The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutagenda.apz.19981006 AGENDA ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, OCTOBER 6, 1998, 4:30 PM COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL COMMENTS A. Commissioners B. Planning Staff C. Public II. MINUTES III. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IV. PUBLIC HEARING 4:45-4:50 Ao 4:50-4:55 B.. Code Amendment, Section 26.36 (related to Security Company Mitch Haas (to be continued to October, 20, 1998) 126 Park Avenue, Conditional Use for an ADU and Residential Design, Chris Bendon (staff is recommending this be continued to a date certain) ~-~G ~,.)'~ '~ ~ 4:5~-$:30 C. Code Amendment, Section 26.28.160 (related to Definitions for sci vses), Chris -¢ Code Amendment, Sections 26.20.030, 26.52 and 26.72, Historic Pres. ervation (relate. d to upgrading a. ll inventoried parcels to be subject to HPC review), amy Guthr~e /X~O~©~'~ ~ .... O 5:45-6:30 E, V. NEW 735 W. Bleeker, Conditional Use for 2 Detached Units on 6,000 sq. ft. Lo.t~p~gcial ~eview, Landmark, Amy Guthrie BUSINESS s:a0-~:4s A. Staff Effectiveness Survey VI. ADJOURN CITY COUNCIL AGENDA September 28, 1998 5:00 P.M. Proclamation - Gentlemen of Aspen Rugby - Mayor and Council proclaimed September 28th as "Gentlemen of Aspen" day in honor of their 3rd straight National Title Resolution #67, 1998 - Reauthorization/Annexation Plan - Adopted in order to keep city's annexation plan valid until the city and county can enter into a joint planning process. to be complete by the end of 1999 Resolution #72, 1998 - Iselin and Rotary Parks Annexation - Starts the statutory process for annexation; next public hearing November 9 HPC Appointments - Appointed Jeffrey Halferty as a regular member; reappointed Susan Dodington as a regular member; appointed IV:�aureen McDonald, Lisa Markalunas and Christie Kienast as alternate members Ordinance #39, 1998 - Tipple Lodge Subdivision Agreement Exemption Adopted on first reading; public hearing October 26. This amendment would allow changes in the existing configuration of the Tipple Lodge to 3 units with kitchens and 9 without kitchens, remove rental restrictions and provide the ability to combine a unit with a kitchen with an adjacent unit that does not have a kitchen Resolution #68, 1998 - Pomegranate Extension of Plat Filing - Approved; extends plat filing deadline to December 8, 1998 Resolution #69, 1998 - City Quit Claim Deed Alpine Cottages East Circuit Avenue - Approved to deed over a portion of land to the Alpine Cottages in exchange for trail and water easements the city received through the subdivision process Resolution #66, 1998 - Recreation Bond Expense Reimbursement - Approved, will allow the city to include any current expenses for design of improvements to Iselin park, trails and golf course in the bond to be proposed in 1999 Ordinance #40, 1998 - Water Service Agreement Shadowood Apartments Approved on first reading; public hearing October 13 water service agreement for property outside the city limits east of town Resolution #70, 1998 - Red Brick School Management Contract - Approved an extended management contract with the Aspen/Snowmass Arts Council to August 2003 Approval of Assignment of Pro Shop Operations at the Golf Course - Approved assignment from Aspen Sports to Specialty Sports Resolution #71, 1998 - Burlingame Annexation - Continued public hearing to November 9 in order to file annexation report with Pitkin County Ordinance #20, 1998 - 930 King Street Historic Designation and Lot Split - Adopted; will allow two smaller structures; access off King street with 25 foot setback on Neale Avenue; maintaining "No Problem Joe's" historic house with addition on the rear Ordinance #36, 1988 - Aspen Country Inn PUD Amendment - Finally adopted PUD amendment to approve altered property boundaries, which reduced the size of the parcel. Reduction of the parcel size changes the dimension so this ordinance allows a variance in the dimensional requirements Ordinance #32, 1998 - Code Amendment - Small Lodge Mitigation - Finally adopted code amendment to require housing mitigation for free market residences occurring from change in use of a small lodge. Employee mitigation for change in use will be to provide on accessory dwelling unit per free market residence. Sunsetting of LP Lodge Program - Council agreed there will be no more large townhouse projects allowed from small lodge change in use. Council scheduled a work session for October 19 at 5 p.m. to discuss further changes Emergency Funding Request from Housing/Daycare Fund - Approved $45,000 to go to Little Feet day care for payroll and expenses through December 1998. Also approved $10,000 to Alpine Bank to help pay off debt. Little Feet to work with advisors on overall management and long term financial viability. Report back to city before end of the year Isis Parking Fee Waiver - Approved deferment of parking fees to September 1999 Ordinance #38, 1998 - Music Tent - Adopted on first reading; public hearing October 13 this SPA amendment which would allow backstage improvements and the installation of a more permanent tent Next Regular Meeting October 13 1998 COUNCIL MEETS AT NOON FOR AN INFORMAL PUBLIC DISCUSSION, BASEMENT MEETING ROOM Nick Adeh, 02:18 PM 9/21/98 , Re: Const Trailer/Parking conf X-Sender: nicka@comdev Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 14:18:56 -0600 To: Julie Ann Woods <juliew@ci.aspen.co.us> From: Nick Adeh <nicka@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Re: Const Trailer/Parking conflict Cc: timw@ci.aspen.co.us, randyr@ci.aspen.co.us, engineering@ci.aspen.co.us Julie Ann - I met with Tim this morning to discuss the ISIS project frontage. Tim's evaluation was not to switch to parallel parking because then in order to make it work, he has to do a whole block of parallel parking and he can loose well over 250 of his spaces. ISIS project on the other hand, needs a staging area to build a building that will have three levels below ground construction activity, and I am reluctant to put the pedestrians next to the edge of such a deep hole with a risky ground stability., Th e existing configuration works well and provides perfect corridor for two ten feet wide travel lanes that are adequate for movement with lower speeds. Parallel parking will make it much more unsafe and difficult for parking maneuvers in and out of these spaces. I would support the enhancement of the pedestrian traffic signs to discourage them from meandering in the streets but instead, to use the sa covered pedestrians walkway next to the project site and leave the car travel lanes alone for automobiles traffic. Nick At 08:13 AM 9/21/98 -0600, you wrote: >Tim, Nick -- >Please let me know what follow-up action you take on this so I can report it >to the P&Z. thanks for your help!! JA. >At 07:15 PM 9/16/98 -0600, Stan Clauson wrote: >>Tim, >>The P&Z last night expressed concern regarding vehicle conflicts in the area >>of the Isis construction trailer. They asked that, if the construction >>trailer cannot be moved, parking on the opposite side of the street be >> changed to parallel for the duration of the impact. FYI. >>Thanks, >>Stan Printed for Julie Ann Woods <juliew@ci.aspen.co.us> 1 Monday, September 28, 1998 12:27:27 PM Healthy Mountain Communities Page 1 of I Hold the Date! Saturday, October 17th Carbondale Town Hall M-4 . for 3 SENSIBLE GROWTH SYMPOSIUM with community and land use planning experts -- Myles Radernan, Director of Public Affairs, Park City, Utah Bill Lamont, President, American Planning Association -- CO John Fregonese, Principal - Fregonese Calthorpe & Associates, Portland Oregon Call Joyce Allbaugh at 963-2733 to register. This event is free, but space is limited. Register early! Sponsored by the Town o, f Carbondale, Town of Basalt, Town o, f S'nowmass ijillage, City o, fAspen, City o, f Glenwood Springs, Car, f field CounV Ditkin Couni�v, and Healthy Mountain Communities MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Interim Community Development Director _ FROM: Mitch Haas, Planner RE: Sign Code Amendments --- Security Signs DATE: October 6, 1998 SUMMARY: Chapter 26.36, Signs, of the Aspen Municipal Code does not permit the security company signs commonly seen throughout the City. As the sign code is currently written, only temporary real estate signs, temporary construction site signs, and home occupation signs are permitted within residential zone districts. Further, off -site signs (i.e., signs which identify a business, but are not located at the place of business) are prohibited in all zone districts. Staff received complaints about the security signs and commenced enforcement of the sign code when Apex Security requested that City Council direct staff to initiate a code amendment process where the proposed amendments would allow for security signs. Council then directed staff to carry out this request. Thus, the purpose of this memorandum is to suggest an amendment to Chapter 26.36 that would allow but regulate the siting and design of security signs in the City of Aspen while eliminating the advertising element of such signs and prohibiting off -site security signage from anywhere within the City of Aspen. At the request of Apex Security, who would be affected by the proposed amendments, Community Development Department staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission open and continue the public hearing to their October 20, 1998 agenda. Staff then recommends that, at the continued public hearing, the Commission advise City Council to approve the proposed code amendments. APPLICANT: The City of Aspen Community Development Department. BACKGROUND: Following up on citizen complaints, the City contacted Apex Security in October of 1997 to inform the company that a number of their security signs were in violation of Section 26.36, Signs, of the Aspen Municipal Code, which prohibits signs from being located in the public rights -of -way and requires that all signs comply with the setback requirements of the zone district in which said signs are located. A follow-up letter was sent to Apex on April 15, 1998, to inform the company that many of its signs were still in violation of the aforementioned regulation, and to request that all signs be brought into compliance by June 15, 1998. In a more general manner, at the July 6, 1998 City Council Brown -Bag session, Council requested that staff look into the overall legality of the Apex signs, which seemed to have become more prevalent. In response, City staff sent another letter to Apex Security on July 14, 1998 stating that Section 26.36 (Signs) of the Aspen Municipal Code only permits temporary real estate signs, temporary construction site signs, and home occupation signs within residential zone districts. The letter went on to further state that off -site signs (i.e., signs identifying a business in the area, but not displayed at the identified business's location) are prohibited in all zone districts. The July 14th letter concluded by stating that the Apex Security signs which are currently located at private residences and commercial locations within City limits are therefore not permitted, and requested that the company remove all such signs by no later than August 15, 1998. Finally, the letter suggested that Apex consider pursuing a code amendment aimed at allowing their signs. At a subsequent City Council Brown -Bag session, it was agreed that the City would initiate the code amendment process on behalf of Apex Security. PROCEDURE: Pursuant to Section 26.92.030, Procedure for Amendment, a development application for an amendment to the text of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval by the Planning Director and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing, and then approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved by the City Council at a public hearing. Therefore, the Commission is functioning in an advisory capacity with final decision -making authority resting with the City Council. DISCUSSION: Proponents of security company signs explain that the signs perform the comforting functions of theft deterrence and making it easier for police or fire department personnel to find their property in case of emergency. Others feel that the signs are out of character with the small town, Victorian mountain resort village charm of Aspen. They point out that the concept of security company signage is an import from other communities in the country where it represents a solution to a set of problems that do not exist in our community, and that the crime rates in Aspen do not justify the perception apt to be created, nor the impression apt to be made on new residents and tourists. Still other critics of security company signage believe the signs serve little purpose outside of advertising, and that they have the cumulative affect of a. Main Street billboard. After asking police and fire department personnel whether the presence of a security company sign helps them respond to a call or alarm, staff learned that the average response time in the city limits is between three (3) and five (5) minutes, depending on location, for both the police and the fire department, and that the presence or lack of a security company sign is not believed to have any affect on this margin. Staff also learned that the police respond to all alarms, and that the adopted Fire Code requires that every residence be clearly and noticeably addressed (identified), as further explained below. Because the Apex guards are located at the Aspen Airport Business Center, it usually takes them anywhere from ten (10) to twenty (20) minutes to arrive at the scene 0 of an alarm. One can conclude, then, that the signs are not needed for the Apex guards to locate the scene of an alarm since, first, the Fire Code requires that the house be clearly and noticeably addressed, and second, the guards need only look for the house with police and/or fire department vehicles in front of it. Staff recognizes that there are many people to which the signs provide a sort of security blanket, and staff in no way intends to belittle this feeling but lacks a better way, of describing it. However, given the relative infrequency of crimes- in Aspen and the apparent lack of affect on emergency response times in the event of criminal activity, staff feels that the significant community character issues associated with the proliferation of security company signs and the perception of a need for deterrence the signs potentially create outweighs the importance of the "security blanket" effect some community members prefer. Nevertheless, in appreciation of the desire to maintain the security blanket effect but still desiring to address the character -related issues and eliminate the advertising element of security signs, staff is proposing a code amendment that involves permitting one (1) six inch by six inch (6" x 6") security sign as part of the total allowable two (2) square feet of residential name and address signs per residence, provided that if the residential name and address sign is to include security signage, it be placed on the building and be non -company specific. The proposed amendment would also clearly prohibit off -site security signage that includes advertising or identification of a specific business. This proposal explicitly distinguishes between security signs and security company signs. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS: In accord with the "Purpose" of the City Sign Code, as described in Section 26.36.010 of the Municipal Code, the intent of the proposed amendment is to regulate the design, size, and placement of security signs in an effort to: • "Preserve and maintain the City of Aspen as a pleasing, visually attractive environment," (26.36.010(A)); • "Enhance the attractiveness ... of the City of Aspen as a place to live, vacation and conduct business," (26.36.010(C)); • "Enable the identification of places of residence and business," (26.36.010(E)); • "Encourage signs that are appropriate to the zone district in which they are located and consistent with the category of use to which they pertain," (26.36.010(G)); • "Curtail the size and number of signs and sign messages to the minimum reasonably necessary to identify a residential or business location and the nature of any such business," (26.36.010(J)); • "Lessen ... confusion and visual clutter caused by proliferation, improper placement ... of signs which compete for the attention of pedestrian and vehicular traffic," (26.36.010(M)); and, to • "Regulate signs in a manner so as not to interfere with ... or distract motorists, bicyclists or pedestrians," (26.36.010(N)). 3 In consideration of the Sign Code's purpose and the concerns described in the "Discussion" section of this memorandum, staff proposes amending Section 26.36.030, Procedure for Sign Permit Approval, subsection (B)(17), Residential Name and Address Signs, and Section 26.36.040, Prohibited Signs, subsection (B), Billboards and Other Off - Premise Signs, as follows, where language stricken out is proposed for removal and language in bold is proposed to augment the existing regulation. Prior to reviewing the proposed changes, it is worth noting that the adopted provisions of the Uniform Fire Code, under Article 9, Section 901.4.4, Premises Identification, mandate that "Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall contrast with their background." The proposed amendments include the added benefit of malting the Sign Code provisions for residential name and address signs consistent with the adopted "Premises Identification" rules of the Fire Code. Proposed Amendment to Section 26.36.030(B)(I7): 17. Residential name and address signs. One freestanding a wall sign per detached residential dwelling unit or duplex unit, located on the residential structure and with an area not to exceed two (2) square feet which identifies the name of ^upant and the street address of the dwelling unit. Within this two (2) square foot limitation, it is also acceptable to include the name of the occupant and/or an area of up to six inches by six inches (V x 6") for a message alerting the general public to the presence of a security system, provided the message is not specifically identifying or otherwise advertising a particular business. Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall contrast with their background. Proposed Amendment to Section 26.36.040(B): B. Billboards and other off -premise signs. Billboards and other off -premise signs, including security company signs, are prohibited, except as temporary signs as provided for in Section 26.36.120. REVIEW STANDARDS: Chapter 26.92, Amendments To The Land Use Regulations And Official Zone District Map, at Section 26.92.020 provides nine (A -I) standards for City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission's review of proposed amendments to the text of the Land Use Code. These standards and staff s evaluation of the potential amendments relative to them are provided below, with the standard in italics followed by the staff "response." A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. RESPONSE: Adoption of the proposed code amendments would not be in conflict with any applicable portions of the Land Use Code. The proposed amendments are consistent with the "Purpose" and other provisions of the existing sign code since no business in the 4 a � � City of Aspen, regardless of type or message, is permitted to display off -site advertising on anything other than a temporary basis. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. RESPONSE: The proposed amendments are not in conflict with any elements of the AACP, and are very much consistent with the "Intent" and "Philosophy" statements of the Design Quality and Historic Preservation Action Plan (page 54 of the AACP). C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land uses and neighborhood characteristics. RESPONSE: Considering land uses and neighborhood characteristics, staff believes the amendments, as proposed, would result in allowing signage that is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses while precluding signs that would be incompatible with the same. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. RESPONSE: The proposed code amendments are not anticipated to have any effect on traffic generation, but could improve road safety by mandating clear and noticeable premises identification for all residences while lessening confusion, distraction, and visual clutter caused by the proliferation and improper placement of signs which compete for the attention of pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular traffic. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. RESPONSE: The proposed amendments would have no effect on infrastructure or infrastructure capacities. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. RESPONSE: The proposed amendments would have no effect on the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. RESPONSE: Please refer to the "Discussion" section of this memorandum, above, for a full. review of character -related issues associated with the proposed amendments. Staff believes the proposed amendments present a reasonable and sound balance between the concerns' of security sign proponents and those related to the preservation of Aspen's small town, Victorian mountain village character and charm. 5 H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. RESPONSE: There has been no significant change in Aspen's general character, nor has there been significant change in local crime rates. However, the amount, visibility and prominence of security company signage throughout the City of Aspen has risen dramatically in the last year and even in recent months. These increases are believed to be negatively impacting and/or hold the potential of adversely affecting Aspen's community character. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. RESPONSE: Staff believes the public's interest with regard to security signage is in the ability to maintain a means of theft deterrence and to make properties easily identifiable, while not unduly permitting off -site advertising or degradation of the community's character and image. Staff further believes the proposed amendments would not be in conflict with this interest, and that the proposed amendments are in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Sign Code and the Land Use Code, in general. STAFF FINDINGS: Please refer to. the "Review Standards" section of this memorandum, above. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission forward to City Council a recommendation to approve the code amendments proposed herein. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to recommend that City Council adopt the code amendments related security signs as proposed in the Community Development Department staff memorandum prepared by Mitch Haas and dated October 6, 1998." EXHIBITS: Exhibit A - Letter from the Aspen Alps Condominium Association 0 ASPEN ALPS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION UAIRT"A" 7.34-56., 4 �� 89 �o N W N � Uzi iz az6�� DISTRIBUTED TO: . August 1, 1998 City :Council of Aspen Response By: 130 S . Galena B`•� Dst" : Aspen, CO 81611 For: Dear Mayor and Council, I am writing in regard to the recent decision to remove all security signs within the city limits of Aspen. The Aspen Alps Condominium Association would like it to be known that they feel the signs are an integral part of -the security system offered by Apex. The signs provide our property with theft deterrence and aides the police department and fire department in findilig our property. For these and other reasons it is our request -that the decision to -remove the signs be reversed. - Sincerel�',yours, Aspen Alps Condominium Association 700 Ute Avenue Aspen, Colorado 81611 700 Ute Avenue, Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 925-7820 Fax (970) 920-2528 1 P&Z Resolution 98- Page 1 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 26.92, AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND USE REGULATIONS AND OFFICIAL ZONE DISTRICT MAP, OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE, CITY COUNCIL APPROVE TEXT AMENDMENTS TO SECTIONS 26.36.030(B)(17), RESIDENTIAL NAME AND ADDRESS SIGNS, AND 26.36.040(B), BILLBOARDS AND OTHER OFF -PREMISE SIGNS, OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE Resolution 98- WHEREAS, Pursuant to the procedures and provisions set forth in Chapter 26.92 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Community Development Department has formally proposed amending Sections 26.36.030(13)(17) and 26.36.040(B) of the Aspen Municipal Code in an effort to regulate security company signs and security signs in the City of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.92.030, Procedure for Amendment, of the Aspen Municipal Code, a development application for an amendment to the text of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval by the Planning Director and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing, and then approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved by the City Council at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department prepared the proposed amendments and recommended approval to the Planning and Zoning Commission; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the proposed amendments and did conduct a properly noticed public hearing on October 6, 1998, and then continued to October 20, 1998; and WHEREAS, upon review and consideration of the proposed text amendments, agency and public comment thereon, and those applicable standards as contained in Chapter 26 of the Municipal Code, to wit, Division 92 (Text Amendments), the Planning and Zoning Commission has, by vote of to, -�, recommended that City Council adopt the amendments related to security signs proposed in the Community Development Department staff memorandum prepared by Mitch Haas and dated October 6, 1998. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission: Section 1: That the Commission formally recommends that City Council amend Section 26.36.030(B)(17), Residential Name and Address Signs, of the Aspen Municipal Code to read as follows: 17. Residential Name and Address Signs. One wall sign per detached residential dwelling unit or duplex unit, located on the residential structure and with an area not to exceed two (2) square feet which identifies the street address of the dwelling unit. Within this two (2) square foot limitation, it is also acceptable to include the name of the occupant and/or an area of up to six inches by six inches (6" x 6") for a message alerting the general public to the presence of a security system, provided the message is not specifically identifying or otherwise advertising a particular business. Approved numbers or addresses shall be placed on all new and existing buildings in such a position as to be plainly visible from the street or road fronting the property. Numbers shall contrast with their background. Section 2: That the Commission formally recommends that City Council amend Section 26.36.040(B), Billboards and Other Off -Premise Signs, of the Aspen Municipal Code to read as follows: P&Z Resolution 98- '� Page 2 B. Billboards and Other Off -Premise Signs. Billboards and other off -premise signs, including security company signs, are prohibited except temporary signs as provided for in Section 26.36.120. APPROVED by the Commission at a regularly scheduled public hearing on October 6, 1998, and then continued to and approved on October 20, 1998. Attest: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Planning and Zoning Commission: Sara Garton, Chairperson MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Interim Community Development Directo FROM: Christopher Bendon, Planner RE: Adair Conditional Use for two Accessory Dwelling Units and Residential Design Waivers, 126 Park Avenue -- Public Hearing DATE: October 6, 1998 SUMMARY: Arj a Adair, owner, has applied for Conditional Use approval for two Accessory Dwelling Units and variances to the Residential Design Standards for a proposed duplex at 126 Park Avenue. The property is a 4,953 square foot lot, zoned R-6, with an existing non -conforming duplex. The applicant is proposing to demolish the existing "A -frame" and redevelop the site with a new duplex and two additional ADU's. Replacement after demolition does require an exemption from GMQS. A 600 square foot ADU or two 300 square foot ADU's provides for such an exemption. The two ADU's are approximately 400 and 540 square feet and each have separate entrances without internal connections. Parking for this proposed development is problematic. The two duplex units require two spaces each with an additional space for each ADU. Six (6) parking spaces is difficult to achieve on such a small parcel without the auto becoming a dominant feature of the front yard. The applicant has proposed three (3) garage spaces, each with uncovered spaces behind. Two of these spaces appear to be partially within the street R.O.W. The applicant is seeking design waivers for volume, a one-story element, garage placement, and inflection. The volume standard refers to windows between 9 and 12 feet above finished floors and penalizes the calculation of Floor Area for those elements. Staff does not believe there exists a site specific constraint requiring larger windows. The one story element standard refers to the extent to which a structure presents a pedestrian scale on the front facade and requires 20% of the width of a building to be one-story in height. Again, staff believes this standard could be met. The garage standard requires the garage to be set back ten (10) feet from the front facade. This is an attempt to de-emphasize the automobile and encourage pedestrian oriented houses. Given the lot configuration, it is difficult to fit a garage on this property which complies. It is possible, but the garage then starts to dictate the design of the house's interior space in a way which the applicant wished to avoid. Staff cannot support this variance. The inflection standard seeks to protect the scale and massing relationship between adjacent buildings. New development which is next to a single -story structure must inflect, or "step-down," along that common boundary where the one-story element exists. The houses on both sides are one-story along the common boundaries. Therefore, the applicant has the opportunity to choose which house to inflect to and is not required to inflect to both neighbors. This standard could be met, and staff does not support a variance. This is a project which may be improved with further study. Staff generally provides favorable recommendation to projects including ADU's which present the physical capabilities to function individually. However, this application is requesting several waivers from the Residential Design Standards and appears to have a parking problem which could be exacerbated with additional units. Compliance with these standards may necessitate substantial changes to the proposal which could nullify an approved site specific development order. If the Commission is not willing to waive the Residential Design Standards as presented, this case may need to be continued to allow the applicant an opportunity to redesign the project. Staff does not believe the site programming and residential design have been fully developed and recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission continue the hearing to November 17, 1998. APPLICANT: Arj a Adair, owner. Represented by David Muckenhirn. LOCATION: 126 Park Avenue. ZONING: Medium Density Residential (R-6) LOT SIZE: 4,953 square feet LOT AREA (FOR PURPOSES OF FAR CALCULATION): 4,953 square feet as represented by applicant. This may be reduced if there exsits any easements or steep slopes. FAR: 3,286 square feet as represented by applicant. 2 CURRENT AND PROPOSED LAND USE: Duplex residence. (non -conforming structure) PREVIOUS ACTION: The Commission has not previously considered this application. REVIEW PROCEDURE: Conditional Use. The Commission shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the application at a public hearing. Residential Design Appeals. The Design Review Appeal Committee (DRAG), or any other board for which land use approval is required, shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the application at a public hearing. STAFF COMMENTS: Review criteria and Staff Findings have been included as Exhibit "A." Referral comments have been included as Exhibit "B." The application has been included as Exhibit "C." At the time of this report, staff had not recieved written referral comments from the City Engineer or from the Parks Department. Rebecca Shickling, City Parks Department, did meet on site with the applicant to discuss some trees which may be affected by the relocated driveway. According to Parks, there may need to be some tree mitigation but most of the vegetation is either below code requirements or diseased. RECOMMENDATION: Staff does not believe this project has been fully thought-out and recommends this public hearing be contintued. However, if the Commission does want to consider approval staff recommends the following conditions: 1. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the building plans shall reflect: a. that the proposed ADU's are labeled as such and each meet the definition of an Accessory Dwelling Unit. b. that the primary residences and the ADUs both be able to function as separate residential units. Each shall have an entrance and access to individual mechanical equipment for the respective unit. c. that the ADUs will contain a kitchen (having a minimum of a two -burner stove with oven, standard sink, and a 6-cubic foot refrigerator plus freezer) and a bathroom. d. that there is a signed and recorded deed restriction on the property for each ADU, a form for which may be obtained from the Housing Office. The deed restrictions shall be noted on the building permit plans. 3 e. that each ADU has the minimum one (1) off-street parking space of standard size (18' x 7.5') provided on -site and not encoaching on public rights -of -way. ADU spaces shall be labeled on the permit plans f. that each ADU meets all applicable UBC requirements for light and air. 2. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide a current Site Improvement Survey signed by a registered Land Surveyor. Any property boundary adjustments must be rectified prior to the issuance of a building permit and must include the consent of all adjoining property owners. 3. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a drainage report and a drainage plan, including a erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer which maintains sediment and debris on -site during and after construction. If a ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 2 year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. 4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the permit plans shall demonstrate compliance with the R-6 Zone District and with all aspects of the Residential Design Standards. Hiatuses shall not contribute to the calculation of Allowable Floor Area for the property. 5. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with the service requirements of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, complete a tap permit, and pay all connection charges due to the ACSD. 6. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall complete and record a agreement to construct sidewalk, curb, and gutter agreement for the adjacent portion of Park Avenue. 7. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall complete and record an agreement to join any future improvement districts for the purpose of constructing improvements which benefit the property under an assessment formula. 8. All utility meters, and any new or relocated utility pedestals or transformers must be installed on the applicant's property and not in any public right-of-way. Easements must be provided for pedestals. All utility locations and easements must be delineated on the site improvement survey. Revisions to utility locations and easements must be delineated on a revised site improvement survey prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Meter locations must be accessible for reading and may not be obstructed. 9. A tree removal permit from the City Parks Department shall be required for the removal or relocation of trees. 10. The applicant shall limit construction to the hours between 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. The applicant shall inform the contractor of this condition. 11. All construction vehicles, materials, and debris shall be maintained on -site and not within public rights -of -way unless specifically approved by the Director of the Streets Department. The applicant shall inform the contractor of this condition. 12. The applicant must receive, approval for any work within public rights -of -way from the appropriate City Department. This includes, but is not limited to, approval for a mailbox and landscaping from the City Streets Department. 0 13. Before issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall record this Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder located in the Courthouse Plaza Building. There is a per page recordation fee. In the alternative, the applicant may pay this fee to the City Clerk who will record the resolution. 14. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to continue this public hearing to (date) to allow the applicant to re- study compliance with the Residential Design Standards." ALTERNATE MOTION: "I move to approve the Conditional Use for two Accessory Dwelling Units and waive the Residential Design Standards related to "volume," "one-story element," "garage placement," and "inflection" for the Adair Residences, 126 Park Avenue, with the conditions outlined in the Community Development Department memo dated October 6, 1998." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A Exhibit B Exhibit C -- Review Criteria and Staff Comments -- Referral Comments -- Development Application 5 Exhibit A Adair Duplex STAFF COMMENTS: ADU Section 26.60.040, Standards Applicable to all Conditional Uses (A) The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and standards of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, and with the intent of the zone district in which it is proposed to be located. Staff Finding: Replacement of a demolished residence requires an exemption from GMQS. An Accessory Dwelling Unit with no mandatory occupancy deed restriction is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and standards of the Aspen Area Community Plan and qualifies as an exemption from Growth Management. Accessory Dwelling Units are a conditional use in the R-6 Zone District. (B) The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and surrounding land uses, or enhances the mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. Staff Finding: The surrounding land uses are mixed single- and multi -family residential. There are existing ADU's in the immediate area. Staff is concerned about the parking proposed for the site and it's potential impacts on the character of the neighborhood. There appears to be spaces provided partially within the street R.O.W. Staff is recommending the case be continued to allow the applicant to better address this standard. (C) The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed conditional use minimizes adverse effects, including visual impacts, impacts on pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise, vibrations and odor on surrounding properties. Staff Finding: The property is small and the required parking may be problematic. The two duplex units require 2 spaces each and the ADU's require 1 space each. The applicant may request a waiver of the parking spaces for one or both ADU's through the conditional use process. There are practically no on -street parking spaces available in the area and staff does believe there should be parking spaces provided on -site. The units appear to be designed with occupancy in mind (there are no internal entrances proposed), and the parking requirement may mandate that only one ADU be provided. The Commission should consider the merits of an `extra' ADU being used, even if there is no parking provided. (D) There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use including but not limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks, police, fire protection, emergency medical services, hospital and medical services, drainage systems, and schools. Staff Comments page 1 Staff Finding: Park fees are payable at building permit for the difference in the number of bedrooms per unit. Infrastructure capacity is sufficient for this development and utilities are available. The sanitary lines from the street to the structure will need to be upgraded for this development. The applicant will need to complete a tap permit for sanitation service and is subject to connection fees. The ACSD may require the provision of separate taps for each unit. (E) The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental Staff Finding: need for increased employees generated by the conditional use. The conditional use mitigates itself. (F) The proposed conditional use complies with all additional standards imposed on it by the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and by all other applicable requirements of this title. Staff Finding: The Commission may waive the parking requirement for the ADU's in the conditional use process. The area, however, has little on -street parking available to absorb the impacts of the waiver. The applicant is seeking waivers from the Residential Design Standards. Staff s analysis of these waiver requests follows these review standards. Section 26.40.090, Accessory Dwelling Units A. General Provisions 1) Accessory Dwelling units shall contain not less than three -hundred (300) square feet and no more than seven -hundred (700) square feet of net livable area. The unit shall be deed restricted, meeting the Housing Authority's guidelines for resident occupied units and shall be limited to rental periods of not less than six (6) months in duration. Owners of the principle residence shall have the right to place a qualified employee or employees of his or her choosing in the accessory dwelling unit. One (1) parking space shall be provided on -site for each studio unit, and for each bedroom within a one or two -bedroom accessory dwelling unit. Staff Finding: The proposed ADU's are approximately 400 and 540 square feet. The applicant will be required to file a deed restriction on the units prior to building permit. 2) An attached accessory dwelling unit shall be subject to all other dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district. Staff Finding. - The applicant's permit plans will be reviewed with respect to the R-6 Zone District. The applicant may preserve the non -conforming duplex with this redevelopment. 3) A detached accessory dwelling unit shall only be permitted on parcels that have secondary and/or alley access, exempting parcels with existing structures to be converted to detached accessory dwelling units, detached garages or carports where an accessory dwelling unit is proposed above, attached to, or contained within such detached garage or carport. Detached accessory dwelling units are prohibited within the R-15B zone district. Staff Comments page 2 Staff Finding: The ADU's are both attached units. 4) An attached accessorydwelling unit shall utilize alley access to the extent practical. Staff Finding: There is no alley which serves this property. A. Development Review Standards. 1) The proposed development is compatible and subordinate in character with the primary residence located on the property and with the development located within the neighborhood, and assuming year -around occupancy, shall not create a density pattern inconsistent with the established neighborhood. Staff Finding: The ADU's are subordinate in character to the primary units. The duplex use is non- conforming which does represent a doubling of the permitted density. With each duplex unit having an ADU, the actual density is higher even though the City does not consider ADUs as units of density. However, there are several non -conforming lots and buildings in the area and several do have Accessory dwelling Units. And, staff generally believes that residential density in town is good and should be encouraged, especially when the units are relatively modest in size. 2) Where the proposed development varies from the dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall find that such variation is more compatible in character with the primary residence than the development in accord with dimensional requirements. The following dimensional requirements may be varied: a. Minimum front and rear yard setbacks b. Minimum distance between buildings on the lot. c. Maximum allowed floor area may be exceeded up to the bonus allowed for accessory dwelling units. d. The side yard setback shall be a minimum of three feet. e. The maximum height limits for detached accessory dwelling units in the R-6 zone district may be varied at the rear one-third (1/3) of the parcel, however, the maximum height of the structure shall not exceed eighteen (18) feet. On Landmark Designated parcels and within the Historic Overlay District the HPC shall have the ability to make height variations. f. Maximum allowable site coverage may be varied up to a maximum of five (5) percent, on Landmark Designated Parcels and within an Historic Overlay District the HPC shall have the ability to make such site coverage variations. g. In the case where the proposed detached accessory dwelling unit is located on a Landmark Designated Parcel or within an Historic Overlay District only HPC may make dimensional variations pursuant to the standards of Section 26.40.070(B) Staff Finding: The applicant is not requesting any variations to the dimensional requirements. Parking standards may be varied through criteria C of the Conditional Use review, staff comments-- page 1. 