Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.200207162 AGENDA ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, JULY 169 2002 4:30 PM SISTER CITIES ROOM I. COMMENTS A. Commissioners B. Planning Staff C. Public II. MINUTES 21� 60 j -ry pi ar / F) .-oo�..- III. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IV. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARINGS A. 216 E. HALLAM CONDITIONAL USE FOR DUPLEX, Joyce Ohlson, continued from 6/18 B. LITTLE AJAX CONSOLIDATED CONCEPTUAL/FINAL PUD, Joyce Ohlson, continued from 7/2 V. BOARD REPORTS VI. ADJOURN P21 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Joyce Ohison, Deputy Director FROM: James Lindt, Planner RE: 216 E. Hallam Conditional Use for a Duplex on a 6,000 SF Lot that Contains a Historic Structure— Public Hearing- Continued from June 18tn DATE: July 16, 2002 APPLICANT: Frost Property, LLC. REPRESENTATIVES: Stan Clauson Associates, LLC. LOCATION: 216 E. Hallam St. ZONING: R-6 (Medium -Density Residential) PROPOSED LAND USE: Duplex REVIEW PROCEDURE: Conditional Use: The Planning and Zoning Commission shall by resolution approve, approve. with conditions, or deny a development application for a conditional use, after recommendation by the Community Development Director. Location of Proposed Duplex Unit SUMMARY: A duplex on a 6,000 SF lot that contains a structure listed on the Inventory of Historic Structures is a conditional use in the R-6 (Medium -Density Residential) Zone District. The Applicant is requesting conditional use approval to convert the existing inventoried single-family residence at 216 E. Hallam Street to a duplex. The Applicant is also requesting HPC Major Development approval that will include proposed variances from the combined front and side yard setback requirements. IRA COUNCIL ACTIONS: The Planning and Zoning Commission tabled the review of the review of the Conditional Use application on June 181h in order to find out the results of City Council's review of the associated rezoning and use of the public property as vehicular access to the rear of the lot. City Council approved the proposed rezoning of a portion of the rear lot from S/C/I to R-6. Additionally, City Council approved the use of public property to the west of the subject parcel as vehicular access to both the front and rear lots. Therefore, the Applicant may utilize the vehicular, driveway between the Red Brick Recreation and Arts Center and the subject parcel as access to the rear of the subject parcel. STAFF COMMENTS: The immediate vicinity consists of mainly single-family residences with a couple of duplexes interspersed. Additionally, the Red Brick Recreation and Arts Center is located directly to the west of the subject site. Staff believes that the proposed duplex use is appropriate and compatible with the surrounding structures and uses. The added density is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan in that it provides for increased density in an area that is near the Commercial Core and is in walking distance to public transportation. Staff also believes that the proposal supports the goals of the Historic Preservation Program. The Historic Preservation Commission has reviewed and approved the Conceptual Design for the proposed conversion to a duplex. Staff does not anticipate that the proposed conditional use will create significant adverse impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. Staff believes that the traffic generation and on -street parking impacts as a result of the added density will be minimal in comparison to that generated by the Red Brick Recreation and Arts Center and the Methodist Church that are located in the immediate neighborhood. City Council has approved a means of access to the rear of the subject parcel which will allow for the parking to be hidden from the street as is consistent with the residential design standards. Additionally, the Applicant is proposing to maintain trash storage internal to the structure and make improvements to the driveway area between the Red Brick and the subject property. The improvements that are made to the driveway area to the west of the subject property will improve pedestrian access to the Post Office Pedestrian Trail to the north of the subject site. Furthermore, the Growth Management Quota System requires that the Applicant mitigate for the additional unit proposed for the property by either constructing an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) or by paying a cash -in -lieu fee for the additional square footage being added as part of the second unit. The Applicant has not included an ADU in their floor plans. Therefore, the Applicant would be required to pay a cash -in -lieu fee for the additional unit. Staff feels that the proposal meets the review standards for granting a conditional use and recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the proposal to convert the single-family residence to a duplex. i� RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve with conditions, the proposed conditional use request to allow for the construction of a duplex on a 6,000 square foot lot that contains a historically designated structure at 216 E. Hallam Street. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No. 141, Series of 2002, approving the conditional use for a duplex on a 6,000 square foot lot in the R-6 Zone District with the conditions as contained within the resolution." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B Historic Preservation Commission Resolution Approving Conceptual Review and Variances P24 RESOLUTION N0. (� (SERIES OF 2002)�� A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE FOR A DUPLEX ON A 69000 SQUARE FOOT LOT, THAT CONTAINS A HISTORICALLY DESIGNATED STRUCTURE IN THE R-6 ZONE DISTRICT, AT THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 216 EAST HALLAM STREET, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel Identification # 2735-073-14-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the Frost Property, LLC., represented by Stan Clauson Associates LLC., requesting conditional use approval to construct a duplex on a 6,000 square foot lot in the R-6 Zone District at 216 E. Hallam Street; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.710.040(C)(7) of the Land Use Code, the R-6 Zone District allows for a duplex to be constructed as a conditional use on a 6,000 square foot lot that contains a historically designated structure; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.425 of the Land Use Code, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission may approve a conditional use during a duly noticed public hearing after considering comments from the general public, a recommendation from the Community Development Director, and recommendations from relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the application and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission held. a duly noticed public hearing on June 18, 2002 and tabled the application; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on July 16, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved, by a to (_-_) vote, a conditional use approval to construct a duplex on a 6,000 square foot lot at 216 E. Hallam Street, with the conditions contained herein; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission fmds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. P25 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION as follows: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the conditional use approval to construct a duplex on a 6,000 square foot lot at 216 E. Hallam Street is approved subject to the conditions described hereinafter. Conditions of Approval: 1. The Applicant shall obtain a GMQS Exemption by either constructing and.Accessory Dwelling Unit, deed restricting an off -site unit pursuant to the Housing Guidelines, or paying an affordable housing cash -in -lieu fee. 2. The Applicant shall obtain Final Major HPC Approval prior to applying for building permit. 3. The Applicant shall submit a drainage plan for review by the Community Development Engineer at the time of building permit submittal. 4. The Applicant shall not park vehicles in the public right-of- way that borders the west side of the parcel. 5. The Applicant shall not plant vegetation that will encroach into the public right-of-way. ~ 6. Vegetation shall not be planted that blocks the site :distance of cars using the driveway and the adj acent public right-of-way as determined by the Community Development Engineer. 7. The Applicant shall obtain an encroachment license from the City Engineering Department if there is a need to relocate a water or sewer service line in the public right-of-way along the east side of the Red Brick Recreation and Arts Center. 8. Conditional Use Approval shall be contingent upon City Council approving the use of the public right-of-way for vehicular access to the rear of the parcel. Conditional Use Approval shall also be contingent upon City Council vacating the alley to the north of the parcel. 'qertinn I - This Resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. A public hearing on this resolution was held and tabled by the Commission on the 18th day of June, 2002. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on July 16, 2002. APPROVED AS TO FORM: IPLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney Jasmine Tygre, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk P27 EXHIBIT A MONA FROST PROPERTY CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS 26.425.040 Standards applicable to all conditional uses. When considering a development application for a conditional use, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider whether all of the following standards are met, as applicable. A. The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and standards of the Aspen Area Community Plan, with the intent of the zone district in which it is proposed to be located, and complies with all other applicable requirements of this Title; and Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposed conditional use is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Aspen Area Community Plan. The AACP states as one of it's goals in managing growth; that additional development density should be concentrated in an area that is "supportive of transit and pedestrian accessibility". Staff believes that relative location of the parcel is such that it is in walking distance of the Commercial Core and is conducive to utilizing public transportation. Staff also feels that proposal meets the goals of the Historic Preservation Program. HPC has already approved the Conceptual design of the duplex. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 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; and Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposed use of a duplex is compatible with the character of the land uses and development in the immediate vicinity. The surrounding neighborhood consists of mainly single-family residences with some duplex dwelling units interspersed. Staff believes that a duplex is an appropriate use for the subject parcel. The increased massing of the structure will allow for it to be a transition structure between the large Red Brick Recreation and Arts structure and the slightly smaller single-family residences to the east. Additionally, the HPC believes that the proposed addition is compatible in scale to the existing historic structure. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 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; and Staff Finding Staff does not believe the proposed conditional use for a duplex will have a significant adverse effect on the surrounding properties. Staff feels that the traffic generation and on -street parking impacts will be very minimal in relation to that of the Red Brick and the Methodist Church that are located in the immediate vicinity. Additionally, the trash storage for both units is proposed internal to the structure. Pedestrian circulation will also be improved by the improvements that are to be made to the pedestrian trail located to the west of the property that links the Post Office Trail with the West End of Aspen. City Council has also approved the use of the public property to the west of the subject parcel for a driveway to the rear of the property. As a result, the Applicant will be able to hide the on -site parking from East Hallam Street as is consistent with the Residential Design Standards. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 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; and Staff Finding Staff believes that there are adequate public facilities in the vicinity to serve the proposed conditional use. Staff finds this criterion to be met. E. The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental need for increased employees generated by the conditional use; and Staff Finding The proposed conditional use may obtain an exemption from the Growth Management Quota System by either constructing anj ADU, deed restricting an off - site unit that meets the Housing Guideline requirements, or by pay a cash -in -lieu fee for the additional duplex unit to be constructed on -site. The Applicant has consented to either constructing an ADU or paying the required cash -in -lieu fee. Staff finds this criterion to be met. ! s RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC) APPROVING AN APPLICATION FOR MAJOR DEVELOPMENT (CONCEPTUAL), VARIANCES, AND ON -SITE RELOCATION FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 216 E. HALLAM STREET, LOTS D, E, H, AND I, AKA LOTS D, E, N, AND O, BLOCK 71, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO RESOLUTION NO.24, SERIES OF 2002 PARCEL ID: 2737-073-14-001 WHEREAS, the applicants, The Frost Property LLC, represented by Camilla Auger and Studio B Architects, have requested Major Development Review (Conceptual), On -site Relocation, and Variances for the property located at 216 E. Hallam Street, Lots D, E, H; and I, aka Lots D, E, N, and O, Block 71, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. The property is listed on the "Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures;" and WHEREAS, Section 26.415.070 of the Municipal Code states that "no building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relocated or improved involving a designated historic property or district until plans or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review; and WHEREAS, for Conceptual Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to. determine the project's conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section 26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application Jo obtain additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny;- and WHEREAS, the application included requests for variances. In order to grant setback variances, according to Section 26.415.110.0 of the Muncipal Code, the HPC must find that the variance: a. Is similar to the pattern, features and character of the historic property or district; and/or b. Enhances or mitigates an adverse impact to the historic significance or architectural character of the historic property, an adjoining designated historic property or historic district; and WHEREAS, in order for HPC to grant an FAR bonus, per Section 26.415.110.E, HPC must find that: 1. In selected circumstances the HPC may grant up to five hundred (500) additional square feet of allowable floor area for projects involving. designated historic properties. To be considered for the bonus, it must be demonstrated that: a. The design of the project meets all applicable design guidelines; and 469509 Page: 1 of 4 07/05/2002 10:19F SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 20.00 D 0.00 P30 b. The