of this code amendment and therefore the criterion does not apply. 1. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest and whether it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this Titk ~ Staff FindinJ(: o Stafffinds that the proposed amendment will not conflict with the public interest. Staff feels that the proposed changes in the Stream Margin Review Process will be to the benefit of the public. An administrative process will be more efficient and save applicants time because it alleviates the need to wait to get on a Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda. The proposed amendment would also free up Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda time that can be used to review and handle other types of land use reviews. Staff believes that applicants will be more informed about their development potential in stream margin areas on the Roaring Fork River prior to going through the review if the Stream Margin Map, generated by Sopris Engineering, is adopted as the official top of slope and high water lines for the Roaring Fork River. This will benefit the public interest. 4 .r"\ n ,- -) Staff is proposing to amend all the sections in the Aspen Land Use Code that referenced the process of a Stream Margin Review. Staff proposes to repeal Section 26.435.040, Stream Margin Review, in it's entirety and replace it with the following Code Language. The following proposed language accomplishes the following four objectives, (1) reorganizes the Stream Margin Review Section into a logical sequence, (2) gives the Community Development Director Review Authority D)r Stream Margin Review on properties located on the Roaring Fork River, (3) adopts the Stream Margin Map as the top of slope for properties on the Roaring Fork River, and (4) sets up a process for the appeal of the Community Development Director's dekrmination. Proposed new language is italicized and in bold. Language in the current Stream Margin Review Section that is not new but is being reorganized is not italicized in the following proposed code language. 26.435.040 Stream Margin Review. A. Applicability. The provisions ofthe Stream Margin Review shall apply to all development within one hundred (100) feet, measured horizontally, from the high water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, and to all development within the 100- year flood plain. B. Exemptions. The Community Development Director may exempt the following types of development within the Stream Margin Review area: I. Construction of pedestrian or automobile bridges, public trails, or structures for irrigation, drainage, flood control or water diversion, bank stabilization provided plans and specifications are submitted to the City Engineer demonstrating that the structure is engineered to prevent blockage of drainage channels during peak flows and the Community Development Director determines the proposed structure complies, to the extent practical, with the Stream Margin Review Standards. 2. Construction of improvements essential for public health and safety which cannot be reasonably accommodated outside of the "no development area" prescribed by this Section including, but not limited to, potable water systems, sanitary sewer, utilities, and fire suppression systems provided the Community Development Director determines the development complies, to the extent practical, with the Stream Margin Review Standards. 3. The expansion, remodeling, or reconstruction of an existing development provided the following standards are met: a. The development does not add more than ten (10) percent to the floor area of the existing structure or increase the amount of building area exempt from floor area calculations by more than twenty-five (25) percent. All stream margin exemptions are cumulative. Once a development reaches these 5 (""\. (") .. totals, a Stream Margin Review by the Community Development Director or the Planning and Zoning Commission is required; and, b. The development does not require the removal of any ltree for which a permit would be required pursuant to Chapter 13.20 of this Code. c. The development is located such that no portion of the expansion, remodeling or reconstruction will be any closer to the high water line than is the existing development; 1. The development does not fall outside of an approved building envelope if one has been designated through a prior review; and n. The expansion, remodeling or reconstruction wjijJ cause no increase to the amount of ground coverage of structures within the 100 year flood plain. C. Stream Margin Review Standards. No development shall be permitted within the Stream Margin of the Roaring Fork River unless the Community Development Director makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements set forth below. No Development shall be permitted within the Stream Margin of the tributaries of the Roaring Fork River unless the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements setforth below. I. It can be demonstrated that any proposed development which is in the Special Flood Hazard Area will not increase the base flood elevation on the parcel proposed for development. This shall be demonstrated by an engineering study prepared by a professional engineer registered to practice in the State of Colorado which shows that the base flood elevation will not be raised, including, but not limited to, proposing mitigation techniques on or off-site which compensate for any base flood elevation increase caused by the development; and 2. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan: Parks/Recreation/Open Space/Trails Plan and the Roaring Fork River Greenway PJ1an are implemented in the proposed plan for development, to the greatest extent practicable. Areas of historic public use or access shall be dedicated via a recorded easement for public use. A fisherman's easement granting public fishing access within the high water boundaries of the river course shall be granted to the greatest extent possible via a recorded "Fisherman's Easement;" and, 3. There is no vegetation removed or damaged or slope grade changes (cut or fill) made outside of a specifically defined building envelope. A building envelope shall be designated by this review and said envelope shall be recorded on a plat pursuant to Section 26.435.040(F)(1). 