3) The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Historic Preservation Committee may exempt existing nonconforming structures, being converted to a detached accessory Staff Comments page 3 dwelling unit, from 26.40.070(B)(2)(a-g) provided that the nonconformity is not increased. Staff Finding: Not applicable. The non -conforming structure is not being converted to an ADU. 4) Conditional use review shall be granted pursuant to Section 26.60.040 Standards applicable to all conditional uses. Staff Finding: Refer to Staff Comments for Conditional Use review. C. Bandit Units. Any bandit dwelling unit which can be demonstrated to have been in existence on or prior to November 1, 1988, and which complies with the requirements of this section may be legalized as an accessory dwelling unit, if it shall meet the health and safety requirements of the Uniform Building Code, as determined by the Chief Building Official. Staff Finding: Does not apply. This is not a bandit unit. D. GMQS/ Replacement Housing Credits. Accessory dwelling units shall not be used to obtain points in the affordable housing category of the Growth Management Quota System (GMQS). Only those units meeting the housing size, type, income and occupancy guidelines of approval of the housing designee and the standards of Section 26.100.090 may be used to obtain points in the affordable housing category. Accessory dwelling units also may not be used to meet the requirements of Title 20 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, "Residential Multi -Family Housing Replacement Program." Staff Finding: Does not apply. Multi -Family housing replacement applies to structures of three or more units. E. FAR for Accessory Dwelling Units. For the purposes of calculating floor area ratio and allowable floor area for a lot whose principle use is residential, the following shall apply: the allowable floor area for an above -grade attached accessory dwelling unit shall be excluded to a maximum of three -hundred -fifty (350) square feet of allowable floor area or fifty (50) percent of the size of the accessory dwelling unit, whichever is less. This floor area exclusion provision only applies to accessory dwelling units which are subject to review and approval by the Planning and Zoning Commission pursuant to conditional use review and approval, Section 26.60.030 of this code, and the units must be deed restricted, registered with the housing office, and available for rental to an eligible working resident of Pitkin County. The owner retains the right to select the renter for the unit. An Accessory Dwelling Unit separated from a principal structure by a distance of no less than ten (10) feet with a maximum footprint of four hundred fifty (45) square feet, shall be calculated at fifty (50) percent of the allowable floor area up to seven hundred (700) square feet of Floor Area. Any element linking the principal structure to the accessory structure may be no more than one (1) story tall, six (6) feet wide, and ten (10) feet long. Staff Finding.• The unit does not qualify for a Floor Area exemption and the applicant is not requesting a Floor Area bonus. Staff Comments page 4 STAFF COMMENTS: Residential Design Standards WINDOWS (VOLUME: The applicant's proposed development is subject to a FAR penalty with the following Residential Design Standard: All areas with an exterior expression of a plate height greater than 10 feet shall be counted as 2 square feet for each 1 square foot of floor area. Exterior expressions shall be defined as facade penetration between 9 and 12 feet above floor level and circular, semi -circular, or non -orthogonal fenestration between 9 and I S feet above floor level. In response to the review criteria for a DRAC variance, Staff makes the following findings: a) in greater compliance with the goals of the AACP; or, Staff Finding. The proposed variance is not in greater compliance with the goals of the Community Plan. The Residential Design Standards are a direct outcome of the AACP. b) a more effective method of addressing standard in question; or, Staff Finding: The design is not more effective than the standard. The standards specifically says no windows in this area unless the house size is reduced by the Floor Area penalty. Staff believes the most effective way to address this standard is to either comply or reduce the FAR by the penalty amount. c) clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints. Staff Finding: There are no site specific constraints for this property which necessitate larger windows, or windows above 9 feet. The site is flat, buildable, and within a developed neighborhood. There does not appear to be any constraints to the site. ONE-STORY ELEMENT: The applicant's proposed development is not in compliance with the following Residential Design Standard: One -Story Element. All residential buildings must have a one-story street facing element the width of which comprises at least twenty (20) percent of the buildings overall width. In response to the review criteria for a DR,AC variance, Staff makes the following findings: a) in greater compliance with the goals of the AACP; or, Staff Finding: Staff Comments page 5 The proposed variance is not in greater compliance with the goals of the Community Plan. The one-story element criteria was to encourage pedestrian scaled facades and to break-up the overall massing of buildings. b) a more effective method of addressing standard in question; or, Staff Finding: The applicant has not provided a more effective method for this standard. c) clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints. Staff Finding: The site is small, but a one-story element could be provided. Houses on both sides have one-story elements. GARAGE PLACEMENT: The applicant's proposed development is not in compliance with the following Residential Design Standard: Garage. All portions of a garage, carport or storage area parallel to the street shall be recessed behind the front facade by a minimum of ten (10) feet. In response to the review criteria for a DRAC variance, Staff makes the following findings: a) in greater compliance with. the goals of the AACP, or, Staff Finding: The proposed variance is not in greater compliance with the goals of the Community Plan. One of the primary concerns which resulted in Ordinance 30 was the prominence of garages on the front facade. b) a more effective method of addressing standard in question; or, Staff Finding: The applicant has not provided a more effective method for this standard. c) clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints. Staff Finding: The site is small, but staff believes the standard could be met. However, it may require less interior space or the elimination of one ADU. INFLECTION The applicant's proposed development is not in compliance with the following Residential Design Standard: Inflection. If the street frontage of an adjacent structure is one (1) story in height for a distance more than twelve (12) feet on the side facing a proposed building, then the adjacent portion of the proposed building must also be one (1) Staff Comments page 6 story in height for a distance of twelve (12) feet. If the adjacent structures on both sides of a proposed building are one (1) story in height, the required one (])'story volume of the proposed building may be on one (1) side only. If a proposed building occupies a corner lot, and faces an adjacent one (1) story structure, the required one (1) story element may be reversed to face the corner. Staff has consistently applied this to mean a 12 wide element for the distance along the lot line where the adjacent on- story element exists. In response to the review criteria for a DRAC variance, Staff makes the following findings: a) in greater compliance with the goals of the AACP; or, Staff Finding: The proposed variance is not in greater compliance with the goals of the Community Plan. The intent behind this standard was to respect the massing of neighboring properties. b) a more effective method of addressing standard in question; or, Staff Finding: The property to the north is one story but is developed on a significant grade change. The resulting structure appears much higher than one story. The property to the south is one story at the same grade. The standard does allow compliance on one side only if there exist one story structures on both sides. If staff had a preference, it would be to inflect to the southern parcel, which has a perceived lower height. c) clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site specific constraints. Staff Finding: Again, there is nothing drastically unusual about this site. The property is small, but staff believes the applicant could inflect to one side. Staff Comments page 7 57spe12 G012SOfIdafe�'6anf aft- 12 t�E 565 North Mill Street �� Aspen, Colorado 81611 Tele. (970) 925-3601 FAX #(070) Sy Kelly Chairman Michael KellN, Paul Smith • Treas. Frank Loushin Louis Popish • Secy. Bruce Matherly, Mgr. September 16, 1998 Chris Bendon Community Development 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Adair ADU's Dear Chris: The development at 126 Park Ave. is currently served by the district. Each ADU will be assessed connection fees in addition to the fees associated with the expansion of the one bedroom duplex. The existing development is served by a four inch service line which may or may not have the capacity to serve the proposed additions. The District would typically require a six inch service line for what could be four separate residences. The applicant should discuss the service line capacity issue with our line superintendent, Tom Bracewell. Service to the development is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications which are on file at the District office. We would request, as a condition of approval, that tap permits be completed prior to the issuance of building permits. Sincerely, Bruce Matherly District Manager EPA Awards of Excellence 1976 • 1986 • 1990 Regional and National Housing Office City of Aspen/Pitkin County 530 East Main Street, Lower Level Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 920-5050 Fax: (970) 920-5580 MEMORANDUM TO: Chris Bendon, Community Development Dept. FROM: Stefanie A. Levesque, Housing Office DATE: September 16, 1998 RE: Adair ADU's (2)s — Parcel ID No. REQUEST: The applicant is requesting approval for two accessory dwelling units to be located in the lower level of the main home. - BACKGROUND: According to Section 26.40.090, Accessory Dwelling Units, a unit shall contain not less than 300 square feet of net livable area and not more than 700 square feet of net livable area. ISSUES: When the Housing Office reviews plans for an accessory dwelling unit, there are particular areas that are given special attention. They are as follows: 1. The unit must be a totally private unit, which means the unit must have a private entrance and there shall be no other rooms in this unit that need to be utilized by the individuals in the principal residence; i.e., a mechanical room for the principal residence. 2. The kitchen includes a minimum of a two-bumer stove with oven, standard sink, and a 6-cubic foot refrigerator plus freezer. 3. The unit is required to have a certain percentage of natural light into the unit; i.e., windows, sliding glass door, window wells, etc., especially if the unit is located below grade. The Uniform Building Code requires that 10% of the floor area of a unit needs to have natural light. Natural light is defined as light which is clear and open to the sky. 4. Should the unit be used to obtain an FAR bonus, the unit MUST be rente-Tto a qualified employee. 5. A deed restriction MUST be recorded PRIOR to building permit approval. The deed restriction shall be obtained from the Housing Office. RECOMMENDATION: After reviewing the application, the Housing Office recommends approval on the condition that issues 1-5 above are met prior to building permit approval. Prior to C.O. the Housing Office requires a site tour to inspect the unit. \referral\eldn798.adu /Z(..J0 - County of Pitkin SS. State of Colorado Attachment 8 AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATIONS SECTION 26.52.060(E) 1, ( L , being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E) of the Aspen Municipal Code in the following man-ner: I . lly ►nailing cif notice, a copy of,which is altachcd hereto, by first-class postage prepaid U.S. Mail to all owners of property within three Hundred (300) feet of the subject property, as indicated on the attached list, on the �T lay of, 199a(which is 1 days prior to the public hearing date of (�CT (v i I8 ). 2. By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from posted and visible continuously from the 2y ay the nearest public way) and that the said sign was A of J , 1998 , to the � day of �i� , 199 (Must be posted for at least ten (10) full days before the hearing date). A photograph of the posted sign is attached hereto. Signed before me th4 6 day of 1998. by WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My Commission expires: Notary Public MYCOMMISSION EXPUS Vf15� 000, LIST OF PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF .ADAIR COMPLEX Irving and Barbara Brown 3900 Island Blvd. P03 Williams Island, FL 33160 Elyse Elliot 610 W. North Street Aspen, CO 81611 Klaus and Henry Obermeyer 115 A.A.B.C. Aspen, CO 81611 Timothy and Marjorie Rodell P.O. Box 9112 Portland, OR 97207 Simon Family Trust c/o Sandra and Charles Simon 290 Park Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 Colleen Grosz 155 N. Harbor Drive #3612 Chicago, IL 60601 Neil Bennett P.O. Box 9937 Aspen, CO 81612 Crystal Palace Corp. P.O. Box 32 Aspen, CO 81612 Gary T. Nichols Lucinda C. Nichols Kenneth E. Nichols P.O. Box 8116 Aspen, CO 81612 Doris Peterson 111 Park Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 Etna Taucher 107 Park Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 Tom Reagan Azalea Hills Apt. 202 44-20 Nishihara 3-Chrome Shibuya-Ku Tokyo, 151, Japan City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen Elf 4301 Arcady Dallas, TX 75205 Andrew and Ricky Sandler Sandler Ellen Trust 104 Midland Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 126 PARK AVENUE CONDITIONAL USE FOR TWO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS AND RESIDENTIAL DESIGN WAIVERS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, October 6, 1998 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, Sister Cities Meeting Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Ma P. Adair, Jr., 5375 S. Geneva Way, Englewood, CO 80111, requesting a conditional use for two Accessory Dwelling Units and waivers of Residential Design Standards related to "volume" and "garages" for a proposed duplex. The property is located at 126 Park Avenue, and is described as Lots 1 and 2. Block 7, Riverside Addition to the City of Aspen, as amended. For further information, contact Chris Bendon at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920-5072. s/Sara Garton, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on September 19, 1998 City of Aspen Account LAND USE APPLICATION PROJECT: Name: /` DA I R �Qu l!! ..EX Location: I Z(o P&RK Ava. (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) APPLICANT: Name: R J A P. A Iit Address: :5 . 4 S ;5• C)EN E-VA WY, ENUVOMb-Ot--) a0/1 Phone #: REPRESENTATIVE: Name: M C> C,. a�j H 1 vE a Address: c> X s s z Aspais)'Co s t (O t 2. Phone #: Z 's 8 TYPE,OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): Conditional Use Ej Conceptual PUD Conceptual Historic Devt. (] Special Review Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) Final Historic Development 5K Design Review 1 R Conceptual SPA Minor Historic Devt. (j GMQS Allotment R Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) Historic Demolition GMQS Exemption Subdivision Historic Designation ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream Subdivision Exemption (includes Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane Lot Split E j Temporary Use Other: Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Text/Map Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) A 704 aaP. -8 P. A ®►js -9 R. D o Lzx PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) Two y asm BF?, u" i `r Du Pt.. x F. AcI4 o 11a t r a � Am A► O. Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ (P 1] Pre -Application Conference Summary Attaclunent #1, Signed Fee Agreement j Response to Attaclunent #2, Dimensional Requirements Form Response to Attachment #3, Minimum Submission Contents Response to Attaclunent #4, Specific Submission Contents ❑ Response to Attaclunent #5, Review Standards for Your Application U o � D m m N W U o U U ar V+ c ?t W c$ a d'oW�'="c ° y$ x v ex Sa� a� y av YC C 01 C ,m Ad odd ° ��E = o io vo8�e° 3� o °3 d� c °C o E a `a N mtLO omm c -Foc 9 p x-d 3 Q ,t ,yC m Q a L0 T O m y U mo N c U NNC p c g m COL O T O O c > Q x o m E ? a z N; OE Q1 (0) • $ n r•-4 m _ J � 1S ONIUdS mo m�j O � m sb v(m 0 U. `3 "=s Z a_ C0G N FL 1S WNIrJINO e Q J 1 S ON31S3M ' " W O g Z o �I w m O m oe� n N m U u o Lo X U 3 �um(7 n � 91II j D ��¢ I o� J oC 0. �. a c z� LL a Z' � .c a � -vie o zD omm o E _ J $ •n 8 •�'� cr3 yy C T � U� MM Q �v `tiJ 1S ONIOOS 1S WNIJ1HO I'URFU, E45 ONL'r AND IS NOT A PA(1T 2 Property Type 5 Premium 8 Survey Amendment LL1--Y. I r ,r., a a.to p„to o A,bi.ri,, 1 rk,;_,. SS 85 1 2 3_ 4 5 6 7 8 9 yers Zltle Insurance Orporation Schedule A OWNER'S POLICY CASE NUMBER DATE OF POLICY AMOUNT OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER THE POLICY NUMBER SHOWN -- PCT-293-86 AUGUST 14, 1986 $ 167 , 500.00 ON THIS SCHEDULE MUST 85-00-492987 3 : 34 P.M. AGREE WITH THE PREPRINTED NUMBER ON THE COVER SHEET 1. Name of Insured: ARJA P. ADAIR, JR. 2. The estate or interest in the land described herein and which is covered by this policy is: IN FEE SIMPLE 3. The estate or interest referred to herein is at Date of Policy vested in: ARJA P. ADAIR, JR. 4. The land referred to in this policy is described as follows: PLEASE REFER TO EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF. 12 C PA 1 /� I a A2 � � Q fAze- At� , T K I /PVtJNI T ZE /h/1 C. ASPEN, COLORADO Co 1 ersignatur Authorized Officer or Agent Issued at (Location) Policy 8 (Rev. 79) This Policy is invalid unless the cover sheet Form No. 035-0 085-0000/3 and Schedule B are attached. ALTA Owner's Policy Form B 1970 (Rev. 10-17-70 and 10-17.84) 0 i, I f. I ^ t ; L_ Copyright 1969 La"ers Title Insurance Corporation NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS RICHMOND, VIRGINIA SCHEDULE A cont'd. EXHIBT "A" -----LEGAL DESCRIPTION PARCEL A: LOTS 1 AND 21.BLOCK 7, RIVERSIDE ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPi:", EXCEPTING THE SOUTHERLY FIFTEEN (15) FEET OF SAID ABOVE DESCRIBED -PROPERTY. PARCEL B : A PARCEL OF LAND BEING PART OF LOTS 1, 2 AND 4, BLOCK 7, RIVERSIDE ADDITION TO THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, SAID PARCEL IS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 1 WHENCE THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT 1 BEARS S 00014'00" W 15.51 FEET; THENCE S 00014'00" W 23.00 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOTS 1 AND 4; THENCE S 8S'41'25" E 40.05 FEET; THENCE N 21'50'00" E 15.00 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 2; THENCE N 75'06'00" W 47.00 FEET ON A LINE PARALLEL TO AND 15.00 FEET FROM THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOTS 1 AND 2 TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. PARCEL C : A TEN (10) FOOT STRIP ALONG THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF -LOT 9, PROMONTORY SUBDIVISION, ASPEN, COLORADO, EXTENDING FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT AT PARK AVENUE EASTERLY APPROXIMATELY TWENTY—FIVE FEET (25') TO THE WF`''T SIDELINE OF A FIFTEEN FOOT (15') STRIP ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF S LOT PREVIOUSLY CONVEYED TO DR. ROBERT BARNARD. P. LL D : BEGINNING AT THE RECITED NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF LOT 2, BLOCK 71 RIVERSIDE ADDITION TO THE SOUTHWESTERLY CORNER OF AN EXCEPTION PARCEL RECITED IN BOOK 457 AT PAGE 136, PITKIN COUNTY CLERK AND RECORDER'S OFFICE, BEING A REBAR AND CAP FOUND IN PLACE' BEARS N 8 8 ° 03' 35" E A DISTANCE OF 17.55 FEET; THENCE N 75*06'00" W ALONG THE NORTH BOUNDARY LINE OF SAID LOT 2, BLOCK 7, A DISTANCE 'OF 32.48 FEET; THENCE N 0 4 ° 3 5' 3 8 " E ALLONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE EASTERLY 15.00 FEET OF LOT.9, BLOCK 11 PROMONTORY SUBDIVISION A DISTANCE OF 13.77 FEET TO A POINT ON AN EXISTING FENCE LINE; THENCE ALONG SAID FENCE LINE THE FOLLOWING TWO (2) COURSES; S 87'00'10" E A DISTANCE OF 4.44 FEET; THENCE S 50*49'49" E A DISTANCE OF 28.10 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY OF LOT 7, BLOCK 1, PROMONTORY SUBDIVISION; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY BOUNDARY LINE S 77'45'35" E A DISTANCE OF 5.37 FEET; THENCE S 21.50'00" W ALONG THE RECITED EXTENSION OF THE EASTERLY BOUNDARY LINE OF LOT 2, BLOCK 7f RIVERSIDE ADDITION TO THE CITY OF ASPEN A DISTANCE OF 3.19 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING, DESCRIBED PARCEL CONTAINING 282.0 SOUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS. COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO. Schedule —Page m 035-1-999-0040/2 ORIGINAL. L-1ho ,n T. D,yt1 J 11 d.1G 1116111 C 111:C Wl 1 [AA Q LIU L L UVVINth-b VULI ;Y CASE NUMBER DATE OF POLICY THE POLICY NUMBER SHOWN ON THIS SCHEDULE POLICY NUMBER MUST AGREE WITH THE PREPRINTED NUMBER PCT-293-86 AUGUST 14, 1986 ON THE COVER SHEET 85-00-492987 Schedule B This policy does not insure against loss or damage by reason of the following: 1 . Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public record. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown bythe public records. 5. Unpatented mining claims; reservations or exceptions in patents or in Act authorizing the issuance thereof; water rights, claims or title to water. 6. Taxes for 1986 not yet due or payable. 7. All. streets, alleys, sidewalks, utilities, power, water and telephone lines, rights of way and easements with respect thereto. 8. Reservations and exceptions as containted United States Patent recorded in Book 175 at Page 246. 9. germs, conditions, obligations, provisions and restrictions which do not contain a forfeiture or reverter clauses, as set forth in instrument recorded in Book 188 at Page 2. 10. A five W ) foot strip of land reserved for the expansion of Park Avenue as reserved and as shown on Plat of Promontory Subdivision -ecorded in Plat Book 2A at Page 240. (Affect Parcel C) 11. Any question as to the size or location of the subject property and as to the encroachment of the subject property onto adjoining property. 12. Any and all interests, claims of interests, or rights as to Parcel B as set forth herein. (Upon further examination of the records, this exception may be deleted.) 13. Terms, conditions, provisions and restrictions of Statement of Exception recorded AUGUST 14, 1986 in Book 516 at Page 749. 14. Terms, conditions, provisions and restrictions as set forth in Restrictive Covenants recorded August 14, 1986 in Book 516 at Page 753. 15. Deed of Trust from : ARJA J. ADAIR to the Public Trustee of Pitkin County for the use of : FIRST SECURITY SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION to secure : $133,250.00 dated : AUGUST 14, 1986 recorded : AUGUST 14, 1986 in Book 516 at Page 759. Policy 85 Rocky Mt. (Rev. 2-79) Litho in U.S.A. Form No. 035-0-085-0502/2 ALTA Owner's Policy - Form B 1970(Rev. 10-17-70and 10-17.84) Copyright 1969 nPIr:INJAI LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION September 3, 1998 David Muckenhirn of Ventures West Enterprises, Inc. is hereby authorized to act as my agent and representative in all matters regarding the application for Conditional Use for two ADUs and for DRAC approval of the plans for my property located at 126 Park Avenue, Aspen, Colorado. Li Arja lP. Adair Jr. c:\david\adaircdu.001 ()9,'OR- 98 09: 13 FAA 9706689923 (_ A5PENMITICU4 COM.tytUNM DEVUOP'. Y'r Dfay AJUNt LENT Agiftmeut rot' i "ent of City of :men Devedopulmt APPH6boa Fees (PIme Print c7mir = : OF ASPS r rb=VUMfV _ M Md A P. (hrseina� APL1C.AINT) AQ;F.-17E AS FOLLOWS. 11 APPLICANT b9 submiVed tQ = an WDECaliorl for 11 ? AIIPLIC.kNT undmtwands anti agtes tt= City aI Aspen Ordia=ce No. 43 (Series of 1996) e bllsbes t a ut #pr �aad use =cas and the Qavmem of all processing tees is a coudicion prz;ed=T' ZQ a ae'.e:ma:nwiQa of 3pplicatioa . n' .: N r aad a7f wee Lh% because ,�f the size. aanue or scape of d7e pro®vsed p=jec'`- it is sot possilbtc az tbi5 time to asctz-aL"! 6e :v,il �.;;+ c OfThe casts invoi`led :a processing e vp(i iou.:��°'L.:C.: Zt"� grad C '�� rye: *F L ;t :s it e :utt:�st C) the Tar, :o all ow .%FpL�C :�►�`v :r.� a e av�xewc of . initial epO5it Lars o e:e~uler er tt u�onai �os�ts �o be ''filled to AF�'L."CAi i oa a. =0'athly bd: i5. ti �:C. �-i s 'te 4��ill a bener:ceri :e Tairz der czsh lisawdiry and will M.�y rad ticc;�nBl' �et�;rats upon'"106fjc�ation ��V 7-he C.^i `. wLlra � e"', me nm-essanr is C;Qm arc mcur—.cz. �..�.` a f az-ees It � il'. *W 1Ie"_Vl !d lb u# t.jc 31=ver �� iFiLi�� at -. CM dud t'�'L.:C��:`� i�:rrh� � cbu It is imIIr�;icaale for C; Z`�Y ��1��-0 co*t�ieie f;tssin& Or UMEME skim Morumdou to the P'Lanning Cornmssion andVor City Covr cu to mate he ?W=ing Com=sion andior City Council to Iznice ivqtdly required findings !or project ammvaL unie s ctrrent biiap am paid in `tli: ;rior ;o -decision_ 3, Th=iom- _-U14'L1C.-Qs T apres ; u M cot,.sidmuion of �he (77n; waive. of L� .ig.tic .0 collect fW fm mior ►o a. dem=m=ou of applicadoa wmpae.=eis. APPLICANT shad pav an uu6 d deposit u'2 the =Ouary of S : Which -is ioM hours of Flaa aing staff ti a, and if actual ncordad cosm meed le imitW deposit, kPPI ICANT shah. pay ad6t o al zt outhly bWin-p to Cif' to remburse the CIT Y for e Pmcesk= of the aappli can meatimed above, is 11 d' z post appmvd review, Such pudic payments sLail'oa madeAidiin A dap of doe bUng dam. APPLIC,AaN ' Rr d= agmes that fiOuir'Lo Fair nxah Lw4-rued cows shad be gm=ds fcr swpcwivn of processing. CITY OF AS 'N ist=atrsa Signature: t.'Ztj 1_� oc Date: Commumity Development U or Printed `lame: A City of Aw= ii rI'�g address° _ 5Z ��.�.. CI) 9/A i' t . ��. ,.FibigLOW" C�> isQ1rr ATTACHMENT 2 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FORM Project: Applicant: Location: I Z & PA9K A Va 6P 0 Zone District: Lot Size: Lot Area: (for the purposes of calculating Floor Area, Lot Area may be reduced, for areas within the high water mark, easements, and steep slopes. Please refer to the definition of Lot Area in the Municipal Code.) Commercial net leasable: Existing: H /A Proposed: /4f Number 0I'reSidC111i,1l Ulllts: I;a:i.5/ir�g:- — ------Prop sed: ___.Z -- _ Number of bedrooms: Existing: Proposed: + (b—(j� Proposed % of demolition (Historic properties only): N DIMENSIONS: Floor Area: Principal bldg. height: Access. bldg. height: On -Site parking: % Site coverage: % Open Space: Front Setback: Rear Setback: Combined F/R: Existing: P?/03 Allowable: S 5, 9 Proposed. G Existing: % �' Allol-gable: 25 -60 Proposed ;2 Existing: Allouvable: -- Proposed. - Existing: Required. -Proposed: t Existing: Required: Proposed Z Existing: 7o Required: Proposed: Existing: t� Required.- 10Proposed Existing: Z,,ollo Required.- 10 Proposed. ,,U Ile) Existing.•_ 3Required: 3o Proposed. .40 Side Setback: Existing:_Required: Proposed: Side Setback: Existing: Required. Proposed: Combined Sides: Existing: Required: //e Proposed: ♦t Existing non -conformities or encroachments: 14 6 M R N F 1 A / PSI Ate( "E' Variations requested: WfNbbW S 4, C4AI264E: boo OQ — _ E AVENUE 1 i 1 I 1 I 1 1 \ I 1 I 1 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I \ • ' 1 •� 1 , I I I 1 1 1 11 W c LIST OF PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300 FEET OF .ADAIR COMPLEX Irving and Barbara Brown 3900 Island Blvd. P03 Williams Island, FL 33160 Elyse Elliot 610 W. North Street Aspen, CO 81611 Klaus and Henry Obermeyer 115 A.A.B.C. Aspen, CO 81611 Timothy and Marjorie Rodell P.O. Box 9112 Portland, OR 97207 Simon Family Trust c/o Sandra and Charles Simon 290 Park Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 Colleen Grosz 155 N. Harbor Drive #3612 Chicago, IL 60601 -Neil Bennett P.O. Box 9937 Aspen, CO 81612 Crystal Palace Corp. P.O. Box 32 Aspen, CO 81612 Gary T. Nichols Lucinda C. Nichols Kenneth E. Nichols P.O. Box 8116 Aspen, CO 81612 Doris Peterson 111 Park Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 Etna Taucher 107 Park Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 Tom Reagan Azalea Hills Apt. 202 44-20 Nishihara 3-Chrome Shibuya-Ku Tokyo, 151, Japan City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen Elf 4301 Arcady Dallas, TX 75205 Andrew and Ricky Sandler Sandler Ellen Trust 104 Midland Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 •`. • DUPLEX R ! • VARIANCE REQUEST For this application for DRAC design approval, variance from two design standards is requested: 1.) Floor area penalty for windows in the "no windows zone" 9'-12' off the second floor; and 2.) Garage doors set back 10 feet from the front building facade. Regarding the windows in the "no windows zone", we understand that this a situation to which it was not meant to apply and therefore ask for relief. Relief from the garage doors criteria is requested because the lot shape makes it extremely difficult to comply with this criteria. The lot is small, wide with a shallow building envelope, 12 deep on the south end. There is no alley or rear access. Perpendicular or access from the side would consume the lot with pavement. The design submitted is for a duplex with an ADU in each unit, as encouraged by the Aspen Area Community Plan. This is not a massive single family residence. The room sizes are not extravagant, they are minimal. There is barely room for the required parking as it is. Code allows for variance from two ADU parking spaces which is not being requested as we feel it would not be realistic. We are committed to renting the ADU's as well as the duplex units and our past rental experience indicates the parking to be necessary. david\adair.005 40 3 c}— a ff 10 w 1-7- -11-w!--= - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Ij, kill Z Q. J; S� RESPONSE TO THE REVIEW STANDARDS FOR A CONDITIONAL USE DEVELOPMENT AND AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT (ADU) DEVELOPMENT This is an application for approval of an ADU in each unit of a duplex in the R-6 zone district. As set forth in Section 26.28.040 of the city code, ADU's meeting the provisions of Section 26.40.090 are permitted as conditional uses in the R-6 district. The R-6 zone district is a "medium density residential district which purpose is to provide long-term residential uses with customary accessory uses". The R-6 zone district is "generally found in the original Aspen Townsite, contains relatively dense settlements of predominantly detached and duplex residences within walking distance to the center of town". The subject ADU's clearly meet the above criteria for the R-6 district. Additionally, the duplex with its ADU's meets the dimensional requirements of the R-6 district without requiring variance from them. The Conditional Use of the subject ADU's is not only consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan (AACP), it is required by it. The subject ADU's are consistent with the following objectives of the AACP: - They are part of a small to mid -sized project dispersed in the Aspen Metro Area; - They are an infill development within the urban area which allows more employees to live close to where they work and helps preserve open space and rural areas; - They are part of a public/private partnership for the development of employee housing; and, - They are interspersed with free market housing This Conditional Use is consistent and compatible with the mixed character of the surrounding neighborhood. The neighborhood is comprised of single family and duplex residences some with ADU's. The proposed ADU 's are well integrated into -the primary duplex and somewhat obscure from the community itself. They will not create a density pattern inconsistent with the established neighborhood. Both subject ADU's are expected to have minimal visual, pedestrian, parking and noise impact on the surrounding property. Visually, only the guardrails for the access stairways will be seen as they are both basement units. On -site parking is provided. (Presently the occupants of the existing duplex park on the street.) The existing public services and facilities are adequate for this Conditional Use. david\adairadu.001 oe MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Interim Community Development Director > FROM: Christopher Bendon, Planner Y I RE: Land Use Code Amendment -- Definitions (related to S/C/I Zone) Public Hearing DATE: October 6, 1998 SUMMARY: The SCI Zone District amendments, pending, included several terms which are either newly created or revised from existing language. These definitions will become part of the Ordinance revising other elements of the SCI Zone but will apply to the City in general. There is one existing term, Shop Craft Industry, which staff is proposing to eliminate. The Artist Studio definition covers this use. This term is used throughout the code and will be comprehensively addressed during the re -codification project under study by the City Attorney. The definitions are listed under the Definitions heading, below. Staff has differentiated between new and modified terms. Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission pass forward a favorable recommendation to City Council for this code amendment. APPLICANT: City of Aspen. PREVIOUS ACTION: The Commission has not formally considered this amendment although some of the definitions were discussed during the SCI public hearings. REVIEW PROCEDURE: Text Amendments. City Council may amend the text of the land use code at a public hearing after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission which was made at a public hearing. STAFF COMMENTS: Bob Blaich submitted a memo during the SCI public hearing detailing a definition of Art which included Architecture. However, for the purpose of defining uses allowed in the S/C/I Zone District it is important to explicitly state whether or not architects 1 studios are allowed. The Commission has already passed judgment on this issue and it is now under consideration by the City Council. Staff s intent with these definitions is to allow the Council to consider definitions as they consider uses. Some of these definitions may not be adopted. Bob Blaich's memo has been included as Exhibit `B." Review criteria and Staff Findings have been included as Exhibit "A." DEFINITIONS: Artist Studio: is a fine arts workshop of a painter, sculptor, potter, weaver, carver, photographer, or other similar art that requires artistic skill, and not generally utilitarian, related to personal adornment, receiving the public, or engaging in retail sales. (existing definition with new language underlined) Architect Studio: A workshop primarily devoted to the design of buildings. (new definition) Design Studio: A workshop primarily devoted to the design or representation of built form, products, or graphic arts. (new definition) Consignment Retail Establishment: A retail establishment in which the operator sells second hand goods as a third party agent. (new definition) Animal Boarding Facility: An establishment which'houses animals overnight or over an extended period of time. (new definition) Animal Grooming Establishment: An establishment principally engaged in grooming animals in which overnight boarding is prohibited. (new definition) Veterinary Clinic: A facility maintained by or for the use of a licensed veterinarian in the care and treatment of animals wherein overnight care is prohibited except when necessary for medical purposes. (replaces in whole the following definition: means an enclosed facility within a building or portion thereof for the care and treatment of animals, where boarding of healthy animals is prohibited and adequate provisions are made to avoid any and all adverse impacts on the surrounding neighborhood which might otherwise result from noise, odors, waste, and the like.) 2 Recycling Center: A building or facility used for the collection and preparation of recyclable material for efficient shipment. (new definition) Brewery: A facility for the production and packaging of alcoholic malt beverages for distribution which does not generally receive the public or engage in retail sales. (new definition) Coffee Roasting Facility: A facility for the processing and packaging of coffee beans for distribution which does not generally receive the public or engage in retail sales. (new definition) Commercial Kitchen: means a commercial establishment producing or wholesaling prepared food items in which retail dispensing is prohibited. (replaces Commercial Bakery: means a bakery in which there is permitted the production and/or wholesaling of baked goods, but where over-the-counter or other retail dispensing of baked goods shall be prohibited.) Shop Craft Industry: means any establishment producing one -of -a -kind products which are handmade or made with limited mechanical assistance. This includes but is not limited to cloth and basket weaving, pottery making, glass blowing, and ceramics. (entire definition to be eliminated with recodification of the land use code) RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I recommend City Council adopt these proposed definitions, as part of the pending amendments to the S/C/I Zone District, as outlined in the Community Development Department memo dated October 6, 1998, and as outlined in P&Z Resolution 98- ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Comments Exhibit B -- Memo from Bob Blaich Exhibit C -- P&Z Resolution 98- 3 Exhibit A STAFF COMMENTS: Text Amendment In reviewing an amendment to the text of this Title, the City Council and the Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. Staff Finding: The proposed code amendment does not represent a conflict with other sections of the land use code. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding: These changes are follow-up items related to the SCI Zone District amendments. The pending SCI amendment is in compliance with the AACP. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Finding: Again, these definitions are follow-up items for the SCI Zone District. These amendments have been tabled and will be again considered in conjunction with these definitions. D. The effect of the proposed amendment 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 facilities, including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Finding: Does not apply. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff Finding_ This is intended to support the code amendments for the SCI Zone which is compatible with the community character. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff Finding: City Council has requested the definitions for new uses in the SCI Zone be included as part of the SCI Ordinance. staff comments page 1 I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. Staff Finding: This proposed amendment does not pose any conflicts with the public interest. staff comments page 2 January 6, 1998 Memo to: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission CC: Stan Clausen Julie Ann Woods Christopher B .n_g don Re:SCI Code Amendment l s� Blaich Associates Design Management Consultants 319 North Fourth Street Aspen, 81611, Colorado, U.S.A. Tel. 970-920 9276 Fax 970-920 3433 E-Mail: blaich@sopds.net There was considerable discussion in the November 18`h. Meeting with regard to the definitions of artists, architects and designers. For purposes of clarification the following definitions are from Webster's New Universal Unabridged Dictionary. Art: 1. The disposition or modification of things by human skill, to answer the purpose intended. 2. Creative work generally, or its principles; the making or doing of things that have form and beauty: Art includes painting, sculpture, architecture, music, literature, drama, the dance, etc. The term Fine Arts usually is restricted to the graphic arts, drawing, painting, sculpture, ceramics, and, sometimes, architecture. Artist: 1. One who is skilled in or works in any of the fine, especially graphic arts. 2. A person who does anything very well, with a feeling for form, effect, etc.; as, his cook is an artist. Architect: 1. One skilled in the art of building, one who designs buildings, draws up plans, and generally supervises the construction. 2. Any similar designer 3. Any builder or creator Design: 1. To make designs. 2. To make original plans, sketches, patterns, etc. Designer: 1. One who designs. 2. One who conceives or forms original designs; original patterns, etc. 3. Planning. Graphic Arts: 1. Any form of visual artistic representation. RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE CODE DEFINITIONS, SECTION 26.04.100 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE. Resolution #98 - WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has considered and passed a resolution regarding proposed amendments to the Service/Commercial/Industrial (S/C/I) Zone District; and, WHEREAS, the recommendation passed by the Commission included terms not yet defined in the existing land use code and contemplated modifications to existing definitions; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission has the authority to initiate an amendment to the text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code, pursuant to Section 26.92, and planning staff brought forward proposed modifications to the land use Definitions, Section 26.04.100; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.92, applications to amend the text of Title 26 of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval with conditions, or denial by the Planning Director and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. Final action shall be by City Council after reviewing and considering these recommendations; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing at a regularly scheduled meeting on October 6, 1998, the Planning and Zoning Commission took and considered public testimony and recommended, by a to vote, the City Council approve the amendments to Definitions, Section 26.04.100, as described herein. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission: Section 1: Pursuant to Section 26.92 of the Municipal Code, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends approval of this amendment to Definitions, Section 26.04.100 of the Municipal Code, as set forth in Section 2 below. Section 2: Recommended amendments to Definitions. Underline indicates language to be added. Virtu indicates language to be removed. Plain font represents language to be unaltered. Artist Studio: is a fine arts workshop of a painter, sculptor, potter, weaver, carver, photographer; or other similar art that requires artistic skill, and not generally utilitarian, related to personal adornment, receiving the public, or engaging in retail sales. Architect Studio: A workshop primarily devoted to the design of buildings. Design Studio: A workshop primarily devoted to the design or representation of built form, products, or graphic arts. Consignment Retail Establishment: A retail establishment in which the operator sells second hand goods as a third party agent. Animal BoardingFacility: acility: An establishment which houses animals overnight or over an extended period of time. Animal Grooming Establishment: An establishment principally engaged in grooming animals in which overnight boarding is prohibited. Veterinary Clinic: A facility maintained by or for the use of a licensed veterinarian in the care and treatment of animals wherein overnight care is prohibited except when necessary for medical purposes. • • • • •rcrMITICTIF2% • • • • 111IM.M.1111111 • • • • • • • • • • •a a a a w w 6.191 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • PUMP Recycling Center: A building or facility used for the collection and preparation of recyclable material for efficient shipment. Brewery: A facility for the production and packaging of alcoholic malt beverages for distribution which does not generally receive the public or engage in retail sales. Coffee RoastingFacility: A facility for the processing and packaging of coffee beans for distribution which does not generally receive the public or engage in retail sales. Commercial Kitchen: means a commercial establishment producing or wholesaling prepared food items in which retail dispensing is prohibited. IMI-17" W N�1-6088*�W'�WIOV MINE • - • 0I • but is not limited to eleth and basket pe:fter-y imaking, glass , and nofnM.-- Section 3: This recommendation should be considered by the City Council in conjunction with Resolution 98-26, the recommendation concerning amendments to the S/C/l Zone District. APPROVED by the Commission during a public hearing on October 6, 1998. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk Sara Garton, Chair �n a nCn m nw C'On?^Z c a y A A SN�SS�O [ZD �mcow .r. .maofDenn.3noZ��mH3ocD;;�03no� _° � 1-i3 £ 7 Qn ° �� n� z� o C 3 0.0 3 �w �" <_ n o o coo a o coo o� y ° o o Sc'.m 3 r�o n e eo w <o o°`< y'Oc £ e o °� E y 1r �j S cD 3 S 7 'C ° ^• 7 Q VG 3. 7 7 �• N O fC `O' ,+ '+ C°,, w Z7 n '� w O 3 O' O •+ ^^ S O 7' E o &oEay^3�ti:•°cd°mH`-''c^wcy�vwc3=ocow�oaa�cM,.0, -^°hoc-°o ��,'co 0��`9-n'now�<S°»�nn m - .,.� `° Z w •D ° o y y m y w •� y w (D ",' ° m iy =^ O G ",• m w S �! J• • t< �mcn�y7aww^yy3(�omoa pO..mm( �a.mi�n~^w<."7 ,3 ToZyy0n.02:=<<^wc- ^.coy<mo�° y0m?7 3 n< m° •, ?' O S m m w -� •, Q _, y o -+ m n 7 O w o c •G co O' ^ w o o ,y+ A p. '� _ `< co ° A S w rp vmi w 7 a �Z H G E y� �`<� d H m.O l3D �rae O� = G 7'C7 d n n•'ZC m w (y^ C C -� O_-( n_ w C 0 ~ �"°� m an 0 n O £ (aD ^ 0 a� oat a. -,0 on _ _ y 0 m •-' Z_ Z 0 m m n O O O n ?v' E nQ" -lot 0 0 7 m O w -m ,w+A �'L 7 .'<'z' O yZ`< -, ° C'y a•m (�DZ�< 0 in 7 C (Mo nC 3 m -•w ~�y.��w_^'�2. ��£nC-•3��°-�c��or�on�°2c'Ovw3op'�yr3ocaocoMod�Rc°o-D�^�cw�so� cc�°'° �3wc�oy(D3 amwoy�PrOm,�cnFOCOc�c� ow 0. ow3 7 o3��0 DMaLr~onc0 nn y mo�N H3 �a-(ow c3E `-'_"° CimRm �? �:yp �o_co Z0Z<7o °3�nm°rty��^ooiw� �you A A Z G G S vi w 3 �= 7 O Tw. M G OS ? m p O_ w `°G n? (~D fnD °~ H C Z^ C-'. O CA Qw o" _ .° w0 a m F a 7 n n a< w a~ °• Gj n n y`< 7 (n y �'� =O O a'^c ° C 0°i vi�n �O`< ry ° n`e y C C O O WZ ZO �m w W n y O S= - w y _. w < m u: n S , m 0 w ^ m O w y o < ' A. y m a G ••( P' < = 5 Sm s m ^ w a '" ^ _ - '°' m Z F , w ^_ (� y 3 •a rD m' a a • C Z a a < m .� '0 -, Z . 3• A O n o m -i -'? to 7 3 Z O -mn oc o a''�ZnOvwtiO °��3(no,°rt<, 0 5oE�mywywo oy°'C°^�;-moor oacmcy� cn,<9 my o 0 n, EwiQe n w : < tin- : o m ^3 p Sry Z^ £ vw� D o'��•" N ro So fD 3 > > m 'coA^�; Q� fD�ry_OR ere<� myo ?wa o?p<< < mT3roZ°;n^^< � o no_'n^3<< �C< ,_,�ndorD Hc00 -0 5yp<<oQa��3 wynw,n:o�v°m�yt°o� ��nQ°a`-'£ �3yG�.d��3 Gnu ory� �°re3Aw,�7� oa,<c~c '�c°'r<.S Gn-m.w 0x' tw�oCoo�t�oc�iy�°ano �1 < � moxy'w A 3 p' ((. < '! O m A �. 7 .O. w < ',1 . ^ S O. O ^ _-� f�C �i C. K ? .w+ `< m 7 7 't .;; (0 7 (e ' -'< y y Y w . w n. _o v, - y y w = n•v 3 •v -- co '° n n �. 'o 3 A.rj O_ S -. •: C M> c w 0 a w_ m £�< a ° o M G o •'.( is. � "•� N 3 0 < n y n =� O `< S C m mt S m O m 3 S O r, 'C Cc- O ^1 C Z w ° C y 7c cn -• @ `< Z y m °; 7 �, 0 w --• O <• y S C^7 m e a v �. n a m w vNy m y 7¢DOo 3 O 0 m S° n ao "� n C w p a _° ac m o io C3. a 3 3 O m 0 C? n y =a O- rn Z. C a O Z .'0 ni3,,� L '' O O o m A G m -' .n.• (A•� (o .n. H ^.... C T m :. = m m (oo rcmw M. c7 m H qua 3 ^° w m- w 0 �(o v: •� a ^• is w 3 (So o+OryymA�waao°�°o �£CM =-:2 -c°y �m any a w ^cw`c £ 3 ^o^, ^o �r�Qc ° w Coms0 °< w �'•� o w -�°: S-oc °_ a 3 w= r c <w H o ar n ry w nmy m �_ 3 0 3 0n a< m °_o_< w o o m (n 0 ^ m o^ w n < m? m c m 3 Z rn y + n^^ o 0 m ^ n n O -� n a< -i .� x'; n C U( cna •,� ?; S �. � N C G .. 0 ° S^ n -• y y a n _ O --] O 3 a y O •O m^' ^. m O ry e o m_ o O 2 -+7 Gpj C 0 '< n �,+ y a H m w m --`i " N a 0 ^'ZC y S a m << O m r. S C C 0 � O m m Sc�-3H3n£�T_3°30 a .wa�CmoCy3o°TMrjMeoM0Ie Z�e,pOrym��n»>>> ?w�p3ta��d m o •� n� a -•3 0 °mn ae-w3eN mw��O 1Zv _�m�z (o°�,�m-•�p0�=nw mwn 'w.aCOow< D° Oo0£m,3 H nrt ^�.r~c K 2�� ti 3 n �ti ^.o' ^�zcx� H O�m< ° mo ° ^ noo 0.° cC-o-o 0 0 nn' f o ^-? =� o n=n : o m M ° -+ .L o N C S e y w w 3 c n 3< m -- 3 m n w H fD y Y °n r£ c_ n m •, a n m (i 3_ (o ° o� 5 0 ^a �3•° -1� - "o oO� n m N.c ° 2£ o� a_a_ n s� °_a = a y (on. 0 0 :?p a2 •y oo?c<wn� n.0'A3 a°°��_�� co yomo?c�_R �`'Gc'^°(3s°3 °� �;3R•£'nv`o (3C 'm0 0o 7 O CAD 7 7 a. 0 O m 3 (Co - O n S �+_ C '--.• (4 7 `G '� w w T m C y w 0 a O y R `G < r: w (xD H° 0 w^ y C n -T T, a< C y L w T vmi n .�. y m 0 io rn y_., y S w+ w r Qc c n n p 7 0 O f C- a w =. 0 ,-� a s ^ 3 '-• m 7 n y cn�e -0 0 0 mz 3 y m .° y 3� c z oa cp<- m� o a m a y �O y � m 2- m a^�-F< ° 3 `° + nw M nm ..Q3 a a 0i m 0a�•< Tn n io o� n- �o m o a 3 c aG < Sm 3 Yn �_ m n no_ n m" O 'C w m£ .0+ y' y .., v O a n S 7C m C7 mi O �' �• 3 0 a p .+ w O m ,n .1 7 _ c p" (p O. 3 O y �3. 0 0 -o((D ?oac < o (o m c w-n _ c o- w 0, Z m a o < y y-OCR 3 -.a 3 _� ay- o C3 m 0 w w (o c m o_ wo o_ a @ (e :� o_ay m o mp a ^; v o cy n-• c a cc . o -� a 37m owl °mC.�^Onu'a_,a°i<n Z `, (D0CAC y00 y.Z2OC2nZam�p'C� n+30mtiwn.�' y <-_y`< C y E ....] n ? = O ^ > > f'zC 7 7J O �. m - w 7c' ry -(n0 a 3y=(.el0 r3:.am woe ° n �(nn(an <`oc3n° 0maS3•�vyo? nn.-m ,o mit°o'yww•�OQ''O�°�,�-��•a'rmv°n�•7� O Y,�`,Ojm 3c,'•_•(Se000`� my�, -•£m n...,o m- `°vcy Q om H J y n A SN.. rn p^7 `O� O O- £ O 3 O O D:=n.D -M ?n,Y3 C7 nCn m a nw C-onSo'v C c ;O 0 0.75 ° 0 m 'vC O .n+O 0 O d•m M" =y O m° a»- mm a aOc m o- °+ �.�w Z? .� .3L 0 3 3 �'v, c n n �3 n � 2� < n ° n<- w•C70 so 0 O 2y A o A y n 3 -Y SSo o m N o y' E a .�co0co�now(o. 0 3.aa,3oae �v(o(o°codomO<� n0 (o3con��<o�a<0C?° Dom' DOv - oycDiao o^? o�° nc3,: o .na re -n +o'wa n�:,3 a 3E(So �`3' (o w7 Z y m ,c`< w t w a w Tw no Sy O N -c < -� w o n n n� Z G Z w° 3° o c f -�_ v 7 = o n < Q=,_0wci onad-F=a 03 � fD w0to-C (o(?rooa WcM_.z�O, "=vim 0�S0mn�o m m 7 S (? vi m S O ry ? (n _ G w -( m 0' a w 'G O o -a m rn m y w o y a • m Mn`_..o A•C�ocoycoGo3y�n0a�a'oyn-a�oo.^M m -tiaco^a<o��3 7^Nv(v�c'-7�e7?;onc ny (o. .7+'O Vc� ^. Tim .y 0• �- m C :+' N �< a 1E -(- ° l< mi ?: S -( ,� -( y O' ?� N y y O .�.. a m `< rn n w T O C v R . m m t O 0 0 n'< y `< .w•. °^ m w y m y w w.my. M m m O S O S A n' Z ¢' y' PCi 7 m m 3 C 0 -' 0 wS 7 C O£ m� .y. � > wwnOO o m3�OC`fDQ°O<m0m^OOP,°m0 0-0-wiw50 coo�womPnio-- ��O a),0uM 5M.007nnw°n ySy7�((t 7 ?�3 w_.,� oo Z n ^nm°. m a ft c o •w m -• 3 :=r m 5 w n?'v a=•° w 3 0 o y to n row °; m A <n O.n a �° e -o m ?m oQQ o 3.. (c 0 a s n , p o (o (o _ o m ., 0 m M =r A •y 0 a 0 m -0 S� y y Yo mv;a ayC?owE`omXa�«m `<oa^a3 'a" °3� n mm =(ono, yA^ y mom Z(So(SonP:, n(7oaow�C3Ey3yw�n'n?��•co.3 :vy,W o(Co "� Z`<��-o3^nfDycyo(n�n=^ m_Z�w_� �Sn-y-_'ow w btAw30 (yn�mo�(UQo�n(°or1Diz�£ ?�o?'£0�=03ccomoamp°y�°<r.��_ Z^�o7°O-Owoa�w� ,o0nH a ;M0� o S� n,.o.S ,__ 7y Cowwmy Cy0.0 •w3 'm as <�o m m�°za3m nc c O °Ho(CowwCYwa ynfDnw°_?f3m'^�n3-wywoo °"`A)-1 ,rowvy��'OA, W (Son. o ow°g,<�� on -ppA=p (°s m ' < m .,�<Sw<U° -^ a •a m� = w-O-miZ(% £-(w�OmO �U, m oM 0..0m c0 y H 0xoma-nn'003o ..D '" o y nwo 3a� o e.a.00 (00-tam n oa S a a' m N£ (� �vw� < nw °°70 �o'�aci°:yv K•3�ocon°vo(vm""3<° o°MZwC,£w�ve'3 �..�.n �(yoZOr°cCoroc°A= �<�� B o £ a� ? o' o �u' , M is ,yam �°° o`< d ° < Co (Co ° ?a c - a�i < (<c (Co r°o-3 rCo o ?:c�^3 < o m.T'= aoo we T< <_.�a :a=.ZG�°'0ma ' =Ln�ov G00 -0Ca�o <<0=Q(Co3 (D "nw, `n.o�ym°cw�(o�o �~ nu=a=£ y i<nm �t^D�O0 _b �my°ow ?_,, Y•M= Q=GZC +.0 0~CTA:c< y��.w n0 w-17 Sa <��06�r0jO ��°O�(mD 0 ac0 (^IDM °»°o_wi(fDo��w<°a::co(P°»��`'et-D ��?°:�m�y��e=(oo roa?�ro n C °- n .w. nq N `G ? o`nG 7 :: o, SD ? ^ ?• rn' C P' y •, 0 O •e T`t m " (o `< 7. m'•G t�� mti nn^ V nw w p0 < n� P�nC ZZ 9r.Cocnnm 3 DDn 3. ^� o cos o m c a o o° uIt D3 n Sa 0 w£ 'o NC1y c y o um, 70 w (3o E,o9m c �wc o io c fl pm DDsv o c y w w m� (n w 1, m> > ^.m _0 •w ° o -•Z G m -, m C o-c^yZcn, 3 ovc-cn0 Z�m,o ,CL Z. y C Q Z Z " °' w' _ .. _ , c~D 0 . Oi S 0 n a 0 m C C O n 0' 0 2 m o m ^w ma =O my m�0;; rn wmO �m7C ;< C? O Om m(D wy CA 7 m to cow m �= Cn ? ? .o �zn H 0 , Z(A co < n n = 0 0 W. meDw -(w To C- v, o+ o mi 0 ° ?❑ o m nd- CN�'o< 0 m 0 --1 00<m y`< °�� C c 3 A M° w a m w 0 N� w �.. a n m v,a va ua m n O £y n £ o o<< n 0T O Z 0 c (5Zr n (70 (�v3 _v_.Qava S0 0 0 Qa Srn�� n � rn nn 0-0 ac c 0.> > .3 m < 3 w _ y> rn aD m o m oo a e rn c uQi' m w (D w mQ?�r:0 0< o m ww w o w e c; a T� as �.Q(y o n o< 0 o m y a 3 £ x o in pDM < n C o »-•o 0 jmCD° ��' ain n�coynm w0pnooCaxZO °xw-M-- (D nmCZr,y3 na,n 3^0n myc =��3m o� <o 3� 0m o cr wTooam0 m-3-n �0C) _.nw' uaG�?S�.�NCc °�°a°� a� n 'yy wn?; j m E T ^•� O a te' C y 3 0 S O ^ C = 7 ti° (�D 7 ° (No ^ C . 7 ,Z7 Z �• •• H y m m vi w O L v; O' m '•t m^ S C m (? m S-o c _ Q', -• o m 0. 0 m Cow v -y 0m cr �_.n A :w m Cp�.a»� w m � .0_0 }�nia "f?m^0 mw (n °Sonw('�CL :3P��p 'oC 3n� �eZv_ � ?Cwamc~o��°'m=MOGna ,< mmS -0 > > O.. o e (r^o pC n�° no 3 to a3 , o m -C rnp a Om. �c m w _ m y p 0. a. m a �w ` °:ate a 0 w`< ;y0 3 y m C .9,.<� .9 0. CO n 3 (? �'.^. m w`�Qa ,pd.c) :z m 00 o (7`< °Q.M� m O mC M = O.C� m 2M 0 Oti (-r m �a m .. m y 3 0 w ova w o nwy < n a a, O m 7 m C� m m n Qn am o o n 7(o c o_- m �-Hlm ;oo' m o i'c) o m 3 0- -,un o X0 03 _l Iq -( w 3 n^ti nw y a y= v_ �£ o° m K c o m° 9 Z _3w G w^n n w w �3b O w °: n° w< m -p ° £ t+ w ?? 3 -n' met :n' < o nn c o o ,m •OnCa�yd0.„ 0n_.wS C 0y 7 rn0 a w3.^ ymy�3- 3 O.. p-1 3 o m oa, aG ,yG3°com(yoomto:o�=.°G°°w�O3 'gym ° n Z �1 y cn 3 o m m � S m -� Oo a y o m 0 = o o e m m a nm oQ°° mN� �en3C^e(neo -y '.�, n y m ecC oo_'no•e �e° -�aH <n° <�y n ,r S< SQp mr, G -ln (4 o 0" `-° x w c aa-o=.Ca cCi,m cyo m n CD no =o c ° nn -('� �'.c o w o o m`< Co ° p3 m w fP S 0 rn Ln? m3 om w m 00 w o .0 EoC w ° w, D• ' �_ -� O a `G m 7 Pa uDi N n..m., C 7 a m N o O^ mt 9 m 'O 7 .w•. m 0 0 w a- = O O . `< m 'a N P. - 0 >r < --1 D m 2Gi (nD D•] '� UQ Z d p :< (�D 3 (aD^ .0•. ' '� G n 3£ C O S w < 3 G C. a< �• m 7 y s n S m 0 O m n O '" 0 (n y° O m m _ ti m ?� m m 0 Q -• 0 w o a p .. w° m in a s nQp C £°° o ° w o < o'�o c£o `� <= C)y �. 'gn , 3 o a m o �•e o H n =OSQ 3 a@ 3 ?� a y o m n _ a o is a .,va ° d n w o m n_. o m m , o a 'y_<A "3? O°0m�<0mo(n�(:mto �^ w LCo c� ^aM^'00--5�Qnvwm�pn.('o ^3°y�cown,�"` Co oQam eo °w�mno=o.mA.wny�°m' �. 3�0 �a o2 aan roC �(°occ0(oa ��"�3oy? co �o yw3� oovn t^o3 •o3a`^ ^o,P;�• (mo onto m 3��oa�e 7ym _£m�noo O�• 3 �, C' =i .0+ lSD Oy G (mD = `< 0 :� (mn 7 w 07a _ 7 m x .< •-( W m -( Cw m Cpy Z (nn £ c On3 �= (A t=Oc wv 3?S� o (n 0w.a0 m a �-•.o m o w.0 o m �' o a o m•0 7 m c c c£ ?aa N ac aw ? _-o < m? n y? Sa. t o a y a m a m C r n << o a3� o co 3 G =y 5 MuID wP £ �3C�a m a.m0 aow a ^'. c 0.- aOr- a M 0- o m m C m o �e 3 e 0 rL w -: m n n _ Nw 0 y O V7 Z Z E O -M,..or.m Q•n'at0.tI Cw 0.m a y y.C-mi v wW A� m 0 m O m p (SD T^ C m- O _mw C. y O y 7 A m �' -j.C» np E c w 0 m- *,m j w m G £ w Z n°:m 0 y mr a� A� G arm p n a ^.m,� C£ W=m m -in E, o o =o nn Cm a -•a Cn n •s0 3 m o'_. c 10 0.M oS J,9Z ° Xm a (n4< m a.0 m O SO (A, m -ti ,a0 < O -'D00 n CZ 1<M "O u; D7 .i H S� w e.w (n •O M o H O-^ a 0-n -d m y m m0 y �Pni n w � P' TC.,m C r-tiw o y "0-(-D m M CL 0 .. ?'M 'a on to CA .ono�o�^cmyoc^=c <Qno. F-0 (�oCL °°£ccm�o rn ~ �o v(D n. �m w one NSA m 3 ^ p, o O'lCL:r _ �S00M P' 1 ° w �, coo + y.m y w ^ H P' y Sao AZ a 7w ,•`oti o a _Y rt a•n .. 0 o �.? 3 on^. t£c Qc aDa _fa nB7Ci.No0 a -o-j0_T.nZ20nn °-m - 3 mCc" •-i 0 �i w �nO a o � °°(D acom D o ow C^emo ,cm c°(w m o'nl Mo (° °msm<° Nc aG > n C S• OZX , O(to "` � t2�° 00 , .o~ oOO ocD iw aCana0,0 cn o 07ZfoD 03 a y-a mO ��n rD-l�v<?�21CprZ 0 w op, 0 -UQ 00 w o o o m�pw- oym�Z aC o _ •-�1� c(°D m � n m C7�•a rnG C.m m w O ,.o Z 3 pr O O 'nc O m < .3 = ^•£ m w., 0 o a w e c cr am,•1 C: C- D Zrn (mn�y M _ O 21 C ."t.. Poi '• fl: H 7 m O^ m M,<. m - a n -1 Zx 'Gm ,.o?le0in omoa ,wp�y my O n n C7�C0 C Cw S(So Q. -M .0 w0 (�° °•'w a v° S m -lm ° C,CA � a -n D O Z O m r c >> , Cc H° N QaaO ?. mP,.w 0°S3O O �cl.. CD QQ ^ _.(O n:ao � C) rn O 3 n 3 n (3D Cf ? a. 7 ? to ? •_) (� 7 Y A MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Interim Community Development Director FROM: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: Text Amendment, Sections 26.20.030, 26.52, and 26.72 of the Aspen Municipal Code, 'to eliminate the distinction between . HPC review authority over landmark and non -landmark properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures- PUBLIC HEARING DATE: October 6, 1998 SUMMARY: The Planning staff recommends amendments to Sections 26.20.030, 26.52, and 26.72 of the Aspen Municipal Code, to eliminate the distinction between HPC review authority over landmark and non -landmark properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. The code amendment was identified as a priority in the Aspen Area Community Plan and the HPC Symposium held in August 1998. The "Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures" contains 260 properties. 71 of these are located within historic districts and therefore have full HPC review for redevelopment as either a "minor" or "significant" project dependent on the scope of work. 87 others are landmark sites outside of the historic districts and have the same stringent HPC protection. Redevelopment of the remaining 102 non -landmark sites is reviewed only in terms of any amount of demolition or relocation proposed. (It should be noted that the HPC program has been set up to encourage property owners to choose to landmark by offering incentives to do so. This system has worked well, but there are numerous significant properties which remain unlandmarked because the owner hasn't chosen to landmark the property.) For the review of a non -landmark property, a public hearing is not required (unless an off -site relocation or total demolition is proposed) and the review standards, particularly for partial demolition, only allow HPC a general mass and scale review of any new construction. If a completely detached structure_ is proposed on a non -landmark site (so that there is no amount of demolition to the historic structure) there is no HPC review. The HPC feels strongly that all of the properties on the historic inventory should have equal protection and review. All projects with a scope beyond minor alterations should be reviewed in a two step process; conceptual and final, with a public hearing at conceptual. This will allow HPC the greatest protection and scrutiny over major alterations to historic sites, and will require public notice. The standards related to demolition, partial demolition and on or off -site relocations will still be used, in conjunction with the broader HPC standards for compatibility of new additions. TEXT AMENDMENT: See Exhibit B, Proposed Amendments. Three areas of the code are impacted, Section 26.20.030 Powers and Duties of the Historic Preservation Commission, Section 26.52 Common Development Review Procedures, and Section 26.72 Development in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. STANDARDS FOR 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 commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. Response: The amendment is not in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Response: The proposed amendment is consistent with a goal of the AACP: "Amend the City Code to require review of alterations and additions to all historic resources identified on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures," as well as the intent statement of the Design Quality and Historic Preservation Action Plan: "To ensure the maintenance of character through design quality and compatibility with historic features." C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Response: The proposed amendment does not create a new land use or density. The intention is to help development, as it affects historic structures, to fit in with the neighborhood characteristics. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Response: The amendment will have no impact 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. 2 Response: The proposed amendment will have no impact on public facilities or services, however, staff can anticipate additional caseload associated with the upgrading of the review authority of the HPC. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Response: The proposed amendment will not cause adverse impacts on the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Response: The amendment will require that modifications to all historically designated structures, landmark or non -landmark, preserve the community character of Aspen. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Response: The amendment does not affect a particular parcel or neighborhood. The community has seen on -going and sometimes substantial alterations to historic structures. The amendment will help address those resources which are currently not sufficiently protected. L Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. Response: The proposed amendment is in harmony with the public interest as expressed through the AACP and the HPC Symposium, the forty attendees of which made this code amendment a high priority. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends P&Z forward a recommendation of approval to Council for the proposed code amendments related to historic inventory properties, as described in "Exhibit B," of the memo provided from Amy Guthrie dated October 6, 1998, and incorporated into Resolution 98- RECOMMENDED MOTION: " I move that P&Z forward a recommendation of approval to Council for the proposed code amendments related to historic inventory properties, as described in "Exhibit B," of the memo provided from Amy Guthrie dated October 6, 1998, and incorporated into Resolution 98- " Exhibits: A.. Memo from Amy Guthrie dated October 6, 1998 B. Proposed Code Amendments C. Resolution # , Series of 1998 �� iot -�o r-W o,.,,,�..�.�i'-�'tie_ r� fie' ►� 3 EXHIBIT B, PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS 26.20.030 Powers and duties. The historic preservation commission (HPC) shall have the following powers and duties: A. Recommendation of approval or disapproval to the commission and the city council of the designation of H, Historic Overlay District or Historic Landmark, under Chapter 26.76; B. Review and approval, approval with conditions, suspension or disapproval. of development with the H, Historic Overlay District or development involving „ h lanark properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, under Chapter 26.72; C. Review and approval, approval with conditions, suspension or disapproval of demolition, partial demolition, on -site, off -site, or temporary or relocation involving a /� a 11 or n " 5 " by the 14 PC in its evaluation of the inventory of uinferin Sites an Stnietufes of the City of Aspen properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, as periodically amended under Chapter 26.72; D. Periodic evaluation of the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, under Chapter 26.72; E. Recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval to the board of adjustment on a request for variance in the H, Historic Overlay District or involving ahister-ie landmark. properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, under Chapter 26.72; F. Recommendation of the city council of Historic District and Historic Landmark Development Guidelines, under Chapter 26.72; G. Recommendation to the commission to initiate amendments to this chapter; and H. To hear and approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove variations under Chapter 26.72. (Ord. No. 60-1989, § 1: Code 1971, § 4-403) Chapter 26.52 COMMON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES Sections: 26.52.010 General. 26.52.020 Pre -application conference. 26.52.030 Application and fees. 26.52.040 Initiation of development application. 26.52.050 Determination of completeness and review by the planning director. 26.52.060 Review of a development application by decision -making bodies. 26.52.070 Certificate of compliance and building permit issuance. 26.52.080 Vested property rights. 1� � � U V \--- FD 4 26.52.010 General. Chapter 26.52 sets out the common procedures for review of all development applications. These common procedures apply to the following types of land development processes in the City of Aspen: Permitted uses (Chapter 26.56), conditional uses (Chapter 26.60), development subject to special review (Chapter 26.64), development in environmentally sensitive areas (ESA) (Chapter 26.68), development or demolition in H, Historic Overlay Districts or of his*er-ie lands properties included on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures (Chapter 26.72), designation of H, Historic Overlay Districts or Historic Landmarks (Chapter 26.76), development in or designation of specially planned areas (SPA) (Chapter 26.80), planned unit developments (PUD) (Chapter 26.84), subdivision review (Chapter 26.88), review of amendments to the text of this chapter or the official zone district map (Chapter 26.92), and growth management quota system (GMQS) review (Chapter 26.100). Generally, for proposed development that is subject to these provisions, the process of development follows five (5) stages: (1) A pre -application conference between the applicant and the planning agency staff; (2) submission of the development application and fees by the applicant; (3) determination of completeness and review of the development application by the planning director; (4) review of the development application by the relevant decision -making body; and upon approval of the development application, (5) receipt of a building permit. These common development review procedures are organized consistently with this process. A chart depicting the common development review procedures can be found in Figure 6-101. By far, the most lengthy and important of these five (5) stages is the review of the development application by the relevant decision -making body or bodies. In instances where the proposed development is simple and its potential effect on substantive land use policy in the city relatively insignificant, the review procedure is expedited. Where the proposed development is more complex and has a significant effect on substantive land use policy, the review procedure is more complicated and lengthy. A chart focusing on the review of a development application by the relevant decision -making body or bodies is found in Figure 6-102. The development review procedures are also summarized in Table 6-101. The Provisions of General Applicability established in this chapter apply to all these development applications and include procedures for pre -application conference, application and fees, initiation of application, determination of completeness, review, hearing, decision -making, public notice, building permit issuance and vested property rights. Unless otherwise stated, all development applications are subject to these common review procedures. However, development which is as of right is only subject to the building permit stage of review. All other substantive development review standards and special procedures requirements which vary from those general requirements are found in Chapters 26.56 through 26.96 or Chapter 26.100, where they are applicable. FIGURE 6-101: PROCESS OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Pre -application Conference Submission of Development Application Determination of Completeness of Development Application Review of Development Application Receipt of Building Permit FIGURE 6-102: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS REQUIRING NO STEPS: 1. PERMITTED USES: a. Reviewed by Planning Agency Staff. b. No public hearing required. 2. EXEMPT HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT: a. Reviewed by Planning Agency Staff. b. No public hearing required. 3. EXEMPT ESA DEVELOPMENT: a. Reviewed by Planning Agency Staff. b. No public hearing required. 4. EXEMPT GMQS DEVELOPMENT: a. Reviewed by Planning Agency Staff. b. No public hearing required. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS REQUIRING ONE STEP: l . CONDITIONAL USE: a. Reviewed by Planning and Zoning Commission. b. Public hearing required. I 2. SPECIAL REVIEW: a. Reviewed by Planning and Zoning Commission. b. No public hearing required. 3. ESA: a. Reviewed by Planning and Zoning Commission. b. No public hearing required. 4. EXEMPT GMQS: a. Reviewed by Planning and Zoning Commission. b. No public hearing required. 5. SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS: a. Reviewed by City Council. b. No public hearing required except for lot splits. 6. MINOR DEVELOPMENT OF A 141ST-0P Tr LANDMARK PROPERTY LISTED ON THE INVENTORY OF HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES OR IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT: a. Reviewed by Historic Preservation Commission. b. No public hearing required. 7. DEMOLITION, PARTIAL DEMOLITION, OR RELOCATION OF A 141,S4:0P,4G LANDMARK PROPERTY LISTED ON THE INVENTORY OF HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES OR IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT: a. Reviewed by Historic Preservation Commission. b. Public hearing required for demolition and off -site relocation. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS REQUIRING TWO STEPS: 1. GMQS: a. Reviewed by: (1) Planning and Zoning Commission (refer to note 1 below), and (2) City Council (refer to note 2 below). b. Public hearing required before Planning and Zoning Commission. 7 C. May be consolidated with a conditional use application, a special review application, and/or an ESA application before the Planning and Zoning Commission and with subdivision exemption application before the City Council. 2. TEXT OR MAP AMENDMENT: a. Reviewed by: (1) Planning and Zoning Commission (refer to note 1 below), and (2) City Council (refer to note 2 below). b. Public hearing required before both Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. 3. GMQS EXEMPTIONS: a. Reviewed by: (1) Planning and Zoning Commission (refer to note 1 below), and (2) City Council (refer to note 2 below). b. No public hearing required. 4. SUBDIVISION REVIEW: a. Reviewed by: (1) Planning and Zoning Commission (refer to note 1 below), and (2) City Council (refer to note 2 below). b. Public hearing required before Planning and Zoning commission. 5. SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT OF uTSTOPJG LM4PMARK A PROPERTY LISTED ON THE INVENTORY OF HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES OR IN HISTORIC DISTRICT: a. Reviewed by: (1) Historic Preservation Commission (for conceptual review), and (2) Historic Preservation Commission (for final review). 8 b. Public hearing required for the conceptual review. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS REQUIRING THREE STEPS 1. DESIGNATION OF HISTORIC LANDMARK OR DISTRICT: a. . Reviewed by: (1) Historic Preservation Commission, and (2) Planning and Zoning Commission (refer to notes 1 and 3 below), and (3) City Council (refer to notes 2 and 3 below). b. Public hearing required for Historic Preservation Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission, and City Council. C. May be consolidated with a conditional use application, a special review application, an ESA application, and/or a GMQS exemption application before the Planning and Zoning Commission. May be consolidated with a GMQS exemption application and/or a subdivision exemption application before City Council. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS REQUIRING FOUR STEPS: 1. SPA or PUD: a. Reviewed by: 1 and 3 below), and (1) Planning and Zoning Commission (for conceptual), and (2) City Council (for conceptual), and (3) Planning and Zoning Commission (for final) (refer to notes (4) City Council (for final) (refer to notes 2 and 3 below). b. Public hearing required for City Council (at conceptual) and Planning and Zoning Commission (for final). C. May be consolidated with GMQS application, GMQS exemption application, subdivision review application, text or map amendment application, conditional use application, special review application, and/or ESA application before Planning and Zoning Commission (for final). May be consolidated with GMQS application, GMQS exemption application, subdivision review application, text or map amendment application, and/or subdivision exemption application before City Council (for final). 6 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS REQUIRING SIX STEPS: 1. SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT OF uT�oF G T n'`TDMA A PROPERTY LISTED ON THE INVENTORY OF HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES OR IN HISTORIC DISTRICT IN CONJUNCTION WITH SPA OR PUD: a. Reviewed by: (1) Historic Preservation Commission (for conceptual), and (2) Planning and Zoning Commission (for conceptual PUD or SPA), and (3) City Council (for conceptual PUD or SPA), and (4) Historic Preservation Commission (for final), and (5) Planning and Zoning Commission (for final PUD or SPA) (refer to notes 1 and 3 below), and (6) City Council (for final PUD or SPA) (refer to notes 2 and 3 below). b. Public hearing required at Historic Preservation Commission (for conceptual), City Council (for conceptual PUD or SPA), and Planning and Zoning Commission (for final PUD or SPA). C. May be consolidated with GMQS application, GMQS exemption application, subdivision review application, text or map amendment application, conditional use application, special review application, and/or ESA application before Planning and Zoning Commission (for final PUD or SPA). May be consolidated with GMQS application, GMQS exemption application, subdivision review application, text or map amendment application, and/or subdivision exemption application before City Council (for final PUD or SPA). NOTES: 1. One step Commission applications can *be reviewed concurrently with a two, three, four or six step application at the step identified in the process. 2. One step Council applications can be reviewed concurrently with a two, three, four or six step application at the step identified in the process. 3. Two step Commission/Council applications can be reviewed concurrently with a three, four or six step application at the step identified in the process. ESA means Environmentally Sensitive Areas. IU1 GMQS means Growth Management Quota System. PUD means Planned Unit Development. 4' SPA means Specially Planned Area. TABLE 6-101: SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES Type of Number of Steps Review Public Consolidate With Development In Process Entity Hearing? Other Apps? Application When. When. Permitted Uses None Planning No No Agency Exempt Development Staff Historic ESA GMQS Conditional Use One Commission Yes --At step 1 No Special Review Commission No No ESA Commission No No GMQS Commission No No Subdivision One Council No --except lot No Exemptions splits at Step 1 Minor DevelopmentOne HPC Yes --For No Of Demolition Only a property listed on the at Step 1 Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures or in historic district GMQS Two Commission/ Yes --At step 1 Yes --Conditional Council Use at Step 1 Text or Map Commission/ Yes --At Step Special Review at Amendment Council 1 & 2 Step 1 GMQS Exemptions Commission/ No ESA at Council Step 1 Subdivision Commission/ Yes- At Step 1 Subdivision Review Council Exemption at Step 2 GMQS Commission/ Yes --At Step 1 Subdivision Exemptions Council Exemption at Step 2 Significant Two HPC/HPC Yes --At Step 1 No development of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures or in historic district Designate historic Three HPC/ Yes --At Step Yes --Conditional landmark or district Commission/ 2 and 3 Use at Step 2 Council, Special Review at Step 2, ESA at Step 2, GMQS Exemption at Step 2&3, Subdivision Exemption at Step 3 SPA or PUD Four Commission/ Yes --At Step Yes--GMQS Council 2 and 3 and/or GMQS exemption at Step 3& 4, Subdivision Review at Step 3 & 4, Text or map amend at Step 3 & 12 Significant Six Development of HT7ferie lands nr�� a property listed on the Inventor, of Historic Sites and Structures or in Historic District in conjunction with SPA, or PUD (Code 1971, § 6-101) HPC/ Yes --At Step Commission/ 1, 3, and 5 Council 4, Conditional Use at Step 3, Special Review at Step 3, ESA at Step 3, Subdivision Exemption at Step 4 Yes--GMQS GMQs and/or GMQS exempt. at Step 5&6, Subdivision Review at Step 5&6, Text or map amend at Steps 5&6, Cond. Use at Step 5, Special Review at step 5, ESA at Step 5, Subdivision Exemption at Step 6 26.52.020 Pre -application conference. A. General. Prior to formal filing of a development application, it is recommended that an applicant confer with the staff of the planning agency to obtain information and guidance. The purpose of such a.conference is to permit the applicant, the planning director and the planning agency staff to review informally a proposed development and determine the most efficient method of development review before substantial commitments of time and money are made in the submission of an application. B. Issues of discussion. Issues that may be discussed at the pre -application conference, may include, but are not limited to the following: l . Proposed development. The applicant should describe the general nature of the proposed development, including, if applicable, proposed land uses and their densities; proposed placement of buildings, structures, and other improvements; character and location of common open space or treatment of public uses; preservation of natural features; preservation of historic structures and landmarks; protection of environmentally 13 sensitive areas; proposed off-street parking and internal traffic circulation; and total ground coverage of paved areas and structures. 2. Review procedure. The planning agency staff should identify procedural review requirements for the proposed development, and applicable review standards and terms of this title that apply to the review of the proposed development. This should include identifying those stages of the common review procedure which apply, which decision -making body or bodies will review the development application, and the approximate length of the development review procedure. 3. Referral agencies. The planning agency staff should identify the city, state, and federal agencies that are required to review the proposed development, provide the applicant with persons at these agencies to contact about review procedures, and generally describe the information which will be needed to satisfy the concerns of the relevant city, state, and federal agencies. 4. Application contents. The planning agency staff should establish the contents of the development application required to be submitted for the proposed development. This should include descriptions of the types of reports and drawings required, the general form which the development application should take, and the information which should be contained within the application. 5. Application copies and fee. The planning agency staff should identify the number of copies of the development application that is required to be submitted for the proposed development, along with the amount of the fee needed to defray the cost of processing the application, and the number of hours of staff review time associated with the fee. At the conclusion of the conference, the applicants will be presented with a written summary of the meeting. One copy of this written summary should be submitted back to the planning agency at the time of submission of the development application. (Code 1971, § 6-201) 26.52.030 Application and fees. A. General. A development application shall be submitted in the form, and shall include the information and materials specified for that application in this section, and Chapters 26.56 through 26.96 and Chapter 26.100, if additional information is required. The development application shall be accompanied by a fee, as is established from time to time by the city council, to defray the cost of processing the application. B. Application. All development applications shall include, at a minimum, the following information and materials. 1. The applicant's name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 2. The street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur. 3. A disclosure of ownership of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements 14 affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Development Application. 4. An 8 1/2" x 11" vicinity map locating the subject parcel within the City of Aspen. 5. A site improvement survey including topography and vegetation showing the current status of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the State of Colorado. (This. requirement, or any part thereof, may be waived by the Community Development Department if the project is determined not to warrant a survey document.) 6. A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. C. Consolidation of applications. If an applicant has requested the consolidation of development applications, the director shall waive any overlapping application submission requirements in the consolidated development application. D. Copyrighted materials. The City of Aspen will not accept for development application or recordation purposes any materials to which copyright applications have been made unless the applicant shall waive all claims and indemnify the city. Any person submitting a development application shall consent that any document submitted to the City of Aspen as part of a development application may be utilized by the city in any manner deemed necessary, including, but not limited to, recording at the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, to preserve the representations made during the development review process. (Ord. No. 6-1989, § 8; Ord. No. 56-1994, § 12: Code 1971, § 6-202) 26.52.040 Initiation of development application. A development application may be initiated by over fifty (50) percent of the owners of real property of a proposed development. In addition, the city council or the commission may initiate a development application to amend the text of this chapter or the official zone district map (Chapter 26.92) or to designate a specially planned area (SPA) (Chapter 26.80), and the city council, commission, or HPC may initiate a development application to designate a H, Historic Overlay District or historic landmark (Chapter 26.76). (Code 1971, § 6-203) 26.52.050 Determination of completeness and review by the planning director. A. Determination of completeness. 1. Submission. In order to initiate a development application, an applicant shall submit to the planning director the number of copies of the application, containing that information agreed upon in the pre -application conference or required by the relevant provisions of this title, and accompanied by the application fee. 2. Determination of completeness. After a development application has been received, the planning director shall determine whether the application is complete. If the planning director determines that the application is not complete, written notice shall be served on the applicant specifying the deficiencies. The planning director shall take no further action on the application unless the deficiencies are remedied. If the application is determined to be complete, the planning director shall notify the applicant of its 15 completeness. A determination of completeness shall not constitute a determination of compliance with the substantive requirements of this chapter. B. Review and recommendation by planning director. 1. Comments on application from city staff. When the development application is determined complete by the planning director, copies shall be distributed to appropriate city staff persons, departments and referral agencies. Any comments shall be returned to the planning director prior to submitting a recommendation to the applicable decision -making body. 2. Report and recommendation. The planning director shall compile all comments and recommendations from appropriate city staff persons, departments, and referral agencies, and shall make a written report and recommendation to the appropriate decision -making body on the development application. The written report and recommendation shall state whether the application conforms to the review standards pertaining to the relevant development approval sought, and whether it should be approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved. The planning director shall attach any referral agency comments to the report and recommendation. C. Setting the hearing. After the planning director determines that a development application is complete and a report and recommendation is completed, the planning director shall establish a place and time certain for the hearing, if required, on the development application, pursuant to the requirements of this section. If the hearing is a public hearing required to be noticed, the planning director shall cause public notice to be given pursuant to the procedure and requirements established in Section 26.52.060(E). (Code 1971, § 6-204) 26.52.060 Review of a development application by decision -making bodies. The following review, hearing, and notice procedures and requirements apply to the review of a development application by the relevant decision -making bodies. A. Review procedures. A development application, depending on what types of development order it requests, shall be subject to one of the nine (9) review procedures outlined below. l . Planning agency staff review: Permitted uses, exemptions of development in H Historic Overlay District and/or of histor-ie landmaf a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, environmentally sensitive area (ESA), GMQS allotments, and subdivision exemption for a lot line adjustment. a. General. Review and approval of a development application for permitted uses (Chapter 26.56) shall be made by the planning agency staff in the form of a certificate of zoning compliance issued to the chief building official. Review and determination of exemptions for development in the H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures(Chapter 26.72), in environmentally sensitive areas (ESA) (Chapter 26.68) or for certain GMQS Allotments (Chapter 26.100) shall be determined by the planning director. b. Permitted uses. A development application for a permitted use shall be reviewed and approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved by the chief building official pursuant to the terms and standards established in Section 26.56.020. a C. Exemptions of development in H, Historic Overlay District and/or of hisror-ie l ndm-ci lE a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. Exemption of development in the H, Historic Overlay District and/or of a h landmafk. a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures shall be granted by the planning director pursuant to the terms and standards established in Section 26.72.010(C). d. Exemption of development from review in environmentally sensitive area. Exemption of development from review in environmentally sensitive areas shall be granted by the planning director pursuant to Section 26.68.030(B), 26.68.040(B) or 26.68.050(B). e. Exemptions of development from growth management quota system (GMQS) allotment. Exemption of certain development from growth management quota system (GMQS) allotment shall be granted by the planning director pursuant to the terms established in Section 26.100.040(A). f. Exemption from Subdivision for Lot Line Adjustments. Exemption of development from the terms of subdivision for lot line adjustments shall be granted by the Planning Director pursuant to the terms established in Section 26.88.030(A)(1) 2. One-step commission review: Development application for conditional uses, special review, and in environmentally sensitive area (ESA) requiring consolidation with no other development application or exemption of certain development under GMQS. A development application for conditional uses (Chapter 26.60), development subject to special review (Chapter 26.64), and development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA) (Chapter 26.68) requiring consolidation with no other Development Application and exemption of certain development from GMQS pursuant to Section 26.100.040(B) shall be reviewed by the commission pursuant to the following procedures. a. Public hearing by the commission for conditional uses. After receipt, of the written report and recommendation of the planning director for a conditional use (Chapter 26.60), the commission, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the commission shall determine if the development application meets the standards for a conditional use (Section 26.60.040), and shall issue a development order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the application. b. Hearing by the commission for special review and ESA, and GMQS exemption. After receipt of the written report and recommendations of the planning director for development subject to special review (Chapter 26.64), development in environmentally sensitive areas (ESA) (Chapter 26.68), or for a GMQS exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.040(B), the commission shall hold a hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the hearing, the commission shall determine if the development application meets the standards for special review (Section 26.64.040), ESA (Section 26.68.030 through 26.68.050), or GMQS exemption (Section 26.100.040(B)), whichever is applicable, and shall issue a development order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the application, or exempting the development from GMQS. 3. One-step HPC review: Development application for minor development or demolition in a H, Historic Overlay District or of hister-ie lan mnrlE. property listed on 17 the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures requiring consolidation with no other development application. A development application for minor development or demolition in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures(Chapter 26.72) only shall be reviewed by the HPC pursuant to the following procedures. a. Hearing by HPC for minor development. After receipt of the written report and recommendations of the planning director for minor development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a hinter e 1-an m„rk property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, the HPC shall hold a hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the hearing, the HPC shall determine if the development application meets the standards of Section 26.72.010(D), and shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or denying the application. b. Public hearing by HPC for Demolition in H Historic Overlay District or involvingperty listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. After receipt of the written report and recommendation of the planning director for demolition of a structure in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a uister- e T andmproperty listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, the HPC, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the HPC shall determine if the development application meets the standards of Section 26.72.020(B), and shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the application. 