HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.gm.Little Nell Lodge.21B-85
Aspen Skiing Company
Mr. Peter Forsch, Director
Resort Services/Real Estate
Box 1248
Aspen, Colorado
81612
.
Re: Little Nell Lodge
Dear Peter,
It has come to the attention of this office that a clarifi-
cation is necessary in the land use review performed by _this
department on the above mentioned project.
Under the heading of AIR POLLUTION. Solid Fuel Burninq
Devices:, there is discussion of the applicant committing to
install only "gas log" type fireplaces in the hot;el. At the time,
this statement was offered by the Aspen Skiing company as an
answer to the issue "of"" fireplaces in new developments. This
department went on to" accept the "gas log" commitment as an
acceptable response to the fireplace issue. Since the December
14, 1985 review of the. proposal new information has surfaced
which dictates the need for this interpretation.
. ," , ..-.,.""",.;_..."""".,'...',.. .',,-.c,
It will be toth.E{ibenefit' t() . the Aspen Skiing Company to
review"'t:he attached memo and" contact "this office with any
questions. The project can:ob'iriously~cont'iriiie, but'Tt is impo'rt-."
ant that the managers and design staff be aware of this technical
interpretation. ')
'"
sincerely,
;';'
.;.0:-:'.-
-
- --_- -1""\- "A$PEN.PITKIN "";--'-_ -~--
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT
,._.~
..~
MEMORANDUM
TO: Building Department
FROM: Thomas S. Dunlop, Environmental Health DiJ:;ector~
DATE: October 24, 1986
RE: Woodburning Laws as they Apply to Gas Logs and other Gas-
Burning Devices
---------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
'*
1. The Aspen and pitkin County woodburning laws limit all
fireplaces and stoves, regardless of what. people may choose to"
install: in these stoves. i.e. ONE FIREPLACE IS ALLOWED PER
BUILDING REGARDLESS OF "WI1JS"XllliK GAS LOGS AR1!:' INSTALLED IN' IT~
What is regu.lated. is then1..llnl::lerci:f:fireplaces~ .
2. The only devices not included in thilS... lilD."it:(lt:iC?ll(l:r~ . LISTED
NATURAL GAS APPLIANCES~. . The law'siangua.ge,' '(incapable of
burning wood" describes why these are exempt. It does not imply
that there is another class of devic~s ." incapable of ):>urning
wood" which is. also exempt. Listed natural gas appliances are
the only devices at this time considered incapable of burning
wood.
3. Fabricated devices which are alleged to be incapable of
burning wood are not exempt. Gas logs are designed for masonry
fireplaces. GAS LOGS MUST BE IN FIREPLACES CAPABLE OF BURNING
WOOD.
4. .To make a site-built d~vice surrounding gas logs, incapable of
burning wood, is. not acceptable. Such fabrications are not
allowed..-:;. In other words, FABRICATED DEVICES CONTAINING GAS LOGS
ARE NOT EXEMPT. ... ...
5. SMOKE SHELVES ARE IRRELEVANT.
In summary, what is allowed is one fireplace and one
certified stove per BUILDING.. THE ONLY EXEMPT DEVICES ARE LISTED
NATURAL GAS APPLIANCES. If any citizens need fui1:liereXplanation
of this, our office would be happy to discuss this with them.
'130 South Galena Street:
Alapen. '?alorada 81B'11
303/925-2020
" ~
,
.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
".. ~,.
~
~
I
MEMORANDUM
CAAB REVIEW
Alan Richman, Planning Office
Thomas S. Dunlop, Director ~JD
Environmental Health Department
December 14, 1985
Little Nell Lodge GMP/Precise Plan
------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------
The above-referenced submittal has been reviewed by this office
for the following environmerital concerns~
AJ:R POLLUTION
Solid Fuel Burning Devices:
The applicant has committed to install only "gas log" type
fireplaces in hotel suites and one wood-burning fireplace in
the main hotel lobby. This approach is in conformance with
policies of this department.
The applicant should be commended in this novel design
feature to address the fireplace issue. As the result of
many air pollution studies which have been performed in the
Aspen Metro area, it is well documented that every development,
large or small, has the potential to negatively impact air
quality. The Aspen Skiing Company's progressive approach to
this very sensitive issue sho.ulc1.be .conside.red .as a model
for other future developments to follow. ...... - -.
The applicant has met and/or exceeded their required compliance
with current woodburning device legislation.
COnstruction Air Pollution
Prior to any demolition of existing buildings, the applicant
shall certify through a qualified source that there is no
asbestos present in those buildings. Inspection, sampling
and analysis of any suspected asbestos materials will be
required.
If asbestos is present in the buildings, the applicant shall
retain qualified asbestos removal personnel to remove the
material.
It shall be handled as a. hazard()us waste and disposed of in
a designated landfill after the removal plan has been
.....>,..___ '._'_ '_".'."'M' ...-,.""".,.-'-,.....-""""'.:...~>._'"'"',....,.
Y""'"
..0". -;._'_'
;
-
1"'1
f')
. r
".
Page Two
Little Nell Lodge GMP/Precise Plan
December 14, 1985
approved by this department and the Colorado Health Departm-
ent, Colorado Air Pollution Control laws, 'Regulation 8
Section II.3.4 dictates the need for this action.
Further, during demolition and construction the applicant
will be required to remove any mud and dirt .carry-out onto
City streets by vehicle traffic from the site.
This soil shall be removed by means of a mechanical street
sweeper which will use a water/brush method. The soil
contained within the machine.. lSilall be re-d~posited on the
applicants property. Daily cleaning of the impacted streets
will be the applicants responsibility.
DEMOLITION
During actual razing of buildings, the applicant will be required
to prevent windblown (fugitive) dust from leaving the property.
This control may take the form of spraying the immediate demolition
site with water. Other examples of acceptable control techniques
include dust suppression chemicals, fencing the site, shrouding
the work area, etc.
Contact by the project sponsor shall be made with. the. .Colorado
Health Department to determine if an (;!missi91l permit and/or a
fugitive dust control plan is required for both the demolition
and construction phase of the project. That determination is'
relative to the estimated emissions which will be. generated
(tons per year). Contact Mr. Scott Miller, Colorado Health
Department, 222 S. 6th Street, Grand Junction, Colorado 81501, or
phone him at 248-7150 to inquire about Regulation 1, Section III,
D,2,h titLed "Demolition Activities" of the "Co~o~adO Air Quality
Control Regulations and Ambient Air Quality Standards," Revised
March 1983.
UNDERGROUND PARKING
It will be a requirement of this office tilat agequate air handling
facilities be designed into the complex to eliminate any buildup
of air contaminants inside the underground parking structures.
NOISE ABATEMENT
The applicant will be required to comply with City of Aspen
Ordinance 2 series 1981 titled Noise AbatelD.ep.t. . All d(;!lD.olition
and construction noise related activities shall be covered under
the maximum decibel levels as direc~ed by the ordiriance~
j
A project of this magnitude can be e:xpected to generate persistent
I
~
" .
('1-
~
]
.. 4~'
Page Three
Little Nell Lodge GMP/Precise Plan
December 14, 1985
sound levels that may be annoying to the neighborhood. The
applicant must be aware of this and be conscious of methods and
approach to minimize generation of complaints to this office.
Time of day, duration of specific activities and using the most
technically quiet equipment are a few mitigating measures that
may be involved. If complaints are received, the referenced
ordinance will be the governing document used in enforcement.
The submittal details plans for a night club to be included in
the proj ect. Construction techniques shall be employeed which
will not allow sound generated from this facility to exceed the
noise abatement ordinance maximum allowable decibel levels. Such
sound levels would be measured at the property line,
As a point of information, the applicant should also be considerate
of guests at the lodge and design the night club to not interfere
with their comfort.
CONTAMINATED SOILS
No evidence of mine dumps or mine tailings being present on the
project site are indicated.in th.e ChElrl a'!:q !'flflPcii:ltes report.
However, during demolition, excavation and. construction if such
soil types are discovered the fOllowing shall apply.
All suspected mine waste materials shall be sampled and evaluated
for Lead, Zinc, Arsenic, Cadmium and other metals commonly found
in mine dumps or mine tailings.
The sample analysis shall be provided to this office from a
qualified~aboratory for evaluation. If elevated levels of heavy
metals are identified, mitigating measures will be required,
Professionally competent people in the field of geology will be
required to develop the mitigation plan.
SEWAGE DISPOSAL
Service to this project of a public sewage collection system as
provided by the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District is in
conformance with policies of this office.
This will include installation and maintenance of grease traps as
required by the District.
WATER SUPPLY
Service to this project by the distribution lines as provided b~
the City of Aspen Water Department is in conformance with policies
A ~
".
~.
-t')
.....-.
Page Four
Little Nell Lodge GMP/Precise Plan
December 14, 1985
of this office.
FOOD SERVICE
All food service establishments shall cqmply with Colorado Rules
and Regulations governing such facilities. This will include not
only restaurants, bars and lounges, but also mountain restaurant
food storage areas. Proper licensing of these facilities through
this department will be required prior to service of food to the
public.
Compliance with Section 11-2.4 of the Aspen Municipal Code titled
"Restaurant Grills" will also bel:equired. This section addresses
the type of cooking devices which can be installed and operated
in new or remodeled food service establishments.
SWIMMING POOLS/SPAS
SWimming pools and spas must comply with the Rules and Regulations
governing such facilities as required by Colorado standards.
Throughout this review reference. h.asl>e~l1lD.ad~~q \'ill:iou:;>I:u.les,
regulations, ordinances and laws.' Copies' ofr>alloCfhell\ll\ay .be
found in this office. It is recommended that architects under
contract to this project become familiar wi fh them dUring the
design phases.
TSD/Co/LittleNell
'"
~
n
:' . ,....i~"
CITY{;xOEi;~;ASPE
13 o~otit h "glliert~'sit r e e t
asp e n;~()f()rll II ti'S1611
303-925 ~2020
D tL@@O. W1@~
Aik ;) (' '00" 7
, " ) IVOQ ,
,",,/
~~.
'/:"r.
~M)RANDU_~
DATE: AUJust 19, 1986
TO: City Clerk
FRQ.!: City Attorney
RE:
Forwarded herewith is the orig inal SPA agreement for the Little
Nell base developnent which can be executed by the Mayor and
recorded with the plat, subject to the following:
1. Mayor and City Clerk's signatures on Page 3, including
acknowledgement of signatures appearing on Page 37.
2. Fully execute the vendor's agreement; please insert date of
City Council approval of precise plan on Page 1.
3. Fully execute the agree1\ent with regard to prOllidirg ease-
ments, in particular:
Fill in record ing information in th~ first "whereas"
cIa use.
- Fill in recording information in Paragraph 1, on Page 1.
- Execute and date the agreement on Page 2, includirg insert-
ing a acknowledgement for the Mayor.
- Fill in record irg information on Page 1 of Exhib it "N' and
Exhibit "B".
4. With regard to the employee housing restrictions, I have
requested that Gideon Kaufman upjate his escrow instructions to be
dated subsequent to the execution of the deed restrictions by the
Skiing Company and that the original be delivered to the City
Clerk. With regard to the deed restrictions the following infor-
mation must be completed:
- I have dated the dedication as of July 3.
.-.,
("'\
..
Memor and un to City Cl er1c
Aug ust 19, 1986
Page TV/o
_ The recording information in the second "whereas" should be
filled in.
_ The date of the City (buncil approval should be inserted in
the third "whereas" clause on Page 1.
_ The recording information should b"! inserted on Page 2.
_ Please not"! that the above information should be canpleted
with regard to both dedications.
5. 'Also please assure that the following exhibits aJ::e appended:
- Exhibit "1" - copy of precise plan.
- Exhibit "3" - utility plan
_ Exhibit "4" - specific cost breakdown for util ity plan
- Exhibit "5" - landscape plan
_ Exhibit "6" - letter from Alan Richman dated March 18, 1986
6. Al so to be filed are the following:
1. Partnership authorization certificate
2. Vendor's agreement
3. Agreement with regard to prov id ing easements
As vou know"the deed restrictions are to be held in escrow by the
City Clerk pending the appropriate i.mplemeritaHondafe.
I request that after the docunents have been recorned, copies of
the record ed and full y ex ec uted docUll ents incl u:ling all exhib its
be forwarded to the agencies 1 isted below, together with copies 0 f
the escrow letter and deed restrictions pertaining to the tio-
perty.
As always, please do not hesitate to call if you have any ques-
tions concerning this matter.
PJT/mc
At tac hnen t
10B
cc: Cit y. Mar.ag er
'.pi~iji1ing Off ice
city fug ineer
Water Department
Building Department
Ib us ing Off ice
:..
(j
,~
"
13 0 ~,()!l,,(g~,< ~:e""\<,,, r e e t
asp e'n;~c'o.)o":r It a~:'~81611
....'v,.."...,."'."".'~::':\.J~ """"',,,.' .,,:. -. ',.'.<<
303:'9~5 -2020
D (g@rno\Wm- I
*V/9936!i
IIJ})
May 15, 1986
Mr. Fred Smi th
Aspen Skiing Company
P.O. Box 1248
Aspen, Colorado 81612
~_-., ,.."'I;::'......,..=..~,.-
Re: various Items
Dear Fred:
I am writing to notify you of several items related to Aspen
Skiing Company activity of concern to the City of Aspen. I would
like to meet with you at your earliest convenience. to discuss
these items. . ' ,
1. Little Nell - It would appear that loaded trucks existing the
site at Nell have disturbed the pavement on Galena at Dean~.. My
inspection of the area last Sii~urday morning indicated that
excavation work. by the project in Dean stre,~t:. hCi,S reIllPV~dth~
surface from the area. , Water powing from behind the Tippler has
saturated the ground in th~ arei'l ()ftheexc:ilvation causing the
concrete slabs in the street to J::lecolD.~un~t:i'll:ll..~. I.would c:()nfJider
the Nell project responsible for ~taJ)~li.zing the base material
and repairing the street.
2. South As}?en Street - Runoff water in the area of Lift lA has
been directed aCr:oss to the.w~st fJide, ()f South Aspen Street and
allowed to flow' down Aspen to 'the City catch-basin at Durant.
High quanti ties of sand in thg runoff haye c:()mpletely filled and
closed off the storm sewer t",ice, this Spring. We would ask that
the Aspen Skiing Company either reroute these fl.ows to reduce the
impact on south Aspen or build a small settling pond in the area
of Lift lA to reduce sediment loads in the flow as it enters the
street.
3. Landsl ide - I have been on the mountain about once a week
over the last month and have not identified any profound evidence
of significant movement by the large landslide mass. I would
request your response on the following:
a. Tower Ten Road - There is an area above the Tower Ten
Road just east of Strawpile run that appears to be preparing
.
t""\,
,-.
?
.",.
Page Two
Various Items
May 15, 1986
to slough onto the road. Contained within the area are at
least two very large round boulders. I would recommend the
Ski Company at least break up the major boulders to prevent
them from taking off should the area slough.
b. Jim Reser of Alpine Surveys has been directed to survey
the monuments he placed during the Chen study for the Aspen
Mountain Lodge to determine whether significant additional
movement can be detected in the laIldsHc1elD.ass. Tl1i,slSh()uld
cost between $1,000 and $1,500 and I would like to suggest a
50-50 split between Aspen Skiing Company and the City.
Results should be available by the end of next week at. which
time we can decide if additional monitoring is appropriate.
c. The Chen and Associates report for the Aspen Mountain
Lodge project dated September 20, 1985, recommended several
measures to remedy stabil i ty probl ems in the slide area
(attached). I would like. t() ~nol-lAspen Skiing Company's
plan for implementation of these recommendations.
Please feel free to contact me if we need to inspect any of these
conditions. Thankis for'yourassistal1ce.
Ve<Y T~'(l:' ~~
a W. Hammond
Director of Public Services
JH/co/Smith
Enclosures
cc: Bill Thompson, U.S.F.S.
Ron Mitcl1ell, Acting City Manager
Alan Ricl:1lll<;ln, Planning and Development Director
Don Davis, Pitkin County Sheriff's Department
Ebbie Tacker, Acting Streets Superintendent
Keren McLaughlin, Assistant City Attorney
..
1""'\
.:)
D-7
q
II
the lv"yj of the lower slide thereby increasing the for~s terding to lrove the
s l icJ., downs lop'.
II
increased nove<rents in the lower slide, as ""asured by observation of
the survey lronuments, inclinometers and piezometers, coincide with increases
..
in the groundwater level associated with spring snowmelt infiltration. In
II
addition, the .reasure<rent devices indi<::ate r~latively low rates of moverent
dur ing the winter when low groundwater readings -.ere recorded. The theore-
II
tical sa~~ty Jactor with no water above the failure surface was calculated to
be 1.23 versus 1.09 at the peak groundwater level.
II
0- 7.0 REMED iAL MEASURES
II
Remedial stabilization rreasures soould account. for differences between
.
the upper and loo.er slide mass.
0-7.1 ~r Slide
.
Increased IlOverents in the upper slide, located ab()ve O3go Road, could
be trig9"red by temporary increases in groundwater pressure. However, the
.
general lack of groundwater in our fi~ld investigation and the results of our
.
stability analyses indicates groundwater pressures are not contributing signi-
ficantly to instability above Dago Road.
.
In our opinion, the rrost effective rreasures to. achieve stability in
this area are removal of the slide material and surface drainage control.
III
r-
~
I
.
.
\ '
Therefore, -.e reccmrend removal of the mine dunp slide material to the extent
necessary to reduce the driving forces. '!his will require removing most of
the lards 1 ide above the basal shear zone and regrading the surface. 'lhe
..
.~
II
II
II
~
II
II
III
..
III
III
..
..
.
..
.
.
.
~
~
r\
;f
k
0-8
excavatoo rrnterial should be hauled to a suitable site off of Aspen Mountain
or to a location on the mountain ~1ich will not adversely effect stability.
After removal, ~ recommend maintaining good surface drainage in the graded
area. TI1is may include lined drainage ditches, interception ditches and small
diversion structures. Reduced snowmaking in the landslide area and removal of
snow in the spring are rreasures that should continue.
0-7.2 IDwer Slide Mass
In the lower slide mass below O3go Road, it dP,l?E'.?-rs that reducing the
pore pc-essures near the basal shear zone will be the lOOSt effective and least
expensive rrethod to stabilize the lower slide. Reducing the water pc-essure on
the slide has the greatest impact on stabili ty as discussed above. In
addition, it is c-elatively cost effective ..nen canpared to extensive c-egrading
to achieve less effective c-esults. ~ recamend installation of horizontal
dc-ains, extending sufficiently far into the larrlslide to intercept the basal
sheac- zone. ~ estimate a minimJrn horizont.al length of 150 feet will be
required.
The nurrl:>er and location of dc-ains will depend on the effectiveness of
individual dc-ains aftec- dc-ain installation. Pec-fornance of the dc-ains should
be aonitored with sevec-al piezcroetec-s near the basal sheac- zone. '!he
horizontal drains should be systematically placed to achieve c-eduction in poc-e
pc-essures. Piezcroetec- installations should be located to rronitoc- poc-e
pc-essuc-e c-eduction and maintained to pc-ovide futuc-e aonitoc-ing of the dc-ains
effectiveness.
.
--
I
.
III
(""\
i
1'""\
Monitoring of piezo~~ters and the existing surface movem~nt points
could be used to evaluate the total requirerents for hor izontal drains. ;..~
suggest beginning with a test drilling program of a few horizontal drains. IE
these appear successful in rerroving water fron the slope additional drains can
be installed. since the drains can be sheared oU by future slide moverrent,
it will be necessary to place the number of drains believed necessary at one
t iroe .
"
Horizontal drains may require nanifolding and frost protection to
ensure their continued year-round performance. Drains should disdlarge in a
manner that can be readily observed and easily creasured. Records of the
disdlarge should be maintained on a regular bas is.
we also recrnrrend the sarre surface draiJ:1ZOJe features and precautions
described above for the upper slide mass. Efforts should continue to reduce
s~io:l on the slope and to rerove excess. s'!9'" in the spr ing.
/--,
: >-\
0....
....w
uw..
<{<{
w..v>
W
.-J
COZ
zO
<{
....
.-J-
<{U
:::>
00::
w..CO
V> w
ww..o
O::O~
V>
>-
.-J
<{
Z e \
<{ zo..
Ow
>- -u
.... v>0::~
www..
.-J :r:....V>
Ozo..
CO u-~
<{
....
V>
w..
0 ,
w
V> 0:: I
.... ::> I
I
-' V> I
::> V>
~\ w I
::: ~\
"'.... ~
a <! 0:: I
0..0::-\
....
z
::>
....
-l :r: ,.-.
<( I..? l.l..
....-u
owo..
.... :>-
z
v>o
V>....
>-
.-Jo
<{z
zo
<{u
.'Wl
'-'
'-
~
LB;l 'NOI1V~313
<{
o
o
r-
eo
o
o
'"'
CO
o
o
o
(J'
o
o
(J'
CO
o
o
CO
CO
~3z3nWHjS AB G311V1SNI
113~ NUI1V~~3SBO
S31V \ JOSSV 3
~313W0Z31 d
~313W0Z31 d
co
M
<{
M
M
M
o
'"
o
M
N
S~313WON\ljN\ / S~313W0Z3ld -
U"' '" '"
N N N
W
U
<{
ww..
1-0::
<{::>
:!:v>
)(0
OZ
0::::>
0..0
0..0::
0 0 0 <{CO
M M M
w
o
.-J
~~\
:>
o
.-J
o
o
o
o
<{
o ~~
:3
..::r a:::w..lO
w.-J....
~ 6g\
o .... "'-
:r:--..
.;:::----
"
~
I
o
"
Ii:
o
:r:
w
u
<{
w..
0::
:::>
ov>
w
....'"
UU
WO
-,0::
00
o::w
0.. co
UJ
",0
V)~
..'"
-,0
<1.Z
Z<
<1.-'
..UJ
I-:!
::;0.
iii~
<1.<1.
I-a:
"'I-
'"
z
o
I-
<{
:>:
v>'"
'" 0
U w..z
owzUJ
o::::;:.-WV"l
00 ~z
wcoOI-O
coc:!UJUJ'r-
I-co<{
oz- u
u.J:3:!:>-0
1-0-0::.-1
4;:I:....lc:!
'1:V'I ;:::oW
_ z ...J
l-Wo>-o
V'lU c::!.:t:
UJ<!o~
w..w ....
wO:::V'lOV'l
J::Jc:!Zw
\-V'l co <I-
w
....
o
z
UJ
9
-'
'"
o
Z
~
\ i
;:
'"
o
M
o
M
o
M
/ S~313WOZ3 I d
o
<{
o
0::
o
'-"
<{
o
V> V>
V> V>
'-" <{ '-" <(
z :!: z :!:
I- O::W 1-0:: W 0::
V> wO VlW <:> w
0..- :3 :3
>< o...-J XO -' 0
w :::>v> w-' VI ...J
V>
VlW w
c::(c:::W0>UJ
x:.Oa:::z-c;l
o..:::>-I-<!
w V'l~UZ
OOl.n:::>W
_O:::WV'll.l-<C
-lW a::: V'll.L.O:::
V'lNQ..c:(UJO
o
WJ
o::N
<(>-
w-'
:r:<(
\,/'l~
u
<(W
z
<(0
CON
U
~
0
w
CO I-
'"'U
w
,,-,
<( -0
00::
:r:o..
'^ '\
"
w
0 0
:r:__
...J
VI ~\
0::
w
0..
0..
::>
~313W0Z3 I d
B313WON IljN I / S~313WOZ31 d
.c
~
~
o
V>
<{
o
o
r-
eo
o
o
o
'"
o
o
(J'
CO
o
o
CO
co
133;l 'NO Il\J^:I13
o
o
'"'
co
0 0
w 0 0
.-J
<( II II
U
V>
- I
",' W
, .... .-J
'" <( '"
:!: .... .-J
Z z<(
0 >< ou
0 N
.... 0:: ....
U 0.. 0:: 0::
W 0.. 0 W
V> <( :r: :>
o
o
U"'
co
o
o
-or
co
r";
~lC.~CJ...<^..
,
f"""\
CITY;t6iffASPEN
~1i' ~'~<t.\JS~~{fr:::)'~~:);~(k;rC'1~,,:f~:;:i't\<>;
13 O$O'uJh;'gaJ~jili'!$t r e e t
,~"""'>':""',"~<~' )",' "~' ,), ~':. ';;'" ~<':\j':,',,'-:~'"
asp e'ni':S~J~Jelg';81611
303:925~'2020
May 8, 1986
Mr. Warren Burke
Shaw Construction
743 Horizon Court, Suite 109
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501
Re: Excavation Scheduling, Circulation
and Staging at Little Nell
Dear Warren:
I have reviewed and acknowledged your letter exhibits dated May 7,
1986, regarding excavation at the Little Nell site. I find these
items acceptable in keeping with the requirements of the SPA
Agreement section B. (2). . I have approved your letter (attached)
and am reiterating the following items as we discussed this morning;
1. Fencing - It is acknowledged that fencing of the staging
areas ~Iill not be required so long as those areas are in use only
for storage of materials and equipment. Shaw Construction and
its subcontractors shall not stor.e pr haI191em~.ter,ia,ls so as to
create a hazard for pedestrians on adjacent sidewalks.
2. Grading - Shaw Construction is to submit to this office copies
of the final grading and excavation plans along with Chen and
Associates approval of each stage of the work prior to commencement
of that stage.
.j. Employee Parking - Contractor employee vehicles may park on
the streets subject to existing time and location restrictions.
Shaw Construction and its subsontractors .will be responsible for
obtaining permits for extended time parking should they so desire.
4. Schedule - The exsavation .scheduleyoupropose appears
acceptable, requiring a little over 3 weeks to complete. I would
view the June 9 completion date as critical and, should it appear
that the schedule is falling behind, will recommend longer hours
and/or work weeks to complete major excavation by that date.
t"')
t)
Page Two
~lay 8, 1986
Warren Burke
If you find these items acceptable, please sign below and I will
authorize permit issuance (as far as my concerns over the excavation
stage of the work) to Jim Wilson.
Very
Truly Yours,
(J.~
c
~
--:::,
Ja W. Hammond
Director of Public Services
0cuJl
Accepted
Warren Burke, Shaw Construction Co. Superintendent
JH/ co/Nell
Enclosure
cc: Jim Wilson
Alan Richman
r-,
(')
,
..f'
SHAW
Construction
May 7, 1986
Mr. Jay W. Hammond
City Engineer
City of Aspen
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
RE: Little Nell Base
Our Job #1124
Dear Jay,
Enclosed is
it I have
may pertain
a copy of the Little Nell
outlined all c()nstruction
to Public Right of Way.
Site Plan.
staging as
On
it
Enclosed also is a City of Aspen Map indicating all
excavation truck. routes, in and out of town. They
will be as follows:. export from the project will
go out on to Durant Street then eas;t to Aspen Street
then north to Highway 82 and west to the Tiehack
Ski Lift turn off. Coming back into town as follows:
back east on Highway $2 .to Original Street and south
to Durant Street.
We anticipate (10) hours per day, (5) days per week,
(10) trucks at (2) trips peT hour, or a total of
two hundred (200) tripsI1er day through town, moving
four thousand cubic yards per day. We are capable
of expanding or subtracting trips a.ccording to the
city's reaction. ThE! e"c.avatJof1~or;k Jssqh~du~ed
to begin May 19, 1986 witii'the "ffi'a:in'biilk of the work
to be completed by June 9, 1986.
At present the city has not instated traffic control
at any point along the route, however, we intend
to comply with all reasonabl.E!requests.
We have met with Lee Caissons at AS]Jen Environmental
Health, and she is in agreement with this plan.
Environmental Health's main
and mud control, which we
satisfaction.
concern is fugi ti ve dust
have addressed to their
Horizon Park Plaza
743 Horizon Court, Suite 109
Grand Junction, Colorado 81501
303/2429236
I""",
1"'1
/.
Page Two (2)
. -
"
All construction equipment and staging will
site not to interfere with the Public Right
with the exception of some (down the road)
parking of subcontractor employee cars.
be on
of Way,
vehicle
I am aware of the impact this project could have
on the up coming summer season, this is why we should
begin work no later than May 19, 1986 in order to
complete the excavation haul off as early as possible.
Jay, if you are in agreement with this plan as written
and graphically shown, please sign below and forward
a copy to Jim Wilson at the Building Department.
S1n1ere~}C, J(I
/V{ib<7 ~"--
Warren urke
Shaw Construction Company Supt.
WB/lc
cc: Steve Meyer, Shaw Construction Company
,-,
t1
May 1, 1986
~!r. Bill Kane
Design Workshop
710 E. Durant
Aspen, CO 81611
Mr. John Cottell
Hagman Yaw Architects
210 S. Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Bill and John,
The purp::lse of this letter is to provide you with a response to
your inquiry as to which portions of the west wing of the Little
Nell proj ect will be subj ect to recei Ft of an allotment under the
commercial growth management procedures. To aid in this analy-
si s, I have reviewed the determinations made by the Planning
Office in 1982 with respect to the Rubey Park Visitors Center
commercial GMP application. I use this precedent because that
building also involved a mix of commercial and public space, some
of which was found to be exempt from the need to obtain a growth
allotment. The criteria for the exceptional competition decision
at that time was whether the space was private and commercial
versus public and open to general use. I have also sought the
advice of the City Attorney in reaching my conclusions.
Following are my determinations with regard to your project:
1. The gondola building itself serves the purp:>se of housing
mechanical facilities and should be exempt from the commer-
cial GMP allotment procedures.
2. All of the ski area administrative offices are commercial
uses and SUbject to receiFt of an allotment.
3. The ski patrol, ski instructor and lift operators lockers
and ski storage are all private uses which serve the needs
of the applicant and are not open to the public. In a
..,........."Il!'
r-,
.~
Bill Kane
May 1, 1986
Page 2
sense, the locker, being the place where the individual
stores his or her street clothes, is the "office" for these
employees and therefore meets the test of being commercial
space.
4. Since the proposed public lockers are to be rented, they are
also considered private, commercial space. This determina-
tion is identical to that made for the Rubey Park project,
which al so propo sed st ora ge loc k er s. Further, it is my
understanding that eventually you intend to convert this
space into retail use, once the hotel is built and lockers
are available to the public therein. Therefore, it is
appropriate for you to compete to obtain the right to use
this space for retail purposes right up front.
The determinations regarding the public and private lockers
represent a conservative, literal reading of what constitutes
commercial development for the purposes of the quota system.
However, I also recognize that these areas will not cause
significant impacts on public services and yet they amount to a
substantial amount of s;juare footage for ~lhich allocations will
be required. Therefore, I suggest" that when you apply f or an
allotment on August 1, you submit a letter providing a rationale
for why these spaces need not be subject to the quota system (see
Section 24-ll.2(i) of the Code) and we will have P&Z and Council
make the fi.nal decision on this question. Your application
should therefore identify two alternative allotment request s for
us to consider in recognition of the minimum and maximum allot-
ment you will need.
I hope that these comments clarify this issue. Please feel free
to call me if you have any questions.
Sincerely
ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
Alan Richman, AICP
Planning and Development
Director
AR: jl r
I""',
f1
".,,,,.
MEKlRANOOM
FROH:
!\J.'l
Alan Richman, Planning and Development Directori'\~
Jim Wilson, Chief Building Official
TO:
DATE:
Little Nell Base - Building Plan Check
April 30, 1986
RE:
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
I have reviewed the plan set which you referred to me.
the following comments with respect to this appl ication.
I have
You have already been provided with the most recent ver sion of
the SPA Agreement for the property, which addresses most of the
issues pertinent to the construction program. Key passages for
your consideration are:
o Detailed construction sc:hedul.El' page 9 which provides
the City Engineer and the Chief Building Official with
the authority to address construction impacts.
o Use of west wing building, page 30, subsection 8, which
requires that the administrat~ve spaces below the
gondola terminal be left uninhi!l?itable until commercial
GMP allotments are secllre.<i.I9r.ij:s, l!..fl..El~ ..'l:heapplica-
tion for commercial qeve:J,opnent wlll not be' submitted
unt il August 1. and no allotment swill be granted unt il
at least the end of Oct()beq it is therefore incumbent
upon you to choose the method of cOl1tr()lling use of
thi s space as per the agreement.
o Grading plans for Aspen Mountain, page 28, Subsection 2
and page 29, subsection 6, which require that the City
and County Engineers. sign. off on all regrading work
before it is initiated. Further, page 27, subsection
1, requires the City Engineer to review the recommended
aqditional .sogs. hydrology studies. Please insure that
these activities take place in the proper timeframe.
o The interim landscape plan, phase I is described on
page 11, and is to be implemented prior to the coming
ski season. Please cOordillClte the.reviewofthis plan
with me during the later phases of thi s summer's
construction as the subgrade work is completed at the
base area.
o The utility plan is designated in detail on pages 19-21
and should be coordinated with the City Engineer if any
questions arise.
1""\
:/
I"",,,
o Trail improvements and easements are described on page
24 in subsection 3. The cross country and hiking
trail s should be accomplished as part of the current
regrading program.
The remainder of the Agreement, with minor exceptions, addresses
issues associated with the hotel, which will be part of a later
construction phase in 1987 or 1988.
In accordance with the statement on Page 27, Section 2, I have
reviewed the gondola terminal building for conformance with
representations made during the process. The applicant indicated
that the buil di ng hei ght woul d be 25 feet above th e loading
platform (20 feet for machinery, 5 feet of clearance for mainte-
nance workers). I find the peak of the roof to be about 29-1/2
feet above grade. The nearly 10 percent difference from repre-
sentations is of concern to me, as height was a crucial issue in
the Council's deliberations. I would like to have you explore
with the ap!'l icant whether the building can be brought closer to
27 feet from grade (by, for example, reducing the number of steps
up to the platform to 2 or 3 rather than 5 as shown), provided
that in no event do we make the function of the building suffer,
given its importance to our resort.
I have spoken to Fred Smith, Planning Director for ASC to
determine the status of the existing Little Nell lift and lift
towers, since the plans provided to me show these facilities
remaining in place. Fred explained to me that the lift and
towers are to be removed, with work to be accompli shed by ASe
rather than a contractor. You should require that the demolition
plans be submitted to you before you approve the construction of
the new gondola building.
I hope these comment s are of Clssi ~tanc.e to you. Given the
complexity of the project, I would expect to coordinate construc-
tion review with you throughout the proj ect, and to participate
in some on-mountain site visits this summer. Feel free to call
on me any time you have a question.
cc: Jay Hammond, City Engineer
AR.56
r"J
~
~
(I
Alan Richman
Director of Planning
Ci ty of Aspen
13 0 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
design workshop, inc.
710 e. durant
pen, colorado 81611
303/925-8354
April 28, 1986
....
"...::,~,H,~
RE: Little Nell Base Development
Dear Alan:
Enclosed is a revised set of Little Nell Base Development SPA
Precise Plan drawings (6 sheets) incorporating the following
changes and additions:
1. Sheet 3 of 6: Addition of the word "paving" to Note 3 under
Zone 4.
2, Sheet 4 of 6: Addition of a note regarding buildings to
remain during Phase 1.
3. Sheet 5 of 6: Designation of trash area and loading dock.
4. Sheet 6 of 6: New sheet showing details of skier drop off.
Exhibit 2 of the SPA Agreement has also been revised to
incorporate these changes. When I receive confirmation that
these changes are satisfactory, the originals will be circulated
for signature by the Aspen Skiing Company.
Yours truly,
~~ td-4
Dave Ellis
DE/ms
cc: Paul Taddune
Jay Hammond
Gideon Kaufman
Peter Forsch
Bill Kane
community development
land planning
landscape architecture
I
r"\
r-,
,
L.AW OFFICES
PHONE
AREA CODE 303
925"8166
GIDEON I. KAUFMAN
GIDEON l. KAUFMAN
DAVID G. EISENSTEIN
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
BOX 10001
315 EAST HYMAN AVENUE, SUITE 305
ASPEN, COLORADO 8t611
April 22, 1986
Mr. Alan Richman, Director
Aspen/Pitkin County Planning Office
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Parking and Transit Issue/Little Nell SPA
Dear Alan:
I write this letter to confirm my understanding of the
modifidation made by the City Council to the Planning and
Zoning condition requiring the lA parking lot to be available
for transit related uses. The Planning and Zoning Commission
wanted not only to retain thirty parking spaces on the
parking lot near lA, but to also make this spot available for
related transit issues. It is my understanding that the City
Council took a different position and stated that transit
related uses were not contemplated in the original agreement,
and, therefore did not impose that requirement upon the Aspen
Skiing Company. Therefore, the only requirements relating to
the parking lot coincided with our current lease agreement
which calls for the availability of thirty parking spaces on
or near the present location. If this is not your
understanding, I hope to hear from you right away.
Otherwise, I will convey this information to Bob Hughes, who,
representing Commerce Savings & Loan, expressed some concern
about adding conditions to a property that has been purchased
from us. If Bob has any additional questions, I am sure he
will contact you directly.
Thank you very much for your help and consideration.
Very truly yours,
LAW OFFICES OF GIDEON I. KAUFMAN,
a Professional Corporation
(J/!l:a
By[tt-1
I Gide n Kaufman
GK/bw
cc: Robert W. Hughes, Esq.
I"'l
tl
(I ~
April 22, 1986
~
design workshop, inc.
710 e. durant
aspen, colorado 81611
303/925-8354
Alan Richman
Planning Director
City of Aspen
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear Alan:
Enclosed is a set of the Little Nell Base Development SPA Precise
Plan drawings (5 sheets) incorporating the modifications you
requested following the April 14 City Council meeting. By copy
of this letter, Paul Taddune and Jay Hammond are also receiving a
set. The originals will be at Design Workshop when you are ready
to circulate them for signatures.
Yours truly,
d)~~
Dave Ellis
DE/ms
Enclosure
cc: Paul Taddune
Jay Hammond
Gideon Kaufman
Peter Forsch
Bill Kane
community development
land planning
landscape architecture
^
("')
MEK>RANOOM
TO:
CC:
FROM:
Jim Wilson, Chief Building Official
Jay Hammond, Public Services Director
Alan Richman, Planning and Developnent Director ~
Staging Area for Gondola Construction
April 22, 1986
RE:
DATE:
-----------------....--..;;.--........--.-;r_..."~;..;;'=_,.;;;;.;.;o;;........~~.;;;.;.;;;;;;/.;,;;;;'....';O.;;;,;.;;;;.~~~.::;;;;;;';;;.;;,:.:.::2:~L',.;:;,;::;;:~;;;:o;.:::;.;;,;;;;;.::'~;:;:;.;;
-----------------------------------------------------------------
You have asked me to comment on the potential use of the Benedict
property as a construction staging site for the gondola construction
on Aspen Mountain. I have reviewed that Little Nell SPA agreement,
which provides that the City Engineer and Chief Building Official,
in the exercise of their reasonable discretion, are responsible
for mitigation of construction impacts. However, I can advise
you that it is my determination that the Benedict site would be
an appropriate location for staging, due to its location proximate
to the mountain and the I imited development between the staging
area and construction site which would be impacted by helicopter
flyover s.
I do not believe that there is a zoning issue to be addressed by
the proposed construction staging area. The establishment of a
temporary staging area does not constitute development which
changes the basic use or character of the land, and therefore is
not a land use under the terms of our zoning regulations. I have
received the attached letter and flight plan from the applicant
indicating that the actual staging is likely to involve two
periods of about one week and two weeks respectively. This very
temporary use is not SUbject to the use table limitations of the
zoning code, nor is it addressed by other sections of the code.
Since the zoning Code does not limit this activity, it is your
responsibility to ensure the temporary nature of the use, the
protection of the public health and safety by the mitigation
of impacts of the use, and the return of the area to its prior
state following completion of the construction. In this regard,
I recommend that you obtain the following:
1. A timetable for the dates when staging will begin and
end and limits on the times of day of operation. Based
on my contact with the Board of County Commissioners
on this item, I recommend that work not begin prior to
8:00 A.M. and be conducted only 5 days per week.
2. A bond or other protection to ensure cleanup of the site.
^
t"')
3. A limit on use of the site for recreation when the
helicopters are carrying the gondola towers and similar
materials.
Please feel free to consult me or the City Engineer to assist you
in handling these issues,
AR.418
1""\
~'~,.
.?..~Z;i~'\
.,,~,
.'.";>;.~~ j
.. ....L..".;.~
\ I
\ '4
\ J
\
,
I
i
~
ASPEN SKIING COMPANY
406 SOUTH MI LL
.
BOX 1248
.
ASPEN, COLORADO 81612
.
PHONE 303/925,1220
Alan Richman
Planning Director
Aspen Pitkin County
Dear Alan:
Thank you for your continued effort to carry the ball on the Gondola project
we hope that the information enclosed will help.
A topographic map is enclosed to depict the helicopter routes. The helicopter
will not fly over homes or population centers.
The helicopter will have two separate times or working periods. The first
period will be for the flying of concrete, which we will let cure for about
one month.' The second period will be the flying of structures. We expect
to fly the initial period in July, either from the top of the mountain or
from our staging area, for less than one week depending upon weather.
The first flight period will be subject to POMA scheduling, availibitity
of helicopters, wind and rain, and any other factors. The second period
for the flying of towers might be anywhere from the end of August to the
begining of October, this will be from our staging area, again subject to
all the factors listed above, but this period may take up to two weeks,
because we have 60 structures to fly.
Helicopters like to fly early in the day. In higher elevations, with
heavy loads a helicopter can attain better lift in the cool of the morning.
Due to 'the amount of work, scheduling, costs and various other factors a
helicopter daily schedule should include as much of the daytime hours as
possible and a start as early in the morning as possible.
I hope the public maintaiil$ a ~~ance of continued support for our Gondola
proj ect, and realize. the .iilccirVen,ience to be minor compared to the rewards.
s.~!'~erelY, _ ,1 .
v,fCt~ CQ))T'~ .
Fred Smith ~
ASPEN MOUNTAIN
BUTTERMI LK MOUNTAIN
SNOWMASS
BRECKENRIDGE
~
.1')
MEII>RANOOM
TO:
Aspen City Council ~
Hal Schilling, City Manag~
Alan Richman, Planning Office ~
2nd Reading - Ordinance 53, Series of 1986 - Little Nell S~
Rezoning
THRU:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
April 21, 1986
====f========================':::'======'==='====='=='=========='==f==='====='===='=
SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends adoption of this Ordinance,
which is the final Council action required with respect to the Little
Nell Base Area Redevelopnent proj ect.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Council tabled this Ordinance on April 1 to
provide for re-noticing to insure that all legal obligations are met.
First reading approval was granted by Council in conjunction with the
conceptual approval in 1985.
PROBLEM DISCUSSION: Ordinance 53, Series of 1985, extends the S~
OVerlay designation across the lower portion of the site (approxi-
mCltely 1 acre) which is zoned C - Conservation. The Ordinance was
approved on first reading on September 17, 1985 and then tabled until
the Precise plan could be submitted and reviewed.
The applicant's zoning boundary charige differs significantly from that
which was considered and eventually denied by City Council in 1983.
The extent of the area requested for SPA designation is considerably
less than that previously identified and corresponds directly to that
area in which the hotel, commercial and ski support facilities are to"
be located at the toe of the slope. In fact, by extending the
boundary, we insure that the location of the lifts is considered at
the same time as the remainder of the base area developnent. The
attached Exhibit identifies the approximately location of the proposed
new S~ boundary.
We find that the increase in the SPA boundary meets the test of being
unique and providing public benefit in that it permits integrated
planning of the lift locations in conjunction with the remainder of
the base area development. Without the SPA OVerlay, our review of the
ski lifts would be limited to the conditional use review process.
The Planning Office supports the proposed boundary adjustment with the
following qualifications:
a. The area designated C-S~ is not used in the calculation of the
FAR for the project, since the hotel is not an allowed use in
,-
~
f"""'\
,
this zone.
b. In the event that growth management allocations for the proj ect
expire, the boundary of the SPA should revert to its prior
configuration until a new conceptual and precise plan is submitt-
ed.
The above two items have been addressed to our satis.:faction dUFing the
precise plan review process and are reflected in the SPA Agreement.
ADVISORY COMMITTEE VorE: The Planning and Zoning Commission recom-
mended in favor of the rezoning in conjunction with their review of
the conceptual plan, Their vote on the precise plan was 5 in favor, 2
opposed,
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "Move to adopt Ordinance 53, Series of 1986."
AR.3
2
I
~ll"
L,
,
~w
g'~~
:~;;o
,_cz
I ~oc(
:wo-'
~
---
----
==ID
"I I
I f'
Q;~ .I!
I a :'1'
~!~ '1F[]1
~ ~ .Ii
~ G ,Ii
,I'
:'; 1
u I'D.'"
=1 I
I ,.'
" v
o
()
I
()
,__'Iiliil.''-
~ 13)lllS _____
_tl3l.'ln.._
I I ,----
II 1 II II
I II. ,.
III I II i
! I ,I j
enll !Ip.-I
Ii I II I 6
L i I I I '
_,,,,,,._ .' I . I .
_,,),,,tlds___1 ! I ....--,
I II :(~
r--13~tllS'- I
I. --_':l'<'tldS .J
I ~ -,-----
! IIIJ r-=~d"'l1i I
~ i Ii;! I I I
; Ii ~ll~!! ,II; 1M
I ! ::j~~1 '0 U :!i ~. i I,
I I ...,..' !~. : u.. .. !....
: I' ~ I .'
~ I i ~
. :g~-
I ' <.J I'
I I II
. liP
133111S____ I
h'NltlII:lO___
---
I
\~
~
r\'
Fig. 7
~--,_.,>;~,.,..,-
1"1
r)
.SPEN
130,
asp
April 17, 1986
Rich Cassens
Rea, Cassens and Associates
4388 South Windermere Street
",_Ol.
Englewood, CO 80110
Dear Rich,
,ree t
611
D &@&ll\'#&
~ I 8 1986 1/~
iJ!!
,1'"./
In accordance with the SPA regulations of the City of Aspen, this
letter is to advise you that I have reviewed the plans and speci-
fications prepared by your firm for the Aspen Skiing Company
pertinent to the construct~on of the water main and pump station
facilities to serve the Little Nell base development. To the
best of my knowledge, these plans and specs, identified as A6-1131,
are in accordance with the City of Aspen Water Department regulations
and said plans and specs as identified, are approved.
"""!i <~'
.n~e'9y~
m Markalunas, Director
en Water Department
JM:ab
cc: Jay Hammond, Public Service Director
Paul Taddune, City Attorney
ASC, Project Mgr.
Planning Dept.
^'>:.
,-."