historic building is the key element of the property and the addition is incorporated in a manner that maintains the visual integrity of the historic building and/or c. The work restores the existing portion of the building to its historic appearance; and/or d. The new construction is reflective of the proportional patterns found in the historic building's form, materials or openings; and/or e. The construction materials are of the highest quality; and/or f. An appropriate transition defines the old and new portions of the building; and/or g. The project retains a historic outbuilding; and/or h. Notable historic site and landscape features are retained; and WHEREAS, in order to grant a parking reduction, per Section 26.415.110.C, the following standard must be met: 1. The parking reduction and waiver of payment -in -lieu fees maybe approved upon a finding by the HPC that it will enhance or mitigate an adverse impact on the historic significance or architectural character of a designated historic property, an adjoining designated property or a historic district; and WHEREAS, the application included a request for approval of on -site relocation of the historic house and barn. In order to approve Relocation of a historic structure, per Section 26.415.090.C, the HPC must find that the proposal meets any one of the following standards: 1. It is considered a non-contributing element of a historic district and its relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; or 2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse impact on the historic district or property; or 3. The owner has obtained a Certificate of Economic Hardship; or 4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district in which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and Additionally, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met: 1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; and 2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and 3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation, repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the provision of the necessary financial security; and ' 459509 Page: 2 of 4 07/05/2002 10:19A SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 20.00 D 0.00 P31 WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report dated June 12, 2002, performed an analysis of the application based on the standards, and recommended that the project be approved with conditions; and WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on June 12 2002, the Historic Preservation Commission considered the application, found the application. was consistent with the "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and other applicable sections of the Municipal Code and approved the application with conditions by a vote of 4 to 1. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: HPC approves Major Development Review (Conceptual), Variances, and On -site Relocation for 216 E. Hallam Street, Lots D, E, H, and I, aka Lots D, E, N, and O, Block 71, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado with the conditions listed below. 1. The HPC hereby approves a waiver of one parking space, a 5' combined front and rear yard setback variance, a 2' west sideyard setback variance, a 7' combined sideyard setback variance, and a 500 square foot FAR bonus on the front lot. A 2' west sideyard setback variance and a 2' combined sideyard setback variance are approved for the rear lot. 2. The HPC recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the "Conditional Use" application for a duplex because the plan as proposed meets preservation concerns and is compatible with the historic resource. 3. Finalization of window and door locations and other detailing will have to be determined through demolition and discovery by removing the asphalt and the interior plaster to expose framing evidence and through photographic evidence -if any becomes available. This issue may wait until the time is appropriate to conduct the demolition work (which may be after HPC has granted Final approval for the project), and then will require a site inspection by the HPC and submittal and approval of drawings before a building permit application may be submitted. Any information discovered through historic photographs must be used to faithfully restore the house. 4. The current proposal must be restudied in regard to the entry. Neither entry porch or door may be removed or changed unless they can be documented to be recent alterations. 5. A complete east elevation of the Frost house must be provided at the June 12th hearing. 6. The Frost House may be moved as proposed. APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 12th day of June, 2002. Approved as to Form: Da id Hoefer, Assistant CNty Attorney 469,50.9 I I Page: 3 of 4 SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY Co 07/05/2002 10:19A R 20.00 D 0.00 P32 Approved as to content: HISTORIC PRESERVATI SuzannoRoid, Chair ATTEST: Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk ION 11111111111111111 SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO 459509 Page: 4 of 4 11111111 07/05/2002 10:19A R 20.00 D 0.00 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Joyce Ohlso�z"I�e u Y p ty City of Aspen Community Development Director DATE: July 2, 2002 RE: Little Ajax Townhomes /Affordable Housing Project - Consolidated Conceptual / Final PUD OWNERS: Parcel 1, located in the City, is owned by Aspen GK, LLC, and Parcel 2, located in Pitkin County, is owned by Burton B. Kaplan REPRESENTATIVE: Joe Wells of Joseph Wells Land Planning EXISTING ZONING: Parcel 1 is zoned R-15 / Parcel 2 is zoned -R-15 LOT SIZE: Parcel 1 is 8,213 sq. ft. Parcel 2 is 44,974 sq ft Total = 53,187 sq. ft. (or 1:22 acres) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions SUMMARY The owners -of Parcels 1 and 2, a property located at the 600 block of West Hopkins Avenue across from the Madsen Apartments, request land use approvals. to- develop the site to include eleven (11) "for -sale" affordable housing units and four (4) free market units. Because Parcel 2 is currently located in Pitkin County, the owners have requested the City annex the parcel into the City concurrently with the development review process. Assuming Parcel 2 is annexed into the City, the owners request the following land use approvals in order to conduct the proposed development: Final PUD Plan ➢ Subdivision ➢ Rezoning to AH/PUD 8040 Greenline Review ➢ GMQS Exemptions for Affordable Housing ➢ Waive of Residential Design Standards -Review ➢ Special Review PRC)C'V.gR This project received Conceptual PUD approval .in February 2001 from City Council, which is memorialized via Resolution No. 19, Series 2001(see Exhibit B). The Land Use Code requires that the Final PUD application be submitted to the City within on year of the Conceptual PUD approval. The Applicant was unable to meet this deadline; however, the Community Development Director determined that this "Final PUD" proposal may be processed as a Consolidated. Conceptual / Final PUD due to a significant community interest which the project would serve and that the four -step PUD process would be redundant and serve no public purpose since the development proposal received Conceptual PUD approval from City Council and has remained virtually unchanged since its original approval. As a result, the Applicant shall present the project to the Planning and Zoning Commission in. order to obtain a recommendation to the City Council. STAFF COMMENTS The subject site proposed for development contains 53,187 sq. ft. Parcel 1 (containing 8,213 sq. ft.) is located in the City of Aspen and zoned R-15. Parcel 2 (containing 44,974 sq. ft.) is located adjacent to Parcel 1 but is located in Pitkin County and zoned R-15. The owners of the parcels are requesting to annex Parcel 2 into the City of Aspen concurrently with this development. A brief description of the development proposal is as follows: I. Affordable Housing Units This project is primarily an affordable housing project. The Applicant proposes eleven (11) affordable housing units located in two separate buildings on the property described as the North Building located on West Hopkins Avenue at the north end of the site and the South Building located just 28 feet to the south (behind) of the North Building on the interior of the site. A brief description of the buildings is as follows: A. North Building Affordable Housing 2 The North Building faces West Hopkins Avenue on the north end of the site and contains four 3-bedroom units. The structure is two stories tall (approximately 21 feet tall from finished grade to a flat roof), includes 4 covered carport parking spaces -on the ground level, and contains 6,127 sq. ft. of floor area. The majority of the living space for the units is located on the second level with each unit containing a south (mountain -facing) balcony. Each unit has two bedrooms on the upper floor and one bedroom on the lower floor. Two of the units are Category 3 units and the other two units are Category 4 units. These units range in size from 1,293 sq. ft. to' 1,320 sq. ft. The entry for these four units is from the ground level. .B. South Building Affordable Housing The South Building is located 28 feet south of the North Building on the interior of the site and contains seven (7) units broken down in the following way: .2 Studio units containing 612 sq. ft. at Category 3 2 1-bedroom units containing 740-806 sq. ft. at Category 3 r 2 2-bedroom units containing 888-900 sq. ft. at Category 3 ➢ 12-bedroom unit containing 976 sq. ft. at Category 4 This structure is three stories tall (approximately 28 feet tall from finished grade to a flat roof), includes 11 covered/ sub -grade carport parking spaces located underneath, the first level level, and contains 6,589 sq. ft. of floor area. The majority of the living space for the units is located on the second and third levels with each unit containing a north -facing balcony onto the interior parking courtyard. The entry for three units is from the ground -level and there are staircases providing access to the four units on the upper level. These affordable housing structures will be totally located on Parcel 1 C. Free Market Units Located on the south portion of the property behind the South Building, this structure contains 17,278 sq. ft. in floor area and consists of four levels (approximately 32 feet tall from finished grade to a flat roof) that consistently follow the existing slope of the hillside southward. The structure includes eight (8) parking spaces located on the first level, and two 3-bedroom units and two 4-bedroom units. This free market structure will be totally located on Parcel 2. The only change from the Conceptual PUD plan includes two Accessory Dwelling Units* (containing between 456 and 593 sq. ft.) located at either end of the structure that are partially sub -grade and attached to the structure. II. Main Issues Discussed During Conceptual Approval The main issues discussed during the Conceptual PUD process included site access, density, traffic, trail connections, size, scale, and mass of buildings, Colorado Midland Right -of -Way, parking, .site plan, annexation, zoning, and rock fall hazards. Ultimately, City Council approved the Conceptual PUD Plan with a set of conditions to be addressed a part of the Final PUD Plan review process. A very brief discussion of those points include: 3 A. Access The current proposal is accessed via the 51h Street stub which is offset somewhat from the existing 5th Street across the street. There was discussion during conceptual review as to its potential alignment with the existing 51h Street. Ultimately, it was decided that -the proposed alignment that is slightly off could remain. However, the Applicant was required to' discuss the 51h Street access issue with the adjacent property owner to the east who recently received land use approvals to expand the Boomerang Lodge project. Staff believes both projects could benefit from a shared access off of West Hopkins Avenue. While the two parties discussed the issue, no agreement has been realized to date for any type of shared access. B. Environmental Hazards There are four apparent environmental hazards associated with the site which include 1) unprocessed rock mine waste, 2) potential subsidence due to. an unidentified mine shaft, 3) rock fall, and 4) a septic system which is still in place and may become an issue during the construction process. C. Trails There are two trails associated with the property; a trail that follows the Midland Right -of -Way and a second trail further up the south slope of the property. The lower trail follows along the Midland Right -of -Way from the east but terminates at the 5th Street ROW and turns towards West Hopkins Avenue. The Applicant was required during conceptual approval to dedicate both trails as public trail easements. In addition, Staff encouraged the Applicant to incorporate the lower trail into the site plan by continuing the trail through the site. The Applicant would like to continue the trail across the property between the affordable housing units and the free market units to the west side. The proposed final plat indicates these easements to be dedicated to the public. D. ADU The Applicant proposes two ADUs, which represent the only significant difference between the proposal that received conceptual approval and the current proposal. These are proposed to be located at each end of the free market building. The Applicant has included these units based on the comments provided by the Planning and Zoning Commission during the conceptual review. While Staff recognizes the value of the additional ADUs, their configuration and location are contrary to current ADU standards, in that, the units are slightly. sub - grade and attached. E. Subdivision / Lot -line Adjustment Once Parcel 2 has been annexed, the Applicant proposes to adjust the lot line between Parcel 1 and 2 to reflect the creation of two different homeowner's associations. This would effectively create Parcel 2 specifically containing the 4 free market units and the main access road and Parcel 1 containing the two .affordable housing structures. In effect, this allows for a separate homeowner's association to be created for each parcel. 