4. On -step council review: Development application for subdivision exemption requiring consolidation with no other development application. A development application for subdivision exemption only (Chapter 26.88) shall be reviewed by the city council pursuant to the following procedures. a. Hearing by council for subdivision exemption. After receipt of the written report and recommendation of the planning director for subdivision exemption, the council shall hold a hearing to review the application, unless the application shall be for a lot split, which shall require a public hearing for which notice has been provided pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E). At the conclusion of the hearing or public hearing, as applicable, the council shall determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.88.030, and shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions or denying the application. 5. Two-step commission and city council review: Growth management quota system (GMQS) allotment; subdivision review; amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map; and certain GMQS exemptions. Review and approval of a development application for growth management quota system (GMQS) allotment (Chapter 26.100), subdivision review, amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map and certain GMQS exemptions require review by the commission and a final decision by the city council and may be consolidated with a development application for a conditional use, special review or ESA. a. GMQS allotment for a permitted use. (1) Public hearing by commission. After receipt of the written report and recommendations of the planning director for GMQS scoring for a permitted use, the commission, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public 18 hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the commission shall determine the points accumulated by the application pursuant to the standards of Section 26.100.060(E), (F) or (G), whichever is applicable, and shall forward the score to the city council. (2) Hearing by city council. Upon receipt of the recommendation of the scoring of the development application by the commission, the city council shall allocate GMQS allotments among eligible applicants in the order of priority established by their rank. b. GMQS allotment consolidated with other development applications; amendment to the text of this title or official zone district map or subdivision review or certain GMQS exemptions alone. (1) Public hearings by commission. After receipt of the written report and recommendations of the planning director for a development application for GMQS scoring in conjunction with a development application for a conditional use, special review, ESA, subdivision review or amendment to the text of this title or official zone district map, or amendment to the text of this title or official zone district map or subdivision review or certain GMQS exemptions alone, the commission, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the commission shall determine if the development application meets the standards of Section 26.60.040 for conditional uses, Section 26.64.040 for special review, Section 26.68.030 through 26.68.050 for ESA, 26.88.040(c) for subdivision or Section 26.92.020 for an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map, whichever is applicable. The commission shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or denying that part of the application pertaining to conditional uses, special review and ESA, subject to approval by the city council of the GMQS allotment for the application. The commission shall recommend approval, approval with conditions or disapproval of the application for subdivision review or for amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map or for certain exemptions from GMQS. Concurrently, the commission shall determine the points accumulated by the application for GMQS pursuant to the standards of Section 26.100.060(E), (F) or (G), whichever is applicable, and shall forward the score to the city council. If a development application for a GMQS exemption is heard alone, there shall be no requirement for a public hearing. (2) Hearing/public hearing by city council. Having received the recommendation of the scoring of the development application by the commission, the city council shall allocate GMQS allotments among eligible applicants in the order of priority established by their rank. If a development application for an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map is consolidated with a GMQS application, or is heard alone, the city council shall consider the consolidated applications at a public hearing, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E). If a development application for subdivision review or a GMQS exemption is heard alone, there shall be no requirement for a public hearing. 6. 'Two-step HPC review: Development applications for significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a h ster- e ' h property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures requiring consolidation with no other M development application. Review and approval of a development application for significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures only requires review and approval of a conceptual development plan by the HPC and review and approval of a final development plan by the HPC. a. Public hearing on conceptual development plan by HPC. After receipt of the written report and recommendation of the planning director for a conceptual development plan for significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a histervrie !a- rdmar- property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, the HPC, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the HPC shall determine if the development application meets the standards of Section 26.72.010(D), and shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the conceptual development plan. b. Hearing for review of final development plan by HPC. After receipt of the written report and recommendation of the planning director for a final development plan for significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a hinter- e l.,,-,a,...,,,f property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, the HPC shall hold a hearing to review the final development plan. At the conclusion of the hearing the HPC shall consider the recommendation of the plaiuling director, determine if the final development plan is consistent with the conceptual development plan, determine if the final development plan meets the standards of Section 26.72.010(D), and adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the application. 7. Three -step HPC, commission, and city council review: Designation of H, Historic Overlay District or historic landmark. Review and approval of a development application for designation of a H, Historic Overlay District, or of a historic landmark requires review and recommendation by the HPC and commission, and a final decision by the city council pursuant to the following terms and procedures. a. Hearing by HPC. After receipt of the written report and recommendations of the planning director regarding a development application for designation, amendment, or rescission of H, Historic Overlay District or of a historic landmark designation, the HPC shall hold a hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the hearing, the HPC shall determine if the development application meets the standards of Section 26.76.020, and shall recommend that a development order be adopted approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the application. b. Public hearing by the commission. After recommendation of the development application by the HPC, the commission, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the commission shall determine if the development application meets the standards of Section 26.76.020, and shall recommend to the city council that a development order be adopted approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the application. Also, if applicable, the commission shall concurrently determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.60.040 for conditional uses, Section 26.64.040 for special review, Section 26.68.030 through 26.68.050 for ESA, or Section 26.100.040 for certain GMQS exemptions and shall adopt a development 20 order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving that part of the application pertaining to conditional uses, special review, ESA, and GMQS exemptions subject to approval by the city council of the development application designating the property. C. Public hearing by city council. After recommendation on the development application by the commission, the city council, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the public hearing;- the city council shall consider the recommendations of the planning director, the HPC, and the commission, determine if the development application meets the standards of Section 26.76.020, and adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the application. If applicable, the council shall also determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.100.040. 8. Four -step commission and council review: SPA or PUD only; SPA or PUD consolidated with other development applications. Review and approval of a development application for SPA or PUD, by themselves, or in conjunction with development applications for GMQS and GMQS exemption or conditional uses, special review, ESA, subdivision review or an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map, require review and approval under a four -step process involving review and approval of a conceptual development plan by the commission and city council, and review and approval of a final development plan by the commission and city council. a. Conceptual development plan review by the commission. After receipt of the written report and recommendation of the planning director for a development application for conceptual development plan approval, the commission shall hold a hearing to review the conceptual development plan. At the conclusion of the hearing, the commission shall recommend approval, approval with conditions, or denial of the conceptual development plan pursuant to Section 26.80.040(B) or Section 26.84.030(B), or whichever is applicable. The recommendation shall then be forwarded to the city council for its review. If the development application is being considered as part of a consolidated review process with development applications for GMQS or GMQS exemption, subdivision review, an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map, or conditional use, special review, or ESA, initial review of these applications will not be heard until the commission and city council consider the final development plan. Provided, however, that at the request of the applicant, an amendment to the text or this title or the official zone district map may be considered in conjunction with conceptual development plan review, but final actions on such development , applications shall not be taken until review and approval of the final development plan is undertaken. b. Conceptual development plan review by city council. After receipt of the recommendations of the commission for a development application for the conceptual development plan, the city council, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public hearing to review the conceptual development plan. At the conclusion of the hearing, the city council shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the conceptual development plan pursuant to Section 26.80.040(B) or Section 26.84.030(B), whichever is applicable. C. Review of final development plan and other consolidated development applications by the commission. Within one year of approval by the city council of a 21 conceptual development plan, a development application shall be submitted for a final development plan or the development order for the conceptual development plan shall automatically expire. After receipt of the written report and recommendation on the final development plan from the planning director, the commission, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public hearing to review that part of the application pertaining to the final development plan, and if applicable, development applications for GMQS scoring or exemption, an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map, or conditional use, special review, and ESA. At the conclusion of the hearing, the commission shall determine if the final development plan meets the standards of Section 26.80.040(B) (SPA) or Section 26.84.030(B) (PUD), whichever is applicable, and shall recommend to the city council that a development order be adopted approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the final development plan. If applicable, the commission shall also concurrently determine the points accumulated by the application for GMQS pursuant to the standards of Section 26.100.060(E), (F) or (G), whichever is applicable, and shall forward the score to the city council. If applicable, the commission shall concurrently determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.88.040(c) and 26.92.020 and recommend approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval of a development application requesting subdivision review and amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map. Also, if applicable, the commission shall concurrently determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.60.040 for conditional uses, Section 26.64.040 for special review, or Section 26.68.030 through 26.68.050 for ESA, and shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving that part of the application pertaining to conditional uses, special review and ESA, subject to approval by the city council of the final development plan and the GMQS allotment. d. Hearing/public hearing on final development plan and other consolidated development applications by the city council. After receipt of the recommendation on the final development plan, GMQS scoring or exemption, subdivision review, amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district snap from the commission, the city council shall hold a hearing to review that part of the application pertaining to the final development plan, GMQS allotment or exemption, subdivision review or amendment, if applicable. At the conclusion of the hearing, the city council shall determine if the final development plan meets the standards of Section 26.80.030(B) (SPA), or Section 26.84.030(B) (PUD), whichever is applicable, and shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the final development plan. If a development application for an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map is being considered, the city council shall hold a public hearing pursuant to public notice required in Section 26.52.060(E), and shall determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.92.020, and shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the application. If a development application for GMQS is being reviewed, the city council shall allocate GMQS allotments among eligible applicants in the order of priority established by their rank or shall determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.100.040(C). If a development application for subdivision is being reviewed, the city council shall determine if the plat WJ meets the standards of Section 26.88.040(c) and adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions or disapproving the application. 9. Six -step HPC, commission, and council review: Significant development in H, Historic Overlay District or of his*^�-landna a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures in conjunction with SPA or PUD, only; or consolidated with other development applications. Review and approval of a development application for significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a' ster- e ' an m a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures in conjunction with a development application for SPA or PUD, by themselves, or in conjunction with development applications for GMQS allotment or exemption, subdivision review, an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map, or conditional uses, special review, or ESA, require review and approval under a six -step process involving review and approval of the historical district application by the HPC, review and approval of a conceptual development plan by the commission and city council, and review and approval of a final development plan by the commission and city council. a. Public hearing on conceptual development plan for significant development. After receipt of the written report and recommendation of the planning director for a conceptual development plan for significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, and after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), the HPC shall hold a public hearing to review the conceptual development plan and recommendations of the planning director. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the HPC shall determine if the conceptual development plan meets the standards of Section 26.72.010(D), and shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the conceptual development plan. b. Conceptual development plan review by the commission. After HPC review of the conceptual development plan for significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a h stef e'andma-rk property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, and after receipt of the written report and recommendation of the planning director for a development application for conceptual development plan approval for SPA or PUD, the commission shall hold a hearing to review the conceptual development plan. At the conclusion of the hearing, the commission shall recommend approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval of the conceptual development plan pursuant to Section 26.80.030(B) (SPA) or Section 26.84.030(B) (PUD), whichever is applicable. The recommendation shall then be forwarded to the city council for its review. If the development application is being considered as part of a consolidated review process with development applications for GMQS allotment or exemption, subdivision review, or an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map, or conditional uses, special review, or ESA, initial review of these applications will not be heard until the commission and city council consider the final development plan. Provided, however, that at the request of the applicant, an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map may be considered in conjunction with conceptual development plan review, but final actions on such development applications shall not be taken until review and approval of the final development plan is undertaken. 23 C. Public hearing on conceptual development plan review by city council. After receipt of the recommendations of the commission for a development application for the conceptual development plan, the city council, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public hearing to review the conceptual development plan. At the conclusion of the hearing, the city council shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the conceptual development plan pursuant to Section 26.80.030(B) (SPA) or Section 26.84.030(B) (PUD), whichever is applicable. d. Hearing for final HPC review. That portion of the development application pertaining to the final development plan for significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a nisier-i . l,,,.,a,,. ar-1 property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures shall be reviewed after the commission and city council review of the conceptual development plan for any consolidated development application, and prior to final development plan review by the commission and the city council for the consolidated applications. It shall be reviewed by the HPC pursuant to the following procedures After receipt of the written report and recommendation of the planning director for a final development plan for significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or a hister-ie la ma,.'. pity listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, the HPC shall hold a hearing to review the final development plan. At the conclusion of the hearing, the HPC shall consider the recommendation of the planning director, determine if the final development plan is consistent with the conceptual development plan, determine if the final development plan meets the standards of Section 26.72.010(D), and adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or denying the application, subject to approval by the city council of the final development plan for the consolidated development applications. e. Public hearing on commission review of final development plan and other consolidated development applications. After HPC review of the final development plan for significant development in the H, Historic Overlay District or of a l J „',-,,,dfil r', prooppe_rty listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, and after receipt of the written report and recommendation on the final development plan from the planning director for SPA, or PUD, and if applicable, a development application for GMQS scoring or exemption, an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map, or conditional uses, special review, and ESA, the commission, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(D), shall hold a public hearing to review that part of the application pertaining to the final development plan, the GMQS application, the amendment application, and the other applications, if applicable. At the conclusion of the hearing, the commission shall determine if the final development plan meets the standards of Section 26.80.030(B) (SPA) or Section 26.84.030(B) (PUD), whichever is applicable, and shall recommend to the city council that a development order be adopted approving, approving with conditions, or denying the final development plan. If applicable, the commission shall concurrently determine the points accumulated by the application for GMQS pursuant to the standards of Section 26.100.060(E), (F) or (G), and shall forward the score to the city council. If applicable, the commission shall also determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.88.040(C) and 26.92.020, and recommend approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval of a development application requesting subdivision review and amendment to the text of this title or the 24 official zone district map. Also, if applicable, the commission shall concurrently determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.60.040 for conditional uses, Section 26.64.040 for special review, or Section 26.68.030 through 26.68.050 for ESA, and shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or denying that part of the application pertaining to conditional uses, special review and ESA, subject to approval by the city council of the final development plan, amendment, or the GMQS allotment. f. Hearing on city council review of final development plan and other consolidated development applications. After receipt of the recommendation on the final development plan, or GMQS scoring from the commission, the city council shall hold a hearing to review that part of the application pertaining to the final development plan, GMQS allotment or exemption, subdivision review, or amendment, if applicable. At the conclusion of the hearing, the city council shall determine if the final development plan meets the standards of Section 26.80.030(B) (SPA), or Section 26.84.030(B) (PUD), whichever is applicable, and shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the final development plan. If a development application for GMQS is being reviewed concurrently, the city council shall allocate GMQS allotments among eligible applicants in the order of priority established by their rank or shall determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.100.040(C). If a development application for an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map is being considered, the city council shall hold a public hearing with public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), before considering the consolidated applications. In reviewing the amendment application, the city council shall determine if it meets the standards of Section 26.92.020, and approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the application. If a development application for subdivision is being reviewed, the city council shall determine if the plat meets the standards of Section 26.88.040(c) and shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions or disapproving the application. B. Modification of review procedures. In the event that an applicant believes that the previously listed review procedures do not directly address the development being contemplated, or that there are other unusual circumstances, the applicant may, pursuant to Chapter 26.92, request an interpretation by the planning director as to the appropriate review procedures for the proposed development. C. General hearing procedures. The following general procedures shall apply to the conduct of all hearings regarding the review of a development application by decision -making bodies. 1. Oath or affirmation. Testimony and evidence shall be given under oath or by affirmation to the body conducting the hearing. 2. Rights of all persons. Any person or persons may appear at a public hearing and submit evidence either individually or as a representative of another person or an organization Anyone representing another person or an organization must present written evidence of their authority to speak on behalf of the person or the organization in regard to the matter under consideration. Each person who appears at a public hearing shall be identified and, if appearing on behalf of another person or an organization, state the name and mailing address of the person or the organization. 25 3. Due order of proceedings. the decision -making body conducting the hearing may exclude testimony or evidence that it finds to be irrelevant, immaterial or unduly repetitious. Any person may ask relevant questions of other persons appearing as witnesses, but shall do so only through the discretion of the chairman or mayor. The order of proceedings shall be as follows: a. The planning agency staff shall present a narrative and graphic description of the development application. b. The planning agency staff shall present a written and oral recommendation. This recommendation shall address each factor required to be considered by this title and the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan prior to development approval and shall be made available to the applicant submitting the development application at least two (2) working days prior to the hearing. C. The applicant shall present any information that it deems appropriate, and shall demonstrate that public notice has been given, if required. d. Public testimony shall be heard, first in favor of the development application, then in opposition to it. e. The planning agency staff may respond to any statement made by the applicant or any public comment. f. The applicant may respond to any testimony or evidence presented by the planning agency staff or public. 4. Testimony. In the event any testimony or evidence is excluded as irrelevant, immaterial or unduly repetitious, the person offering such testimony or evidence shall have an opportunity to make a proffer in regard to such testimony or evidence for the record. Such proffer may be made at the hearing or in writing within fifteen (15) days after the close of the hearing. 5. Continuance of hearing. The decision -making body conducting the hearing may, on its own motion or at the request of any person, continue the hearing to a fixed date, time and place. No notice shall be required if a hearing is continued. An applicant shall have the right to request and be granted one continuance; however, all subsequent continuances shall be granted at the discretion of the decision -making body conducting the hearing, only upon good cause shown. All adjourned public hearings shall commence only upon the giving of all notices which would have been required were it the initial call of the public hearing. 6. Other rules to govern. Other matters pertaining to the public hearing shall be governed by other provisions of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, applicable to the decision -making body conducting the hearing and its adopted rules of procedure, so long as the same are not in conflict with this chapter. The city's decision - making bodies may adopt rules of procedure to limit the number of development applications which may be considered at a hearing. 7. Record. a. Records of hearing. The body conducting the hearing shall record the proceedings by any appropriate means which shall be transcribed at the request of any person. b. Record. The transcript of oral proceedings, including testimony and statements of personal opinions, the minutes of the secretary, all applications, exhibits 26 and papers submitted in any proceeding before the decision -making body, the report and recommendation of the planning agency staff, and the decision and report of the decision - making body shall constitute the record. C. Public records. All records of decision -making bodies shall be public records, open for inspection at reasonable times and upon reasonable notice. D. Actions by decision -making bodies. All decision -making bodies shall act in accord with the time limits established in this title. Action shall be taken as promptly as possible in consideration of the interests of the citizens of the City of Aspen. E. Public notice. 1. General. Prior to a public hearing on a development application, notice shall be provided to the public, pursuant to the terms of this section. Table 6-101 establishes the steps in the development review process at which time notice is to be given. 2. Content of notice. Every notice shall include the name and address of the applicant, the type of development application sought, date, time and place of the hearing, the address and legal description of the subject property if applicable, a summary of the development application under consideration, and identification of the decision -making body conducting the hearing and such other information as may be required to fully apprise the public of the nature of the application. 3. Manner of notice. Every notice shall be given in one or more of the following manners, as specified in Section 26.52.060(E)(4). a. Publication of notice. Publication of notice shall be provided by the planning agency at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing through publication in an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen in the legal notice section. The content of the notice shall be that described in Section 26.52.060(E)(2). b. Posting of notice. Posting of notice shall be made by the applicant, who shall obtain a copy of the form from the planning agency, which shall be posted at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing, by posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the property subject to the development application. The sign shall be made of suitable, waterproof materials, shall be not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and shall be composed of letters not less than one inch in height. The content of the notice shall be that described in Section 26.52.060(E)(2). C. Mailing of notice. Mailing of notice shall be made by the applicant, who shall obtain a copy of the notice from the planning agency, which. shall contain that information described in Section 26.52.060(E)(2). At least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing, notice shall be sent by first class, postage prepaid U.S. mail, or at least five (5) days if sent by hand delivery, 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 shall be sent by first class, postage pre -paid U.S. mail or hand delivery 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 27 Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. 4. Required notices. Notice of hearing to the public for a development application shall take the following form. a. Development application for permitted uses, special review, ESA, GMQS exemptions, subdivision exemptions (other than for a lot split) or minor development in -I an "H," Historic Overlay District or involving a property listed on the Inventory o Historic Sites and Structures. A development application for a permitted use, development subject to special review, GMQS exemption, development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA) or minor development in H, Historic Overlay District or involving_a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures requires no notice to the public prior to review. b. Development application for conditional uses and variances. A development application for a conditional use or a variance requires mailing of notice and posting of notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E)(3)(b) and (c). C. Development application for significant development in H an "H," Historic Overlay District; demolition in 14 an "H," Historic Overlay District; development in or designation of specially planned area (SPA); planned unit development (PUD); amendments to official zone district map unless for entire city; subdivision exemption for lot split; designation of Historic Overlay District or historic landmarks; growth management quota system (GMQS). Significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, development, demolition of a his of ^ ' and of of ^f st�int,, v_n les as -"'CL"T of a "5" by the 14PC; in its ev4aatien of the inventer-y of hister-ie sites and stfuetuf property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, designation of a specially planned area (SPA), plaimed unit development (PUD), amendments to the official zone district map unless for the entire city, subdivision exemption for lot split, designation of Historic Overlay District or historic landmarks, and growth management quota system (GMQS) review requires publication of notice, posting of notice and mailing of notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E)(3)(a), (b) and (c). d. Amendment to the text of this title. Amendment to the text of this title requires publication of notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E)(3)(a) for Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing and ordinance adoption procedures for City Council public hearing. e. Development application for subdivision. Subdivision review requires publication of notice and mailing of notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E)(3)(a) and (c) and notice by registered mail to all surface owners, mineral owners and lessees of mineral owners of the property subject to the development application. f. Any development application which will cover five (5) acres or more of land. Any development application which will cover five (5) acres or more of land requires publication of notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E)(3)(a) and mailing of notice to the Colorado Land Use Commission, the state geologist, and the Pitkin County Commissioners. In addition, a development application for subdivision approval also requires notice by registered mail to all surface owners, mineral owners and lessees of mineral owners of the property subject to the development application. 28 5. Rezoning of entire city. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this title, or whenever the text of this title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change, shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. (Ord. No. 13-1993 § 3; Ord. No. 56-1994, § 13: Code 1971, § 6-205) Chapter 26.72 DEVELOPMENT IN AN "H," HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT, OR INVOLVING THE INVENTORY OF HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES Sections: 26.72.010 Minor development, significant development, and exemptions. 26.72.020 Demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation, or temporary relocation. 26.72.030 Insubstantial amendment of development order. 26.72.040 Appeal and call up. 26.72.050 Variances. 26.72.060 Minimum maintenance requirements. 26.72.010 Minor development, significant development, and exemptions. A. General. Any development' within an "H," Historic Overlay District, or development involving a histve -Tre landmar-ii property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures must be reviewed in accordance with the provisions of this Section 26.72.010 and Common Procedures, Chapter 26.52, unless exempted by the community development director under Section 26.72.010 (C). If not exempted, development is categorized as minor or significant development which must obtain approval of the HPC. Minor development review and approval is a one-step process and requires no public hearing. Significant development must go through a conceptual and final development plan review and approval process, with a public hearing occurring at the time of conceptual development plan review. B. General prohibition. No development shall be permitted within the "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving a hriste,-in land,property listed on the Inventorof Historic Sites and Structures unless: 1. The development is not subject to the provisions of this section; or 2. The development is exempted pursuant to Section 26.72.010(C); or 3. The development is approved by the HPC as either minor or significant development pursuant to the procedures outlined in Common Procedures, Chapter 26.52, because it meets the standards of Section 26.72.010(D). 29 C. Exemption. 1. Development which is not subject to the provisions of this section shall include any interior remodeling of a structure, repainting of the exterior of an already painted structure, and choice of color of any exterior architectural feature. Such development shall not require the review by the community development director or HPC, and shall proceed directly to building permit review, when a building permit is required for the development. 2. Development which the community development director shall exempt from HPC review shall include repair of existing architectural features, replacement of architectural features when found necessary for the preservation of the structure, and similar remodeling activities which create no change to the exterior appearance of the structure and have no impact on its character. The community development director shall exempt awnings, canopies, fences, mechanical equipment or other similar attachments to, or accessory features of a structure, provided however, that in the process of erecting said attachments, none of the significant features of the structure are destroyed or permanently removed. Incidental destruction or limited removal necessary to erect any attachment shall not make the action significant development. The community development director shall exempt signs which are not reviewed under Section 26.72.010(F)(2)(A). Within the Commercial Core, the community development director shall exempt any insignificant changes in the site design of an individual property, such as paving and new street furniture. The Community Development Director shall exempt any development required for compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act when it affects a nonhistoric structure in the "H," Historic Overlay District, and has no significant impact on the character of the structure. For any of the exemptions listed above, the Community Development Director may place conditions on the exemption which are relevant to mitigation of impacts to the affected historic site or structure or to adjacent historic sites or structures. An appeal of a Community Development Director exemption is to the historic preservation commission. The Community Development Director may also determine that any of the above applications are more appropriately reviewed by HPC as a minor development, because of significant effects upon historic resources. 3. Before any proposed development can be considered for an exemption under the provisions of this section, an application for exemption shall be submitted to the Community Development Director in the form provided by the Community Development Director. D. Review standards for all development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, and all development involving 'ster-ie landmarks- properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. 1. Development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, and all development involving properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures . No approval for any development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving hister-ie lanes properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures shall be granted unless the HPC finds that all of the following standards are met. a. The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale, and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay 30 District, or is adjacent to an historic landmark. For historic landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units, pursuant to section 26.40.090(B)(2). The floor area bonus will only be awarded to projects which make an outstanding preservation effort, for instance by retaining historic outbuildings or by creating breezeway or connector elements between the historic resource and new construction. Lots which are larger than nine thousand (9,000) square feet and properties which receive approval for an historic landmark lot split may also be appropriate recipients of the bonus. No development application which includes a request for an FAR bonus may be submitted until the applicant has met with HPC in a workshop format to discuss whether or not the proposal might qualify for the floor area bonus, prior to design; and b. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development; and c.The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels; and d. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. 2. Additional development guidelines. The City Council, upon recommendation of the HPC, shall established additional guidelines for use by HPC in the review of all development in. an "H," Historic Overlay District, and involving histIIr; e landmarks - properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, in accordance with the procedures in Chapter 26.08. E. Minor development. 1. Procedure for review. Before HPC approval of minor development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, and of all development involving histerie land nr'-s properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures a development application shall be submitted to the Community Development Director and reviewed and approved by the HPC pursuant to the procedures established in Common Procedures, Chapter 26.52. 2. Definition. Minor development shall be defined as follows: a. Remodeling of a structure where alterations are made to no more than one (1) element of the structure, including but not limited to a roof, window, door, skylight, ornamental trim, siding, kickplate, dormer, porch, staircase, and balcony; b. Expansion or erection of a structure wherein the increase in floor area of the structure is two hundred fifty (250) square feet or less; or c. Erection or remodeling of combinations of, or multiples of no more than three (3) of the following features: awnings, canopies, signs, fences and other similar attachments; or windows, doors, skylights and dormers. Erection of more than three (3) of the above 31 listed features may be defined as minor if there is a finding that the cumulative impact of such development is minor in its effect on the character of the existing structures. d. Erection of street furniture, signs, benches, public art, or similar development which is to be placed throughout the Commercial Core or Main Street Historic Districts. The Community Development Director may determine that the development is to be reviewed as a significant development, pursuant to section 26.72.010(F). Public hearing requirements will not apply. 3. Application. A development application for minor development shall include the following: a. The general application information required in section 26.52.030. b. If determined appropriate by the Community Development Director, a site plan or survey showing property boundaries and predominant existing site characteristics. c. An accurate representation of all major building materials, such as samples and photographs, to be used for the proposed development. d. A scale drawing of the proposed development in relation to any existing structure. e. A statement of the effect of the proposed development on the original design of the historic structure (if applicable) and character of the neighborhood. F. Significant development. 