,
()
,~
J
Jay Hammond
City Engineer
City of Aspen
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(i~
April 16, 1986
design workshop, inc.
710 e. duranl
aspen, colorado 81611
303/925-8354
FE: Little Nell Base Development-Grading Plan and Schedule
Dear Jay:
The purpose of this letter is to provide a brief summary of the
items discussed at our meeting of Thursday, April 10 which was
attended by Fred Smith (Aspen Skiing Company), Al Claybourn (Chen
& Associates), A.J. Zabbia (Fea Cassens & Associates), you, and
myself.
The Aspen Skiing Company proposed to modify the original Little
Nell Base Development SPA Grading Plan by removing approximately
53,000 cubic yards of earth. ffOITlt,hesite insteCid. of placing it
as on-site fill. Approximately 17,000 cubic yards of fill will
still be placed on the lower benc.l1 just above the Aspen Mountain
Road. The advantages of these modifications are Cis follows:
1. The 30,000 cubic yards of fill originally proposed below the
midway unload stati.on on Lift #4 hCiS. b",e~ <=Ul1)i~ated. . This
eliminates any concerns regarding slope stab:i.li'ty problems
resulting from the fill. It also eliminates the possibility
that placement of the fill ",ollld a.lt;<=.r .c:urrent dra.i~age
patterns in this cI;"itical area. Finally, the overall'
construction time; fral1)e ~O:r"slO?eregrading will be improved
by eliminating the slowest and Illost (iiffi.,cult;segments of
the on-site haul.
2. By removing approximately 75% of the material from the site,
the start date for grading can be moved up to May 19 without
jeopardizing any slope stability concerns. All excavation
will be removed from the site until. Che~.& l<sE<()ciateE<
completes the slope stability analysis for the proposed
fill, expected in late Mayor early June.
3. The early start allows for hauling through the city when
traffic volumes are low. Several excavators have indicated
that the overall slope regrading could be completed no later
than July 1, pending good weather, compared to mid August
under the earlier proposal. This will dramatically reduce
the impacts of slope regrading on adjacent property owners.
To take maximum advantage of the early start date and the
low tourist season prior to June 15, extra hours, and
possibly the weekends, will be worked.
community development
land planning
landscape architecture
:;..~
~
r')
.....,!/
The only disadvantage to the proposed modification is the impact
of truck traffic hauling the material to the Buttermilk ski area.
The conclusion of the meeting was that the proposed modification
made sense and the advantages considerably outweighed the
disadvantage of the haul. Your approval of the plan was
conditioned upon:
1. The Aspen Skiing Company obtaining support for the
modification from adjacent property owners including the
Aspen Alps and North of Nell and possible reaction from the
Aspen Resort Association regarding impacts of the hauling on
business at that time of year.
2. The implementation of necessary dust control and street
cleaning measures.
The subject of Aspen Mountain run-off entering the Aspen Alps
project was also discussed. You identified the proposed lodge
improvement district's concern for intercepting the historic
drainage entering the Aspen Alps above the 800 Building and
rerouting the flows down the Little Nell slope to Spring Street.
Before making any final decision on this matter, Fred Smith
requested Rea Cassens & Associates to evaluate the feasibility of
intercepting the drainage from Basin.A3 as well as the Aspen
Mountain Road drainage. It was confirmed that the project is
being designed to accommodate the 33.000 cubic feet .of detention
required under the worst case scenario until such time as the new
aerial topography and revised drainage study indicate that this
volume can be reduced.
We are proceeding with our planning and contractor negotiations
based on the above modifications and ~ill be fOllowing up with
necessary revised grading plans and letters of review from both
Chen & Associates and Rea Cassens & Associates. If you have any
questions or comments regarding the above, please advise.
Yours truly,
~C1-ve. ~
Dave Ellis
DE/ros
cc: Fred Smith
Al Claybourn
A.J. Zabbia
John Cottle
I) ('\
m. .fe (c:" [?'-r'\-Cr;:T':;--",..-j
12, \ .. d.~. i \::, .iC3.\1
!...- ...,.., .._J ."........0.,,/ <.......,! '1
r-----.--.'-- . 'I
ASPEN WATER DEPARTMENT ~j APR - 9 I~&) ttW
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
PAUL TADDUNE, CITY ATTORNEY
JIM MARKALUNAS
LITTLE NELL SPA AGREEMENT
APRIL 7~ 1986 M
'- 1);'h-1 ~LVNA.S ~
Regarding section 8, subparagraph (b) Water, this portion of
the SPA outlines what the Ski Company is required to do. Although
not explicit, can we assume from the section that this facility
will be relocated and installed in a manner satisfactory to
the Water Department? Since our engineers (Rea, Cassens and
Associates) will be employed by the Aspen Skiing Company, I
do not believe there will be a coordination problem. However,
should there be a dispute as to what constitutes satisfaction,
question, who will have the final say? Since our facilities
are to be disrupted, relocated, and substituted for, I have
emphasized to Rea, Cassens that the Water Department expects
the subsitute of its existing facilities to be quantitatively
and qualitatively the same as what now exists. This cannot
be specifically spelled out in an SPA agreement, but I believe
the inference is there. Should there be a conflict as to what
represents the City's best interest, who would have the final
say? One suggestion, perhaps the following wording should
be incorporated into the agreement: "such relocation and/or
reconstruction shall be in a manner satisfactory to the City
of Aspen".
Please fell free to call me on this.
JM:ab
cc: Jay Hammond, Engineering Dept.
~P1anning Dept.
1"'1
r'"")
rL 0
(L:=JJ~
Gideon Kaufman
315 East Hyman Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
"a. inn
~rn@@o~~~~'
aspen, colorado ill~ 1:
. :aQ;Mll25"Il3$a
~\ APR - 41:1tlO '.i.i. \ n
\ \ Ii ,; i'
~ IV
. April 4, 1986
RE: Legal Descriptions for Little Nell SPA Rezoning
Dear Gideon:
Attached are the two legal descriptions prepared by Alpine
Surveys for the Little Nell C-SPA rezoning. The first is the
"Revised Description of Entire Little Nell SPA:" the second is
the "Description of a Parcel of Land to be Zoned C-SPA." The
respective areas of the C-SPA and CC-SPA zones are 44,839 sf. and
43,728 sf.
Yours truly,
~~. r;et<-6
Dave Ellis
DE/ms
cc: Alan Richman
Jay Hammond
Katherine Koch
Paul Taddune
Bill Kane
community development
land planning
landscape architecture
..t.'
1""'\
(')
.
,
EXJ..lIBIT ./
Alpine Surveys
414 Norlh Mill Street
Post Office Box 1730
Aspen. Colorado 81612
303 925 2688
April 3, 1986 Job No. 85-121
REVISED DESCRIPTION OF ENTIRE LITTLE NELL S.P.A.
(This description supersedes that of February 24, 1986)
A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN
COUNTY, COLORADO, MORE FULLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 102 IN SAID
CITY OF ASPEN;
THENCE S 75009'11" E 220.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY
LINE-OF SAID BLOCK 102 TO A POINT 10.00 FEET EASTERLY
OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF LOT H OF SAID BLOCK 102;
THENCE S 14050'49" W 241.76 FEEl' TO A POINT HALF\"AY
BETWEEN THE NORTHERLY LINE OF WATERS AVENUE AND THE
SOUTHERLY LINE OF UTE AVENUE;
THENCE N 75009'11" W 29.34 FEET ALONG SAID HALFI"AY
LINE TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE OF LOT
21, UTE ADDITION;
THENCE N 38035'40" hT 16.98 FEET ALONG SAID NORTHERLY
LINE OF LOT 21 TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 21;
THENCE 5 45021'00" W 124.28 FEET ALONG THE \"ESTERLY
LINE OF SAID LOT 21 TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF LOT 21,
UTE ADDITION, SAID CORNER BEING ALSO A POINT ON LINE 1-9
OF THE ORIGINAL ASPEN TOWNSITE;
THENCE N 75009'11" W 50.00 FEET;
THENCE N 14050'49" E 51.30 FEET;
THENCE N 30009'11" W 34.00 FEET;
THENCE N 75009'11" W 235.35 FEET;
THENCE N 15030'00" E 126.67 FEET TO A POINT ON LINE 8-9
OF THE ORIGINAL ASPEN TOWNSITE;
THENCE N 74023'18" E 13.11 FEET ALONG LINE 8-9 TO CORNER
NO. 9 OF THE ORIGINAL ASPEN TOWNSITE;
THENCE S 40001'52" E 52.02 FEET ALONG LINE 1-9;
THENCE S 75009'11" E 4.92 FEET TO A POINT ON THE \"ESTERLY
LINE OF LOT R, BLOCK 98, CITY OF ASPEN;
THENCE N 14050'49" E 10.00 FEET ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE
OF LOT R TO A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF DEAN AVENUE;
THENCE S 75009'11" E 60.24 FEET ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY
LINE TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF VACATED HUNTER
STREET;
THENCE N 14050'49" E 50.00 FEET ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE
TO. THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT I, BLOCK 97, CITY OF ASPEN;
1""'\
,
"
Page 2
Job No. 85-121
Revised Description
April 3, 1986
THENCE S 75009'11" E
OF LOT A, BLOCK 102,
THENCE N 14050'49" E
OF SAID LOT A TO THE
Ex f..-II BIT /
~
of Entire Little Nell S.P.A.
75.00 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER
CITY OF ASPEN;
100.00 FEET ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE
POINT OF BEGINNING;
CONTAINING 88,567 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS.
'I ' ..
~ j";;,I." . i .
~~1 f .. ..
~- '=2" = fj ~ =:
,~i Jf ~ ~f:;~ ilj'!;1 ~.,ef!;*
,..,J .!l < mu 2~~fdi' g !fi
1
!I~
,
2 ..
<
I' , j
),..
I :
I' , .
1 "
c
.
0.
.
o
.~ ~ ~
ct .EeL
<( 132
c.. (1)._
C/)I-c/)
.":0
..
cr: ~Ci
tJ in
Z .!o::
a :J~:
iI .!J:Od.
..J x.:.'
;: ::!~
G 4;:3
.
... ! f'I
.. . .
~ ! fig
:z:G:. i ,"
W4NO';
~1I.l:AU..
...~ .";;-:
Og :::C\
~ffic1:&g
.oil
;lJ;
i~
~: I
" \
\ . I
I- I
a: ,
w
-'
"-
"-
>= -'
-'
w .
z
u. ~ I
0 I
J: / I
l- I
a: /
0 ~
z
~i
'I
;
,
,
,
,
,
I
,
,
I
,
I
" Ak \ I
,
: ( ," 1/ ,
,
, , I
, I ,
,
' = I \ .'
Q; : t \ "
"
oi I. \ ~:
;1 ~,
E,
'" .,
Zi \~!
E! I I
~ , '
Ii
II
\
1\
:1
'I
1\
IJClS II
IMJ1S , , .
- , , '<
\ a'_M,t! - I ,
,
\ ,
,
,
III ,
"~ ,
3w ,
,
uC) ,
ZC ,
,
wO ,
", 0.-' "---, I
(/)
" ..:
.
"i
.
.
~
o
~
h
.....
~
.....
:t
\l1
'o"""'UIIO~~
-~ .."'C:.::7
'.----..:.. '. '.'-.-.'.-.
~.:_'-~ 0-
~~~ -~. -
m
~
C
~
>
<<
C
~
t:?l
~
--.. .-'0.. '. ';~_.-
......,'>.,::.
.~
.::'.
>-. -....-.:.::::~
-~~~-:'~~_;2-~~;..:,~_:~;~-
'--'~,-~~~.':~~;;:.:'~~'~~~:
{
~..'."'f "'f'.~ 1- ~
i~:~,,/yt ..~
'<~~\i.".~~~~~:;' ~
- ---
~=~i~,~~,;+tt--~ i; =r":~~
.~~ ~~~:,;::~'~?"'-':-;~"'='i ::1.:. :co. _:.~;',~'~ .~~=.
,-' ~.-.
5 ~-~~_ :,~"" 2'
.. ~
~
~~D;
'.i~
.0
,
13
C~
~~
n"C
~o
<-'
~
I,
, .
I
I,WI
lDJ'~
lnhI
=J~
.
mJ;,--=
WJi<;!!.
;v
"
laaJtS elJa!eo
.:::::
;j!
'0
~
ii
z
~
~
>
<<
:.~ ~
3
..~ a
. ':SV ,
.
!
c
~
0::
~ Q.l
'0 > C
lD :;::ClI
Q: ~a:
0:( 'UilV
0.. :l.~
Cf.l =(/)
~
\--.
...
\()
...
:t
o
.
;;
;;
.
.
~
~
.
,
.. . ~
r"
~:"::
... .:
tjJi
r: .,'
at
/
I ' ., .~~
.,....... .....J \": .~'.. Jl ~ .. -' i!~
GJ ,-, ~ .r, ,_;";,,. ... , ,"'" .. - '.," .
-.... .' ....... 'H ' ., , ,!I 'i m : 8~
~:ii il' '!'!g* !"!,liIJlgi 1.ltfJg~IO ~ ~Ifr
~~ II;U . f~f! ~f E S;H
0.11'3 j",f~ _f U .1010'1
.. : . "
.. J ~.
u. ,g",
.. 10. .....'
:em NO::::""'"
uw..~; .
~~;'&=,..
o"'lltcll..~
~:i B :&g
I';
i d ,
i! i,
, i , II;
,
! "
" t:'!
ii' nt; .'
. .
~
'<
~O..
J:i
~i..
:e:
J~~
,
j
r 'I
~~, i~' d
~'~f .~~
S\:\h''t
~~ I t1~"'1 .
,\~ ''Ol\i
.~!~\'~,~
,1.!~ "
(") ~:i ~>,~~~
il! ./'.1' j('
is <'l'11,~.11! ~
N ~I .'...::::
- .,
'" i
J,t' H'~
.rl'~ "'.
~, "..... \'I '" ~
(\ \'..' ~
t~." 1).1 ~.f\
"~ 'I~t ~.,,:~.l
~ .,f:.. ,~,di
~.~\~3~:~~
" tl" '" I
:'I'~(.(\'01il{~'
11 "\'I~ ;~ ~~f
~ l\ ~ 0" l\
...'1 ~.,..i;;tJ
.... ~i~~j~h~~
~ ''''1,~1.~t\1~'~
N ~I';;:~"~I~~~*
.,~ '"
\ . , ,
,jl .I
,
i
I ~~
"
s C' ,7
~ ~(
t ~... ~ :
! ~ n ~
lhlihl
~~~\~~I\
,f : 1 i : ~~
,
~~ :t:.~ i
, ."1
1..\'1 J,~ ,,~
rH ~~ ~~
_/_'/"':.1 'I
~ 11.1 I I..
, ! ;:l,~ \0\'/1
i:J? ,1' "'11'
~~~ I\~ lp'l
\ {tl.:i I" (~~
o,"..';I/l'tJ\!\
"<t ~~to..j'! l" IJl"~
~ .,.; It'~\~/~~~
~ ~~~\l .J~:~~~;~
. 01 '"
/'.,'
~ 1'1 t~J'
;:!'f") l
{Jr..,. J!.\
\1,\ .It ~l'!\ ~~
,:llt,_17 ;~I~
l\" 'I ..:- I~ ~\
tlt'A\\'Ih~.
.,} ~" ~,,' 1-,
1> 'f..~,1 I' '{ ,I .\~.
1l(......!,I, 'Ill' ~
~l ~~!\ (I j
'" 'tdlplr...C.\
Q) . .!-it" ~ ,'.3' ,l"
c" ", '1'~'
o ;l!(>,):"..~"tH
N ~'1 ."':l..'\'l'
. \
. j
.
j
j.
di,
~ 11 ~
~ ~~ ~},
,~ ?~ \t
l
l
,
,
,
~
~i
,I
i:
. . .
, . .
~1 . .
" sd i 2, ,;
I
'.
j
,1
< '
.t ~ 2 i
o ,;! i ~ q,;, ~
._ j . ~" f II"' ~" ')
-J J r t 'I oJ> "
_1"\ \l"jln'i~
~ " ~. I' J ,.~ k
ii: l' 1 in!: s110*
.
lit:?". I t
~~.i~'~ el'J~
J ". \'l~'
to ,,~ 1 11'I,1,
~, I ~ ~,~ 'I
~~~tf l~~
,~.t II l~ ~l'
I.. ~ ~
l."~ l'
J.1!~", . ~~
~ ~..' l{t ~l'I
"<t '\'it'h ~ j"
~ "'''' . c ~. \' ~
No ;L~!-l:l~~i\'i
'.."':{l;'
., 1
. . ,
'.~" ' .'
r,J':' -1>>;'\
'II J\ ~ 1 . ",::
" ~.. &<<>~
3",1\ III ~i ,II
l' ~1 .If \ ~\,
1<> '''1
~~~~ i~ ~l~
(t ~~~ .fLI
.]~t~~~1j'Hf
Ii) 1\'~:~~3' I<>~ .:.~
11l L,{'i',\':I;n\,"
5 .U;i~ t l~"\ ~I\
N ~:i,~~(>~~r~~~i
I
f
~
\
1
.
,,'
{{'~
~' t~
~ ~ I
~ "'::0
~"
.:n
illv~
taaJl$ euale~
;J ~
~:::I
~f~
:,pt
'\
" '1
.'.
II~
~ I~'
'f
~ ~~l
~ s:"~ ,
~
~w'1
~~I\
1, -l ~
~ R,~ .
~~I~
, .,
I'" ~
lll't\
~/,. I -!
torr'l
t l~r1~
~ I~ ~
~ ~'lr~
:. :
::::
~.:~.;;;.
f'
~
l@j
;:-'
.~~:'
'".
""..'
.0.:.
"".,-.; .
f1k;~~~
-
" .s
;;" J
.: ~ I-:~
"~~"'~ ,)
" .'~'
i~\..~
lti ~~' ",'"
1"\' !,I' ~
-4,81, ~
l~'
.S! ~,,~"It~ J
~ ~i. 'l~ I
~ ~l~~~:~
E t:~~I: " 'I
& ~~~S:t~
! l,
~::~-", ~j~~
<>,:~.t 't\"
'1/11f-'''
1;1 ~ '11"1 ~,'
a; 'JI::\ ~.I )
~ ~eJ. t;ij
S, l\i;i"
/J ~'" dl":tl.J
'0 .:~~~'l!~,.l.
~ 111~t~i~~\~
I~
fa:
,~ (J) &5
U QE
~ CIl a.
0.. ~..Q
.c( -g ~ c
a. ro m co
(f)-:ca:
~
"'
M
~
h..
.....
l:oi\)
.....
~
~
;;
.
<
o
"
,
c
"
~
,
,
-,
,
'..~
"
.'
ljh
.2'..
\.~
~,I ~
1~1
J ,
~~
h:~
f \,~ {
~ .~)
~td
"
'i
'\
" ~
"
"
',.
'.
1~
",''\
f'
~\~
.'
."
Qt ~\'I
:Ejl\
. ,
: t:t
c
e
,
c
,
,
1\1."
,qllr'
,,,~ ~
f', l
.:"
'1' '
!J~f ~~
~rl .e
;~.:. ," ~
, , I
\"'1 i
~ \ ~ 'l:t; 11'1
. '.
~I;ll I
~ t ~il # :! ;C
~ ,pqJi i ~~
,
,
,
,
,
~ \0>
.~ J ~1'
..'11,:","
""'Jl'Ill
: H::: ~l
':1 rGj
t ~ i -u,,"
= ~/i'jl' ,t
o t 1:; 11'~
8' ..1.. II .~:i'
Co. i~ '11('1,.
.~'"\ 1",
.t ".~.'I ('I ~~ '
~ ,I ~~)l'lr
,
,
,
,
I
,
,
,
,
,
,
I ! f
J I ~
. . ./" ! ~
;r~.-...~~-~jf ~J
\ At -. i'h
,.' ii" J
\ '01 j
: ,~~~)r
..:' -
-~
61
.'; I (
nIl "
u ~ > I .
\ \ '.
\, ;.
'.\,.
l
h
t
~ .
~ t
II
II
:DJ
l'/i
~n
x'.
d'
I'll"
"t'
~l, .
,
,
II
~ f
" , -
, . >
, , , ,
t , , "
" ~ ~
. ,\ ~ I
" .
\, 1 . .
.\ 1 "J ,
, . 1 ~ \
, .
,
,
,
I ,
,
! ,
,.
II
,
,ill
,
,
,
,
.~
J2
cil
~
.s;
.~
....
..'
-..-4....-....
~ \', "-
'.\\\
. \.~'.>....-
; ~ .,'~'... -....
. . . ,:"... .~. ".
,,1\ " .....
I i I.j " '\ t (~)'
/ . I' " t \ \. \'.0 \.
/ .'. !n t, '.~.. .___'wu
--'/'--11 J .! ~'\._! ....~.~-_..._._' ----
I 1 -I' c~- "":--0-----::'--' I
I. .,-1' --
/ .-J.--./..-~ I . ~...-,-"" +
I I rm-t.--- ~,
;' ! 'i -- . .~
I I ] <3 ..,)
I ,:
, I I j .......,
I I r t, ,<.tI;
I I I ~; ..j
, I i ~. i-~
I I 1 "1 I l__,:
-Ill ~,1
I I l ~ I l_ .,l
f ~ 't' ~
I I I I \..~)
I I I I .
I I I \ /
I J 1 ......../
J I I==""'"'....!';r~
'5
~
'"
----~:
'n , :5
II)
.'" .
.. 'c:. ,
--:-!l<-'
"
,
f
l
~
1
"
;...\
::'1
:::1
IIII
IIII '
U [1 9/
....-
-- -...." ,'..
.__ J '
,0
\ I ~Ii:
+L
;If'': .11 J
. ~~-\
I
,-'
, .
\ t
, ,
, .
} ~ ~ ~ .,
l.t ~ ~
/ \ ~ I ~
I
,
I
,J
..!!c;
OC
'C..
cE
o~
"'....
.0
"'.
:;::; :
"
.",
z'
, 8 " \.
, \ \
, I \
I /-\ ,',' ~ /-
I 11 \ t1 ",/""
t 0 ~ J I I '00 /" /--
I ~ \ I , ,~// /'
, ~ ,/ I / / / .-~'--'
.~ .../ / ! I /' .-
: ' / I' I / 1/
\ II II,;
\ I I I / /
/ I II I
\ I I / / I
I 1 1 I I I
\ I I I I I
............ I / I /
~ I..... I I
/ I
r 1 I
I , I I
I ( /// /1
.......;/ ,,/
,
I
I
I
t
I
,
\
\
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ I
\ \ I
\' I
" I
" I
,I,
,"
1'1 I
" ,
I
I
~/'
~$
fl
<
,-, J~
I ,~
\ ' .
~ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
\ \
06 ~ \ \
I .Q \ I
,..___:;;: \ 1
! ---~--.J"--- "'!'"l \ I I
! 0 1 I \ I
~ ~ L'/ ,:
"'/,,:c:=:=..:::.:..__------- I
/ ,-,:
..."" ...__-i:::'----..J
;.
~
~
::;
,
, 1
_.. "T
"
,
{
,
.
,
\
.
t.
f
c
~
;;:
.
.!!l
u
~
d:
it
(f)
~
_c
.
~-
.a.
.~
-"c.
a..
]~
_'C
~c
'Ej
.
.
~
.
.
'0'
.
"-J
h,
"
tQ
'-
~
4;
~
<
j
"
10'"
IjJ,
\ i I
i,JP'
l\~ l'
1ll\II"b
~ ~,lt
It t
,;~~~l
-" .
,.~,l
~jl' ~
)i~t~
\,1' ~.
1~1\~f
~.' "c<<
C
,
,
"
"
"
!
~
j
nl-llfl>tT 3
M.ge J ".p 4-
i"""\
~-.I
,-
~:;!
~,
~-
.'
~
\l:;
.
.
o
. "
. .
,w~
Z .. ~
."w
o..ga:
..w.
0>.
vw.
~~~
z..
- ..
...
. ~.
~x
z..
. . .
~~:c
...
..
::;::
.
.
:J;
::I... ~ J
~! ~~;
Ill'" .. ~
~.5;1'; i
i
=-.1
.'
"
:!::i
~;
"'t
.-
n
i.
; ~:
~ ~H
~ U~
~' \
1
1
1
\
1
L
\~
I~
\!
~ \;
, I'
; 1\
l~:
1
,
;~
ij
U
,.
(D.
';~
/ "
/
/
/
:! J I
~*l !
UU'
~- .'3
. .,
H
/--- - ---
'010'
~.
c.o'
~~I)j'''''
,:0<
\ )
~;L_____ __
.... r oIQ....".","""'"...-.........
",./ i~ ............:::~.... --
/ . ,
-/1' ..........
"-<",
!
hg
,;':8
'" b{Z
r------
I
I
\
\
,
\
,
t
"
,
~i
:~
~~
".
~~!
i;
.,
&;:
:;~
:!;
'~Ola
113N 31.1..1.11
M3N
~Ola
113N.:I0 HJ.l:lON
~
e
r-
1'1
I'
1
l
"__IX"-_"
3nN.Jllrt
I
" ''''''1'-'/
I
J '
!I ~
~
1 i
r ~
.1~M~...'.HCI.'..
. :l;::!~~::~~~;~-~ .
,
I
-....:::..-;-.---
~NviJ;ia"-:::: -. -'~'j:.
I
l'
~
. ;
~
ru
,
I
I
I,
I~
~ f!::
~ ~
l .
, ~
,"
I
I'
.1.
~~~
It.:.
'rll~
~.
~~
z<
..
~<
~o
.~
~ i 1-=1'-11' '
i ~ I ,I ~--~ t I
",."....- II I' \. ' t I
Il' I ___L__' I
~ 1,..-1 [I I -\ \ ^
~ I I I' \
~z I I I I I ,. \
~~ t I I / ' ,I 1
z I / I I I
~Q I ~ I I II II
I j....' \ I
I I I' I ,I
__ " i i t ;;1
- \ \' ' ,;1
\ ' \ ;~ \
! \ \-~; \
, __ I \. I
_~ It::...------y~...~ou....,;.j------' J:~ I
I , ,~ --,-.-
"; '" I ___, ' - / ! (~ .--.----1
" + I -'--- j' -~
i C II -' --Iii I 1\-1
~ __, ,I \'" \, ,I
~ ,'_ ,I ,I< t:, .1
~ ." _, I I 11 'I
~ ,'!l1 I It 1'1
\ 'II \ I"
\ '11 I Ii :I
: 1\ 0 ,'11 1\
r ,I a I II
, II ~ \ I I'
\ 1\ .J \ I II
I ~ ( II
\ z: I I II
/ I ~ ,I 1\
< ( ~ \ i :1
: I z I: 'i
L Ii II: Ii
-+L I I II
I,I -v---'--- I :)-1
1'/ I,
I I" \
I ill ~ "
1\, __ ~I f:t \
L..2.- ,\, ~ /
~l [/r-'
"1
\ I'
J\ \t \1
[ \ ~
I I
i \
I I
il \
, :1 ,\
, ;1'\
___~--- __ I !i II \
___ _ UU:iS"-"'-'-~ '\ ;: \
____ ___...: :'~tI$""" !I .~;
,~",,"".:';1m .... ,i \ ,--
_ _"_' ..n.m;w +.--, " I '::' ,;..',,"~';;
..=. ';'"!P""t
..,~.... .', .
__~=-d=71\' I. "~:llilli ,.,.' ..,..
: . \ ,I ,",,~.i= r'^'='-' "Ie I' , " . "'....
! ".~___ b t-_:' ... '. ... fl 1 ~,;;:
, 'c ' --~,~---'l ,-~~ --'
~ '-J'\ \ r " .,.J ; r' --" ',' ,--.
,,[_, I ' ___, .'
g J' c,J,\,--'-- I "\ ::: .... :-- L --- -1'-
, , "~~' ' ...........
, " 7 ' ~-- ~ :_:1".'_'___
, . \' I'.'
, ,'\ ...... ..
O 'I " .n n'r---:~'
_ . L'~ :; ,J .
I
,
I
,
r-
/ '
,
,
'--
"
z
~
.
.
9
~
>
~
a
"
"
"'
z
~
"
"
"
J
,._J-'---r-..:;-::.\.
,-
I
\
-'
,
.I
~1
t
)
,
"
,
\
r-.
CK,h./:;d- 3
f~e. ZdP4-
1
I
I
\
f"""\
is:
i ~
.
IE
r
.- ...-+-
"
I
I'
!
L
,
,.
.J,
,
,.
,
r.
.............'1l,m.. '''1.m
L
,
,.......l..
t
I..,..
I
._-......;..-
--- --- j.. +
I -, ----+ -- -f. '
~:~-'-m.~t,:' ']'1 . mf.- .:--
~-~~H ...~.~~...
_; ...,." .i. ----
--4- ~
I
I
";"1
...,1
I
, ..,(,
,
""i"U
"',;~
". ''''''''
"", ruOlld
1""\
--
C::XJ..I,If!,lT' .3
f-kge 3 of 4-
3t1N3AIi' .I.N""na
-(...... -----,ooo_.....r:-.......,j17.r--------
n ---1'>-
"
~"
Zw
~b
e'
e
~
~~_..
"-
,
,
"-
,
"-
,
,
v~~
g€!
...
~
i
L
i
~ ! ~
.!'": _..,..1;
,
..,,;,.
',.;j""
""
..
.~,~..
~-
.~...
.
,
....,..
,
1----
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I.
I!.
'"
~~
l-:!U
~~
7~-"-
"'I
..../.)
.. .... ..., i .
..../....
i
r
I'"
z
~
I
. '''j r
......r..
....."g'I'
"
%
o
,.
"
Q
Q
o
~
I
I
___I
.1...(
j:: ~~=_ :I;,
/',
/'~'/ "
/1"''-/ "-
/ "
/ ~
'\ /"1,
'^ .... /' / /
....... /.../ /
\...//. <....1...
"
"
"
"
\ :~
~~
CI
I.....~
' .......::::~~ "::l'
. . ~,. ~-I-II ;
~ '-:I' '.., ~
... .....,'"
1"3-;..-~::6 !
:l......~:5~ :~
>-....... -.~
~~~~~H;
~........ 0 . i
. :;i1!<l':i~ _
_.z:i.f.=:-= I
WI~i ,;
. ii:
t.. ~
"'j -
--------.
I
,
""'1
I
,
.i....!..
.....
.....
I
r.'
--1
.. .......... _.....!.....
:~...~.!tt>._.
"., ""I" :""/-:-"1'
...,....
. ......... .._..... ..,_.._ ..._.n.
____,I .. . ..
~ -;~ ._--~-~ ._-~ .----
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
DB~
!
n
~"
I' eft i .
! r
,I I ~ ~
, I i \ J~
!:!, 10 ! .,
"11
.
!
-'
-'
w
z
...
o
:l:
...
a:
o
z
""
I ~,. ", .rlN
: J !.~ " \
Y J-" I;;g ,,;
{I-__ I ~'" \:
,.- II
iJ---1_J:; II
~_..--...... \.i
'---~-
'.I_M.1l
'_IOM ~.
, !JdS
--
"
"
,
III
:>
-,w
u"
ZO
wO
0.-'
'"
"
c
~
0::
~
o
'(3 m c:
~ () l'Il
a..cii:
"1"5 ~
a. Q.l:t:
"'....'"
/"
;i
'I
;1
~ i .
1 \
, "
, "
: J
I /1
, I
, I I
: I
: I
: I
, I
: \
\ ",1
\ ~l
\ ~:
-,
"
"
\eSt
\ :
, I
I:
I:
\
:1
:1
'I
:j
!\
, ,
, '.
, ,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
i
.
..
~
~
ol
~
l"V)'
\---
...
~
....
'.:t
\~
;;
.
.
o
.
(""\
"
('\
EXHIBl'I' 4
Little Nell Base Development SPA Agreement
Site Utility Costs
, .
Zone 1:
Zone 2:
Zone 3:
Zone 4:
~
("""\,
I
EXHIBI'r 5
Little Nell Base Development SPA Agreement
Landscape and Paving Costs
Planting, paving, irrigation
and street furniture
19,250 sf @ $15.00/sf
$ 288,750
Special finish concrete
8,750 sf @ $3.50/sf
30.625
10 trees @ $500 ea. = $5,000
3,000 sf of sod or ground
cover and irrigation
@ $1.75/sf = 5,250
10,250
25 trees @ $500 ea. =
75 shrubs @ $25 ea. =
3,000 sf of irrigation
@ $1.50 sf =
1,920 sf of sidewalk
@ $3.50/sf =
700 If of curb and gutter
@ $10/lf
$12,500
1,875
4,500
6,720
7,000
32,595
Zone 4a: 30 trees @ $500 ea. =
125 shrubs @ $25 ea. =
3000 sf of irrigation
@ $1. 50/sf =
Zone 5:
$15,000
3,125
~,500
22,625
30,000 sf of wildflower/ native
grass seeding @ $.30/sf
9,000
$ 393,845*
Total
-_.- -----
--------
* Includes $118,400 for Phase 1. improvements in
Zones 1, 2 and 5
1"1
;
(")
MEK:lRANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Aspen City Council
Hal Schilling, City !1anager
Alan Richman. Planning Office
~
THRU :
RE:
Little Nell sm Agreement
DATE:
April 3, 1986
-----------------------------------------------------------------
---- ------- - - - --- ---. - -- - --- - - --- - --- - - -.-- .----.- - - - - - - - -- -- ..- - -.-..- - - -- --
The staff has been working with the applicant to develop a
comprehensive sm Agreement in a form which is acceptable for you
to review. We anticipate that a draft will be available to place
in your boxes on Friday, April 11. Please review this document
so that it can be di scussed in detail at your meeting on April
14.
r;
?1
\':.. ,1
MEK>RANOOM
FROM:
Jim Wilson, Building Department
Glenn Horn, Planning Office ~\C:~Y1n
Aspen Mountain 1986 Off-Season Improvements
April 1, 1986
TO:
RE:
DATE:
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Aspen Mountain Ski Area Ma ster Plan addressed 1 ift construc-
tion primarily within unincorporated Pitkin County. As part of
the Plan approval process, the Board of County Commi ssioner s
granted the following exemptions.
1. Lift construction, renovation and upgrading to the extent
that the majority of the work is already inspected and
approved by the Colorado Tramway Board and the USFS dupli-
cate inspection and imposition of fees from and by the
Pitkin County Building Department.
2. Exempt lift construction renovation and upgrading from the
28 foot height limitation of the Code.
In addition to these exemptions, we placed several conditions on
the Aspen Mountain Ski Area Master Plan which must be satisfied
prior to the issuance of an excavation permit for Little Nell.
The primary condition which you should be aware of is:
"An excavation permit will not be issued for Phase I of the
Little Nell base area redevelopment unless and until the ASC
provides written acknowledgement and acceptance of the
operational plan for Lift #4 contained in this letter as a
pre-requisite to such a permit."
Therefore, give us a call to see if we have received the letter
from ASC before you issue an excavation permit.
It is important to understand that the County exemptions relate
only to the portion of the project which falls in County juris-
diction. The base of the gondola and all of Little Nell is in the
City. Alan is working on the Little Nell review and it will not
be completed for a while. When the Little Nell review is
complete you should get together with Alan to find out if there
are any additional building process exemptions or conditions.
JIt. .J\r "~iIl'L fi .~
1f~~~""'0~tv"~~~~s
GH.ll
PLAt."NING AND ~()NING COM1USSION MEETING
MARCH 4, 1986
MOTIONS
Motion:. Blomquist moved that the terms of Condition '13 had been
met; Tygre seconded. All in favor; motion carried.
....
Motion: Blomquist moved to defer the judgement as to the visual
compatibility of the lift/gondola bUilding to City Council review
in as much as it has only been possible for the applicant to
prepare functional detail which the Commission finds meet-s the
intent of Condition .12; Markalunas seconded. All in :eavor;
motion carried.
Motion: Hunt moved to approve that the applicant has met Conditions
'10, '22, #5, and '11 subj ect to memorandums from the City
Engineering Department dated January 20, 1986 and March 3, 1986
and referencing to memorandums from A.J. Zabbia of Cassins and
Assoc, dated February 20, 1986; Tygre seconded, All in favor;
motion carried.
1
f""l
~
)'
"
",.'
David +Friends
77J.' G1 (;1LJ/IIet L-. . ;
filWZ! /i?v1(J C kth rE- ~N'I4-I Zm!;ltcr tfwtMfS.fIcA<t
StkIf~"( MlN~It/ OI'N)//~A./ IJAI ..P12 /ffC-fotPn01i/ /~
· t.~ 77Z--C- N~L-
..--,---" . .-r-:
/;hs IS KSWTlrn~ 17ft:- .5;Muf-- 5;:;~ L &ftfife:- U45/
ItIdfrl/TfS6'0U i/onlttti- tJAI b~e !lIc-L-L- IfE:5VLi/77d~
~dr-:77fC-~' ~6~ 77/6-S;1# ?-:~c;Sf ?/kIYC~
7Jff PIZ .6~t<7&) TJrI6' ~~Or TM7Jc--t/,q::::s 'jA!
771f- tft-uJ).4U~ .p;C V;theJ/h7Gf>1/ t/A/tOe:tL 77IE- Sr'JI- Z'&Mto/
r t.f1vf (Jt6-l~/ ~AJ7L/-77f6-" tBU/uJl/l/y-cJIC'- /1- /ft72h- @
It 17?6-- ii.k~L #VIJ J. Cdi1/~4tJa LAnV 7716- JKI &. OA/
771b~ ~;J()LI1- /f7VdCfl)N~ J/;w:w~:L 6n/e1A
· 0 "
71Mr I IZ- /)10 A/ro- M/t/Ju376- '7J:I6=~ Idt?i/( IA-?C7-
S/rfniLlJ J.h1.-1/6- ON' 0 /h(..6f:f /1\/#71:.1:1 ,...2 b<//? i~ L-/s /6H.tllA/.'
.
T- ~(/dtj- - ~ I- S;O;feb fJ1C- ;9/17C/</df-dl/lvtj)
~/NCtLL4bJ N SIre-: a.e. #AIShM;977Mf;lrbvA/'FY
~MI5-I/~'
~ ,.-
-/~/rsrvu/~ .- /)tS,#lfJtJ7N76J 7}/-If7CP'NtfUtStattJ
IJt /) Nif/7'Ih( G i/\/VO f}UozJAlr ;frJ1j/!fW j1 ~ fow.dtJ?/f-/
71I6/G ~t;fT1dNJ(I,e. - -; tiANJlr7l/Jl1-.5I-ViJ/~J/
DAVID WHITE CONSULTANT POBOX 3887 ASPeN, CO 81612 (303) 92S:nal
b8s5
.-.
~
~ ~ - {iONtJOL/f ---/ju. ~/(/14f- (J11-TJ"8W1 /!-No lJ/&1i/
n:-- nnJlUJT 7lJ 771&' lS45c- o/- ~,c- WiU/ ~
1fz;Tb(6). 60tVo~tA---Sl-fpvi/) J-frNe-- I.f,~/ L4li1G'~j
;n-" M9~--El Y
ff .. yICthtltJ /A/7JC/ht/tH -l3tJl&/.J/~I3;fc/G
lfNoTJlttC /5"-2( H~ .
tL - (# ~c- Mod OAJV J;,4z;E- 'TV Irf;N7ht- s---~O
7J11&" Url/IA/lC/N?7
i> - ha/\/r iff-' 77? SIr?- M/{f/7 NcT/~C'- TO tJt0-
" II
~JIP~/((~
C!.- -S/MiJItt/y tfAl /)uIetl7l/1 /1rV!J 7)16/~/lV'rfvG~~1
ON VlIAeh/l .
d --5VMM6~~ /I-rh././O/I!S~Ln/ lJ/Jf!viJSE-;J.
V - cSK 1/6< Mol-- -o-fIZ- - ~(4J oAf ~
.- eNT/Grl7ttcE ft) /ft:Ps /'f;1/J) A-A:n/ 11a6 ~tJf~
/?1Z..-- 1hU- NO/TO 4- C-cNt/!~L JJ~/f..v Kv&L-
/Jnfl) nILe:. StJbU 77 W ~ N'or-~7J17:5 tiF-- -y'r:r:
~Vj . - el(~t(Uf77CM/ -- ~/ //h"3 t)cwtJdwr ;kL
~ C;HNtj61 7716- WIh?E' 1:Sr1fC:' ~fA- /WI} WIn! kmc-
~/I//d IN~' 1et/7tJ~' lIVe:- Jl,NC-NtJ/ PUfNNUJ
f?v;( 77!f- /M~ ~fJcJtI7'7t V
~/ //!w,( t""'- ~ f,wej!fU(f/#GUffJox/~/V/b
'.'/
~
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
RE:
Aspen City Council
Planning Office
City Engineer
Roger H. Hunt, Aspen Planning and Zonil1g Cc>mmi'ssid!l
Little Nell SPA Development Plan; Mil10rity \Tie..
March 19, 1986
TO:
THRU:
DATE:
-- - - -- - - - --.- -- - - -'--'- -- --'--'- - - - -- - - -.- - -.- - -.....-..- -....-.-,.......:....,..........-,..............,....-...........''''''.........
----------------------------------------------------------------
I am generally in favor of the Little Nell, Iledeveldpm'ent ~s
proposed. However, the skier drop-off area and the Impacts dl1
Durant Avenue caused me to vote against the conditio'nal IIS'e of
the hotel (included in P&Z Resolution 86-3).
The problems I see with the proposed drop..off are~ at'eS1l"'elfld'ilt~n
1. It does not comply with the City cOl!!lei:l'seon.il'$tldh
regarding that area, neither is it an illt1lt'.w'E>'ltie.l'lt:to
that condition.
2. Assllming the concept of full ft'o1t~al. af!l'~>""dft1i$a"li
acceptable alternative, the intru!!I~lrl.l'It(:l tlll,fll'l'I't
Avenue with curb extensions andpla<::I~'meJlll'h.n(t
parking in line with present ~nglepltt'Khl\'~ lIh, 'E>1tl!ri$~
side of the proj ect is unacceptable fot!ret~liIli'iti~etl!!ll'1l'l!
and will probablY have an adverse'ef[~Yi;:~ tSir'sh..~
circulation especially when theil!ct'e',,~im~etil'~'f
the gondola and the. hotel com,eon lil1'e;, ,..' "",,,, ",' ,
3. The skier drop-off exit and the hot.il~t'~J1iEtfaeS:j)9'<i
has placed too much (all) automobilelil'llItellfl!'l\'\: e'Gih'fllc'"
in the circulation lane (s) of DuYant A'VI!lltI'E>. '
4. Though the above "technical" prolili!ffls<!ahl:ieSiol"e't1~
the City Engineer (who shares myeOl1e'etitsh . thellhd
result would have maj or differe'itees which. th(! City
Council may not like and may welll10t have a$'pt'6i1l#dllf
if seen before hand.
5. Finally, all intrusions into DuratltAv'enlle' l:fi<l'lti'8'1:it'll
extensions of the Hunter St reetMall ,shotild.WIit., 1:n,
allowed without the consideration of futllte eirdll:liit.fo'll
and transit needs. For example, it maS' be fie'(;teY!i'!>'€~eo
convert to parallel parking on each side of th~. p1:Clje'dt
in the near future. Allowing the prdject trow'tb t>ut in
protrusions beyond the parallel parkin9 line ct~~ee$~~
unnecessary future expense.
The majority of my fellOW tommissioners chos'e it'bt to idetltify tli'!!'
above problems. ! bring them to your attel1ffoh cl11y bec~u'!i'e !
think you can make better decisions if YO'II khO''' as milch a's
possible up frol1t.
Thal1k you for your consideration.
ctivelY,
::;:;l~~-/
R~r H. HUl1t
-
LITTLE NELL SPA PRECISE PLAN
Report to Council -- Remaining Concerns of Allan Blomquist
1. I would normally have voted no -- except that the Trade-offs
make the project desireable.
2, The advantageous Trade-offs are:
a. The gondola as a summer operation.
b. Small conferences as a summer business,
c. Improved drop-off, mall, ticketing for skiing with
positive potential for summer.
d. Putting ASC into the hotel business, something they
have not always understood in ARA-ACR matters.
e. Potential summer use of Aspen Mountain/Richmond Hill.
3. The Council should require:
a, That all of the Ski Company land within the City limits
be plated with the base as Lot 1, the trails, road and
malls as Lots 2 - ?, for public access, and the ski
slope as Lot OS for open space in perpetuity (and
settle if Aspen Mountain Road is County or City inside
City) .
b. Something more definitive concerning skier parking,
i,e., re joint venture with future City lots or garage.
-,.,
~. .i5<f' T
II ~r 'I' ~ . 'rr t ~ T". '1 ."
~-~....""""""~ - - ~r" ~4 t.....~~- .-".:ri-"'-
, ~ .k
"'-'_~o"
~
r"\
. >I
.1=1 LA tV
MINORITY POSITION OPPOSING APPROVAL OF LITTLE NELL SPA.
The SPA was placed on this parcel because of its unique
attributes (the location at the base of Aspen ~~ountain)
and the variations requested are justified only if the
result is to the "public benefit." There are several,":reas
which result in the public detriment with this design',
NO "GRAND ENTRANCE" - The development of this property is
crucial to the link between Aspen and Aspen Mountain. This
design effectively walls off the town from its mountain.
Although the applicant claims to have "preserved" the
view through Hunter Street, this is not the applicant's
property to preserve. The applic~nt is actually appropriating
public real estate (Hunter and Dean streets) for private
uses. And the gondola station will block off the view from
Hunter street anYW<;l:Y. The City Council required a "grander
entrance" as a condition of approval but this condition has
clearly not been met, and cannot be met with the planned
footprint.
SHADING - The applicart'~ shadow study shows that part of
Durant street will be in the shade all day long, and much of
it will be in shade except for the noon hour during the
coldest months. This means dangerous icy conditions on
Durant street, on what is now the only reamining patch of
Durant which is safe for pedestrians to cross for access to
the mountain. Only a different footprint can solve this problem.
CROTtlDING & CLUTTER - Two lifts with milling areas and mazes,
a trench cut into the hill to accommodate the gondola (would
this be necessary if the gondola station were located nearer
Durant where the hotel is planned?) commercial and administrative
ski company space, plus a 92-room hotel is packing too much
and too many uses onto this small and sensitive site. Crowding,
both visual clutter and use conflicts will result.
i ,<'
If.,
.. ';:\\.\,
,
\ ~,\~,-
Pl\ .
annlng
& Zoning Commissioner
March 18, 1986
Mari Peyton,
~ (')
Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office
130 south galena street
aspen, colorado 81611
March 18, 1986
Mr. Fred smith
Planning Director
Aspen Skiing Company
0060 Atlantic Avenue
P.O. Box 1248
Aspen, CO 81612-1248
Dear Fred,
I am in receipt of your March 4, 1986 letter which requests that
insubstantial modific.iltio.n!3 b~ Il)il?~~()the Aspen Mountain Ski
Area Master Plan (AMSAMP). The Planning Office has reviewed the
improvements proposed by the Aspen Skiing Company (ASC) for
construction during the 1986 off-season and compliments ASC for
aggress ively working to improve the sk iing exper ience on Aspen
Mountain.