0 III. Land Use Reviews In order to achieve the proposed development, the Applicant is required to apply for the following land use approvals: A. Subdivision The Applicant wishes to annex parcel 2 into the City then re -subdivide the property into Parcel 1 containing the two affordable housing structures, and Parcel 2 containing the free market structure. The Applicant is proposing to conduct a lot line adjustment to create this scenario that is exempt from subdivision. In addition, the Applicant is required to apply for subdivision to condominiumize the free market units as well as the for -sale affordable housing units. B. Special Review The Land Use Code requires that on -site parking for an affordable housing project is determine through Special Review. In this case, the on -site parking may also be determined as part of the Planned Unit Development process. C. GMQS Exemptions The 11 proposed affordable housing units are exempt from the provisions of the Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) as well as the 2 ADUs. In addition, the free market units proposed as part of this project are also exempt from GMQS because they are proposed in conjunction with an affordable housing project in the AH/PUD zone district. D. 8040 Greenline Review The subject property and development is .partially located within .150 feet of elevation of 8,040 feet above sea level, which requires review under the provisions of the City's Environmentally Sensitive Areas. These regulations specifically address the environmental and terrain hazards on the property such as subsidence, rock fall and avalanche hazards, and contaminated soils issues. E. Rezoning from Conservation & R-15 to L/TR The Applicant wishes to annex Parcel 2 into the City, which requires that a zoning designation be placed on that property. Assuming the property is annexed into the City, the Applicant requests to rezone -the entire property, Parcels 1 and 2, to Affordable Housing with a Planned Unit Development overlay (AH/PUD). It is this zoning that allows the ability to conduct such a proposal. IV. Affordable Housing & Rezoning The Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) reinforces the importance affordable housing plays in the community. The AACP. encourages the private sector to participate in providing housing rather than having that responsibility rest solely on the shoulders of the Housing Authority / City of Aspen. Further, the AACP places importance on evaluating each housing project regarding site location, project design, unit type, category mix, and proximity to the City's employment base (i.e. 5 the down town commercial core), to enhance the ability to walk to work or proximity to mass transit. Moreover, the purpose statement in the Affordable Housing / PUD zone. district acknowledges the necessity of including a limited component of free market units to offset the cost of developing. ("subsidizing") affordable housing costs. The Land Use Code requires affordable housing projects include a minimum of 70% of a project's bedrooms to be deed -restricted affordable housing. The remaining 30% may be free market bedrooms, which are exempt from GMQS. However, there is an exception to the rule; the project may be eligible for a reduction in the minimum affordable housing bedroom mix (to a level of 60% of the project's total bedrooms) if the Applicant can demonstrate to the satisfaction of City Council that -the project meets the requirements for an exceptional project as set forth in the Affordable Housing Guidelines. [It should be noted, as part of the Conceptual PUD review process, The Housing Authority recommended and the City Council approved that the project be deemed an exceptional project. The Applicant returned to the Housing Authority as part of this Final P UD review in order to obtain a second recommendation to City Council.] This project's main focus is affordable housing. As a result of the aforementioned, the Applicant is proposing this project be approved as an exceptional project. The project proposes 61% (22 bedrooms / 11 units) of "for -sale" affordable housing units and 39% (12 bedrooms / 4 units) free market units. A matrix below illustrates how the affordable units are configured regarding number of bedrooms, size and category. North Building: Unit ' No: of Bedrooms . Size. {sq.= ft) "Cafie;gory7777 2 3-bedroom 1,293-1,320 3 2 3-bedroom 17293-1,320 4 South Building: Be;droorns . Size: (sq;`ft) ....... : r :Category::..,_ .; 2 Studios 612 3 2 1-bedroom 740 & 806 3 2 2-bedroom 888 & 900 3 1 2-bedroom 976 4 AH Totals: Total AH To#A AH Bedrooms - Average AH Cate9orjr i 11 21 3.27 Rezoning I Currently, Parcel 2 in Pitkin County is zoned R-15 and Parcel 1 in the City is zoned R-15. Once Parcel 2 has been annexed into the City, the Applicant proposes to rezone both parcels to Affordable Housing / Planned Unit Development (AH/PUD). The AH/ PUD zone district's sole purpose is to provide a zoning that fosters the ability to develop affordable housing projects that are integrated throughout the City of Aspen. In addition, it is a planning mechanism that is significantly. supported -by the goals of the AACP, which are intended to maintain the balance between Aspen "the Community" and Aspen "the Resort." As mentioned above, there are primarily only two types of affordable housing projects the City allows in the AH / PUD zone district: 1) projects that contain 30% free market housing and 70% affordable housing and 2) projects that contain 40% free market housing and 60% affordable housing. The Little Ajax project is an example of the latter which as been deemed as an exceptional project by both the Housing Authority and the City Council. Planned Unit Developments are planning mechanisms that allow for projects to reestablish the dimensional requirements for a site -specific development plan using the underlying zone district as a guide. However, the AH / PUD allows projects to establish their dimensional requirements with no underlying guide. This is done in an effort to afford a development plan more flexibility due to the distinct community benefit (AH units) provided. Given this discussion., Staff finds that the proposed rezoning will further the affordable housing goals of the AACP which supports providing affordable housing within the City which promotes a more stable / reliable employment base for the local economy which is vested in the community while reducing the commuter traffic impact to Highway 82. Staff finds the development is consistent with the surrounding development that includes large structures that provide local resident housing. as well as tourist accommodations, and duplex and single-family long term residences. The development is located within walking distance to downtown and mass transit which reduces reliance on the automobile and remains consistent with the affordable housing policies as described in the Infill Report where free market units are recognized as an integral and necessary component to making affordable housing financially feasible. V. Site Environmental Issues & Hazards The subject property is located at the base of Shadow Mountain and was the intense focus of considerable silver mining activity during the late 1800s. As such, it is apparent that the site contains the remains of unprocessed rock (mine waste rock) from the mining activity as well as a potential abandoned mine shaft under a portion of the property. In addition, the southerly portion of the property (Parcel 2) contains steep slopes that are subject to potential rockfall hazards. Lastly, the lower portion (or most northern portion of Parcel 1 in the City) was the former home to the "Parlour Car Restaurant" which utilized a septic system that remains buried on the site. 7 As mentioned above, the project is subject to the 8040 Greenline Review regulations / standards. The map to the right illustrates the subject site and the applicable elevations that require this review who's purpose is to examine suitability for development considering issues such as steep slopes, ground stability characteristics, including mine subsidence, mud flow, rock fall, and avalanche danger. In addition, this review is the mechanism that requires the Applicant fully investigate soil content and provide adequate mitigation measures where required. The specific environmental issues regarding this site are discussed in detail below: ➢ Unprocessed Mine Waste Rock According to the Environmental Assessment and Geologic and Geotechnical Investigation (Exhibits D and E provided by the Applicant) conducted by CTL Thompson, Inc. as well as the On -Site Soils and Sampling Analysis (Exhibit G) conduced by Waste Engineering, a large portion of the site contains unprocessed mine waste rock (or mine tailings). In addition, these studies indicate that a mineshaft exists on the east side of the site although its exact location is unknown which represents_a potential subsidence issue. In order to properly mitigate the mine tailings on the site, the consultants recommend keeping the mine waste rock on -site by covering it with pavement, where allowed, and in landscaped areas by implementing the performance standards in Ordinance 25, Series of 1994 which have. been incorporated as conditions of approval. In addition, mine tailings should be covered by a minimum 1-foot clean soil in exposed and landscaped areas. If the project has excess soil and removal. from the site is required, removal of native soils is recommended, not the removal of fill or mine waste rock. (Please refer to Exhibit D - Phase I Environmental Site Assessment conducted by, CTL/Thompson, Inc, Consulting Engineers, page 2.) Further, the consultants also recommend analysis of the native soils prior to removal. It is possible that metal concentrations in . native soils will also be elevated and that proper disposal will be necessary. As a result of this and in keeping with the recommendations of the consultants, Staff shall require the Applicant to complete a "material handling plan" that incorporates proposed methods of compliance with the performance standards in Ordinance 25, Series 0 1994 prior to on -site construction to be reviewed by the City Environmental Health Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. Mine Shaft / Subsidence According to the Environmental Assessment and Geologic and Geotechnical Investigation (Exhibits D and E) conducted by CTL Thompson, Inc. indicate that a mineshaft exists on the east side of the site although its exact location is unknown which represents a potential subsidence issue. The Geologic and Geotechnical Investigation indicates that while the mineshaft most likely does not represent an environmental concern, it may represent subsidence issues. The consultants recommend the Applicant contact a specialist to perform a geophysical investigation to determine the exact location of the shaft or other potential voids in the soil. Staff will require the Applicant to contact a specialist to have this analysis completed for review by the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of building permits. In addition, Staff will require the Colorado Geologic Survey to conduct a site analysis for review by the Community. Development Department Engineer prior to the application of building permits. During a site visit to the property, Staff found what might appear to be a mine opening that has been boarded up on the southerly portion of the property among the mature conifers. Staff shall require as a condition of approval that the Applicant shall consult with the Colorado Geologic Survey to examine this potential mine portal and comment on its impact, if any, to the stability of the slope and the proposed development. The results of:_this analysis shall be presented in a report from the Colorado Geologic Survey to the Community Development Department Engineer prior, to the application for building permits. Rock FaI1 & SIope Issues The Applicant provided Staff with a Rock Fall Hazard Evaluation conducted by CTL Thompson, Inc. (attached to the Application as Exhibit F), which indicates southern portions of the site contain "moderate" rock fall hazards. The report indicates that the hazard can be effectively mitigated with supported / reinforced foundations on the free market structure as well as constructing a "Bruge Netting" barrier (rockfall fence) on the slope above the structure. Staff shall require the Applicant to comply with the consultant's recommendation to also provide for an MSE wall that protects the western side of the free market units where the Bruge fencing terminates. i Septic System The lower portion of Parcel 1 on West Hopkins was the former home to the "Parlour Car Restaurant" which had a septic system that remains buried on the site. According to the Environmental Assessment prepared by CTL Thompson, I Inc. and a Memorandum prepared by the City's Environmental Health Department, the contents of the septic tank vault, or seepage pit, must be properly disposed of. The emptied tank, vault, or pit must be filled with soil or rock, or the Environmental Health Department may require the tank or vault to be removed and disposed of properly. Staff shall require that if any part of the septic system is encountered during construction, the Applicant shall contact the EH Department for proper handling and disposal. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: While there are environmental issues. associated with the site, Staff finds that they can be adequately mitigated by following the consultant's recommendations, which have been incorporated as conditions of approval. This project also benefits the City in that the private sector will clean up the site from its current status regarding mine tailings. Staff supports this project because it provides quality affordable housing by the private sector in a location that is within easy walking distance to Aspen's downtown core as well as its close proximity to mass transit, which significantly reduces the reliance on the automobile. Further, the design quality of the units and their associated category levels have been deemed an exceptional project by the Housing Authority. The project as a whole remains very consistent and furthers the affordable housing, transportation, and design quality goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission approve this Resolution recommending approval to City Council. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to Approve Resolution No. ��, Series 2002, recommending City Council approve the Little Ajax Affordable Housing Project with the conditions stated herein." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Staff Findings for Land Use Code Review Standards Exhibit B: Resolution No. 19, Series 2001 granting Conceptual Approval Exhibit C: Application Exhibit D: Exhibit Supplement to the Application 10 RESOLUTION No. c. SERIES OF 2002 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVE A CONSOLIDATED CONCEPTUAL / FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE LITTLE AJAX AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT LOCATED ON THE 600 BLOCK OF HOPKINS AVENUE Parcel No. 2735-124-00-003 WHEREAS, the Community Development Director received an application from Aspen GK, LLC, owner, represented by Joe Wells, for a Consolidated Conceptual / Final Planned Unit Development approval for an affordable housing project at the 600 block of West Hopkins Avenue, City of Aspen; and WHEREAS, the owner renamed the project which received Conceptual Planned Unit development approval from "New West Hopkins Affordable Housing Project" to "Little Ajax Affordable Housing Project" for this Consolidated Conceptual and Final PUD; and WHEREAS, the owner of the "Little Ajax Affordable Housing Project" requests additional land use approvals including Subdivision, Rezoning to AH/PUD, 8040 Green line Review, GMQS Exemptions, waiver of the Residential Design Standards Review, and Special Review as part of the Planned Unit Development review for this project; and WHEREAS, the subject property is approximately 53,187 sq. ft. is located partially in the City of Aspen and partially in Pitkin County, and is located in the R-15 zone district for both jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Director determined that this Consolidated Conceptual and Final PUD shall effectively serve as the Final Planned Unit Development for this project because of a significant community interest which the project would serve and that the four -step PUD process would be redundant and serve no public purpose since the development proposal received Conceptual PUD approval from City Council and has remained virtually unchanged as currently submitted; and . WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning shall provide a recommendation to City Council for a Consolidated Conceptual / Final Planned Unit Development, during a duly noticed public meeting after considering a recommendation from the Community Development Director, comments from the general public, and recommendations from relevant referral agencies; and 11 the applicant received Conceptual Planned Unit Development WHEREAS, PP al from the Aspen City Council on February 12, 2001 which is memorialized via approval . Resolution No. 19, Series 2001; and WHEREAS, during a public hearing held on July 2002, the Planning and l to vote, to recommend City Council Zoning Commission voted, by a to g dated Conceptual /Final Planned approve the Little Ajax Affordable Housing Consolidated P Unit Development with the conditions, and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the merit proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the #. develop p P oposal, with conditions,.is cons approval of the development pr elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHER EAS, the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, T HEREFORE, ' BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING . COM MISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO ON THIS 2 ndDAY O DULY, THAT: Section 1 Planning and Zoning Commission recommends the City Council approve the LUn t Theg Ajax Affordable Housing Project. Consolidated Conceptual / Final enline Review, g to AH/PUD, 8040 Gre development including Subdivision, Rezoning GMQPS Exemptions, waiver of Residential Design Standards Review;- and Special Review with the following conditions: icant shall contact the Environmental Health Department in the event that 1) The Appl . an art of the septic system is encountered during construction for proper handling yP and disposal. ant shall with the consultant's recommendation to also provide for 2) The Applicant comply P y an MSE wall that protects the western side of the free market units where the Bruge fencing terminates. A licant shall contact a specialist to conduct a geophysical investigation.for 3) Thepp regarding the location of the mineshaft in order to determine the pot nmmunit ytial subsidence. This report shall be submitted for review by th Development Department prior to the issuance of building permits. 