1. Procedure for review. Before HPC approval of significant development within an "H," Historic Overlay District, and of all development involving his+er;e !,,, dffl ,,ate properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, a conceptual development plan and final development plan shall be reviewed and approved by the HPC pursuant to the procedures established in Common Procedures, Chapter 26.52. 2. Definition. Significant development shall be defined as follows: a. Erection of an awning, canopy, sign, fence or other similar attachments to, or accessory features of, a structure that, in the process of erecting, cause significant features of the structure to be permanently destroyed or removed; b. Erection or remodeling of combinations of, or multiples of any single feature of a structure which has not been determined to be minor; c. Expansion or erection of a structure wherein the increase in floor area of the structure is more than two hundred fifty (250) square feet; d. Construction of a new structure within a "H," Historic Overlay District; and e. The development of any property which is listed on the inventory of historic sites and structures and which has received approval for demolition or off -site relocation when a development plan has been required by the HPC pursuant to section 26.72.020(J)(5). 3. Conceptual development plan. a. Development application for conceptual development plan. A development application for a conceptual development plan shall include the following: (1) The general application information required in section 26.52.030. (2) A site plan and a survey showing property boundaries and predominant existing site characteristics. (3) Conceptual selection of major building materials to be used in the proposed development. (4) A statement of the effect of the proposed development on the original design of the historic structure (if applicable) and/or character of neighborhood. 32 (5) Scale drawings of all elevations of any proposed structures, including a roof plan. (6) A visual description of the neighborhood context through at least one (1) of the following: diagrams, maps, photographs, models, or streetscape elevations, with the intent to provide HPC with the necessary information without adding excessive costs to the applicant. b. Effect of approval of conceptual development plan. Approval of a conceptual development plan shall not constitute final approval of significant development or permission to proceed with development. Such approval shall constitute only authorization to proceed with a development application for a final development plan. c. Limitation on approval of conceptual development plan. Application for a final development plan shall be filed within one (1) year of the date of approval of a conceptual development plan. Unless an extension is granted by HPC, failure to file such an application shall render null and void the approval of a conceptual development plan previously granted by the HPC. 4. Final development plan. a. Submission of application for final development plan. A development application for a final development plan shall include: (1) The general application information required in section 26.52.030. (2) Reserved. (3) An accurate representation of all major building materials, such as samples and photographs, to be used for the proposed development. (4) Finalized drawings of the proposal at 1 /4" = V0 scale. (5) A statement of the effect of the details of the proposed development on the original design of the historic structure (if applicable) and character of the neighborhood. (6) A statement of how the final development plan conforms to the representations made during the conceptual review and responds to any conditions placed thereon. G. Historic Landmark Lot Split. The development of all lots created pursuant to section 26.88.030 (A)(5) shall be reviewed by HPC ata public hearing. (Ord. No. 6-1989, § 9; Ord. No. 60-1990, § 3; Ord. No. 21-1995, § 1(part); Ord. No. 49-1995, § 4; Ord. No. 33-1997, § l: Code 1971, § 7-601) 26.72.020 Demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation, or temporary relocation. A. General. No demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation, or temporary relocation of any structure included in the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures of the City of Aspen, established pursuant to section 26.76.090, or any structure within an "H" Historic Overlay District, shall be permitted unless the demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation, or temporary relocation is approved by the HPC because it meets the applicable standards of section 26.72.020(B), (C), (D), (E), or (F) unless exempted pursuant to section 26.72.020(G) or (H). For the purposes of this section, "demolition" shall mean the total razing of any structure on an inventoried parcel which contributes to the historic significance of that parcel. "Partial demolition" shall mean the razing of a portion of any structure on an 33 inventoried parcel or the total razing of any structure on an inventoried parcel which does not contribute to the historic significance of that parcel. B. Standards for review of demolition. No approval for demolition shall be granted unless the HPC finds that all of the following standards are met. 1. The structure proposed for demolition is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure; and 2. The structure cannot be rehabilitated or reused on site to provide for any reasonable beneficial use of the property; and 3. The structure cannot be practicably moved to another site in Aspen; and 4. The applicant demonstrates that the proposal mitigates to the greatest extent practical, the following: a. Any impacts that occur to the character of the neighborhood where demolition is proposed to occur. b. Any impact on the historic significance of the structure or structures located on the parcel and adjacent parcels. c. Any impact to the architectural character and integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel and adjacent parcels. C. Standards for review of partial demolition. No approval for partial demolition shall be granted unless the HPC finds all of the following standards are met: 1. The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the structure, or the structure does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel; and 2. The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: a. Impacts on the historic significance of the structure or structures located on the parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions. b. Impacts on the architectural character or integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel by designing new additions so that they are compatible in mass and scale with the historic structure. D. Standards for review of off -site relocation. No approval for off -site relocation shall be granted unless the HPC finds that all of the following standards are met: 1. The structure cannot be rehabilitated or reused on its original site to provide for any reasonable beneficial use of the property; and 2. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be the best preservation method for the character and integrity of the structure, and the historic integrity of the existing neighborhood and adjacent structures will not be diminished due to the relocation; and 3. The structure has been demonstrated to be capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re -siting. A structural report shall be submitted by a licensed engineer demonstrating the soundness of the structure proposed for relocation; and 4. A relocation plan shall be submitted, including posting a bond or other financial security with the Engineering Department, as approved by the HPC, to insure the safe relocation, preservation and repair (if required) of the structure, site preparation and infrastructure connections. The receiving site shall be prepared in advance of the physical relocation; and 34 5. The receiving site is compatible in nature to the structure or structures proposed to be moved, the character of the neighborhood is consistent with the architectural integrity of the structure, and the relocation of the historic structure would not diminish the integrity or character of the neighborhood of the receiving site. An acceptance letter from the property owner of the receiving site shall be submitted. E. Standards for review of on -site relocation. No approval for on -site relocation shall be granted unless the HPC finds that the standards of Section 26.72.020(D)(2), (3), and (4) have been met. If the structure that is to be relocated does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel, only standard 26.72.020(D)(2) must be met. F. Standards for review of temporary relocation. No approval for temporary relocation shall be granted unless the HPC finds that the standards of Section 26.72.020(D)(3) and (4) have been met. G. Exemption for structures within an "H," Historic Overlay District. The demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation, or temporary relocation of a structure located within an "H" Historic Overlay District, may be exempt from meeting the applicable standards in Section 26.72.020(B), (C), (D), (E) or (F) if the HPC finds that the following conditions have been met: 1. The structure is not identified on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. 2. The structure is considered to be noncontributing to the historic district. 3. The structure does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district, and that its demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation or temporary relocation does not impact the character of the historic district. 4. The demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation or temporary relocation is necessary for the redevelopment of the parcel. 5. The redevelopment or new development is reviewed by HPC pursuant to Section 26.72.010. H. Exemption for structures which do not contribute to the historic significance of an inventoried parcel. A structure which does not contribute to the historic significance of an inventoried parcel is exempt from meeting the standards of Section 26.72.020(D), off -site relocation and Section 26.72.020(F), temporary relocation. I. Procedure for review. A development application shall be submitted to the community development director before HPC approval of demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation, temporary relocation, or exemption which shall be reviewed and approved by the HPC pursuant to the procedures established in Common Procedures, Chapter 26.52. The HPC shall be authorized to suspend action on demolition, partial demolition, off - site relocation, or on -site relocation applications when it finds that it needs additional information to determine whether the application meets the standards of Section 26.72.020 or that the proposal is a matter of such great public concern to the city that alternatives to the demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation or on -site relocation must be studied jointly by the city and the owner. Alternatives which the HPC may consider having studied shall include, but not be limited to finding economically beneficial uses of the structure, removal of the structure to a suitable location, providing public subsidy to the owner to preserve the structure, identifying a public entity capable of public acquisition of the structure, or revision to the demolition, partial demolition, 35 off -site relocation or on -site relocation and development plan. The HPC shall be required to specify the additional information it requires or the alternatives it finds should be studied when it suspends action on the demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, or on -site relocation application. Action shall only be suspended for the amount of time it shall take for the necessary information to be prepared and reviewed by the community development director, but in no case shall suspension be for a period to exceed six (6) months. J. Application for demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation, or temporary relocation. A development application shall include the following. Applications which affect a structure which does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel shall only include the submission requirements listed in Section 26.72.020(J)(1), (2), and (5): 1. The general application information required in Section 25.62.030. 2. A written description of the structure proposed for demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation, temporary relocation, or exemption, and its year of construction. 3. A report from a licensed engineer or architect regarding the soundness of the structure and its suitability for rehabilitation. 4. For demolition or off -site relocation only: An economic feasibility report that provides: a. Estimated market value of the property on which the structure lies, in its current condition, and after demolition or relocation. b. Estimates from an architect, developer, real estate agent or appraiser experienced in rehabilitation addressing the economic feasibility of rehabilitation or reuse of the structure proposed for demolition or relocation. c. All appraisals made of the property on which the structure is located made within the previous two (2) years. d. Any other information considered necessary to make a determination whether the property does yield or may yield a reasonable return on investment. 5. For demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation and on -site relocation only: A development plan and a statement of the effect of the proposed development on the other structures on the property and the character of the neighborhood around the property shall be submitted so that HPC is able to make a finding whether the applicable standards are met. In the case of a demolition or off -site relocation, the development plan will be reviewed as a Significant Development application, pursuant to Section 26.72.010. K. Application for demolition or exemption from demolition, partial demolition, off - site relocation, on -site relocation, or temporary relocation. A development application for exemption shall include all items specified in Section 26.72.020(J)(1) and (2). L. Penalties. A violation of any portion of this Section 26.72.020 shall prohibit the owner, successor or assigns from obtaining a building permit for the affected property for a period of five (5) years from the date of such violation. The city shall initiate proceedings to place a deed restriction on the property to this effect to insure the enforcement of this penalty. (Ord. No. 17-1989, § 1; Ord. No. 9-1991, § 1; Ord. No. 21- 1995, § 1(part): Code 1971, § 7-602) 36 26.72.030 Insubstantial amendment of development order. A. An insubstantial amendment to an approved development order may be authorized by the community development director. An insubstantial amendment shall be limited to technical or engineering considerations, first discovered during actual development which could not reasonably be anticipated during the approval process. An insubstantial amendment shall be defined as a change in shape or location of a single window, awning, door, staircase or other feature on the structure or use of a material made by a different manufacturer that has the same quality and approximately the same appearance as originally approved. B. All other amendments shall be approved by the HPC pursuant to Section 26.72.010 or 26.72.020, whichever is applicable. (Ord. No. 21-1995, § 1(part): Code 1971, § 7-603) 26.72.040 Appeal and call up. A. Any action by the HPC in approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving a development order or suspending action on a demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, or on -site relocation application or in rating a structure on the inventory of historic sites and structures may be appealed to the city council by the applicant or a landowner within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property within thirty (30) days of the decision. The reasons for the appeal shall be stated in writing. The city council may also call up for review any decision of the HPC approving, disapproving, or suspending action on a demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, or on -site relocation of any structure on the inventory of historic sites and structures by serving written notice on the HPC within fourteen (14) days of the HPC's decision and notifying the applicant of the call up. B. Within thirty (30) days after the date of a decision by the HPC which is appealed or called up by the city council, the council shall hold a public hearing after publishing notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060 (E)(3)(a). C. The city council shall consider the application on the record established before the HPC. The city council shall affirm the decision of the HPC unless the city council shall determine that there was an abuse of discretion, or a denial of due process by the HPC. Upon determining that there was an abuse of discretion or denial of due process, the city council shall be authorized to take such action as it shall deem necessary to remedy said situation, including but not limited to reversing the decision, altering the conditions of approval, changing the length of time during which action on a demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, or on -site relocation application has been suspended or the terms of the suspension, or remanding the application to HPC for rehearing. (Ord. No. 7-1989, § 2; Ord. No. 21-1995, § I(part): Code 1971, § 7-604) 26.72.050 Variances. The board of adjustment shall not take any action on a development application for a variance pursuant to Chapter 26.108, in the "H," Historic Overlay District. or development affecting a =,ister-ie1anproperty listed on the Inventory of Historic 37 Sites and Structures, without receiving a written recommendation from the HPC. (Ord. No. 21-1995, *§ 1(part): Code 1971, § 7-605) 26.72.060 Minimum maintenance requirements. A. Purpose. The intent of this section is to reduce the incidence of "demolition by neglect." B. Requirements. All buildings and structures identified in the inventory of historic sites and structures as described in Section 26.76.090, and all structures located within a historic district, shall be maintained to meet the requirements of the Uniform Conservation Building Code (UCBC) and the Uniform Building Code (UBC). Said structures shall receive reasonable care, maintenance and upkeep appropriate for the preservation, protection, enhancement, rehabilitation, reconstruction, perpetuation or use in compliance with the terms of this chapter. Every owner or his designated agent in charge of such building or structure shall keep in good repair: 1. All of the exterior portions of such improvements. 2. All interior portions thereof which, if not so maintained, may cause or tend to cause the exterior portions of such improvements to deteriorate, decay or become damaged or otherwise fall into a state of disrepair. The historic preservation commission, on its own initiative, may file a petition with the chief building official requesting that said official proceed under the provisions of this section to require correction of defects or repairs to any structure covered by this chapter so that such structure shall be preserved and protected in consonance with the purpose of this chapter. C. Demonstration of hardship. Any owner of a structure identified in the inventory of historic sites and structures which HPC and the chief building official finds requires such maintenance and repairs as described in this section may make application requesting from the city council a one-time, no interest loan, in an amount not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00), which the owner shall agree to pay back to the city within ten (10) years or when the property is sold or the title is transferred, whichever is the soonest. An extension of the payment period may be granted by the city council, following written request by the owner. To be eligible for the loan, the owner shall submit a written request to the community development director, which shall include a description of the proposed repairs necessary to maintain the historic structure and approximate costs for such repairs. The loan request shall also demonstrate economic hardship which previously prohibited these repairs and that the loan amount is the minimum necessary to maintained the structure. The loan request shall be considered by the city council. Any loan granted by the council shall be administered through the community development director, who shall obtain copies of bills from the owner substantiating all expenditures made to maintain the structure with monies obtained from the loan. D. Penalties waived. The general penalties for violations of the Aspen Municipal Code contained in Chapter 1.04, Section 1.04.080, shall not apply to violations 38 of these minimum maintenance requirements. (Ord. No. 7-1989, § 2; Ord. No. 21-1995, § 1(part): Code 1971, § 7-606) 39 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 26 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, LAND USE REGULATIONS, SECTION 26.20.030 POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION, SECTION 26.52 COMMON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES, AND SECTION 26.72 DEVELOPMENT IN AN "H," HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT, OR INVOLVING THE INVENTORY OF HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES Resolution 98- WHEREAS, The Community Development Department received from the Historic Preservation Commission a recommendation for an amendment to the land use regulations, regarding certain text amendments to Chapter 26 relating to Section 26.20.030 Powers and Duties of the Historic Preservation Commission, Section 26.52 Common Development Review Procedures, and Section 26.72 Development in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.92.030 of the Municipal Code, amendments to Chapter 26 of the Code, to wit, "Land Use Regulations," shall be reviewed and recommended for approval by the Planning Director and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing, and then approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved by the City Council at a public hearing; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the application at its regular meeting on October 6, 1998, at which the Commission approved the proposed text amendment. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission: Section 1 That Section 26.20.030 Powers and Duties of the Historic Preservation Commission shall be amended to read as follows: 26.20.030 Powers and duties. The historic preservation commission (HPQ shall have the following powers and duties: A. Recommendation of approval or disapproval to the commission and the city council of the designation of H, Historic Overlay District or Historic Landmark, under Chapter 26.76; 40 B. Review and approval, approval with conditions, suspension or disapproval of development with the H, Historic Overlay District or development involving properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, under Chapter 26.72; C. Review and approval, approval with conditions, suspension or disapproval of demolition, partial demolition, on -site, off -site, or temporary or relocation involving properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, as periodically amended under Chapter 26.72; D. Periodic evaluation of the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, under Chapter 26.72; E. Recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval to the board of adjustment on a request for variance in the H, Historic Overlay District or involving properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, under Chapter 26.72; F. Recommendation of the city council of Historic District and Historic Landmark Development Guidelines, under Chapter 26.72; G. Recommendation to the commission to initiate amendments to this chapter; and H. To hear and approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove variations under Chapter 26.72. (Ord. No. 60-1989, § 1: Code 1971, § 4-403) Section 2: That Section 26.52 Common Development Review Procedures shall be amended to read as follows: Chapter 26.52 COMMON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES Sections: 26.52.010 General. 26.52.020 Pre -application conference. 26.52.030 Application and fees. 26.52.040 Initiation of development application. 26.52.050 Determination of completeness and review by the planning director. 26.52.060 Review of a development application by decision -making bodies. 26.52.070 Certificate of compliance and building permit issuance. 26.52.080 Vested property rights. 26.52.010 General. Chapter 26.52 sets out the common procedures for review of all development applications. These common procedures apply to the following types of land development processes in the City of Aspen: Permitted uses (Chapter 26.56), conditional 41 uses (Chapter 26.60), development subject to special review (Chapter 26.64), development in environmentally sensitive areas (ESA) (Chapter 26.68), development or demolition in H, Historic Overlay Districts or of properties included on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures (Chapter 26.72), designation of H, Historic Overlay Districts or Historic Landmarks (Chapter 26.76), development in or designation of specially planned areas (SPA) (Chapter 26.80), planned unit developments (PUD) (Chapter 26.84), subdivision review (Chapter 26.88), review of amendments to the text of this chapter or the official zone district map (Chapter 26.92), and growth management quota system (GMQS) review (Chapter 26.100). Generally, for proposed development that is subject to these provisions, the process of development follows five (5) stages: (1) A pre -application conference between the applicant and the planning agency staff, (2) submission of the development application and fees by the applicant; (3) determination of completeness and review of the development application by the planning director; (4) review of the development application by the relevant decision -making body; and upon approval of the development application, (5) receipt of a building permit. These common development review procedures are organized consistently with this process. A chart depicting the common development review procedures can be found in Figure 6-101. By far, the most lengthy and important of these five (5) stages is the review of the development application by the relevant decision -making body or bodies. In instances where the proposed development is simple and its potential effect on substantive land use policy in the city relatively insignificant, the review procedure is expedited. Where the proposed development is more complex and has a significant effect on substantive land use policy, the review procedure is more complicated and lengthy. A chart focusing on the review of a development application by the relevant decision -making body or bodies is found in Figure 6-102. The development review procedures are also summarized in Table 6-101. The Provisions of General Applicability established in this chapter apply to all these development applications and include procedures for pre -application conference, application and fees, initiation of application, determination of completeness, review, hearing, decision -making, public notice, building permit issuance and vested property rights. Unless otherwise stated, all development applications are subject to these common review procedures. However, development which is as of right is only subject to the building permit stage of review. All other substantive development review standards and special procedures requirements which vary from those general requirements are found in Chapters 26.56 through 26.96 or Chapter 26.100, where they are applicable. FIGURE 6-101: PROCESS OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW Pre -application Conference Submission of Development Application Determination of Completeness of Development Application 42 Review of Development Application Receipt of Building Permit FIGURE 6-102: DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS REQUIRING NO STEPS: 1. PERMITTED USES: a. Reviewed by Planning Agency Staff. b. No public hearing required. 2. EXEMPT HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT: a. Reviewed by Planning Agency Staff. b. No public hearing required. 3. EXEMPT ESA DEVELOPMENT: a. Reviewed by Planning Agency Staff. b. No public hearing required. 4. EXEMPT GMQS DEVELOPMENT: a. Reviewed by Planning Agency Staff. b. No public hearing required. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS REQUIRING ONE STEP: 1. CONDITIONAL USE: a. Reviewed by Planning and Zoning Commission. b. Public hearing required. 2. SPECIAL REVIEW: a. Reviewed by Planning and Zoning Commission. b. No public hearing required. 3. ESA: a. Reviewed by Planning and Zoning Commission. 43 b. No public hearing required. 4. EXEMPT GMQS: a. Reviewed by Planning and Zoning Commission. b. No public hearing required. 5. SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS: a. Reviewed by City Council. b. No public hearing required except for lot splits. 6. MINOR DEVELOPMENT OF A PROPERTY LISTED ON THE INVENTORY OF HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES OR IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT: a. Reviewed by Historic Preservation Commission. b. No public hearing required. 7. DEMOLITION, PARTIAL DEMOLITION, OR RELOCATION OF A PROPERTY LISTED ON THE INVENTORY OF HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES OR IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT: a. Reviewed by Historic Preservation Commission. b. Public hearing required for demolition and off -site relocation. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS REQUIRING TWO STEPS: 1. GMQS: a. Reviewed by: (1) Planning and Zoning Commission (refer to note 1 below), and (2) City Council (refer to note 2 below). b. Public hearing required before Planning and Zoning Commission. C. May be consolidated with a conditional use application, a special review application, and/or an ESA application before the Planning and Zoning Commission and with subdivision exemption application before the City Council. 2. TEXT OR MAP AMENDMENT: a. Reviewed by: 44 (1) Planning and Zoning Commission (refer to note 1 below), and (2) City Council (refer to note 2 below). b. Public hearing required before both Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council. 3. GMQS EXEMPTIONS: a. Reviewed by: (1) Planning and Zoning Commission (refer to note, I below), and (2) City Council (refer to note 2 below). b. No public hearing required. 4. SUBDIVISION REVIEW: a. Reviewed by: (1) Planning and Zoning Commission (refer to note 1 below), and (2) City Council (refer to note 2 below). b. Public hearing required before Planning and Zoning commission. 5. SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT OF A PROPERTY LISTED ON THE INVENTORY OF HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES OR IN HISTORIC DISTRICT: a. Reviewed by: (1) Historic Preservation Commission (for conceptual review), and (2) Historic Preservation Commission (for final. review). b. Public hearing required for the conceptual review. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS REQUIRING THREE STEPS 1. DESIGNATION OF HISTORIC LANDMARK OR DISTRICT: a. Reviewed by: 45 (1) Historic Preservation Commission, and (2) Planning and Zoning Commission (refer to notes 1 and 3 below), and (3) City Council (refer to notes 2 and 3 below). b. Public hearing required for Historic Preservation Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission, and City Council. C. May be consolidated with a conditional use application, a special review application, an ESA application, and/or a GMQS exemption application before the Planning and Zoning Commission. May be consolidated with a GMQS exemption application and/or a subdivision exemption application before City Council. DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS REQUIRING FOUR STEPS: • 7113 a. Reviewed by: (1) Planning and Zoning Commission (for conceptual), and (2) City Council (for conceptual), and (3) Planning and Zoning Commission (for final) (refer to notes 1 and 3 below), and (4) City Council (for final) (refer to notes 2 and 3 below). b. Public hearing required for City Council (at conceptual) and Planning and Zoning Commission (for final). C. May be consolidated with GMQS application, GMQS exemption application, subdivision review application, text or map amendment application, conditional use application, special review application, and/or ESA application before Planning and Zoning Commission (for final). May be consolidated with GMQS application, GMQS exemption application, subdivision review application, text or map amendment application, and/or subdivision exemption application before City Council (for final). DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS REQUIRING SIX STEPS: 1. SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENT OF A PROPERTY LISTED ON THE INVENTORY OF HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES OR IN HISTORIC DISTRICT IN CONJUNCTION WITH SPA OR PUD: a. Reviewed by: 46 (1) Historic Preservation Commission (for conceptual), and (2) Planning and Zoning Commission (for conceptual PUD or SPA), and (3) City Council (for conceptual PUD or SPA), and (4) Historic Preservation Commission (for final), and (5) Planning and Zoning Commission (for final PUD or SPA) (refer to notes 1 and 3 below), and (6) City Council (for final PUD or SPA) (refer to notes 2 and 3 below). b. Public hearing required at Historic Preservation Commission (for conceptual), City Council (for conceptual PUD or SPA), and Planning and Zoning Commission (for final PUD or SPA). c. May be consolidated with GMQS application, GMQS exemption application, subdivision review application, text or map amendment application, conditional use application, special review application, and/or ESA application before Planning and Zoning Commission (for final PUD or SPA). May be consolidated with GMQS application, GMQS exemption application, subdivision review application, text or map amendment application, and/or subdivision exemption application before City Council (for final PUD or SPA). NOTES: 1. One step Commission applications can be reviewed concurrently with a two, three, four or six step application at the step identified in the process. 2. One step Council applications can be reviewed concurrently with a two, three, four or six step application at the step identified in the process. 3. Two step Commission/Council applications can be reviewed concurrently with a three, four or six step application at the step identified in the process. ABBREVIATIONS: ESA means Environmentally Sensitive Areas. GMQS means Growth Management Quota System. PUD means Planned Unit Development. SPA means Specially Planned Area. 47 TABLE 6-101: _ SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES Type of Number of Steps Review Public Consolidate With Development In Process Entity Hearing? Other Apps? Application When. When. Permitted Uses None Planning No No Agency Exempt Development Staff Historic ESA GMQS Conditional Use One Commission Yes --At step 1 No Special Review Commission No No ESA Commission No No GMQS Commission No No Subdivision One Council No --except lot No Exemptions splits at Step 1 Minor DevelopmentOne HPC Yes --For No of a property listed on Demolition Only the Inventory of Historic at Step 1 Sites and Structures or in historic district GMQS Two Commission/ Yes --At step 1 Yes --Conditional Council Use at Step 1 Text or Map Commission/ Yes --At Step Special Review at Amendment Council 1 & 2 Step 1 GMQS Exemptions Commission/ No ESA at Council Step 1 Subdivision Commission/ Yes- At Step 1 Subdivision 48 Review Council Exemption at Step 2 GMQS Commission/ Yes --At Step 1 Subdivision Exemptions Council Exemption at Step 2 Significant Two HPC/HPC Yes --At Step 1 No development of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures or in historic district Designate historic Three HPC/ Yes --At Step Yes --Conditional landmark or district Commission/ 2 and 3 Use at Step 2 Council, Special Review at Step 2, ESA at Step 2, GMQS Exemption at Step 2&3, Subdivision Exemption at Step 3 SPA or PUD Four Commission/ Yes --At Step Yes--GMQS Council 2 and 3 and/or GMQS exemption at Step 3& 4, Subdivision Review at Step 3 & 4, Text or map amend at Step 3 & 4, Conditional Use at Step 3, Special Review at Step 3, ESA at Step 3, Subdivision Exemption at Step 4 Significant Six HPC/ Yes --At Step Yes--GMQS 49 Development of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures or in Historic District in conjunction with SPA, or PUD (Code 1971, § 6-101) Commission/ 1, 3, and 5 Council GMQs and/or GMQS exempt. at Step 5&6, Subdivision Review at Step 5&6, Text or map amend at Steps 5&6, Cond. Use at Step 5, Special Review at step 5, ESA at Step 5, Subdivision Exemption at Step 6 26.52.020 Pre -application conference. A. General. Prior to formal filing of a development application, it is recommended that an applicant confer with the staff of the planning agency to obtain information and guidance. The purpose of such a conference is to permit the applicant, the planning director and the planning agency staff to review informally a proposed development and determine the most efficient method of development review before substantial commitments of time and money are made in the submission of an application. B. Issues of discussion. Issues that may be discussed at the pre -application conference, may include, but are not limited to the following: l . Proposed development. The applicant should describe the general nature of the proposed development, including, if applicable, proposed land uses and their densities; proposed placement of buildings, structures, and other improvements; character and location of common open space or treatment of public uses; preservation of natural features; preservation of historic structures and landmarks; protection of environmentally sensitive areas; proposed off-street parking and internal traffic circulation; and total ground coverage of paved areas and structures. 2. Review procedure. The planning agency staff should identify procedural review requirements for the proposed development, and applicable review standards and terms of this title that apply to the review of the proposed development. This should include identifying those stages of the common review procedure which apply, which decision -making body or bodies will review the development application, and the approximate length of the development review procedure. 3. Referral agencies. The planning agency staff should identify the city, state, and federal agencies that are required to review the proposed development, provide the applicant with persons at these agencies to contact about review procedures, and 50 generally describe the information which will be needed to satisfy the concerns of the relevant city, state, and federal agencies. 4. Application contents. The planning agency staff should establish the contents of the development application required to be submitted for the proposed development. This should include descriptions of the types of reports and drawings required, the general form which the development application should take, and the information which, should be contained within the application. 5. Application copies and fee. The planning agency staff should identify the number of copies of the development application that is required to be submitted for the proposed development, along with the amount of the fee needed to defray the cost of processing the application, and the number of hours of staff review time associated with the fee. At the conclusion of the conference, the applicants will be presented with a written summary of the meeting. One copy of this written summary should be submitted back to the planning agency at the time of submission of the development application. (Code 1971, § 6-201) 26.52.030 Application and fees. A. General. A development application shall be submitted in the form, and shall include the information and materials specified for that application in this section, and Chapters 26.56 through.26.96 and Chapter 26.100, if additional information is required. The development application shall be accompanied by a fee, as is established from time to time by the city council, to defray the cost of processing the application. B. Application. All development applications shall include, at a minimum, the following information and materials. 1. The applicant's name, address and telephone number, contained within a letter signed by the applicant stating the name, address, and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 2. The street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur. 3. A disclosure of ownership of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property, and all mortgages, judgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Development Application. 4. An 8 1 /2" x 11 " vicinity map locating the subject parcel within the City of Aspen. 5. A site improvement survey including topography and vegetation showing the current status of the parcel certified by a registered land surveyor, licensed in the State of Colorado. (This requirement, or any part thereof, may be waived by the Community Development Department if the project is determined not to warrant a survey document.) 6. A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. 51 C. Consolidation of applications. If an applicant has requested the consolidation of development applications, the director shall waive any overlapping application submission requirements in the consolidated development application. D. Copyrighted materials. The City of Aspen will not accept for development application or recordation purposes any materials to which copyright applications have been made unless the applicant shall waive all claims and indemnify the city. Any person submitting a development application shall consent that any document submitted to the City of Aspen as part of a development application may be utilized by the city in any manner deemed necessary, including, but not limited to, recording at the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder, to preserve the representations made during the development review process. (Ord. No. 6-1989, § 8; Ord. No. 56-1994, § 12: Code 1971, § 6-202) 26.52.040 Initiation of development application. A development application may be initiated by over fifty (50) percent of the owners of real property of a proposed development. In addition, the city council or the commission may initiate a development application to amend the text of this chapter or the official zone district map (Chapter 26.92) or to designate a specially planned area (SPA) (Chapter 26.80), and the city council, commission, or HPC may initiate a development application to designate a H, Historic Overlay District or historic landmark (Chapter 26.76). (Code 1971, § 6-203) 26.52.050 Determination of completeness and review by the planning director. A. Determination of completeness. 1. Submission. In order to initiate a development application, an applicant shall submit to the planning director the number of copies of the application, containing that information agreed upon in the pre -application conference or required by the relevant provisions of this title, and accompanied by the application fee. 2. Determination of completeness. After a development application has been received, the planning director shall determine whether the application is complete. If the planning director determines that the application is not complete, written notice shall be served on the applicant specifying the deficiencies. The planning director shall take no further action on the application unless the deficiencies are remedied. If the application is determined to be complete, the planning director shall notify the applicant of its completeness. A determination of completeness shall not constitute a determination of compliance with the substantive requirements of this chapter. B. Review and recommendation by planning director. 