The Planning Office has reviewed your proposal to amend the
AMSAMP to include .il neYi.. Lift #4 ..ilt the base of Aspen Mountain
serving Little Nell. As you know, toe Board of County Commis-
sioners recommended certain improvements to the AMSAMP proposed
as part of Resoluti<)pNO.. 85-;41'< . Specifically, the Board
proposed that the ABC be given the option of retaining Lift i4 or
a similar lift system with certain operational restrictions as
part of the AMSAMP. Since the Board made this reconunendat.ion I
consider your proposal to construct a new Lift. Ht() .be an
"insubstantial change" to the AMSAMP as long as Lifi #4 ii
operated in accordance .with the operation plan as set forth in
this letter.
Pitkin County's major concern regarding Lift #4 relates to the
impacts upon the City of Aspen from an increase in the daily
capacity to Aspen Mountain and potential safety problems which
could occur on the Aspen Mountain trails system particularly at
the end of the skier day. Therefore, the conditions of the
.,-"
!""'\
j
Mr. Fred Smith
Planning Director
Aspen Skiing Company
March 18, 1986
Page 2
County's approval are designed so that Lift #4 will not operate
as an Initial Access Lift except under special circumstances. It
should be explicitly understood by the ASC that any changes to
operations of Lift #4 which deviate from the conditions set forth
below which lead to a daily capacity increase will require a
substantial amendment to the AMSAMP.
Based upon the authority vested in me by Section 3-1.12(e) of the
Pitkin County Land Use Code, permission is granted to the ASC to
construct a new Lift #4 on Aspen Mountain subject to the follow-
ing conditions:
1. The Aspen Skiing Company will revise the AMSAMP map proposed
conditions to reflect the new location of Lift #4 and submit
copies of the mgp to the staff prior to the issuance of an
excavation permit for Phase I of the Little Nell base area
redevelopment.
2. Lift #4 may be a fixed grtptri~le chat~.with a design
capacity of 1200 pers.(?IJ~ ~er.. g~lf~'.' Newill. consider
request s for a quad upon further amendln(i!nt requests.
3. Lift #4 will not be operated before 10:00 A.M. except in the
event of:
o B rea kdOW n, slowdown, or non-complet ion of alternat ive
initial access lifts (Gondola, #lA).
o Major special(i!y~n~~,o!1'?J.~I>e1il' M'td~I1t:~:fl"t$uc~as World
Cup Races, Summit: Sedes'Races, TowFt t~a.giIe' RaceS.
o Isolated, temporary, experiments are being conducted to
observe the impacts of operating Lift 114 during the
first two hours of mountain operation on the functional
characteristics of Aspen Mountain, particularly end of
the day mountain egress. Prior to such temporary,
isolated experiments the Aspen Skiing Company will
notify the Planning Director and Forest Service.
It is the mutual understanding of the County and ASC that
the principle function of this lift's opening at 10:00 A.M.
will be ski school checkout, but it will also be available
to the general skiing public.
4. It is explicitly understood that changes to the operation
plan for Lift 114 or increases to the capac ity of Lift 114
will require an amendment to the AMSAMP.
f"'.
,
Mr. Fred Smith
Planning Director
Aspen Skiing Company
March 18, 1986
Page 3
5. An excavation permit will not be issued for Phase I of the
Little Nell base area redevelopment unless and until the ABC
provides written acknowledgement and acceptance of the
operational plan for Lift #4 contained in this letter as a
pre-requisite to such a permit.
Based upon the discussions which we have had with you, we
recommend that you consider operating Lifts #3 or #7 or both
until 3:45 P.M. as one means of relieving end of the day egress
pressure on Spar Gulch and Copper. As your plans for Aspen
Mountain evolve we would welcome the opportunity to discuss
ope r at i ona 1 modi f icat ions with you prior to your submission of
future amendments.
This letter shall be recorded with the County Clerk and Recor-
der's Office and will serve as an amendment to the AMSAMP.
We look forward to the opening of the new Lift #4 and the gondola
on Aspen Mountain. If we can be of any further assistance to you
pI ease let us know.
Sincerely,
ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
~ 9-J2-
Alan Richman, AICP
Planning and Development
Director
AR:jlr:ltr.2
cc: Board of County Commissioners
Tom Smith, County Attorney
John Eldert, County Manager
Glenn Horn, Asst. Planning Director
:;':',,~'<i:""--"
~ ...,
r"\
'~
MEMORANDUM
RE:
Aspen City Council
Hal Schilling, City Manag~
Alan Richman, Planning and Development Director ~
Little Nell Review Schedule
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
DATE:
March 19, 1986
---------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------~------------------------
" ., ,'" .... .... ......... ,."." .." "',c.",>; ", .
Attached for your review is the Planning Office's analysis of the
Little Nell Precise Plan, Thill 90mprehensive memo is the only one
which we intend to produce for this stage of the review, and therefore
should be brought to each of the following meetings (along with the
applicant's executive summary which was provided to you earlier).
Wednesday, March 19
TIME
5:00-7:00 PM
LOCATION
DATE
Council Chambers
Tuesday, April 1
5:00-7:00 PM
4:00-6:00 PM
5:00-7:00 PM
Community Center
Council Chambers
Council Chambers
Monday, March 24
Wednesday, March 26
Monday, March 31
Regular Meeting
Council Chambe~s
Please call me if you have any questions about the schedule or the
attached memo,
AR.l
^
!')
MEMORAm>UM
FROM:
Aspen City Council ~
Hal Schilling, City ManageW"
Alan Richman, planning and Development
Little Nell Precise Plan
Director .~
TO:
THRU:
RE:
DATE:
March 19, 1986
---------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
".. ..,......... ..................v....... ._.._.............'v_,...,....,. ............_..,_"..."...,_.._..__
APPLICANT: Aspen Skiing Company
ZONI.m/Lor SIZE: The base area of Little N~ll.i.s. presently zoned
CC/SPA and C. Ordinance No. 53, Series of 1985, which received
first reading approval from Council at the cOnceptual stage, will
place an SPA OVerlay on that portion of the base area zoned C.
Final action on that ordinance sho~ld only be taken when Council
is ready to take final action on the Precise PlCin~ .'l'h~..Cire.a
zoned CC/SPA comprises 43,124 s.f., while the area zoned '(;
requested for inclusion within. ~h~ SPA. ()verlay comprises 45,738
s.f., for a total lot size of 88,862 s.f.
APPLICANf'S REQUEST: At this stage of the review process, the
following land use reviews are before the City Council:
1. Final action on SPA Precise Planl
2, Final action on Ordinance 53, Series of 19851
3. Final action on change in use GMP exemption to convert
the Holiday House from lodging to employee housing 1
4. Final action on encroachment (vendor's agreement) into
Dean St reet 1 and
5. Allotment of lodge units to the project (multi-year
allotment requested 1 allotment for additionCil commer-
cial space not yet submitted, but anticipated on August
1, 1986).
Final actions taken by the Planning and Zoning Commission
included the following: .
1. Grant of Conditional Use Permit for hotel in CC zone
and ski lifts in the C zone districtl and
2. Grant of mountain viewplane and 8040 greenline ap-
provals.
I"'"
~
PLANNING OFFICE REVIEW: In order to provide Council with an
organized sequence in which to consider this application, we
suggest that issues be taken in the following order:
A, Analysis of project's compliance with conditions of concep-
tual approval:
1. Architecture, site design and lift configuration.
2, Access, circulation and parking.
3, Geologic hazards, drainage, grading, utilities and
employee housing,
4. Miscellaneous issues which have been resolved.
B. Evaluation of consistency with precise plan review criteria,
C, Specification of zoning regulations to apply to the parcel,
variations permitted, construction schedule and mitigation
of construction impacts.
D. Growth Management allotments.
E. SPA Overlay Rezoning (Ordinance 53, Series of 1985).
Our review of these issues follows, and should be used alongside
the executive summary provided to Council by the applicant which
provides the graphics to illustrate the points contained herein.
A, Compliance with Conditions of Approval. Council Resolution
No. 85-33 set 25 conditions of approval of the applicant 's
conceptual plan. These conditions set the framework within
which the applicant and the P&Z have been working to develop
a preci se plan in keeping with the site's unique location
and function. Therefore, our analysis of the applicant's
compliance with these conditions forms an integral part of
our evaluation of the suitability of the precise plan
itself .
1. Condition$ Concerning Architecture, Site Design and
Lift Configuration. The issues to be discussed in this
section are open space (Condition No.1), skier drop
off (Condition No, 7), visual impact (Condition No.4),
shadows (Condition No. 15), pedestrian gateway (Condi-
tion No. 19), encroachments (Condition No. 23), lift
building design (Condition No, 12), lift service
(Condition No. 13), snow shedding (Condition No. 16)
and FAR (Condition No, 2).
"1. The applicant shall amend the site plan to provide
2
""
1""'\
open space along the length of the Durant Street
frontage of the hotel, so as to create a courtyard
of at least 10 feet in depth. The open space
requirement shall be considered in coordination
with rather than in addition to the area to be set
aside for the on-site drop-off facility required
in condition #7 below,"
During the conceptual review, we raised a concern that
the open space on the site, being at the rear of the
building, did not meet the requirement of Section 24-
3.7(d) that open space be open to the street. By the
conclusion of that stage of the review we suggested
that the open space along Spring Street could be
justified as technically meeting this requirement.
Therefore, when the condition was rewritten, reference
to the technical requirement was dropped in favor of a
simple statement that open space be provided along
Durant to create a courtyard effect.
When Condition No, 1 was written, we had in mind that
the skier drop-off area could be set in the midst of
open space, and that the two areas need not result. in. a
total requirement for 20 or more feet of set back,
However, we did not anticipate that the drop-Off area
would be designed to occupy the entire frontage, and
would essentially be used instead of providing open
space, as it was in the original design provided to the
Planning Commission at the Precise Plan stage.
The original Precise Plan reviewed by P&Z showed the
building moved back the minimum .of 10. fE!E!t which had
been required by Council, with the skier drop-off
thereby extending partly into the Durant Avenue right-
of-way. This aspect of the Plan received relatively
low scores from P&Z in the GMP process, and caused the
applicant to re-think the project's design.
The revised plan, which was accepted by P&Z, was for
the building to be moved back another 10 feet on the
site, with the following results:
o The skier drop-off is accommodated fully within
the applicant's property.
o Views to the mountain have been improved.
o Shadow effects on Durant Avenue have been reduced.
o Four hotel units and a limited amount of accessory
space have been eliminated from the project,
3
.'-".
The major trade-offs for these several benefits are:
o The image of the hotel on Durant Avenue is still
influenced by the presence of the parking area.
To mitigate this problem, the applicant proposes
to continue the Hunter Street paving program into
the drop-off area, and to do plantings in front of
the hotel and along the drop-off lane,
o The building no longer sits along Durant, but
instead is placed well back from the street. To
maximize pedestrian activity in the downtown, and
to be consistent with the character of our
victorian town, it is normally considered prefer-
able to have storefronts directly on the street,
Buildings such as Ajax Mountain and City Plaza are
examples of how "dead" open space is not prefer-
able to on-street building frontage. The appli-
cant demonstrated to the Planning Commission that
the arcade in front of the building could serve
the function of an active street front and would
draw people walking in either direction along
Durant or from the Hunter Street Plaza into this
walkway.
o There are potential conflicts from the drop-off
onto Durant Avenue, which are discussed in detail
below.
Given the overlapping benefits which accrue from moving
the building back to its proposed location, we feel
that the proposal is a reasonable solution, We support
the applicant's argument that the mall area through
Hunter Street, and extending from the deck of the hotel
to the deck at the Tippler is the best location to have
people gather, given its sun exposure, mountainside
views and the skiing/socializing and shopping activi-
ties which are planned there. Once it is accepted that
a hotel is an appropriate use for the site, as was done
by Council at the conceptual level, we feel that the
orientation of the hotel and the pedestrian spaces has
been properly planned,
"7. The applicant shall revise the site plan to
indicate an auto-taxi-limo drop-off facility
of adequate size for the needs of the ski
area, which is in addition to any drop-off
area for hotel guests. As the Council is
concerned about maintaining adequate traffic
flows on Durant Avenue, it is expected that
the applicant will address the proper
location for this facility within the
4
I""'\,
~
,
project's property boundary."
In conjunction with pushing the building back an
additional 10 feet, the applicant presented several
alternative designs for the skier drop-off area. The
p&Z originally chose an alternative which totally
separated the traffic circulation in the drop-off area
from that for the hotel. This solution pushed the
entrance to the hotel off the Durant/Spring corner,
onto Spring Street and created an impractical series of
turning movements out of the drop-off area and into the
hotel. A revised plan, which was presented to and
accepted by the P&Z subject to final approval by the
City Engineer has the fOllowing key features:
o The drop-off function is contained within the
applicant's property, and provides 9-10 spaces.
o The planting island between the drop-off and the
street is intended to buffer the view of the hotel
frontage. A sidewalk has also been provided in
the island to enhance pedestrian movement.
o Parallel parking for four cars will be permitted
alongside the island. The edge of this parking is
at the edge of the angle parking which now occurs
at the North of Nell and Aspen Club Lodge Build-
ings.
The City Engineer has serious concerns about the
impacts of this design, due to the presence of three
curb cuts on Durant Avenue. Jay Hammond is reviewing
the plan, and considering recommending that the curb
cuts be reduced from three to two. As will be demon-
strated to you at the meeting, either of these ap-
proaches creates car turning conflicts, but with three
cuts these conflicts are on the public st reet, while
with two cuts the conflict is on the applicant's
property.
"4, The applicant shall continue to evaluate the
impact of the hotel on the views of Aspen
Mountain from Hunter Street, and propose any
design changes which will reduce obstructions
of the mountain from the corner of Cooper or
Hyman Avenues on Hunter Street. Detailed
architectural renderings and elevations shall
be provided at the Precise Plan stage,"
The applicant has provided a computer simulated view of
the hotel as it will appear from Hunter Street at the
Durant and Cooper corners. These simulations are
5
-,
~.
evidence that the critical yiewplane from the town to
the Little Nell run and Bell Mountain will be preserved
th rough the hotel's design approach. The Council
should require that these simulations be augmented by
the addition of the proposed gondola terminal building
to insure that this viewplane has been preserved. It
should also be recognized that the views presented from
the east and west on Durant demonstrate that the
building will fill in the one remaining open area along
this st reet, and complete the "walled in" feeling from
the Aspen Club Lodge and North of Nell Buildings.
Finally, Council should be informed of the applicant's
commitments to P&Z that no equipment on the roof of the
building will be visible from Durant Avenue or the base
area, and that no height variation from the 40 foot CC
zone standard is required to build this project.
"15. The applicant shall provide a shadow study of
the effects of the building along Durant
Avenue and Spring Street, and mitigate the
problems caused by the building's shadows for
pedestrians crossing the street."
The applicant's original shadow study stated that
"Durant Avenue will be in shade for most of the winter.
In December, shadows from the Little Nell Hotel will
sha de the st reet north of the Hotel all day. By the
end of February, most of the driving surface of Durant
Avenue will be in the sun from 10:30 - 1:30. The south
side of Durant, adjacent to the lIotel, will remain in
shade all winter," This study was revised after the
building was moved back to demonstrate a significantly
less, al th ough st ill apparent, shading effect on the
street.
The applicant's response to this problem is that "a
major pedestrian crossing be constructed at the
intersection of Durant and Hunter Street" at the
applicant's expense. Included in this plan is a neck
down of the street to two travel lanes at the intersec-
tion. We advised P&Z that with Durant acting as a
major thoroughfare for downtown, this neck down may be
ill advised, and may create turning conflicts into the
drop-off area, The Commission considered our concerns,
and the manner in which the neck down in front of the
courthouse functions, and determined that the neck down
is a desireable addition to the plan. The Commis-
sioners felt that if the neck down were pulled back 1
to 2 feet, it would allow pedestrians a chance to react
to on-coming traffic, but would improve their view of
that traffic. Further, they felt that much of the
shading problem had been solved by the new building
6
I'"", f'l
location, and therefore, accepted the mitigation
proposed as adequate,
"19. The applicant shall make every effort,
including working with the City of Aspen, to
increase the extent of the pedestrian gateway
to the mountain so as to make it a more
"grand" entrance in the winter and summer."
In essence, the plan for the pedestrian gateway to the
mountain is quite similar to that proposed at the
conceptual level, and was not found by P&Z to be
significantly more "grand." The applicant made the
following representations to the P&Z as to improvements
in the gateway concept:
o Pushing the building back has slightly increased
the width of the Hunter Street entrance to the
mountain.
o The roof on the western portion of the building
has been sloped more than in other locations to
increase the feeling of spaciousness in the
pedestrian mall.
o The mall paving/landscaping theme has been carried
into the drop-off area in front of the hotel.
o A paving link will be created between the deck at
Little Nell and that of the Tippler, to include
the maze area for the gondola, which will be a
substantial milling area for apres-ski, events and
summer visitors.
o There will be formal landscaping at the rear of
the hotel, which will transition into a more
natural mountain environment in the vicinity of
the lift towers.
Council should be aware that the ABC has broken the
mall proposal into Zone I, comprising all of Hunter
Street and that portion of Dean Street between Hunter
and the Tippler, and Zone II, which involves the
Tippler frontage to Galena Street. ABC intends to pay
for the improvements in Zone I, and to participate with
its neighbors in the improvements to Zone II. The
likely vehicle for these improvements is the Lodge
Improvement District, but the ASC agreed that if Zone I
is completed before the District is underway, they
would pave Dean Street with materials consistent with
the rest of Dean Street, and restrict the entrance to
the Street such that it is limited to authorized
7
r'\
: ,J
A
vehicle access only (e.g., Tipple Inn residents and
service vehicles for the Tippler). This arrangement
appeared to satisfy both the Planning Commission and
the Tipple Inn residents, who had previously objected
to the ASC proposals in this area.
"23. The applicant shall disclose at the Precise
Plan stage all plans related to the Dean
Street right-of-way, including any requests
for encroachments as may be necessary."
The applicant has disclosed the plans for Dean Street
and made an encroachment request of the City Engineer-
ing Department for paving, landscaping, street furni-
ture, ski ticket sales booths and skier drop-off
parking. We have, however, received a comment from
the City Attorney that an encroachment may be the wrong
tool to address these improvements. Paul suggests that
the use of Dean Street by ASC for its ticket kiosk,
landscaping and street furniture is similar to the
arrangement by McDonalds to add facilities to, and use
the mall, which was done by a "vendor's agreement" with
the City. In this sense, we differentiate the en-
croachment of a private building into a public right-
of -way from the use of public space for public type
improvements, to allow business to be conducted in
these areas. We, therefore, recommend that Council
enter into a vendor's agreement with the applicant, in
which the applicant indemnifies the City for any
liability associated with its improvements, and agrees
to maintain the mall for the period of the agreement.
"12. The applicant shall provide detailed drawings
of the new base lifts, demonstrating that
these buildings are visually compatible with
the base area and that the principal storage
area for either chairs 01' gondolas will not
be above grade at the base area,"
The appl icant was only able to prov ide P&Z with the
design parameters for the gondola building, as the
structure itself is still in the design stage. The
applicant's presentation identified some of the
critical variables which defined the building's
location, including the following:
o It is essent ial that the gondola follow a route
which keeps its profile as low to the ground as
possible, to minimize wind disturbance, Given
existing lifts and mountain forms, orientation of
the lift building is relatively fixed,
8
1"'\
o The gondola requires an extensive flat area,
including a "negative" grade, to permit accelera-
tion of the cars to necessary speeds . This area
also serves the function of skier slow. down,
mazing and entry to the building, The design of
this area is intended to minimize skier climbing
to get into the building.
o The building's form is set by its function,
including a height to cover the machinery and
allow for maintenance work (about 22-25 feet) a
width to provide not only for the lift, but also
for the underground entry to the building of
supplies for the mountain restaurant (about 40-45
feet) and a length to include the acceleration
facilities (about 55-60 feet). It was noted that
if the capacity of the lift were to be increased
at some point in the future, the length of the
building would also increase (to 100-110 feet).
o It is the architect's intention to create a
building which uses primarily transparent materi-
als to create visual interest and minimize its
impact on views,
The Planning Commission deferred its consideration of
the detailed design of the building to the Council
Precise Plan review, recognizing that the required
drawings would take some time to complete, As was
noted above, the Council should pay particular atten-
tion to the building's effect on the Hunter street
viewplane and make every effort to preserve that public
view corridor, We also recommend that consideration be
given to refraining from affecting the. function' of the
gondola by setting artificial building constraints
which will be counter to the best interests of the
community over the long-term.
"13. The applicant shall reiterate the commitment
as to how lift service will be provided on
Little Nell for special events, ski instruc-
tions and for secondary access to Lift 5,
The applicant will show the location of all
lifts proposed for the base area and will
provide a commitmeIlt that their installation
will be initiated in 1987. The applicant
shall be required to specify to the City
which lift system is intended to be installed
prior to review of the Precise Plan by the
City Council, also giving the Planning Office
approximately two (2) weeks to review the
proposal and obtain referral comments from
9
r--,
("')
other agencies prior to the initial presenta-
tion of the Precise Plan to Council."
Since the applicant has chosen to install a gondola,
rather than a detachable quad chair, the issue of lift
service to Little Nell has come into clearer focus.
Attached for your information is a letter which I wrote
to the ASC amending the Aspen Mountain Ski Area Master
Plan (AMSAMP) to provide for the installation of a new
lift lf4A. The lift is expected to be a triple chair
(although double or quad configurations are still under
consideration), capacity of 1200 skiers at one time
(SAar) which will not operate as an initial access
lift. The lift will function as a backup to the
gondola, if the latter is out of service or running at
reduced capacity, and will provide ski school and
special event access to the Little Nell Run, but will
not operate until 10:00 A,M., while the gondola will
open at 8:30 A,M. If the ASC intends to alter the
operation of the lift, this will be considered a major
plan amendment, to allow the City and County to address
the on-site and off-site impacts of any capacity
increase which would result.
The new lift program has been reviewed with, and found
acceptable by the U.S, Forest Service, which is now
considering the amendment to their Master Plan for
Aspen Mountain. I have also received verbal comments
from the USFS that their landscape architect has looked
at the base area design for the ski area and feels that
it will function properly, Finally, the USFS has
indicated that they are meeting with ASC to develop a
program to bring the lift towers into conformance with
applicable visual appearance criteria (i. e., painting)
and would like a condition applied to the project to
insure that this occurs.
"16. The applicant shall demonstrate the techni-
ques to be employed on the roof of the hotel
to manage snow shedding to insure that it
does not interfere with or endanger pedes-
trians below,"
The applicant has provided us with a schematic drawing
of the features designed into the building to manage
the snow on the roof. The techniques employed include
a flat slope on the roof top to retain snow, avalanche
guards at the edge of the sloped portions of the roof,
use of dormers to protect entryways and use of a flat
roof on the arcade to protect pedestrians. This
presentation satisfied the concerns of P&Z, and should
be reviewed by Council to insure that you are also
10
^
r"\
J
comfortable with the proposed approach,
"2. The applicant shall, in the Precise Plan
submission, request a variation of the
project's FAR if it is above 1.5:1, since the
land zoned Conservation does not count toward
the overall project FAR. The applicant may
also request special review approval to
increase the allowable commercial FAR of the
property to 1.7:1 by providing employee
hous ing in the appropriate ratio on or off
site. "
The applicant has indicated that the proj ect 's FAR is
about 1. 93:1, using the land area zoned CC, and about
0.94:1, using the land zoned CC as well as that zoned
C. These numbers are based on the actual building size
proposed at 81,265 s.L, plus 2,000 s.f. requested by
the applicant to provide for miscellaneous building
needs which may become apparent during final design and
construction,
Since the Conservation zone does not allow the hotel or
retail uses, we continue to recommend that the same
method of FAR calculation as was used for the Aspen
Mountain POD be applied to this proj ect. This rule
states that we do not calculate the FAR using land in a
zone in which the use is not allowed, Council should
also note that Ordinance N'o.2, Series of 1986, elimi-
nates the ability to obtain bonus FAR when off-site
housing is provided. Therefore, the applicant should
be viewed as requesting an FAR variation from 1,5:1 to
1.93:1, a substantial increase of about 25 percent over
the allowable FAR, although within the maximum 2.0: 1
permitted in the CC z one when employee housing is
provided on-site. This variation should, however, be
permitted, if Council finds the design of the building
to be suitable for this site as presented.
The PI anning Commission supported the Planning Office
in its calculation methodology, and recomm.ended that
you grant the requested FAR variation to the project.
2. Conditions Concerning Access, Circulation and Parking. The
issues to be discussed in this section include parking needs
(Condition No.3), adequacy of streets (Condition No.9),
service areas (Condition No.8) and trails (Condition No.
18) .
"3, The applicant shall provide a detailed, technical
study of the parking needs of the facility to meet
11
tl
tl
/
the demands from the lodge rooms, skiers, adminis-
trative offices, commercial spaces and skier
support facilities, and shall increase the number
of spaces to be provided at the Precise Plan
stage. "
TDA has accomplished the requested study and based on their
recommendations, the number of parking spaces has been
increased from 77 to 116. (Note: There are 83 spaces, not
85 on Level -22, and 33 on Level -12, for a total of 116 and
not ll8 spaces, as represented.) Following is a category by
category calculation of the applicant's proposal as compared
to the Code requirements:
CATmORY
STANDARD APPLIED
SPACES TYPI~ .CQl:>J
PROPoSED* STANDA1ttln
CODE
REQMT
Lodge Units (92)
Administrative
Offices (4883 s,f.)
Retail (20,553 s.f.)
Restaurant
(5196 s. f . )
Skier (1300 skiers
added)
.*
**
0.55-0.7 spaces/unit 53/67 l/unit 92
Replace Existing 27/7 3-4/1000 a.f. 17
0,1-0.8 per 1000 s.f. 2/17 4/1000 s.f. 82
1/1000 s.f. 5 4/1000 s.f. 20
AMSAMP approval 46*** N/A N/A
(off-site)
Range reflects winter vs. summer,
No parking is required in the CC zone for. lodge or commercial uses.
These standards reflect those of the most similar zone for the
proposed mix of uses,. the r....l/L-2 zone districts,
As a condition of AMSAMP, ASC agreed to provide 46 spaces either at
Little Nell, off-site (no location designated) or via cash contribu-
tion to parking or transit facilities of at least $460,000, but not
more than $690,000 (based on $10-15,000 per space, to be specified by
a City study), The condition also stated that "under no circumstances
will the automobile parking requirement of Pitkin County be increased
unless ASC proposes additional daily capacity increases on Aspen
Mountain in the future."
***
Based on the standards applied by the consultant, the
applicant argued that 92-101 spaces will be demanded for the
proj ect in the winter versus the. summer (92 = 53 + 5 + 27 +
2 + 5; 101 = 67 + 5 + 7 + 17 + 5), and, therefore, some
credit should be given to ASC against the 46 space require-
ment. The p&Z rej ected this request, but approved the
proposal to provide 118 spaces subgrade on site as meeting
the project's needs. It should be noted that in the discus-
sion of the impact of the project on City streets, the
consultant stated that 67 cars would be generated by the ski
12
.~
r"')
capacity increase approved by
P&Z considered increasing the
additional 21 spaces, but this
vote.
Pit kin County in 1985. The
46 space requirement by an
motion was defeated by a 4-3
Staff has numerous comments on the information provided by
the consultant, including the following:
o The parking standard applied to the Aspen Mountain
Lodge and to the hotels at the Highlands base of
0.7 spaces per unit is the minimum which we can
justify for this facility,
o It is reasonable to assume that many of the
visitors to the shops will already be on the site
for other reasons, However, the standard of one
space per 1000 s.f. of restaurant is exceptionally
low. We would expect some guests to the luxury
dining facilities to arrive at the port cochere
and expect valet parking to be available.
Further, no space has been provided for visitors
who may attend a conference on the site, whether
they be in-town residents or guests from other
lodges. Invariably, some limited parking will be
needed for such facilities, The accessory parking
need for conference is included in the above-noted
standard of 0,7 spaces per unit but not in the
lower standard proposed by the applicant,
o Parking for ski area employees, based on 40
percent of employees driving, is reasonable, given
the Ski Company I s excellent bus service for
employees.
o The 46 space requirement from AMSAMP represents a
very low standard applied only to the capacity
increase for the mountain. No provision was made
for the increased attractiveness of the Little
Nell Base Area due to the high speed lift to be
installed. No provision was made for any parking
with respect to existing skiers on the mountain.
While we do not suggest a reassessment of the on-
mountain parking commitment which emerged from the
Master Plan, we strongly suggest that you rej ect
any request to meet some of this requirement by
requiring any less than the 118 spaces proposed
for the hotel and other uses, We recommend that
at a minimum the Council require the same number
of parking spaces as did the Planning Commission,
in addition to the 46 spaces required by AMSAMP.
o Council should be aware that a condition of AMSAMP
13
t"""l
~
from the City's referral review was that "ASC
shall agree to maintain the existing parking lot
(of at least 30 automobile parking spaces) located
on Aspen Street within the City of Aspen for
skiing area parking or transit related uses, The
Agreement shall be in the form of a recorded
covenant on the property to the benefit of Pitkin
County and the City of Aspen. II This parcel of
land has passed from the ASC to John Roberts, who
has since provided an option to purchase the lot
to Hans Cantrup as part of his 601 Aspen Street
Residential GMP proj ect. ASC has a lease with
Roberts which recognizes that 30 parking spaces
must be provided on this site, proximate to the
site, or underground and proximate to the site.
The lease does not, however, recognize the City's
desire to consider the lot for transit related
uses. We recommend that this issue be addressed
by the applicant as part of Council's review and
that an appropriate condition be carried forward
with this project.
o Another condition of AMSAMP was that "ASC shall
institute a taxi-limo-auto drop-off facility at
Lift lA within the time frame of the three year
improvement program for Aspen Mountain." This
Condition seems particularly important if we are
to continue to have a viable second entry point
for Aspen Mountain for the near term, Also
valuable would be a shuttle between the Little
Nell Base and lA to respond to overcrowding at the
gondola and to otherwise better distribute skier
impacts on the town. We recommend that Council
also carry this condition forward in its review of
the Precise Plan, and further ask the applicant to
make representations as to any auto disincent ives
such as vans which are being designed into the
hotel and the remainder of the base area,
"9. The applicant shall provide a detailed,
technical study of the adequacy of Durant,
Spring and Dean Streets to handle the vehicle
traffic volumes associated with skiers, hotel
guests, employees, service vehicles, and
visitors to the commercial uses and shall
propose appropriate mitigation measures to
address any traffic prOblems which will
result from the project. The applicant shall
also take into account the access needs of
emergency vehicles, including, but not
limited to ambulances and fire trucks.
14
r>,
o
The TDA study of streets shows a daily net traffic
increase on Durant of about 250 trip ends per day in
winter (60 trips at the peak hour) and about 375 trip
ends per day in summer (42 trips at the peak hour).
However, in the original study, no accounting was made
of the approximately 300 vehicle trip ends per day due
to the mountain capacity increase. The implementation
of this increase, through constructing the new high-
speed lift, is clearly a part of this project, and was
not accounted for in AMSAMP. The consultant prov~ded
an updated review of the street impacts to P&Z,
demonstrating that even with the inclusion of the ski
capacity increase, Durant could accommodate expected
vehicle trips, particularly since the skier drop-off
has been moved out of the right-of-way. Spring Street
was also demonstrated to have sufficient capacity, and
is discussed in further detail below with respect to
service and emergency vehicle access.
"8. The applicant shall provide a detailed
analysis of the proposed service yardS on
Spring Street and Dean Street, demonstrating
that adequate space has been provided for
truck stacking and that proper turning
movements can be accomplished within these
streets, The applicant shall also confer
with the Environmental Health Department as
to any air and water quality devices which
may need to be installed in these areas (and
in the parking facility for cars), The
applicant shall work with the North of Nell
and Tippler management entities and shall try
to accommodate the service delivery needs of
these buildings in a single location off Dean
Street. Finally, the applicant shall demon-
strate that the service delivery area on Dean
Street will not cause saf ety probl ems for
pedestrians on Dean Street or nuisance
prOblems for the residents of the North of
Nell, and that the needs of the facility
could not practically otherwise be met by a
single facility on Spring Street,"
There have been two major improvements to the service
yard proposal since Council reviewed this application
at the Conceptual stage. First, the service area
adj acent to the Tippler on Dean stre.et has been
entirely eliminated, which will significantly benefit
pedest rians in thi s area. Serv i ce to the hotel is
proposed in a covered area off Spring St reet, as is
receiving for on-mountain restaurants, which will be
transported beneath the site, to the gondola building
15
I""",
~
,
and up the mountain. This solution will substantially
reduce Snow-cat traffic to the base area, as will the
plan to remove the maintenance facility and move it up
to the mountain location.
The second change came about during the P&Z'S review of
the proj ect. The applicant agreed to construct a
modified "cul-de-sac" at the end of Spring Street which
would improve the turning capabilities of trucks in the
service area, and allow the largest likely service
vehicle to maneuver past vehicles parked at the new
entrance to the Aspen Club Lodge. Although the
modified cul-de-sac would remove two of the Aspen Alps'
parking spaces adjacent to the Little Nell property,
its benefit to that facility is that it would reduce or
eliminate the through traffic which is currently
experienced at the Alps' drop-off area. It should be
noted that the ASC has a 30 foot circulation easement
over that portion of the property zoned "park" over
which a portion of the cul-de-sac would be built.
Finally, it was agreed that the applicant would be
responsible for providing landscaping to buffer the
Alps from any visual impact from the service yard and
cul-de-sac,
The Council should be aware that the utility/trash
service area requires a variation, as permitted by the
SPA regulations. There is a minimum rear yard require-
ment for the utility/trash service area in the area and
bulk requirements chart for the CC zone, referenced to
Section 24-3,7 (h) (4), stating that the area be on an
alley and setting standards for its dimensions. It
appears that an area for this building would require a
minimum length of 20 feet for the first 6,000 s.L of
building area and 5 feet for each addition 6,000 s,f.,
resulting in a length of about 83 feet for the service
area. The P&Z recommends that you grant a variation
of thi s requi rement to 36 feet which more accurately
represents the needs of the project.
"18. The applicant shall provide a trail easement
through the property connecting the trail
near the Aspen Alps with the Dean Street
trail and will include any required ramps for
bicycles or other year-round trail facilities
in their site plan at the precise plan
stage. The applicant will also examine the
potential for creating a pedestrian trail
connecting to the Aspen Mountain Road within
the context of the base area regrading and
provide an alignment for said trail if it is
found to be feasible."
16
1""\
""J
The original proposal by the applicant was to provide a
trail which swung from the Aspen Alps, to the south of
the lift, in the flat portion of the site, connecting
to a ramp and to the Dean Street trail. However, the
location of the gondola, and its associated structures,
makes a trail in this location infeasible, The
applicant now proposes to connect the Dean Street and
Aspen Alps trails through the base area, using the
paving area behind the lift and providing signs for
connections as needed. The applicant has also expres-
sed a willingness to provide an unpaved, graded trail
connection to Aspen Mountain Road for summer hikers out
of the base area, but no design has been provided to
date. Finally, we have been informed that the appli-
cant has been working with the Nordic Council to
provide a trail across Aspen Mountain above the Aspen
Alps near Aspen Mountain Road. The applicant should be
required to provide a year-round trail easement to the
City for this trail, and to accommodate the needs of
the trail in the slope regrading program.
3. Conditions Concerning Geologic Hazard, Drainage, Grading,
utilities and Employee Housing. The issues to be discussed
in this section include geologic hazard (Condition No. 10),
grading (Condition No.5), drainage (Condition No. 22),
pumphouse relocation (Condition No. 11), and employee
housing (Condition No. 14).
"10. The applicant shall provide a detailed,
technical study of the geologic hazard on
Aspen Mountain as it affects this site and
shall demonstrate that any haz ard posed to
the property can and will be fully mitigat-
ed. The applicant shall also investigate the
soils hydrology in the area to demonstrate
the suitability of the site for development
pu rposes. "
Chen and Associates has prepared two studies of the base
area subsurface, slope regrading and the on-mountain
geologic haz ard during this phase of the proj ect. The two
principal recommendations of their first study concerning
subsurface conditions were that:
o A program of test holes should be drilled and observa-
tion wells installed to provide information on ground-
water.
o A subsurface investigation program should be conducted
to provide information on subsurface soil conditions
and to analyze slope stability,
17
.-.
,-..,
The later study recommends that:
o Monitoring of groundwater conditions be done through
the spring run-off period,
o Additional design level foundation study be performed.
o Additional slope stability analysis be performed for
fill placement areas.
o Further surface water hydrology study be performed when
aerial topographical information can be obtained in the
spring.
Jay Hammond, City Engineer, feels that there are not any
unsolvable subsurface geological problems for the site and
recommends that you find that this condition has been met
if:
1. The additional studies recommended by Chen are com-
pleted; and
2. The final structural design and grading plan is
certified by the geotechnical engineer as not impacting
slope stability and surface hydrology to the detriment
of this project or its neighbors.
With respect to the potential off-site impacts from flood or
debris flow from Copper/Spar Gulch, and Vallejo Gulch, Jay
states that:
"Additional information is also required regarding the
flood and debris flow risk from the Vallejo Gulch area
onto the proj ect site and adj acent sites. Adequate
mitigation should be provided to protect the proj ect
and any adjacent properties impacted by new grading.
Related to the work undertaken by Chen to evaluate the
geological hazard and mud flow risk for the Little Nell
redevelopment site is the ongoing effort to evaluate
the haz ards and mitigation across the entire base of
the mountain, To the extent that. the Aspen Skiing
Company is the major land holder within the upslope
source areas and since a failure to mitigate the
problems in the upslope area could affect Little Nell
and other downslope sites, we would recommend that ABC
be required to commit to ongoing hazard study, engi-
neering and mitigation construction in those areas
under their control via direct ownership, leasehold, or
other usage agreement as a condition of the Little Nell
approval. "
18
.~
f"l
This language should be carried forward in the agreement to
be written between the applicant and the City.
"5. The applicant shall provide detailed grading plans
for the earth work which is proposed to occur at
the base area, including any activity associated
with the base of the new lifts which may fall
outside of the SPA boundary, and shall identify
the locations for any material deposition which is
to occur."
The current grading plan for the site calls for a balanced
cut and fill program between the material to be removed from
the lower portions of the Little Nell slope and the material
which will be placed at the upper end of the slope, princi-
pally in the vicinity of Aspen Mountain Road and at the top
of the new Lift #4A terminal. ThE! regrading of Aspen
Mountain Road is intended to create no more than a 14
percent grade on the road, in keeping with current grades on
the road. The applicant will need to obtain an encroachment
permit from Pitkin County for the work on this County road
prior to initiating any regrading activities. Further,
Jay's comments with respect to geologic stability should
also address the proposed grading program.
"22. The applicant shall provide a drainage plan at the
Precise Plan stage which meets the standards of
the Engineering Department concerning the 100 year
storm and which addresses drainage from Aspen
Mountain as it affects the site and drainage from
the development site itself."
During the course of P&Z's review, the applicant's represen-
tative, A.J. Zabbia, provided the City Engineer with
adequate information to indicate that this condition had
been met. The basic detention facility will be a 12 foot
deep trough, 24 feet wide, and 90 feet long, in front of the
gondola building, which will be fenced or otherwise pro-
tected against any skier or hiker crossing. Incidentally,
the trough helps in the functioning of the gondola by
providing the negative grade needed for the acceleration of
compartments.
"II. The applicant shall provide a solution to the
pumphouse relocation problem and shall agree to
implement said solution at the applicant's cost."
The applicant's has made the following representation with
respect to this problem:
"The pumphouse relocation and well modification will
19
occur .in.essentially two phases, In 1986 the facili-
ties providing pumping capability to serve the Little
Nell 0.5 MG steel tank; control and telemetry equipment
to se rve the tank; aJ:1d c()nt rols for. the mot oriz ed
butterfly valve at the well will be relocated inside a
new proposed pumping station thus eliminating the 12
inch steel line up the Little Nell slope.
In conjunction with Hotel construction and final
improvements in Hunter Street, the Little Nell well
will be modified by pulling the existing turbine pump,
cutting the casing below grade, and installing a
submersible pump and controls, The existing wellhouse
will be removed and a subsurface vault with a removable
access lid constructed in its place. The chlorinator
and necessary control equipment will be relocated in a
room provided in the commercial structure with an
outside door,
The water produced by the Little Nell well will be
pumped directly into the system through the existing
motorized butterfly valve."
The City Water Department supports this solution, provided
that all plans, equipment and access easements are viewed in
advance of any construction. Council should also be aware
that the applicant has committed to under grounding all
utilities on the site east of Galena Street,
"14. The applicant shall provide housing for
employees of the proj ect in a manner accept-
able to the Housing Authority and Planning
Commission, The numi:>er of employees to be
housed will be determined at the Precise Plan
stage, based on the applicant's commitments
as part of the growth management plan
application. "
The applicant's proposal is to house 30 employees, repre-
senting 36 percent of the net new employees generated by the
proj ect. The Housing Authority concurs with the generation
figures submitted by the applicant, and the method by which
the employees are to be housed, The Planning Commission
recommends that you grant the requested change in use of the
Holiday House from lodge to residential use. We would also
note that the AMSAMP requirement that four additional
employees be housed is proposed to also be met at the
Holiday House, Therefore, 17 units (2 persons per unit)
will be converted at this time, while 5 other units were
previously required to be deed-restricted by Hans Cantrup.
The remaining six units on the site will likely be used to
off-set the employee hOUSing impacts of the commercial
20
,~
development at the Little Nell base area.
4, Conditions Concerning Miscellaneous Issues Which Have Been
Resolved. The following issues were fully resolved during
the course of the P&Z'S deliberations.
"20, The applicant shall demonstrate in the Precise
Plan submission that all questions as to the
ownership of the Hunter Street right-of-way are in
the process of being resolved, to insure that
permanent guarantees of the availability of Hunter
and Dean Streets for pedestrian access will be
provided. The Precise Plan shall not be approved
until the pedestrian access issue has been
resolved to the City's satisfaction. The appli-
cant will also demonstrate that the boundary
questions adjacent to the Tippler have been
resolved, and the SPA boundary designation shall
be adjusted accordingly."
The applicant has obtained ti.t1e to the contested land in
Hunter Street, The Tippler boundary problem has been
resolved by only including in the SPA plan that land which
is not subj ect to any dispute. If the boundary issue is
resolved in the favor of the ASC, the added land will only
enhance the project.
"6. The applicant shall evaluate the applicability of
the City's 8040 greenline and mountain viewplane
review procedures to the proposed development,
Should it be found that either review procedure
applies, the applicant will submit the necessary
materials at the Precise Plan stage demonstrating
compliance with the review criteria of the Code."
The Planning Commission gave final 8040 G reenline and
Mountain Viewplane approval to the proj ect at the time of
its Precise Plan review,
"17. The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed
buildings do not encroach into the land within the
Park zone near the Aspen Alps."
The applicant proposes no building activity on the property
in question, Emergency skier service is proposed through
this site, with ambtilance pick up on Spring Street.
Further, the cul-de-sac will encroach into this land, but on
the portion of the site which has an easement over it for
circulation. These uses would not appear to affect the
status of the land in the Park zone district,
"21, The applicant shall provide the Environmental
21
("""\
~
}'
Health Department with detailed information
on any fireplaces which will be included in
the proj ect, demonstrating their compliance
with applicable Code provisions,"
The Environmental Health Department is quite pleased at the
applicant's proposed use of "gas log" type fireplaces, which
meet or exceed current woodburning device legislation.
"24. Final approval of the proposed SPA boundary
change shall only occur in conjunction with
final approval of the Precise Plan for the
proj ect. "
This procedure is being followed by the tabling of Ordinance
53, Series of 1985, at second reading until the Little Nell
project completes its Precise Plan review,
"25. In the event that the growth allocations for
the project shall expire, the boundary of the
SPA shall revert to its prior configuration."
This item should continue forward as a condition of ap-
proval.
B. Evaluation of Consistency with Precise Plan Review Criteria.
The evaluation of the project's consistency with the Precise
Plan review criteria should be conducted using the following
language from Section 24-7,7 as the standard of evaluation.
"(b) The burden shall rest upon an applicant to
demonstrate the reasonableness and suitability of
the Precise Plan, its conformity to the require-
ments of this article, that the adverse effects of
the proposed development have been minimized to
the extent practicable, and that it complies with
the City Council's intent in originally designat-
ing the site with an SPA overlay, including the
reasonable conformance of the precise Plan with
the approval granted to the conceptual plan."
Each of the criteria in the Code are considered with respect
to this project below.
1, Compatibility with Neighboring Development - The proposal is
surrounded by other short-term tourist uses. Its height is
40 feet, in compliance with underlying zoning and lower than
the North of Nell or Aspen Square. Its FAR of 1.93:1 is
well below that of the North of Nell Building and its mass
is offset by use of various architectural techniques.
Problems noted at the P&Z review stage concerning open
space, shadows and skier drop-off as they affect this site
22
r".
and the neighborhood have been adequately addressed by the
applicant.
2. Utilities and Roads - The project will upgrade water, sewer
and fire service to the area, underground existing utili-
ties, and provide for detention of stormwater from the site
and the mountain and routing to the City's storm sewer. The
proj ect will add significant volumes of traffic to Durant
Avenue, although within available street capacities. The
City Engineer remains concerned about traffic conflicts
between cars entering and exiting the skier drop-off and
those on Durant itself,
3. Environmental Suitability - The applicant has initiated
studies of the identified hazards affecting the site. If
the recommendations of the consultant and City Engineer,
summarized above, are followed, the site appears to be
suitable for development.