4) The Applicant shall contact the Colorado Geologic Survey to conduct a site analyst g he is regarding potential rock fall hazard and potential subsidence issues related to b presence of a mine shaft for review by the Community Development Departmen P . prior to the issuance of building permits. 12 5) The Applicant shall provide a 12' wide public trail easement for the lower trail across the property as required by the Parks Department. This 12' wide public trail easement shall be depicted on the Final _Plat and recorded in the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office prior top the submission of building permits. 6) The Applicant shall complete all the necessary tree removal permits and pay the applicable tree removal mitigation fees to the City of Aspen Parks Department prior to the submission for building permits. 7). The Applicant shall file a deed restriction with the Aspen/ Pitkin County Housing Authority for the two (2) Accessory Dwelling Units prior to the final inspection for the four free market units on Parcel 2. 8) Applicant shall consult with the Colorado Geologic Survey to examine the existence of a potential mine portal on the southerly portion of the site located within . the mature conifers and comment on its impact, if any, to the stability of the slope and the proposed development. The results of this analysis shall be presented in a report from the Colorado Geologic Survey to the Community Development Department prior to the application for building permits. 9) The Applicant shall provide the City with a mine waste testing and handling plan that complies with the following conditions of approval as memorialized in Ordinance No. 25, Series 1994 regarding the handling of any contaminated soils encountered on the property prior to the application for building permits: a) Any disturbed soil or material that is to be stored above ground shall be securely contained on and covered with a non -permeable tarp or -other protective barrier, approved by the Environmental Health Department so as to prevent leaching of contaminated material onto or into the surface' soil. Disturbed soil or material need not be removed if the City's Environmental Health Department finds that: 1) the excavated material contains less than 1,000 parts per million (ppm) of total lead, -or 2) that there exists a satisfactory method of disposal at the excavation site. Disturbed soil and solid waste may be disposed of outside of the site upon acceptance of the material at a duly licensed and authorized receiving facility. b) Non -removal of contaminated material. No contaminated soil or solid waste shall be removed, placed, stored, transported or disposed of outside the boundaries of the site without having first obtained any and all necessary State and/ or Federal transportation and disposal permits. c) Dust suppression. -All activity or development shall be accompanied by dust suppression .measures such as the application of water or other soil surfactant to minimize the creation and release of dust and ogler particulates into the air. 13 d) Vegetable and flower gardening and cultivation. No vegetables or flowers shall be planted or cultivated within the boundaries of the site except in garden beds consisting of not less than twelve (12) inches of soil containing no more than 999- ppm lead. e) Landscaping. The planting of trees and shrubs and the creation or installation of landscaping features requiring the dislocation or disturbance of more than ,l (1) cubic yard of soil shall require a permit as provided in Section 7-143 (4). f) Any contaminated soil or mine waste rock to be left on -site shall be placed under structures or pavement. Soils used in landscaped areas or engineered fills shall be covered by a minimum of 1 foot of clean soil that contains less than 1,000 ppm lead.) 10) The Applicant shall comply with the established Planned Unit . Development dimensional requirements for the Affordable Housing / Planned Unit development (AH/PUD) zone .district as follows: �tmenstonl Requirement :. f _' (AH`Un�ts} Lot 2 E y (Free lYlarket) Minimum Lot Size (square feet) 13,939 sq. ft. 39,204 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling Unit 1,267 sq. ft. 9,801 sq. ft. Maximum Allowable Density (4) 1-bedroom units x 500 sq. ft. / unit (3) 2-bedroom units x 1,000 sq. ft. / unit (4) 3-bedroom units x 1,500 sq. ft. ! unit (2) 3-bedroom units x 1,500 sq. ft. / unit (2) 4-bedroom units x 2,000 sq. ft. / unit Minimum Lot Width 115 feet 20 feet (at access point) Minimum Front Yard Setback 5 feet 35 feet Minimum West Side Yard Setback 5 feet 5 feet Minimum East Side Yard Setback 0 feet et Minimum Rear Yard Setback 20 feet 40 feet Maximum Site Coverage 6,723 sq. ft 7,109 sq. ft Maximum Height North Building: 22 feet South Building: 28.5 feet 33 feet Minimum Distance b/w Buildings 15 feet 15 feet Minimum Percent of Open Space 55% Trash Access Area On each end of the free market building an at the east end of the south AH building Allowable Floor Area (FAR) Total Allowable: 29,994 sq. ft. Minimum Off Street Parking 15 parking spaces 8 parking spaces 11) The Applicant shall be required to provide the adjacent property to the east with an access easement via the proposed Little Ajax driveway to access two parking spots on the west end of the Boomerang property. 12) The Applicant shall be required to provide a sidewalk, curb, and gutter at the time of this development as shown on the proposed development plans. These improvements shall be designed using the City's engineering standards. In addition, the tree species and landscaping to be provided in the planter strip between the curb and gutter and the sidewalk shall be approved by the City Parks Department. 14 13) The Applicant shall install the Bruge fence and MSE wall as recommended by CTL Thompson in their engineering report in order to protect the buildings from potential rock falls. The Applicant may also propose an acceptable alternative to the above recommendation to the Community Development Director. 14) The Applicant shall provide the City Community Development Department Engineer with a drainage. and grading plan in order to determine that storm water runoff detention for post -development flows do not exceed pre -development flows. 15) The Applicant shall contact the City Community Development Department in order to determine an appropriate street name for the entrance to the property in order to assist emergency vehicle response. 16) The Applicant shall calculate the established allowable roof height from existing grade, not the grade after the site has been re -graded. 17) The Applicant shall re-examine the emergency access and confirm with the City Fire Department that no problems exist. Further, the Applicant shall install sprinkler systems and alarms pursuant to the regulations of the City Fire Department. The Applicant shall inform the City Water Department regarding the sprinkler requirements prior to the application for building permits. 18) The Applicant shall re -seed disturbed areas with natural vegetation pursuant to the recommendation of the City Parks Department. The Applicant may obtain these seed mixes from the Parks Department. 19) The Applicant shall provide an erosion control plan to the City Parks and Engineering Departments. Specifically, the Applicant shall install 1) silt -fencing and hale bales across the middle and front of the property below disturbed areas and 2) fencing to protect existing vegetation 20) The Applicant shall submit a refined landscaping plan to the Parks Department prior to the application for building permits that indicates the specifications. for the irrigation system that will be installed in the public ROW. 21) The Applicant shall include appropriate language in the Final PUD Agreement for Lot 5 and its associated condominium documentation regarding the homeowner's association for Lot 5 (to be reviewed and approved by Staff) that ensures that the 11 AH units shall comply with the representations made in the application, adhere to the conditions of this Final PUD Approval, and comply with the required deed restrictions as administered by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority so that the owners of said units shall not be unduly burdened by a disproportionate share of responsibilities associated with the ownership of these units. 22) The Applicant shall complete and provide the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District with a "Line Extension Request" and a "Collection System Agreement" for the main 15 line extension. In addition, since all of the units will be condominiumized, the Applicant shall obtain a Shared Service Agreement for the owner -of each unit. 23) The Applicant shall provide a handling and waste* disposal plan that complies with City Environmental Health Department requirements for the abandonment .of the existing septic system. This plan shall be provided to and approved by the City Environmental Health Department prior to the application of building permits. 24) The Applicant shall develop additional "traffic reduction measures" for the project prior to building permit issuance in order to comply with code requirements. The Applicant should work with the City Environmental Health Department to determine whether the measures are sufficient. 25) The Applicant shall consult with an engineering firm about design of the carport parking ventilation system to ensure that ventilation is adequate to prevent carbon monoxide from reaching high levels inside the carports or in the units above them. This is a concern because the carports are under overhanging units with bedrooms inunediately above the parking spots, so that fumes might collect beneath sleeping areas in areas where air circulation is poor. An engineer who specializes in design of heating and ventilation systems must certify that the proposed design will prevent excessive levels of carbon monoxide from concentrating inside the carports .or in buildings above. 26) The Applicant shall pay the required School Land Dedication Fee to the City of Aspen, which is due and payable at the time of building permit application for the development. This fee shall be assessed at the rate of the regulations and calculations in effect at the time of the building permit application. 27) The Applicant shall pay the required Park Development Impact Fee to the City of Aspen, which is due and payable at the time of building permit -application for the development. This fee shall be assessed at the rate of the regulations and calculations in effect at the time of the building permit application. 28) The Applicant shall include appropriate language in the Final PUD Agreement and it's associated condominium documentation regarding the homeowner's association for Parcels 1 and 2 (to be reviewed and approved by Staff) that ensures that the 11 affordable housing units on Parcel 1 shall not be unduly burdened by a disproportionate share of responsibilities associated with the free market units on Parcel 2. 29) One of the Category 3 studio units shall be priced between the maximum sales price of Category 2 and Category 3 and that the Category 4 two -bedroom unit sales price shall be priced between Category 3 and Category 4. 30) The construction of the affordable housing units shall be built in conjunction with the free market units. and that the approval of the Certificate of Occupancy for the deed- 16 restricted units be prior to or in conjunction with the Certificate of Occupancy for the free-market units. 31) The affordable housing units shall be deed -restricted prior to building permit approval or at the time of Final Plat approval, along with all other required documents; i.e., Subdivision Improvements Agreement, Declaration of Covenants, etc., and that these documents shall be reviewed by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority for approval. 32) The affordable housing units shall be listed with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority at the time of Certificate of Occupancy and shall be sold through the lottery process. 33) The maximum sales prices for the deed -restricted units shall be set at the prices stated in the Guidelines in effect at the time of Final Plat approval. 34).The accessory dwelling units shall be deed restricted prior to building permit approval for the free market units and abide by the conditions established under Section 26.520.050 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code, 35) Prior to Certificate of Occupancy for the free-market units associated with the accessory dwelling units, a site visit shall be conducted for compliance. Section 2 All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals herein awarded, whether in public meeting or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorizing entity. ,iectinn I This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any section 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 ordinance. Sectinn d If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed. a separate, distinct, and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. ,�ectinn _5 That the City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this Resolution, to record a copy of this Resolution in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. 17 -"4 Section 6 hearing on this Resolution was held on the 2nd day of July, at 4:30 in the City A publicg Sist er Cities Room, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearin a ublic notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation g P within the City of Aspen. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on July 2nd, 2002. S TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING APPROVED A COMMISSION: City Attorney Jasmine Tygre, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk UN Exhibit A: Review Standards. I. Consolidated Conceptual & Final Planned Unit Development A. General Requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding Staff finds this project is not only consistent with many of the goals of the AACP, it f irthers them. While there are environmental issues associated with the site, Staff finds that they can be adequately mitigated by following the consultant's recommendations, which .have been. incorporated as conditions of approval. This project also benefits the. City in that the private sector will clean up the site from its current status regarding mine tailings, which betters Aspen's environment. Staff supports this project because it provides quality affordable housing by the private sector in a location that is within easy walking distance to Aspen's downtown core as well as easy access to mass transit, which significantly reduces the reliance on the automobile. Additionally, the design quality of - the units and their associated category levels have been deemed an exceptional project by the Housing Authority. The project as a whole remains very consistent and furthers the affordable housing, transportation, and design quality goals of the AACP. Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission approve this Resolution reconunending approval to City Council. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent - with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. Staff Finding The surrounding area includes a variety of land uses that consist of single-family dwellings, lodges, duplexes, and multi -family dwellings. As a result, the character of the surrounding land uses is as varied as the types of structures and their residents. This projects proposes 61 % affordable housing for local working residents and 39% free. market units that will most likely serve as second home / tourist type units. Both of these. uses already existing in the immediate neighborhood. For example, the Madsen Apartments directly across the street have historically housed and currently continue to house local working residents. The Boomerang Lodge across the street has long provided for tourist accommodations. Both examples are consistent with the proposed development. Additionally, the surrounding zone districts are primarily long-term residential types of uses. Clearly, the intent of the affordable housing units is to provide long-term residential housing for the Pitkin County's locally working residents. Staff finds this project is consistent with these surrounding uses. 19 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future. development of the surrounding area. Staff Finding A large portion of the site proposed to be developed through this project is covered with residual mine waste in the form of mine tailings and debris form intensive silver mining activity. This development will clean up much of the waste soils that have been placed on the site to date. In Staff s view this action / mitigation will make the site more attractive and clean the site with respect to the soils. As a result, Staff finds the proposed development will not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area., 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. Staff Finding The 11 proposed affordable housing units are exempt from the provisions of. the Growth Management Quota -System (GMQS) as well as the 2 ADUs. In addition, the free market units, proposed as part of this project are also exempt from GMQS when they are proposed in the AH zone district. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD ... The dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining, the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. Durina review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. Staff Finding The PUD provides a mechanism to adjust the underlying zoning's dimensional requirements for ,particular developments, which is appropriate for a site that is 27,000 square feet or larger. Indeed that is the case for the Little Ajax site. The Applicant. proposes to rezone the property to Affordable Housing / PUD which requires the Applicant to establish the dimensional requirements through a Final PUD Development Plan pursuant to the list provided in Section 26.7 10.11 O(D) in the land use code. Staff provides the following matrix below to illustrate the proposed dimensional requirements for this project. Dimensional Lof Lot 2 r ' Requirement `k f (AH Vnits tFree Market } s Minimum Lot Size (square feet) 13,939 sq, ft. 39,204 sq. ft. Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling Unit 1,267 sq. ft. 9,801 sq. ft. Maximum Allowable (4) 1-bedroom units x 500 sq. ft. / unit (2) 3-bedroom units x 1,500 sq. ft. / unit 20 Density (3) 2-bedroom units x 1,000 sq. ft. / unit (2) 4-bedroom units x 2,000 sq. ft. / unit (4) 3-bedroom units x 1,500 sq. ft. / unit Minimum Lot Width 115 feet 20 feet (at access point) Minimum Front Yard 5 feet 35 feet Setback Minimum West Side Yard 5 feet 5 feet Setback Minimum East Side Yard 0 feet 5 feet Setback Minimum Rear Yard 20 feet 40 feet Setback Maximum Site Coverage 6,723 sq. ft 7,109 sq. ft Maximum Height North Building; 22 feet 33 feet South Building: 28.5 feet Minimum Distance b/w 15 feet 15 feet Buildings Minimum Percent of Open Space o 55 /o Trash Access Area On each end of the free market building an at the east end of the south AH building Allowable Floor Area Total Allowable: 23,238 sq. ft. (FAR) Total Allowable: 29,994 sq. ft. Minimum Off Street Parking 15 parking spaces 8 parking spaces 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property_ are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property: . a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b) Natural and man-made hazards. .c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and landforms. d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. Staff Finding The proposed dimensional requirements are appropriate and compatible with the surrounding area. More specifically, the proposed heights of the three buildings are consistent with the requirements of the surrounding R-6, R-15, and R/MF zone districts of 25 feet with the exception of the free market at the rear of the site. Regarding scale and massing, there already exist structures that are compatible in size and relationship to West Hopkins Avenue such the Madsen Apartments and the Boomerang Lodge. The. proposed dimensional requirements dictate to some degree where structures will be placed on the site. Due to the existing mine tailings on the site the three structures and associated impervious asphalt surfaces will cover a portion of the site that will effectively contain these mine tailings as recommended by the report provided by CTL Thompson. 21 Due to an apparent mine shaft on the property that could cause subsidence, Staff has required the Applicant to contact a specialist to conduct a geophysical investigation regarding the location of the mineshaft in order to determine the potential for subsidence. This report shall be submitted for review by the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of building permits. There are steep slopes on the southern portion ,of the site (Parcel 2). Due to potential rock fall hazards, Staff has required the Applicant to comply with the CTL Thompson's recommendations that the hazard can be effectively mitigated with supported / reinforced foundations on the free market structure as well as constructing a ."Bruge Netting" barrier (rockfall fence) on the slope above the structure. Staff shall require the Applicant to comply with the consultant's recommendation to also provide for an MSE wall that protects the western side of the free market units inhere the Bruge fencing terminates. According to the Environmental Health Department, the proposed development will generate approximately 129 vehicle trips per day. However, these trips will most certainly be reduced due to the project's location to mass transit and the downtown core. The Applicant is also required to construct sidewalks in front of the entire property along West Hopkins Avenue, which will add to the pedestrian experience along West Hopkins as it will connect and be similar to the approved Boomerang project to the east. Further, the Applicant is required to dedicate a public trail easement to the City of Aspen for both the upper and lower trails that cross the property. Staff finds this. project is not a significant traffic impact to the area due to the likely limited vehicle use of residents of the affordable housing units. Staff .finds that the proposal and the required conditions of approval satisfy this standard. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale,- massing, and quantity of open space and site .coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding, area. Staff Finding There presently exist structures of similar scale and massing to the structures that are proposed as part of this development such as the Madsen Apartments and the Boomerang Lodge. The site is over 50,000 sq. - t. (slightly over an acre) in area, of which, only a small portion of the site is proposed for development. The adjacent properties to the north, east, and west are presently developed by multi -family structures, single-family dwellings and a proposed lodge expansion of the Boomerang Lodge. 3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. 22 d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. Staff Finding The proposal provides the required number of parking spaces for the free market structures and 15 spaces for 11 affordable housing units as well as the required space .for each of the ADUs . More particularly, the development provides affordable housing within the City which promotes a more stable / reliable employment base for the local economy which is vested in the community while reducing the commuter traffic impact to Highway 82. The development is located within walking distance to downtown and mass transit, which reduces reliance on the automobile. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to service the proposed development. b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance- to the proposed development. Staff Finding The proposal address the issues of water pressure, drainage, other utilities as well as sufficient access for fire protection, snow removal and road maintenance. S. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if.• a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground instability or the possibility of mudflow, rockfalls or avalanche dangers. b) The effects of the proposed development are. detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and consequent water pollution. c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City. d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. Staff Finding The proposal outlines the use of a Bruge fence to mitigate the dangers of rock falls as outlined in the application. The proposed development is taking into account the issues of natural watershed, runoff, drainage, soil erosion and water pollution. Further, the proposal does not have a pernicious effect on air quality and the design and location of the project is located away from the natural features of the site. 23 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's physical constraints. Specifcally, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if: a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area plan to which the property is subject. b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in subparagraphs 4 and S, above, those areas can be avoided, or those characteristics mitigated c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern, land uses, and characteristics. Staff Finding The proposed project is within. the allowable density requirements as outlined in the AH/PUD zone district. B. Site Design: The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. S. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately de -signed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. STAFF FINDING The project is clustered so that natural features the site and open space are preserved. The structures are appropriately oriented to West Hopkins Avenue and contribute to the urban context. The Applicant complies with the requirements for emergency and service vehicle access, is proposing units that comply various entities for handicap access and 24 there is a proposed trail running through the middle of the project for pedestrian access to I the property. The Applicant will comply with the site drainage requirements of the Community Development Engineer and the City Engineering' Department to ensure adequate drainage. Standard 7 is .not applicable as there are no non-residential uses proposed. C. Landscape Plan: The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: I. The landscape plan exhibits a well designed treatment of exterior spaces, preserving existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. STAFF FINDING The City of Aspen Parks Department has reviewed the proposal for issues that relate to tree removal, revegetation and erosion control. The Parks Department, through several conditions of approval, believes the landscape plan satisfies the above three standards. D. Architectural Character: It is the purpose of this standard to encourage architectural interest, variety, character, and visual identity in the proposed development -and within the City while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the building's proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of materials, and other attributes which may significantly represent the character of the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan and architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development shall. 1. be compatible with or enhance . the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the intended use, and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less -intensive mechanical systems. 2. Accommodate the storage and shielding of snow, ice, and water in a safe an appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. STAFF FINDING As previously mentioned, this proposed multi -family project is located adjacent to a the Boomerang Lodge, which operates as a short term tourist accommodation, and the Madsen Apartments, which is a multi -family complex. Therefore, the project 25 F respects scale and massing of nearby resources. The proposed materials for the project are neutral in color, allowing the buildings to sit on the site. Due to the P J erty 's location in proximity to Shadow Mountain, the use of solar access would prop be difficult to accomplish. The Applicant is proposing highly efficient radiant heat k and boilers and large windows will allow for the use of natural light. E. Lighting: will be The purpose of this standard is to ensure the exterior of the development generalligln ed in an appropriate manner considering both public safe y a aesthetic concerns. The following standards shall be accomplished. or hazardous 1. All lighting is proposed so as to prevent or lands. irect glare ighting of site interference of any king to adjoining streets features, structures, and access ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. 2. All exterior lighting shall be in compliance with tin inOihefinalgIPUD Standards unless otherwise approved and,°tl ndscd e elements, and documents. Up -lighting of site features, buildings P lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. ..STAFF FINDING Applicant is wired to comply with Section 26.575.150 of the Aspen Municipal Code. The Applicant The q is proposing shielded, down -directional fixtures for the trails and sidewalks. F. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area: ace, or If the proposed development includes a common en ankthe open PUD, recreation area for the mutual benefit of all develop proposed the following criteria shall be met: The proposed osed amount, location, and design of the common parkopen 1. P Pproposed space, or recreation area enhances the character structures 1 and natural development, considering existing and prop, provides visual relief to io SPrQ property's landscape features of the property, uses built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the v and property users of the PUD. 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park t, and-recreationalot or areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposedel al inn a strument for the 3. There is proposed an adequate assurilar manner. ance througha a f open space areas, an permanent care and maintenance os, recreation residential shared facilities together with a deed restriction aaaanst future commercial, or industrial development. STAFF FINDING site will be open space at the completion of the project. The As proposed, 5 5 /a of the sl P ace will be handled through the homeowners' s maintenance of the open spto the unit A proportionate interest in the commons areas will bdeeded inope require a PUD tuity owners. Any additional development on the property amendment and the Applicant has agreed to take additional measures ta ou r covenants to assure the permanent care and maintenance of the open space an shared facilities. 26 G. Utilities and Public Facilities: The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose any undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated,with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. .2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. 4. Oversized ` utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. STAFF FINDING The Applicant has been working with Schmueser Gordon Meyer, as well as the necessary. parties in the. City of .Aspen to insure that adequate infrastructure facilities will be installed to accommodate this development. The Applicant will make any _necessary improvements to mitigate adverse impacts on the public infrastructure and are willing to install oversized facilities if that is deemed necessary by the City of Aspen. L Access and Circulation. (Only standards 1 &2 apply to Minor PUD applications) The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet thefollowing, criteria: 1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD -has adequate access to a public street either directly or througah an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. 3. Areas of historic pedestrian or recreational trail use, improvements of, -or connections to, the bicycle and pedestrian trail system, and adequate access to significant public lands and the rivers are provided through dedicated public trail easements and are proposed for appropriate improvements and maintenance. 4. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan and adopted specific plans regarding recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and transportation are proposed to be implemented in an appropriate manner. 5. Streets in the PUD which are proposed or recommended to be retained under private ownership provide appropriate dedication to public use to ensure appropriate public and emergency access. 27 P44 6. Security gates, guard posts, .or other entryway expressions for the PUD, or for lots within the PUD, are minimized to the extent practical. STAFF FINDING The proposed development has adequate access via West Hopkins Avenue and through proposed private driveways within the project. Based on the location of the project, composition. of the residents and staff analysis, the development will not, create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the development to such an extent that improvements will need to be made to the road. The applicant is .proposing two trails within the project that will serve both the residents of the project and the public. The proposal is consistent with the AACP and adopted plans regarding trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths and transportation. The final PUD documents will allow for limited public use .of the streets for emergency access and there are no security gates or guard posts being proposed. Other entryway expressions will be minimized. H. Phasing of Development Plan. 1. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. 2. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate. improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees -in -lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. 3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees -in -lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable _housing, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. STAFF FINDING The Applicant is planning on completing the project in one phase and will mitigate any necessary impacts as required with each step in the project 28 P45 TT r'7 • I 1 TT / TT TT JUL. L-JU11111V14 lu 1-kn i r uL A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this Title. Staff Finding The Applicant wishes to annex Parcel 2 into the City, which requires that a zoning designation be placed on that property. Assuming the property is annexed into the City, the Applicant requests to rezone ,the entire property, Parcels 1 and 2, to Affordable Housing with a Planned Unit Development overlay (AH/PUD). It is this zoning that allows the ability to conduct such a proposal. Staff finds the very nature and purpose of the proposed zone district of AH/ PUD is not in conflict with any portions of this title. Currently, Parcel 2 in Pitkin County is zoned R-15 and Parcel 1 in the City is zoned R-15. Once Parcel 2 has been annexed into the City, the Applicant proposes to rezone both parcels to Affordable Housing / Planned Unit Development. (AH/PUD). The AHI PUD zone district's sole purpose is to provide a zoning that fosters the ability to develop affordable housing projects that are integrated throughout the City of Aspen. In addition, it is a planning mechanism that is significantly supported by the goals of the AACP, which are intended to maintain the balance between Aspen "the 29 P46 Community" and Aspen "the Resort." As mentioned above, there are primarily only two types of affordable housing . projects the City allows in the AH / PUD zone district: 1) projects that contain 30% free market housing and 70% affordable housing and 2) projects that contain 40% free market housing and 60% affordable housing. The Little Ajax project is an example -of the latter which as been deemed as an exceptional project by both the Housing Authority and the City Council. Planned Unit Developments are planning mechanisms that allow for projects to reestablish the dimensional requirements for a site -specific development plan using the underlying zone district as a guide. However, the AH / PUD allows projects to establish their dimensional requirements with no underlying guide. This. is done in an effort to afford a development plan more flexibility due to the distinct community benefit (AH units) provided. Staff finds that the proposed rezoning will further the affordable housing .goals of the AACP which supports providing affordable housing within the City which promotes a more stable / reliable employment base for the local economy which is vested in the community while reducing the commuter traffic impact to Highway 82. Staff finds the development is consistent with the surrounding development that includes large structures that provide local resident housing as well as tourist accommodations, and duplex and single-family long term residences. The development is located within walking distance to downtown and mass transit which reduces reliance on the automobile and remains consistent with the affordable housing policies as described in the Infill Report where free market units are recognized as an integral and necessary component to making affordable housing financially feasible. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding The project as a whole remains very consistent and furthers the affordable housing, transportation, and design. quality goals of the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP). More specifically, the AACP reinforces the importance affordable housing plays in the community. The AACP encourages the private sector ' to participate in providing housing rather than having that responsibility rest solely on the shoulders of the Housing Authority / City of Aspen. Further, the AACP places importance on evaluating each housing project regarding site location, project design, unit type, category mix, and proximity to the City's employment base (i.e. the down town conunercial core), to enhance the ability to walk to work or proximity to mass transit. Moreover, the purpose statement in the Affordable Housing / PUD zone district acknowledges the necessity of including a limited component of free market units to offset the cost of developing ("subsidizing") affordable housing costs. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding, zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. 30 P47 Staff Finding The surrounding area includes a variety of land uses that consist of single-family dwellings, lodges, duplexes, and multi -family dwellings. As a result, the character of the surrounding land uses , is as varied as the types of structures and their residents. This projects proposes 61 % affordable housing for local working residents and 39 % free market units that will most likely serve as second home / tourist type units. Both of these uses already existing in the immediate neighborhood. For example, the Madsen _Apartments directly across the street have historically housed and currently continue to house local working residents. The Boomerang Lodge across the street has long provided for tourist accommodations. Both examples are consistent with the proposed development. Additionally, the surrounding zone districts are primarily long-term residential types of uses. Clearly, the intent of the affordable housing units is to provide long-term residential housing for the Pitkin County's locally working residents. Staff finds this project is consistent with. these surrounding uses. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Staff Finding The applicant calculated a trip generation figure of 5.86 trips per day based on the standards of the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE). This figure is a relatively high estimate due to the close proximity of the site to the commercial core and due to the fact that this figure takes into account the free-market townhomes, which will most likely not be occupied year round. Even with this over -estimation, the increase will have a minor impact on the surrounding streets. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Staff Finding A project of this size will not result in the over -capacity of such public facilities as transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, school and emergency medical facilities. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Finding The structures on this lot will be limited to' -the lower, flatter portions of the site, therefore limiting the amount of excavation and alteration of the lower part of 31 M.i: Shadow Mountain. Further, the applicants are taking steps to assure the fill located on site is properly handled and utilized. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible . with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff Finding The applicant is proposing quality, livable affordable housing in a mixed -use neighborhood. The City of Aspen Municipal Code provides incentives for such projects and therefore this project is consistent and compatible with the community character of the City. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff Finding A development on the adjacent property has been approved for a combined lodge and affordable housing use. The rest of the neighborhood is mixed -use with a variety of lodge and multi -family complexes. The proposed use and rezoning .to AH/PUD is consistent with the surrounding neighborhood and other proposed developments. L Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest and whether it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this Title. Staff Finding The proposed amendment is consistent with the guidelines outlined in the Aspen Area Community Plan as well as the Aspen Municipal__ Code, which provides incentives and exemptions for AH/PUD projects. III. 8040 Greenline Review This provision of the code requires all development located at, above, or within 150 feet below the 8,040-foot elevation in the city limits of Aspen to be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission. No development shall be permitted at, above, or one hundred fifty (150) feet below the 8040 Greenline unless the Planning and Zoning Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all requirements set forth below. The development is proposed to take place within the 150-foot elevation below the 8040 Greenline as depicted on the following map (next page): 32 P49 1) The parcel on which the proposed development is to be located is suitable for development considering its slope, ground stability characteristics, including mine subsidence and the possibility of mud flow, rockfalls and avalanche dangers. If the parcel is found to contain hazardous or toxic soils, the applicant shall stabilize and revegetate the soils, or, where necessary, cause them to be removed from the site to a location acceptable to the city. Staff Finding The lower benches of the proposed development are suitable for development once the issues of the septic system and the mine rock waste are handled. The applicant is complying with the suggestions of their consultants, CTL/Thompson, related to both these matters and -there are conditions of approval in the proposed resolution which require addressing these two issues. As for the rockfall hazard, the applicants are installing a Bruge fence to protect the residential units. Z) The proposed development does not have a significant adverse affect on the natural watershed, runoff, drainage, and soil erosion or have consequent effects on water pollution. 33 P50 Staff Finding The proposed development will not have a significant adverse impact on the natural watershed, runoff, drainage and soil erosion nor will it have consequent effects on water pollution. Drainage on site will be , designed to comply with City standards and areas disturbed during construction will be revegetated following the completion of the project. 3) The proposed development does not have .a significant adverse affect on the'air duality in the city. Staff Finding The development' -will not have a significant adverse impact on the air quality in the City. Through using the ITE standards, it was determined traffic generation will be minimal and the applicants will only install gas appliances in the project. 4) The design and location of any proposed development, road, or trail is compatible with the terrain on the parcel on which the proposed development is to be located. Staff Finding The road will be limited to providing access the proposed units on the property. The utilities will be extended underground to the unit and the lower pedestrian trail will be designed to go through the proposed development. The upper trail will generally follow an existing game trail. S) Any grading will minimize, to the extent practicable, disturbance to the terrain, vegetation and natural land features. Staff Finding Grading will be minimized to the lower benches of the property. The applicant must re - grade the existing mine waste on site and cap the material, therefore grading on the lower benches will be significant. The proposed site plan does not call for any grading on. the steeper and more vegetated portions of the property.. 