1. Comments on application from city staff. When the development application is determined complete by the planning director, copies shall be distributed to appropriate city staff persons, departments and referral agencies. Any comments shall be returned to the planning director prior to submitting a recommendation to the applicable decision -making body. 2. Report and recommendation. The planning director shall compile all comments and recommendations from appropriate city staff persons, departments, and referral agencies, and shall make a written report and recommendation to the appropriate decision -making body on the development application. The written report and 52 recommendation shall state whether the application conforms to the review standards pertaining to the relevant development approval sought, and whether it should be approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved. The planning director shall attach any referral agency comments to the report and recommendation. C. Setting the hearing. After the planning director determines that a development application is complete and a report and recommendation is completed, the planning director shall establish a place and time certain for the hearing, if required, on the development application, pursuant to the requirements of this section. If the hearing is a public hearing required to be noticed, the planning director shall cause public notice to be given pursuant to the procedure and requirements established in Section 26.52.060(E). (Code 1971, § 6-204) 26.52.060 Review of a development application by decision -making bodies. The following review, hearing, and notice procedures and requirements apply to the review of a development application by the relevant decision -making bodies. A. Review procedures. A development application, depending on what types of development order it requests, shall be subject to one of the nine (9) review procedures outlined below. l . Planning agency staff review: Permitted uses, exemptions of development in H Historic Overlay District and/or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, environmentally sensitive area (ESA), GMQS allotments, and subdivision exemption for a lot line adjustment. a. General. Review and approval of a development application for permitted uses (Chapter 26.56) shall be made by the planning agency staff in the form of a certificate of zoning compliance issued to the chief building official. Review and determination of exemptions for development in the H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures(Chapter 26.72), in environmentally sensitive areas (ESA) (Chapter 26.68) or for certain GMQS Allotments (Chapter 26.100) shall be determined by the planning director. b. Permitted uses. A development application for a permitted use shall be reviewed and approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved by the chief building official pursuant to the terms and standards established in Section 26.56.020. C. Exemptions of development in H, Historic Overlay District and/or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. Exemption of development in the H, Historic Overlay District and/or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures shall be granted by the planning director pursuant to the terms and standards established in Section 26.72.010(C). d. Exemption of development from review in environmentally sensitive area. Exemption of development from review in environmentally sensitive areas shall be granted by the planning director pursuant to Section 26.68.030(B), 26.68.040(B) or 26.68.050(B). e. Exemptions of development from growth management quota system (GMQS) allotment: Exemption of certain development from growth management quota system. (GMQS) allotment shall be granted by the planning director pursuant to the terms established in Section 26.100.040(A). 53 f. Exemption from Subdivision for Lot Line Adjustments. Exemption of development from the terms of subdivision for lot line adjustments shall be granted by the Planning Director pursuant to the terms established in Section 26.88.030(A)(1) 2. One-step commission review: Development application for conditional uses, special review, and in environmentally sensitive area (ESA) requiring consolidation with no other development application or exemption of certain development under GMQS. A development application for conditional uses (Chapter 26.60), development subject to special review (Chapter 26.64), and development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA) (Chapter 26.68) requiring consolidation with no other Development Application and exemption of certain development from GMQS pursuant to Section 26.100.040(B) shall be reviewed by the commission pursuant to the following procedures. a. Public hearing by the commission for conditional uses. After receipt of the written report and recommendation of the planning director for a conditional use (Chapter 26.60), the commission, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the commission shall determine if the development application meets the standards for a conditional use (Section 26.60.040), and shall issue a development order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the application. b. Hearing by the commission for special review and ESA, and GMQS exemption. After receipt of the written report and recommendations of the planning director for development subject to special review (Chapter 26.64), development in environmentally sensitive areas (ESA) (Chapter 26.68), or for a GMQS exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.040(B), the commission shall hold a hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the hearing, the commission shall determine if the development application meets the standards for special review (Section 26.64.040), ESA (Section 26.68.030 through 26.68.050), or GMQS exemption (Section 26.100.040(B)), whichever is applicable, and shall issue a development order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the application, or exempting the development from GMQS. 3. One-step HPC review: Development application for minor development or demolition in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures requiring consolidation with no other development application. A development application for minor development or, demolition in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures(Chapter 26.72) only shall be reviewed by the HPC pursuant to the following procedures. a. Hearing by HPC for minor development. After receipt of the written report and recommendations of the planning director for minor development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, the HPC shall hold a hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the hearing, the HPC shall determine if the development application meets the standards of Section 26.72.010(D), and shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or denying the application. b. Public hearing by HPC for Demolition in H Historic Overlay District or involving a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. After receipt 54 of the written report and recommendation of the planning director for demolition of a structure in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, the HPC, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the HPC shall determine if the development application meets the standards of Section 26.72.020(B), and shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the application. 4. On -step council review: Development application for subdivision exemption requiring consolidation with no other development application. A development application for subdivision exemption only (Chapter 26.88) shall be reviewed by the city council pursuant to the following procedures. a. Hearing by council for subdivision exemption. After receipt of the written report and recommendation of the planning director for subdivision exemption, the council shall hold a hearing to review the application, unless the application shall be for a lot split, which shall require a public hearing for which notice has been provided pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E). At the conclusion of the hearing or public hearing, as applicable, the council shall determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.88.030, and shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions or denying the application. 5. Two-step commission and city council review: Growth management quota system (GMQS) allotment; subdivision review; amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map; and certain GMQS exemptions. Review and approval of a development application for growth management quota system (GMQS) allotment (Chapter 26.100), subdivision review, amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map and certain GMQS exemptions require review by the commission and a final decision by the city council and may be consolidated with a development application for a conditional use, special review or ESA. a. GMQS allotment for a permitted use. (1) Public hearing by commission. After receipt of the written report and recommendations of the planning director for GMQS scoring for a permitted use, the commission, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the commission shall determine the points accumulated by the application pursuant to the standards of Section 26.100.060(E), (F) or (G), whichever is applicable, and shall forward the score to the city council. (2) Hearing by city council. Upon receipt of the recommendation of the scoring of the development application by the commission, the city council shall allocate GMQS allotments among eligible applicants in the order of priority established by their rank. b. GMQS allotment consolidated with other development applications; amendment to the text of this title or official zone district map or subdivision review or certain GMQS exemptions alone. (1) Public hearings by commission. After receipt of the written report and recommendations of the planning director for a development application for GMQS scoring in conjunction with a development application for a conditional use, special 55 review, ESA, subdivision review or amendment to the text of this title or official zone district map, or amendment to the text of this title or official zone district map or subdivision review or certain GMQS exemptions alone, the commission, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the commission shall determine if the development application meets the standards of Section 26.60.040 for conditional uses, Section 26.64.040 for special review, Section 26.68.030 through 26.68.050 for ESA, 26.88.040(c) for subdivision or Section 26.92.020 for an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map, whichever is applicable. The commission shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or denying that part of the application pertaining to conditional uses, special review and ESA, subject to approval by the city council of the GMQS allotment for the application. The commission shall recommend approval, approval with conditions or disapproval of the application for subdivision review or for amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map or for certain exemptions from GMQS. Concurrently, the commission shall determine the points accumulated by the application for GMQS pursuant to the standards of Section 26.100.060(E), (F) or (G), whichever is applicable, and shall forward the score to the city council. If a development application for a GMQS exemption is heard alone, there shall be no requirement for a public hearing. (2) Hearing/public hearing by city council. Having received the recommendation of the scoring of the development application by the commission, the city council shall allocate GMQS allotments among eligible applicants in the order of priority established by their rank. If a development application for an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map is consolidated with a GMQS application, or is heard alone, the city council shall consider the consolidated applications at a public hearing, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E). If a development application for subdivision review or a GMQS exemption is heard alone, there shall be no requirement for a public hearing. 6. Two-step HPC review: Development applications for significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures requiring consolidation with no other development application. Review and approval of a development application for significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures only requires review and approval of a conceptual development plan by the HPC and review and approval of a final development plan by the HPC. a. Public hearing on conceptual development plan by HPC. After receipt of the written report and recommendation of the planning director for a conceptual development plan for significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, the HPC, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the HPC shall determine if the development application meets the standards of Section 26.72.010(D), and shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny the conceptual development plan. we b. Hearing for review of final development plan by HPC. After receipt of the written report and recommendation of the planning director for a final development plan for significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, the HPC shall hold a hearing to review the final development plan. At the conclusion of the hearing the HPC shall consider the recommendation of the planning director, determine if the final development plan is consistent with the conceptual development plan, determine if the final development plan meets the standards of Section 26.72.010(D), and adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the application. 7. Three -step HPC, commission, and city council review: Designation of H, Historic Overlay District or historic landmark. Review and approval of a development application for designation of a H, Historic Overlay District, or of a historic landmark requires review and recommendation by the HPC and commission, and a final decision by the city council pursuant to the following terms and procedures. a. Hearing by HPC. After receipt of the written report and recommendations of the planning director regarding a development application for designation, amendment, or rescission of H, Historic Overlay District or of a historic landmark designation, the HPC shall hold a hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the hearing, the HPC shall determine if the development application meets the standards of Section 26.76.020, and shall recommend that a development order be adopted approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the application. b. Public hearing by the commission. After recommendation of the development application by the HPC, the commission, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the commission shall determine if the development application meets the standards of Section 26.76.020, and shall recommend to the city council that a development order be adopted approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the application. Also, if applicable, the commission shall concurrently determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.60.040 for conditional uses, Section 26.64.040 for special review, Section 26.68.030 through 26.68.050 for ESA, or Section 26.100.040 for certain GMQS exemptions and shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving that part of the application pertaining to conditional uses, special review, ESA, and GMQS exemptions subject to approval by the city council of the development application designating the property. C. Public hearing by city council. After recommendation on the development application by the commission, the city council, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public hearing to review the application. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the city council shall consider the recommendations of the planning director, the HPC, and the commission, determine if the development application meets the standards of Section 26.76.020, and adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the application. If applicable, the council shall also determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.100.040. 8. Four -step commission and council review: SPA or PUD only; SPA or PUD consolidated with other development applications. Review and approval of a development application for SPA or PUD, by themselves, or in conjunction with 57 development applications for GMQS and GMQS exemption or conditional uses, special review, ESA, subdivision review or an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map, require review and approval under a four -step process involving review and approval of a conceptual development plan by the commission and city council, and review and approval of a final development plan by the commission and city council. a. Conceptual development plan review by the commission. After receipt of the written report and recommendation of the planning director for a development application for conceptual development plan approval, the commission shall hold a hearing to review the conceptual development plan. At the conclusion of the hearing, the commission shall recommend approval, approval with conditions, or denial of the conceptual development plan pursuant to Section 26.80.040(B) or Section 26.84.030(B), or whichever is applicable. The recommendation shall then be forwarded to the city council for its review. If the development application is being considered as part of a consolidated review process with development applications for GMQS or GMQS exemption, subdivision review, an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map, or conditional use, special review, or ESA, initial review of these applications will not be heard until the commission and city council consider the final development plan. Provided, however, that at the request of the applicant, an amendment to the text or this title or the official zone district map may be considered in conjunction with conceptual development plan review, but final actions on such development applications shall not be taken until review and approval of the final development plan is undertaken. b. Conceptual development plan review by city council. After receipt of the recommendations of the commission for a development application for the conceptual development plan, the city council, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public hearing to review the conceptual development plan. At the conclusion of the hearing, the city council shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the conceptual development plan pursuant to Section 26.80.040(B) or Section 26.84.030(B), whichever is applicable. C. Review of final development plan and other consolidated development applications by the commission. Within one year of approval by the city council of a conceptual development plan, a development application shall be submitted for a final development plan or the development order for the conceptual development plan shall automatically expire. After receipt of the written report and recommendation on the final development plan from the planning director, the commission, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public hearing to review that part of the application pertaining to the final development plan, and if applicable, development applications for GMQS scoring or exemption, an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map, or conditional use, special review, and ESA. At the conclusion of the hearing, the commission shall determine if the final development plan meets the standards of Section 26.80.040(B) (SPA) or Section 26.84.030(B) (PUD), whichever is applicable, and shall recommend to the city council that a development order be adopted approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the final development plan. If applicable, the commission shall also concurrently determine the points accumulated by the application for GMQS pursuant to the standards of Section 26.100.060(E), (F) or (G), 58 whichever is applicable, and shall forward the score to the city council. If applicable, the commission shall concurrently determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.88.040(c) and 26.92.020 and recommend approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval of a development application requesting subdivision review and amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map. Also, if applicable, the commission shall concurrently determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.60.040 for conditional uses, Section 26.64.040 for special review, or Section 26.68.030 through 26.68.050 for ESA, and shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving that part of the application pertaining to conditional uses, special review and ESA, subject to approval by the city council of the final development plan and the GMQS allotment. d. Hearing/public hearing on final development plan and other consolidated development applications by the city council. After receipt of the recommendation on the final development plan, GMQS scoring or exemption, subdivision review, amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map from the commission, the city council shall hold a hearing to review that part of the application pertaining to the final development plan, GMQS allotment or exemption, subdivision review or amendment, if applicable. At the conclusion of the hearing, the city council shall determine if the final development plan meets the standards of Section 26.80.030(B) (SPA), or Section 26.84.030(B) (PUD), whichever is applicable, and shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the final development plan. If a development application for an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map is being considered, the city council shall hold a public hearing pursuant to public notice required in Section 26.52.060(E), and shall determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.92.020, and shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the application. If a development application for GMQS is being reviewed, the city council shall allocate GMQS allotments among eligible applicants in the order of priority established by their rank or shall determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.100.040(C). If a development application for subdivision is being reviewed, the city council shall determine if the plat meets the standards of Section 26.88.040(c) and adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions or disapproving the application. 9. Six -step HPC, commission, and council review: Significant development in H, Historic Overlay District or involving a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, in conjunction with SPA or PUD, only; or consolidated with other development applications. Review and approval of a development application for significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures in conjunction with a development application for SPA or PUD, by themselves, or in conjunction with development applications for GMQS allotment or exemption, subdivision review, an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map, or conditional uses, special review, or ESA, require review and approval under a six -step process involving review and approval of the historical district application by the HPC, review and approval of a conceptual development plan by the commission and city council, and review and approval of a final development plan by the commission and city council. 0 a. Public hearing on conceptual development plan for significant development. After receipt of the written report and recommendation of the planning director for a conceptual development plan for significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, and after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), the HPC shall hold a public hearing to review the conceptual development plan and recommendations of the planning director. At the conclusion of the public hearing, the HPC shall determine if the conceptual development plan meets the standards of Section 26.72.010(D), and shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the conceptual development plan. b. Conceptual development plan review by the commission. After HPC review of the conceptual development plan for significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, and after receipt of the written report and recommendation of the planning director for a development application for conceptual development plan approval for SPA or PUD, the commission shall hold a hearing to review the conceptual development plan. At the conclusion of the hearing, the commission shall recommend approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval of the conceptual development plan pursuant to Section 26.80.030(B) (SPA) or Section 26.84.030(B) (PUD), whichever is applicable. The recommendation shall then be forwarded to the city council for its review. If the development application is being considered as part of a consolidated review process with development applications for GMQS allotment or exemption, subdivision review, or an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map, or conditional uses, special review, or ESA, initial review of these applications will not be heard until the commission and city council consider the final development plan. Provided, however, that at the request of the applicant, an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map may be considered in conjunction with conceptual development plan review, but final actions on such development applications shall not be taken until review and approval of the final development plan is undertaken. C. Public hearing on conceptual development plan review by city council. After receipt of the recommendations of the commission for a development application for the conceptual development plan, the city council, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), shall hold a public hearing to review the conceptual development plan. At the conclusion of the hearing, the city council shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the conceptual development plan pursuant to Section 26.80.030(B) (SPA) or Section 26.84.030(B) (PUD), whichever is applicable. d. Hearing for final HPC review. That portion of the development application pertaining to the final development plan for significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures shall be reviewed after the commission and city council review of the conceptual development plan for any consolidated development application, and prior to final development plan review by the commission and the city council for the consolidated applications. It shall be reviewed by the HPC pursuant to the following procedures After receipt of the written report and recommendation of the planning director for a final development plan for significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, the HPC shall hold a hearing to review the final development plan. At the conclusion of the hearing, the HPC shall consider the recommendation of the planning director, determine if the final development plan is consistent with the conceptual development plan, determine if the final development plan meets the standards of Section 26.72.010(D), and adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or denying the application, subject to approval by the city council of the final development plan for the consolidated development applications. e. Public hearing on commission review of final development plan and other consolidated development applications. After HPC review of the final development plan for significant development in the H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, and after receipt of the written report and recommendation on the final development plan from the planning director for SPA, or PUD, and if applicable, a development application for GMQS scoring or exemption, an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map, or conditional uses, special review, and ESA, the commission, after public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(D), shall hold a public hearing to review that part of the application pertaining to the final development plan, the GMQS application, the amendment application, and the other applications, if applicable. At the conclusion of the hearing, the commission shall determine if the final development plan meets the standards of Section 26.80.030(B) (SPA) or Section 26.84.030(B) (PUD), whichever is applicable, and shall recommend to the city council that a development order be adopted approving, approving with conditions, or denying the final development plan. If applicable, the commission shall concurrently determine the points accumulated by the application for GMQS pursuant to the standards of Section 26.100.060(E), (F) or (G), and shall forward the score to the city council. If applicable, the commission shall also determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.88.040(C) and 26.92.020, and recommend approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval of a development application requesting subdivision review and amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map. Also, if applicable, the commission shall concurrently determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.60.040 for conditional uses, Section 26.64.040 for special review, or Section 26.68.030 through 26.68.050 for ESA, and shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or denying that part of the application pertaining to conditional uses, special review and ESA, subject to approval by the city council of the final development plan, amendment, or the GMQS allotment. f. Hearing on city council review of final development plan and other consolidated development applications. After receipt of the recommendation on the final development plan, or GMQS scoring from the commission, the city council shall hold a hearing to review that part of the application pertaining to the final development plan, GMQS allotment or exemption, subdivision review, or amendment, if applicable. At the conclusion of the hearing, the city council shall determine if the final development plan meets the standards of Section 26.80.030(B) (SPA), or Section 26.84.030(B) (PUD), whichever is applicable, and shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving the final development plan. If a development application for GMQS is being reviewed concurrently, the city council shall allocate GMQS allotments among eligible applicants in the order of priority established by their rank or shall R determine if the application meets the standards of Section 26.100.040(C). If a development application for an amendment to the text of this title or the official zone district map is being considered, the city council shall hold a public hearing with public notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E), before considering the consolidated applications. In reviewing the amendment application, the city council shall determine if it meets the standards of Section 26.92.020, and approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the application. If a development application for subdivision is being reviewed, the city council shall determine if the plat meets the standards of Section 26.88.040(c) and shall adopt a development order approving, approving with conditions or disapproving the application. B. Modification of review procedures. In the event that an applicant believes that the previously listed review procedures do not directly address the development being contemplated, or that there are other unusual circumstances, the applicant may, pursuant to Chapter 26.92, request an interpretation by the planning director as to the appropriate review procedures for the proposed development. C. General hearing procedures. The following general procedures shall apply to the conduct of all hearings regarding the review of a development application by decision -making bodies. l . Oath or affirmation. Testimony and evidence shall be given under oath or by affirmation to the body conducting the hearing. 2. Rights of all persons. Any person or persons may appear at a public hearing and submit evidence either individually or as a representative of another person or an organization Anyone representing another person or an organization must present written evidence of their authority to speak on behalf of the person or the organization in regard to the matter under consideration. Each person who appears at a public hearing shall be identified and, if appearing on behalf of another person or an organization, state the name and mailing address of the person or the organization. 3. Due order of proceedings. the decision -making body conducting the hearing may exclude testimony or evidence that it finds to be irrelevant, immaterial or unduly repetitious. Any person may ask relevant questions of other persons appearing as witnesses, but shall do so only through the discretion of the chairman or mayor. The order of proceedings shall be as follows: a. The planning agency staff shall present a narrative and graphic description of the development application. b. The planning agency staff shall present a written and oral recommendation. This recommendation shall address each factor required to be considered by this title and the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan prior to development approval and shall be made available to the applicant submitting the development application at least two (2) working days prior to the hearing. C. The applicant shall present any information that it deems appropriate, and shall demonstrate that public notice has been given, if required. d. Public testimony shall be heard, first in favor of the development application, then in opposition to it. e. The planning agency staff may respond to any statement made by the applicant or any public comment. m f. The applicant may respond to any testimony or evidence presented by the planning agency staff or public. 4. Testimony. In the event any testimony or evidence is excluded as irrelevant, immaterial or unduly repetitious, the person offering such testimony or evidence shall have an opportunity to make a proffer in regard to such testimony or evidence for the record. Such proffer may be made at the hearing or in writing within fifteen (15) days after the close of the hearing. 5. Continuance of hearing. The decision -making body conducting the hearing may, on its own motion or at the request of any person, continue the hearing to a fixed date, time and place. No notice shall be required if a hearing is continued. An applicant shall have the right to request and be granted one continuance; however, all subsequent continuances shall be granted at the discretion of the decision -making body conducting the hearing, only upon good cause shown. All adjourned public hearings shall commence only upon the giving of all notices which would have been required were it the initial call of the public hearing. 6. Other rules to govern. Other matters pertaining to the public hearing shall be governed by other provisions of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, applicable to the decision -making body conducting the hearing and its adopted rules of procedure, so long as the same are not in conflict with this chapter. The city's decision - making bodies may adopt rules of procedure to limit the number of development applications which may be considered at a hearing. 7. Record. a. Records of hearing. The body conducting the hearing shall record the proceedings by any appropriate means which shall be transcribed at the request of any person. b. Record. The transcript of oral proceedings, including testimony and statements of personal opinions, the minutes of the secretary, all applications, exhibits and papers submitted in any proceeding before the decision -making body, the report and recommendation of the planning agency staff, and the decision and report of the decision - making body shall constitute the record. C. Public records. All records of decision -making bodies shall be public records, open for inspection at reasonable times and upon reasonable notice. D. Actions by decision -making bodies. All decision -making bodies shall act in accord with the time limits established in this title. Action shall be taken as promptly as possible in consideration of the interests of the citizens of the City of Aspen. E. Public notice. l . General. Prior to a public hearing on a development application, notice shall be provided to the public, pursuant to the terms of this section. Table 6-101 establishes the steps in the development review process at which time notice is to be given. 2. Content of notice. Every notice shall include the name and address of the applicant, the type of development application sought, date, time and place of the hearing, the address and legal description of the subject property if applicable, a summary of the development application under consideration, and identification of the decision -making 63 body conducting the hearing and such other information as may be required to fully apprise the public of the nature of the application. 3. Manner of notice. Every notice shall be given in one or more of the following manners, as specified in Section 26.52.060(E)(4). a. Publication of notice. Publication of notice shall be provided by the planning agency at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing through publication in an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen in the legal notice section. The content of the notice shall be that described in Section 26.52.060(E)(2). b. Posting of notice. Posting of notice shall be made by the applicant, who shall obtain a copy of the form from the planning agency, which shall be posted at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing, by posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the property subject to the development application. The sign shall be made of suitable, waterproof materials, shall be not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and shall be composed of letters not less than one inch in height. The content of the notice shall be that described in Section 26.52.060(E)(2). C. Mailing of notice. Mailing of notice shall be made by the applicant, who shall obtain a copy of the notice from the planning agency, which shall contain that information described in Section 26.52.060(E)(2). At least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing, notice shall be sent by first class, postage prepaid U.S. mail, or at least five (5) days if sent by hand delivery, 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 shall be sent by first class, postage pre -paid U.S. mail or hand delivery 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 appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. 4. Required notices. Notice of hearing to the public for a development application shall take the following form. a. Development application for permitted uses, special review, ESA, GMQS exemptions, subdivision exemptions (other than for a lot split) or minor development in an "H," Historic Overlay District or involving a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. A development application for a permitted use, development subject to special review, GMQS exemption, development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA) or minor development in H, Historic Overlay District or involving a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures requires no notice to the public prior to review. b. Development application for conditional uses and variances. A development application for a conditional use or a variance requires mailing of notice and posting of notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E)(3)(b) and (c). C. Development application for significant development in an "H," Historic Overlay District; demolition in an "H," Historic Overlay District; development in or designation of specially planned area (SPA); planned unit development (PUD); 64 amendments to official zone district map unless for entire city; subdivision exemption for lot split; designation of Historic Overlay District or historic landmarks; growth management quota system (GMQS). Significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District or of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, development, demolition of a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, designation of a specially planned area (SPA), planned unit development (PUD), amendments to the official zone district map unless for the entire city, subdivision exemption for lot split, designation of Historic Overlay District or historic landmarks, and growth management quota system (GMQS) review requires publication of notice, posting of notice and mailing of notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E)(3)(a), (b) and (c). d. Amendment to the text of this title. Amendment to the text of this title requires publication of notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E)(3)(a) for Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing and ordinance adoption procedures for City Council public hearing. e. Development application for subdivision. Subdivision review requires publication of notice and mailing of notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E)(3)(a) and (c) and notice by registered mail to all surface owners, mineral owners and lessees of mineral owners of the property subject to the development application. f. Any development application which will cover five (5) acres or more of land. Any development application which will cover five (5) acres or more of land requires publication of notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060(E)(3)(a) and mailing of notice to the Colorado Land Use Commission, the state geologist, and the Pitkin County Commissioners. In addition, a development application for subdivision approval also requires notice by registered mail to all surface owners, mineral owners and lessees of mineral owners of the property subject to the development application. 5. Rezoning of entire city. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this title, or whenever the text of this title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change, shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map shall be available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. (Ord. No. 13-1993 § 3; Ord. No. 56-1994, § 13: Code 1971, § 6-205) Section 3: Section 26.72 Development in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures shall be amended to read as follows: Chapter 26.72 DEVELOPMENT IN AN "H," HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT, OR INVOLVING THE INVENTORY OF HISTORIC SITES AND STRUCTURES 65 Sections: 26.72.010 Minor development, significant development, and exemptions. 26.72.020 Demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation, or temporary relocation. 26.72.030 Insubstantial amendment of development order. 26.72.040 Appeal and call up. 26.72.050 Variances. 26.72.060 Minimum maintenance requirements. 26.72.010 Minor development, significant development, and exemptions. A. General. Any development within an "H," Historic Overlay District, or development involving a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures must be reviewed in accordance with the provisions of this Section 26.72.010 and Common Procedures, Chapter 26.52, unless exempted by the community development director under Section 26.72.010 (C). If not exempted, development is categorized as minor or significant development which must obtain approval of the HPC. Minor development review and approval is a one-step process and requires no public hearing. Significant development must go through a conceptual and final development plan review and approval process, with a public hearing occurring at the time of conceptual development plan review. B. General prohibition. No development shall be permitted within the "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures unless: 1. The development is not subject to the provisions of this section; or 2. The development is exempted pursuant to Section 26.72.010(C); or 3. The development is approved by the HPC as either minor or significant development pursuant to the procedures outlined in Common Procedures, Chapter 26.52, because it meets the standards of Section 26.72.010(D). C. Exemption. 1. Development which is not subject to the provisions of this section shall include any interior remodeling of a structure, repainting of the exterior of an already painted structure, and choice of color of any exterior architectural feature. Such development shall not require the review by the community development director or HPC, and shall proceed directly to building permit review, when a building permit is required for the development. 2. Development which the community development director shall exempt from HPC review shall include repair of existing architectural features, replacement of architectural features when found necessary for the preservation of the structure, and similar remodeling activities which create no change to the exterior appearance of the structure and have no impact on its character. The community development director shall exempt awnings, canopies, fences, mechanical equipment or other similar attachments to, or accessory features of a structure, provided however, that in the process of erecting said .I attachments, none of the significant features of the structure are destroyed or permanently removed. Incidental destruction or limited removal necessary to erect any attachment shall not make the action significant development. The community development director shall exempt signs which are not reviewed under Section 26.72.010(F)(2)(A). Within the Commercial Core, the community development director shall exempt any insignificant changes in the site design of an individual property, such as paving and new street furniture. The Community Development Director shall exempt any development required for compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act when it affects a nonhistoric structure in the "H," Historic Overlay District, and has no significant impact on the character of the structure. For any of the exemptions listed above, the Community Development Director may place conditions on the exemption which are relevant to mitigation of impacts to the affected historic site or structure or to adjacent historic sites or structures. An appeal of a Community Development Director exemption is to the historic preservation commission. The- Community Development Director may also determine that any of the above applications are more appropriately reviewed by HPC as a minor development, because of significant effects upon historic resources. 