4. Land Planning Techniques - The techniques employed by the
applicant include the use of subgrade space for the support
services to the hotel and ski area, removal of the mainte-
nance function from the base area, use of stepped back
architectural form to preserve the Hunter Street viewplane,
provision of substantial open space at the rear of the
parcel, and upgrading of Hunter and Dean Streets into
pedestrian malls. The design of the gondola terminal is an
important factor which has yet to be reviewed but must be
sensitively accommodated on the site,
5. Conformance with Aspen Area Plan - The 1973 Aspen Land Use
Plan designates this site as "re9reation/accommodations",
which is intended lito allow for the recreation and accommo-
dation needs of the visitor to Aspen in an area that is
especially suited for this because of it.s unity with, and
identity to, the proposed transportation system, the ski
area and the central area, II The con(ormance of the proj ect
with the Growth Management Policy Plan has been discussed at
the conceptual stage, and is reviewed again below.
6. Expenditure of Public Funds - The project does not appear to
directly require the expenditures of additional public
funds, although there will be costs to the improvement
district to upgrade that portion of Dean Street not addres-
sed by the applicant, The applicant will enhance services
to the neighborhood in a variety of categories,
The Planning Office and the Planning Commission find that the
project is generally consistent with the intent of the above six
review criteria.
C. SPECIFICATION OF ZONE DISTRIC'.r REGULATIONS, VARIATIONS
23
~
PERMITTED AND CONSTRUCTI()N SCI'I}lJjtit.l!f; Section, 24-7.6(c)
requires that the application specify the zone distiict
regulations and variationswg;ch .are to apply to the
development, while Section 24-7.6(d) requires the provision
of a schedule specifying the timeframe of the development,
The zone district regulations recommended by the Planning
Office and Planning Commission are a combination of those. of
the two underlying zones (CC and C). In all Cases, however,
the regulations are limited by the Precise Plan as it has
been presented to the P&Z and C()uncil, since Section 24-
7,5 (b) states that "the plan (including all conditions of
approval and representations of the applicant) shall
constitute the development regulations for the parcel. . ."
1. Area and Bulk Requirements (with variations from
underlying zone noted)
a,
b,
c,
d,
e.
f.
g.
h.
j ,
i.
Minimum lot area
Minimum lot aFea per dwelling unit
Minimum lot width
Minimum front yard
Minimum side yard
Minimum rear yard
Maximum height
Minimum distance ~etw~~p primary
and accessory buildings
Percent of open space required
for building site (minimum)
External floor area ratio
(maximum)
k.
1.
Internal floor area ratio
Utility/trash service area
2. Off-Street Parking Spaces
a.
b.
Internal to the project building
External to the project building
3. Permitted and Conditional Uses
3,000 s.L
No requirement
No requirement
26 feet
No requirement
No requirement
40 feet
No requirement
25 percent
1. 93 : 1
(83,265 s,f.)
(vaiiation)
No requirement
36 feet in
length
(variation)
118
15 (9 in drop-
off lane, 4 in
par a I leI
parking along
drop-off island
and 2 service
delivery bays)
The following uSeS for the project will be permitted,
unless identified as conditional uses (variations from
24
1""'1
~
,
underlying zone requirements noted)
a. Hotel (conditional use, variation allowed for
hotel protruding into C zone)
b. Retail commercial
c. Ski accessory retail to include ski shops, repair,
rental and storage
d, Open use recreation
e. Restaurant
f. Additional retail commercial as specified under
permitted uses in the CC zone Section 24-3,2 of
the Aspen Municipal Code
g. Ski area administrative offices
h, Shipping and receiving for hotel and mountain food
service
i, Storage of materials accessory to the above
j. Cabaret and night club
k. Activities associated with emergency medical
service for treatment o:f injured skiers
1. Ski lifts and lift buildings (conditional use)
m. Ski mazes and milling areas
n. Hotel accessory retail
As noted above, the variations which the Planning Commission
recommends you grant are:
1. FAR from 1.5:1 to 1.93:1;
2, Utility/trash service area from 83 feet in length to 36
feet in length; and
3. Hotel protruding into the C zone district,
The reason for continuing to identify the hotel and ski
lifts as a conditional use is that a public hearing is
required for substantial modification of a conditional use,
but not for an SPA amendment, and so in this manner the City
will retains its greatest review powers over the two most
sensitive, and potentially impactive uses at the base area.
25
1"""1
1"""1
The construc~ion schedule originally proposed by the
applicant has be.en altered by the decision to construct the
gondola and the new Lift #4A this Season. Generally,
following is the intended schedule:
Summer/Fall 1986 - Excavation and structural work for
the ski administration area (hotel, west wing>,
Utility relocations, regrading of Little Nell slope.
Construction of gondola and Lift #4A with the former to
be operational by Christmas and the latter by Thanks-
giving. Interim skier services plan to be implemented,
Spring/Summer/Fall 1987 - Demolish Little Nell complex,
complete work at western wing of new complex to provide
skier services for the 1987-1988 season, initiate hotel
and commercial construction.
Winter 1987-Winter 1988 - Complete interior and
exterior of hotel, complete landscaping, sidewalks and
plaz as.
Since the construction site is intended to continue in use
for initial skier access and commercial support services
throughout the construction period, we feel it is important
for us to fully understand how circulation will occur and
what the base area will look like during construction, The
applicant has submitted a preliminary plan for the base area
as it will function in the 86/87 season which includes the
following features:
o The new ticket kiosks will be in place in Dean and
Hunter Streets, and the ski corral will be recon-
structed in its current location.
o Regrading will take place in the mall areas, temporary
steps will be constructed to allow access to the lifts,
and planters will be installed with temporary plantings
accomplished, The surface treatment on the site will
be asphalt. The pumphouse will remain in place until
the hotel is built.
o The ASC office and ski school buildings will remain in
operation. The maintenance building will remain for
receiving of goods, but most maintenance functions will
occur on the mountain in the new building.
Since these plans are quite schematic at this time, we
recommend that the applicant should be required to provide
the Planning Office and the City Engineer with the following
materials prior to the issuance of a building or excavation
permit during each construction season:
26
"'0' """,,,,,,_,,,",,",,,",,,.,,.
1"""1
t"'\
" ,~
1. Specific design and location of pedestrian barricades
and walkway structures.
2. Traffic and pedestrian circulation routes during
construction.
3. An agreement on the part of the applicants to properly
maintain the barricade and walkway system throughout
the course of construction, including repairs and
removal.
4. Provision of a plan addressing site access and material
and equipment storage areas during construction.
5. Scheduling and design detail regarding utility reloca-
tions, replacemerits and undergrounding.
6. Further detail regarding the limits of excavation,
construction easements and shoring needs,
7. Proposed landscaping of areas where demolition is
contemplated without immediate reconstruction.
A final issue for Council's information has to do with the
construction of the ski area administrative offices this
year. The Planning Office and City Attorney have determined
that this office space requires receipt of a growth allot-
ment in the "CL and other Zone district" commercial competi-
tion, The date for submission of applications for such
projects is August 1, yet the applicant will need to have a
building permit for this space this spring if the new
gondola is to be built. We recommend that Council allow
this space to be constructed in the form of a hotel or ski
area accessory "shell" (which doesn't need an allotment) and
that its occupancy as commercial space only be permitted if
growth allotments are obtained. .l\.dequate assurances to
protect the City in this regard should be written into the
SPA agreement.
D. Lodge Development Allotment: As you recall, the issue of a
mUlti-year lodge development allotment was discussed
extensively at the conceptual plan stage, at which time
Council indicated "its willingness to consider granting a
multi-year allocation to the proj ect upon approval of the
applicant's precise plan .. "Since so much time was
spent on the policy aspects of this issue at the earlier
review stage, we will merely provide you with a brief
numerical analysis of the implications of awarding the 92
units requested by this project,
Before we address the numerical analysis, Council should be
27
,-."
~
aware that at a public hearing on January 21, the P&Z scored
the Little Nell project at 55.2 points, just above the 54
point minimum threshold. P&Z Resolution No, 2, Series of
1986, is attached, providing you with documentation of the
scores awarded by P&Z to the proj ect. Further, Council
should note that during its review of the development
allotment issue, the P&Z declined to make a recommendation
either in favor of or opposed to the multi-year allocation
request.
In the nine years since the adoption of the lodge GMP,
following is a history of what has taken place in the L-l/L-
2/CC/CL zone districts:
OUC7rA AVAILABLE
1977/81 (5 yrs)
@ 18 units/yr. = 90 units
1982-85 (4 yrs)
@ 35 units/yr. = 140 units
OU01'A AWA1U)ED
1977 (Aspen Inn - 36 units)
1981 (Lodge at Aspen -
31 units)
TarAL 230 units
1982 (Carriage House -
26 units)
1983 (Aspen Mtn, Lodge -
172 units)
TC7rAL
265 units
The above summary demonstrates that we have awarded all of the
units available through 1985, plus the 35 units availal:Jle in
1986, It is also obvious, given the four proj ects involved, that
no units have been built under this quota system in nearly a
decade,
Beyond the above units, two lodge proj ects have received GMP
exemptions as historic struct ures in this development category,
including the 20 units at the Sardy House and the 67 units to be
added at the Hotel Jerome, If we also account for these units in
the quota, as required by the Code, then .the quota has been
allocated for 1987, 1988 and 17 of the 35 units in 1978. The 92
units requested by the Little Nell project therefore takes the.18
units in 1989, 35 in 1990, 35 in 1991 and 4 in 1992.. Obviously,
these numbers presume that (i) the anticipated amendment to the
Hotel Jerome will not increase the number of rooms in the addi-
tion, which is not likely to be the case, as an increase of 10-20
rooms is expected; and (ii) the four projects which are approved
but unbuilt will be constructed, rather than forfeit their units,
28
1""\
~
which may also be unlikely.
There is one important mitigating factor to this quota analysis.
There are four L-3 lodges which are to be converted to employee
housing as part of the lodge development activities, as follows:
Copper Horse
Alpina Haus
Cortina Lodge
Holiday House
14 units (part of Aspen Mtn. Lodge project)
40 units (part of Aspen Mtn. Lodge project)
11 units (Hotel Jerome Addition, Aspen Club
Lodge)
17 units (Little Nell and AMSAMP)
Total
82 units
There are also 6 units remaining at the Cortina Lodge and 6 units
at the Holiday House which are being held for future projects but
are also expected to be converted,
The total of 94 units at these four small lodges completely
offsets the increase in lodge units from the Little Nell project
and indicates that if the four approved lodge proj ects and the
Little Nell project were built, and the conversions took place,
we would still be right on track for our overall projected lodge
growth rate in the community. Given the fact that it will take
2-3 years at a minimum for these projects to be occupied, it can
be seen that even including the Hotel Jerome GMP exemption, if no
other projects are approved over the next few years, we will be
back on our lodge quota target by 1990, at which time the hotels
will be in operation. We, therefore, recommend that Council
direct the Planning Office to credit the L-l/L-2/CC/CL and Other
zone category with the units from the change in use of the above
four L-3 lodges, in order that the quota effects of the approved
lodge development can be addressed. The newly converted employee
units will have to be deducted from the resident~al quota in the
year of their conversion to address the growth impacts of this
additional housing which is created by each of the lodge pro-
j ects.
E. Ordinance 53, SPA Rezoning
Ordinance 53, Series of 1985, extends the SPA Overlay
designation across the lower portion of the site (approxi-
mately 1 acre) which is zoned C - Conservation. The
Ordinance was approved on first reading on September 17,
1985 and then tabled until the Precise Plan could be
submitted and reviewed.
The applicant's zoning boundary Change differs significantly
from that which was considered and eventually denied by City
Council in 1983, The extent of the area requested for SPA
designation is considerably less than that previously
29
~,
1""\.
~
identified and corresponds directly to that area in which
the hotel, commercial and ski support facilities are to be
located at the toe of the slope. In fact, by extending the
boundary, we insure that the location of the lifts is
considered at the same time as the remainder of the base
area development.
We find that the increase in the SPA boundary meets the test
of being unique and providing public benefit in that it
permits integrated planning of the lift locations in
conjunction with the remainder of the base area development.
Without the SPA Overlay, our review of the ski. lifts would
be limited to the conditional uSe review process,
The Planning Office supports the proposed boundary adj ust-
ment with the following qualifications:
a. The area designated C-SPA is not used in the calcula-
tion of the FAR for the project, since the hotel is not
an allowed use in this zone,
b. In the event that final approval of the proj ect
expires, the boundary of the SPA should revert to its
prior configuration until a new conceptual and precise
plan is submitted,
F, PLARRIIC ARDZORIIC COMMISSIONRBCOIUIERDA'UOR
On March 18, 1986, by a motion of 5 in favor, 2 opposed, the
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission adopted the attached
Resolution 86-3, recommending that you approve the Little
Nell Base Redevelopment SPA. We also attach for your
consideration a minority position statement sublllitted by
four members of the Commission, either opposing or com-
menting upon the maj ority action. We anticipate that
members of the Commission will be present at your meeting to
express their concerns with respect to particular aspects of
the proposal,
G . SOJUIARY
The above analysis provides you with material for your
upcoming meetings on the Little Nell Precise Plan. Staff is
working with the applicant to develop a draft SPA Agreement,
which will be the device used to tie together all of the
applicant's commitment$ into a coherent document. This
document will be presented for your review at the conclusion
of your deliberations.
AR.ll5
30
~
RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNIR; AND ZONIR; COMMISSION
,,, '. "" , .-. , .... , ....." -,,, " ,-,',."",;.-.,"-- ,', ._....,.,,_,.,.,,_..,",.""',,~,_.,....."C,'-'""'0'.".__....~.~.;
RECOMMENDIR; PRECISE PLAN APPROITAL OF THE
LITTLE NELL BASE REDEVELOPMENT SPA
Resolution No. 86-3
WHEREAS, on November 5, 1985, the Aspen City Council
(hereinafter "Council") did adopt Resolution No, 35, Series of
1985) granting conceptual approval to the Little Nell Base
Redevelopment; SPA (hereinafter th~ "project"), and
WHEREAS, on December 2, 1985, the Aspen Skiing Company
(herein after "Applicant") did submit an application for SPA
Precise Plan review, 96 (later revised to 92) lodge growth
management allotments, conditional use reviews, mountain view-
plane review, 8040 greenline review, and change in use for the
proj ect; and
WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission (herein-
after "Commission") did hold a public hearing on January 21,
1986, at which time the Commission dig eVialuate (ind pc6g t;he
proj ect according to the lodge development qUota system regula-
tions; and
WHEREAS, the project did meet the lodge development minimum
threshold of !'i4 points by having scored 55.2 points, which score
was forwarded to the Council by the Commission's Resolution No. 2
(Series of 1986); and
WHEREAS, the Commission did hold public hearings to consider
the remainder of the applicant's requests on February 4, 18 and
25 and March 4 and 11, 1986, at which time evidence and testimony
with respect to said requests was presented.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning
t'*)
~
Resolution No. 86-3
Page 3
2.
The applicant shall const ruct the improvements shown in
the Hunter Street intersecti()n, inclpding the paving
pattern which designates this cor'ner as the principal
entrance to Aspen Mountain.
3.
The applicant shall provide 118 parking spaces in the
subgrade parking structure on the site. The 46 spaces
required to be provided through the Aspen Mountain Ski
Area Master Plan (AMSAMP) shall be in additiolJ to the
118 spaces required on-site.
The applicant shall const ruct a cul-de-sac at the end
of Spring Street to enhance the drculation of service
vehicles and cars in the area. The design of the cul-
de-sac shall be coordinated with'fhlf City Engineer,
whose final approval of all construction plans shall be
required. A landscape plan to screen the Aspen Alps
from the cul-de-sac shall be prepared and implemented
by the applicant, and signage shall be provided
according to the plan on file with the Planning Office.
The applicant shall take full responsibility for the
construction and maintenailc:e, .9f, a),~ ,i,m,provements
presented for the Hunter f1.t.;,~.~t ma.!,!' and Zone r of the
Dean Street mall. The apphcanf. shall participate with
its neighbors in the Special rmprovement District for
that section oftne'I5eanstreet mall labeled as Zone
II, p.rovided that if tj\eMst:'dct'l~n:~f'unCf~rway by
the ~~me the rest of. tl:l~JIlalls. ~r~ f:!-!la~~y ou~lt,. the
appl~cant will at least, pave Zone II w~th matenals
consistent with that in Zone I and restrict the
entrance to the street to authoriZed"vehicle access
only. The applicant shall co'ordinate all mall and
mall-type improvements with the work of the District to
insure compatibility of materials anddesignsfyle. '
The applicant shall provide a trail cqnnectionJrorn the
ute Averiue T rai~ to. tl1e D~Cin) St r;eet '1'ra~l, through the
paved area behfnd Ehif" Da:se area 'IHts, . and provide
signage to desfgnatesaidt(r'aiL' The applicant shall
also' provide a defined, unpaved trail from the base
a,:ea to Aspen M'ou~t ain Road,. for s~Il!I!1er J:!i,ktpg pu rpose~.
F~nally, the appl~cant shall prov~de a year-round tra~l
easement to the City of Aspen for the cross country
skiing trail proposed to cross the Little Nell Run, and
will accommodate the needs of said trail in the
regrading program, provided that the trail design and
maintenance will not interfere with the needs of the
alpine skiing area.
4.
5.
6.
3
Iii;
r~
,:-'l
Resolution No. 86-3
Page 5
already completed studies, and provide these studies to
the City Engineer, whose recommendations as to con-
struction practices shall be. followed by the applicant.
The final structural design and grading plan shall be
certified by the geotechnical engineer as not impacting
slope stability and surface hydrology to the detriment
of this project or its neighbors.
12. The applicant shallc011lmit to participation in the
ongoing geologic hazard and mud flow risk study for the
upslope areas of ASI>enMollntain, and to engineering
dE'!si~n and mitigatiol1. coniltruc:t~oll' ~n th9se aJ:eail of
the mountain under tl1eJr.c:on~ro~ yiCiCiirE!stoIVIlE!rfihip,
leasehold or other usage agreement.',. " " . " '. '" '..' " ,
13. The applicant shall submit an application to Pitkin
County for an encroaclnnent: permit for the regrading
work which will affect Aspen Mountain Road. Affected
portions of the I<.oad sl1aU be reConstructed at the
applicant's expense at a grade not to exceed 14
percent, and to il'lc1tlCl.E! al1.Y draina~e facilities
consistent .",.it:the RE!a Cassens Report which the County
Engineer may requirE!~
14. The. appliGa.nt shall, in< conl1E'!ct.i9l'l with the., SPA
agreemenf: ~,...f.H7 (iCl\~ElCl:rE'!.fiFric:f:~gl'l.",G?I'lY7tt:'~'llg <17 units
at thEl,IfQH~(ilfIf0Us~Er froIll.lQdl]"e fg employee 'housing
use . Ti)ificonVerl';Jonis. Jl1tend'Eldt,o .1IlE!etFl1eIlollsing
requireIllents ofthll'; prO) ed;,andAMSAMP'; ahd shall be
filed in a form accl;!ptable to the City Attorney' and
Housing Director. ThE!re shall be provided a minimum of
thirteen (13) parking spaces at the rear of the Holiday
House for resident parking only.
15. TheaI>I>licantshallprc>vide the City Attorney with. an
uI>-to-datetitlecoIllIll~tID.Elnt. tCia~). .I.(inCls.wltIlill ,tilE!
proI>ert}'lJc)l~ndary,ancl ~< legal description of the land
zoned C. reCJ)uested fQr r~~oninl]" '<lith an SPA, overlay,
~::f2s ~iri~t~;ionl';g(i).lB7 ~IlQl.ll~E!~ .il1drCl~I'l(inc:El 53,
16. The applicant's c011lmitmE!nts astgtheptimpnouse
relocation and well, mOdificatign, water system upgrades
in the Spring Street and Nell Slope lines, sewer system
upgrade from Spring Street-ute Avenue to Galena Street,
on-site stormwater detention facilities and fire
hydrant provision at the south end of Spring Street and
on Dean Street behind the North of Nell Building shall
all be requi rements of this approval whose cost shall
5
r-1
I")
Resolution No. 86-3
Page 7
25. The above conditions, along with all representations
otherwise made by the applicant, shall be required to
be accomplished prior to the first occupancy of the
hotel, unless a mOre or less restrictive time deadline
has been indicated herein.
Section 4
That it does hereby recommend that Council adopt the zone
district regulations of the underlying CC and C z ones, as
modified below, as the standards which apply to the parcel:
1. Area and ~ulk. RTq.uirements (with variations from
underlying zone noted)
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
,
,.
..
j.
k.
1.
2
.
Minimum lot area
Minimum lot area per dwelling unit
Minimum lot width
Minimum front yard
Minimum side yard
Minimum rear yard
Maximum height
Minimum disfance between primary
and accessory buildings
Percent of 'open space required
for building site (minimum)
External floor area ratio
(maximum)
Internal floor area ratio
Utility/trash service area
Off-street Parking Spaces
;.ti;,.
b.
Internal to the proj ect building.
External to the proj ect building
(91ndrop-off lane, 4 in
parallel parking along
drop-Off island and
2 service delivery bays)
3. Permitted and Conditional Uses
3,000 s.f.
No requi rement
No requirement
26 feet
No requirement
No requirement
40 feet
No requirement
25 percent
1.93:1 .
( 83, 265 s. f. )
(variation)
Nq requi rement
36 feet
in length
(variation)
U8
IS
The following uses for the project will be permitted,
unless identified as conditional uses (variations from
7
.
,
r>,
n
Resolution No. 86-3
Page 9
shall deduct the employee units which result from each conversion
from the residential quota in the year the conversion takes
place, as is already required by the Code.
APPROITED by the Commission at its regular meeting on March
18, 1986.
ASP~N PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION
By t.
C. Welton A
Chairperson
L-
ATTEST :
~~w~
Kim wnh()~€;I5epu1Ey city cierk
AR.iH
9
r,
,~
"I
MEMORANDUM
THRU:
FROM:
Aspen City Council ~
Hal Schilling, City Manag
Alan Richman, Planning and .' elopment
Director ~
TO:
RE:
Little Nell Executive Summary
DATE:
March 14, 1986
================================================================
Attached for your information is a copy of the Executive Summary
of the Little Nell Precise Plan prepared by the applicants.
Please bring this document to each meeting we have scheduled on
this topic.
The Planning Office memo analyz ing this proj ect will be distributed
to you under separate COVer, It will be available early next
week, and will then be put in your boxes or handed to you directly
at our first meeting on the proj ect, scheduled for March 19 at
5:00 P,M.
cc: Paul Taddune
Jay Hammond
AR.nec,314
f"""'\
.,-"
~.
MBIIlORARDUM
THRU:
FROM:
Aspen City Council
Hal Schilling, City Man~
Alan Richman, Planning and Development Director ~
TO:
RE:
Council Review Schedule for Little Nell Precise Plan
DATE:
March 4, 1986
--------------------~-------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
The mayor requested that I provide each of you with a copy of the
Little Nell review schedule which was accepted by the Council at
the beginning of last night's work session. The schedule is as
follows:
Wednesday, March 19 5:00 - 7:00 PM
Monday, March 24
Informational update
by Aspen Skiing
Company
Regular Council
Meeting - Initiate
Public Hearing
Public Hearing
Continued
Public Hearing
Continued
Wednesday, March 26 5:00 - 7:00 PM
Monday, March 31 4:00 - 6:00 PM
Monday, March 31
6:00 - 7:30 PM
Electrical
grounding
Session
Under;-
Work
,
Wednesday, AprilJ5:00 - 7:00 PM
Public Hearing
COIDpleted (?)
Please let me know if you have any questions with regard to this
schedule,
cc: Kathryn Koch
Paul Taddune
Jay Hammond
Media
A
.'. ~
D m@rn Dwrn ~1
II:'!
.
~
i
t)
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Paul Taddune, City Attorney
Jay Hammond, Director of Public Services ~
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
February 25, 1986
Little Nell
-------------- -- -- --'..... - -'---- -- ---- ----.... .;....---..... ---.-........- - -.---.....................--....,--....;.
Pursuant to my meeting yesterday with Dave Ellis of Design
Workshop, a couple of questions "a:013~ related to actions being
requested by the Little Nell Hotel proJect.
1. Efncroachment - The developer prOP6seutoco;ll;t.r~ct atjcK~t~ .... '>'"
kiosk and mall in a portion ,()f,D,.e,an 9,treetadjaCent to .t:heir
property. Given the extenslve lmprovements they are proposing
and in view of the fact tnattne 'dght-'of:"wctyi is not cuuenUy in
use for vehicular traffic, i witS w(jndeiring whether' a crQsure
similar to the arrangement wi th tne.1\spenAJ:ps (attached agreement
and resolution) might be more appropriate. Dave was concerned
that a "closure" might raise greater concern for the neighbors,
I'm not 1 eaning strongly in one direction or the other so the
questiol1 r w01;lld pose is", dC5~k<J)~ ,~ItE;'J'~ij:,;nment license Prov:id~
ad'ilquate l?rot~ct:Lon to tIle €:ltf and! Would you see any distant,
differences: between enc'r'oachment a.nd closure. . .
:.-C"'-"'_, ',.-,':: '<" :CO' .'...:/..<'....."".,<... '"-,.',""--,":.:,:.;.,-:.:.,,,.,,. ""y, "-" ".. ".. -'.... .'-, ..,"" ,....d.". .... ","',,' -'-'-, ,", _"'.;_".,' .. '/':',":".i/~'.',-<>::':~:;;.:'".,:.'~",:.',,\">'''.'''',:'".'::'i.".,.",'/:.,..,. ..,.,....'..... ';C. " "::.<,',";.' """.. '" ,.,..' ," "'''. . ,..,...','. ..", ';,\':'.\',.';," ,__ ;.;;'.', .",
'" 4. J1?oes the ~~xrsfin<J SiH1Cqm:a<n; E!<tifeltl~nt . (ar~aaHi!i~i;'~dl"'
, ~'''''''~~~vfrl1e; theM tne lil:fHllde to', €6ns1:ru~t Hie Hcket iki10sf(and: !iji1Il
fIllProiemenrfi"rAv~ca;ted~untet' $heeL' TfielanguageinHi~" ,C '''!'
easement agreement gri:\I1ts "tne right tCi install and maintain sid
{:€lnfaIs and reJated faciliiHes utiHzed iri conne'ctJo'!t''Wifh
. ..' , '" '., '..' '"' . v" '. ". ,""'. ,v
grantee's sldingoperations. .. :t nave researched tfue deed at
book 19:fpage 296 and Ordinance #53 sedes of 1941. Toe d~ed is
an easement for a water pipeline and Ordinance #53 is the vacation
ordinance. Both documents reserve the right to install and
maintain utili ties and, subject to the applicant's willingness to
relocate and provide revised easements such facilities, I
have no problem with the constructi the mall under the
current easement,
JH/co/LittleNell
cc: Alan Ri9fimall'
f
~
^/
HANNING AND Z ONING CO~SION
lElUm~y 18. ..lPJH~
HQ'J.'...l.QlW
MEE~
Motion: Hunt moved to reconsider the prev.ious moticn from the
February 4, Ig86 meeting regarding parking; White seconded.
Tygre asked for a roll call vote:
Blomquist no
Colombo nc
White aye
Peyton aye
Hunt aye
Markalunas no
Tygre . no
Three in favor, four opposed; motion NOT carried.
"lotion: Hunt moved to accept the drawings presented for the
service area on Spring St. as part of the official submission,
including encouragement to proceed with the cul-de-sac for
automobiles, and that the applicant come forward with a landscape
pI an f or the vacini ty; Markal unas seconded. All in favor; motion
carried.
Motion: Blomquist moved to not consider the encroachment on Dean
St. unless it encompasses the entire street block; White seconded.
.
Blonquist withdrew his pre'\7ious motion, White agreed.
Blomquist moved that t~e Ski Company agree to participate with
its neighbors in the Special Improvement District for that
secti.on of the Dean St. Mall labled as "Zone 2" with the provision
if a special improvement district does not come forward py,lI.,the
time the rest of the Dean St. and Hunter St. malls are',' buil t
that the Ski Company will at least pave what is presently the
west portion of Dean St. with pavers that are consistent with the
rest of Dean St. and ~t~ict the eMrq,nce to the street such
that it is limited to"':kr'l~e vehicle;;""access only; White seconded.
All in favor; motion carried.
'.
:-/
(")
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
Aspen City Council
Planning Office
City Engineer
Roger H. Hunt, Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
Little Nell SPA Development Plan; Minority View
TO:
THRU:
RE:
DATE:
March 19, 1986
===============================================~=====~~=~===~=~=
I am generally in favor of the Little Nell Redevelopment as
proposed. HOwever, the skier drop-off area and the impacts on
Durant Avenue,calise9,I'\le, t()", yo~~against the conditional use of
the hotel (included inP&Z Resolution 86-3).
The problems I see with t,he proposed drop-off area are specifically:
I. It does not comply with the City Council's condition
regarding that area, neither is it an improvement to
that condition.
2. Assuming the concept of full frontal drop-off is an
acceptable alternative, the intrusion into Durant
Avenue with curb extensions ,and placing the parallel
parking in line with present angle parking on either
side of the project is unacceptable for street maintenance
and will probably have an adverse effect on stre,et
circulation especially when the increased impacts of
the gondola and the hotel come on line.
3. The skier drop-off exit ana the hotel entrallce design
has placed too much (all) automobile movement conflict
in the circulation lane (s) of Durant Avenue.
4. Though the above "technical" problems can be solved by
the City Engineer (whO sha res my concerns), the end
result would have major differences which the City
Council may not like and may well not have approved of
if seen before hand.
5. Finally, all intrusions into Durant Ayenue, including
extensions, of t,he Hunter ,Str~etMall, sl10uld not be
allowed without the cOllsiaerat.ionof f:U1:.Ure circulation
and transit needs. For example, it may be nece'ssary to
convert to parallel parking on each side of the project
in the near future. Allowing the project now to put in
protrusions beyond the parallel parking line creates an
unnecessary future expense.
The majority Of my fellow commissiollers chose not to identify the
above problems. I bring them to your attention only because I
think you can make better decisions if you know as much as
possible up front.
Thank you for your considerati,on.
')
'--
1'1'"
,1"--'-'
\ .
\ '
\;t
I
f"'\
./
,~
-~~
AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEi1S,N"T, made and entered into this df:. day of
, 1972, by and be tween the CITY OF ,ASPEN, a
Hunicipal corpor<ltion, (hereinafter sometimes referred to
a,S "City"), and the ,ASPEN ALPS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, a Colorado
~....;.;...,~.:~~;,.;~.."...,.....,~.......:,....._,,,. e.......... ......",.. ",.;:... ......~...."r '
corporation, (herei.nafte:t:So~es~~esref~rred to as "Association"):
\~ll:E:REAS, the Associ.atio~hi3s requested the City to clo.~e
a portion of Ute Avenue to vehicul<J.r traffic in order that the
Assoc,i.al:ion' maycor\s~~~p~i3;~d~~~~ia~tn~1.1 within the closed
portion of Ut~ Averl\lep,she~e~l'\~fSE!:: ,described.
AND HlIEREAS, the City of Aspen reviewed the plans for
the maned area and finds th<lt",t[le SlCJsing of that portion of
Ute Ave"nue her,einafter described and the construction of a malled
area within saJcl street for tbe benefit of the public.
r"
\HTNESSETll:
NO\~, THER)~fORE, for goocl and valuable consideration,
the partieS here,!;o, agree as JCl1l0WS
1. The t,ssociatiCln hercpy agrees to construct, land-,
scape {locl maintl'lin the ml'llled are<l in accordance "ith the plans'
attached her<:to, which malled area shall be open 0 the pub1.:l.c
and shan provi,.de Jor ace sS,by et)\ergency vehicles as well as a
pedestri!ln path, all at the expense of the Association.
2. The City agrees that
of Ute Avenue to vehicular traffic
Exhibit "B", providinr, that at all
shall be available t? the public.
it shall close that portion
as described on attached
times said closed street'
3. It is further understood and agreed that in the
event that Lot No. 21 is conveyed to the City by: the pssociation,
the city shall pay and be, responsible for the construction of the
cul-de-saC west of the closed portion of Ute Aveml'2; provided
hO'ilever, that the ^ssocia,tionshall be resp0nsible for the main-
tenaClCe of the landscaped area within the dul-de-sac.
"",<"."",:""":....",,,,:,,<><>,),;:':".i;.:,'.,:,""'i"".,.""".'c',;.;,,.;;',/\i.'.";i':::,..'..- --'::"'"
Msociation shRll save th," City harmless from any and a1) claims
_.,...,....,........_.....,..,'.;....."J..___...,;.".,:"",""",,-;:..;.;';,;,,;-;;-.:.",;,:.-.;<"i,,',:;.....:............,:....,.
for p,ersonal injury and property d<1l11Clge occurring within the
malled area,.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto
4. It 'is further unders
";c""....",,,,,,''''''''',
eed that the
.
,
~';
,"
.
.. :-
, '.
\'
"
,~ i-
",
:.,,' ,",
';"'0c,..:>;:,;.
:':.i:;'.::-"".,;
i"".:;"
',<,~;,;'"
,'-'"
r'.,
w
Q
EXHI13IT ItS"
DESCRIPTION OF UTE AVENUE CLOSED
FOR PEDESTRIAN HALL
Beginning stthe Squthe~sterly corner of Lot 34, Ute
subdivisiol1, C'lty of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado;
thence SQuthwesteEly slong a line being the projection of the
Westerly ~ight of way line of original Street a distance of
21,00 feet; thence NOJ;thwesterly along a line parallel to the
Non,herlY right of way line of Ute Avenue a distance of 52.50
feeti thence Southwesterly a distance of 40.00 feet more or less
to s point on the,Southcdy right of way line of Ute Avenue;
tlWt;lce Northwestedy 129,00 fee'\: slong said Southerly right of
way to a point; th"nce Northe~sterly a distance of 70.50 feet
mor$ or less to a~point on the Northerly right of way line of
Ute 'Avenue..; thence EasJ,etly along said Northerly l'i.ght of way
line) <\ ,gist.anS€: ,of ??,}. OO}ee t qr less to the point of beginning.
.' ,.,
~,., ~
"', .
','
~"1\1'.
.>:..:"
.'~"
(,
.'
,'f!>.",
:,(':\,',
1,.1, .' ,'I'
T::
.. . ~,'
~.. .
,. . .'l .'>' ':'\~'
'. . -b;lfJ. ."
.~
-'-<'-,
:,i:
..' ~ .
.
"
",.,
'.'
"
, "
.
>
,
"
'.," "
I,:
"
,-
'.'
...:::' .
"
.. .,',
"
'.',
, .'
"
,.
,"
~
.'\
I'
.'
'"
"C:::::. .
~ '.
'~
'<
!
'\
"
""".".
"I
"
,.,.,
,.
,
r,
: ,.
.
,
//
,
\...-- '
"
"
"
"
.
'"
q'
\; ..
,
,.
~
.'
1"""'\
:'"
~
,. '"
"
set theil: hands ancl' seals ~the cJay and year first above written
ATTES'l::
ATTEST:
, ,
I'
,
.'on
"
~.'~'")
,~ '
" /",?--.-;...<'t;A..C'1I';':
Ci(:y
t(
.,:.
(',
,/
//1
" ,'co ,.' ./.>' <',.;//,//...
"," J >>{"..: />,'<~;)>{" ',,/<-?t<-;t
'/, ,(, (. .,' "I' / ~,,,<. /'
\' .D, l, V' , .. f..' I . "
<v.'., __ .' - -- - - ./.'
Se~r'et;atY' '7
/
.0
"
"
,
"
'\"'~
!; ~.
. '"
,'I
CITY OF ASPEN, a Col.orado
Municipal Corporation
.
~,/:::J '
n:~ ~~,,______...,,_,.A
P' 'i/ Hayop
','
ASPEN ALPS CONDONINIUH
ASSOCIATION, a Colorado
Corporation
By;
".--..., ,,",
I., 1"
.' \ / l'
: )! I' ,
I - i'
\__.1 ((.) /( ,';/
i' " " , , ..
President
/>/"
/~/I .
(/ ,,' ~.r /)
(.."
~
/
:/ /)
'....
/'u_
.
t~\
'~
,
?~
'.
"
'.
.
"
" '
. '
i!l'
'>
/'
........
1'"'\
()
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
'()~loI" e.~. ..otc~n s. e. a l. co.
;'..,::""",.-.::,.;' ';';,..",'"
i
I
I
I
,
I
I
I
,
,
i
i
I
'1
,j
I
.
,
1
I
I .
I
!
,
I
I
I
:-1
'1
!
I
. i
i
i
RESOLU'l:'ION NO. /L/
(S~r:L~s of 197~
WHEREAS, th,~ City of Aspen in its continuing efforts
to b~,?\lt:;Jfy th~ City a,nd to provide for convenient and safe
p,ed,~str:Lan tr.avel h?-sagre~d with the Aspen Alps Condominium
AssociatiOn for the,~C?nst:;rlJstioI1 of a maIled area on a certain
po): t,iQo. of Ut\' Av~nu~ h,el:ei,V'!. ':ter descr ibed.
AND WHEREAS, the City of Aspen desires to close a
certain p,ortion of Ute Avenue from vehicular traffic and to
permit it to be landsSaped in accordance with a mall area
plan stj,bm:Ltted by the Aspen Als'p Condominium Association.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that that portion of
Ute Avenue described on the attached Exhibit "A" be and is
hereby elosed fro\ll vehic'lJ.h.r traffic from this day forward.
a~~uJ
'(J
~~~
I,LORRAINE (';.M1J':E:.8, duly appointed g Clerk of the
City of Aspen, Colorado,dOh.e):'eby certify that the foregoing
is a trtj~ and, corr~ct~()py of the Resolution adopted by the
Asp~n City Council at t:;h~ ,:J:;egular meeting held on a<-tA~ /r
()
Dated this ..d day of
, 1972.
1972.
~~/I~
CITY CLERK
J
~
~
EXHIBIT "A"
DESCRIPTION OF UTE AVENUE CLOSED
FOR PEDESTRIAN MALL
Ileginning e.t th~ South~4sterly corner of Lot 34, Ute
Subdivision, City of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado;
thence SO'l.),thw~sterly along a line beit}g the ,projection of the
Westerly right of way line of Original Street a distance of
21.00 feet; thence Northwesterly along a line parallel to the
Northerly right of way line of Ute Avenue a distance of 52.50
feet; thenc~ Southwest~rly a distanc'e of 40.00 feet more or less
to ,a point ot} the S01Jt,h~r:ly right of way line of Ute Avenue;
tneOGe NortJ'lW~st('n;ly 129.00 feet 410ng said Southerly right of
'4a'1 t.o a p,oint; thenc~ North~astex:1y a distance of 70.50 feet
more ox: less to ,a, point on t:ne Northerly right of way line of
Ute AVenJ,"e; tnenGe Eastex:ly along said Northerly right of way
line a distat}Ge of +n,9P>:f:e~t,OX: le~s to the point of beginning.
I
l'
. I
f"'1
~
,
f;HcnOAC::T
]-\GBEr:~nI';i,F2
~llis~grQeDGDt IJa~I0 ~nd01'lterecl into t~is
., l~)_t by and b2twec:n tl'l(~ C'I':C';' OF 1~8PE?1,
County, CQI0fDdo, i'lc:rE;in,~lft(::r r:(~ferr(':c: 'C.O au "As!;)cn" aW:'1
dav of
P (t kin
11e:[CdndftR:;croicrr,t;6 to S "Lic(;!"isQC;. II
;TEEIlEAS, L.iccn~:)ef; i:3 tr1c QI./ner of the follul'linc described
prop('~rty loc;:lte in the City of I\SL)e'n, Pitt~in C6t.:n,t~~, Colorado:
Ci ty Qf
n, Pitkin County, ColornJo
tTF:n~RBhS, :.:..:1id prop:'~rt:./ ai,JuJ::';3 the loll'8\'lirtt~': (~c:~;crib(:d public
ri(;l1t-Qj'-'.wy (,,:):
t'TH E:P>"El~,:J, L5J:e n~,~ c c
ir
to (:
c::>on ;;,;:1(: riqbt-oi ';,1;JY(s)
\)HF~T~T:~l-\S, Asp,~~n 21~!ri;;,e.s to t'he '~':ra.nt ok: .3. private liccn.:30 of:
enPto:~.c;hl'n{~nt b,ui).t$\lbj~.ct to"certain conc"iitionn.
~t'lJEI:El?ORE, in c()n~:idc_~2~t~on of the mutq,~l o:Cjroer:::ent llereina:eter
0, t"''''''. -;;[ !Ie"'.:':' ..,...,:1' r.. '::' c'~~, t"< ,..;, ~-.t" ~','; .,.~. ,~y-' ...~. f('!l' O'
C'0,,.~~+:.X)q~.i( t:~.';)J;)l;;;:n d"'"C.....lS>>.;:p;;>_y,;,~_()v(;;J}.}n,. (",/10 ~1.s)r~.c n,..;. ..\. .,_O~,\l..-...
1., j\ ::)rivo.terevoC0b~:.(~ liCE~!)sq ,i~,,; ~-le!"eby ~)r"lntc(3 to Licensee
to OCCl1l:~Y'~ r:}a~:itain,. -::Jnd. lltil iZt:: the (.tbo,!c~- (\c:,sc'r_ibeIJ portion of
ptJ bl ic X'lg0 t~'o:t:~.l..?aYIor 1:n<-: 010 pur po ::~e oe s c r 1 bCCi.
2. 'l:hi$ licE;ns,e iE- Cjrant.c~(J for a ':'x~r:,)(.~tu(:Ll t.0rI:l Eubj Get to
bein~J tC:'n;;ir"19t:(~d ~lt'lny' ti,r;\(; ~:lnd for" t~n~l r:::::'L:~on at the sole
(:ii~;(':r(:t;i..on oftL.e City'Council o:t ;,:1':(; Ci OJ.: (~~)l:~'~~n.
3. rl'hi;:;liccns:::: she',1.1
subor6irlQtc tC) ti1C rigilt of Aspen to
u;.;c: ~;2I.id n.rcc. for ,:_~n:l public ~?~~):pOSl.::::~.
I~_. IJic{;n~)c<~ i;:;; r;c:;;;;:)OI1::,iblc: .l:oJ: th(; :~\aintcLr~:-lcc ancl repair of
tile public; ris.!ht-oJ~-\'l(~Y, toq2tller -l/:ith l.!:irJ1.OV\2iJOnts con~;tr1Jcted
'-;~""'r(:.:"'" \'ll,iC')' J),(::""(>~) ),:1 l~r,~..-,. c~:'~(".rc1.<''',,::: o.c I' ".,.., "::J' ,-:0 C"!"<>tl' C' ''"'\ l::'i"'a11
(-.-L.l\.~_ ._,.1....:., .' ."~ ...,1, ".'l.,,~.l--"-' I ..J...._. ~ ....,.~ 1. 1..'< ,'........ _L. '_,- - );., ~")~l -
C:2tc:rj'::tJ,ue t.o be ~'lcces r~. to l~c:cp th<: ~-ic.I.;'.'lC: l!'~ .:"t [3.::t:;,.:C nnd clean
r'\
r)
_"1" "
c.,on.(~J,. t:.l on,..
5. fJicer:s.eo ,sb.;:t+l_~t:~~11,t.iq,~s _ dur in9 the tern herE~of 1 ca.r ry
p~hl~ cl~,~ b~:l_JtyI n'Sln: an'ce."'{'6i:' E'.h-C,bc'nE:f:~t: o~ ,the City _ Hit h
li.rCtitsof,,'hotlt2~i3tl'10.D:~J~<2~,,9 spcc.;if j,(~d 0;l Secti on 2 (~-10-11 ~, C. D.. S. 1
.:L$, may be C;l;:rl~ndcd' 'fcrori1-'Wtlr:l:,:?:,-~t:o,t~_m'-?,_ c.iJT(:in~J tl'I0 Ci ty as co-insured.
Lic_en$'(::8,8h_al1mqint:J.~r:.'_' 99icf'SpyerClSJiJ in full force and effect
QUril'19t,hc terT:10~ tLi.$,_ ~~i.9qp-geq_nc1:;sh011,i:urL)f:i)) thc,>C~ty \'lith a
CQPYQf s:L1chcovGt;a~r:; or a c:ertiffc,o.te evic1cncing such coverage.
hll" insurance pol ici cs:nain t-a~nq d pursuant to thi~; ,:;' 9r e cment
5hq11 c:pnt(~ip thef.o.ll Q;,:rin9 'cndo ~!:;e'p~nt:
"It is hefE:by unc'\Cl;stoodl~lnc 3(.;recd that t:hi~'~ insurance
poliG,2' not ~)() c.?~r)ccl18rj by tllG ;::ll:cety \.i:1til tl1irt.y (30)
days' after recciJ?tby the CitYI by re~;i;::.tercd Bail, of ...
\)(itt:Qn n.oticc:,of;:;ucl1 it)tqrl_~,io0" to nccl or not to reneT,). I
6. License(~ 8b.011 sCtV(::, de:r2ncl and hold llarmlesG aq2_inst any
2:1nd all c12d.r::;:) ror ,:L3r:laq'.:;::;, costs 2..71('; c::;):~n~;(~rJ, to 'perr,ion::; or
propcrty that I'ili..1:{ 2rioc Qut.~ c:::'. .,orbe occ::1r.~iol:ed by the l~se,
occupancyq.!'l(1 L3intenanC-2 01: ;:;ti:~(: prop'2rt),' by Llcensec, or 1: rOD
any act or qf:)J.s:::iorJ of any {epresente.ti\'el ,3.q9n~.:, custoDcr and/or
(;Llployee of -Li cc:nsee.
7. roI'bif'; 3. icense way L>:~ tc:rrLI..in".ted by Licc;n~;(::e Z:\ t Zlny tiI1H;
a_Dd ror 2,ny r(;Gl~;0n or~ tl~i_rty (30) dEl.YS ~.1rittE.:n :-loticc' of Licensee's
intent. 'co ca,ncel. r)1l1i;.~ Ii n.s.c":C1ay ;J(; terl'i1.ir:t:ited by j:\f3pen at any
tine and tQr any r~::2;lson by resolut:io;l duly l>~ssed by the City
Council of t.h<0 City of l~spen. Upon t,;;rr:'tintttion Licensee shall,
qt;. .r.J~.ccnseel ;:;.c~~:':pQ.rl.~e, .:t:8r.IQVQ ~r:y.irnpr.?v.(?r,~(::nts or (;~croa.cj:r,tl?nt~:;.f~Ol;1
~3.:11,C/. pr:-opcrt.-_y., rl'i'lQ !")ro ccy ~'~hc:!lJ. !')('; rGstol>~(: to a CODciltlon
scJ.tisi'Cj.ct:ory to t\.$PQn.
g. '211.is lic(~nse i~:; t;~(b~;~;ctt,o all ;.'l.te }'::1.1./8, 'CflC provisions
o~ the C,l~lGlrt(!.r of t!.li" Ci\=v q,i: A;;D2n i1 it ;10'.1 c;:i.sts or nay
hcretlftl;:.J: .,be,>,,}Llqr~dpd,,<:l. thc,o~(i"'n,a.rl(':,C:,~ of. tllc~City 0:: ASDen now
in effect or 1:;.,hO;:.'..2 T,1hi he'rc~~1:Eter be <:1clOF;t.(~I.J.