6 I""', , , t) 4. The proposed development does not pollute or interfere with the natural changes of the river, stream or other tributary, including erosion and/or sedimentation during construction. Increased on-site drainage shall be accommodated within the parcel to prevent entry into the river or onto its banks. Pools or hot tubs cannot be drained outside of the designated building envelope; and 5. Written notice is given to the Colorado Water Conservation Board prior to any alteration or relocation of a water course, and a copy of said notice is submitted to the Federal Emergency Management Agency; and 6. A guarantee is provided in the event a water course is altered or relocated, that applies to the developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that ensures that the flood carrying capacity on the parcel is not diminished; and 7. Copies are provided of all necessary federal and state permits relating to work within the one-hundred-year floodplain; and 8. There is no development other than approved native vegetation planting within fifteen (15) feet back of the top of slope or the high waterline, whichever is most restrictive. This is an effort to protect the existing riparian vegetation and bank stability. New plantings (including trees, shrubs, flowers, and grasses) outside of the designated building envelope on the river side shall be native riparian vegetation as approved by the City. A landscape plan will be submitted with all development applications. The top of slope and 100 year flood plain elevation of the Roaring Fork River shall be determined by the Stream Margin Map located in the Community Development Department and filed at the City Engineering Department. 9. All development outside the fifteen (I 5) foot setback from the top of slope does not exceed a height delineated by a line drawn at a forty.-five (45) degree angle from ground level at the top of slope. Height shall be measured and determined by the Community Development Director using the definition for height set forth at Section 26.04.1 00 and method of calculating height set forth at Section 26.575.020, as shown in Figure "A". Figure "A" 7 ,-., n IO. All exterior lighting is low and downcast with no light(s) directed toward the river or located down the slope and shall be in compliance with section 26.575.150. A lighting plan will be submitted with all development applications; and I I. There has been accurate identification of wetlands and riparian zones. (Ord. No. 55-2000, S6, 7; Ord. No. 47-1999, S3) D. Appeal of Director's Determination. An appeal of a determination in regards to a Stream Margin Application or in regards to the top of slope determination made by the Community Development Director, shall be reviewed as a Special Review pursuant to subsection E, below. In this case, the Community Development Director's finding shall be forwarded as a recommendation and a new application need not be filed. E. Special Review. An application requesting a variance from the Stream Margin Review Standards, or an appeal of the Stream Margin Map's top of slope determination, shall be processed as a Special Review in accordance with Common Development Review Procedure setforth in Section 26.304. The Special Review shall be considered at a public hearing for which notice has been published, posted and mailed, pursuant to Section 26.304.060(E)(3)(a b, and c). Review is by the Planning and Zoning Commission. A Special Review from the Stream Margin Review Determination may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied based on conformance with the following review criteria: 1. An authorized survey from a Colorado Professionally Licensed Surveyor shows a different determination in regards to the top of slope and 100 year flood plain than the Stream Margin Map located in the Community Development Department andfiled in the City Engineering Department, and 2. The proposed development meets the Stream Margin Review Standard(s) upon which the Community Development Director had based the finding of denial. F. Building Permit Submittal Requirements Prior to receiving a building permitfor a property within the stream margin review area, the following mist be submitted: 1. The applicant shall record a site improvement plat with topography prepared by a Colorado licensed, professional surveyor showing the building envelope determined by the Community Development Director based on the Stream 8 r, 1'\ ;t Margin Review Map located in the Community Development Department. 2. Site sections drawn by a registered architect, landscape architect, or engineer shall be submitted showing all existing and proposed site elements, the top of slope, and pertinent elevations above sea level. 3. The building envelope shall be barricaded prior to issmmce of any demolition, excavation or building permits. The barricades shall remain in place until the issuance of Certificates of Occupancy, Section 26.435.020, Authority, must also be amended to be consistent in giving the Community Development Director the review authority in Stream Margin Reviews on the Roaring Fork River. The section is stated below with the old language having a "strike out" through it and the new language documented in bold and italics, as follows: Original Text: 26.435.020 Authority. Following the receipt of a recommendation from the Community Development Department, the Planning and Zoning Commission, in accordance with the procedures, standards and limitations of this Chapter, shall by resolution approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA). The Community Development Director, in accordance with the procedures, standards and limitations of this Chapter, shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for exempt development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA). New Text: 26.435.020 Authority. Following the receipt of a recommendation from the Community Development Department, the Planning and Zoning Commission, in accordance with the procedures, standards and limitations of this Chapter, shall by resolution approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA), with the exception of development within a stream margin of the Roaring Fork River. Development within a stream margin of the Roaring Fork River shall be reviewed by the Community Development Director. The Community Development Director, in accordance with procedure, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove an application for development in the stream margin. The Community Development Director, in accordance with the procedures, standards and limitations of this Chapter, shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for exempt development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA). 