3. Before any proposed development can be considered for an exemption under the provisions of this section, an application for exemption shall be submitted to the Community Development Director in the form provided by the Community Development Director. D. Review standards for all development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, and all development involving properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. 1. Development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, and all development involving properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures No approval for any development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, or involving properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures shall be granted unless the HPC finds that all of the following standards are met. a. The proposed development is compatible in general design, massing and volume, scale, and site plan with designated historic structures located on the parcel and with development on adjacent parcels when the subject site is in an "H," Historic Overlay District, or is adjacent to an historic landmark. For historic landmarks where proposed development would extend into front yard, side yard and rear yard setbacks, extend into the minimum distance between buildings on the lot or exceed the allowed floor area by up to five hundred (500) square feet or the allowed site covered by up to five (5) percent, HPC may grant such variances after making a finding that such variation is more compatible in character with the historic landmark and the neighborhood, than would be development in accord with dimensional requirements. In no event shall variations pursuant to this section exceed those variations allowed under the Cottage Infill Program for detached accessory dwelling units, pursuant to section 26.40.090(B)(2). The floor area bonus will only be awarded to projects which make an outstanding preservation effort, for instance by retaining historic outbuildings or by creating breezeway or connector elements between the historic resource and new construction. Lots which are larger than nine thousand (9,000) square feet and properties which receive approval for an historic landmark lot split may also be appropriate recipients of the 67 bonus. No development application which includes a request for an FAR bonus may be submitted until the applicant has met with HPC in a workshop format to discuss whether or not the proposal might qualify for the floor area bonus, prior to design; and b. The proposed development reflects and is consistent with the character of the neighborhood of the parcel proposed for development; and c. The proposed development enhances or does not detract from the historic significance of designated historic structures located on the parcel proposed for development or adjacent parcels; and d. The proposed development enhances or does not diminish or detract from the architectural character and integrity of a designated historic structure or part thereof. 2. Additional development guidelines. The City Council, upon recommendation of the HPC, shall established additional guidelines for use by HPC in the review of all development in an "H," Historic Overlay District, and involving properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, in accordance with the procedures in Chapter 26.08. E. Minor development. 1. Procedure for review. Before HPC approval of minor development in the "H," Historic Overlay District, and of all development involving properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures a development application shall be submitted to the Community Development Director and reviewed and approved by the HPC pursuant to the procedures established in Common Procedures, Chapter 26.52. 2. Definition. Minor development shall be defined as follows: a. Remodeling of a structure where alterations are made to no more than one (1) element of the structure, including but not limited to a roof, window, door, skylight, ornamental trim, siding, kickplate, dormer, porch, staircase, and balcony; b. Expansion or erection of a structure wherein the increase in floor area of the structure is two hundred fifty (250) square feet or less; or c. Erection or remodeling of combinations of, or multiples of no more than three (3 ) of the following features: awnings, canopies, signs, fences and other similar attachments; or windows, doors, skylights and dormers. Erection of more than three (3) of the above listed features may be defined as minor if there is a finding that the cumulative impact of such development is minor in its effect on the character of the existing structures. d. Erection of street furniture, signs, benches, public art, or similar development which is to be placed throughout the Commercial Core or Main Street Historic Districts. The Community Development Director may determine that the development is to be reviewed as a significant development, pursuant to section 26.72.010(F). Public hearing requirements will not apply. 3. Application. A development application for minor development shall include the following: a. The general application information required in section 26.52.030. b. If determined appropriate by the Community Development Director, a site plan or survey showing property boundaries and predominant existing site characteristics. c. An accurate representation of all major building materials, such as samples and photographs, to be used for the proposed development. d. A scale drawing of the proposed development in relation to any existing structure. 68 e. A statement of the effect of the proposed development on the original design of the historic structure (if applicable) and character of the neighborhood. F. Significant development. 1. Procedure for review. Before HPC approval of significant development within an "H," Historic Overlay District, and of all development involving properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, a conceptual development plan and final development plan shall be reviewed and approved by the HPC pursuant to the procedures established in Common Procedures, Chapter 26.52. 2. Definition. Significant development shall be defined as follows: a. Erection of an awning, canopy, sign, fence or other similar attachments to, or accessory features of, a structure that, in the process of erecting, cause significant features of the structure to be permanently destroyed or removed; b. Erection or remodeling of combinations of, or multiples of any single feature of a structure which has not been determined to be minor; c. Expansion or erection of a structure wherein the increase in floor area of the structure is more than two hundred fifty (250) square feet; d. Construction of a new structure within a "H," Historic Overlay District; and e. The development of any property which is listed on the inventory of historic sites and structures and which has received approval for demolition ,or off -site relocation when a development plan has been required by the HPC pursuant to section 26.72.020(J)(5). 3. Conceptual development plan. a. Development application for conceptual development plan. A development application for a conceptual development plan shall include the following: (1) The general application information required in section 26.52.030. (2) A site plan and a survey showing property boundaries and predominant existing site characteristics. (3) Conceptual selection of major building materials to be used in the proposed development. (4) A statement of the effect of the proposed development on the original design of the historic structure (if applicable) and/or character of neighborhood. (5) Scale drawings of all elevations of any proposed structures, including a roof plan. (6) A visual description of the neighborhood context through at least one (1) of the following: diagrams, maps, photographs, models, or streetscape elevations, with the intent to provide HPC with the necessary information without adding excessive costs to the applicant. b. Effect of approval of conceptual development plan. Approval of a conceptual development plan shall not constitute final approval of significant development or permission to proceed with development. Such approval shall constitute only authorization to proceed with a development application for a final development plan. c. Limitation on approval of conceptual development plan. Application for a final development plan shall be filed within one (1) year of the date of approval of a conceptual development plan. Unless an extension is granted by HPC, failure to file such an application shall render null and void the approval of a conceptual development plan previously granted by the HPC. 4. Final development plan. M1 a. Submission of application for final development plan. A development application for a final development plan shall include: (1) The general application information required in section 26.52.030. (2) Reserved. (3) An accurate representation of all major building materials, such as samples and photographs, to be used for the proposed development. (4) Finalized drawings of the proposal at 1 /4" = F0 scale. (5) A statement of the effect of the details of the proposed development on the original design of the historic structure (if applicable) and character of the neighborhood. (6) A statement of how the final development plan conforms to the representations made during the conceptual review and responds to any conditions placed thereon. G. Historic Landmark Lot Split. The development of all lots created pursuant to section 26.88.030 (A)(5) shall be reviewed by HPC at a public hearing. (Ord. No. 6-1989, § 9; Ord. No. 60-1990, § 3; Ord. No. 21-1995, § I (part); Ord. No. 49-1995, § 4; Ord. No. 33-1997, § 1: Code 1971, § 7-601) 26.72.020 Demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation, or temporary relocation. A. General. No demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation, or temporary relocation of any structure included in the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures of the City of Aspen, established pursuant to section 26.76.090, or any structure within an "H" Historic Overlay District, shall be permitted unless the demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation, or temporarl relocation is approved by the HPC because it meets the applicable standards of section 26.72.020(B), (C), (D), (E), or (F) unless exempted pursuant to section 26.72.020(G) or (H). For the purposes of this section, "demolition" shall mean the total razing of any structure on an inventoried parcel which contributes to the historic significance of that parcel. "Partial demolition" shall mean the razing of a portion of any structure on an inventoried parcel or the total razing of any structure on an inventoried parcel which does not contribute to the historic significance of that parcel. B. Standards for review of demolition. No approval for demolition shall be granted unless the HPC finds that all of the following standards are met. 1. The structure proposed for demolition is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's efforts to properly maintain the structure; and 2. The structure cannot be rehabilitated or reused on site to provide for any reasonable beneficial use of the property; and 3. The structure cannot be practicably moved to another site in Aspen; and 4. The applicant demonstrates that the proposal mitigates to the greatest extent practical, the following: a. Any impacts that occur to the character of the neighborhood where demolition is proposed to occur. b. Any impact on the historic significance of the structure or structures located on the parcel and adjacent parcels. 70 c. Any impact to the architectural character and integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel and adjacent parcels. C. Standards for review of partial demolition. No approval for partial demolition shall be granted unless the HPC finds all of the following standards are met: 1. The partial demolition is required for the renovation, restoration or rehabilitation of the structure, or the structure does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel; and 2. The applicant has mitigated, to the greatest extent possible: a. Impacts on the historic significance of the structure or structures located on the parcel by limiting demolition of original or significant features and additions. b. Impacts on the architectural character or integrity of the structure or structures located on the parcel by designing new additions so that they are compatible in mass and scale with the historic structure. D. Standards for review of off -site relocation. No approval for off -site relocation shall be granted unless the HPC finds that all of the following standards are met: 1. The structure cannot be rehabilitated or reused on its original site to provide for any reasonable beneficial use of the property; and 2. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be the best preservation method for the character and integrity of the structure, and the historic integrity of the existing neighborhood and adjacent structures will not be diminished due to the relocation; and 3. The structure has been demonstrated to be capable of withstanding the physical impacts of the relocation and re -siting. A structural report shall be submitted by a licensed engineer demonstrating the soundness of the structure proposed for relocation; and 4. A relocation plan shall be submitted, including posting a bond or other financial security with the Engineering Department, as approved by the HPC, to insure the safe relocation, preservation and repair (if required) of the structure, site preparation and infrastructure connections. The receiving. site shall be prepared in advance of the physical relocation; and 5. The receiving site is compatible in nature to the structure or structures proposed to be moved, the character of the neighborhood is consistent with the architectural integrity of the structure, and the relocation of the historic structure would not diminish the integrity or character of the neighborhood of the receiving site. An acceptance letter from the property owner of the receiving site shall be submitted. E. Standards for review of on -site relocation. No approval for on -site relocation shall be granted unless the HPC finds that the standards of Section 26.72.020(D)(2), (3), and (4) have been met. If the structure that is to be relocated does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel, only standard 26.72.020(D)(2) must be met. F. Standards for review of temporary relocation. No approval for temporary relocation shall be granted unless the HPC finds that the standards of Section 26.72.020(D)(3) and (4) have been met. G. Exemption for structures within an "H," Historic Overlay District. The demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation, or temporary relocation of a structure located within an "H" Historic Overlay District, may be exempt 71 from meeting the applicable standards in Section 26.72.020(B), (C), (D), (E) or (F) if the HPC finds that the following conditions have been met: 1. The structure is not identified on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures. 2. The structure is considered to be noncontributing to the historic district. 3. The structure does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district, and that its demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation or temporary relocation does not impact the character of the historic district. 4. The demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation or temporary relocation is necessary for the redevelopment of the parcel. 5. The redevelopment or new development is reviewed by HPC pursuant to Section 26.72.010. H. Exemption for structures which do not contribute to the historic significance of an inventoried parcel. A structure which does not contribute to the historic significance of an inventoried parcel is exempt from meeting the standards of Section 26.72.020(D), off -site relocation and Section 26.72.020(F), temporary relocation. I. Procedure for review. A development application shall be submitted to the community development director before HPC approval of demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation, temporary relocation, or exemption which shall be reviewed and approved by the HPC pursuant to the procedures established in Common Procedures, Chapter 26.52. The HPC shall be authorized to suspend action on demolition, partial demolition, off - site relocation, or on -site relocation applications when it finds that it needs additional information to determine whether the application meets the standards of Section 26.72.020 or that the proposal is a matter of such great public concern to the city that alternatives to the demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation or on -site relocation must be studied jointly by the city and the owner. Alternatives which the HPC may consider having studied shall include, but not be limited to finding economically beneficial uses of the structure, removal of the structure to a suitable location, providing public subsidy to the owner to preserve the structure, identifying a public entity capable of public acquisition of the structure, or revision to the demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation or on -site relocation and development plan. The HPC shall be required to specify the additional information it requires or the alternatives it finds should be studied when it suspends action on the demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, or on -site relocation application. Action shall only be suspended for the amount of time it shall take for the necessary information to be prepared and reviewed by the community development director, but in no case shall suspension be for a period to exceed six (6) months. J. Application for demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation, or temporary relocation. A development application shall include the following. Applications which affect a structure which does not contribute to the historic significance of the parcel shall only include the submission requirements listed in Section 26.72.020(J)(1), (2), and (5): 1. The general application information required in Section 25.62.030. 72 2. A written description of the structure proposed for demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, on -site relocation, temporary relocation, or exemption, and its year of construction. 3. A report from a licensed engineer or architect regarding the soundness of the structure and its suitability for rehabilitation. 4. For demolition or off -site relocation only: An economic feasibility report that provides: a. Estimated market value of the property on which the structure lies, in its current condition, and after demolition or relocation. b. Estimates from an architect, developer, real estate agent or appraiser experienced in rehabilitation addressing the economic feasibility of rehabilitation or reuse of the structure proposed for demolition or relocation. c. All appraisals made of the property on which the structure is located made within the previous two (2) years. d. Any other information considered necessary to make a determination whether the property does yield or may yield a reasonable return on investment. 5. For demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation and on -site relocation only: A development plan and a statement of the effect of the proposed development on the other structures on the property and the character of the neighborhood around the property shall be submitted so that HPC is able to make a finding whether the applicable standards are met. In the case of a demolition or off -site relocation, the development plan will be reviewed as a Significant Development application, pursuant to Section 26.72.010. K. Application for demolition or exemption from demolition, partial demolition, off - site relocation, on -site relocation, or temporary relocation. A development application for exemption shall include all items specified in Section 26.72.020(J)(1) and (2). L. Penalties. A violation of any portion of this Section 26.72.020 shall prohibit the owner, successor or assigns from obtaining a building permit for the affected property for a period of five (5) years from the date of such violation. The city shall initiate proceedings to place a deed restriction on the property to this effect to insure the enforcement of this penalty. (Ord. No. 17-1989, § 1; Ord. No. 9-1991, § 1; Ord. No. 21- 1995, § 1(part): Code 1971, § 7-602) 26.72.030 Insubstantial amendment of development order. A. An insubstantial amendment to an approved development order may be authorized by the community development director. An insubstantial amendment shall be limited to technical or engineering considerations, first discovered during actual development which could not reasonably be anticipated during the approval process. An insubstantial amendment shall be defined as a change in shape or location of a single window, awning, door, staircase or other feature on the structure or use of a material made by a different manufacturer that has the same quality and approximately the same appearance as originally approved. 73 B. All other amendments shall be approved by the HPC pursuant to Section 26.72.010 or 26.72.020, whichever is applicable. (Ord. No. 21-1995, § 1(part): Code 1971, § 7-603) 26.72.040 Appeal and call up. A. Any action by the HPC in approving, approving with conditions, or disapproving a development order or suspending action on a demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, or on -site relocation application or in rating a structure on the inventory of historic sites and structures may be appealed to the city council by the applicant or a landowner within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property within thirty (30) days of the decision. The reasons for the appeal shall be stated in writing. The city council may also call up for review any decision of the HPC approving, disapproving, or suspending action on a demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, or on -site relocation of any structure on the inventory of historic sites and structures by serving written notice on the HPC within fourteen (14) days of the HPC's decision and notifying the applicant of the call up. B. Within thirty (30) days after the date of a decision by the HPC which is appealed or called up by the city council, the council shall hold a public hearing after publishing notice pursuant to Section 26.52.060 (E)(3)(a). C. The city council shall consider the application on the record established before the HPC. The city council shall affirm the decision of the HPC unless the city council shall determine that there was an abuse of discretion, or a denial of due process by the HPC. Upon determining that there was an abuse of discretion or denial of due process, the city council shall be authorized to take such action as it shall deem necessary to remedy said situation, including but not limited to reversing the decision, altering the conditions of approval, changing the length of time during which action on a demolition, partial demolition, off -site relocation, or on -site relocation application has been suspended or the terms of the suspension, or remanding the application to HPC for rehearing. (Ord. No. 7-1989, § 2; Ord. No. 21-1995, § 1(part): Code 1971, § 7-604) 26.72.050 Variances. The board of adjustment shall not take any action on a development application for a variance pursuant to Chapter 26.108, in the "H," Historic Overlay District. or development affecting a property listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures, without receiving a written recommendation from the HPC. (Ord. No. 21-1995, § 1(part): Code 1971, § 7-605) 26.72.060 Minimum maintenance requirements. A. Purpose. The intent of this section is to reduce the incidence of "demolition by neglect." B. Requirements. All buildings and structures identified in the inventory of historic sites and structures as described in Section 26.76.090, and all structures located within a historic district, shall be maintained to meet the requirements of the Uniform Conservation Building Code (UCBC) and the Uniform Building Code (UBC). Said structures shall receive reasonable care, maintenance and upkeep appropriate for the 74 preservation, protection, enhancement, rehabilitation, reconstruction, perpetuation or use in compliance with the terms of this chapter. Every owner or his designated agent in charge of such building or structure shall keep in good repair: 1. All of the exterior portions of such improvements. 2. All interior portions thereof which, if not so maintained, may cause or tend to cause the exterior portions of such improvements to deteriorate, decay or become damaged or otherwise fall into a state of disrepair. The historic preservation commission, on its own initiative, may file a petition with the chief building official requesting that said official proceed under the provisions of this section to require correction of defects or repairs to any structure covered by this chapter so that such structure shall be preserved and protected in consonance with the purpose of this chapter. C. Demonstration of hardship. Any owner of a structure identified in the inventory of historic sites and structures which HPC and the chief building official finds requires such maintenance and repairs as described in this section may make application requesting from the city council a one-time, no interest loan, in an amount not to exceed ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00), which the owner shall agree to pay back to the city within ten (10) years or when the property is sold or the title is transferred, whichever is the soonest. An extension of the payment period may be granted by the city council, following written request by the owner. To be eligible for the loan, the owner shall submit a written request to the community development director, which shall include a description of the proposed repairs necessary to maintain the historic structure and approximate costs for such repairs. f The loan request shall also demonstrate economic hardship which previously prohibited these repairs and that the loan amount is the minimum necessary to maintained the structure. The loan request shall be considered by the city council. Any loan granted by the council shall be administered through the community development director, who shall obtain copies of bills from the owner substantiating all expenditures made to maintain the structure with monies obtained from the loan. D. Penalties waived. The general penalties for violations of the Aspen Municipal Code contained in Chapter 1.04, Section 1.04.080, shall not apply to violations of these minimum maintenance requirements. (Ord. No. 7-1989, § 2; Ord. No. 21-1995, § l(part): Code 1971, § 7-606) Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5: This Ordinance shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. 75 Section 6: A public hearing on the Ordinance was held on the 6th day of October, 1998, at 4:30 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on October 6, 1998. APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: City Attorney Attest: Jackie Lothian, Assistant City Clerk Sara Garton, Chair Planning and Zoning Commission 76 NPc PUBLIC NOTICE RE: CITY OF ASPEN CODE AMENDMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, October 6, 1998 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Planning and Zoning Commission, Sister Cities Meeting Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an amendment to Sections 26.20, 26.52, and 26.72 of the Aspen Municipal Code, regarding review of properties listed on the "Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures." For further information, contact Amy Guthrie at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920-5096. s/Sara Garton, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on September 19, 1998 City of Aspen Account TO: MEMORANDUM Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Julie Ann Woods, Interim Community Development Director Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 735 W. Bleeker Street Conditional Use Review for Two Detached Dwellings on a 6,000 Square Foot Lot, Two Accessory Dwelling Units, Special Review for Off -Street Parking, and Landmark Designation- Public Hearing. DATE: October 6, 1998 SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting approval for two (2) detached residential dwellings on a 6,000 square foot landmarked designated lot, and two (2) Accessory Dwelling Units, both of which are Conditional Uses permitted in the R-6 zone district. One parking space. waiver is requested via the Special Review standards. The Planning and Zoning Commission is also asked to recommend approval of landmark designation. Community Development staff recommends that the Conditional Uses, Special Review, and Landmark Designation at 735 W. Bleeker Street be approved, subject to conditions. APPLICANT: Drew Dolan, represented by Charles Cunniffe Architects. LOCATION: 735 W. Bleeker Street, Lots A and B, Block 18, City and Townsite of Aspen. ZONING: Medium -Density Residential, (R-6). CURRENT LAND USE: Single-family residential. The site in question contains a historic home of approximately 1,084 square feet. LOT SIZE: The lot in question is a 6,000 square foot lot, which meets the minimum requirements for the zone district. ALLOWABLE FAR: The allowed, floor area for a single family house on this site is_3,240 square feet. Two detached dwellings on this lot will also be restricted to 3,240 square feet. The Accesory Dwelling Units are below grade, so no FAR bonus is requested. Each of the free market units will have a single stall garage. 1 PROPOSED LAND USE: Two (2) detached single-family residences with attached garages. Two below grade "Accessory Dwelling Units." REVIEW PROCEDURE: Conditional use and Special Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission require a public hearing. They are one-step reviews that require notification to be published, posted and mailed in accordance with Section 26.52.060(E). The following sections of the code are applicable to the request to allow two detached units on a 6,000 square foot lot: Section 26.28.040, Medium -Density Residential (R-6); Section 26.60.040, Standards Applicable to All Conditional Uses. In regard to the Accessory Dwelling Unit, the following section of the code is also applicable: Section 26.40.090, Accessory Dwelling Units. For special review; Section 26.64.040.8, Off-street Parking Requirements, will apply. Landmark designation is a three step process, with recommendations made by the Historic Preservation Commission and Planning and Zoning Commission, with a final decision made by Council. The applicant is currently in the HPC review process, with a request for Conceptual Review, Partial Demolition, On -Site Relocation, Landmark Designation, and variances to the side yard setbacks. The project has improved significantly from the original submittal, and at this time HPC's only remaining concern is with the compatibility of the addition to the historic house. REFERRAL COMMENTS: Referral comments from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, Housing, and Environmental Health are included as Exhibit B. These comments have been incorporated as conditions of approval. STAFF COMMENTS: Section 26.28.040, Medium -Density Residential (R-6) Two (2) detached residential dwellings on a landmark lot of at least 6,000 square feet is permitted as a conditional use in the R-6 zone district. One Accessory Dwelling Unit, which are not counted for purposes of density limitations, is also permitted for each house. The applicant has requested from the HPC a west side yard setback variance of 1' 8," a 5' rear yard setback variance, and a 5' combined front and rear yard setback variance. These are required so that the two free market units can be separated from each other, which HPC finds to be a very positive proposal. The site coverage is not allowed to exceed forty (40) percent (2,400 square feet), and the maximum roof height cannot exceed twenty-five (25) feet, as measured to a variety of points depending on the particular roof slope. There must be a total of six (6) off-street parking spaces provided (two (2) for each dwelling 0) unit; one (1) each for the ADUs). The applicant requests a waiver of one parking space from P&Z. Section 26.60.040, Standards Applicable to All Conditional Uses Pursuant to Section 26.60.040, a development application for a conditional use approval for two detached units on a 6,000 square foot lot and two accessory dwelling units shall meet the following standards: (A) The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and standards of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, and with the intent of the zone district in which it is proposed to be located. Response: The stated purpose of the R-6 zone district "is to provide areas for long-term residential purposes with customary accessory uses. .. Lands in the Medium -Density Residential (R-6) zone district are generally limited to the original Aspen Townsite, contain relatively dense settlements of predominantly detached and duplex residences and are within walking distance of the center of the city. " The proposal would provide two long-term detached residential units, one of which is 1,400 square feet and one of which is 1,700 square feet. Two "Accessory Dwelling Units," which may be rented to year round working residents, are also provided. ADUs are allowed as conditional uses in the R-6 zone district, and the proposal helps further one of the stated themes of the AACP with regard to "revitalizing the permanent community" by "increase(ing) resident housing." Also, the proposal is consistent with the following purposes, goals, objectives and standards of the AACP: • , "Promote, market and implement Cottage Infill and Accessory Dwelling Unit programs;" • "Develop small scale resident housing which fits the character of the community and is interspersed with free market housing throughout the Aspen Area and up valley of Aspen Village;" and, • "The public and private sectors together should develop . . . employee -occupied accessory dwelling units, to achieve the identified unmet need to sustain a critical mass of residents." The "Intent" of the Design Quality and Historic Preservation element of the AACP is to "ensure the maintenance of character through design quality and compatibility with historic features." This section of the AACP also declares that "the loss of our historic architecture through total removal or insensitive adjacent development must be prevented." The applicant could, by right, make an addition of some 2,100 square feet to the existing historic structure but has, instead, decided to preserve the miner's cottage with a more modest addition, and place a new detached home, also of a relatively small scale, behind it. 3 (B) The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and surrounding land uses, or enhances the mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. Response: The subject parcel is. surrounded by single-family residential and some commercial uses. The proposed development is both consistent and compatible with the existing residential development in the immediate vicinity. From a visual perspective, the proposed development would be . highly compatible with the historic nature of the surrounding area, as described above. The proposed density of one (1) dwelling per 3,000 square feet of lot area is consistent with the historic development pattern of Aspen. (C) The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed conditional use minimizes adverse effects, including visual impacts, impacts on pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise, vibrations and odor on surrounding properties. Response: The proposal will help to preserve a historic resource while developing the property in a manner that creates an attractive and appropriately scaled residential area at the entrance to town. The property is situated on important vehicular and pedestrian routes and will be an asset to their character. The proposed development would ensure that this gateway to town includes human and pedestrian -scaled homes, rather than the "hunchback" addition to historic structures which are very undesirable. All vehicular traffic, trash, utilities and services will be located off the alley at the back of the site. The "Accessory Dwelling Units" are located below grade and have private entries. (D) There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use including. but not limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks, police, fire protection, emergency medical services, hospital and medical services, drainage systems, and schools. Response: The property is in the historic Aspen Townsite and all services and facilities are immediately available. (E) The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental need for increased employees generated by the conditional use. Response: According to Section 26.100.050(A)(2)(c), in order to qualify for a single- family GMQS Exemption, the applicant has three (3) options: provide an accessory dwelling unit, pay the applicable affordable housing impact fee, or record a resident - occupancy deed restriction on the single-family dwelling unit being constructed. Housing 4 mitigation would only be required for the new home that is proposed on the site, but the applicant has chosen to provide an ADU for both units. (F) The proposed conditional use complies with all additional standards imposed on it by the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and by all other applicable requirements of this title. Response: The proposed conditional use will comply with all additional standards imposed on it be the AACP and by all other applicable requirements of the Municipal Code. Section 26.40.090(R), Accessory Dwelling Units, Development review standards 1. The proposed development is compatible with and subordinate in character to the primary residence located on the parcel as well as development located within the neighborhood, and assuming year-round occupancy, shall not create a density pattern inconsistent with the established neighborhood. Response: The proposed units are studios which exceed the minimum size requirement for Accessory Dwelling Units. Each has a private entrance, although there are interior doors which connect to the rest of the houses. One unit will have a parking space, but the other is requested to be waived by Special Review because it cannot be accommodated on the site. The City has developed programs to encourage this sort of infill housing development. 2. Where the proposed development varies from the dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall find that such variation is more compatible in character with the primary residence than the development in accord with dimensional requirements. Response: The applicant is in the HPC review process and has requested setback variances to allow the two free market units to be detached from each other. No dimensional variations are needed for the Accessory Dwelling Units. 26.64.040 Review standards for special review. Off-street parking requirements. Whenever the off-street parking requirements of a proposed development are subject to establishment and/or mitigation via a payment in lieu by special review, the development application shall only be approved if the following conditions are met. 5 1. In all zone districts where the off-street parking requirements are subject to establishment and/or mitigation by special review, the applicant shall demonstrate that the parking needs of the residents, customers, guests and employees of the project have been met, taking into account potential uses of the parcel, the projected traffic generation of the project, the projected impacts onto the on -street parking of the neighborhood, its proximity to mass transit routes and the downtown area, and any special services, such as vans, provided for residents, guests and employees. In determining whether to accept the mitigation or whether to require that the parking be provided on -site, the commission shall take into consideration the practical ability of the applicant to place parking on -site, whether the parking needs of the development have been adequately met on - site and whether the city has plans for a parking facility which would better meet the needs of the development and the community than would location of the parking on -site. Response: Six parking spaces are required for the project; 2 for each free market unit and one each for the Accessory Dwelling Units. Only five spaces can be accommodated on the site plan; one each in garages, two stacked behind the garages, and one pull in space, parallel to the back of the new house. The property is located on the bus line and there is adequate on street parking available to meet the needs of the project. 2. In all zone districts, where the off-street parking requirement may be provided via a payment in lieu, the applicant shall make a one-timd only payment to the city, in the amount of fifteen thousand dollars (S1 5, 000.00) per space. Approval of the payment -in -lieu shall be at the option of the commission. The payment -in -lieu of parking shall be due and payable at the time of issuance of a building permit. All funds collected shall be transferred by the Building Inspector to the Finance Director, for deposit in a separate interest -bearing account. Monies in the account shall be used solely for the construction of a parking structure or similar new parking facility within or adjacent to the zone districts to which this subsection applies. Fees collected pursuant to this section may be returned to the then present owner of the property for which a fee was paid, including any interest earned, if the fees have not been spent within seven (7) years from the date fees were paid, unless the Council shall have earmarked the funds for expenditure on a specific project, in which case the Council may extend the time period by up to three (3) more years. To obtain a refund, the present owner must submit a petition to the Finance Director within one \(I) year following the end of the seventh (7th) year from the date payment was received. 9 For the purpose of this section, payments collected shall be deemed spent on the basis of the first payment in shall be the first payment out. Any payment made for a project for which a building permit is canceled, due to noncommencement of construction, may be refunded if a petition for refund is submitted to the Finance Director within three (3) months of the date of the cancellation of the building permit. All petitions shall be accompanied by a- notarized, sworn statement that the petitioner is the current owner of the property and by a copy of the dated receipt issued for payment of the fee. In order to insure that the payment -in -lieu rate is fair and represents current cost levels, it shall be reviewed within two (2) years of its effective date, and every two (2) years thereafter. Any necessary amendments to this section shall be initiated by the Commission or the City Council to address the results of the review. Response: The R-6 zone district allows for required parking to be reduced for historic landmarks and for Accessory Dwelling Units. The Historic Preservation Commission is in favor of the site plan and the separation of the two houses from each other. There does not appear to be any reasonable way to accommodate the sixth parking space without significantly impacting the plan, therefore staff recommends that a cash -in -lieu payment be accepted. 