:-) . No,th.in9 :.'lcrein .~)~',a.11 b<;~, ,conc3tr 119,J so :'-'\i', to pr(:;vl~nt ji.f3pen
frQTJ9:(antinSJ!:~qch 2.<JoitLon lic(;nsQi:'; or :)rop(:r~..:y int(~rest:-) in
qf "tffec't i D'J ~'E,trd}'),r'Ol'J~r t:Y:"af..;it~Te~::n;3 n (; C2 S~3tl ry.
10. ~~'bl;; COiJ.'c.,:it:io:1s hereof i:r::lposed on the c;r,~lnte(',; license of
,E.'ncro,~clJnH:nt sibSlJI con~)~Jtll~e,_.covqnClnts rLl!1nir:~l \litb thE: l(~ncJ,
ell'),() bin.diJ)'9 upon rjicen_$c(~, .thf;ir'~'h(~-ir's,' ~)ucce~~'s()r.::;ttnd aSEigns.
11. In any legal {7:ction to eni;orce t,he :~'rov'i::)ions of this
Ac;reeITlent., tbt;;prl?vailiu9 rtY[3halJ be entitl{;rJ to it;::; rca.sonClblG
at.:: t Q,r DE)Y I ~ f (?C$~
12. H tho
rcmov'e(} fQrgny
1 OC(";lt i'Ofr 'It} i thollt
st: r t:ct. ure; i(;r
re?lson, Lic€~nt-;ce
obta i nq Glnothq.r
is 1.:\.cenSG t:lc~S i:;;::Juec is
~1ay not rebu11(::in the same
encroacl1ment license.
-
~. 'l
r\
I::J t'JTNEf;f:i \'.JEFHCPFr t.b rtiE~.s e:u:;cl1t~.,;d thi~) ZtqrE:eme.nt at
J\spsn dZll:' 0n(:"~ y.(~t;r fir.$t \>?ritten.
i\/flTE S'I' ~
CIII1Y or.'
P::'~:,l, cor.. Dp.?\nO
I1V
BTIJL S1'TJ~LING, i1ayor
r:,A.TIIRY1:1
KOCF, City Clerl:
s:~~\,~~rrE Q? G.QLOIU\DQ
~~
.:.::>.....)..
Cl)".hlfl,ty oE..J?it,k"i n
Li censee
acl:nO~112(;0ed before me tIlis
,l~;_, b:,.r
~.lh(':, forq\:oin~i in.strL:l,n~?::Jt. i,''](~S
da.y oi
r.lfc'e6::,6"~.
l'JFt';;E.SS
f,.riD
rv CQ)\liJ1S-310n c. ireD:
ALDT:hL.
))etClry Pl.~~)J..ic
Z\ d (~;. r (: [; ;~:;
,,,.....,
f""1
Z1 r ;6~
,
Recorded 3:35 PII V,c.h 26, 1979 R~ception f
Loret taBanner Re 'der
.355 PACE352
EASEMENT AGREEMENT
Y.0
7'J:lJS AGREE:MENT, made anq entereq into this c.& day of
'~~J' '" .", 1979: between THE CITY .oF
AJ'f"" !;:91,.o,R.A.P.o, a mlJiplC1PiJ.) c.orporatlon (hereinafter referred
to !l's "Grantor"), anq THE ASPE:1\i' SKI ING C.oRPORATION, a Colorado
corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Grantee").
R E C IT A L S
1. Grantors are the QW1:l'ers of the following described
real estate in th,e City of
, County of Pitkin, State of
Colorado'
,A tract of land" comprising 0,14 acres, Clore
oj' ).ess, rnoTepartic"l.!).arl\' described as follows:
, "'." - ..., >.. .-.- .......,;<..-,..~,... ,.'c......,.... .
'tbie Easler).~' one~h"Jf 0:: 1/2) of vacated Hunter
STreet, westerly of,iJ.nd"djacent to Block 1 02,
CitY anq '1'ownsite of Aspen, between the southerly
line of Durant Avenue and, the northerly line of
Lot 22, \.:te Subdivision, Said tract being the
Easterly one-half (E 1/2) of all that portion of
said Hunter Street vacated by City of Aspen
.ordinance No, B-~3, Series of 1947 recordFd in
the public records of Pitkin County on March 17,
1959, under Reception No, 107787 in Book 18/1;'at
Page 101,
"j'j{EREFORI, in considerat.:i.on of the mutual benefits to
be d,eriveo herebY, and other goOO and val uable consideration, it
isagreeo by tbe parties as follows'
A G R IE MEN T
1. Grantors do bereb)' g-r"nt,and convey to Grantee a
perl'?etual non-exclusive easern,ent for purposes of ingress and egress
oYer and ac.ross Q.raptor's PrOPerty to and from Durant Avenue and
AspeJ;l ),l,ountiJ.in, t~e right to p.,rk v.~hicles upon the parking area
e::;:.i~,t,,;,c,.; G~
~liJ ~i-.ll.;' ,i'~b~J'\. tv it'd~L.u.ll allJ liw.int41Cl
ski cor'rals and related facilities utilized in connection with
"-.'.;
rigot to ut:j,lizat
, :':O\\'EVER, that Grantee's
of the above-described easement
.sbal1 be restricted
interfere with Grantor's right
Of utilization apd el'ljoyment
in that deed recorded ip
Boo],(182, ?a~,e 296, in the r<?cqrds of the Pitkip County,:::olorado,
ano reserved ip Ordinance #5:;>, Series of 1947, of the City of Aspen,
Colorado,
..-.
, ,
t"')
.365 ~Ac:353
2, ~q,"r(': ii:? l',"","rved ,t,oGp,ntQr the right to utilization
ano en,joYl'lJ,ent Of toe "bove-oescribed easement provided the same
"h"ll not ,interfere or be incon$istent wi th the right" herein
granted,
3, J,:,xcept as otoerwise specifically provided herein,
all of the provisioI'ls of this agreemeI'lt shall be ,binding upon
th,e oeirs, Persqnal represe,nta,tives, succes"or" and a"signs of
the parties ).ieretq anQ Shall inure to the benefit of the successors
and, a,ss,igni:? of the Grante,e,
ATTEST:
By
Stacy
Ma)'ql'
!
ORADO
Da t ed : ~u2.'u!-/-~ / 19-19
" .,", ./
~
~~~f~
City (;1<:, ,;
THE ASPE~ Sl\ II NG CmlPORAT IO?;
;)atecj:
March 21, 1979
By
Its
) /, .-/'" /' '
I,,-'~.(~~~'-<'~
Vice'President-General Manager
, \ , ..:~ C\ C ;-
, ,
~;f.,1"I"E;;T; '~,
,."' .
,~." ~~...', ::>",
. .r. ."'\ ,';' .;.':
,,:~.,..0>~~:;;',~: ,./r
, . ~ f,~;.//4-. -- /4~
l>.,sst ",Si~1'et ary-Tre,asu,r(':l'
, l ~ ,; ,', "
;,,'\
-2-
1"'"'\
f)
. j
,
-~5 'Acr354
ST,ATE OF COLORAPO
COUNTY OF PlTK~N sS.:
T,he foregoing instrument was acknoldedged before
. ri-
me this;; 7 , day of ,/})areA- ,1979 by Stacy Standley III,
M Mayor of THE CITY QF ASPEN, COLORADO, and by Kathryn
S. Ko,<;h,
a,s city Cler,k <;:if THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO.
',".\'\; :;., 1/1 .
" (.~'.\' '-, "/.~,>
""..... .
, v./ ,/(:.
,
W:Lt;n~ssmy hand and official seal.
., ~ . .. .
: ': ' ".,(/ ~ i I.~.
-., "::.' . .i........' f'.
'. '", <.,:." ,.'
". . ( .,. ..,\,. ~,
"-" (; ,'. ,:~' \ (
" ' .....,.. .'
My <;ol1U'11iss:Lon expires:
"
, .
,
YI'~Y~h:/}7.~'1J
Notary lie
S1ATE or C.oLOAAPO )
COUNTY OF PITKIN )
The foregoing instrurnent was acknowledged before
roe this 21.stday of
'.',,-.'...-.-'-"".";
Ma:rch
, 1979 by 'Tom Richardson
Assistant
gS Vice P;resident and Luet1:a Whitson as Secretary/_of THE
'Treasurer
A~!'EN SK'!INGcOFtPOAA'T:;:ON_
(' i. E [/ (i,
,~",::""""Y,:, j':itness my hand and official seal.
e ./,' 'T' '" "?
", ,\ U /' ,-;, ".\,.
:',' d,.'" My cPlTil1'iissJon expires: Octob,er 27, 1979
\c:: ~;,. >;,. ; ~
,'\ ('"
,', . ,:" /,r ""'l ~ \...., .. Q
.. (.I ~." ,""
'" ............,.';',\..
,\..' .
:-',1.1'. .
.'
~ ~"'''~~\
Notary Public '
I''''
....l~
... , .. . ,
~CilT.~':ZST
.... ,. . - . y
EXHIBIT JL
-' "~_'I :;tq ~."~611
..L.....(,...-'_.., ~... Vv . - -.-
".... 1....I.;>l !O~, H.C., h':?:'t!'i!lilf t...:c
(t"'1
.
/"r'I
(..... )
"
S LII T 0 - C(l~I',D'"".~INIU;'l
\:iH:R.E:\, . NL oJ
.. . f 0 .. . .~. & L' " , .
It!'ferred to as Ll t ne lS ~eSlro~s O..U~1_1z1n; c~:t~i!l P:D?~rty,
hc?reina!tl:r refecrell to ~s "subjt.ct P:'O?~!ty" l'l:1'," o;..;:!:.u
Skijn~
utilb:ed by ~s~<<n )['}~ Corp::>ri:ltion, herei:1aZt"r r",':e::rec
and (, ., '//
//^f.,.~.
to & s ,,:J ~ !. _
"Ski Cc>r~. to and
\';iiE?.E.~S ,
the pnrtiet hereto
an~';-:.':"'''D
--""'-:'-.~-
~ j~i~t us~ of s~bj~ct
property with the Ski Corp. using the pro?~~t~' ~\'rins the ~int~~
ski ~onths for the parkins of emp]oy~e ve~icles ~n~ Lift C~e
using the prop~rty for a tennis facility d~rin;
~'n.=.
\0...._
b!lla~ce of
the year. The period available for ter.nis ~se is antic:p:ted to
'be from approximately ":!l}' 1 to NO'v'e;;-.be:- 1 of Ecch :::'ear.
"NON THE~FORE, for and in considerctio:1 of the tei7lS ?nd
concitions hereinafter set forth the pertics agree as follows:
1. Lift One shall upply to the ?la~ning and Zoni~g Cc~~ission,
City of Asp~n for a ~oning variance es reQuiree for the use of
the Subject Property as a combined parking and tennis ("cility.
This ~P?lication will be at the sole risk an~ e~p~nse of Lift
One. The Ski Corp. agrees to formallyco~sen~ to such appllcatio~
D-
2. Lift (lne agrees to contract for and ~o~plete the paving ~
of the Subject Property hereinafter described as follows:
if required to do 50.
Such paving will provide an acceptable entrance to
the p2'O?~:-ty
=
C)
c=
Da
Lots 7-12, Bloc}~ 11, F.ames Addition
City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Color~do
from the east access. In hddition, paving shall cover existing
- parking area and ,~hen necessary, on tne 5CH:!t.h side of th~
crihbing ,,,ill be constructed to enl.a~s~ t.h~ pc','''::: ??ridng
property
to the south l~~:!'~':~i':l;g: lin~. This c>'.P(?;)SC ,;ill v:? the sole
?ro?~;:ty ,
a:-ca \:? }(t' 4
,. .~
-'
....
l':.:~~p:>n -
sibility of Lift One.
3 ~ Li ft O!'se agrees to pJ"ovide ~a~=~uc te S;'!O',., rc:::o\.al for i. h~
(",,~,p)oY~C ;,ncJ Ctlslo!ner parl;)ng \<hjch ',.',\ II )'('"'1ui1'l=' .:".:'v :::0:'01,,':1
r,,;"oval prior to lhe time cr.,ployees arri,.e for \,'ork. This :-'-'~;"'"'t\C'"
\,'ill continue c1\ll-ing llie t.Cl'n, of t.his _"I'Jl'(:(','l:':1t .'nc! ;,ny cxl"I1!'lor:s
a~rc~d upon h~lw~2n the p~rti~s.
.
f,om the ef(ective date of this Air~~m~~~.
1:1("~;-;:l o~ tc.-n
I",~ .
.... . ''-'
:~lS eO:':".w:.n~c!
~."::>
~.:!~'r ~
.
~~~~~z 9r~nt~d by Ski r-fP' to ~i!: One for
,
..,,-,~
....-
a~rc~ment shall be D covenant r~nnir.9 with t~e Ihnc ~n~ ~h!11
rCIllain an encu,'!.b:rance 0:'\ the p=operty bi'r:tji~l; t~e S~~i Co.:p. its
successors or as~i9ns. At the ~nc of the ten ye~= t~=m. the
,
,
,..;
0.'
.-'
Pa,.ties mav bgree to an extension of the ~:rren~.'~~e~t~ if t
~ J ::~!f::
is
,;
..-
'-'
',...;>-
.~
m~tua1 u9ree~ent to do so.
5. In accordanc~ with the zo~in; rules and =e;ulatio~s of
the city of Aspen. the'perti~s hereto understenc anc cs=~e thct
the use of the tennis facility ~ill be 1i~itce to the O~ne:s ~ne
~uests of Lift One.
THIS AG?~E}~NT S~~L BE EFFECTIVE ~L~Y 1, 1978.
ASPEN SKJI~G CO~?ORATION
,
By :-1; tf ~ /it~
LIFT o:-n: CO:-;DO...~Hi!i.;",?! l.SS0CrATION. INC.
~ ,\
~) \\~Kd
,)
r,.I/ .'
'" L"'i:..,\",~.l~
By:
STATE OF COLOR~DO
)
) ss.
)
\';'lre\:foregoing instrument
:3thcl3Y of Apri1. 1978, by
ASper; Sk~'i,!l~:CorpoTation.
.
,,'as ackno,~lec3c;ed before rr.e this
D. R. C. Bro~n.'President
of
~
~
,.~
~
'~
~,
C)
~
D..
.' . . -. . ~
COv~)TY or PiTKIN
liitness'my hand and ofiicialseal.
MY' co",""i ssion expires: l;r C~::>.;:;;::.. E";:'" c'n 1:. ~.lS
~'-,~ ~,'<-..,,~~ ~
~otary Public -
STATE OF
)
) 55..
)
COUNTY OF
f . . t ~ ~ c' o' " ......co'. .' .
The orego~ng 1ns rumenL U~S a ~n~__~~_o c?rore ~ie thlS
~^{:A. , day cf i'.pril. 1978. by fl~ (1. -I;(:-'lC.,J',!;~ &-=R
Witness my hand ana official se~l.
Ny co:,unission expires: 'ii'Jj7'j
_y)/~w~. 21 ~---L~-,--.___
Not~ry Pll~lic
.
,.,
- .
1.'-1,.,,1\....:.,. ..;..." 4
t.J\.HIBII ..Ii-
, .
f~
"('(1 C"~'31
ryr"''1'~ '"",,' ~~~":u 1,
. .""C ,........_.. .".,' \..I\..- -._~.
.',S., 1~.l;\l.lO~, :J1.t:.. ht::'ei!'Ii.ltt:~c
~^
( f-,'
\:tn:Ri:r.s, 1.11'1' ONt C0:-10:>:1Wlli:';
l~!~rrt"<l to as "Lift One" is clesi:-o'Js of \ItilizirlS c~r~l:hl P!t>?'~rt:)..
l-..!reina!t,c:r reh,cr~cJ to .:5 "subjt.ct ?:"O?~!'ty" n::.ow O'..;;~:.c
Skjin~
utili%~d by ASyi:n ~;;'i Corp=>rDtion, h~!ei:1ertc:r r...~e;rn~d
IIlld J;"
.~'^ e:~
to &5 ":J~, ,:.
"Ski C()r~." ltnd
t~EP~~S, the pnrties hereto an~ic!?~te
&l ~';)int cs: o' s"'~J"'-"
., - -... -"'-'"'
pro?erty with the 5;;i Corp. using the proplo-rty ~ll!"ins the \.;int~=
ski ponths for the parkins of effi?loy.e vehicles
.:.-~
.. "-
Lift C:'lC
using the prop=rty for a tennis fecility durin;
.I."'n.:>
"-..-
balel'lce of
the year. 'fhe period ev~ilabl~ for t~nnis cse is antic:?=ted to
'be from approximately Jo~a)' 1 to Nove;;-.be::- 1 of each year.
~ow THEREFORE, for ind in consideration of ~he te!~s p.nd
conditions hereinafter S!t forth the parties ~gree as follows:
1. Lift One shall ~pply to the Planning ~nd Zoni~g Co~"ission,
City of Asp~n for a zoning variance ~s reguiree for the use of
1;he S\lbject Property as a combined parking ~nci, tennis fc::cilit)..
This epplication will be at the sole ris}: ~n;; c::;:pC:'nse of Lift
Lots 7-12, Bloc}: 11, Fames AcdH:.ion
~
~:).
~
~
~~~
~
C)
~
ene. The Ski Corp. agrees to !ormally,cons~n~ to such cpplir.ation
if r~quired to do so.
2. Lift One agrees to contract for end ~o;:lpl ete t;"!e paving
of the Subject P.coperty hereinafter cescr ibec ~s fol10'.:s:
City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colo::"~co
Such paving ,.,ill provide ~n acceptable entrance to the p~c>?".ty
from the east access. In ..ddition, paving shall cOver E'xisting
. parking area and ,.,hen necc.'ssary, on the sout,h side of th~ plO?.:n.ty,
~ill u? the sole
a~'cp. \!p}(t'6
.t ,i/
'-
crihbil.g will be constructed to en1ars~
pTOpel't.)'
t.o the south p.n'~",!,-~:g: line. This c>:p:.';'lSC
10. ... ..
Ln~ pa~cc p~r~Jns
l';.~~p:>;)-
:s~bilit.y of Lift One~
3.. Li ft O-"Je iigT(':C'S to pI'ovid!: ~::~=;uc: te S:)O-~l !' e:::o\;al for i. h~
C::"'IJ10yC'c ~rllJ cuslomer par):ing ,,'hjch '.:.i 11 ]'c:~ui1 ~ C",:'v :.:o:'ning
rc.:;"ovi'll prior to the tir;>c cr::ployees i'lrrive for \.'ork.
~.. .... .. ~
JnlS :,,~...l(';~tl.~:"\
".j 11 conti flUC r1\ll'ing U,e lCl'm of lhi s .='\'Jl'c.:c.'lent .,nc il!"lY CX: ,'n!'lor:s
~~rced upon b~lw~~n the parties,
,
..c;. ""'J '76 _..~.....- -,J -....
---.-- -- .-..... _.~... ..--
~. _ .. l :!::o
- ....... ... -.. "\..:.
.
.
htll1l. the eH~ctive d( no: U.isr.C;U'~I:I~n~.
.~rc~ment shall be ~ cov~n.nt r~~nir.9 with
'; t"'\ co:':~i n~e \:~t:
,; .,)
the lnnd ~n~ ~h~ll
rCI:lairi an enc\\."!;brance on the p=operty bi"ndir!; t~e S~i Co:!>. its
successors or assigns. At the tnc of the ten ye~r term. the
perties may ~9ree ~o an extension of the ~rre~~~m=~t~ if t~~r~ i~
~~tual D9ree~ent to uo ~o.
S. In accordance with the %o~ing rules end =es~letio~s of
the City of Aspen, the'parties her~to ~nderstc~e ane asr~e th~t
the use of the tennis facility ~ill be li~it~c to the O~nc:s ~n~
cuests of Lift One.
~
THIS AGPZ~~~NT S~ALL BE E?FEC?IVE ~~y 1. 1978.
ASPEN SK}I~G COR?ORAT}O~
,
(), ~ # /,!...
BY:~-y~
)
.
-'
r 'n
'.'
,-
"
......,
- .
--
',;:.
LIFT O~E CONDO:,! Hi! l.;"?-! hSSOC!ATIO!,. INC
:By:
~ ,\
~-) \\l\~1
/
r,.I/ "
'-" L""-..,"'\~~
STATE OF COLOR~Do
)
)
)
55.
.1 'i. ..
COur'TY orp~TKIN
.. , .
"'.:'lie 'foregoing instrUlTlent
:9tho3Y of April. 1978. by
A:;pen S);~~;tl~ :Corporation.
.
~as ec~nowledsed before ~e this
D. R. C. Bro"n.'President
witness'my hand and official seal.
Hy'co"""ission expires: J,;rt::,.,,~,.;;;;,.t";:...CrC\ 2:. ~.lS
~'-,~ ~,-'-~,~~ ~
li:otary Fubl ic -.
STATE OF
)
) ss.,
)
cm"iNTY OF
Th~ foreooing instrument
~~~ ' day cf April. 1978. by
w~s ~ck~owleesed befo=e ~;e ~his
/;:)~ {J.. -ty..~..!. ~..t ~_~
'~itness my hand ancJ official seal.
My co~mission expirC5:~/7/7?
_0/4~"> (!.. )] !'J~~-,--.___
Notc:ry PubllC
.
, C
0...
>
el.
C)
~
'=
C)
C)
"-
.
'*,1
.",',,"'.,".'v'^ jlilt'
(f-,
,~> j
.
~.........t
j::J"(\
v'- .
/~
,. '5
r.'~"~U~.i
i' ...
=-,... N
~o
'" z::u '"
am
.......
A -<-; c,.)
. >
.I: '"'''' :>>
YO m>
." a :z
0% en
X ::Um
- ""::u
CD "'
..,., '"
LEASE AGREEMENT
THIS LEASE AGREEMENT, is made and entered into as of the 26th
day of November, 1985, by and between JOHN H. ROBERTS, JR.,
whose address is 114 West Commerce, Third Floor, San Antonio, Texas
78205, ("Landlord"), and the ASPEN SKIING COMPANY, a Colorado gen-
eral partnership, whose address is P.o. Box 1248, Aspen, Colorado
81612, ("Tenant"). '
WIT N E SSE T H:
--_.-'------
Landlord, in consideration of the rents, covenants and agree-
ments hereinafter provided to be paid, kept and performed by Ten-
ant, hereby leases to Tenant and Tenant hereby rents from Landlord
that certain parcel of land [the "Parking Lot") described as
Lots 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12
Block 11 of the Eames Addition
City and Townsite of Aspen
Pitkin County, Colorado
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the Parking Lot for a term of 99 years
commencing with the date of this lease. Tenant acknowledges and
accepts this lease subject to the rights of the Lift One Condomin-
ium Association, Inc. as set forth in that certain Agreement dated
May 1, 1978 and attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated here-
in by this reference.
This lease is made upon the foregoing and the following terms,
covenants and conditions and Landlord and Tenant, hereby covenant
and agree further as follows:
1. Rent. Tenant shall pay to Landlord at 114 West Commerce,
Third Floor;-San Antonio, Texas 78205, or at such other place as
Landlord may hereafter designate in writing, rent at the rate of
$10.00 per year or a total of $990.00 for the lease term, which
total amount shall be due or payable upon the execution hereof.
2. Insurance. Each party shall be responsible for its own
general public liability and property damage insurance.
3. Compliance with Law. Landlord will comply with the provi-
sions of all statutes, regulations, rules and decisions of govern-
mental boards, bodies and authorities ("requirements of law.), even
though such requirements may require alterations to the premises.
Tenant represents that it knows of no alterations required by this
paragraph.
(i-l
~<:......_..j
rn
~ j'" I 6"6
~""''''( ~ . ""~..~;,,.
~.. .....#.... .' "'. ~ \.)
4. Parking Area. Tenant, at its expense and to its satisfac-
tion, shall keep the Parking Lot in constant good order, condition
and repair, whether the necessity of such repairs may arise from
wear, tear, obsolescence, casualty or any other cause. Tenant
shall maintain a"parking area on the entire Pa~king Lot at its
expense. The parking area shall remain surfaced with asphalt so as
to afford proper drainage of the entire parking area surface.
5. Substitute Parkinq. At such time as Landlord provides
Tenant with (a) an equal amount of parking Space in square footage
and in the same or similar configuration as the Parking Lot, in a
location proximate to the Parking Lot and in the same improved
condition as the Parking Lot parking places or (b) thirty
(30) underground parking places on a parcel of land in a location
proximate to the Parking Lot, either of which shall be subject to
the prior written consent and approval of Tenant not unreasonably
withheld, Tenant and Landlord hereby agree to modify this Lease to
substitute such parcel of land for that set forth herein. In all
other respects, th~s lease and its terms and conditions, shall
remain unaltered a~d in full force and effect.
6. Condemnation. If the entire Parking Lot shall be taken
for any public or quaSi-public use, under any statute, by right of
eminent domain, or by purchase by public authority in lieu thereof,
or if part of the Parking Lot is so taken and the part remaining is
less than one-half of the original area, at the election of Tenant,
this lease and the term hereby granted shall terminate and expire.
Such election shall be exercised by written notice served upon
Landlord by Tenant and shall be effective on a date thirty days
after the date of such notice. All condemnation awards shall be
paid over to Tenant. Landlord agrees never to approach or discuss
condemnation of the Parking Lot with a public authority and further
agrees to pay an amount equal to the damage suffered by Tenant as a
result of any such action, provided that no damage shall be
incurred if the appropriate substitute parking is provided pursuant
to Paragraph 5 hereof. Tenant agrees never to approach or discuss
condemnation of the Parking Lot with a public authority and further
agrees to pay an amount equal to the damage suffered by Landlord as
a result of any such action.
7. Landlord Covenants and Warranties.
(a) Based upon Tenant's warranty that there are no existing
breaches of the warranties provided herein, Landlord covenants
that, if and so long as Tenant pays the rent and performs all the
obligations of Tenant hereunder, Tenant shall quietly and peaceably
enjoy the premises for the lease term.
(b) Landlord covenants and warrants, (i) that it has as good
and marketable title in fee simple to the Parking Lot as that which
-2-
/'~
.'~
0"'''''''
. ,
>;(" I
V'_., .
F;r'7
,......._ ..' f
r.,: J\i
has been conveyed to it by Tenant; (ii) that no other person has
any right of possession (however Landlord shall have the right to
convey its interest) or any other rights adverse to those of Tenant
hereunder; and (iii) that Landlord will, upon request, deliver such
instruments of further assurance as may be necessary to confirm
Tenant's rights and leasehold interests hereunder. Landlord makes
these warranties based upon Tenant's warranty that Tenant knows of
no breach.
8. Default of Landlord or Tenant. The following shall con-
stitute defaults of Landlord or Tenant hereunder:
Failure to perform any affirmative obligation hereunder for a
period of ten days after written notice, except that if such obli-
gation cannot reasonably be performed within such period, the
failing party shall not be in default if it shall commence such
performance within such periOd and shall thereafter prosecute the
same to completion with reasonable diligence and without unneces-
sary delays.
9. Remedies of Landlord. In case of any default by Tenant,
Landlord shall have the following rights and remedies:
Landlord shall have the right to terminate this lease by
notice in writing, and upon the giving of such notice, if such
default shall not be cured as provided herein, this lease and the
term hereof, as well as all the right, title and interest of Tenant
hereunder, shall wholly cease and expire in the same manner and
with the same force and effect as if the date fixed by such notice
were the expiration of the term herein originally granted. Upon
any termination, Tenant shall immediately quit and surrender to
Landlord the entire Parking Lot.
10. Remedies of Tenant. In case of any default by Landlord,
Tenant shall have the following rights and remedies:
(a) Tenant shall have the right to terminate this lease by
notice in writing, and upon the giving of such notice, if such
default shall not be cured within thirty days after receipt of such
notice this lease and the term hereof shall wholly cease and expire
in the same manner and with the same force and effect as if the
date fixed by such notice were the expiration of the term herein
originally granted; or
(b) Tenant may, at its own cost and expense, perform the
Obligation which was the subject of Landlord's default and bill
Landlord the cost of performing such obligation, in addition to
such other available and appropriate remedies it may have to col-
lect such sums due.
-3-
,'~
("",
\.. /
",.."',.
:". ,
::("1 E'\8
- , ,..",.-:
v..... ." - ".,'
II. Taxes. Tenant shall pay all real estate taxes and
assessments, charges, fees and payments imposed, assessed or levied
by any governmental or public authority upon or in connection with
the use, occupancy or possession of the Parking Lot or any part
thereof during the term, provided that Landlord provides Tenant
with the applicable notice of taxes or other payments due.
12. Surrender of Parkinq Lot. Upon termination of this
lease, Tenant shall peaceably and quietly leave, surrender and
deliver up to Landlord the Parking Lot.
13. Indemnification. Tenant shall indemnify, defend and save
harmless Landlord from any and all liabilities, damages, penalties,
costs, expenses, claims, suits or actions due or arising out of any
breach, violation or non-performance of any covenant, condition or
agreement in this lease contained on the part of Tenant to be ful-
filled, kept, observed and performed and against any damage to
property or injury to person or persons (including death resulting
at any time therefrom) which arises out of the privileges granted
to Tenant by this lease.
14. Notices. All notices hereunder to the respective parties
or any of them shall be in writing and shall be served by prepaid
registered or certified mail, or by personal delivery, addressed to
the respective parties at the following addresses or at such other
addresses as may be supplied in writing to all parties.
If to ASC:
Mr. Jerry Blann
President
Aspen Skiing Company
P. O. Box 1248
Aspen, Colorado 81612
If to Roberts:
John H. ROberts, Jr.
114 West Commerce
Third Floor
San Antonio, Texas 78205
With copies to:
Arthur B. Ferguson, Jr., Esq.
Holland & Hart
600 East Main Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Any such notice Shall be deemed to be given and effective when
such notice has been deposited in the United States mail addressed
as aforesaid, or when personally delivered to and received by the
specified parties. Notice of an assignment or change of address
shall be given in the manner provided herein.
-4-
rr.
( f"'\
,...,. ..1
?~"'i'l
.;,- ') ~.~c" '9
v.... '. ,_;,.~
15. Assignment. Any party may assign its rights or Obliga-
tions under this agreement.
16. Captions. All headings and captions are solely for iden-
tification purposes and have no effect on the interpretation or
meaning of the provisions contained in each paragraph.
17. Law Governing. The laws of the State of Colorado shall
govern the validity, performance and enforcement of this agreement.
18. No Implied Assumption of Liability. The parties do not
and shall not, under this agreement, assume any liability or obli-
gation of any other party to any person except as may be specifi-
cally provided herein.
19. Severability. If any provision of this agreement shall
be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, it shall not affect or impair
the validity, legality or enforceability of this agreement itself
or of any other provision hereof, and there shall be substituted
for the affected provision, a valid and enforceable provision as
similar as possible to the affected provision.
, 20. Binding Effect. This agreement shall be binding upon and
inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective
heirs, personal representatives, successors and assigns.
21. Covenants to Run. The terms, covenants and conditions of
this agreement shall be construed as covenants running with the
land, and shall be binding upon, and shall inure to the benefit of,
the respective successors and assigns of the parties hereto.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Landlord and Tenant have duly executed
this lease the day and year first above written.
LANDLORD:
llll/,11 r;-
JoDh H. Roberts, Jr.
TENANT:
ASPEN SKIING COMPANY, a Colorado general
partnership
B~ Q.
er ~ann, President
-5-
(t)
"('\
( .
~ ,,;< ." '"
,
n......,..
, \
;;:'"" ,
~..._f-.',t 0
. V.L
'-".'
STATE OF %/titS
COUNTY OF Dl?j.i4/(
)
) ss.
)
I~The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
;;2tc'fYI day of /VCa=nlt0ec.. , 1985, by John H. Roberts, Jr.
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
~rc -c;)..- r!"/
'/J , /)
(/, (t/
k::;:1}7 j \ //ZTe%~
Nota il-' ubI ic
, ,
,," ,~:,)\.\ C , ...
, <( - ,'':
. "- JA _
" .).. , J I 'r
:0: ~ ',.-'
- <<1:" ;1'"
\ i' t-- ',~ ~
'..'1-', " ,..
" * ~.~.
STATE OF COLORADO
)
) ss.
)
COUNTY OF PITKIN
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
-~(' d day of ~ \ '''' \.< , , 1985, by Jerry Blann, President
of the Aspen Skiing Company. a Colorado general partnership.
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:1~2~
\
\f I , , I
) ;.. ~ \, '.\. t \, r
Notary Public
r (
I I
, '"',
". \
v
'). .'.1,
, '/.....3;;'...""
~: b" <9 '.
;-J;~ tI",'?:-
:..d '/>- ~e>-:.:.
~...\ ~OA' .'",
....+ .', It ....
. .". ~.
'.. r .......... ..
......, ~ H V l' '
"
't", .......
-6-
)0
f)
(')
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM:
Alan Richman, Planning and Development Director
Little Nell Precise plan/Conditional Use Public Hearing
Continued
Little Nell Resolution Forwarding GMP Score to City
Council
RE:
DATE:
February 18, 1986
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
Rather than duplicate materials which have already been distri-
buted at prior meetings and in order to save the cost of photo-
copying, we would appreciate it if you would bring your February
4 packet containing the captioned items to the February 18, 1986
meeting.
?
J
1"""'\
,~
PROPOSED AGENDA FOR P&Z REVIEW OF LITTLE NELL PRECISE PLAN
A. Compl iance with Condi tions of Council Resol ut ion 85-33
1. Conditions concerning access, circulation and parking (* 7,
3,9,8, 18 and 23) - February 4.
2. Conditions concerning building design (*1,4,15,19,16,2 & 12)
- February 4 and/or 18.
3. Conditions concerning miscellaneous technical issues (*lO,5,
22,20,13,6,11,14,17,21,24 & 25) - February 18 or 25.
B. Review of Precise Plan and Conditional Use Evaluation Criteria -
February 25 and or March <1
1. Conformance with standards for review of Precise pJ.an.
2. Conformance with conditional use criteria.
C. Specification of zoning district regulations, variations
permitted, and const ruct ion schedul e impact analysi s - March 4.
D. Review of draft Planning Commission Resolution - March 18.
t""',
("'\
.
AGENDA
ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
February 25, 1986 - Tuesday
4:30 P.M.
City Council Chambers
City Hall
CONrINUED REGULAR MEETING
I. COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS
II. PUBLIC HEARING CONTINUED
A. Little Nell Precise Plan
Please bring your prior packet materials with you. We will
be discussing building design issues which begin on Page 6
of the prior memo.
III. ADJOURN MEETING
i
I
!
,1""'\
^
1 .~
j
""~..""_o."'''''
APPLICATION TO THE ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR USE OF THE PREMISES
KNOWN AS THE HOLIDAY HOUSE FOR EMPLOYEE HOUSING
Application is hereby made to the City of Aspen Planning
& Zoning Commission for a determination under Section 24-3.3
of the Aspen Muncipal Code permitting the use of premises
known as the Holiday House for employee housing. The Aspen
Skiing Company (hereinafter referred to as "ASC") proposes
the deed restriction of the Holiday House to employee housing
in connection with the development of the Little Nell
project.
The Holiday House is located at 127 West Hopkins, Aspen,
Colorado, and is zoned Lodge-2 (L-2). Permitted uses in that
zone are:
Lodge units, boarding houses, hotel; dining room,
laundry and reception facility for guests only,
single-family and duplex residences.
The change in use proposed for the Holiday House Lodge
from free-market tourist lodge to deed restricted employee
housing will have negligible, if not reduced, growth impacts
on the neighborhood and community. The Holiday House has
operated as a free-market lodge in the past in that nightly,
weekly, and monthly rentals have been offered. Dick Wilhelm,
former manager of the lodge, has stated that historically the
rooms were rented on a nightly basis during the Winter high
season, and on a monthly basis, primarily to music students,
- 1 -
~
t1
during the Summer season.
As deed restricted employee housing, the Holiday House
is proposed to house fifty-six (56) employees in twenty-eight
(28) private lodge rooms at two (2) employees per room.
Neither the sleeping capacity nor the physical
characteristics of the Holiday House will be expanded by this
proposal. Therefore, during the Winter season it is
reasonable to assume the Holiday House will experience less
"user" turnover and less neighborhood impact. The employee
use will be permanent for the Winter season, whereas the
tourist use has been transitory. In the Summer, the Holiday
House will operate much the same as it has in the past. The
Holiday House will be a permanent residence for ASC
personnel, as needed, and a residence for music students on a
monthly or as needed basis at a reduced deed restricted
rental rate. Again, the impact on the neighborhood should be
the same or less for the proposed Holiday House summer
operation. Since no physical expansion, additional lodge
rooms, or increase in tourist/employee sleeping capacity is
proposed for the Holiday House, there should be negligible,
if not reduced, impact on the community by this proposal.
The employee use will be more permanent and less transitory
than the historic tourist use. The proposed change in use
will help to meet the need for employee housing. The
proposal creates no change in available parking spaces, no
change in traffic demand, and no change in water and sewer
- 2 -
,..."
n
demand since the Holiday House is within walking distance of
the skiing areas and the town's commerical areas. Moreover,
the proposal has no impact on fire and police protection,
offsite drainage or road demands.
The continuation of the use of the Holiday House by
Summer music students is consistent with the express
intention of the L-2 Zone to house tourists. The proposal is
compatible with the surrounding land uses, and uses in the
area in that there will be a continuation of on-site guest
facilities.
Dated this ~ day of February, 1986.
Respectfully submitted,
LAW OFFICES OF GIDEON I. KAUFMAN,
a Professional Corporation
By
Kaufman
cond use app/ASC
- 3 -
,r'\
o
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
RE:
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
Alan Richman, Planning and Development Director
Little Nell Base Redevelopment Continued Public Hearing
February 27, 1986
TO:
DATE:
================'==========:=====:=================================
. ... ....,.........-,. ,',. ..'..' ,... '". ....',
Please bring your February 4, 1986 Little Nell memo with you to
the meeting. The issues to be discussed will include drainage,
grading, geologic hazards and lifts.
'"
.....~ ,,"4
n
CITY
130
asp
DATE: February 10, 1986
TO: City Council
City Manager
plarinillg 15irect.dt
Media
FROM: City Attorney
D~@@aWl@
1 FEB IO~ l~
~~MO~NDUM
RE: Johnson v. Ski Company, City of Aspen, et al.
The Johnson lawsuit, and the prospect of a City condemnation of
the subj ect parcel, appear to have been resolved, by the Skiing
Company's agreelllent to purchase Johnson's interest for an undis-
closed amount. These negotiations occurred last Sunday between
Johnson and Skiing Company. At our request, Gideon Kaufman has
provided the attached letter confirming the agreement.
PJT/mc
Attachment
2D
~'li. _ -~
:.,
n
^
)
LAW OFFICES
GIDEON 1. KAUFMAN
DAVID G. EISENSTEIN
GIDEON I. KAUFMAN
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
BOX 10001
315 EAST HYMAN AVENUE. SUITE 305
ASPEN. COLORADO 81611
February 6, 1986
HAND-DELIVERED
Paul J. Taddune,
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado
Esquire
Street
81611
Re: Condemnation of the Stan Johnson property
Dear Paul:
TELEPHONE
AREA CODE 303
925-8166
Pursuant to our telephone conversation, I write this
letter to advise you that the Aspen Skiing Company and Stan
JohnSon have ent~r~d into ,a ten1:.atiYEl" agreement, for the
purchase of' the Johnsqn parcel at thelS;"se of Li.ttle Nell.
Because of this. development, it is not appropriate at this
time for the City to act on a condemnation, action at the
February 10, 1986 meeting. If this situation changes, I will
let you know. I appreciate both your and the City Council's
attention to this matter.
Very truly yours.,
LAW OFFICES OF GIDEON I. KAUFMAN,
a Professional Corporation
By
b!l;:fman
GK/bw
f
("".1
()
~/
PRESENTATION AGENDA
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
REVIEW OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
2/4/86
A. INTRODUCTION - Peter Forsch
B. ACCESS, CIRCULATION, PARKING
1. Skier Drop-off (#7) - Bill Kane
a. review background of drop-off study
b. present alternatives
c. introduce new alternative (with new 10' set back)-
plan cures three main criticisms of the project
1) open space/landscaped facade
2) function of drop-off
3) shading of Durant Street
d. P&Z discussion
2. Parking Needs (#3) - Bill Eager
a. lodge room ratios - summer vs. winter
b. commercial ratios - retail, restaurant, conference
c. employee parking - ok as submitted
d. 46 AMSAMP spaces commitment
e. Aspen St. lot - 30 space covenant - Peter Forsch
f. P&Z discussion
3. Street Capacity (#9) - Bill Eager
a. additional 300 trips per ~r - street irilpact
b. mitigation measures
c. P&Z discussion
4. Analysis of Service Yards (#8) - Bill Kane
a. turning movements in service yard - Dave Ellis
b. service delivery to Tippler, North of Nell,
c. request variance from service yard requirement~
5. Trail Connection (#18) - Bill Kane
a. presentation of trail plan and design of Dean St.
connection
6. Dean St. encroachment license (#23) - Gideon Kaufman
,..
r\
(")
"
Presentation Agenda
P&Z Commission, 2/4/86
Page 2
Illustrations
A. drop-off alternatives
B. new site plan with 10' setback
C. service yard turning diagrams
D. illustrative site plan
E. technical SPA precise plan
C. BUILDING DESIGN
I. Open space on Durant (#l) - Bill Kane, John Cottle
a. new set back site plan
b. discussion by P&Z
2. Visual impact (#4) - John Cottle
a. presentation of principal design elements
b. explain materials
c. discussion
3. Shadow study (#15) - Bill Kane
a. present shadow drawings
b. explain impact of further set back
c. icing
d. pedestrian crossing, design and cost
e. discussion
4. More "grand" entrance (#19) - Bill Kane, John Cottle
5. Snow shedding design (#16) - John Cottle
6. FAE variance request (#2) - Gideon Kaufman
7. Lift building design (tI2) - Mark Henthorn, John Cottle
a. Floor plan/operations
b. elevations
c. discussion
Illustrations
A. New Site Plan
B. Shadow Studies
C. Building Elevations (Hotel)
D. 'Lift Building Elevations)
,....."
A,
MEMORAlilDUM
TO:
Alan Richman, Planning and Development Director
Tom Newland, Planning Engineer
FROM:
RE:
Little Nell Base Development SPA
January 24, 1986
DATE:
====================================================================
I have reviewed the applicant's submission and wish to forward to
you the following comments:
Relocation of County Road: In the appl icant' s submittion the
grading plan shows the Aspen Mt. Road (County Road #14) relocated
approximately 25 feet above it's present alignment on the ski slope
known as "Little Nell". This county road is a Class V or primative
roadway that traverses the face of the Aspen Mountain ski area.
Since the Aspen Skiing Company is completely responsible for the
maintenence of this road, it is not necessary to require any
culverting or other upgrading to compensate for effects the
proposed grading plan might have on this realigned road. However,
an escavation permit should be secured through the county for
this work. This permit is obtainable through the County Road and
Bridge Department.
,("""'j
("""'j
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
Alan Richman, Planning and Development Director
Little Nell Precise Plan/Conditional Use Public Hearing
TO:
RE:
DATE:
January 23, 1986
========================?~==~==??~=~?????~~~~~~~~~~~~~~?~~~~~~~~~~~~~
APPLICANT: Aspen Skiing Company
ZONIR;/Lor SIZE: The base area of Litt.le, Nelli.s presently zoned CC/SPA
and C. Ordinance No. 53, Series of 1985, will place an SPA Overlay on that
portion of the property zoned C. This Ordinance has re,ceived first, reading
apprOval from Council and will b~ heard at.., seco,nd !-"eac1ing when the Precise
Plan is before Council. The area zoned CC/SPA comprises 43,124 s.f., while
the area zoned C requested for inclusion within the SPA Overlay comprises
45,738 s.f., for a total lot size of 88,862 s.f.
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The following requests are before the Planning
Commission at this time:
I. Recommendation to City Council for Precise Plan Review.
2. Grant of Conditional Use Permit for hotel in CC zone.
3. Grant of Mountain Viewplane Review.
4. Recommendation to c:ity Council for Change in Use GMP Exemption to
convert units at the Holiday House from lodge to employee housing.
5. Grant of 8040 Greenline Review to regrade the Little Nell slope and
install new lift towers.
6. Recommendation to City Council for encroachment into the Dean Street
right-of-way.
Copies of the applicant's entire submission have been provided directly to
the Planning Commission, therefore, the Planning Office's memo will
concentrate on the comments of review agencies rather than summarizing tpe
applicant's proposals. Coinments are not provided herein on any growth
management issues. We have already provided the Commission with olu
recommended lodge allotment scoring in an earlier memo. The applicant has
not yet appl ied for commercial allotment, although such a request is
anticipated on August I, 1986. Finally, we have not again provided you
with comments on the, multi-year allotment issue, preferring to await your
direction to determine if it is necessary to spend additional time on this
issue.
PLANNING OFFICE RE'l7IEW: Our review of this pI' oj ect is organized in the
following sequence:
A. Analysis of compliance with conditions of conceptual approval.
B. Review of applicable preCise plan and conditional use evaluation
criteria.
C. Specificat ion of zoning dist rict regulat ions to apply to the parcel,
variations permitted, and a schedule for <::orist'rriction.
A. COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS OF APPRQlTAL: Council Resolution No. 85-33
set 25 conditions of approval of the a.pplicant' s conceptual plan. An
analysis of the applicant's response to ea.ch condition is contained
below, organized into the following three broad topical areas:
I. Conditions concerning access, circulation and parking;
/"",\,
,A"
2. Conditions concerning building design; and
3. Conditions concerning miscellaneous technical issues.
1. Conditions Concerning Access, Circulation and Parking: The
issues to be discussed in this sec:tion inclllde skier drop off
(Condition No.7), parking needs (Condition No.3), adequacy of
streets (Condition No.9), service areas (Condition No.8),
trails (Condition No. 18) and encroachments (Condition No. 23).