6) The placement and clustering of structures will minimize the need for roads, limit cutting and grading, maintain open space, and preserve the mountain as a scenic resource. Staff Finding The clustering of all three buildings is at the lower portion of the property. Due to the design of the freemarket building, the driveway access will be able to remain at near natural grade and the upper portion of the property will remain undisturbed. 7) Building height and bulk will be minimize[ and the structure will be designed to blend into the open character of the mountain. 34 P51 Staff Finding The buildings gradually step up in height going up the hill. The highest structure, the freemarket building, will be built into the hill and the design will utilize proposed and existing trees the screen the building from West Hopkins Avenue. s) Sufficient water pressure and other utilities are available to service the proposed development. Staff Finding All utilities are on -site. There is sufficient water pressure for domestic use and a fire sprinkler system, which must be provided. 9) Adequate roads are available to serve the proposed development,. and said roads can be properly maintained. Staff Finding Tile applicants are proposing a private road, accessed off of West Hopkins Avenue, which will be maintain by the owners in the Subdivision. The road will be required to meet City standards. 10) Adequate ingress and egress is available to the proposed development so as to ensure adequate access for fire protection and snow removal equipment. Staff Finding. Adequate ingress and egress are proposed for the development. The applicant will be required to meet the City's standards -as established; by the City Engineering Department and Fire Marshal. Snow storage is designated on site. 11) Any trail on the parcel designated on the AACP: Parks / Open Space / Trails map is dedicated for public use. Staff Finding The applicant is proposing to pedestrian trails which will be designated on the final plat. The upper trail will be a rough trail occasionally used by Nordic skiers. The lower trail across Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 will run through the project between the freemarket and affordable housing buildings. IV. Special Review PARKING A. All zone districts. In all -zone districts where the off-street parking requirements are subject to establishment and/or mitigoation 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 35 P52 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.Planning and Zoning 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. Staff Finding The applicant is providing 25 parking spaces for 15 units and 2 Accessory Dwelling Units. Per the Aspen Municipal Code, based on the number and size of the units being proposed, the required parking spaces shall be 30 spaces. The requirement for the AH/PUD zone district is that the parking be set per the PUD. This project is near mass transit routes and the commercial core, therefore the proposed parking should be adequate for the proposed density. B. Multi family dwelling units. Off-street parking provided for multi family dwelling units which do not share a common parkin, 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 (2-1/2) 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. Staff Finding The applicant is primarily proposing carport/garage access, therefore planter buffers are not necessary. C. Cash -in -lieu Staff Finding The applicant is not proposing to mitigate by paying cash -in -lieu. 36 P53 A CCESSOR Y D WELLING UNIT 1. The proposed ADU is designed in a manner which promotes the purpose of theADUprogram, promotes the purpose of the zone district in which it is proposed, and promotes the unit's general livability. Staff Finding The units are partially sub grade but are consistent with the AH/PUD zone district by providing additional housing. 2. The proposed AD is designed to be compatible with, and subordinate in character to, the primary residence considering all dimensions, site configuration, landscaping, privacy, and historical significance of the property. Staff Finding The ADUs are compatible with and subordinate in character to the primary residence. 3. The proposed AD is designed in a manner which is compatible with or enhances the character of the neighborhood considering all dimensions, density, designated view planes, operating characteristics, traffic, availability of on -street parking, availability of transit services, and walking proximity to employment and recreational opportunities. Staff Finding The ADUs are compatible with the neighborhood, parking spaces are provided and the units are within walking distance of employment and recreational opportunities. V. GMQS Exemptions (26.470.070) Staff Finding The Applicant proposes that they are eligible for GMQS exemptions as it relates to the development of the four (4) deed restricted affordable housing units proposed for Parcel 2 on Lot 3. Currently, these units .will be deed -restricted to a Category 2 income and occupancy levels. These units are, pursuant to section 26.470.070(J), exempted from GMQS. .37 P54 RESOLUTION NO. 19 (SERIES OF 2001) A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING OF THE NEW WEST HOPKINS CONCEPTUAL PLANNED -UNIT DEVELOPMENT, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, C OL ORAD O. Parcel No. 2735-124-00-003 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Aspen GK, LLC, owner, represented by Joe Wells, for Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval for an affordable housing project at the 600 block of West Hopkins Avenue, City of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is approximately 53,187 square feet, is located partially in the City of Aspen and partially in Pitkin County, and is located in the R-15 Zone District in both jurisdictions; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445, the City Council may approve a Conceptual Planned Unit Development, during a duly noticed public meeting after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission made at a duly noticed public hearing, comments from the general public, a recommendation from the Community Development Director, and recommendations from relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, during a -public meeting on January 2, 2 00 1, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted, by a six to zero (6-0) vote, to recommend City Council approve the New West Hopkins Affordable Housing Conceptual PUD; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission also voted by a six to zero (6- 0) vote to recommend the Applicant pursue the possibility for shared access to this site with the Boomerang Lodge along the east property boundary; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority voted unanimously on December 6, 2000, to find that the project meets the requirements for an exceptional project as set forth in the 2000 Affordable Housing Guidelines; and, )NHER.EAS, City Council finds that the project meets the requirements for an exceptional project as set forth in the 2000 Affordable Housing Guidelines; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Planning -and Zoning Commission, Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WITREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development. standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, V MREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this Resolution Ru-thers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, 'THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY TEI CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL as follows: Section 1 The New West Hopkins Affordable Housing Conceptual Planned Unit Development is approved, with the following conditions: 1. The Final Application shall include detailed descriptions of two (2) trails across the property to be dedicated public trail easements. One trail shall be across the lower portion of the property connecting the existing trail to West Hopkins Avenue and the other across the upper portion of the property. The Parks Department shall approve the trail easements. 2. The Final Application shall show a shared access along the east property. boundary between this property at the Boomerang Lodge expansion property. 3. The Final Application shall demonstrate how the project will The Green Development Strategies as required by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. a. Use of gas log appliances. Pollution reduction and energy conservation. b. Occupant recycling. Areas for glass, metal, plastic and newspaper. c. Waste management. Identify ways to recycle materials where possible, and minimize trips to the landfill, including separate dump containers for wood and other potential recyclables. d. Destratification fan systems. Fans recycle hot air at roof and recirculate to -living areas to decrease heating loads. e. Attic fan systems. Naturally ventilate building, reducing the need for air conditioning from solar gain. f. Comply or exceed energy code requirements. g. Landscaping. Utilize native vegetation to reduce water use. h. Bike storage areas. i. Trail. To be made permanent fixture of town system by way of easement. j. Erosion control. Measured specified by licensed geotechnical engineer to minimize damage to vegetation and ground stability. k. Site preservation and restoration. Topsoil to be preserved for re -use in areas of disturbance. Site disturbance limited.. Intensive restoration plan to ensure proper re -growth and stabilization of disturbed areas. P56 4. The Final Application shall address the Housing Authority's requirement to investigate additional Green Development Strategies, including: a. Building Commissioning. b. Asbestos -free building. c. CFC-free building products, including refrigeration systems and carpeting. d. Recycled materials. e. Building materials. f. Water conservation. g. Certified wood products. h. Human comfort. i. Energy efficient lighting. J. Light pollution. k. Indoor air quality. 1. Construction air quality plan. 5. The Final Application shall include a long-term hazard mitigation and containment plan to protect the development from rock falls, snow slides; and other natural hazards. The plan shall be approved by the City Engineer. 6. The site contains an old abandoned septic system. The Applicant shall comply with Pitkin County Environmental Health Department requirements for abandonment of the system and properly disposing of waste material. 7. The Applicant shall develop traffic reduction measures for the project prior' to final submission in order to comply with the City's Municipal Code requirements.. The traffic reduction measures shall be approved by the City's Environmental Health Department. _. S. The landscape plan shall indicate that the native areas will be treated with the Parks Department's recommended seed mix. 9. A 5-foot buffer to accommodate snow storage and removal on each side of sidewalks and trails shall be indicated on the final site plan. 10. The final site plan shall show the areas of the dedicated public trail easements, approved by the Parks Department. 11. The buildings shall include an adequate fire sprinkler system and alarm system, approved by the Aspen Fire Marshall 12. No excavation or storage of dirt or material shall occur within tree driplines or outside of the approved building envelope and access envelope: 13. All construction vehicles, materials, and debris shall .be maintained on -site and not within public rights -of -way unless specifically approved by the Director of the Streets Department. 14. The applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is limited to the hours between'7 a.m. and 7 p.m. 15. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction. P57 16. All uses and construction shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) .of the Aspen Municipal Code as they pertain to utilities. 17. The Applicant or owner shall mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3• This Resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Attest: - Kathryn S. h, eity Clerk WZZFerr r r Memorandum To: Jasmine, Aspen P & Z From: Aspen Carriage Company Date: 7/16/02 Re: Redevelopment Application for Existing West End House Adjacent to the Red Brick School We do not believe that the current proposed redevelopment plan may fit the surrounding historical character of the neighborhood. This particular area has several .homes that have not been reconstructed into "hunchback Victorians" or into excessively large spread out floor areas. The exception being the Paepcke property. Our carriages routinely pass on this street and the drivers tell the passengers of the history of the dwelling and general area. We tell people about the original small clap board Victorians, the few brick Victorians, the new constructed "looks like a small Victorian" next to the subject house and of course the subject house with 1.940s asbestos siding. We tell people about the teacher who lived to 100 years old in that house and taught at the school. People seem to be impressed by the carriage house barn in the back. We tell them that lots of houses use to have them but they have all been tarn down or converted into some garden room or ADU that nobody lives in. Small homes are becoming rare in aspen as is asbestos siding. This property is a highlight of our tour. Most people should be allowed to do what they want but in Aspen only the rich seem to be able to get things done. Some old houses with some poor people should remain to add character to this declining town. ASPEN CARRIAGE COMPANY, INC. ASPEN COLORADO TOTAL P.01 P-J--2:- -q-/ l _ERGY 3SOCIATES DIPLOMATES AMERICAN BOARD OF ALLERGY AND IMMUNOLOGY FELLOWS AMERICAN ACADEMY OF ALLERGY AND IMMUNOLOGY RICHARD B. JOHNSON, M.D. ALLEN T. SEGAL, M.D. ROBERT N. LAND, M.D. SUITE 310 • EAST TOWER 13601 PRESTON ROAD AT ALPHA ROAD DALLAS, TEXAS 75240-4954 �!' .ice f ✓ '� � r 9721661-9197 FAX 972/960-2205 -�,00lot Yi. f Joseph A. Amato 222 E. Hallam St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 June 21, 2002 Re: Mona Frost Property; 216 E. Hallam St. Aspen — Application Before Planning And Zoning — City Council & Historic Preservation Commission Dear Neighbor: I am writing to you in an effort to provide information for your review and consideration. A development group has purchased the "Mona Frost Parcel" which includes Mona. Frost's home and the old barn to the rear of her home. Both are in a sad state of disrepair. The good news is that the developer plans to "restore" the old house and barn. The bad news is that they are planning to create "duplexes" on the side of each structure which will produce 12 bedrooms and 11 bathrooms This will essentially destroy "all green areas" on this site and create "mass and density" which does not exist in our neighborhood. In order to accomplish this goal (4 structures — 12 bedrooms & 11 bathrooms) they need variances, waivers, and the use of the pedestrian walkway located along the western side of the Red Brick School House. The bottom line is the dramatic effect and unnecessary change from our Victorian single family neighborhood to a multiple family village type setup (i.e. too many bedrooms, cars, and excessive massing of structures.) The streetscape changes and impacts all of us in a negative way. Aside from a dramatic change to the neighborhood by additional cars (from the 12 bedrooms and the new structures), they will be using the existing pedestrian walkway. At the present time, only emergency vehicles and occasional service vehicles use the pedestrian walkway. This will create a dangerous condition for young children entering or leaving the gymnasium and for pedestrians using the walkway to get to the music tent. What can you do? IN The HPC is prepared and willing to overlook so many of their design standards as set forth in the "Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" dated April 2000 (see attached list) and is willing to waive set back requirements, parking requirements, and FAR restrictions to permit the uses requested. Without the setback waivers, variances and permission to use the pedestrian walkway, the Mona Frost house and the old barn can be restored without the duplexes! Fortunately, the Planning & Zoning Commission has questioned many of the issues and problems associated with this high density, massive scale proposed development. The city counsel has to approve the use of the pedestrian walkway as a driveway for this new construction. If you feel as I do that the development should be limited to the restoration of the Mona Frost home and the old barn in keeping with our neighborhood, please take some time to call the Chair of Planning and Zoning or a member City Counsel and express your disappointment and feelings with the development of this large scale development in our neighborhood. You could attend the meeting at City Council on Monday July 8th (a) 5:00 PM to express your concern for the safety of the kids and people using the pedestrian walkway and the traffic associated with a 12 bedroom development on this property. (Less mass, less congestion.) You could also attend the HPC meeting on Wednesday July 10tCod 5:00 PM and the continuation of the public hearing at the next meeting of Planning and Zoning Commission on Tuesday July 16th Cd 4:30 PM and voice your objection to the proposed waivers and variances. A curb cut is available to serve the Mona Frost house and the old barn as opposed to using the pedestrian walkway. Your letter and voice is extremely important. As I said in the beginning of this note, the restoration of the Frost house and the old barn is fine. The addition of duplexes and the increase to 12 bedrooms and 11 bathrooms destroy the very fabric of our single family neighborhood. There is nothing personal here. Good planning in our neighborhood requires serious consideration of the impacts to the subject site as well as its neighbors. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, M Joseph A. Amato JAA/lag Enc. -3- Additional Facts Development — Mona Frost Home and Old Barn 216 E. Hallam St. Aspen 1. The duplexes added to each of the old structures (which in total produce 12 bedrooms and 11 bathrooms) can only be created with the waivers and variances requested. Without the setback waivers and variances and the use of the pedestrian walkway, the only development that -could occur would be the restoration of the Mona Frost house and the old barn. The restoration of the two old structures would be in keeping with our single family neighborhood and would be satisfactory. 2. Reference is made to the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines dated April 2000. These design guidelines are in effect and are the rules and regulations to be followed by the Historical Preservation Commission in considering development at or on historically designated sites. I call your attention to the following pages and language relating to this development. • Page 2 ...... in general setback variances and parking waivers are supported by the HPC when they benefit the landmark structure and have no detrimental effect on the property of the neighborhood. The FAR bonus is very valuable to some applicants, but its one that HPC generally feels should only be awarded to projects of significant merit . .. to preserve or restore the historic structure when it is used to create a historic landmark lot split. Comment — A lot split would occur here for the old barn and the Mona Frost house; however, there are 2 buildings and those 2 buildings are being restored. However, they wish to add 2 additional structures (duplexes) which essentially have a major detrimental effect on the property as well as the immediate neighborhood. • Page 35 — "Private Yard 1.11 Preserve and maintain mature landscaping on site particularly landmark trees and shrubs. Comment — By creating the duplexes a major tree will be taken away on the easterly side of the development as well as 60 to 75 year old lilac bushes which should be preserved. By granting the Mona Frost house variance, 3' to the west there are a grouping of lilac bushes that would be destroyed. • Page 78 — "Preserving Building Locations and Foundations ... it must be demonstrated that relocation is the best preservation alternative." 0 Comment — The sole purpose of moving each of the existing structures is to create duplexes. HPC ,very rarely allows the relocation of a building. Why have they allowed this here based on their normal consideration of relocation? • Page 82 — "Basic Principals for New Additions" — "The addition also should not affect the perceived character of the building. In most cases, loss of character can be avoided by locating the addition to the rear." "Keeping the size of the addition small in relation to the main structure also will help minimize its visual impacts." "For example, a side addition may change the sense of rhythm established by side yards in the block. Locating the addition to the rear could be a better solution in such a case." Comment - The basic orientation of the existing barn is being turned in order to add a large duplex. Why? The Mona Frost house is being moved 3' to the west by granting a setback variance so a duplex can be added alongside of the Frost home. Why? Based on the above they are violating the basic principles for new additions. The barn should be left where it is. • On page 88 - "Mass and Scale — The mass and scale of a new building is also an important design issue. A new building should be considered compatible in mass and scale with its historic neighbor and not overwhelm it." Comment - By adding the two duplexes the mass and scale of the old houses is overwhelmed and so is the lot. Therefore, the current development plan does not conform to the mass and scale that the design guideline speaks to. • Pedestrian Walkway — There is a letter from the city attorney — The pedestrian walkway should not be used as a means of ingress and egress from the proposed development. Comment - Why has HPC chosen to ignore the contents of this letter? City Council will vote on this and hopefully not ignore the City Council's Attorney. • There are numerous other sections of the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines that are essentially being ignored. If you wish to take the time to review this book it is available at the HPC or other places in town. �tUC1 ®C;LJ JUL 16 2002 Diana Van Deusen 233 N. Spring Street Aspen, CO 81611 7/13/2002 To the following: Aspen City Government; Helen Klanderud, Mayor John Worster, City Attorney All Planning and Zoning All City Council Members All COWOP members ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENT It has been said that the Obermeyer re -development of Rio Grand Place will be Klaus Obermeyer's legacy. I wonder if it will matter to Mr. Obermeyer what those will think of him if they lose their mountain views? Six years ago, after studying the Rio Grande Master Plan for Aspen, our family bought our property in Oklahoma Flats on the curve of the Roaring Fork River. We built our house following the rules of height limit and stream margin review "to the letter". We knew that nothing exceeding the 35 ft. limit could. ever be built to obstruct our mountain view. Now, the proposed four story building of Rio Grand Place would completely destroy our view! I think it is important for all Aspen residents to know the following paragraph in the Development in Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESA) Chapter 26.435.050; Mountain view planes. Development within designated mountain view planes as set forth in Section 26.435.050 shall be subject to heightened review so as to protect mountain views from obstruction, strengthen the environmental and aesthetic character of the city, maintain property values, and enhance the city's tourist industry by maintaining the city's heritage as a mountain community. These kinds of enforced standards are what has kept Aspen the beautiful and special city that it is. Are we going to let a task force with the intent on railroading this plan through, change what Aspen stands for? There could be serious legal problems ahead. With great concern, Diana Van Deusen cc: Klaus Obermeyer Letters to the editors: Aspen Times, Aspen Daily News Oklahoma Flats Homeowners �I■o JUL-15-2002 MON 10,10 AM EXABYTE QUALITY FAX NO, 3034177164 :■ '■w t■■ CAPLAN AND EARNEST LLC ATTORNEYS AT LAW G. LANIw EARNEST LYNN G. KUYKENDALL RICHAkD E. 13UMP W I LLIAM A. AI•I LSTRAN D LYNN DAVIT BIRD W►LLIAM J. KOWALSKI �U 5AN S, SCHERMERHORN J. M,AIICUS PAINTER ALLEN P. TAGGART SHARON E. CAULFIELD SARAH E. MESHAK W. STUART STULLER CHEVIYL M. KARSTAEDT THOMAS S. CnABO PETER M. HAMILTON WATE11STREET 2G95 CANYON DOULEVARD, SUITE 400 BOULDER, COLOnADO R0302-0737 TELEPHONE: (303) 443-801 0 TELECOPIER. (303) 440-3967 WWW.CELAW.COM July 15, 2002 TO: Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director P, 01 RECEIVED JUL 1 r) MZ Abrdn j rYl i KiN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COLLEEN A. O'LAUGHLIN JENNIFER A. SULLIVAN M. GWYNETH WHALEN MARK B. WIL[TSKY JULIE A, TISFIKOWSKI SHELLY D. MERRITT KATHLEEN M. SHANNON CHRISTOPHER A. GUNLIKSON CHRIS-TOPHER P. FRIIEDMAN DEREK H. KIERNAN-JOHNSON JAMES C. BRANUM PHILLISA S. SHOEMAKEl1 OF COUNSEL GEIIALD A. CAPLAN COMPANY: City of Aspen Community Development Department FAX #: (970) 920-5197 PHONE #: (970) 920-5062 FROM: Richard E. Bump Sender's Fax No.: (303) 440-3967 Sender's Phone No.: (303) 443-8010 RE: 216 E. Hallam Conditional Use (Mona Frost Property) No. of pages (iiieluding cover letter): 3 ORIGINAL/COPY WILL FOLLOW BY MAIL MESSAGE: Ms. Ohlson, Attached is a letter from Bill and Joan Light of 219 North Monarch, expi,essin,g their concerns about wid objections to the above - referenced conditional use :application. Thank you in advance for your courtesy in making this pert of the record and for distributing copies to the members of the Planning sand Zoning Commission before tOmOITOW evening's continued he,u-ing. Richard Bump NOTE; The inibtYnatio n conixinad ut or attached to this; FAX nesgabe it; intended for tho confl(iondal use of tho h4yidwd(s) naltted above, I1' you ait not the waied re6pient, yott are hereby jiotihcd that you have rrerAvcd this doctunew in error and that review, dissemination or copyiltg o1' this cominUnication is prohibited. If you have received ails communication to enw, please notify us itmnediately by telephone and rcU►rn the oji Taal dUcILT)IM % to us by mail. Thank you. JUL-15-2002 MON 10:10 AM EXABYTE QUALITY FAX NO. 3034177164 P. 02 219 North Monarch Aspen, Colorado 81611 July 14, 2002 Jasmine Tygre, Chair Members of the Planning and Zoning Commission City of Aspen 130 S. Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611-1975 Re: 216 E. Hallam Conditional Use for Duplex on a 6,000 SF Lot .that Contains a Historic Structure Dear Ms. Tygre and Members of the Commission: Can behalf of our family, we respectfiflly request that the Conditional use application for 216 E. Hallam be denied. Ibe proposed use is significantly out of character, larger in scale, and substantially snore dense than the neighboring homes. When considered in context and fairness, the ultimate effect of the Application will be to convert a historic barn and single family home of 2-3 bedrooms and one bath on the current property, into and 8 ha hs. combined„ on the sgme site, The intensity of the proposed use would push. development below ground, above ground, and virtually to the extremes of the property lines, consuming the historic site with structures and requiring variances in setbacks and in parking for the cars that will inevitably overflow into the street. The historical character of the neighborhood will be irreconcilably altered by this development and its adverse effects. Our home, 219 N. Monarch, is diagonally across the street ftom the Mona Frost house, During the 40 years of our ownership, we have ,greatly appreciated the City's efforts to maintain the character of our West End neighborhood, as it was when we purchased in the 1960's. 'nie City has done this despite changes in ownership and those new owners' desires to reap large financial rewards from more intensive development, Tile first challenge to the distinctive qualities of our neighborhood was when Vzed and -Florence GhddeT-,'s house sold, The next was the Reynolds' house adjacent to the Ghdden's on the west, Perhaps the greatest threat to neighborhood character occurred when the School District determined to vacate the red brick elementary school. In each case, even though an addition and a new single family home were eventually approved on the Glidden and Reynolds' sites, the ultimate uses have remained single family and, particularly in the case of the red brick school, did not succumb to multi -family, intensive development pressure, JUL-15-2002 MON 10:11 AM EXABYTE QUALITY FAX NO, 3034177164 P. 03 Asa result, population density, traffic, and parking on the street have not measurably changed over the years. Having been in our neighborhood for 40 years, it is inconceivable to us that the staff could seriously state that "the proposed duplex use is appropriate and compatible with the sutrounding structures and use." The term "duplex," as applied to this development, while perhaps legal., is a misnomer for all practical purposes. Three, multi -thousand -square -foot residences, including 12 bedrooms, 8 baths, and 5 cars on the Mona Frost site, are not even close in character or use to such homes as the Birko-s or ours, each of which have historically had only a small one -bedroom apartment incorporated as part of the residence, We respectfully appeal to you to preserve the character of our neighborhood and deny the application as presented. The adverse consequences of a development of the nature, snagriitude, scale, and intensity that has been proposed by the applicant will have significant, adverse effects upon and forever change the nature of the neighborhood that City has consistently worked so long to protect. "Ibank you for your serious and thoughtful consideration of our concerns. Sincerely, ' C. Light J E% 7ight Hon. Mayor IIelen Kanderud .Members of City Council John P. Worcester, Esq., City Attorney Ms. Joyce Ohlson, Deputy I)irector James Lindt, Planner -2- I August 2002 Dear Editor, Being a long- time contractor here in the city of Aspen, I am very aware of how stringent the city is in monitoring the height limit of all structures and enforcing zoning regulations. But suddenly, is Aspen becoming a city with two sets of rules? Is one set for the independent builder, and a new one for the proposed Obermeyer Project at Rio Grande Place? It seems a special COWOP has been given the "green light" to plan a massive commercial development across from Rio Grande Park. This plan would by-pass the current rules concerning height limitations, stream margin and zoning reviews. Even worse, the city, by agreeing to be a partner in this venture, would be giving up small open parcels of land which we the people, in essence, own! These parcels now allow a "breathing space" between structures. Without them, a massive wall of buildings would obstruct the view of the mountains. The COWOP plans to close a portion of the street (Rio Grande Place), further impacting the area by pushing the building site closer to the river side! True - the COWOP cannot move mountains, but it is getting ready to hide them! v GarnMo e Aspen cc: All Aspen City Council Members All Planning and Zoning Members All COWOP Members All Pitkin County Commissioners Mayor Helen Klanderud City Attorney John Worster All Oklahoma Flats Homeowners Klaus Obermeyer