9 r"; ~ , Staff concludes that the proposed code amendments to the Stream Margin Review Process have been reviewed per Section 26.310.040 Standards of Review. Staff finds that the proposed amendments will make the review process more efficient for both applicants and the City of Aspen without compromising the thoroughness or importance of the Stream Margin Review. Staff feels that by adopting the Stream Margin Map as the official determination of top of slope and high water line, it will rid the stream margin review process of subjective determinations in regards to this matter. This will enable the review process to be approved at an administrative level because the review will be completely based on whether or not the applicant meets the standards much like the review of Accessory Dwelling Units are currently handled. The Planning and Zoning Commission recornmends that the City Council approve the proposed code amendments to the stream margin review section as proposed. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of the Proposed Code Amendments to Section 26.435, Stream Margin Review, that will allow for the Community Development Director to be the review authority on Roaring Fork River Stream Margin Review Applications and the adoption of the Stream Margin Map as the official determination of top of slope and high water line. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that City Council approve the Proposed Code Amendments to Section 26.435, Stream Margin Review. Recommended Motion: II "I move to approve Ordinance No.~ Series of 2001, approving Code Amendments to the City Land Use Code that will reorganize the Stream Margin Review Section, give the Community Development Director decision-making authority on Roaring Fork River Stream Margin Review Applications and the adoption of the Stream Margin Map as the official determination of top of slope and the high water line for properties on the Roaring Fork River. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A- Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution No. 43, Series of200I. 10 Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Julie Ann Woods, Cornnmnity Develop~ent Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director ~ James Lindt, Planning Technician ~ Proposed Amendments to the Stream Margin Review Process and Review Standards, SectiJl'.,26.435.040 - Code Amendment. Public Hearing Resolution No.~ Series of 2001 November 6,2001 1"""'1 To: THRU: FROM: RE: DATE: ("'\ .ME. MEMORANDUM ~fJProv€eJ 7-0 APPLICANT: City of Aspen Community Development Department PROPOSED AMENDMENT: The Community Development Staff proposes to amend the Stream Margin Review Process with the overall intent of clarifying and streamlining the review process. The proposed alllendments to Section 26.435.040, Stream Margin Review, are intended to change the Stream Margin Review process for properties only on the Roaring Fork River from a Planning and Zoning Commission process to an administrative review process in order to handle what staff feels is a "technical" review more suited for staff review versus the more substantial, quasi-judicial reviews by the Planning and Zoning Commission. This challge will also have a secondary benefit of freeing up agenda space and saving applicants the unnecessary time and money of going through a board review process. The Stream Margin Review Standards are also proposed to be changed to utilize a newly created map of the Roaring Fork River to determine top of slope and mean high water line for the properties along the Roaring Fork River. Other amendments in this section are proposed to update, reorganize and clarify the current review standards. SUMMARY: The Community Development Department Staff is proposing code amendments to Section 26.435.040, Stream Margin Review, to change the stream margin review from a Planning and Zoning Commission Review to an Administrative Review by the Community Development Director. As a work program item, City Council directed staff to have the top of slope and high water line of the Roaring Fork River mapped from the eastern edge of the City limits to the Slaughter House Bridge on the western City limits. The aforementioned map is proposed to be adopted and utilized to determine the top of slope and the high water line on all Strealll Margin Review Applications. A process to appeal the map determination of the top of slope is also put in place through the proposed code amendments. The proposed amendments also include a reorganization of the existing review standards but not a subst~ntial change to them.. The Stream Margin Review Standards are mainly technical in their existing state and require an applicant to meet set n~quirements that are not subjective of discretionary. Because of the objective nature ofthe standards, staff believes that the Stream Margin Revi(~w Process for properties on the Roaring Fork River could be reviewed as effectively and accurately at an administrative level. Therefore, the Community Development staff proposes the following code amendments to the Stream Margin Review Section of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. f""": ~ Process: Amendment to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map ~ To determine if the application meets the standards for an amendment to the code text or official zone district map. ~ Planning Cornmission makes a recommendation to City Council. Review In reviewing an amendment to the text of this Title or an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. ~ Staff Findiml: o The changes regarding the proposed amendment would be made throughout Title 26 so as not to cause a conflict in how the text reads or what it means. Process changes will be made throughout the land use code, no conflict is created in that regard. The section will be reorganized' to make it more user friendly and logically organized. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan. ~ Staff Findinfl: o Stafffeels that the proposed amendmellts will continue to yield as thorough of a review of the stream margin review as that currently in place. The protection of environmentally sensitive areas as desired by the AA CP will still be accomplished. By cutting the number of steps in the stream margin review process for properties on the Roaring Fork River, staff feels that it will be more efficient for the applicant and will save money and time of going through a public review process. Staff also believes that by utilizing the new Stream Margin Review Map as the official top of slope and high water determinations for properties on the Roaring Fork Rivers, that much of the conflict and dispute between the City and the applicant over these determinations will be alleviated. Staff believes that the Stream Margin Review Map generated by Sopris Engineering is accurate and that substituting it for a private surveyor's work will not compromise the quality of the review of the stream margin standards. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. 2 f"""\ f1 , "'1 ,.)' ~ Staff Findinf!: o Stafffinds that the proposed amendmer.lt is compatible with the surrounding zone districts and land uses, and will not change the characteristics of the neighborhood. The land use pattern will not change, as the stream margin review standards for the zone districts will not be affected. The review process will be more efficient ami streamlined with the same outcome as today's regulations would yield. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. ~ Staff Findinf!: o There will be no effect or negative impacts of these proposed amendments on traffic generation and road safety. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demallds on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. ~ Staff Findinf!: o The proposed amendments will not result in changed to the demands of public facilities. F Whether the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. ~ Staff Findinf!: o Stafffinds the proposed amendments wUl not have a significant impact on the natural environment. Stafffeels that the Stream Margin Review Standards are objective enough that there is not a lot of decision-making involved in the stream margin review process. There should be no difference in the impact on the environment if stall is reviewing an application as opposed to the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewing the same applic~ltion. Many of the conditions of approval on Stream Margln Reviews are asked for by the referral agencies and are standard conditions of approval. Staffstill intends to refer Str~~am Margin Review Applications to the other pertinent City Irlepartments and place conditions on the administrative approv,als of Stream Margin Reviews. The proposed code amendments shall have no impact on the natural environment. 3 1""\ n G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. >- Staff Findinfl: o Stafffinds that the proposed amendment will not effect the community character in the City of Aspen. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subj,:ct parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. >- Staff Findinfl: o Staff finds that no specific subject parcel or specific neighborhood is the subject of this code amendment and therefore the criterion does not apply. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with th(: public interest alld whether it is in hmony with the purpose and intent of this Title. >- Staff Findinfl: o Stafffinds that the proposed amendment will not conflict with the public interest. Stafffeels that the proposed changes in the Stream Margin Review Process will be to the benefit of the public. An administrative process will be more efficient and save applicants time because it al/.f!Viates the need to wait to get on a Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda. The proposed amendment would also free up Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda time that can be used to review and handle other types of land use reviiews. Staff believes that applicants will be more informed ,about their development potential in stream margin areas on the Roaring Fork River prior to going through the review if the Stream Margin Map, generated by Sopris Engineering, is adopted as the official top of slope and high watel'lines for the Roaring Fork River. This will benefit the pubUc interest. Staff is proposing to amend all the sections in the Aspen Lalld Use Code that referenced the process of a Stream Margin Review. Staff proposes to repeal Section 26.435.040, Stream Margin Review, in it's entirety and replace it with the following Code Language. The following proposed language accomplishes the following four objectives, (I) reorganizes the Stream Margin Review Section into a logical sequence, (2) gives the Community Development Director Review Authority for Stream Margin Review on properties located on the Roaring Fork River, (3) adopts the Stream Margin Map as the top of slope for properties on the Roaring Fork River, and (4) sets up a process for the appeal of the Community Development Director's dete:rmination. 4 r'\ ~ , i Proposed new language is italicized and in bold. Lallguage in the current Stream Margin Review Section that is not new but is being reorganized is not italicized in the following proposed code language. 