"7. The applicant shall revise the site plan to indicate an
auto-taxi-limo drop-off facility of adequate size for
the needs of the ski area, which is in addition to any
drop-off area for hotel guests. As the Council is
concerned about maintaining adequate traffic flows on
Durant Avenue, it is expected that the applicant will
address the proper location for this facility within
the project's property boundary,"
In our review of the project in the GMP scoring process, we
indicated that the skier drop-off facility represents one of the
principal design flaws in the proj ect. This comment was
reinforced by the relatively low scores given to the project by a
majority of the Commission in the categories of site design and
parking and circulation.
The principal problems we see with the present solution include
the following:
o Potential turning conflicts for cars entering and exiting
from the area with cars on Durant Avenue.
o The area extends into the public right-of-way, contrary to
the intent of the condition.
o There is a loss of approximately 12-14 public parking spaces
on Durant, which are being replaced by the 12 skier drop-off
spaces. This problem could be mitigated through management
of the spaces to allow public usage during other than peak
skiing periods.
o The area creates a poor image for the entrance to the
mountain/front of the hotel. The entrance in this area is
neither open space, nor is it a lively street facade, but
instead is a parking lot. The area should either truly be
an open space area, or should create pedestrian interest
through stores fronting directly on the street.
The Planning Office recommends that the applicant be required to
submit alternative designs to resolve the identified problems
with the drop-off area.
"3. The applicant shall provide a detailed, technical study
of the parking needs of the facility to meet the
demands from the lodge rooms, skiers, administrative
offices, commercial spaces and skier support
facilities, and shall increase the number of spaces to
be provided at the Precise Plan stage."
TDA has accomplished the requested study (Appendix 3) and based
on their recommendations, the number of parking spaces has been
increased from 77 to 116. (Note: There are 83 spaces, not 85 on
Level -22, and 33 on Level -12, for a total of 116 and not ll8
spaces, as represented. However, there are also 12spaces in the
skier drop-off which are to replace those lost on Durant.)
Following is a category by category calculation of the
applicant's proposal as compared to the Code requirements:
2
/""",
r"'1
SPACES TYPICAL CODE CODE
CATmORY STANDARD APPLIED PROPOSED* STANDARD** ~OIlT
Lodge Units ( 96) 0.55-0.7 spaces/unit 53/67 l/unit 96
Administrative Replace Existing 27/7 3-4/1000 s.f. 17
Offices (4883 s.f. )
Ret a il (20,553 s.f.) 0.1-0.8 per 1000 s.f. 2/17 4/1000 s.f. 82
Restaurant 1/1000 s.f. 5 4/1000 s.f. 20
(5196 s.L)
Skier (l300 skiers 0.05/skier 46 N/A N/A
added) (off-site)
*
**
Range reflects summer vs. winter.
No parking is required in the CC zone for lodge or commercial uses.
These standards reflect those of the most similar zone for the
proposed mix of uses, the L-I/L-2 zone districts.
Based on the standards applied by the consultant, 92-101 spaces
will be demanded for the project in the winter versus the summer
(92 = 53 + 5 + 27 + 2 + 5; 101 = 67 + 5 + 7 + 17 + 5).
Considering that the project removes 45 on-site existing spaces,
and provides 116 new spaces, supply has been calculated to exceed
demand in the winter by 11 spaces. Therefore, the applicant
requests that 11 spaces be applied to the 46 spaces requirement
in the Aspen Mountain Ski Area Master Plan (AMSAMP) that offset
the ski capacity increase of 1300 skiers per day.
Staff has numerous comments on the inform,ation provided by the
consultant, including the following:
o The parking standard applied to the Aspen Mountain Lodge of
0.7 spaces per unit is the minimum which we can justify for
this facility. The consultant did propose a standard of
0.66 spaces/unit for summer use for the Aspen Mountain
Lodge, which was not 9ccepted. The proposed winter standard
of 0.55 spaces per unit should be rej ected unless adequate
reasons are provided for its usage.
o It is reasonable to assume that many of the visitors to the
shops will already be located on the site. However, the
standard of one space per 1000 s.f. of restaurant is
exceptionally low. We would expect some guests to the
luxury dining facilities to arrive at the port cochere and
expect valet parking to be available. Further, no space has
been prov ided for visitors who may attend a conference on
the site, whether they be in-town residents or guests from
other lodges. Invariably, some limited parking will be
needed for such facilities.
o Parking for ski area employees, based on 40 percent of
employees driving, is reasonable, given the Ski Company's
excellent bus service for employees.
o The 46 space requirement from AMSAMl' represents a very low
standard allied only to the capacity increase for the
mountain. No provision was made for the increased
attractiveness of the Little Nell Base ,Area due to the high
speed lift to be installed. No provision was made for any
parking with respect to existing skiers on the mountain.
While we do not suggest a reassessment of the on-mountain
parking commitment which emerged from the Master Plan, we
are very discouraged at this effort to meet some of this
3
--
-
, ,
requirement by proposing unreasonably low parking standards
for base area uses. We reco!llmend that the Planning
Commission request the use of more realistic parking
standards, and cont.inue to" require that 46 skier spaces be
provided on site, or as part of City initiated parking plan
off-site (see attached condition approving AMSAMP).
o P&Z should be aware that a conditi()nof Af.l.9M'1:p",~ile;,~hat"A9<::
shall agree to maintain the e'xisfingparking lot' (of at
least 30 automobile parking spaces) located on Aspen Street
within the City of Aspen for skiing area parking or transit
related uses. The Agreement shall be in the form of a
recorded covenant on the property to the benefit of Pitkin
County and the city of Aspen." We were very disturbed to
review the 601 Aspen Residential .GMP project and find that
ASC placed this property under option to that project's
developer, without covenanting the property as required.
The developer of the 601 Aspen Project intended to place the
spaces underground, contrary to the intent of that
condition., we,l:ec<:l\ll\1l~l1d,tl2ilt "the,:p~~C:1lrry forward the
AMSAMP condition as 'part' of'thi'sreviewand" set a specific
date for th~ implementation of this condition.
"9. The applicant shall provide a detailed, technical study
of the adequacy of Durant, Spring and Dean Streets to
handle the vehi,cle traf:J:ic:yoJul'\l~e;, "ae;~oc~,at~d,,~ ith
skiers, hotel guests, employees,seriiice vehicles, arid
visitors to the commercial" uSesilnde;haHpropose
appropriate mitigation measures to address 'any' traffic
problems which will result from, the proj ect. The
applicant shall also take into, accoun~ the access needs
of emergency vehicles, inCluding, but not limited to
ambulances and fire trucks.
The TDA study of streets shows a daily net traffic increase of
about 250 trip ends per day in winter (60 trips at the peak hour)
and about 375 trip ends per day in summer (42 trips at the peak
hour). However, no accounting is made of the approximately 300
vehicle trip ends per day due to the mountain capacity increase.
The implementation of this increase, through constructing the new
high-speed lift, is clearly a part of this project, and was not
accounted for in AMSAMP. The, applicant should be required to
address these impacts, and propose appropriate mitigation
teChniques. Further, the applicant should be required to remove
the skier drop-Off area from the Durant Avenue right-Of-way, as
this proposal is viewed as adding to the circulation problems on
Durant Avenue, which is a major through street in the downtown
area due to the existing mall closures on Cooper and Hyman
Avenues. Finally, the applicant should provide comments on the
emergency vehicle situati<m, which does not appear to have been
addressed in the submission.
"8. The applicant shall provide a detailed al'lalysis of the
proposed service yards on Spring St reet and Dean
Street, demonstrating that adequate space has been
provided for truck stacking and that proper turning
movements can be accomplished within these streets.
The applicant shall also confer with the Ellvironmental
Health Department as to any air and water quality
devices which may need to be installed in these areas
(and in the parking facility for cars). The applicant
shall work with the Nortl1".,,()fN~g llJ'l.<'!",' Tippler manage-
ment entities and shall try to accommodate the service
delivery needs of these buildings in a single location
off Dean Street. Finally, the applicant shall
demonstrate that the seryice delivery area on Dean
St reet will not cause safety problems for pedestrians
on Dean Street or nuisance prOblems for the residents
of the North of Nell, and that the needs of the
facility could not practically otherwise be met by a
4
,-,
^
single facility on Spring Street."
The applicant is proposing a single, covered shipping and
receiving area off Spring Street to handle t,he needs, of, the hotel
and on-mountain restaurants. Whilew,e prefer the single access
point to the prior dual service area concept, we have the
following comments to make:
o The schematic drawing contained in the submission does not
constitute a "detailedal'lalysis". Conclusive drawings and
calculations should be provided to the City Engineer,
demonstrating the adequacy of the turning radius.
o The applicant's drawing of the Dean Street area does not
respond to the request that cooperative planning be
accomplished for service delivery to the North of Nell and
Tippler!Tipple Inn properties. While we understand that the
drawing has been abandoneti,and responsibility given to the
improvement district, we feel that a conceptual proposal by
all three entities is needElda,tth:ilSt.imEl.Witho~t ,a
service access plan suitable to the entry to Dean Street, we
believe that the entire cpnqept of the Dean Street mall will
be flawed. Therefore, a design of this area is an integral
part of this SPA plan, although responsibility for
accomplishing the improvements should fall on the
improvement district.
o There is a minimum rear yard requirement for the
utility/trash service area in the area ,and bulk requirements
chart for the CC zone, referenced to Section 24-3.7(h)(4),
stating that the area be on an alley and setting standards
for its dimensions. It appears that an area for this
building would require a minimum length of 20 feet for the
first 6,000 s.L of building area and 5 feet for each
addition 6,000 s.f., resulting in a length of about 135 feet
for the service area. We recommend that the applicant quest
P&Z'S variation of this requirements since the area shown on
the plans is about 35 feet in l.ength and does not abut an
alley. The request should provide adequate justification
for the area as proposed.
"18. The applicant shall provide a trail easement through
the property connecting the trail near the Aspen Alps
with the Dean Street trail and will include any
required ramps for bicycles or other year-round trail
facilities in their site plan at the precise plan
stage. The applicant will also examine the potent ial
for creating a pedestrian trail connecting to the Aspen
Mountain Road within the context of the base area
regrading and provide an alignment for said trail if it
is found to be feasible."
The illustrative site plan shows a trail connection from Spring
Street to Dean Street across the base area. There do n()t appear
to be any ramps or other facilities required to implement the
trail. The applicant further commits to "an informal pedestrian
trail" to the Aspen Mountain Road.
"23. The applicant shall disclose at the Precise Plan stage
all plans related to the Dean Street right-of-way,
including any requests for enqroachmElnts as may be
necessary."
The applicant has disclosed the plans for Dean Street and made an
encroachment request of the City Engineering Department for
paving, landscaping, street furniture, ski ticket sales booths
and skier drop-off parking. Jay Hammond's comments with respect
to this application are that the required submittal materials and
fees have not been received. The applicant should get together
with Jay to provide him the necessary materials.
5 "
----
t"""\
~
2. C(mditions C()~cf!rl'1Jng Building Design: The issues to be
discussed in this section are open space (Condition No. I),
visual impact (Condition No.4), shadows (Condition No. IS),
pedestrian gateway (Condition No. 19), snow shedding (Condition
No. 16), FAR (Condition No.2) and lift building design
(Condition No. 12).
"1. The applicant shall amend the site plan to provide open
space along the length of the Durant Street frontage of
the hotel, so as to create a cOllrtyard of at least 10
feet in depth. The open space requirement shall be
considered in coordination with rather t.han in addition
to the area to be set aside f()r~he()l1...lilite dr()p-off
facility required in condiHonll7 'bl:!iow." " ,','
During the conceptual review, we raised a concern that the open
space on the site, being at the rear of the building, did not
meet the requirement of Section 24-37. (d) that open space be open
to the street. By the conclusion of that stage of the review we
suggested that the open space along Spring Street could be
justified as technically meeting this requirement. Therefore,
when the condition was rewritten, reference to the technical
requirement was dropped in favor of a simple statement that open
space be provided along Durant to create a cOUrtyard effect.
When Condition No. I was written, we hi3.d" in mind that, the skieE
drop-off area could be set in the midst of open space, and that
the two areas need not result in a tot;alrequirement for 20 or
more feet of set back. However, we did not anticipate that the
drop-off area would be deSigned to occupy the entire frontage,
and would essentially be used instead of providing open space.
It is not reasonable to consider the Clrop-off area as an open
space courtyard, and we do not approve of the street image which
is created by this proposed solution.
In our opinion, there are two distinctly different ways of
looking at the open space requirement. If, on the one hand, the
building were truly set back from Durant by open space, its
impact on the str,eet would, be sof~ened" the pedestrian entrance
be made more grand, the shadows onDurant might be reduced and a
more positive image created for the hotel. On the other hand,
the historic character of our victorian town is that. commercial
buildings front directly on the street, creating active people
places on the adjacent sidewalks. Therefore, if we are given a
choice between" a parking lot and no setback at all, the street
frontage might be preferable. Our preference is that the
applicant should be made to provide true open space on the front
of the site, moving towards (although not necessarily
duplicating) the open base area concept advocated by Hans
G ramiger, and creating the several complimentary benefits noted
above. However, we recognize that this redesign should
fall within the parameters of the conceptual approval upon which
the applicant has relied in preparing the Precise Plan, and
suggest that a reasonable compromise be proposed by the
applicant.
"4. The applicant shall continue to evaluate the impact of
the hotel on the views ofA/ilpen Mountain from Hunter
St reet, and propose any design changes which will
reduce obstructions of the mountain from the corner of
Cooper or Hyman Avenues on Hunter Street. Detailed
architectural renderings and elevations shall be
provided at the Precise Plan stage."
The applicant has provided a computer simulated view of the
building as it will appear from Hunter Street at the Durant and
Cooper corners. These simulation.Iil, are evidence thi3.t the Critical
viewplane from the town to the Little Nell run and Bell Mountain
will be preserved. On the other hand, the views shown looking
6
""....
^
,
east and west on Durant dem()ll~tratE!tl1a~t.l1et>llild~ng will fill
in the one remaining open area along thIs 'stree't,and complete
the "walled in" feeling from the Aspen Club Lodge and North of
Nell Buildings. The applicant has provided renderings and
elevations of the building on its four sides which I consider to
be relatively schematic for this final stage of the review
process, although nearly identical in detail to, tl1a,t provided by
the Aspen Mountain POD at the preliminary review stage. It would
be helpful if the applicant identified the materials to be used
in each location in the puildipg during your review so as to give
a better picture of the way tne building will truly look.
"IS. The applicant shall provide a shadow study of the
effects of the building along Durant Avenue and Spring
Street, and mitigate the problems caused by the
building's shadows for pedestrians crossing the
street. "
The applicant's shadow study states that "Durant Avenue will be
in shade for most of the winter. In December, shadows from the
Little Nell Hotel will shade the .stre,et n()J:~11 oftl1e liotel a,g
day. By the end of February, most of the driving suiface of
Durant Avenue will be in the sun fFom IO,:30 - ,I,: 30. The south
side of Durant, adjacent to the Hotel, will remain in shade all
winter."
The applicant's response to this problem is that "a major
pedestrian crossing be constructed at the intersec,tion ot;Dllrallt
and Hunter Street." Included in this plan is a neck dowriofthe
street to two travel lanes at the intersection. We feel that
with Durant acting as a major thorol1ghfareror downtown, this
neck down is ill q<lVj,lSE!d, and will create turning conflicts into
the drop-off area. It is also ,unclear frol'\lth,e applicant'S
presentation whether theA~<;\'lg~t.a,ke, rE!sponsibility for placing
the proposed sidewalk pavirii,{mat:edals across the street to
indicate pedestrian zones. Finally, it should be noted that the
icing problem which now exists from the Jl,spen Club Lodge and
North of Nell Buildings is likely to be repeated on this block as
well, causing additional problems for vehicular traffic. The
only real solution to this problem would appear to be a maj or
design change in the hotel by either (a) stepping the building
back from one story to the next or (b) setting it back much
further from the street ,t.han" l1<:isbeenproposed.
"19. The applicant shall make every effort, inCluding
working with the City of Aspen, to increase the extent
of the pedestrian gateway to the mountain so as to make
it a more "grand" entrance in the winter and summer."
We do not see any improvements in the plan for either Hunter or
Dean Streets which are, any more "grand" than the proposal made at
the conceptual level. Clearly, the improvements to both streets
will make a vast difference ,in teFIll~ ofbe~ter ,skier circulation,
visual image and functional 13upport of recreation at the base
area. These elements of the plan were present at the conceptual
level, and are now committed to be paid for fully by ASC, with
the exception of the area in "Zone II" on the, landscape plan,
whose cost is to be shared with other own,e.r.s having property
along Dean Street.
"16. The applicant shall demonstrate the tec:hniques to be
employed on the roof of the hotel to manage snow
shedding to insure that it does not interfere with or
endanger pedestrians below."
The applicant has provided us with a schematic drawing of the
features designed into the building to manage the snow on the
roof. The techniques employed include a flat slope on the roof
top to retain snow, avalanche guardS at the edge of the sloped
portions of the roof, use of dormers to protect entryways and use
7
-~
;-...
t"""\
of a flat roof on the arcade to protect pedestrians. In our
review of the elevations and perspectives for the building, we
see large sloped areas on the roof which appears to be capable of
allowing snow t,o slide beyond the arcade area., We feel that this
design problem should be reviewed visually by the P&Z with the
project architect.
"2. The applicant shall, in the Precise Plan submission,
request a variation of the project's FAR if it is above
l.5:1, since the land zoned con!3er:V'~tiollCloel'lJ'l()tcount
toward the overall project FAR. Theapplicanfmay alSo
request special revie,w approval to increase the
allowable commerciaIFJl.R()L1:h~property to 1. 7: I by
providing employee housing in the appropriate ratio on
or off site."
The applicant has indicated that the project's FAR is 1.96:1,
using the land area zoned CC, and 1.05:1, using the land zoned CC
as well as that zoned C. Since the Conservation~one does not
allow the hotel or retail uses, we continue to recommend t.hat the
same method of FAR calculation as was ,1l!3ed .for th~, Aspen Mountain
POD be appliea to this project. This rule states that we do not
calculate th,e FAR using land in a zone in which the, Ilse is not
allowed. P&Z should also note, t.h~t. ()r:ClinaJ:lc:e~()"c~, Series, of
1986, eliminates the ability to obtain bonus FAR. when off-site
housing is provided. Therefore, the applicant should be viewed
as request ing an FAR variat ion from 1. 5: I to 1. 96: I, a
substantial increase, ,0f,ov,er,}0 percent of the allowable FAR,"c
This variance should; h~owever, be permitted, if P&Z finds the
design of the building to be suitable for this site ,as presented.
"12. The applicant shall provide detailed drawings of the
new base lifts, demonstrating that these buildings are
visually compatible with the basear,ea anCl that the
principal storage area for eithe,r c,llairs or gondolas
will not be above grade at the base area."
The elevations provided in Appendix 7 include a drawing from the
Hunter Plaza, showing the proposed lift building. The lift
building should meet the representation made in the Master Plan
that it will be a minilllal struc::t\1re, as generally represented by
several conceptual drawings provided at that time. Instead, the
building has been scaled at 25 feet in height, which seems quite
substantial. Further, the sketch provides little detail as to
the building design, including no indication of building
materials. The applicant has indicated, however, that storage of
gondOla cabins will be at the" top terminal, but that limited
"work rail" storage will be at the bottom. 'l'hil'lrepresentation
should be clarified as we do not know what "work rail" storage
means.
3. Conditions Concerning Miscellaneolls'1'ecl:ln,ic~:L J:E1E111~s:
The issues to be disc\lssed in" ~J:!il'l se9~i()n Jnc,lllde geologic
haz ard (Condition No.' lli) , , grading (ConiHtioo'No;'S); drainage
(Condition No. 22), rights-of-way ownership (Condition No. 20),
lift service (Condition No.3) 8040 Greenline andM9unt(iin
Viewplane (Condition No.6), pumphouse relocation (Condition No.
II), employee housing (Condition No. 14), potential park zone
encroachment (Condition No. 17), fireplaces (Condition No. 21),
and SPA Boundary Change (Condition Nos. 24 and 25) .
"10. The applicant shall provide a detailed, technical study
of the geologic hazard on Aspen Mountain as it affects
this site and shall demonstra1:e, ~hClt ,any hazard posed
to the property can and wili be fully mitigated. The
applicant shall also investigate the soils hydrology in
the area to demonstrate the sUit.,ClI:lJUty of the site for
development purposes."
8
I""'<,
.~
Chen and Associates has prepared a study, contained in Appendix
I, which reviews the geologic hazards to the site. On-site
impacts include potentially shallow groulldwater, steep slopes and
mine subsidence. In this regard, the consultant recommends:
o A program of test holes should be drilled and observation
wells installed to provide infOrmation, on groundwater.
o A subsurface investigation program should be conducted to
provide inform.ationonsubsurf.ac:e soil conditiolls and to
analyze slope stability. " ",
In this regard, Jay Hammond notes that the regrading and
subsurface work on the site wJll li~ely require the use of a pile
retaining system, adj acent to$outh Spring Street, which is a
difficult construction tec:hnique, involving noise and disruption
to the neighborhood. Jay would like to see more detailed
investigation of the design of this system prior to any
construction on the site. More comments on construction impacts
are provided in a later sectionofthfsrnemc:;.'>.'..
o No action is recommended relative to, mine induced subsidence
due to the low risk posed to the site.
The potential off-site impacts to the proposed development
include the potential for flood or debris flow from Copper/Spar
Gulch, and Vallejo Gulch. According to Jay Hammond:
"Additional information, is also required regarding the flood
and debris flow risk f.r,om the Vallejo Gulch area onto the
project site and adjacent sites. Adequate mitigation should
be prov ided to protect the proj ect and any adj acent
properties impacted by new grading.
Related to the work unClert.~I<~n.by, Chen to evaluate the
geological hazard and mud flow dsk for the Little "Nell
redevelopment site is the ongoing effort to evaluate the
hazards and mitigation across the entire base of the
mountain. To the extent thatth,~Aspen Skiing Company is
the maj or land holder within the' upslope source areas and
since a failure to mitigate the problems in the upSlope area
could affect Littlel<l'ell Cind,otl1erdOWn.13tol'e sites, we would
recommend that ASC be reC}ufredtocommlt to ongoing hazard
study, engineering and mitigation construction in those
areas under their control via dir,e,ct. ()\vlleF13l1ip, leasehold,
or other usage agreement as a condition of " the Little Nell
approval. "
"5. The applicant shall provide detailed grading plans for
the earth work which is proposed to occur at the base
area, including any activity associated with the base
of the new lifts which may fall outside of the SPA
boundary, and shall identify the locations for any
material deposition which is to occur."
The grading plan for the site calls for the creation, ofa 160
foot flat area between De,Cin Streetan,d ,t.he uphill end of the
~cc~lerationwheels ,on ,thec'le~Clc:h?l?l~ l.;ft system. The plan
1nd1cates that approx1mately 66,600 cub1c yards (c.y.) of dirt
will be cut, in the lower potions of the slope and 51,350 c.y.
will be filled, in the upper portion of the slope. This leaves
approximately 15,250 c.y. of dirt which is not addressed by the
plan, with our assumption being that this dirt will be removed
from the site. If other plans for the dirt are proposed, these
should be disclosed by the applicant. We would also note at this
time that the regrading involves a proposed relocation of Aspen
Mountain Road, a County Road which is maintained by ASCby
agreement with Pitkin County. The applicant should be required
to obtain an encroachment permit for road work from Pitkin County
prior to initiating any regrading activities.
9
^
;-...
"22. The applicant shall provide a arainage plan at the
Precise Plan stage which meets the standards of the
Engineering Department concerning the 100 year storm
and which addres,s;es dr~il}age from Aspen Mountain as it
affects the site andarainage from the development site
itself. "
Appendix 5 contains the drainage study prepared by Rea Cassens
and Associates., T.he scope of the study was to determine drainage
requirements for the site, including those due to runoff from
Vallejo Gulch, which appears to flow down the Little Nell slope
and to handle rlln9ff froIn,t.hed~velopment site itself. The City
Engineer's comments olltl1isplan are that:
"Rea Cassens and AssociateS l1Cl,fil provided a thorough analysis
of the various basin impacts from the 5 year and 100 year
storms. Conceptually, they appear to be both conservative
and in keeping with City policy of detaining major flows and
releasing them off-site at historic, .rates.T,hesi~e plan,
however, does not address the, specific location of proposed
detention facilities and channels. Pre9ise plan approval
should include Cl,dequate locatiollanq capacity for storm
routing and detention. In addition, Basin A-3 on the
drainage plan indicates a dis;9l1arge onto the Alps property.
To the extent that this dis9harge has been in9reC!sed due to
grading or other sitea9tiyity it should be detained by the
Nell developer and released at historic rat,es."
"20. The applicant shall demonstrate in the Precise Plan
submission that all questions ast() theo..,.,nership of
the Hunter street right-of-way are in the process of
being resolved, to insure that permanent guarantees of
the availability of Hunter and Dean Stre,ets fo.r
pedestrian access will be provided. The Precise Plan
shall not be approved un,til the pedestrian access issue
has been resolved tO,the , City's satisfaction. The
applicant will also demollstrate t.I1,Cl,t ,t.lle,]:)oundary
questions adjacent to the Tippler have been resolved,
and the SPA boundary designation shall be adjusted ac-
cordingly. "
We received a letter from Gideon KCl,U;mCl,llindicCl,t.ipg that ASC
would provide the City with funds to purchase or condemn the west
half of vacated Hunt,er St.reetCl,PClw()l,qClClef~nCl thE!<9ty' s right
to acquire this land through condemnation. This matt.erwastaken
up by City Council on their regular agenda on January 27,' at
which time it was decided that the City Attorney should research
this matter, and provide the Council with a recommended 90ur~e of
action at their meet.ing on February 10. When a decision is
reached, we will provide you updated information on t.his mat.ter.
As to the Tippler issue, we are informed by the applicant that
resolution of the boundary location is proceeding and does not
affect the site plan due to relocation of the service yard.
However, in a conversation with the representative of the Tippler
we were informed that no contact has been, made with thE!mby ASC
since the conceptual approval. This issue should be resolved by
the applicant.
"13. The applicant shall reiterate the commitment as to how
lift service will be provided on Little Nell for
special events, ski instructions and for seconqary
access to Lift 5. The applicant will show the location
of all lifts proposed for the base area and will
provide a commitment that their install,at:ion will, b,e
initiated in 1987. T,heapplicant shall be required to
specify to the City which lift system is intended to be
installed prior to review of the, PreciSe Plan by the
City Council, also giving the Planning Office approx-
10
f"".
r'\
imately two (2) weeks to r~view tl1e proposal and obtain
referral cOmments from ()theragencies prior to the
initial presentation of the'Pr~ciEle .J?19:!1",~,2 C<?,UIlC:.!!. "
The Master Plan provides two options for the new high speed lifts
on Aspen Mountain, as follow,s:
1. Detachable grip, quad chair, capacity of 1800-2000 skiers
per hour, terminatipg at the top of Tourtelotte Park.
Access to Little Nell and Lift 115is cmnrn,itted to via a
midway unload station or Eleparate lift system similar to the
present Lift U.
2. Gondola system, capacity of 1800 to 2000 skiers per hour,
terminating near the Sundeck. Acce,ss to,Litt,le ,N~ll a,nd
Lift 115 is committed to via a separate lift' system similar
to the present Lift 114.
We would expect a choice between these two systems to be made and
presented to the Planning Office following the completion of
P&Z'S review.
"6. The applicant shall evaluate t.he.1ipplicability of the
City's 8040 greenline and mquntaill viewplane review
procedures to the proposed development. Should it be
found that eithe,r review procedure applies, the
applicant will S\Jbmit tl:1eJ'lec:eElEl1iry materials at the
Precise Plan stage demonstrating compliance with the
review criteria of the Code~"
The applicant has determined thCi.tbqth ,r.eyiew procedures apply to
the project and included appropriate review materials in Appendix
4. The 8040 greenline review applies to the placement of two
lift towers and regrading of the Little Nell slope, and not to
the base area construction. We tend t(),agree with the applicant
that this type of development is not the kind which r,esulted in
8040 review being implemented by the City. Nonetheless, the
regrading will substalltially change the view of the mountain,
will affect the drainage on the site and is affected by the site
geology. In general, the be,nefit to, the cOlllmunity of installing
the new high speed lift justifies, in our opinion, the regrading
which must be accomplished to allow the detachablesh1iir/gondola
to gain speed out of the base area." Drai.nage and site stability
concerns are adClr~13Eled eIEl~\>[per~. "Tp~Eef()r~, ,\>[e concur,with Jay
Hammond that. thereiippears to 'be l1'O problem wIth the proposed
regrading or lift tower construction, subj ect to appropriate
utility relocations, accomplishment of necessary drainage/slope
stability investigations and reseeding of disturbed slopes.
The Mountain Viewplane issue also does n()ti:>ring particular
concerns. Although the site does fall wi.t.hin the Wagner Park,
Cooper Avenue, Courthouse nand 112, Wheeler Opera House and Main
St reet Viewplanes, only the Wheeler Viewplane presents any
limitations to the height of the, deyelopment. Further, due to
the existing buildings on the Hyman and Cooper malls, there is no
further degradation of the view of, Aspen Mountain from the
Wheeler due to this proj ect. Although, as Jay notes, if the
foreground obstructions wereredev eloped and brought into
compliance with the Viewplane, there would be an intrusion by the
hotel into the viewplane, given its minor nature and its position
in the backdrop and not the foreground, this effect is minimal.
The Planning Office and Engineering Department recommend approval
of the 8040 Greenline and Mountain Viewplane reviews.
"II. The applicant shall provide a solution to the pumphouse
relocation problem and shall agree to implement said
solution at the applicant's cost."
The applicant's solution to relocating the pumphouse in Hunter
11
I"'"
^,
st reet is to install a submEl!:l:liblEl, pump with a remote
chlorination station. The City Water Department supports this
solution, provided that all plans, equipment and access easements
are viewed in advance of any construction.
"14. The applicant shall provide housing for employees of
the project in a manner acceptable to the Housing
Author ity and Planning Commission,. The number of
employees to be hou$ed will be determined at the
Precise Plan stage, based on the applicant' s commit-
ments as part of the growth management plan applica-
tion."
The applicant's proposal is to house 30 employees, representing
36 percent of the net new employees generated by the project.
The Housing Authority concurs with the generation figures
submitted by the applicant, and the method by which the employees
are to be housed. WewCluld no~e ,~h.l:lt ,the applicant has not
applied for a Change in Use approval for the Holiday House Lodge
conversion to residential statlls,', The, applicant $hould submit a
letter of application, site plan and drawings of internal
configuration so that tl'lel:ldequacy of this facility can be
determined.
"17. The applicant shall demonstrate, tl1at ,t.he proposed
buildings do not encroach int.Cl tl'le lanQ within. the Park
zone near the Aspen Alps."
The applicant propo$es no building activity on the property in
question. Emergency skier service is proposed through this site,
with ambulance pick up on Spring Street. This use would not
appear to affect the status of the land in the Park zone
district.
"21. The applicant shall provide the Environmental Health
Department with detaileQ ill~(HI'\lI:lt.~Cln.()llCiny fireplaces
which will be illcluded in, the project, demonstrating
their compliance with applicable Code provisions."
The Environmental Healt,h Department is quite pleased at the
applicant's proposed use of "gas log" type fireplaces, which meet
or exceed current woodburning device legislation.
"24. Final approval of the proposed SPA boundary change
shall only occur in conjunction with final approval of
the Precise Plan for the project."
This procedure is being followed by the tabling of Ordinance 53,
Series of 1985, at second reading until the Little Nell project
completes its Precise Plan review.
"25. In the event that the growth allocations for the
proj ect shall expire, the boundary of the SPA shall
revert to its prior configuration."
This item should continue forward as a c()nditiClll Clf approval.
B. REVIEW OF APPLICABLE PRECISE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE EVALUATION
CRITERIA: As noted '.aboye; 'thei:eatesTK'r~\iI~w~procedur'es"'wnrcftne'e'd'
to be addressed in this process. 80 4QGreenline, Mountain Viewplane,
Change in Use, and Encroachment were ad,dressed above. The, purpose of
this section is to address the following:
1. Conformance with standards for review of Precise Plan (Section
27-7.7).
2. Conformance with conditiollal use review c:xi~eri,a (Section 24-
303) .
In our review, the fOllowing provision from Section 24-7.7 should be
12
""""'".....-
,,-.,
~
the governing review criterion:
"(b) The burden shall rest upon an applicant to demonstrate
the reasonablene,ss al'ld su~tCibility of the Precise Plan,
its conformity to the requirements of this article,
that the adverse effects of the ,proposed development
have been minimized t() the eltt,el'lt practicable, and that
it complies with the c'lty Council's intent in
originally designating the site with an SPA overlay,
including the reasonable conformance of the Precise
Plan with the approval grantea to the conceptual plan."
1. COnformance with Precise Plan Review Standards.
.;"....,.'.,..... .. ..." .. .. '.,."" .. ". ,-..... ..." ...- c 'c"""/;:"."/,...",.";.:b;~,';",,o.'?,S'-;'~/'.'<::.'ri,'>;-'.:.:'" <,
a. Compatibility with Neighboring Development - The proposal is
surrounded by other short-term tourist uses,,~ ,It!!, height is
40 feet, in compliance with underlying zoning and lOwer than
the North of Nell or,Aspen Square~ Its FAR of 1. 96:1 is
well below that of the North of, Ne:!.lIlqgding and its mass
is offset by use of various architectural techniques.
Problems noted elsewhere in thJs memo collcern open space,
shadows and skier qrop-off as they affect this site and the
neighborhood.
b. Utilities and ROadfj,"": 'l'J;le project will upgrade water, sewer
and fire service to the area, and provide for detention of
stormwater from the site ,and ,thelllolll'l,~,Cl,ina'i1d,r91l~~I'lCJ to the
City's storm sewer .As noted above, we are most concerned
that the road system analysis by the consultant discounts
the impact of the mountain capacity increase on the, City
streets, and feel this issue should ,be more ~horoughly
studied. " " ,.., ,
c. Environmental Suitapility - The applicant has initiated
studies of the identified haz,a,rds aff~c:ting the site. If
the recommendations of the confjultCintCindSity Engineer,
summarized above, are followed, the "site appears to be
suitable for development.
d. Land Planning Techniques - The techniques employed by the
applicant incluae the use of sub grade space for the support
services to the h()teland"s~iHeCi' remov Cl10f the
maintenance function f r()m the baseal'~a, use of stepped back
architectural form to preserve the Hunter street viewplane,
provision of substantial, open space at the rear of the
parcel, and upgrading of Hunter and Dean Streets into
pedestrian malls.
e. Conformance with Aspen Area Plan - The 1973 Aspen Land Use
Plan designates this site as "recreation/accommodations",
which is intended "to allow for the recreCition" an,d
accommodation needs of the visit()l' tO,Aspen in an area that
is especially suited for this becausEl()I itfj".Il11~ty with, and
identity to, the proposed transportation system, the ski
area and the central a,r,eCl~" "Thec()nf91'man9El()fthe proj ect
with the Growth Mallagement: Polic:yPlanhas been' discussed
earlier, and will be reviewed again at the conclusion of the
Precise Plan review.
f. Expenditure of puplic, J;'ullqe;."": ,'!'he proj ect does not appear to
directly require the expenditures of additional public
funds, although there will be costs to the improvement
district to upgrade that portion of Dean Street not
addressed by the applicant. The applicant will enhance
services to the neighborhood in a variety of categories.
Issues not adequately addressed at this time include parking
and road impacts and associatElc:'l costs.
2. Conformanc,e witl1 CcmdJ,t;ioll,{Ja,.El., Cl'it;,Ci!.,:,i,<I:!,
13
~",._-..':
tf""',
^
a. Compliance with Zoning Code Requirements - The proposed use
of the property complies with most of the standards of the
underlying CC zone district. The proposal strictly complies
with the 40 foot height limitation, substantially exceeds
the 25 percent open space requirement and provides a front
yard of 16 feet, where no setback requirement exists, and
provides 116 subgrade and 12 at grade parking spaces where
no Code requirement exists. The only variations requested
are in terms of FA,R, from a Code allowance of 1.5:1 to a
proposed 1. 96: I; and in the reClr yard trash area, from about
135 feet in width to a,bout, 35 feet }l}widtl1.''l'he applicant
also requests a use variqnce Jo, CllI0w~hel1.otel,~()0C::7uPY
land zoned C - Conservat.icm. Ail,o~hei,cl1s:esapp0ear'tobe in
conformance with the limitations, of their ulld~rlying zones.
b. Consistency with Intents and Purposes of CC Zone - The
intent of the CC zone ill ",~.o e,Uo\>i' tl1.,el1s~()f: lalla f:,or
retail and serviCe comme~,cialrx:~c~E!etion,aJ'\d institl1tional
purposes, with customary accessory uses to enhance the
business and se,rvice charac~er:ill t.l1.j-l!c~ll~rCilcor~ of the
City. Accommodation and resfdentialuses a:i:e1JlIlited~()all
accessory status." Base don thj,sIn'fent;the project' is '
consistent with the intent of the zone in terms of its
retailal'ld recreatIol'luses.The~c:CiCi!it!itoCl~ti..o~lll1s~Sr which
are the principal use of the property' ratherthan"ii'c'cessory,
are more in keeping with the surrounding properties and
nearby CL, L-I, and L-2 zone districts. Nevertheless, since
this CC property is not loc.ated int.he ,c:entral commerc,ial
area, but instead is more closely associate'dwfth the base
of Aspen Mountain and its touristacc:()mm()da~.i()ns the hotel
use can be viewed as appropriate to 'thesTte."
c. Compatibility with Surrounding Land Uses - This review
criterion has already been covered under the Precise Plan
review standards.
Based on the above analysis, the Planning Office finds that:
1. The proj ect meets the conditional use review criteria; and
2. There is a substCinqal amount .of mat.erial which must, be
provided by the applicant before it can be demonstrCited tl1.at
the proj ect complies with Precise, Plan standards of revIew.
C. SPECIFICATION OF, ZONE DIS'rRIC'J.' ,~~~l:ONS,VARI~IONS PERIII'1.'TBPA,ND
CONSTRUC'l'ION SCHBJ)ULE: sectJO,n"2r":"1~6 (e) 'requires that the
application specify the zone district regUlations and variat.ions which
are to apply to the development, while Section 24~7.6(d) requires the
provision of a schedule specifying the timefr,ame of the deVelopment.
Based on the preceding review, it is clear that several of the zoning
district requirements will need to, be .,s,ei: f.olll>\>l'ing the review by the
Planning Commission, including trash area access and parking, and
possibly minimum front yard. The proposed uses listed on Page 13-14
of the SPA Precise Plall portion of the application appear reasonable,
with the exception that the hotel should continue as a c:ollditional use
for the property, to give greater review power over any alterations or
modifications which may be proposed after it is constructed (i. e.,
public hearing is required for substantial modification of a condition
use, but not for an Sl'A amendment). We would expect to specify the
zoning regulations for the property within the final resolution
concerning the project.
The applicant has provided a construcUonllc:,hedule onpage l8-19 of
the GMP submission. The sc.hedule provides for the following:
Summer/Fall 1986 - Excavation and st.ructural work. for thec:ol'\ll'\leFc:,ial
s~ructureall.dll>\>l'er 19tterlll!!!i.ihalong with the regrading of' the
L1ttle Nell slope to permit future lift construction/operation. The
regrading would be done in such a way as not to disrupt the footings
of the existing lift towers so as to maintain the existing Lift #4 in
14
t"""\
~
operation for the time being.
Spring/summer/Fall 1987 - Demolish Lft.t::Je NeU c()mplex, complete work
at western wing of new complex to provide skier'services for the 1987-
88 season, const ruct new lifts, initiate hotel and comlllerCial
construction.
winter 1987/Winter 1988 - Complete interior and exterior of hotel,
complete landscaping, sidewalks and plazas.
Since the construction site is intended to continue in use for initial
skier access and comlller cii.ar"~'tlppO'rt.s'e'rvrcesfnrolighoi!t:"fhe
construction period, we feel it is important for us to fully
understand how cfrC:l1l~tionw il,l9c:cur: and~l1a~".~l1e I:l~se~r:e~w il11()ok
like during construction: We 'feel'tnat the ,applicant should submit
both graphic materials aSW,ell a,l'l",~,Cl~t~ileCl ~ritten desc:ript ion of
the proposal for the interim ):)al'l~a,.~e~.~H!p.~~pplicant should also be
required to demonstr,ate that ~1:1~regrading of the slope can be
accomplished without disrupting the lift service or otherwise
endangering visitors to the area. Fina,Jly, in keeping with' our
approach to the Aspen Mountain PPD, the applicant should be ~equired
to provide the Planning Office and the City Engineer with the
fOllowing materials:
I. Specific design and location of pedestrian barricades and walkway
structures. '
2. Traffic and pedestrian circulation routes during construction.
3. An agreement on the part of the applicants to properly maintain
the barricade and walkway system throughout the course of
construction, including repairs and removal.
4. Provision of a plan addressing site access and material and
equipment storage areas during construction.
5. Scheduling and design detail regarding utility relocations,
replacements and undergrounding.
6. Further detail regarding the limits of excavation, construction
easements and shoring needs.
7. Proposed landscaping of areas where demolition is contemplated
without immediate reconstruction.
SOJIIIIARY AND co~g;1:JS:IOlhAflll()~ed ear:li~r:illtl1il'l m~m(), SPA ,'p,r:ec:ise Plan
review puts the burden' on 'theapp1i.Ciant'€od'deRtQii'sFriit'e,.tl1er~asclll~blel1el'ls
and suitability of the project, including the miniiniZatfO'nof''fFs'adverse
effects to the exte,nt practicable, and its compliance with the Council's
intent in designating the site with anSp./\ oyer:lay. Given the strategic
location of this parcel and its crucial importance to the success of Aspen
as a resort, we have been most c:arefl1lt,o~()rk~ ith il1t~e ~pplicable
provisions of the Code, to try to obtaint:heoesfpossT61epr6ject for the
residents of and visitors to Al'lpen.
Based on our review to date, we feel that subst,antial ,work must be dolle,t.o
demonstrate to the, Planni.ng Commission that the proj ect is reasonable and
suitable for the site and has, mini.milledi~saClYer,seef.:fects to" the extent
practicable. We recommend that .the. foll()Wing work be accomplished during
the course of p&Z'S review of this sl1~issi.911'
1. The applicant should be required to submit alternative designs to
address the skier dropMoff problem.
2. The applicant should review the parking and circulation studies with
the Planning Commission. If the consUltant's.al'lfll1mptions cannot be
justified, additional mitigation in terms of parking and roads should
be required.
3. The applicant should provide detailed drawings and calculations as to
IS
".....,
~
,,-,",:...,
the service area turning radius.
4. ASC should work with its neighbors to develop a design concept for the
entrance to the Dean Str~et Mall and present this concept to the P&z.
5.
The
the
". '.' ", .. ',."...d, '...... .. .. .. ,', ',..... .. _.... .. ,'~' .. ...., ..
i' .......','. _ ,m "'_'''<:''''.. "', ,',>, ,"
.'i':. .... i;:'<:,':'''.',;:>:,,:; i,_;.~'O::,..<::;,.':,:::.. '::,:>,-,''''_'''':<!:_'~_:'-';:::::':<>'.'........' ," _,' .:0.......... .... : .. ..... '::'_ .............:.:.:....:.._._:.,
appHcantshouIa 'invesfigateana present alternative designs for
hotel which provide true open space along Durant Avenue.
6. The applicant should propose ways to mitigate the shading effects of
the building on Durant Avenue.
7. The Planning Commission should review the ,SI)OW r~tenti()ll plan and
detailed architecture (including materials) with the architect.
8. The applicant should agree 'to the requests by-the CIty Engineer with
respect to geOlogic concerns" grading and drainage, and provide the
Commission with the nec~ssary review materials.
9. The applicant shall make appropriate submissions witb respect to the
change in use of the Holiday HOUSE!, th~ request to vary the size of
the trash access area, and the encroachment licenses.
IO. The applicant shall submit the requested materials with r~spect to the
construction at the base area.
11. Other miscellaneous requests and comments m/ide throughout this memo
should be reviewed and addressed by the applicant and the Planning
Commission.
The Planning Office has no final recommendation on the entire application
until these concerns have been addressed.
AR.5
16
"'"
1""'\
(""\
o ,
Page Two
Little Nell S.P.A. Precise Plan
January 20, 1986
per the Chen report.
involves the potential
South Spring Street.
One important construction related concern
need for retaining structures adjacent to
Additional information is also required regarding the flood and
debris flow risk from the Vallejo gulch area onto the project
site and adjacent sites. Adequate mitigation should be provided
to protect the project and any adjacent properties impacted by
new grading.
Related to the work undertaken by Chen to evaluate the geological
hazard and mud flow risk for the Little Nell redevelopment site
is the ongoing effort to evaluate the hazards and mitigation
across the enti re base of the mountain. To the extent that the
Aspen Skiing Company is the major land holder within the upslope
source areas and since a failure to mitigate the problems in the
upslope area could affect Little Nell and other downslope sites,
we would recommend that ASC be required to commit to ongoing
hazard study, engineering and mitigation construction in those
areas under their control via direct ownership, leasehold or
other usage agreement as a condition of the Little Nell approval.
STORM DRAINAGE
Rea Cassens and Associates has provided a thorough analysis of
the various basin impacts from the 5 year and 100 year storms.
Conceptually, they appear to be both conservative and in keeping
with City policy of detaining major flows and releasing them
off-site at historic rates. The site plan, ho\~ever does not
address the specific location of proposed detention facilities
and channels. Precise plan approval should include adequate
location and capacity for storm routing and detention. In
addi ti on, basin A-3 on the drainage plan indicates a discharge
onto the Alps property. To the extent that this discharge has
been increased due to grading or other site activity it should be
detained by the Nell developer and released at historic rates.
PARKING AND CIRCULATION
Service Access - Further detail with respect to appropriate
turning radii for truck access and egress are needed. Maintaining
public parking on the east side of Spring adjacent to the Aspen
Club Lodge is a concern as is the limited right-of-way in Spring
Street.
Skier Drop-Off - The skier drop-Off proposed involves elimination
of public on-street parking and an unworkable curb line extension
adj acent to the Hunter Street right-of-way. We Ilould recommend
exploration of alternative designs that maintain on-street public
1""\
o
"
l>lEHORANDUI\
TO:
Alan Richman, Planning and Development Director
Jay Hammond, City Engineering~
FROH:
DATE:
January 20, 1986
Little Nell S.P.A. Precise Plan
RE:
===============================================================
Having revie,~ed the above application for precise plan approval
of the Little Nell S.P.A., the City Engineering Department would
offer the following comments;
UTILITIES
I'Jater - Generally, we are pleased ,'lith the
and relocations presented by the applicant.
informed of:
system improvements
,'le ,~ill need to be
Pumphouse Relocation - Conceptually, this does not appear to
create problems though the City will need to approve all plans,
equipment and access easements to all relocated facilities.