3. Off-street parking provided for multi family dwelling units which do not share a common parking area is not required to have unobstructed access to a street or alley, but may consist of garage area, parking strip. or apron provided that the applicant demonstrates that adequate landscaping will be installed to reduce the parking's visual impact. Developments consisting of three or more dwelling units shall install one (1) planter buffer per three parking spaces. Planter buffers shall be a minimum of ten (10) feet long by two and one-half (2-112) feet wide by two (2) feet high unless otherwise varied by the Commission. The location and dimensions of the planters may also be varied by the Commission based on site specific circumstances provided that no fewer than one (1) planter buffer is provided per three (3) off-street parking spaces. Multi family projects using this provision shall access parking from the alley, if available. Response: The proposed project does not meet the definition of "multi -family" development. Section 26.76.020, Standards for historic designation. Any structure that meets two or more of the following standards may be designated "H," Historic Overlay District, and/or Historic Landmark. It is not the intention of HPC to landmark insignificant structures or sites. HPC will focus on those which are unique or have some special value to the community: 0 A. Historical Importance: The structure or site is a principal or secondary structure or site commonly identified or associated with a person or event of historical significance to the cultural, social, or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado, or the United States. Response: This standard is not met. B. Architectural Importance. The structure or site reflects an architectural style that is unique, distinct or of traditional Aspen character, or the structure or site embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant or unique architectural type (based on building form or use), or specimen. Response: This structure is a good example of housing built in Aspen in the late 1800's. It has a typical floor plan, gabled roof, a front porch which has been enclosed, and detailing which was common to these buildings. C. Designer. The structure is a significant work of an architect or designer whose individual work has influenced the character of Aspen. Response: This standard is not met. D. Neighborhood Character. The structure or site is a significant component of an historically significant neighborhood and the preservation of the structure or site is important for the maintenance of that neighborhood character. Response: At one time, there were many miner's cabins in this neighborhood. There are several others located along West Bleeker Street, and several similar small houses along Main Street, ' behind the building. Staff believes that the preservation of these small houses is important to maintaining the character of the area. E. Community Character. The structure or site is critical to the preservation of the character of the Aspen community because of its relationship in terms of size, location and architectural similarity to other structures or sites of historical or architectural importance. Response: The structure is representative of the modest scale, style, and character of homes constructed in the late 19th century, Aspen's primary period of historic significance. It is located on a prominent corner at 7th and W. Bleeker (southeast corner) and is surrounded by several mature evergreen trees and a white picket fence. The structure exemplifies an earlier era of Aspen architecture, and is representative of miner's cottage vernacular. STAFF FINDINGS: Based upon review of the applicant's land use application and the referral comments, Community Development staff finds that there is sufficient 8 information to support the request. The proposal meets or exceeds all standards applicable to the review of conditional uses, special review, and landmark designation. The proposed development seeks to preserve an historic resource at the gateway to town by maintaining its scale, form, and design while adding one new and appropriately scaled home of small -to -moderate size by Aspen standards and two Accessory Dwelling Units. RECOMMENDATION: Community Development Department staff recommends that the conditional use request to develop two (2) detached dwellings, two Accessory Dwelling Units, and recommendation for Landmark Designation for 735 W. Bleeker Street be approved with the following conditions: 1. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends landmark designation finding that the structure is eligible for landmark status as it meets criteria B, D, and E. 2. The approvals contained herein shall be of no force unless and until the proposed Historic Landmark Designation is granted final approval by the adoption of an ordinance to that affect by City Council. The project must also receive final significant development approval from the Historic Preservation Commission for the design and layout of the proposed development. 3. The approvals contained herein are fully contingent upon the applicants' receiving approval of the needed variances from the dimensional requirements of the underlying R-6, Medium -Density Residential zone district; the conditional use approval shall not create any nonconformities. 4. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall: a. Complete all tap permits through the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. b. Verify that the site development will meet the runoff design standards of the Land Use Code at Section 26.88.040(C)(4)(f), and the building permit application must include a drainage mitigation plan (full size - 24" x 36") and report, both signed and stamped by an engineer registered in the State of Colorado. The applicant must also meet the other concerns of the Environmental Health Department as stated in "Exhibit B" of Amy Guthrie's memo dated October 6, 1998. c. In the event required, a tree removal permit must be obtained from the Parks Department for any trees that are to be removed or relocated; also, no excavation can occur within the dripline of the tree(s) to be preserved and no storage of fill material can occur within this/these dripline(s). Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Housing Office shall inspect the unit to ensure compliance with the following conditions of approval: a. The owner shall submit the appropriate deed restrictions to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Office for approval. Upon approval, of the deed restrictions by the Housing Office, the applicant shall record the deed restrictions with the Pitkin County Clerk 9 and Recorders Office with proof of recordation to the Planning Department. The deed restriction shall state that the accessory units meets the housing guidelines for such units, meets the definition of Resident Occupied Unit, and if rented, shall be rented for periods of six months or longer. b. The unit must be a totallyprivate unit which means the p unit must have a private 01i• entrance and there shall be no other rooms in this unit that need to be utilized by the C. ' individuals in the principal residence; i.e. a mechanical room for the principal �..�� residence. c. Kitchen plans shall be verified by the Housing Office to ensure compliance with specifications for kitchens in ADUs. Co d. The ADU shall be clearly identified as a separate dwelling unit on building permit f plans and shall comply with 1994 UBC Sound Transmission Control guidelines Sr (Appendix Chapter 12, Division II, Section 1208) and natural light requirements. Prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy, the applicant shall: a. Install detached sidewalks of at least five (5) feet in width as recommended by the Engineering Department. Any sections of curb and gutter in disrepair shall be replaced and the applicant shall sign a curb and gutter agreement; b. Install any new surface utilities requiring a pedestal or other above ground equipment on an easement provided by the property owner and not within the public rights -of -way; said easements shall be depicted on the building permit application plan sets. c. Agree to join any future improvement district(s) which may be formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in adjacent public rights -of -way; the agreement shall be executed and recorded concurrently upon approval of this application; and, d. Permit Community Development Department, Engineering and Housing Office staff to inspect the property to determine compliance with the conditions of approval. Submit as -built drawings of the project showing property lines, building footprint, easements, any encroachments, entry points for utilities entering the property boundaries and any other improvements to the Aspen/Pitkin County Information Systems Department in accordance with City GIS requirements, if and when, any exterior renovation or remodeling of the property occurs that requires a building permit. In the event required, the applicant must receive approval from: • The City Engineer for design of improvements, including landscaping, within public rights -of -way; 0 The Parks Department for vegetation species, tree removal, and/or public trail disturbances; • The Streets Department for mailboxes and street cuts; and, i U1 • The Community Development Department to obtain permits for any work or development, including landscaping, within the public rights -of -way. During construction, noise cannot exceed maximum permissible sound level standards, and construction cannot occur between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. !� If the proposed use, density or timing of the construction of the project change, or the site, parking or utility plans for this project change subsequent to this approval, a complete set of the revised plans shall be provided to the Engineering and Community Development Departments for review and re-evaluation, or for referral back to the Planning and Zoning Commission. �. All material representations made by the applicant in this application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and shall be considered conditions of approval,. unless otherwise amended by a Board/Commission having authority to do so. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS: The Planning and Zoning Commission may decide to approve the proposal with the conditions outlined above, approve the proposal with additional and/or modified conditions, or deny the request. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the conditional use requests to place two (2) detached residences on 735 W. Bleeker Street, as well as two (2) Accessory Dwelling Units, waiver of one on -site parking space for a cash -in -lieu payment, and recommendation for landmark designation with the conditions outlined in the Community Development Department memo dated October 6, 1998, as incorporated into Resolution 98-a/. EXHIBITS: "A" - Conditional Use Application "B" - Referral Comments "C"- Resolution 98-3,1 11 PROJECT: LAND USE APPLICATION APPLICANT: Name: tao�. �EsJr�Ee� Location: '� 3 s w. 6c K�� , �aT .� 13 t31- 4c 194 C My # Tvva►+SrrE . 0= A,.5,Pe"4 _ (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) Name: D CE t,W tD ,oLA�4 Address: 7 3.3' w. B�.tCKE,Z Phone #: Zt ea REPRESENTATIVE: Name: G �,�.ES c c.�.rrrJi F �t>zcyr ►c.T� 41, J Address: sza ct. HYr�.�rrN Aye, Phone #: zs- SS-7v TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): Conditional Use Conceptual PUD 3LZ, Conceptual Historic Devt. Special Review Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) Final Historic Development Design Review Appeal Conceptual SPA Minor Historic Devt. GNIQS Allotment 7 Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) Historic Demolition GMQS Exemption a Subdivision Historic Designation ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream 7 Subdivision Exemption (includes Small Lodge Conversion, Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane Lot Split 7 Temporary Use Other: Lot Line Adjustment ❑ TextlNlap Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) �iJ s ro A.l G S � �►! f�L Fart � c.Y �,�5/ p�i•+�- PROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) r-fLOZ—ATIoh/ of H/6= 44, ST,Lt,ccTt., G"1 stre s,J/ �LSC� �,{N►t�h'tiiR4G �EsS�GrN�tTJr+"f lei../ D(.�L�! �iOENG�- Have you attached the following? Pre -Application Conference Summary Attachment # 1, Signed Fee Agreement ® Response to Attachment #2, Dimensional Requirements Form Response to Attachment 93, Minimum Submission Contents Response to Attachment 44, Specific Submission Contents Response to Attachment #5, Review Standards for Your Application FEES DUE: S 4. ATi7AC: HMENT Z 01MENSICNAL RE-QUIREAENTS �RiUt 1998 � Accfi ' 17+�. FLj tb t_.A t l Lo�;��t✓�Ir� c�iE�o��ssvr Accrass: -v-f 9�,T- .. ss e ST' aria Cisulc� - (' L::t Sim: Op E.'—.,;;sung FAR., Alicwalbie FAR: _3,, a `�'D ?nr,^.csi3Li FAR: , Do Z�> E.:istina net leas2me (C^.rnmerm.30: Al A FrCCCsed ^e= Ieasecie (,�rnmerC:al): ' �WNisting °'a of Site Ct."verece: =y_ Iry :Cse{I �'o uT Site 0-7 CCer1 jCGCe: f'{' =;s� rc maximum ~eici�t. -^rc,,,�� .ccc: �� - 3 �r Irv.. v. �7v. = zsE 7� ^��''�.r 77^• IVA I JarVve"v max. I lelCl iL. _ vvvv..t -i .+. CermCliticn: / !� S.:;CutiC ~L'IT1Cer CT CeCr^.Cr �'S: 02 C�v...Sad 1,urrter .-T ig Cn-5ite CGr ,rlc Cn-mite canine e, zuir:.r: (o , r�i�znc: f � r ait z. - O 31 c_O,! C� cinec F�cntrra2r: O SidSt: M #-CN Side: /_ n CCrrcined Sides: 3 D - o Nininium r.cuir: C :r-,,Cirie - to �cnttr�er v -o Side: CZmbirer Sides: 15 Existing ncn=nfcrmities cr 1\11 varictIC11S rgLested: Si D VA e ia,v4.� o P 5- D 'I ' e-gM F�CCCser: F ''CIIt: Lc� `--,� u CG2 . C�rrcre <<cnt/ rear: S ice: f V CCrrtcined _ Sides: 5 r -o N (i~F has the abiRy to varl the ti ftwing re-quireme.= set1mc s, distance between buildings, FAR bonus of up to 5,00 sg.t, site =vesage varianca up to ilfs, height variations underte wttage inn71 program, parking waivers gar residentiat uses in tfie ; �-o, F- l 5, RMF, CC, and Q =ne dis lms) g: ;�,7AICZ. CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 520 E. HYMAN SUITE 301 ASPEN, CO 81611 PHONE (970) 925-5590 FAX (970) 925-5076 ARCHITECTURE Review Standards: Development of an Accessory Dwelling Unit PLANNING INTERIORS 1. The two proposed Detached Residential Units are located in a residential (R-6) zone and conform to the character of the established neighborhood. The attached Accessory Dwelling Units are located within the proposed Units, each with separate exterior entrances, and are therefore compatible with the project on the site. 2. Each proposed Accessory Dwelling Unit conforms to all dimensional and code requirements as set forth in the Aspen Land Use Code and the Uniform Building Code, respectively. a) The applicant is requesting a variance of 5'-0" for the minimum rear setback, and a variance of 5'-0" for the combined front and rear setback. b) The minimum requirement for the distance between buildings has been maintained. c) Each Accessory Dwelling Unit meets and exceeds the minimum Net Livable Area as set forth in section 26.40.070 of the Aspen Land Use Code d) The applicant is requesting a variance of 1'-8" for the west sidevard setback. e) The Accessory Dwelling Units are below grade, therefore the height limit is not applicable f) The maximum allowable site coverage in not exceeded. g) The proposed Accessory Dwelling Units meet the dimensional requirements but request a variance to the required parking requirements on a Landmark Designated Parcel J. There are no nonconforming structures being converted to detached Accessory Dwelling Units 4. N/A CH:ARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 520 E. HYMAN SUITE 301 ASPEN, CO 81611 PHONE (970) 925-5590 FAX (970) 925-5076 ARCHITECTURE Review Standards: Development of Conditional Use PLANNING INTERIORS A. The two proposed Detached Residential Units are consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and the R-6 Zone District in which it is to be located B. The two proposed Detached Residential Units are consistent and compatible with the adjacent residences in the established neighborhood. _ C. The two proposed Detached Residential Units are within the same mass and scale as surrounding structures and do not create any adverse impacts within the established zone. Pedestrian, vehicular circulation, parking, trash, noise, etc will not be impacted nor disrupted. D. Public facilities and services will be accessible to service the proposed project. E. The two proposed Detached Residential Units will commit to provide two (2) Accessory Dwelling Units on site. These units will meet and or exceed the minimum requirement as set forth in section 26.40.090 of the Aspen Land"Use Code. F. The two proposed Detached Residential Units comply with The Residential Design Standards as well as all additional standards imposed by the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and other applicable requirements. CHARLES CUNNIFFE ARCHITECTS 520 E. HYMAN SUITE 301 ASPEN, CO 81611 PHONE (970) 925-5590 FAX (970) 925-5076 -C C ARCHITECTURE Standards for Designation -Historic Overlay District/ Historic Landmark PLANNING INTERIORS The Owner, Drew Dolan, requests to apply for a Historic Landmark Designation for the structure located at 735 W. Bleeker, Aspen Colorado. The Existing building and site meet four (4) of the five standards as set forth in section 26.76.020 of the Aspen Land Use Code: Historical Importance: The original structure and site are part of the original Aspen Townsite as well as being present on the historic Sandborn Map of this Area. Architectural Importance: Tlie original structure significantly reflects the traditional Aspen character. The architectural style is unique to the early mining time of the town in the late 1800's. Traditional gable roof forms as well as ornamental fagade treatment represent the building style of that time. Neighborhood Character: The original structure and site are a significant component of the established neighborhood in which it is located. The site and Structure, located on 7`' and Bleeker, is a integral part of the historic West End neighborhood. Historic Designation is important for the maintenance of this historic part of town. Communitv Character: The original structure and site are critical in preserving the character Aspen. The highly risible location of the site on the entry to Aspen is an important visual key to the history of die town. This structure is one of the feNv remaining "Historic Structures" on the entry approach to Aspen. i �u L i i i r � To A/rpoM Sisatt rank �y High �J t Scool 33�{{ t2tQCC t To Maroon Lake f p�mpse Ply PROJECT LOCATIO VICINITY MAP-73 5 W. BLEEKER � M� Cstcll I%t Ad POW66 "'a7 W ibOAM or Md~d ow neo/ L` or lure+% ill rmrrt� Soew rwali ewe/ it t � /ritvrt. /n/ast or rwaGr aminwiiow• LHiry �� 1d �+Y"°U�• Rd� lnJa•N�•nJ�•nat• Piss To: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer From: Nancy MacKenzie, Environmental Health Specialist Date: September 21, 1998 Re: 735 W. Bleeker Parcel ID # 2735-124-45-'001 The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department has reviewed the land use submittal under authority of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, and has the following comments. SEWAGE TREATMENT AND COLLECTION: Section 11-1.7 "It shall be unlawful for the owner or occupant of any building used for residence or business purposes within the city to construct or reconstruct an on -site sewage disposal device." The plans to provide wastewater disposal for this project through the central collection lines of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD) meet the requirements of this department. The ability of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District to handle the increased flow for the project should be determined by the ACSD. The applicant must provide documentation that the applicant and the service agency are mutually bound to the proposal and that the service agency is capable of serving the development. ADEQUATE PROVISIONS FOR WATER NEEDS: Section 23-55 "All buildings, structures, facilities, pants, or the like within the city limits which use water shall be connected to the municipal water utility system." The provision of potable water from the City of Aspen system is consistent with Environmental Health policies ensuring the supply of. safe water. The City of Aspen Water Department shall determine if adequate water is available for the project. The City of Aspen water supply meets all standards of the Colorado Department of Health for drinking water quality. A letter of agreement to serve the project must be provided. WATER QUALITY IMPACTS: Section 11-1 .3 "For the purpose of maintaining and protecting its municipal water supply from injury and pollution, the city shall exercise regulatory and supervisory jurisdiction within the incorporated limits of the City of Aspen and over all streams and sources contributing to municipal water supplies for a distance of five (5) miles above the points from which municipal water supplies are diverted." A drainage plan to mitigate the water quality impacts from drive and parking areas will be evaluated by the City Engineer. This application is not expected to impact down stream water quality. AIR QUALITY: Sections 11-2.1 ,It is the purpose of [the air quality section of the Municipal Code] to achieve the maximum practical degree of air purity possible by requiring the use of all available practical methods and techniques to control, prevent and reduce air pollution throughout the city..." The Land Use Regulations seek to "lessen congestion" and "avoid transportation demands that cannot be met" as well as to "provide clean air by protecting the natural air sheds and reducing pollutants". The major air quality impact is the emissions resulting from the traffic generated by this project. PM-10 (93% of which comes from traffic driving on paved roads) is a significant health concern in Aspen. The traffic generated will also produce carbon monoxide and other emissions that are health concerns. The municipal code requires developments to achieve the maximum practical degree of air purity by using all available practical methods to reduce pollution. The applicant needs to implement measures that will minimize traffic increases of the development, or offset the emissions from the project with PM10 reduction measures elsewhere. In order to do this, the applicant will need to determine the traffic increases generated by the project (using standard ITE trip generation rates), commit to a set of control measures, and show that the control measures offset the traffic or PM10 produced by the project. Standards used for trips generated by new development are the trip generation races and reductions from the `Pitkin County Road Standards' which are based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Report, Fifth edition. Housing units use the trip generation rate for ITE Land Use code 210, which is 9.55 trips per day per unit. Free -Market units located within one half mile of a transit stop are allowed a reduction of 1.5 trips per day. Affordable Housing units are allowed a reduction of 2.0 trips per day. The existing single family house does not have to mitigate its impact. The new detached residential unit and the two new Accessory Dwelling Units will have to mitigate their impacts. For the one residential unit we used Code 210, 9.55 trips/day and used the pre - approved trip making reduction of 1.5 for being located within 1/2 mile of a transit stop. 9.55 minus 1.5 = 8 trips per day. We made that assumption that the small ADU's would not generate as many trips per day as the above category of housing that we normally look at. These studio units would probably typically be occupied by one or two people and not children. So we used half the above trip rate and the pre -approved trip making reduction of 2.0 for being located within 1/2 mile of a transit stop. 9.55/2 minus 2.0 = 3 trips per day per unit. The proposed development will generate 14 new trips per day, 1.96 lbs of PMLO traffic emissions, which will have to be mitigated. A condition of approval should be that the applicant provide a PM10 mitigation plan for approval from the Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department, which documents that measures are sufficient to offset increases in PMlo caused by the project. This plan should be approved prior to.detailed submission or issuance of building permits. The mitigation must be implemented before final CO of any of the buildings. FIREPLACE/WOODSTOVE PERMITS The applicant must file a fireplace/woodstove permit with the Environmental Health Department before the building permit will be issued. In the City of Aspen, buildings may have two gas log fireplaces or two certified woodstoves (or 1 of each) and unlimited numbers.of decorative gas fireplace appliances per building. New homes may NOT have wood burning fireplaces, nor may any heating device use coal as fuel. FUGITIVE DUST,A fugitive dust control -plan is required which includes, but is not limited to fencing, watering of haul roads and disturbed areas, daily cleaning of adjacent paved roads to remove mud that has been carried out, speed limits, or other measures necessary to prevent windblown dust from crossing the property line or causing a nuisance. Dust control will be crucial due to the closeness of existing homes to the site. 2 ASBESTOS Commercial - Prior to remodel, expansion or demolition of any public or commercial building, including removal of drywall, carpet, tile, etc., the state must. be notified and a person licensed by -the state to do asbestos inspections must do an inspection. Environmental Health cannot sign any building permits until we get this report. If there is no asbestos, the demolition can proceed. If asbestos is present, it must be removed by a licensed asbestos removal contractor. CONFORMANCE WITH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH LAWS: NOISE ABATEMENT: Section 16-1 "The city council finds and declares that noise is a significant source of environmental pollution that represents a present and increasing threat to the public peace and to the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the City of Aspen and it its visitors. .....Accordingly, it is the policy of council to provide standards for permissible noise levels in various areas and manners and at various times and to prohibit noise in excess of those levels." During construction, noise can not exceed maximum permissible sound level standards, and construction cannot be done except between the hours of 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. It is very likely that noise generated during the construction phase of this project will have some negative impact on the neighborhood. The applicant should be aware of this and take measures to minimize the predicted high noise levels. TJNDERGRO= FUEL STORAGE TANKS We were told by the Engineering Department that there is a possibility that an old fuel storage tank is buried on this property. Tanks being removed need approval prior to removal by the Oil Inspection Section of the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment, 303-620-4300. 3 bcl-F` lb "S6 01: 46FM RSPE111 HOUSING OF C =I �j ri I -11r, 'j M I ' Housing Office City of Aspen/Pitkin County. i 530 East Main Street, Lower Level Aspen, Colorado 81611 (970) 920-5050 Fax, (970) 920-558.0 TO: Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officier FROM: Stefanie A. Levesque, Housing Office DATE; September 15,1998 RE., 735 East Durant Avenue (2) ADUs - Parma ID Flo. 2735-124-45-001 REQUEST; The applicant is requeaflng approval for two accessary dwelling units to be located below grade. BAgKGROUND: A=nding to Section 26.40.090, AccessW Dwelling Unfts, a unit shall 0ontain not less than 300 square feet of net livable area and not more then 700 square feet of net livable area. Imo: When the Housing Ofte reviews plans for an accmary dwelling unit, there are particular areas that are given special attention. They are as follOW6.' 1 The unit must be a totally private unit, which means the unit must have a prwzte entmnce, and there shall be no other rooms in this unit that need to be utilized by the individuals In the principal residence; i.e., a mechanical mom for the principal residence. 2, The kitchen includes a minimum of a two -burner stove with oven, standard sink, and a 6-cubic foot refrigerator plus freezer. 3. The unit is required to have a certain percentage of natural light into the unit; i.e., windows, sliding glass door, window wells, etc., especially if the unit is located below grade. The Uniform Building Code requires that 10% of the floor area of a unit needs to have natural light. Natural light is defined as light which is clear and open to the sky. 4. Should the unit be used to obtain an FAR bonus, the unit MUST be rented to a qualified employee, 5. A deed restriction MUST be rewrded PRIOR to building permit approval. The deed restriction shall be obtained from the Housing 01'rice. RM91VIVIENDATION- After reviewing the application, the Housing Office recommends approval an the condition that issues 1-5 above are met prior to building permit approval. Prior to C.O. the Housing Office requires a site tour to inspect the unit. VeferraMidn798.adu e12 C0r2sof o(¢fed -6a 2lialrol2 01sfrlcf . ? 4 1 565 North Mill Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 ? 1998 Tele. (970) 925-3601 FAX #(970) 925-2537 Sy Kelly Chairman M i c e11y E' Paul Smith • Treas. Frank Loushin Louis Popish Secy. gr. Bruce MatherlY� M September 16, 1998 Amy Guthrie Historic Preservation 130 S . Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: 735 West Bleeker Dear Amy: The development at 735 West Bleeker is currently served by the district. The proposed development will require the construction of two separate service lines for each detached house, Each ADU will also be assessed connection charges. Service to the development is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications which are on file at the District office. We would request, as a condition of approval, that tap permits be completed prior to the issuance of building permits. Sincerely, Bruce Matherly • District Manager EPA Awards of Excellence 1976 • 1986 • 1990 Regional and National RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION FOR THE APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE TO PLACE TWO (2) DETACHED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES AND TWO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS ON A SINGLE HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT OF 6,000 SQUARE FEET IN THE R-69 MEDIUM -DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONE DISTRICT, TO WAIVE ONE OFF-STREET PARKING SPACE BY SPECIAL REVIEW, AND TO RECOMMEND LANDMARK DESIGNATION FOR 735 W. BLEEKER STREET, LOTS A AND B, BLOCK 18, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO Resolution 98- WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Drew Dolan, owner, for a Conditional Use Review to place two (2) detached single- family residences and two (2) Accessory Dwelling Units on a single Historic Landmark Designated lot of 6,000 square feet in the R-6, Medium -Density Residential zone district, to waive one (1) off-street parking space and to review landmark designation for 735 W. Bleeker Street; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to Section 26.28.040(C)(7) of the Aspen Municipal Code, two detached residential dwelling on a designated Historic Landmark lot of at least 6,000 square feet may be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission as Conditional Uses in conformance with the requirements of the aforementioned Section as well as Section 26.60.040, Standards Applicable to All Conditional Uses, of the Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to Section 26.40.090 of the Aspen Municipal Code as well as Section 26.60.040, Standards Applicable to All Conditional Uses, each unit may have one Accessory Dwelling Unit; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to Section 26.64.040.B of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission may consider a waiver of off-street parking requirements; and WHEREAS, Pursuant to Section 26.76 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission must review and make a recommendation in regard to Landmark Designation; and WHEREAS, the Housing Office, Aspen . Consolidated Sanitation District, Environmental Health, and Community Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval with conditions; and WHEREAS, a public hearing, which was legally noticed, was held at a regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission on October 6, .1998, at which the Commission approved the Conditional Uses, Special Review, and Landmark Designation for the above -described application with the conditions recommended by the Community Development Department. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED- by the Commission: That the conditional use request to place two (2) detached single-family residences and two (2) Accessory Dwelling Units on a single Historic Landmark Designated lot of 6,000 square feet in the R-6, Medium -Density Residential zone district, to waive one (1) off- street parking space and to recommend landmark designation is hereby approved with the following conditions: 1. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends landmark designation finding that the structure is eligible for landmark status as it meets criteria B, D, and E. 2. The approvals contained herein shall be of no force unless and until the proposed Historic Landmark Designation is granted final approval by the adoption of an ordinance to that affect by City Council. The project must also receive final significant development approval from the Historic Preservation Commission for the design and layout of the proposed development. 3. The approvals contained herein are fully contingent upon the applicants' receiving approval of the needed variances from the dimensional requirements of the underlying R-6, Medium -Density Residential zone district from the Historic Preservation Commission; the conditional use approval shall not create any nonconformities. 4. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall: a. Complete all tap permits through the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. b. Verify that the site development will meet the runoff design standards of the Land Use Code at Section 26.88.040(C)(4)(f), and the building permit application must include a drainage mitigation plan (full size - 24" x 36") and report, both signed and stamped by an engineer registered in the State of Colorado. The applicant must also meet the other concerns of the Environmental Health Department as stated in "Exhibit B" of Amy Guthrie's memo dated October 6, 1998. c. In the event required, a tree. removal permit must be obtained from the Parks Department for any trees that are to be removed or relocated; also, no excavation can occur within the dripline of the tree(s) to be preserved and no storage of fill material can occur within this/these dripline(s). 3. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Housing Office shall inspect the unit to ensure compliance with the following conditions of approval: a. The owner shall submit the appropriate deed restrictions to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Office for approval. Upon approval of the deed restrictions by the Housing Office, the applicant shall record the deed restrictions with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorders Office with proof of recordation to the Planning Department. The deed restriction shall state that the accessory units meets the housing guidelines for such units, meets the definition of Resident Occupied Unit, and if rented, shall be rented for periods of six months or longer. b. The unit must be a totally private unit, which means the unit must have a private entrance and there shall be no other rooms in this unit that need to be utilized by the individuals in the principal residence; i.e. a mechanical room for the principal residence. c. Kitchen plans shall be verified by the Housing Office to ensure compliance with specifications for kitchens in ADUs. d. The ADU shall be clearly identified as a separate dwelling unit on building permit plans and shall comply with 1994 UBC Sound Transmission Control guidelines (Appendix Chapter 12, Division II, Section 1208) and natural light requirements. 4. Prior to the issuance of any Certificates of Occupancy, the applicant shall: a. Install detached sidewalks of at least five (5) feet in width as recommended by the Engineering Department. Any sections of curb and gutter in disrepair shall be replaced and the applicant shall sign a curb and gutter agreement; b. Install any new surface utilities requiring a pedestal or other above ground equipment on an easement provided by the property owner and not within the public rights -of -way; said easements shall be depicted on the building permit application plan sets. c. Agree to join any future improvement district(s) which may be formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in adjacent, public rights -of -way;* the agreement shall be executed and recorded concurrently upon approval of this application; and, d. Permit Community Development Department, Engineering and Housing Office staff to inspect the property to determine compliance with the conditions of approval. 5. Submit as -built drawings of the project showing property lines, building footprint, easements, any encroachments, entry points for utilities entering the property boundaries and any other improvements to the Aspen/Pitkin County Information Systems Department in accordance with City GIS requirements, if and when, any exterior renovation or remodeling of the property occurs that requires a building permit. 6. In the event required, the applicant must receive approval from: • The City Engineer for design of improvements, including landscaping, within public rights -of -way; • The Parks Department for vegetation species, tree removal, and/or public trail disturbances; • The Streets Department for mailboxes and street cuts; and, • The Community Development Department to obtain permits for any work or development, including landscaping, within the public rights -of -way. 7. During construction, noise cannot exceed maximum permissible sound level standards, and construction cannot occur between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. 8. If the proposed use, density or timing of the construction of the project change, or the site, parking or utility plans for this project change subsequent to this approval, a complete set of the revised plans shall be provided to the Engineering and Community Development Departments for review and re-evaluation, or for referral back to the Planning and Zoning Commission. 9. All material representations made by the applicant in this application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and shall be considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by a Board/Commission having authority to do so. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on October 6, 1998. APPROVED AS TO FORM: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney Attest: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk Planning and Zoning Commission: Sara Garton, Chairperson EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION Els- IN m___Erra EXISTING WEST ELEVATION LEGEND : EXISTING CONSTRUCTION TO BE DEMOLISHED I EXISTING CONSTRUCTION TO REVAIN VPORCH TO BE RE -OPENED EXISTING EAST ELEVATION o(j PROPERTY UNE FRONT SETBACK n i 1 s 1 I 1 i I EXISTING LOCATION OF HISTORIC STRUCTURE ... T-i PROPOSED LOCATION OF EXISTING HISTORIC STRUCTURE W H (� 1 i 1� Iy ly 1 I 1 I 1 1 I 1 1 1 �1 1 i 1 SITE COVERAGE: 1 UNIT l: 1297 SF UNIT 2 IJ88 SF 1 I MrAG 2?W / 6me - 4a UNIT 1: 1,403 SF UNIT 2: 1714 SF ALLEY BLOCK 18 TOTALG 30 SF AU4WA6M =40 SF PROPOSED SITE PLAN An . 1'—o~ n, LEGEND EXISTING CONSTRUCTION TO BE DEMOLISHED ® EXISTING CONSTRUCTION TO REMAIN PORCH TO BE REOPENED EXISTING FLOOR PLAN V uLj LL. 1 Z z u QQ J NO �c DREENO.9836 LG P ODA SHEET NO. X2.e- SHEET OF UNIT 2 PROPOSED MAIN LEVEL PLAN -tim 0 1 1 • Z U I DRAWING XA,w I&M JOB NO, 9836 DATE 9-14-91 SHEET NO. A2.- 1�,u - Y-Qu 'i' SHEET OF T1�!flR niMR n ew UNIT 1 UNIT 2 PROPOSED UPPER LEVEL PLAN a ♦ a Q �1. Lz Z z z U w J C4 1 M DRAWING (UPPER W JOB NO. 4 DATE 4 SHEET NO. Aer 1 f u - T-Qn SHEET �.ca�earown liallm PROPOSED LOWER LEVEL PLAN 0 1 4 4 t ADU UNIT #2 480 SF 0 1 2 4 q ADU UNIT #1 523 SF 0 1 2 4 EX/STIN SILYNG UNIT 1 - PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION VERTICAL WOOD SIDING -MATCH EXISTING COLOR 0❑� I I � � I EXISTING HORIZONTAL f EXISTING HORIZONTAL SIDING SIDING VERTICAL WOOD SIDING - MATCH EXISTING COLOR EXIST/N SIDING UNIT 1 - PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION 11 UI I UNIT 1 - PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION- 0 1 4 C C) 6 , U Q TURNED WOOD POSTS - RE -USE FROM DEMO OF REAR PORCH j u w U V z Q w Z 0 0 VERTICAL WOOD SIDING - MATCH EXISTING COLOR F WING ATAaMS 9836 9-14-98 SHEET NO. A3.1 SHEET OF 'Umrerww QSItlB cLN-*m rdil 8RCx � HCRIM SIDING METAL il'GY]0 f BRACX i UNIT 2 - PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION UNIT 2 - PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION mmmm 0 t 4 • HORIZO SIDING UNIT 2 - PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION UNIT 2 - PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION m6mmp " of 4 , WOOD POST County of Pitkin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT } SS. TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATION State of Colorado } SECTION 26.52.060 (E) I,. Klcen4 &_6_F=L4 , being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 26.52.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Regulations in the following manner: 1. By mailing of notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, by first-class, postage prepaid U.S. Mail to all owners of property with three hundred (300) feet of the subject property, as indicated on the attached list, on the aA day of lam. _,1998 (which is L�r days prior to the public hearing date of 0- $). 2. By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest public way) and that the said sign was posted and visible continuously from the M � day of , 199!� (Must be posted for at least ten (10) full days before the hearing date). A photograph of the posted sign is attached hereto. Signature Signed 'before me this day PUBLIC NOTICE ,199*y DATE _ TIME epueliPau PLACE - � -- J4''URMSE_ y- WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL Fog ; w� A, _ My commission expires: i �- 1'1 194 UNITS ON L Om SF LO . CIA t REVIEW F R- ?ARK;4 i • Nary P _ c �.. I Notary P lies Signature —"`�" SANDUNES LTD 4823 OLD KINGSTON PIKE STE 140 MANGONE PARTNERSHIP LP 12687 W CEDAR DR # 100 HUTCHESON RICHARD L KNOXVILLE, TN 37919 LAKEWOOD, CO 80228 PO BOX 161930 AUSTIN, TX 78716-1930 BAYOUD GEORGE S & JOAN 3525 TURTLE CREEK BLVD MCMANUS JAMES R BROOKS JOHN A & LORRAINE M DALLAS, TX 75219 285 RIVERSIDE WESTPORT, CT 06880 720 W BLEEKER ASPEN, CO 81611 SIVART HOLDINGS LTD EPSTEIN MARC L REVOCABLE PARTNERSHIP TRUST #1 ASPEN HISTORICAL SOCIETY 708 W BLEEKER ST 205 N 6TH ST 620 W BLEEKER ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611-1103 ASPEN, CO 81611 KRUIDENIER DAVID & ELIZABETH S 3409 SOUTHERN HILLS DR DOLAN ANDREW C 50% MEANS GRAEME DES MOINES, IA 50321 735 W BLEEKER ST ASPEN, CO 81611 711 W BLEEKER ST ASPEN, CO 81611 COULTER G LYNNIE PO BOX L3 LUU INVESTMENTS LLC GOLDRICH MELINDA ASPEN, CO 81612 435 E MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 706 W MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 Pr,�ZSON MARK M & LEES M 702 W MAIN ST MANGHAM NANCY JANE CHRISTIAN SCIENCE SOCIETY " ASPEN, CO 81611 1709 DAKAR RD E ASPEN/SNOWMASS INC FT WORTH, TX 76116-2035 734 W MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 CHRISTIAN SCIENCE SOCIETY RYANCO PARTNERS XXX 1 WEIEN J ROBERT ASPEN/SNOW1ViASS INC 715 W MAIN ST STE 203 709 W MAIN ST 344 W MAIN ST ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 ANSON WESTON T & SUSAN BAILEY CITY OF ASPEN TRUSTEE OF 130 S GALENA ST ANSON FAMILY LIVING TRUST ASPEN, CO 81611 PO BOX 28025 EL JEBEL, CO 81628 LE BLANC SHERIE MATILDA 634 W MAIN ST #2 ASPEN, CO 81611 OLSHAN BURTON D 1/2 5408 OLD LEEDS RD BIRMINGHAM, AL 35210 MANSON MARGARET J MORGENSON CONSTANCE M PO BOX 2056 CARBONDALE, CO 81623-5056 OLS1 AN BURTON D 1/2 5408 OLD LEEDS RD BIRMINGHAM, AL 35210 ',I BURTON D 1/2 HAYES MARY E OLSHAN BURTON D I/2 LD LEEDS RD 209 E BLEEKER ST OLSHAN KATHLEEN W 1/2 NGHAM, AL 3 52 10 ASPEN, CO 81611 5408 OLD LEEDS RD BIRMINGHAM, AL 35210 KLEIN HERBERT S & MARSHA 201 Iv MILL ST STE 201 ASPEN, CO 81611 STEINBERG EDWARD M 1068 HOLLY ST DENVER, CO 80220 EICHNER SAMUEL L EICHNER SUSANA STERN DE FUENTE PIRAMIDES 243 TECAMACHALCO MEXICO CITY, 53950 D'ALESSIO ROBERT J D'ALESSIO JEAN M 814 W BLEEKER C-4 ASPEN, CO 81611 TRAN HONG HUONG 814 W BLEEKER ST #C 1 ASPEN, CO 81611 LL,j TONG KHON TRAN TUYET LE PO BOX 2785 ASPEN, CO 81612 LICHTENWALTER GARY R 350 HOUBOLT RD JOLIET, IL 60431-8305 KHALAF ALEXANDER R & FAHIMA 408 E HYMAN AVE ASPEN, CO 81611 GELLER SCOTT 29 BARKLEY CIR FORT MYERS, FL 33907-7531 SAVANAH LIMITED PARTNERSHIP BAVARIAN INN 1925 CENTURY PK E STE 1900 LOS ANGELES, CA 90067 HEISLEY MICHAEL E C/O K J LONG 2004 DIANA DR MENDOTA, IL 61342 HOGGATT JERRY S PO BOX 1776 HARVEY, LA 70059 COHEN RICHARD A COHEN ELIZABETH A PO BOX 1806 ASPEN, CO 81612 SCHAFFER WILLIAM H SCHAFFER KAREN W 127 BRIXWORTH LN APT 7 NASHVILLE, TN 37205-2036 TOPELSON ALEJANDRO TOPELSON REBECA 5300 DTC PKWY #400 ENGLEWOOD, CO 80111 POLSE KENNETH A & JOYCE L REVOC 1992 TST 452 SCENIC AVE PIEDMONT, CA 94611 DAILY KIMBERLY DAWN 814 W BLEEKER PL E2 ASPEN, CO 81611 MINNESOTA MATERNAL FETEL MEDICINE 2115 D WIGHT LN MINNETONKA, MN 55305 KENNETH T & KAREN SHAFER ROBERT C & ADRIAN C JR CUSTOM CABINETRY INC DORWORTH- 3554 QUEBEC ST NW 18656 S RT 59 WASHINGTON, DC 20016 SHOREWOOD, IL 60435 LONG RICHARD E & LOIS N PO BOX 1314 ASPEN, CO 81612 LARNER JACQUELINE L 376 DAHLIA DENVER, CO 80220 MURRY PAUL J MURRY BONITA J 814 W BLEEKER ST C-5 ASPEN, CO 81611 FATAHI AMENEH PO BOX 8080 ASPEN, CO 81612 MORRIS CHARLES R JR ASPEN VILLAS MGM'T 814 W BLEEKER ASPEN, CO 81611 UHLER FRANCES M 814 W BLEEKER ASPEN, CO 81611-3115 BOSSART TODD L 814 W BLEEKER ST E4 ASPEN, CO 81611 MITTON JOSEPH & PATRICIA 1/2 INT FRANKLE DAVID 1/2 INT 1015 VOLTZ RD NORTHBROOK, IL 60062-4722 HEISLEY MICHAEL E LW GIES - HEICO INC C/O 2075 FOXFIELD RD STE 102 ST CHARLES, IL 60174 SANDUNES LTD 4823 OLD KINGSTON PIKE STE 140 KNOXVILLE, TN 37919 WOOD HELENA C/O AMBIANCE LTD PO BOX 420315 DALLAS, TX 75342 HINELINE SUSAN 730 W BLEEKER ST ASPEN, CO 81611-1134 BRADY LINDSAY KEVIN 146 FORREST ST PEPPERMINT GROVE 6011 WESTERN AUTRALIA, rA O z ,o ,o Z 'd -d O � � o Cam, C13. U CA Z Pro C's F. O U