26.435.040 Stream Margin Review. A. Applicability. The provisions of the Stream Margin Review shall apply to all development within one hundred (IOO) feet, measured horizontally, from the high water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, and to all development within the 100-year flood plain. B. Exemptions. The Community Development Director may exempt the following types of development within the Stream Margin Review area: I. Construction of pedestrian or automobile bridges, public trails, or structures for irrigation, drainage, flood control or water diversion, bank stabilization provided plans and specifications are submitted to the City Engineer demonstrating that the structure is engineered to prevent blockage of drainage channels during peak flows and the Community Development Director determines the proposed structure complies, to the extent practical, with the Stream Margin Review Standards. 2. Construction of improvements essential for public health alld safety which cannot be reasonably accommodated outside ofthe "no development area" prescribed by this Section including, but not limited to, potable water systems, sanitary sewer, utilities, and fire suppression systems provided the Community Development Director determines the development complies, to the extent practical, with the Stream Margin Review Standards. 3. The expansion, remodeling, or reconstruction of all existing development provided the following standards are met: a. The development does not add more than ten (I 0) percenll to the floor area ofthe existing structure or increase the amount of building area exempt from floor area calculations by more than twenty-five (25) percent. All stream margin exemptions are cumulative. Once a development reaches these totals, a Stream Margin Review by the Community Development Director or the Planning and Zoning Commission is required; and, b. The development does not require the removal of any tree for which a permit would be required pursuant to Chapter 13.20 of this Code. c. The development is located such that no portion of the expansion, remodeling or reconstruction will be any closer to the high water line than is the existing development; 5 1"', r-" i.. ....:' i. The development does riot fall outside of an approved building envelope if one has been designated through a prior review; and n. The expansion, remodeling or reconstruction will cause no increase to the amount of ground coverage of structures within the 100 year flood plain. C. Stream Margin Review Standards. No development shall be permitted within the Stream Margin of the Roaring Fork River unless the Community Development Director makes a determination that the proposed developrnent complies with an requirements set forth below. No Development shall be permitted within the Stream Margin of the tributaries of the Roaring Fork River unless the Planning and Zoning Commissiolll makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements set forth below. I. It can be demonstrated that any proposed development which is in the Special Flood Hazard Area will not increase the base flood elevation on the parcel proposed for development. This shall be demonstrated by an engineering study prepared by a professional engineer registered to practice in the State of Colorado which shows that the base flood elevation will not be. raised, including, but not limited to, proposing mitigation techniques on or off-site which compensate for any base flood elevation increase caused by the development; and 2. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan: Parks/Recreation/Open Space/Trails Plan and the Roaring Fork River Greenway Plan are implemented in the proposed plan for development, to the greatest extent practicable. Areas of historic public use or access shall be dedicated via a recorded easement for public use. A fisherman's easem~nt granting public fishing access within the high water boundaries of the river course shall be granted to the greatest extent possible via a recorded "Fisherman's Easement;" and, 3. There is no vegetation removed or damaged or slope grade changes (cut or fill) made outside of a specifically defined building envelope. A building envelope shall be designated by this review and said envelope shall be recorded on a plat pursuant to Section 26.4~5.040(F)(1). 4. The proposed development does not pollute or interfere with the natural changes of the river, stream or other tributary, including erosion and/or sedimentation during construction. Increased on-site drainage shall be accommodated within the parcel to prevent entry into the river or onto its banks. Pools or hot tubs cannot be drained outside of the designated building envelope; and 5. Written notice is given to the Colorado Water Conservation Board prior to any alteration or relocation of a water course, and a copy of said notice is submitted to the Federal Emergency Management Agency; and 6 (". [) 6. A guarantee is provided in the event a water course is altered or relocated, that applies to the developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that ensures that the flood carrying capacity on the parcel is not diminished; and 7. Copies are provided of all necessary federal and state permits relating to work within the one-hundred-year floodplain; and 8. There is no development other than approved native vegetation planting within fifteen (15) feet back of the top of slope or the high waterline, whichever is most restrictive. This is an effort to protect the existing riparilm vegetation and bank stability. New plantings (including trees, shrubs, flowers, and grasses) outside of the designated building envelope on the river side shall be native riparian vegetation as approved by the City. A landscape plan willi be submitted with all development applications. The top of slope and 100 year flood plain elevation of the Roaring Fork River shall be determined by the Stream Margin Map located in the Community Development Department and filed at the City Engineering Department. 9. All development outside the fifteen (15) foot setback from the top of slope does not exceed a height delineated by a line drawn at a forty-five (45) degree angle from ground level at the top of slope. Height shall be measured and determined by the Community Development Director using the definition for height set forth at Section 26.04.100 and method of calculating height set forth at Section 26.575.020. 