Spring Street Line - We would recommend the upsizing of the
proposed Spring Street water line to a 12 inch line with a valve
at Durant and a valve, plug and kick block at Ute Avenue to
provide for future extension by the City.
Nell Slope Line - The City would like to coordinate with the
applicant the placement, by the City, of a parallel 6 inch main
crossing the Nell slope adjacent to the new 12 inch proposed by
the devel oprnent.
Easements - Relocation of water and other utilities will
require ne\J easements from the Ski Company. Also, some existing
easements will need to be formally abandoned by all utilities
currently utilizing them.
Electric - Relocation of City electric facilities in the
area shall be at the applicant's expense with relocation and
equipment design subject to approval by the City Electric Superi-
ntendent.
GEOLOGICAL CONDITIONS
Precise plan approval should be subj ect to further geotechnical
investigation to investigate slope stability and groundwater
conditions in the areas of the proposed cut slopes and foundation
and groundwater condi tions in the areas planned for s truct ure s
f""""
o
Page Three
Little Nell S.P.A. Precise Plan
January 20, 1986
parking and revision of the curb design adjacent to the North-of-
Nell.
Parking - While the parking provided on-site appears reasonable
for the needs of the lodge and skier support facilities, we
remain concerned about the adequacy of parking for the new
restaurants and for the increased skiers attracted to Little Nell
by the proposed new lift and general area expansion. Expansion
approval by the County required 46 additional parking spaces and
some indication of where these are to be located may be appropr-
iate.
SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
The applicant should be required to commit to participation in
the Lodge Area Special Improvement District if86-1 pursuant to the
representations in the application and appendix IO as a condition
of the SPA agreement.
ENCROACHMENTS
Despite the representations in the application, we have not
received appropriate submi ttal materials or the fee for encroachment
application.
8040 GREENLINE
Subject to appropriate utility relocations, as represented by the
applicant, as well as reseeding of the revised slopes, we have no
particular problems .,ith the proposed regnxding or lift tower
construction under the 8040 criteria.
VIEW PLANE
Again, \~e are not particularly concerned about the vie\v plane
issue. I would suggest that one of the the or ies of the view
plane was that foreground obstructions may eventually be redeveloped
and brought into compliance. Given the distance from the Wheeler
and the minor nature ,of the intrusion, hO\vever, .,e are not
particularly concerned.
JH/ co/LittleNe1l2
cc: Jim Markalunas
Rich Cassens
I"")
rj
. ~'~ '-.....;
,l.
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
I hereby certify that on this nH- day of
198~, a true and correct, copy of the attached No
Hearing was deposi ted in the Uni ted States mail
postage prepaid, to the adjacent property owners as
the attached list of adjacent property owners which was supplied
to the Planning Office by the applicant in regard to the case
named on the aforementioned public notice.
~I/u! ~~ ~
Jalf!t Lynn R czak -
,I
,1""'\
n
~
,
'"
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: LITTLE NELL LODGE GMP - PRECISE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE
REVIEW
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on
February 4, 1986, at a meeting to beging at 5:00 P.M. before the Aspen
Planning and Zoning Commission in City Council Chambers 130 S. Galena,
Aspen, Colorado, to consider an application submitted by Peter Forsch'
on behalf of the Aspen Skiing Company. The pulbic hearing will
consider the applicant's request for Precise Plan Review (since the
property is located int he CC zone district with an SPA overlay) and a
request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 96 unit hotel and
associated skier support, commercial and ski area administration
spaces at the base of Little Nell.
For further information, contact the Aspen/Pitkin Planning
Office, 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado, 81611 (303) 925-2020,
Ext. 225.
sic. Welton Anderson
Chairperson, Aspen Planning and Zoning
Commission
---------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------
published in the Aspen Times on January 16, 1986.
City of Aspen Account.
r;
n
f'I E !~ 0 RAN DUn
m:
~ ae-n ~r.VN -
1iOUSIl1G AUTHORITY BOARD
PITKI:J COUlJTY
FRGrl:
ANNE BOHli"-lJ, HOUSEIG OFFICE
RE:
LITTLE, NELL LODG.c Gnp/PRECISE PLAN
DATE:
JNlUp~~Y 10, 1986
BACKGROUND: This application consists of a request for a 96 unit
LOGge G!!P quota allotment. Precise Plan revie\'1 (since the
property is located in the CC zone district with an SPA overlay),
Conditional Use, 8040 Greenline Review and Eountain Viellplane
Revie\-t.
The a ppl i cant states and we agree vii th the Employee Gener ation
and Housing illustrated as Table 1 (attached).
The appl icant proposes to house the 30 er:tployees by converting
and deed-restricting tl1e existing Holiday House Lodge located at
127 N. Hopkins Avenue.
The Holiday House is currently a free-market lodge except for 5
lower level rooms (~12, 13, 14, 15 and 17) housing 10 employees
\-Ihich \vere deed-restricted to 10lv-income rental in 1981 by the
prior O\'lner of the lodge. The 5 rooms or 10 employees have not
been "double-counted" under the appl icant r s proposal.
In total, the EOliday Fouse is proposed to house 56 eDployees in
28 private lodge rooms at 2 employees per room. Each lodge room
lIill have a private bath and small kitchen. The private lodge
rooms vary in individual sizes, but in total the 28 rooms contain
9,658 net 1 ivina snace or an average of 172 s.L of gross area
including net living space, storage, laundries, hallllays, etc. or
an average of 237 s.f. of gross space per employee.
On-site amenities include a s'rlimr'1ing pool, 2 laundry rooms, anple
storage closets, and a snall cop~on lobby. Jim Curtis and I did
an on-site inspection in December and the Housing Office feels
that these a,re e}:ceptional enployee housing accomr.lOdations.
HOUSING OFFICE RECOmIEIJDATION: The applicant proposes to house
30 of the 34 net ne'" employees generated by ,the development,
equivalent to 36 percent of net neu employees. Employees vlill be
housed at the Holiday House on N. Hopkins Avenue, to be converted
f rom lodge to housing, and ilill be housed at highly affordable
monthly 1m., incone rental prices of about $100 per per SOl'!. The
Housing Office recommends approval of this appl ication with the
following deed restriction:
. ,
..
IJ
A
The Applicants shall covenant with the City of I.spen that
the employee housing units be restricted in terms of use and
occupancy to the rental and sale guidelines established and
indexed by the City Council's designee for low income
employee housing units at the tine or prior to issuance of
the building permit. Verification of employment and income
of those persons living in the low income employee units
shall be completed and filed l'lith the City Councilor its
designee by the O\'mer conmencing on the date of recording
hereof, in the pitkin County Real Property records and
annu211y thereafter. These covenants shall be deemed to run
\lith the land as a burden thereto for the benefit of and
shall be specifically enforceable by the City or its
designee by any appropriate legal action including inj unc-
tion, abatement or eviction of noncowplying tenancy during
the period of life of the last survivina menber of the
presently e::isting City Council of the "City of Aspen,
Colorado, plus tl'lenty-one (21) years, or for a period of
f if ty (50) year s f rom the da te of recordi ng hereof in the
Pitkin County real property records, whichever period shall
be greater.
The Owner of the unit shall have the right to lease the
units to qualified enployees of his own selection. Such
individual T"ay be employed by the Owner, or employed in
Aspen/Pitkin County, provided such persons fulfill t;,e
require::lents of a qualified ecnployee. "Qualified employee"
as used herein shall neil,n any person currently residing in
and ehlployed in the City of Aspen or Pitkin County for a
mininum avero.ge of 30 hours per \1eek, nine Ti10nths out of any
tuelve-month period, \'Ino shall meet 101>' income and occupancy
eligibility requirements established and then applied by the
Housing Authority with respect to employee housing.
No lease agreenent executed for occupancy of the employee
rental unit shall provide for a rental term of less than six
consecutive 3onths.
l'lhen a lease is signed ,'lith a tenant, a copy shall be sent
to the Rousing Office so that a current file shall be
maintained on each unit.
Deed restriction shall be approved and signed by the
Chairman of the Housing Authority prior to recordation and a
copv of the recorded docunent shall be prov ided to the
Housina lluthoritv Office after recordation. '.
J "
.'
""""')
n
""",J
CITY OF ASPEN
130 south gale~a street
asp en'; 'C.o hWa dO: ,81611
303-925 -2020
MEMORANDUM
---.-.-,-----
DATE: January 9, 1986
TO: City Council
City Manager
FROM: City Attorney
RE: Purchase or Condemnation of Vacated Hunter Street
,..-" ,oc,Eorwarded herewith for your consideration is a copy of a December
26, 1985, letter from attorney Gideon Kaufman expressing the Ski-
ing Company's interest in providing funds necessary for the City's
acquisition of vacated Hunter Street to preserve tne scenic view
of Aspen Mountain. The Mayor has su9gested tnat this matter be
discussed at the January 13 council meeting.
PJT/mc
Attachment
6G
..,..":'1;:.;.,;,
......,.,
cc: Planning Director
City Engineer
Gideon I. Kaufman, Esq.
"
r-,
~
......~
LAW OFFICES
/~Fr' t''':''
U '- r,-t ,.) CO:: 'i;~Est
GIDEON I. KAUFMAN
BOX 10001
315 EAST HYMAN AVENUE
ASPEN. COLORADO 81611
GIDEON L KAUFMAN
DAVIO G. EISENSTEIN
December 26, 1985
TELEPHONE
AREA CODE 303
925-8166
Paul J. Taddune,
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado
Esquire
Street
81611
Dear Paul:
The Aspen Skiing Company fully support the City's desire
to purchase or condemn the east half of vacated Hunter Street
which would put into City ownership all of vacated Hunter
Street and would preserve the scenic view of Aspen Mountain.
The Aspen Skiing Company, as an interested member of the
public, would provide the funds necessary for the City's
acquisition of this land, and would defend the City's right
to acquire this land through the condemnation process. This
acquisition would culminate many years of planning for the
area, and would confirm the City's long standil'lg desire for a
mountain view corridor at that location.
As you know, in redesigning the Little Nell area, the
Skiing Company has maintained the Hunter Street view corridor
as a design priority. We believe our design complements the
City's desire for the area. If I can be of any help, please
feel free to contact me.
Very truly yours,
LAW OFFICES OF GIDEON I. KAUFMAN,
a Prof $sional Corporation
By
GK/bw
cc: Peter Forsch
cc: Stuart Greenberger, Esquire
cc: Bill Stirling
-.
.-
Ie .,.?;
MEMORANDUM
! JAN~9_
C ;;/t
---__.ii,/'
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
Alan Richman Planning Dept.
Bill Ness Parks Dept.
Landscape Development Plan Little Nell
January 9,1986
----------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------
After viewing the landscape conceptual site plan,I believe
it to be a big improvement and should fit into the citys
overall design.AII the plants the architect will be using
are indigenous with this elevation.My only concern is,Who
will be responsible for the maintenance of the trees along
Durant St"and the snow removal on Spring St.sidewalk in
front of the hotel?
~
~
~
~
MEMORANDUM
Date:
January 7, 1986
TO:
Alan
Richman, Planning Director
Drueding, Zoning Officer~
FROM:
Bill
SUBJECT:
Little Nell Precise SPA
As mentioned in the previous memo, what is the ownership status
of the "Hunter Street R.O.W." About two years ago, Stanford
Johnson applied to the Board of Adjustments claiming he owned
this property. He withdrew his application, however, I felt he
was looking for a lawsuit.
In Zone 2, it appears by this plan that access to the Tippler and
Tipple Inn will be affected concerning deliveries and fire
access.
The plan shows a sidewalk in Zone 1 extended into Durant Street.
This skier drop off and extended sidewalk appears to cut down the
intersection drastically.
cc: Patsy Newbury, Zoning Official
Jim Wilson, Chief Building Official
BDlar
.
Transamenca ,;-'"
Title Services
if
Transamerica
Tftlelnsurance compan:]J II ~
1800 Lawrence Street ' r L
Denver, Colorado 80202 :(' \) V
1303) 291-4936 \..
,
"
Philip G, Burney 'If \';J
Assistant Counsel, Colorado Division r ~ '})~j~__
'Jl
December 5, 1983
Mr. Stanford H; Johnson ';
Box 406
Aspen, Colorado 81612
Re: Claim No. 54,016
Pitkin No. 7,301,704
(Aspen Skiing Company)
Pitkin No. 7,302,234
(Johnson)
Aspen Zoning No. 83-12
Dear Mr. Johnson:
Our company has issued its Owner Policy under the second Pitkin number
referred to above insuring you as the owner of the following described
property:
THE WESTERLY ONE-HALF OF VACATED HUNTER STREET, lying
southerly of the South line of Durant Avenue in a south-
erly direction to the CltY'iLindtsiof" the City of Aspen"
lying East of and adjacent to Lot I, in Block 97 in and
to the City and Townsite of Aspen.
We have been advised by Aspen Skiing Company that a zoning application
had been filed asserting that your title extended along the entire
length of vacated Hunter Street which has been underlined in the above
description. However, in issuing our policy ,insuring the above de-
scription, Mr. Vince Higens has indi'cated that the description in such
policy was lind ted to that portion of the westerly one-half of vacated
Hunter Street lying East of and adjacent of Lot I which would limit
the description to the northerly 100 feet thereof (easterly line of
Lot I is 100 feet).
Our company has also issued its policy insuring Aspen Skiing Company as
the owner of all of the above described portion of the westerly one-
half of vacated Hunter Street, EXCEPT the northerly 100 feet thereof.
After receiving the notice of claim from Aspen Skiing Company, the de-
scription has again been carefully evaluated by three attorneys who are
knowledgeable with respect~eal property descriptions and has been e-
valuated by our company. land engineer who is 'also knowledgeable with
respect to real estate descriptions.
.
.
,
f"'\
I
Mr. Stanford H. Johnson
December 5, 1983
Page Two
'1
'OC-
t
We have concluded that even though there might be a slight ambiguity by
wording a description which would terminate with the underlined portion
as set forth above, that ambiguity is then resolved by the additional
wording which limits the description to that portion lying East of and
adjacent to Lot I. Consequently, we have informed Aspen Skiing Company
that there is not an ambiguity in the description and that title as in-
sured to both owners has been properly described and insured. In the
event that any attempt is made to assert any interest other than those
set forth above in this letter, we are prepared to actively resist such
attempt.
PGB/mlb
cc: Gideon I. Kaufman, Esq.
Aldo G. Notarianni, Esq.
VRegional Building Department
Vince Higens
.
Sincerely,
Philip G. Burney
Assistant Counsel
Colorado Division
'<;
-/
1""1
". )
C)
September 15, 1983
City of Aspen Board of Adjustment
Aspen City Hall
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Board Members,
I am here today as a property owner whose permanent residence
is right on the west line of the applicant property. I am also
representing, as Managing Agent, the North of Nell Condominium
Association and the 57 members of that Association.
To explain bur position and concerns regarding this application,
I wbuld like to bring to your attention certain facts related to
tbis property.
1. In the ordinance dated Oct. 6, 1947 vacating South Hunter
Street, Section 2 states" reserving to the City of Aspen at all
times the right to construct, maintain, and remove sewers, ditches,
open canals, water pipes, and appurtenances, and to authorize the
construction, maintenance, and removal of the same therein and
therefrom, and subject to the continued right of the owners to
maintain and operate existing electric light and power lines,
telephone lines, gas mains, water mains, and pipelines".
2. A deed from tbe City of Aspen to Toni and Ilse Woerndle, dated
Feb. 23, 1968, describing this piece of property, which states
"subject, however to tbe easements of the City of Aspen for the
construction, maintenance, and operation of electric light and
power lines, telephone lines, gas mains, water mains, and other
similar pipe lines and appurtenances.
3. An easement dated Oct. 6, 1960 to the City of Aspen to con-
struct, maintain, and repair a water line. Although this right
is provided for in the Oct. 6, 1947 ordinance, the pipeline goes
over other property as well, so all of the affected properties
are listed.
4. A deed from the Aspen Skiing Corporation to Daly Construct-
ion, dated July 3, 1968. This deed is for the West 8 feet of
the Westerly one-half of South Hunter Street, and the North
10 feet of the East 15 feet of the Westerly one-half of South
Hunter Street. With this transaction, the owners of the prop-
erty sold 950 square feet of a 3750 square foot lot, thereby
voluntarily creating a non-conforming lot. At the time this
lot was zoned Cl, with a minimum lot size of 3000 square feet.
The same deed also conveyed "a non-exclusive right of way for
ingress and egress over and across the Westerly one-balf of
vacated Soutb Hunter Street.
5. An easement dated July 13, 1971, from Stanford H. Johnson
to the Aspen Skiing Corporation, conveying " a perpetual ease-
ment over and across the land described in exhibit "c",
attached hereto and made a part hereof, for pedestrian ingress
and egress between Durant Street and the Little Nell Ski Area,
owned by the Aspen Skiing Corporation. The minimum width of
said easement is 14 feet."
All of these easements and encumbrances are filed in the
County courthouse and were either in effect prior to or con-
veyed by the applicant when he acquired the property. The City
of Aspen, the Skiing Corporation, and North of Nell Condominium
Association are all using these easements and intend to continue
doing so.
Sincerely,
~p~
Charles H. Hopton
/
(1)
, <f)
f-
</la(])
zr---
a<f)>-
u........J
10::>
,...,..,
>-N
..J ,...,
<l:
o
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I WATER DEPT
I EASEMENT
STREET I
I NORTH OF NELL
EASEMEllT
I SKIING CO
I EASEMENT
I I
37.5 I
I
I
I
/
DAILY CONST,
235/670
3 JULY 1968
s'
I
VACATED I
I HUNTER
I
I
I
I
I
I
I 37.5'
I
I
I
I
7 ,5'
,
,
I
CITY
OF
ASPEN
196/525
27 NOV.196,1 ,
N I
12'
0:
W
"-
~
. "-
Ooe
"'w
'< 0
)w <0
UJ II) <o5!!
<to>
wN'"
'<.J
o NO
W 0>
CXl w-<o
-oe
0:-
<.J-J
II) W'
WCl.
00:
l
r
,
,
(')
(')
MEMJRANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Jay Hammond, Engineer
Bill Drueding, Zoning Enforcement Officer
Alan Richman, Planning and Development Director
Little Nell Precise SPA
RE:
DATE:
January 6, 1986
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Attached for your review is supplemental materials received from the Ski
Company with respect to the Little Nell Precise SPA. Please review this
material and return your comments as soon as possible. I would like to
remind you that the GMP comments deadline is today, January 6th.
memo.13
1""'\
n
,...
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Alan Richman, Planning and Development Director
Jay Hammond, Public Services Director ~
DATE:
January 6, 1986
Little Nell Base Development GMP Submission
RE:
==================================================================
Having reviewed the above application for Growth Management Plan
scoring of the Little Nell Base Development, the City Engineering
Department would offer the following comments:
WATER
Subject to the commitments expressed by the applicant to:
a. Abandon the Little Nell 12 inch steel line.
b. Relocate and reinforce the Little Nell 12 inch gravity
line (per Marky's letter of November 27, 1985).
c. Relocate pumping facilities to the snowmaking plant.
d. Relocate well control and treatment facilities from the
Hunter Street pumphouse into the lodge structure
And, subject to the applicant's willingness to assist and coordinate
with the City in its installation of an additional line to the
Aspen Alps, as well as upsizing of the proposed Spring Street
line, we would view the proposal as a substantial upgrading of
the area water system.
We are currently analyzing some of the additional items above and
will be more specific in our recommendation as soon as possible.
Recommended Scoring
-L
SEWER Based on the development plan, and pursuant to the
comments in Heiko Kuhn's letter of November 20, 1985, the plan
represents an improvement to the Aspen Sanitation District's
system in the area.
Recommended Scoring
-L
STORM DRAINAGE The proposal responds to current requirements
with regard to on-site detention of storm flows. In addition, it
responds, at least conceptually, to the need for upsizing of
detention to accommodate potential mud flows and is beneficial to
the area in general in that regard. Subsequent information
f"'\
o
,
~,
Page Two
Little Nell Base Development GMP Submission
January 6, 1986
regarding the specific location of detention facilities should be
required.
Recommended Scoring
-L
FIRE PROTECTION The application provides for two new fire
hydrants and is responsive to Peter Wirth's letter of November
21. The hydrants are recommended to serve the project and
represent a standard solution to the needs of the new development.
Recommended Scoring
-L
ROAD SYSTEM TDA's analysis would appear to indicate that the
existing network is adequate. We are concerned that traffic
generation figures for the winter months may be low anticipating
the increased use of Little Nell as a skier acCess following
completion of the Gondola. Generally, however, the road system
should be adequate to provide some flexibility in the trip
generation figures. Greater concerns resolve around parking and
will be discussed later.
Recommended Scoring
-L
SITE DESIGN The site plan calls for extensive utility relocation
and proposes to place all "proposed utilities" underground. We
would request some further detail regarding any existing utilities
slated for undergrounding.
Recommended Scoring
-L
PARKING AND CIRCULATION Generally, parking provided for the
lodge and base facilities, taken in consideration of a firm
commitment to proposed van service, valet parking, employee
shuttles, etc., would appear to be adequate.
Problems include:
a. Elimination of public parking on Durant to accommodate
controlled skier drop-off and parking on the site.
b. Parking, circulation and service access problems created
for the Tipple Inn and the associated bar and restaurant.
"," ..#'
f""'1
n
Page Three
Little Nell Base Development GMP Submission
January 6, 1986
We would recommend further work in these areas to maximize public
and require private parking.
Recommended Scoring
-L
JH/co/LittleNeIIGMPSub
"..-
~~-
".,.-
/""
;l
~
./
RICHARD D, LAMM
GOVERNOR
1'1
PI -86-0013
JOHN W, ROLO
DIRECTOR
COLORADO GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
715 STATE CENTENNIAL BUILOING -1313 SHERMAN STREE
OENVER, COLORADO 80203 PHONE (303) 886-2611
D rn@rna~[g ~
1\\ JIM - 91006 ml
u I/.W
January 6, 1986
Mr. Alan Richman
Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office
130 South Galena St.
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Mr. Richman:
RE: LITTLE NELL LODGE, GMP
We have reviewed the pertinent portions of this application and the general
and engineering geology of the area. We concur with the findings and recom-
mendations found in the Chen & Associates, and Rea-Cassens & Associates re-
ports (Appendix 1 & 5 respectively).
The potential problems associated with high watertable and slope instability
are resolvable based upon detailed, site-specific design studies as recom-
mended by Chen. These studies should be accomplished prior to actual con-
struction or grading activities commence.
The recommendations found in the Storm Water Drainage Report appear adequate
for the water/mud floods anticipated. The observation for the need to update
and revise the entire city plan is well taken.
In summary, we see no adverse conditions of a geologic nature which should
affect GMP approval. The detailed studies regarding slope stability and
water table problems should be conducted prior to final approval.
Yours truly,
Geologist
bcr:JLH-86-049
GEOLOGY
STORY OF THE PAST", KEY TO THE FUTURE
,...",
t'"\
ASPEN WATER DEPARTMENT
II [g@rno'W~ ~
u I I
\ DEC24. \
MEMORANDUM
';\g,J11~
<:i'~;j)1.';'i:
",~,
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
ALAN RICHMAN, PLANNING OFFICE
JIM MARKALUNAS
LITTLE NELL LODGE GMP/PRECISE
DECEMBER 23, 198~
- ----.J /J;.-.
PLAN
fz1 A~r(A'-UNA 5-
This is to advise you that we have reviewed the Little Nell Lodge
GMP/Precise Plan, and at this time, we do not have any additional
comments. We do wish to reference our letter of Nov. 27, 1985,
and note that we have been in close contact with the developer
and engineers regarding tbis project. It has been suggested that
the 6" fire main in Spring St. be increased to a 12" for future
connection to Ute Ave. We have no further comments to make at
this time, except that the Water Department wishes to be advised
of any changes in the overall plan and the scheduling of construction
work, so we can properly schedule the necessary changes to our
operations and construction activities.
JM:ab
r....
~
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: Little Nell LodgcG/-lp/Precise Plan/~onditional Use
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing ,,,ill be held on
January 21, 1986 at a meetin'g to begin before the Aspen Planning
and Zoning Commission at 5:00 P.M. in city Council Chambers, 130
s. Galena, Aspen, ColoradO, to consider an application submitted by
Peter For sch on beha1t of the Aspen Skiing Company. The publ ic
hea rin 9 Idll consider the appli ca nt's req ue st f or a Lodge GllP quota
allotment for a 96 unit hotel. Other aspects of the project to be
considered include ne~l retail, space, skier support services, and anell
lift or qondola, all to be located at the Little Nell Property
located at the base of Aspen ~:ollntain. Precise Plan ,reyiew (since the
property is located in the CC zone district Ilith an SPA overlay), and
a conditional use permit Id11 al so be the subject of the pub:Lic
hearing. 8040 Greenline Reviel" and Hotmtain Vie~iplane Reviev' will
also occur during the public review process.
For further information, contact the Aspen/Pitkin Planning
Ofiice, 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-2020,
Ext. 225.
sLc. We.l..t9JLAItd,~SQ,Q
Chairperson, Aspen Planning and Zoning
Commission
==============~====================================~==========~======
Published in the Aspen Times on December, 19, 1985.
City of Aspen Account.
. ,
.. '.,....",,.,y"'..;...""'...M-.-.,,'''''O..'''',_..___.._._
---,- -~~~-~
t"1
!\
'::'17"
ASPEN SKIING COMPANY
0060 ATLANTIC AVENUE. AIRPORT BUSINESS CENTER. BOX 1248 . ASPEN, COLORADO 81612 . PHONE 303/925-1220
December 18, 1985
Mr. Alan Richmond
130 South Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Alan,
I have had some concern expressed to me by a couple of Tippler Inn
condominium owners regarding parking and access off of Dean Street.
Their concern stems from the illustrative site plan which shows
landscaping in front(north) of their building.
It is not our intention to landscape that area or to eliminate the
parking. In fact, I think it appears as such due to a some what
overenthusiastic artist and was not caught by us until after we
submitted our applications.
While, I hope we can preserve a pedestrian use of Dean Street, I
am not suggesting any public or Aspen Skiing Company use of private
property.
(js truly, /) ~ 0
\ ~~~ ~<"-'^'--
Peter Forsch
Project Manager
PF/dm
cc Gary Plumely
J.D. Mueller
Bill Kane
Gideon Kaufman
ASPEN MOUNTAIN
.
BUTTERMILK MOUNTAIN
.
SNOWMASS
.
BRECKENRIDGE
ASPEN.PITKIN'
ENVIRONMENTAL" HEALTH PEPARTMENT
I
~
I
f\'J
~~
l~
i
;,;::;
~@
III
i
(lI
i
i
ill
i!I
DATE: December 14, 1985' I
RE: Little Nell Lodge GMF/Precise Plan ~
===.================,==,=~=='='=='=-=-=~=:.~_'~::::?:=-=='='===:='=-==.:::-=~==':='='='ft="::::":;:'="=9='~~~=='-;':'-~"0,",-W""~
~
~,
0:::
"'-"'"._-
',~~" ~~".-,
'-'-;';'-"-'~;'''':'''-'-''''-'''='''''-'
MEMORANDUM
CAAB REVIEW
TO:
~1ilnRichniari;' PlannfrigofIice
PRbM:
Thomas s. l>unlop; I5irElctor 7S:D
Environmental Health Department
AIR POLLUTION
Solid' F'uEillrtirninq"Devfces':
.,,,1
:;;;j
"'
ill
@'J
li
f@
'"
"~
The above-referenced stibmn::fal has been reviewed by 'f:hls 6l'fice
for the following envi'rorllnerital' concerns.'
The appllcant has'comniittEidto Hirist'al1'~onIy'lo'gas-1:og""fype'-"
fireplaces in hotel itiices' arid, onewood'.:::b'urriirig fireplace in
the main -hotel loooy:,,,wTnIs'approach Ts"1n'conforinance with
policies or"this '(lepartment. "
~;
....",,-.-
~
'"
~
;.;m
!III
~
The applicant should""-be' 'co-mnfEl"'n-aed'Tn-thrs"n'<;>v~r--ClEnrrgn----'~
feature ,to aodresstne"Hrepfiice:-rssue.As"'"l:llEt"resilI't" of ~
many air poHrition studi~"s.whic:h-fiave oeeriperfor!lledint~E' , ~
Aspen Metro area, it is well documented that every development, '1
large or small, has the potenfial to negatively impact air ~
quality. The Aspen Skirng'Company's'progressive approach to "i
this very sensitive issue "shoulCl "De consfde"re'd as 'a model "
for other fut:ure dev'el-opitienH'fo^f'oilow~ ",' ,..' ~ ~
ill
,'",,"j
~".
The applicant has met and/or exceededtnidrrequi red c'omp:Crance
wi th curn~nt wOO(1ouirilii<:f aevice"reglsIa tTon.
~
iIC;,!i
Construction Air Pollution
""~"
~
~
Prior to any demolition of existing buildings, thE'! applicant
shall certify through a qualifiedsou"i'ce'''that thel"e is no
asbestos present in those buHdings. ' "Infipe"cfion,samp'i J n,j'''''' ..
and analysis of any suspec'ted' asbesros'rna te I' i al swill be ~
required.
Iii
'"'~
'~
If asbestos is present in the bui1dirigs;tne iipplicantshall
retain qualified asbest'os'r'emoval personnel t<j' r"emove the
material. ' -
!8
"",.1
!Iil
, i
iii
~
It shall De hanaled" as iinaz"al:douswaste and'alspo'secfO'tfil"'"
a designated land'f iH' iirter"'tll'e' iemoviil"j5!an'has been
I
,,,-,-"~
130 South Galen.." Street
.6:speri; Colarai:li:i B"I61'''
'" '3'd'37925'~'202f.f'
I
~
....,~
...
""~
~
"",-.
,....,
,......"
, I
I
i
I
-~1
"
Page TWo
Little Nell L'odge GMJ?/Precise Plan '
December 14;1985
approved by this dePartment ~and the Colot'ado'HeaiHt'O'epartm:::"
ent. Colorado ':Aft' polriit:ron-~'Conttol'-lm~~'ife-guraHoriS'
Section U:3.4 aicta:t:esfheneecrIoi''''€'liIs'acEIon:
Further, during demolition and'.constiuctIon 'fhe~a:pp:iicarit
will be requirea to "rernove'anymu('f a:ndx'aI'rtCarry:"'o'utonto
City streets by veniclet'ra1fic from the site. '
This soil shall -15e'iemov€a-~oy"means~'oT'amechanrc"arstreer"'.""'"
sW'e ee r which w i llus eaw' ate rIb I' U s 11 'ni e'En"ocr: '~"'l'1ie"" so Tl-'-'''''-''
cont~ined within the roaching sna:l.'1""b'ere::'crepoS'1'teo''''on"''th'ir'' .,.. '
applicants property. Daily cleaning of the impacted streets
will be 'the applicants responsibility.
.
DEMOLITION"""" '
During actual razing of' bunarn9s,.mfIie'a'ppncanEqwrrrl5e~-requrre"a'&".--_oA-
to prevent windblown Cfugftrv;e) dust from leaving' the property.
This control may take tIle form oCspraying the immediate demolition
site with water. Other examples'of acceptable cOn't'iO!"lecnn"fcfues
i ncl udedusr"suppr'EissTo'ji'"chemicals" fencing the si te,shrouding
the work area, etc.
Contact by the project sponsor shalf be'lnaae.'wnn.ffie.qeorofaao-...._-~._.
Heal th Department to' defermine rf"a'ii'''ern[s''sIo''n''pe-rrn1 Caqnd7(;r~a",,,,,,,,,q,.
fug'i tive dust controlpla"nfs "iequTre(r-fo-r~'ooth the demolition
and constructiori phase of the project. That determinafioriHls
relative to toe estimate'd'emissions which will De""gene"rated ,,~
(tons per year). Contact Mf:'Scol'f'MHler; ~C'ol'ora'do'l!ean1i'"
Department, 222 S-: 6th St'reet'; G'rand^'J'unffibi1,""c6'.rora<To"81!5n:r, or "-
phone hiin at'24S=1T50'''to'1'nquire a6o'ut~egii:iationt;sEtC"tron"Y:tl:;'" '
D,2,htftlecr"DemoU:€fon"Activit'ies" of the "Colorado'lI.fi' Quaiit
~~~~~oi9:i?UraH ons ' a'nd"~brent' A"f rHQoualTty'-'s'tanaaras;--t{evrse~ I
ONDERGl<<>UNJj PARKING
It will be a requi rement of this officetha't aaequate'afr11'a"na'i'rng'"'''' '"
facilities be 'designed into the compIex to eliIninate any buildup
of air contaminants inside thelmder(iro'und"paik{n(i'sEitictures~' ,
NOISE' ..JU:i'XTE'tun:t1r..'....'..~ ,." ........ ,.... ','"'....M...., ..,.. - ...,....".... '..'M".."......,.... ""'''"'' "'"
. ^",_,.."..";,._.".,,, .w~,~ ~ ,~,,'"' :~" ..,~"~,,_M ;-"~~~"~"v' '''"''__," ,,,,~","._'.~~__".,,,". "
The applicant will be required fo" COmply' with c"ifyo:f Xspen"" ," ,
Ordinance 2' sedes1'glrr't1 tIed Noise Abatement. An demoli tion
and construction noise relafe(ractrvltre-s-"snari~becove~'r""""-"""
the maximum decibel levels' as"Clffecrea"oy....tflEi".orarnanc:e':..-""..M'~"..,." '"
A project of this magnitude can be expected to generate persistent
I
I
~
aIM
j
iii
&i
~ft~ I
Little Nell LQ<!ge GMPfp,eoi,e Plan, I
:::be:e:::,19t:~t__"_ay be ann6ying to the neighbo'hood. The .
:~~~~~ac~ ~~s;i~~m~i~~gEf~ef~Io~1}~i~~o%~f:~~O~St~f ~~~h~m~~:'" '~~":_~_"1'4
Time of "day, dura Hon of specific activi tie,;:;,9,rldJ.J.l';J,ng the most '
technic~llyquiet equipil1ent ,are a ,f~wmit;igating measures that , "I
may be lnvolved. If""qgmplalntsa,re 'reC;:E!lV~"d" the ref~"renced ".
ordinance will !?E!""th~, governing document used in ,E:!..nf<;>r::.qE!}E,g}},b~".... ~^,.." "....,'1
The submittal a~t~g~ plans for a night club to Q,\Lirlcl"tl}:1~,d, JIJ ," ",
the projecC' C(fnst:r,llct:JQl!t~S:l)}:!iques shall be ernployeed which "
will not a1l91fi "gstll)Xd," generated frQIll thi"sf<!2Jli.ty to exceeq the
noise abatem'e'nt ordinance maximum allowable decibel levels. Such
, ",:" " " ,__",:,,_,__,_,.:'''___m,,''__'_'_'_''~_'';'_^'''__'''"''''''""'--'-'''?'::_'''':''''''~'i'j'~drk~''''m''"'<w(~~''''\ii~'_'~~,"~WAi;{'':;';'Mi".f;.~~Z*#~~,",~
sound levels w()tl14 b.~ID~.e.:;n,1f..~(Lat.~L.~ proper y l1ne.
"""""-...:,-,'
,......,
R
~~' ~ur:;t~t aO: N::Qf;2~~():~d t~:s!~~lt~:rl~i~fulcLa6'st()o"PrCo~~~:.~''':~,,''~
with their c~omf'ort,
CONTAMIN'ATED SOILS
No evidence of mi,nedumps or mine ti:!ilings being present on the
proj e c t site are i nqi S..a t..~s1i!L!;:I}~..,QlW ii"Ild,.~lll!gc..i.9.t~~r e po r t.
However, during d'emolition, excayg.J::JQ!l a!l~'L9.PQstrlic!;ion.)"f such
soil t s are discovered the folr6wIn ' snaIl ''a='"f'''':''''' _,'""'_'-'~W_"""<'"
ype """-,..",,,,, g pp y
~~~"~~~~ c~~~c :ix;.~s:~1~~"~~~~?u~!~na~1lo*f\~r~L~HcfI..:~c~~:();~~lf~~~~
in mine' dumps' or mine tqil ings ~
The sample analysis shall be provided Eo this, of..f..i,~,E:!JSg,l)l, a"" '" ,,,
qualified laboratory for evaluaUQn,..H~;L~y~,t;ELq,J,j!~l~~~Lh~!:vy
metals are id~ntifieq, mitigating measure,s will ,be L~quired.
Professionally competent' peopl e in the fi~l,.:!. Q{ geology will ,be
required todev~lop the mitigation plan. ",',',
SEWAGE DISPOSAL
Service to th~s
provided by the
conformance w~l;:h
project of a public sewage collecti'on system as
Aspen Corrso I i da test" ;?gl}i.t..8tL<(,!l,.PJ:,9,t;fj.S,t~,,,L~_
policies of this office.
in
",o."'~'W'^"
Thi s . w ildlb' in ClhU de '. i p,s S all a~t9.!}".,,{lJ!.9_,.m{'!,~.!1.liUJl'!1.9_~....,~t., grease, "t~ a ps as
requlre y t e D1Strlct. '.. ,"" "',, "," '
WATER" SUPPLY
Service to this project' by the disl;:rioution lines as provided by
the City of Aspen Wate,r pepartment is,,iD.. GonfQ'!:I]lClI](::~,\>{g.l1. policies
'",..,
^
,--,
Page Four
Little Nell L'odge CMP/Precise P!"an
De<:ember 14, 198~
of this o,fffce.
FOOD SERVICE
I
I
I
I
All food service establishmen\:s shall comply with Colorado Rules
and Regulations governing such facilities. Tnisw.iil' inc1l,l<1enol:, "
only restaurants, bars and lounge!;;", but also mountain re~taur,GlJ1t;;.,.
food s\:orageat'eas. '.'l'roper'licensing of these facilities through
this department will 'be' required pdortoseiviceqof 'food to tbe
public. .
Compliance with Section 11-2.4 of the Aspen Municipal Code tnl"ed
"Restaurant (;riIJ,s~ ,wiil,i3,lso' ~e (equired. ''rhis section addresses
the, type of 'cooking' dev ices which can be installed and operated
in new or remodeled food 'service 'es\:a5lishments.
."-' -'--,o",.-"^" , "'-' , ,"-', "..,,,. """""""""- "~'''',-''''~'~','_'.'',''''Y'''''''"T-'l"'''''''-~-'-''--''-
SWIMMING POOLS/SPAS'
Swimming pools and spas must comply with the Rules an'dRegulations
governing such fa:Cilities as required by, Colo.rado standards."
Thrql,lghout this review reference nas been inGl,de, 1:9 vaJ:iolls ru.1es,'
regulations, ordinances and laws.Co'pies of ail of them may be
found in this office. It' is recommended that architects "i'ihder "
contract: tOl:l1iS project become f"affi1:t"fii"i w]''th''the''in (f"tirIng "the
design phases. 'q ,
TSD/co/LittleNe11
I
,I
r
A.
~"""
,
);<-
,
~
MEK>RANDUM
TO: City Attorney
~ City Engineer
,*/Housing Director
'J Aspen vJater Dept.
Environmental Health Dept.
v'Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
Parks Department
'" Fire Chief
Chief Building Official
.. Zoning Enforcement Officer
Alan Richman, Planning Office
FROH:
RE:
Little Nell Lodge GMPjprecise Plan
December 11, 1985
DATE:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Attached for your review is an application submitted by Peter Forsch
of the Aspen Skiing Company. This application consists of a request
for a 96 unit Lodge GNP quota allotment, Precise Plan review (since
the property is located in the CC zone district with an SPA overlay),
Conditional Use, 8040 Greenline Review and r'IDuntain Viewplane Review.
vIe are referring this application at this point in time although there
are additional materials expected from the applicant (e. g., addi-
tional drawings to be submitted around 1st of year), which we will
provide to appropriate referral agencies at the time they are submit-
ted. 'Also, please note that .,e are referring full scale plan sets to
a select group of the referral agencies. If other agencies are
interested in seeing full scale plan sets, they are available here
in the Planning Office.
We would appreciate if you would please limit your comments to your
own particular area of expertise. If you have any questions as to why
this application was referred to you and .,hat comments we may be
looking for from you, please contact me. This application is unusu-
ally complex and has a great deal of political importance. We,
therefore, need your comments on time, and in any case, no later than
January 6, 1986. We cannot accept delays in this case.
Thank you for your cooperation in advance.
!""\
rl
"1E~IORANDUM
v
FROH:
City Attorney
City Engineer
Housing Director
Aspen \'later Dept.
Environmental Health Dept.
"1\.s""""e'lf'"COn"SOrraa teCf"'"S'a"riiEat i 0 j'fPTII's t riEl:
~., _. p. ....... _." '0-'-'-:""':"_"" ....._~.."".__;.':<:,.,<<,_""_*'..w:.~.',_.,_.,--.~,_,~_,,;:~_""""'''''-_:''>__'"'''''''''':<e'.
1?arks Department'"'"""""..,..,..,""""'"" .,'....
Fire Chief
Chief Building Official
Zoning Enforcement Officer
Alan Richman, Planning Office
Little Nell Lodge Gr~p/precise Plan
TO:
RE:
DATE:
December II, 1985
----------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------.---------------
Attached for your reviel'l is an application subndtted by Peter Forsch
of the Aspen Skiing Company. This application consists of a request
for a 96 unit Lodge Gnp quota allotment, Precise, Plan review (since
the property is located in the CC zone district with an SPA overlay),
Conditional Use, 8040 Greenline Review and r'lountain Viel~plane Review.
He are referring this application at this point in time although there
are additional materials expected from the applicant (e. g., addi-
tional drawings to be submitted around lst of year), ~Ihich ~Ie will
provide to appropriate referral agencies at the time they are submit-
ted. Also, please note that we are referring full scale plan sets to
a select group of the ref erral agencies. If other agencies are
interested in seeing full scale plan sets, they are available here
in the Planning Office.
He would appreciate if you would please limit your comments to your
o~m particular area of expertise. If you have any questions as to why
this application was referred to you and what comments we may be
looking for from you, please contact me. This application is unusu-
ally complex and has a great deal of political importance. \'Ie,
therefore, need your cormnents on time, and in any case, no later than
January 6,1986. vie cannot accept delays in this case.
Thank you for your cooperation in advance.
T've A5/le~ CO_~Oi.-'h^''''tef') SA~~r"'J-/"'''''' 1~/~i'k.ICI CA.- se&""'tC~
or- J,... (""'/5: S
II"'-"~O(..'-t~ SOJ-7e /?-e. ;e.o--?,-e..
T" rl e.. c...,.. 7'"' C 4 A \,.0 e. ..,.. /'Z..... _Ie- ~ I '- ~ ."
,
-rlil"" PIl-63e:c.Y" NO......S-':"..... I r- # 'I--C-
. . J'-'- S; 1'1' \.) v R. "L-
f'.$ ,'tN'S t>'-"I'-""~<- ~
~
~~F
j\ C <; /:,. H~
~.'.,~"'c~,~:O::'!~'P\~~~,-,;o;:e'.'C.,".!)~1'}.:r~~~~~O.~7...n~n.',~-..::_r:?'.t."',;r~I'1'''''.,,'1':':/~_r:~n>;l:"..'';i~;-.'':4'''''.:i".''''''TI;:t~';'''~~~'.)'':'Y. 1'" i.'.(.~'.~:'":flt"~M#',:""O;'":'''~,. ^ '",,'-"',' -;-;.:~...-,r,':'"..'."/.. "'-', ,.-.,"'I1;..~:1:.'~""l'!'::'::~"'..l=<;,~"~"~,..._~'
,-.,.
~
I
I
I
I
,
December 10, 1985
Hr. Peter For sch
Aspen Skiing Company
Box 1248
Aspen, CO 81612
Dear Pet er :
I have completed my preliminary review of the completeness of the
Little Nell GMPjSPA Precise Plan submission. I have, determined that
it is appropriate to send the application to referral agencies for
their review. However, I also need additional materials to allow for
proper Planning Office revievl of the proposal. I therefore request
that the following be submitted to my office no later than January 3,
1986 :
1. A preliminary landscape plan, pursuant to the requirements
of Section 24-8.16 of the Code and as discussed by us over
the phone. Please specify existing and proposed tree
species and sizes, and proposed materials (Le. types
of paving, street furniture etc.). Your plan should
establish the level of commitment you are making, which will
eventually be used by the Lodge Improvement District planners
to finalize your planting and materials program.
2. A perspective of Dean Street as it is to be improved,
indicating grade changes 100 king toward the 1 ift, vlhat the
pedestrian will see looking toward the administration
building and the hotel, and how the Tippler patio fits into
the circulation in the area.
3. Elevations of the hotel on its south face, indicating the
skiers perspective of the building from the base area.
4. A per spect iv e of how the regradi ng of the hill will look as
one emerged from Hunter Plaza up onto the base area from the
nevI st eps.
5. A better definition of the building housing the lift machin-
ery. As I indicated to Bill Kane this morning, this drawing
should be prepared only after a decision has been reached
regarding the quad lift versus the gondola, but should be
available prior to Council review of the application.
r'\
t""'\
,
,6. Written documentation that the Holiday House Lodge has been
and currently is functioning as a short term facility, is
regularly rented to tourists and is not used by employees
(with the exception of the already deed-restricted rooms).
7. Floor by floor calculations of floor area for all proposed
uses within the project. Please specify areas you believe
are exempt versus those which are to be included, and break
the hotel count itself into rooms, non unit space and
accessory space.
8. Stamped, addressed envelopes for each owner within 300 feet
of the site, and a typed list of all addresses, to be kept
in the file. Should you have any questions about this
requirement, please obtain a cop! of Ordinance 52 of 1985
from the City Clerk's Office.
Please let me know if we need to meet to di scuss any of the above
req uirement s.
Sincerely,
Alan Richman
Planning and Development Director
AR/nec
cc: Bill Kane
Gideon Kaufman
Jay Hammond
Pa ul Taddune
~
\ )
r)
;...-.
~
i
1
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
Fcm.,.\O e.r,1I0ECICELa.B.&t.CO.