10. All exterior lighting is low and downcast with no light(s) directed toward the river or located down the slope and shall be in compliance with slection 26.575.150. A lighting plan will be submitted with all development applications; and I I. There has been accurate identification of wetlands and riparian zones. (Ord. No. 55-2000, S6, 7; Ord. No. 47-1999, ~3) D. Appeal of Director's Determination. An appeal of a determination in regards to a Stream Margin Application or in regards to the top of slope determination made by the Community Development Director, shall be reviewed as a Special Review pursuant to subsection E, below. In this case, the Community Development Director's finding shall be forwarded as a recommendation and a new application need not be filed. E. Special Review. An application requesting a variance from the Stream Margin Review Standards, or an appeal of the Stream Margin Map's top of slope determination, shall be processed as a Special Review in accordance with Common Development Review Procedure set forth in Section 26.304. The Special Review shall be considered at a public hearing for which notice has been published, posted and mailed, pursuant to Section 26.304.060(E)(3)(a b, and c). Review is bv the Plannim! and Zoninf! 7 ('") n Commission. A Special Review from the Stream Margin Review Determination may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied based on conformance with the following review criteria: 1. An authorized survey from a Colorado Professionally Licensed Surveyor shows a different determination in regards to the top of slope ami 1 00 year flood plain than the Stream Margin Map located in the Community Development Department and filed in the City Engineering Department. and 2. The proposed development meets the Stream Margin Revi,rnv Standard(s) upon which the Community Development Director had based the finding of denial. F. Building Permit Submittal Requirements Prior to receiving a building permit for a property within the stream margin review area, the following mist be submitted: 1. The applicant shall record a site improvement plat with topography prepared by a Colorado licensed, professional surveyor showing the building envelope determined by the Community Development Director based on the Stream Margin Review Map located in the Community Development Department. 2. Site sections drawn by a registered architect, landscape architect, or engineer shall be submitted showing all existing md proposed sit,e elernents, the top of slope, and pertinent elevations above sea level. 3. The building envelope shall be barricaded prior to issuance of any demolition, excavation or building permits. The barricad,es shall remain in nlace until the issuance of Certificates of Occupancy. Section 26.435.020, Authoritv. must also be amended to be consistent in giving the Community Development Director the review authority in Stream Margin Reviews on the Roaring Fork River. The section is stated below with the old language having a "strike out" through it and the new language documented in bold and it:alics , as follows: Original Text: 26.435.020 Authority. Following the receipt of a recommendation from the Community Development Department, the Planning and Zoning Commission, in accordance with the procedures, standards and limitations of this Chapter, shall by resolution approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA). 8 . . f""', The Community Development Director, in accordance with the procedures, standards and limitations of this Chapter, shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for exempt development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA). New Text: 26.435.020 Authority. Following the receipt of a recommendation from the Community Development Department, the Planning and Zoning Commission, in accordance with the procedures, standards and limitations of this Chapter, shall by resolution approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA), with the exception of development within a stre/zm margin of the Roaring Fork River. Development within a stream margin of the Roaring Fork River shall be reviewed by the Community Development Director. The Commull!ity Development Director, in accordance with procedure, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove an application for development in the stream margin. The Comrnunity Development Director, in accordance with the procedures, standards and limitations of this Chapter, shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for exernpt development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA), Staff concludes that the proposed code amendments to the Stream Margin Review Process have been reviewed per Section 26.310.040 Standards of Review. Staff finds that the proposed amendments will make the review process more (:[ficient for both applicants and the City of Aspen without comprornising the thoroughness or importance of the Stream Margin Review. Staff feels that by adopting the Stream Margin Map as the official determination of top of slope and high water line, it will rid the stream margin review process of subjective determinations in regards to this matter. This will enable the review process to be approved at an adrninistrative level because the review will be completely based on whether or not the applicant meets the standards much like the review of Accessory Dwelling Units are currently handled. STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends approval of the Proposed Code Amendments to Section 26.435, Stream Margin Review, that will allow for the Community Development Director to be the review authority on Roaring Fork River Stream Margin Review Applications and the adoption of the Stream Margin Map as the official determination of top of slope and high water line. Recommended Motion: "I move to approve Resolution No._ Series of 2001, recommending that City Council approve Code Amendments that will reorganize the Stream Margin Review Section, give the Community Development Director decision- making authority on Ro,aring Fork River Stream Margin Review Applications and the adoption of the Stream Margin Map as the official determination of top of slope and the high water line for properties on the Roaring Fork River. 9