ORDINANCE NO. 20
(Series l)f 1985)
AN ORDINANCE REPEALING AND REENAC'l'HlG ARTICLE VII, CHAl?TER 24 OF
THE MUNICIPAL CODE PER',rAIliIING TO SPECIALLY PLANNED AREAS: AM-EMlING
SECTION 24-2.1 BY IDENTIFYI~lG PUD AND SPA AS ZONE DISTRICT U/ER-
LAYS; AMENDING SECTION .24-3.4 TO PROIlIDE THAT THE AREA AND
BULK REQUIREMENTS OF THE PARK ZONE DISTRICT SHALL BE SET BY THE"
ADOPTION OF AN SPA PLAN; ADDING A NEW ,SECTION 24-11.3(j)
TO PROVIDE FOR THE SIMULTANEOUS SUB1USSION AND PROCESSING OF GMP,
SPA, PUD AND SUBDIVISION APPLIC.I"TIONS~ AND REPEALING AND
REENACTING SECTION 24-11.1 (b) TO CLARIFY THAT APPLICAN'l'S IN
ALL ZONE DISTRICTS MAY APPLY FOR LODGE DEVELOPMENT ALLOTMENTS
WHEREAS, during 1983, the Aspen City Council (hereinafter "Council")
did direct the Planning Office to evaluate Article VII of the Municipal t
Code, Specially Planned Area (SPA); and
~mEREAS, following an extensive review of the regulations as well
as the status of properties currently identified on the zoning district
map as "SPA", the Council did refer the matter to the Aspen Planning
and Zoning Commission (hereinafter "Commission"); and
WHEREAS, the Commission did hold a public hearing on July 17,
1984, which hearing was continued to August 7, August 21 and September
4, 1984, to consider Code amendments to Section 24-7 and to identify
on a preliminary basis the intent behind having an SPA designation
remain on various key sites in Aspen; and
.' ~
WHEREAS, the Commission did adopt Resolution 84-9, recommending
that the Council adopt various amendments with respect to the Specially
,
!
Planned Area provisions of the Municipal ,Code; and
WHEREAS, the Council, having considered the Commission's resolution,
did adopt Ordinance 29, Series of 1984, empowering the Planning
Director to authorize minor changes to sites which have adopted
precise plans; and
WHEREAS, the City Attorney, in a memorandum to the Planning
Director dated January 24" 1985, did recommend that the Ordinance be
returned to the Commission for its review; and
."'~,
1""'\
\; ,:/
.",
,
,
i
.1 rOF/II ~ c. r. HOECKF.t. $, e, ll: ~, co.
j
\
I
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
WHEREAS, the Commission did hold a duly noticed public hearing,on
the proposed Ordinance at its regular meeting on February 19, 1985; and
WHEREAS, the Commission did adopt Resolution No. 85-2, a resolution
recommending various additions and deletions to the' Ordinance regarding
Specially Planned Areas; and
WHEREAS, having considered the recommendations of the Commission,
the Council desires to repeal and reenact Article VII, Chapter 24 of
the Municipal Code as set forth hereinbelow.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COONCIL OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADO:
Section 1
That Article VII, Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code of the City of
Aspen, be and the same is hereby repealed and reenacted to read as
follows:
i
,
.:!
· ARTICLE VII. SPECIllLL Y PLANNED AREAS
Sec. 24-7.1 Statement of Intent; Development
(a) Specially Planned Area (SPA) refers to those parcels designated
on the zoning district map by the overlay "SPA" upon which
uses may be permitted and development shall proceed only
upon compliance with the requirements of this article.
(b) The purpose of a Specially Planned Area (SPA) designation is
to:
;
'1
i
(I) Provide design flexibility for parcels which require
innovative consideration in those circumstances where
traditional zoning techniques do not adequately address
their historic significance, there is a potential for
community benefit from the parcel's development and
the parcel has unique attributes.
(2)
Allow the integration of mixed use projects on a single
parcel of land through the encouragement of innovative
design practices and by permitting variations from
standard use limitations.
(3)
Establish a precise plan which provides a detailed land
use plan for the entire'parcel in question.
Establish a mechanism by which parcelS upon which there
has historically been a variety of uses or parcels
which are considered appropriate for mUltiple uses can
be planned and developed in a manner which provides the
greatest public benefit. .
(4)
2
I
i
'1_, ..._m.. '"
t""1
rJ
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
I
I
,
i
;
,
1
I
1
1
1
i
I
1
I
I
!
I
1
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
1
"
i
,
,
j
i
,
i
I
,
!
'.j
,
'j
I
I
j
I
I
,
~J
;.
,i
"
i
"1
(c) For the purposes of this Article, 'development' shall be
defined as any activity which materially changes the use of
the land in question, including but not limited to the
construction or substantial modification of residential or
lodge units, commercial square footage, or other accessory
buildings and structures located on the property, the
construction or substantial modification of roads, any
significant site grading or other earthwork or the installation
or substantial modification of utilities.
Sec. 24-7.2 Procedure for Designation of Sites as SPA
(a) Parcels of land shall be designated with a Specially Planned
Area (SPA) ove-rlay or the boundaries of parcels already
designated with an SPA shall be adjusted 'only following the
procedures and requirements for amendments to the zoning map
described in Article XII of this chapter, and by submitting
a conceptual plan for development of the parcel, as described
below.
(b) Parcels which are designated with an SPA overlay shall also
be designated on the zoning map with an appropriate underlying
zone(s), based on the currently available information as to
the intended use of the parcel. The underlying zone designa-
tion shall be used by the Planning Commission and City
Council in their review of any precise plan submission for
the parcel as a guide, but'not as an absolute limitation, to
the uses and development permitted on the parcel.
(c) In designating parcels with an SPA overlay, the Planning
Commission and City Council shall make findings as to' the
unique characteristics of the parcel \qhich justify its
designation with an SPA overlay, including ho\q the parcel
complies with the intents and purposes of this Article.
(d) The removal of an SPA designation from a parcel shall occur
in accordance with the same procedures used in designating
the parcel with the SPA overlay, but shall leave an underlying
zone(s) on the property.
24-7.3 Conceptual Plan
(a) An applicant for any site designated, or proposed to be
designated \iith an SPA Overlay shall submit a conceptual
plan, for the purpose of establishing the obj ectives which
the SPA designation is to achieve. The conceptual submission
shall include a statement of the intent and a conceptual
description of the type of development which is proposed to
take place on the parcel, inCluding but not limited to use
categories, overall project density, and design concepts to
be employed. The applicant shall consult with the Planning
Director as to the submission requirements prior to the
submission of the conceptual plan; however as a general
guide, it is not intended that the submission go into the
technical detail required of conceptual subdivision or
conceptual PUD.
(b) If a parcel is owned by more than one individual, consent to
the application from all owners shall be required before the
,application may be processed.
3
'\
.""""",,,,;;..;:~"~co.
~
r")
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1 00 Leaves
(c) The conceptual plan shall be reviewed by the Planning
Commission. Following the conclusion of ,its review, the
P:Lanning Commission shall recommend the. approval or denial
of the conceptual plan to the City Council, including any
applicable conditions thereto. The City Council shall
review the conceptual plan following the receipt of the
recommendation frqm the Planning Commission and shall grant
conceptual approval (including such revisions or conditions
as may be appropriate) or deny the plan. The City Council's
conceptual plan review shall occur at a public hearing which
shall be noticed according to the procedures in Section
24-7.5 below.
Sec. 24-7.4 Variations Permitted Within SPA OVerlay
"
(al Applicants shall only be permitted to obtain variations from
the zoning requirements of the underlying district or
otherwise develop a parcel designated as SPA, by first ,
obtaining approval of a precise plan for the entire parcel
in question by following the procedures in this Article.
(bl Variations from the following requirements of the underlying
zone district may be allowed based on the standards of
Section 24-7.6: open space, minimum distance between
buildings, maximum height, minimum front yard, minimum rear
yard, minimum side yard, minimum lot width, minimum lot
area, trash access area, external and internal floor area
ratios, number of off-street parking spaces, use and minimum
lot area per dwelling unit.
(c) Except to the extent variations may be permitted pursuant to
this Article, the application shall demonstrate compl iance
with applicable zoning requirements of this chapter and
subdivision requirements of Chapter 20, if a subdivision is
proposed.
(d) Applications for development in the public, park, academic
or any other zone district listed in Section 24-3.4 of the
Municipal Code for which the area and bulk requirements are
to be set by adoption of a plan for a Specially Planned Area
shall follow the procedures set forth in this Article.
However, no variations shall be permitted from the U.3e
requirements of the underlying zone district unless the site
shall also be designated wi than SPA overlay.
Sec. 24-7.5 Procedure for Review of Precise Development Plan
(a) Applicants shall meet with the Planning Director in a pre-
application conference at which the Planning Director shall
identify the r.eview procedures, submission requirements and
evaluation criteria for the processing of the Precise Plan.
(b) Following the submission of the application and its certifica-
tion as complete by the 'Planning Director, the Planning
Commission shall hold a public hearing on the precise plan.
Notice of the hearing shall be published once in a newspaper
of general circulation in the City at least fifteen (IS)
days prior to the hearing date. Written notice shall be
4
("j
r)
1
j
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
'OR~ II c. r. HOtCK[L o. o. &, L. co.
'I
I
I
1
I
1
sent by first-class mail to all property owners within the
area of the proposed development plan and within 300 feet of
the property at least fifteen (IS) days prior to the hearing
date. Owners of residential mUlti-famIly condominium units
may be served by mailing sufficient copies of any such
required notice (one for each owner) to the record address of
their homeowners', association. The applicant shall post a
sign meeting the specifications of Section 2-22(c) (3) on the
property noticing the public hearing at least ten (10) days
prior to the hearing date.
(c) Following the conclusion of the hearing, the Planning
Commission shall recommend the approval or denial of the
precise plan to the City Council, including any applicable
conditions thereto.
I
I
I
I
1
j
(d) The City Council shall grant final approval (including such
revisions or conditions as may be appropriate) or deny the
plan after a public meeting; provided, however, that if the
applicant is requesting any variations in the use of the
property from that permitted in the underlying zone, then
the meeting shall be noticed in a newspaper of general
circulation in the City at least fifteen (IS) days prior to
the hearing date.
~
i
J
I
.f
I
(e) In the case of an application in which a subdivision approval
is requested, the review and adoption of the precise plan
shall occur at the preliminary and final subdivision stages.
(f) Following the approval of a precise plan, the plan (including
all conditions of approval and representations of the
applicant) shall constitute" the development regulations for
the parcel until such time as the plan is amended or the SPA
designation is removed from the parcel. The precise plan
shall be recorded in the Office of the Pitkin County Clerk
and Record and shall be binding upon the applicant and the
applicant's successor or assigns, and shall limit and
control the issuance and validity of all building permits
and certificates of occupancy for improvements thereon.
)
Sec. 24-7.6 Submission Requirements for Review of Precise PI~n
(a) The app~ication shall reflect the proposed development for
the entire ownership and shall indicate all adj acent lands
owned or under option by the applicant.
(b) The application shall include ten (10) copies of all maps,
tabular data and narrative materials described under Section
24-8.9 of the Code as chey may apply to the type of development
being proposed. The applicant shall consul t wi th the
Planning Director as to the applicability of each of these
requirements to the project proposal.
(c) The application shall specify the zone district regulations
which are to apply to the parcel by designating the appropriate
underlying zone(s) for the development and specifying any
variation requested from the standards of that district(s).
5
n
,,-.,
;}
;
,
,
I
i
1
I
I
I
1
1
I
j
j
j
,
I
,
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
'OIIlI!O e.'.ttOECKtLB.B.&L.CO;
(d) The application shall provide a schedule specifying the time
fkame .of the development which is to occur on the parcel.
(e) Development en parcels which contain lands having slopes in
excess of 2,0% shall comply with the slope reductien require-
ments of Section 24-8.18 of this Code and underlying density
shall be calculated according to the previsiens of that
section.
,
j
I
1
j
1
I
I
1
1
J
,
j
!
-;1
1
!
(f) The precise plan shall be submitted no later than tw.o (2)
years subsequent to the date of the City Ceuncil approval of
the conceptual plan, The conceptual plan approval for the
site shall automatically expire at such time unless application
for an extension is made and granted by the City Council.
Sec. 24-7.7 Standards fer Review of Precise Plan
(a) In their review of the precise plan, the Planning Commission
and City Ceuncil shall censider the following standards:
(I) Whether the proposal is compatible with neighboring
develepments in terms of use, density, height, bulk,
open space, landscaping and other site and architectural
design features.
(2) Whether sufficient utilities and roads exist to service
the intended development
(3) Whether the parcel is suitable for the intended develop-
ment, censidering the slope, ground instability and the
possibility of mud flow, rock falls, avalanche dangers
and fleod hazards.
(4) Whether the applicant has creatively employed land
planning techniques such as setbacks, Clustering,
screening, bUffering and architectural design to
preserve significant view planes, avoid adverse enviren-
mental impacts and provide open space, trails and
similar amenities for the users .of the project and the
public at large.
(5) Whether the proposal is in compliance with the Aspen Area
General Plan.
(6) Whether the development will require the expenditure of
excessive public funds to provide services and facili ties
for the site .or surrounding neighborhood.
(b) The burden shall rest upon an applicant to demonstrate the
reasenableness and suitability of the precise plan, its
conformity to the requirements of this article, that the
adverse effects of the proposed development have been
minimiz ed to the extent practic:able, and that it complies
with the City Council's intent in originally designating the
si te wi th an SPA overlay, including the reasoni'lble conformance
of the precise plan wi th the approval granted to the conceptui'll
plan.
(c) The City Ceuncil shall only grant final approval to those
portions of the precise plan for which growth management
allotments, if otherwise requi"red, have been obtained.
6
1"""'1
.r""l
.J
1
i
"
l
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
,
.j
rORll11 e,',1l0[CI(ELB.B.ilIL.eo.
i
,
I
i
)
Sec. 24-7.8 SPA Agreement
Upon final approval, the applicant and the City Council shall
enter into an agreement (which agreement may be the same as a
subdivision agreement) binding the real property to the conditions
upon which the precise plan was approved by the City Council and
defining such variations from the underlying zone district and
regulations and limitations thereto as are set forth in' the
precise plan.
Sec. 24-7.9 Amendment of Adopted Precise Plan
i
i
1
I
1
i
j
!
I
,
,I
i
I
I
1
1
I
i
I
I
i
1
1
,I
i
,
r
Substantial amendments'to the precise plan shall constitute a new
application subject to the review procedures outlined in this
article and shall only be approved if consistent with the intents
and purposes of this article, including the criteria for the
review of the precise plan. Minor changes in the adopted precise
plan may be authorized by the Planning Director without additional
public review, if required by engineering standards or other
technical design needs not anticipated during the review of the
project. The Planning Director shall follow the standards of
Section 24-8.26 in determining whether or not a change is deemed,
minor. In the absence of an adopted precise plan, an accurate
improvements survey of existing conditions may be substituted to
permit the evaluation of whether the proposed activity is a minor
or substantial change to the site.
Section 2
~
That Section 24-2.1 of 'the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen be
'and the same is hereby amended such-that subsections (21) and (22)
read as follows:
" (21)
(22)
SPA Specially Planned Area (Overlay).
PUD Planned Unit Development (Overlay)."
Section 3
,
,J
':J
'I
.1
I
i
That Section 24-3,4 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen be
and the same is hereby amended such that the area and bulk requirements
for the P - Park zone district are set by an adopted plan for a
Specially Planned Area.
Section 4
That a new Section 24-11.3(j) of the Municipal Code of the City of
Aspen be and the same hereby is enacted to read as follows:
"(j) For proj ects requiring subdivision, PUD, precise SPA plan,
zoning, special review or other approval from the City of
Aspen, complete applications shall be submitted addressing
the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code simultaneously
wi th the submission of applications for a development
7
. "
j
')
1
,-..,
" f
....
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
'OR"'lO C.F,MorCKtLlJ.B.lll.CO.
I
1
!
,
I
.'1
allotment. Zoning applications submitted in conjunction
with development allotment applications shall not be subject
to' the limitations upon the date of submission and review
established in Section 24-12.5 of this Code. All required
associated reviews shall be initiated by the Planning and
Zoning Commission in conjunction with the review of an
application for a development allotment.
Section 5
That Section 24-11.1 (b) of the 11unicipal Code of the City of
Aspen be and the same hereby is repealed and reenacted to read as
,
follo~ls :
"(b) Within all zone districts except the L-3, thirty-five (35)
lodge or hotel units."
~
Section 6
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion
of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional
in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a
separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions thereof.
Section 7
-fA.J
A public hearing on this Ordinance shall be held on the /3 day
of )1J1~ ' 1985, in the City Council Chambers,
Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (IS) days prior to which
hearing notice of the same shall be published once within a newspaper
of general circulation within the City of Aspen.
City
INTRODUCED, READ, AND ORDERED published as provided by law
Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, on the ~~
a,o~ , 1985.
day of
of the
~~.
William,
ATTEST:
4
Koch, City Clerk
8
. j"
--'---"-'-:~ ,:...;
i"'1
~
,:'\
I
'~~
1
1 'I. "
I
I 'O~fll ~ C. '.HOftKH 5. a.1t l. r.o.
f
i
1
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
I
I
I
I
FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this
9~ , 1985.
A'fTEST:
~ ,.j 4~
Kathryn S~och, City Clerk
c:<VfC.~
day of
~.~~
William L. Stirling, Mayor
"
1
I
I
I
'\
1
I
;
i
":
I
\
i
;
1
i
i
,
I .
i
1
:1
i
1
'I
;..1
i
,i
I
1
1
I
1
I
I
I
!
9
'"
,
,t"";
.
1
.
I
,
I
.Wi
1
1
"
'1
j rO~M 'III c. F. MoeCKEL 8. 8. , L. co.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
-1
l
I
j
.:~
,
I
1
"
r
I
!
1
i
I
I
I
j
STATE OF COLORADO
CERTIFICATE
COUNTY OF PITKIN
i
r
. .1
I
I
,
I
I
i
i
,1
I, Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk of Aspen, Colorado, do hereby
certify that the above and foregoing ordinance "'as introduced,
,read in full, and passed on
,
first reading at a regular meeting of
~d~
,
the City Council of the City of Aspen on
1985, and publ ished in the Aspen Times, a weekly newspaper of
,
,
i
I
I
I
,
."!.
i
!
general circulation published in the City of Aspen,Colorado, in
its issue of ,~A5 1985, and was finally
adopted and approved at a regular meeting of the City Council on
9~ A~ , , 1985, and ordered published as
Ordinance No. Jf) , Series of 1985, of said City as provided
,
,
j
'i
I
by law.
IN WITNESS
of
said Ci ty
~
WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and
of Aspen, Colorado this _~____
the seal
day 0 f
1985.
,1
',4
:r
i'
1
,
I
-)
,
,
I
i
I
,
. ','.
~~>4~
Kathryn S. och, City Clerk
S E J:.. L
Deputy City Clerk
\ '
i
i
i
,
"
'\
.
'.-
.~
.'~ "8-'"
,...",
I
~
. ?
'-...
/
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
RESOLUTION No.'3~
(Series of 1985)
A RESOLUTION GRANTING CONCEITUAL APPROVAL TO
THE LITTLE NELL BASE REDEVELOPHENT SPA
WHEREAS,
pursuant to Ordinance 20, Series of 1985, the Aspen
Skiing Company (hereinafter, the "Applicant") did submit a proposal
for the redevelopment of the Little Nell base area; and
WHEREAS,
aspects of the development proposal incluce a 96
unit hotel, replacement of the existing commercial space, ne~l pedes-
trian gatel~ays to the mountain from Hunter and Dean Streets, ne~1 base
lifts and an expansion of the area designated ~Iith an SPA overlay; and
WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission (hereinafter,
the "Commission") did hold a public hearing on August 20, 1985 to
consider the applicant's SPA boundary change proposal, and did also
hold meetings to consider the base area redevelopment, plan on August 6
and August 27, 1985, and did adopt Resolution 85-18 recommending that
the conceptual SPA be approved; and
WHEREAS, the Aspen city Council (hereinafter "Council") did hold
pllblic hearings to consider the Little Nell Base Redevelopment
Conceptual SPA on September 23, October 15, November 4 and November 5,
1985, and a work session on October 7; and
WHEREAS, at the conclusion of its deliberations the Council did
make the following findings:
I. The proposed mix of uses for this site is an appropriate one
and meets the intent of its original designation lvith an SPA
overlay.
2. The requested extension of the boundary of the SPA overlay
into the Conservation zone provides public benefit by
integrating the planning for the lifts I-lith the remainder of
the base area redevelopment plan. The redesignation meet s
the test of Section 24-7.2 (C) of the Code due to the unique
location of the parcel as the summer and winter gate~lay to
Aspen Mountain and the potential year-round recreational
benefits. to. the community ~Ihich can be provided on this
site.
3. The Council supports the policy stated in Section 24-11.3
(b) of the r,runicipal Code that "City Council may (but: need
not) grant a development allotment for an entire project to
be constructed over a period of years . . . " and, there-
fore, expresses its Idllingness to consider granting a
multi-year allocation to the project upon approval of the
applicant's precise p;I.an, if submitted. The formal con-
sideration of this issue Idll occur follOl'ling the scoring of
the applicant's growth management applicntion at the precise
plan revie\1 stage.
t"l
t"1
I
-
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
1. The applicant shall amend the site plan to provide open
space along the length of the Durant Street frontage of the
hotel, so as to create a courtyard of at least 10 feet in
depth. The open space requirement shall be considered in
coordination with rather than in addition to the area to be
set aside for the on-site drop-off facility required in
condition #7 below.
2. The applicant shall, in the Precise plan submission, request
a variation of the project's FAR if it is above 1.5:1,
since the land zoned Conservation does not count toward the
overall project FAR. The applicant may also request special
review approval to increase the allowable commercial FAR of
the property to 1.7: I by providing employee housing in the
appropriate ratio on or off site.
3. The applicant shall provide a detailed, technical study of
the parking needs of the facility to meet the demands from
the lodge rooms, skiers, administrative offices, commercial
spaces and skier support facilities, and shall increase the
number of spaces to be provided at the Precise Plan stage.
4. The applicant shall continue to evaluate the impact of the
hotel on the views of Aspen ~buntain from Hunter Street, and
propose any design changes which will reduce obstructions of
the mountain from the corner of Cooper or Hyman Avenues on
Hunter Street. Detailed architectural renderings and
elevations shall be provided at the Precise Plan stage.
5~ ,The applicant shall provide detailed grading plans for the
earth work which is proposed to occur at the base area,
including any activity associated with the base of the new
I ifts which may f all out side of the SPA boundary, and shall
identify the locations for any material deposition which is
to occur.
6. The appl icant shall evaluate the applicabil ity of the City's
8040 greenline and mountain viewplane review procedures to
the proposed development. Should it be found that either
review procedure applies, the applicant will submit the
necessary materials at the Precise Plan stage demonstrating
compliance with the review criteria of the Code.
7. The applicant shall revise the site plan to indicate an
auto-taxi-l imo drop-off fac ili ty of adequate s iz e f or the
needs of the ski area, which is in addition to any drop off
area for hotel guests. As the Council is concerned about
maintaining adequate traffic flows on Durant Avenue, it is
expected that the applicant will address the proper location
for this facility, within the project's property boundary.
2
"
,...."
r,
, 'j
RECORD OF PROCEEnINGS
100 Leaves
8. The applicant shall provide a detailed analysis of the
proposed service yards on Spring Street and Dean Street,
demonstrat.ing that adequate space has been provided for
truck stacking and that proper turning movements can be
accomplished within these streets. The applicant shall also
confer with the Environmental Health Department as to any
air and water quality devices which may need to be installed
in these areas (and in the parking facility for cars). The
applicant shall work with the North of Nell and Tippler
management entities and shall try to accommodate the service
delivery needs of these buildings in a single location
off Dean Street. Finally, the applicant shall demonstrate
that the service delivery area on Dean Street will not cause
safe,ty problems for pedestrians on Dean Street or nuisance
problems for the residents of the North of Nell, and that
the needs of the facility could not practically otherwise be
met by a single facility on Spring Street.
9. The applicant shall provide a detailed, technical study
of the adequacy of Durant, Spring and Dean Streets to
handle the vehicle traffic volumes associated with skiers,'
hotel guests, e.ilployees, service vehicles, and visitors to
the commercial uses and shall propose appropriate mitigation
measures to address any traffic problems which will result
from the project. The applicant shall also take into
account the access needs of emergency vehicles, including,
but not limited to ambulances and fire trucks.
10. The applicant shall provide a detailed, technical study
of the geologic hazard on Aspen Mountain as it affects
thi s site and shall demonstrate that any hazard posed
to the property can and will be fully mitigated. The
applicant shall also investigate the soils hydrology in
the area to demonstrate the suitability of the site for
development purp::>ses.
II. The applicant shall provide a solution to the pumphouse
relocation problem and shall agree to implement said
solution at the applicant's cost.
.~
,
.
12. The appl icant shall prov ide detail ed drawings of the
new base lifts, demonstrating that these buildings are
visually compatible with the base area and that the
principal storage area for either chairs or gondolas will
not be above grade at the base area.
13. The appl icant shall reiter'ate the commitment as to how lift
service will be provided on Little Nell for special events,
ski instructions and for secondary access to Lift 5. The
applicant will sho\q the location of all lifts proposed for
the base area, and will provide a commitment that their
installation will be ini.tiated in 1987. The applicant shall
be required to specify to the City which lift system is
intended to be installed prior to review of the preci se Plan
by the City Council, also giving the Planning Office approx-
imately two (2l. \'leeks to review the proposal and obtain
referral comments from other agencies prior to the initial
presentation of the precise, Plan to Council.
14. The appl icant shall prov ide housing for employees of
the project in a 'manner acceptable to the Housing Author-
ity and Plannin'g Commission. The number of employees to be
housed will be determined at the Precise Plan stage, based
on the applicant's commitments as part of the growth manage-
ment, plan application.
3
-"
i
j
!
1
,
,
I
1
!
j
.~
1
'.
,...",
,.1
~
RECORO OF PROCEEpINGS
100 Leaves
IS; The applicant shall provide a shadow stucly of the effects of
the building along Durant Avenue and Spring Street, and
mitigate the problems caused by the building' s shado~ls for
pedestrians crossing the street.
16.
The, appl icant
employed on the
insure that it
trians beloH.
shall demOnstrate the techniques to be
roof of the hotel to manage sno~1 shedding to
does not interfere with or endanger pedes-
The applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed buildings
do not encroach into the land within the Park zone near the
Aspen Alps.
18. The applicant shall provide a trail easement through
the property connecting the trail near the Aspen Al ps with
the Dean Street trail and will include any required ramps
for bicycles or other year-round trail facilities in their
site plan at th-e preci se plan stage. The applicant will
also examine the potential for creating a r.edestrian trail
connecting to the Aspen Mountain Road within the context of
the base area regrading and provide an alignment for said
trail if it is found to be feasible.
17.
19. The applicant shall make every effort, including \10rking
with the City of Aspen, to increase the extent of the
pedestrian gateway to the mountain so as to make it a
more"grand" entrance in the winter and summer.
.
20. The applicant shall demonstrate in the Precise Plan submis-
sion that all que stions a s to the o~mer ship of the Hunt e r
Street right-of-way are in the process of being resolved, to
insure that permanent guarantees ,of the availability of
Hunter and Dean Streets for pedestrian access will be
provided. The Precise Plan shall not be approved until the
pedestrian access issue has been resolved to the Cityis
sa.tisfaction. The applicant Idll also demonstrate that the
boundary questions adjacent to the Tippler have been
resolved, and the SPA boundary designation shall be adjusted
accordingly.
21. The applicant shall provide the Environmental Health
Department with detailed information on any fireplaces
which will be included in the project, demonstrating
their compliance with applicable Code provisions.
22. The applicant shall provide a drainage plan at the Precise
Plan stage which meets the standards of the Engineering
Department concerning the 100 year storm and which addresses
drainage fro:n Aspen Hountain as it affects the site and
drainage froD the development site itself.
23. The applicant shall disclose at the Precise Plan stage all
plans related to the Dean Street right-of-way, including any
requests for encroachments as may be necessary.
24. Final appro.val of the proposed SPA boundary change shall
only occur in conjunction with final approval of the Precise
Plan for the project.
4
...... ;./1;.
.. - ~;.
,
,
"
,
,
..,j.
'.,
I"'j
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
25. In the event that the growth allocations for the project
shall expire, the boundary of the SPA shall" revert to it s
pri or conf igurati on. ,,~,'
Dated: 7l~d"t/7 ' 1985.
William L'. Stirling, Hayo
I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do
certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate copy of that
resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado,
at a meeting held
7Jn~ .:;-
'-
, 1985.
Kath ryn
AR.81
5
C;"-:.'.>.
~ 6ej,
City Clerk
"
~
"
....
"
el....
f:l ~~
~ '" 0'"
I-' Nt;
tIj it:
~ \ill"'
; r~
<'" '" "'~8.
~ "'~"
~tnt"l
; gj;:Jfi
w "i~"tI
" a!l
....'"
~~
",'"
'"
~()
S"
~
....
~
~
'"
...
w
'"
;' ~ ~
.. 8
~
~ ~~.8 n~w ~ ~~o~~o ~~o~m ~ ~
!il " 1!i ..... ~ ..... g ~
c: ~ Z l:'" ~ Z
~ n~ ~ ~~~3 ~ <~~~> ~ ~~tn.~..~ ~ ~
I!:I O;l:z <D .....Ql t'\) I-l .....Qj:::s .....H K1 0 ....rt ro OJ :z ro
~ 0 ~ :::S~ ~ n:::som ro OOHroffO. OlHO(rt.~ ~
o I-l <~ Z H~~rt en C~Hm~ 0 ~<DH~m ~ 2
~ Z (DO n ro:::s......... W.....lQ...... ~ Ul :::INN (") '"
> 1-3 > 1'1'< t=:I CJ\.O.....:::s "tj. .....:::s'<l:1i"1"... 1t1... I-l l:I3
l:"'I 00 I:"l thtrl CD tr.I rt M"l,Q :t:I Cf.l l.Q III CD 0 t1.l 1'1 tjtnUl t" "
@ ~m ~ ..~... ~~~> ~. ~ ;~ga~ .~ i ~;=~ ~ 0
a cs 8:::s:t: . ~. :::snoot; 1-l8 I'd::SOtnC ~."8 <D.....'<:< ..1-'"1
.... .... 0 0 ~ 0 ~~ ~ '" 0 ~~~=" ,,0 n=~~ '"
21 21 8 0 c: c: 8' .....1-1. I)l tl:I 80 ro 'lB. ."t1 8 rt III nn U'l
~ ~""'~ "'" ~. ~ '" " ...,," .... "'" ~.",,,~
rn tf) t'l ..... t"' t" ..~ rt... t"'. ..... <: .. 0 t"1 0 I'D ~
~ .. ;i~ M ,. ~~. ..... ~." ri ~ ~. .~..:::s 1:1
1-" ""'m o::cl c..... rn.. '?
m ~ I-' ~ .....0 ~ ~ en
rt 0 "". C" G') 1)l:::S lQ Z t=:I
oIlo ..... t:'" rt .... Cl l"'t:::s 8 <'"
:::s I-l ..... l'tl M ..... tn
l.C sa ~!~ g '"3 a
c: tn 0 ~..
g. gg t1 tn
;; ~ ~ ~
tn ~ ~
~ "
"
n
~
F ~ IF F rr F II I r ~~rrr ~ ~H+:'"
rr r
~ ~ ~ F rr F ~~ ~ ~ ~krrr I 11I1I
r ~i~ir
f ~ If ~ r~ F ~~ r r r~~rr I 11II1
F rrrii
I I f I I r f r~ r F ~~rr~ r rrrrr
f i I:;: r
f ~ r F rr f r~ r ~ r~r~~ t tr~rr
f r f ~ ~~ ~ t~ t ~ ~~~t~ ~ ~~~~~
f ~ ~ F ~~ F ~~ ~ F ~,~~~~ F ~~~~~
~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ f
~...
I'"
I~
~~
'"
<
~
1;
'"
.--Ie
:r
f-
a::
o
z
<lJ
1\ . ~
,\- ~
,-1.~
Jt
~ \),
M~ s
~~~i
~~~11)
tl-::Z~\\)
~~1!
2~-
~ \\ \\)
-5\\\\\)
.~ 1 ~ ~ ~
CI.) ~ \\\ Q m
.... f: -1 tt
~ ~~t 3
.... f~L~
C f- ~~
~ i ~~~ 1
a.. ~ ~,~
.
I I
~aaJ~S eualee>
CIl
z
Q
CIl
>
UJ
a:
~
,\1
~
i
~
~
'-'
I
~~
'2
~-
- ~
~7 .
-~G~
'-Ji\\
4ltl-
7J~
=~J.
i ~
>OID
~FJ ' ~i
\\l ~ ~~
~:L3 ~ "
\) t 5 ~ iJ.
~ 5 .- ~7
g> ~~):- : ~~
.-t :4 ::1 CI.) ~
Es~~ ~ ~l
Or\\)~~-O 'i ~
:J ~~ g F ~ ~
@~
~~
~~
::l~
-K
5
~~
.>> ~ '
, J:,
~ 5 .~
t j~~
1 h- \\\tl
~'1l\)
I -zlh-;
) '~jl1''''''cn '<l ~~
- ~
,~ ~ f~~
': ~>~ ~
~ a.. .\\..~\-
~
-<If
:J
ID'~
~~
~
.'
.
"
j
'\)...1
~~
.
,
[DJ
~III ~I
>-
<0
>-
_<OaJ
U c: .>:
,~ ~ u ~
o ('0 Q) l"IJ
.... ... J: U
C.OUUl
___ ..0.---- ___.' ...._~...--t--,.. - --__
'"--r- +-
-
-
CI.)
Z
"t-
O
.c
....
~
o
-
in
'd"
: I
U) I
~...... '
.8 ~I I,
"0,",
~ '-'!
"'
~ I I
o
(')
It) I.
co,
"
co
...
$ ,
('5N,
...
in
,..
o
!
:::z<\
\L
~i
i~.
.}.t\
!t1
\t~\i
"::z~
-t
\-~~
-s'~~
~
~t\tl
:aO
j
0) -~e
c ~ \\)\\)
..... ' ti i
> ,11) oJ -.}
<<:s2'1 1-
a.. ~~~.
'....-..'....c
<<:S
a:
....
c
CI.)CI.)
o.E'"
<<:S '
00.
cn..Q
-eCl.)
c>
<<:sCI.)
...JC
,
l
I
~
~
I
"
"
~
~
,
,
t'l
~
l\\
1\
...l"
;t~
~::z
\)
~&
~()
;il...l
...J
1~
- d
...aU)
)
~~
'-
~::z
\1--
O)\)
C \)
..... SUl
.... ll} l)
<<:S I-
Qr~~
CI) ~~,
,
~
~
!ol
I
"
,
~
I
;,
,
I
I
I
@
I
I
I
I
,\.
I
I
;J
;I
,
~
I
I
i
!
,
I
!
I
i
I
i
I
~j
j
I
~.,
"
..
,
CI.)
::s
c:
CI.)
>
<(
~<
~ ~
"'~
,.... .':
.;> "',1;
:.: ..."
:.. - ',-
............~
.}....:,,:."\
:., -.... ~
, "
i; ".' .~.
....
C
<<:S
~
::J
,.....
, ,
i: ;j:.;;
'. . .. ~ -'.
':-~~'; ,
/" " '...,
~'
\Y 0 ~I~
II~ 0 <2
o
I I~l V ~"""
,
l88JlS 6UIJdS
,,},~.,..~:... ,I
,1~~:;'::.:,:~~ "I
" ,"' 1.'$
~': :.. ;'Q 'I"
"~~\.~,.."'.~,,~~:! .
I""<J~> .,.a I.
,..I ". . ~~,
, r;~#: 1
l,/;;:q '1 ".
~'" --); '.
{): '..;~.:~ . .
, ei .....;1.
H"'" ',",. .
,f::....., .
t l'~,~ ~ .<~:'~ 1 .
.r~,:.< . -i . ",
"...... ....i.~>. ..'
l:; .... ," JL......
':..:: ",. ~~~ I. . '
L..i:/ffj "
N
"
.' :."
, . :',.
'.
'.' ~.
-;,1 "
....
. , .L)
!~,
::'.: "S::'~
. "', 1
',:. ~.
_: ~ I
"1.,;,
..
,-
,-
.... ".;.
-:..:......;,..
..... .......~.
,
--
,
r-
-
~::.,
,:. :
..... ~~.~~l.
~
4t~
~
/.':~. .
'. ,
:":J.'~"
:~
iJ I . I ~I
1
[.
~
.'
l~~
.~~
...J. ..J.
-~ ~
~~
A
!~
~
'.'.
: .'. ~.
.' . .'
,. . . 1
.. '
0~
o 0 Q0<20"f , )1
.JM. -f.' o~ ~_+_ lW LV
~~ ~lt~ ~
~~ 0~}~' ~J ~t= r
O?Q @", ~ (J (loQ ...
~8..~~~~t(j~ '.' '11 0
.. . !:;l Cl'frulJ(
C> 0 .il,
(~ ""
/' ~
't.
t.~~ B
rW1\
..~ "~
() ," ..~ ~~ ~ ~ ~
I'V/O\rO
, :. . L ..... ............~........".._:".."__."".~,,..__..
h
I1II
JV~ ~
t==
=
~I
t:::=
11 I
c'
II I 1
~
i"
[
.
f
i
i'
F
L
[
!
I
-
-
"
.
~
.
....~
~.
:~
";':~it
..~"...~,,~
i . . '"t'''
....... : ~
.* '. :..,.i
~:;.:....
i" .
. . .
.' ".
\.;,.- . :-~.
" ::..
.,~
" ,
"~I' . ...~.:
....,...
t-
r-
r---
. ......?
.. ,..,:)
.,~.,'~'
.1 J.
II
Q)I~
O~
J: :'::l.l111111
_.
-
a>z::.
Z ~Ijll
a>
-
......
......
.-
...J
.. ,~~
~
./~
'~
I
f-- \
r- ~r
. rIDDD~
. ' 1 Ei
"1 B
bI>l 0
1\\ ti. 1 0
<'JJDClDDDDDQ[
L~~V .". ,': ...~
- ;~~L. '~r~~<:~
= <tf .~~
0~ g:~
!~:~~~~:: ~ :7
...
,'.
.. <..... -"0
'. . .,
1:::","
/. '.', .
"", .
.. ~;~ -b
,,~
.', -
(:. .'
pQ\ .,;
L,,, t::l. ~.
./ """'.
t-
.."
, .'
. ':'.
:"ft.7',':"
-
-
.~
~
.a/'l
~..
~ ~
-.
~;
l
~i
8~
,~ t-
..
J.9i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
i
I
I
i
I
>!j
I
i
!
{,
j
:;J
I
i
~
,
i
l
~
':1
j
"~
1l
;
-,<
::;
,
j
I
"
I
I
I
~
"
i
I
'C
^,- """'^""'~";"'~"""'~'.""CCM'"'
.-....""'..,. '_'~"~-"'''''''.''"*'''~~''''i''''''i.d.;;"".,,.,,;,,-~''~~''''''';;)~''."'"'Jo/4'~~~
~ij&~ ~gll~ :@~j
I'n'J
~ 1: ~
-:I\-
\\)~ t~ \::-
ijj ~ tV
ul~ t\~~~ .
~-r ftes!)1
, \-~~ &
:z3 i\\$~~\\l
-" \)'J\\ ~
~. \\}~I;)
~d. , ~().J\l-\\
\l-=z~ iS~-:I\-
l".<.\..) ~\::",\ln)
~~~ i\ \\.~~
.1 \:~Ff
'ig~ i~:~r
~~ \-I \-
~ \) -:l :n- \--
""J7 ~~ -:1&
]\\\~ 1~~
\--~~ \\\~~",\\\
~::J\\\ ~ \l.')~
ili :r:~_,~ \-Ct~"
ul'1 ~=~\\.
~F t ~ ~:1~'1
..0: t't
en
CD
+""
o
Z
i & ~ ~
f ~ ~
~ IS' IS" IS'
~
.1
~
d.~
\91'&
\\.-
" -Ii.
~ 1(:),
~ ~~"1
~ ~ "'~
1. 7.-
r \D -7.. ~
\l ?:. ~~ ~
~ ~ t~ ~ ~
'--.\.1 ~ ~
!l1L -3'. ~ .1) ?
10 ~ ~ ~ i ~~ ~
~( :: ,'" 1\. 7.
3"", - - r\\. ~ -::1
('\1. ,'7. ;l.:::; <;;?"J ~
<1
~
J.
l-1
\-'1
j~ \\.
~j ~
J...) \)....
- r: \\\ J.
\\."1 "3-:J
\U ,,\ a n
'" (:: L .....,
~
\-
~,,~
1) d-'1
-=zl-=-=
"J~~
\l.i\~
1\ ']
~\-~
7.L
l~~
~~Ul
~{~
t~~
\-
\\~']
\\) ~ \)
J~~
J_\\:
~'"\.\
-\)F.
tl~\i,~
~~'::I
uf.-"--"~
2\\\~~
~?=-~
,~
...
~
~ ~
~ i
~
~ \l\
~ ~
i
!
I
i
I
i
I
~
~-
i
~n
jw-:z
\L!)f
t~~
IDi4
~'~~
\ hID
\---~
::Z~i
-:J
:r
U\~~
FJ
J
~~~
1.-- ~~~
7~~~\\\
+"" I.)
en ~~~
,
~
~~ ~
']~ J
.}
1\ \l\ 3
~f= ~
~1 ~
~- ~
~~ ~ l~
~\\\, ~
\l\ ~ ~.J
l~! ~\-
~ _ ~2
1~..\ _ ~
~ ,~ Il
\\l~ ~. ~~
:~ l' ~l
~t~i ~~
~ .IS:' ~
\\
.~
\\)
i\
~
I
!
:~
.
- --
-
--s......;--~
--_.._'-"~ -- ~
-- --.----------- -- ~~,_.
-'>-.~_..~.:....._... ',':..,' _.-~ -- ......,--
-', " ~-- ,-- .,~
~~--- - ---~ -------.
.- .___~-~- _ __ --~~___~ _:2-
- ~------ ------- -- ~----::-=--
----- ....----- -- -- . ---:.
....- - ----- ...-'-- ~
~ -/~.
~
I
..~
I
i:i
i
I
I
I
j
I
i
I
I
, j
./~""J
r
/.....'"
.....
en
.-
-J
.....
c
ctS
-
0..
\-- i\
~ -~-
'- .
2 ...l
,~ ~<;-l~
\\\
~,
1$
.
...l
~~
~ \\\
~~ ~~
.A 1\\ <I
... 1 \\l -
.J ~.:l ~. ~~
f! 1 i ~~
"] 1. ~~ ">
~ "il t:~
-4" \U ~ \\l:l
-. D. lL s::JI 1.)"]
~ ~~ ~~ ~l
IS"
7-
3
\\l
,..
~
W
2
~..t
~"]
L~
7."
\\-
27.
2~
~2
4\ ~
_....- _...-
d\ &
_1~ ~:i
-t>\ d t'l \3
~
"
~ "]
~ 1
j ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ r= ~~ "1
~ ~~ m
~ ~3:Z~ !
.L ~~ ~l \\\
.~ "t~ &\\. ~
~
m
~
J
-r
~
~
~
.J
~
V
j
~ ~
~ ~
IS" W'
~
~
7..
u)
n
'"
11.
o
..J
3
1 ~
1\ \U tl
Sa ~
~~ ~
"..lI-j
H? 1",
~ \\l:>
\9 (\
~ ~~ \\l~
~ f"]:1.1
l }?td.~:l
~ if ~ 0t
~ Ii) \\\
-"" .' -"'-
~ 1\\ ~
'i !i ~
::l
~ <t) 4l
~
.1
~
~
J
&
~
.
\-
U
\).i
~
U)
7.~
-m
\\.1'\\
~rL
._" ",v.^.:..",.../.',.,:~." ,.'.,'-h',
-j
J
j
-~
-
...
\\l
7
\\\
~
\\l
\l
-:l ~ \\}
~7 ~~
~ill <ill\..
~? d.~
~~ 5~ \l.~
~ 0~ ~
~~ ~~ ~i\
&~ ~3 H
. _.~
", . ,/~,;i:7' '..
.;,\~ :.,,'"
4..../..
/':' ;)'
/.'J;'"'( .. .~.
f" . ~"/.
'..' v .
,..' ,..
.;.<~';' t~,'
.~... .~
~ .. :~V' . -
t...", ./"
. i~\;i1:"
""'~
".' .~ .
g~~~y " ,~
"," .
!'to '.
'\'.. .'
.' ".',-",~,'C.",~..",""",,",,,"'~~O,.'~~~"'-' ,.' ~~.~ ..~'iti\i~:,:'ii!!il'J~"r:_-I:r'!'~'rfJ~' ~-'~'/!!ll~' """lr'Pli:i"~1?""';'nJ'"'''''T;,"{,..~t'K''''''1
. ..'1'
.~ "
; -~-
-".:"
-
:f;~: .
:..." ")
~=-. '~~i'~~.'
,. .J ~
==----~ ;:,",'~ .
~~~ . t,,'~l
-----= . l--i:~:' " .
-~ ',~,';;:
-- .~,!',,',.>l.>.
~~
-, . l~~:;:~
7~-~-. l'i;<;
" =- - .._~'..
~ . ::-~~:
. ----- ~.~~
~ ~. /'
~ ;;...:.-:':
~'.: ,,:..-_ ""c,:~ '
- f~:,':;
~_~-" ~:.:.~r:
_-----_ ':.,. .'t.
~_:~ . ~~:.:;
== ' ',-~-~~ .~. ,
~ ~- . ~\:::~,
."'~ ,?, .-.
~~-~' J;:~1
~ -- --.---:- ~ C. . ',;,
~----- ' ".--:-' ,::;~ ;:~':;~
--. -~ '.~:, , -
" , ~: ". ::~ .
~~ .....~\,..',
----- ~'
------::::::::--- :~. ~:: . ,
~------~~~ . ~~'.?;~ '. '
, - ;::.-. - --:.- ;k:. ,:,: .
~-:;:> , ;:':'j'
~. ~.,...~"
~~~~/' ',' ::,;.,~ .".
~- '..:.......:}.
~1!7:/ ' " r::;~,',
~.l~.
~~~~~~:'1,:.?~: "
= . -~----...,...
~.~..-{.,.~"
, , -'." S :/f\:'
~- r~-.(~:..~
. ......:;'.;
--..,- . .Y;-;I
I
I
,I
, i
.' ~
'I
I
i
i
,
~
.,
~
;
i
~
,
~
~
~
1~J!!! ... ... n 1
I