Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.1461 Ute Ave.A065-031461 Ute Avenue Case A065-03 CASE NUMBER A065-03 PARCEL ID # CASE NAME Peter K McClain PROJECT ADDRESS 1461 Ute Park PLANNER James Lindt CASE TYPE PUD Amendment OWNER/APPLICANT Peter K McClain REPRESENTATIVE same DATE OF FINAL ACTION 10/29/03 CITY COUNCIL ACTION PZ ACTION ADM1N ACTION Approved BOA ACTION DATE CLOSED 10/29/03 BY D Driscoll PARCEL ID: DATE RCVD; 10/21/03 MCCASE NO A065-03 CASE NAME: Peter K McClain PLNR: I James Lindt PROJ ADDR: 1 1461 Ute Park CASE TYP: PUD Amendment S, P. OWN/APP:jPeter K McClain ADR. 1461 Ute Avenue C/S/Z: Aspen/CO/81611 PHN: 910-925-3829 REP: same ADR: C/S/Z: PHN` FEES DUE: FEES RCVD: $210.00 Rcpt 10116 STA REFERRALS REF: BY�_ DUE MTG DATE REV BODY PH NOTICED DATE OF FINAL ACTION: _REMARKS CITY COUNCIL: MEW_... - - .. BOA: CLOSEDT- BY: D Driscoll DRAC: PLAT SUBMITD: PLAT (BK,PG): ADMIN:I WAIN FOR PERMANENT IMCM MEMORANDUM TO: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director FROM: James Lindt, Planner �T�_ RE: Ute Park Townhomes PUD Amendment DATE: October 20, 2003 APPLICANTS: Peter McClain LOCATION: 1461 Ute Avenue ZONING: AH- PUD REVIEW PROCEDURE: Insubstantial amendments to an approved PUD may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by the Community Development Director, pursuant to Section 26.445.100(A), PUD Insubstantial Amendments. BACKGROUND: Peter McClain, the owner of Unit #4, Building No. 1, of the Ute Park Townhomes has requested approval of a PUD amendment to allow for a snow retention wall to be maintained that was constructed outside of his entryway in 1998 without first obtaining a PUD amendment or a building permit. The addition of the retention wall requires a PUD Amendment because it is a change to the site -specific development plan and architecture that was approved pursuant to City Council Ordinance No. 18, Series of 1992. The Applicant believes that the retention wall is necessary to prevent build up of snow and ice on his front door entryway because his porch faces north (does not get much winter sun) and is located in area where it catches significant snow drifts. Prior to constructing the retention wall, the Applicant contends that there was an extreme buildup of ice in front of his front door entrance during late winter and early spring to the extent where a jackhammer was required to remove the ice. The snow retention wall that was erected is shown in the photo below. STAFF COMMENTS: Staff has inspected the site and does believe that a drainage problem led to the need for the snow retention wall that was constructed. According to the Applicant, the snow retention wall solved the drainage problem and he is no longer experiencing an icing over of his front entryway in the late winter and early spring. Additionally, the Applicant obtained homeowner's association approval to construct the wall and it is completely located within [united common element that is dedicated for the use of the Applicant's unit. In summary, staff believes that the proposed amendment is insubstantial in nature and meets the applicable review standards to approve an insubstantial amendment to an approved PUD. Therefore, staff recommends that the Community Development Director approve the proposed insubstantial PUD amendment with the conditions stated herein. RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes that the proposed application meets the review standards for approving an insubstantial PUD amendment to the PUD. Therefore, staff recommends that the Community Development Director approve the proposed amendment to allow for the existing snow retention wall to be maintained. APPROVAL: I hereby approve this insubstantial PUD amendment to the Ute Park Townhomes PUD to allow for the existing snow retention wall to be maintained with the following condition: 1. The Applicant shall retroactively obtain a building permit and pay all applicable fees associated with said building permit to maintain the snow retention wall. OCT 2 2003 WMMUNITY DEvc--,-r11tNT U,hry date CTIOFASPEN Ju ' Ann Woods, Community Development Deputy Director ACCEPTANCE: I, as a person being or representing t e Applicant, do hereby agree to the condition of this approval and certify the informatio rovided in thi application is correct to the best of my knowledge. date �*eterMcC/Iain, Owner of 1461 Ute Avenue ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B -- Application 2 Exhibit A Review Criteria & Staff Findings Insubstantial PUD Amendment. The Community Development Director may authorize an insubstantial amendment to an approved development if the proposal meets the following review standards: 1. A change in the use or character of the development. Staff Findin Staff does not believe that the proposed amendment is inconsistent with the use or character of the final planned unit development. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. An increase by greater than three (3) percent in the overall coverage of structures on the land. Staff Finding: The amendment does not increase the overall coverage of structures on the land because the snow retention walls exist under an approved deck. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable. Any amendment that substantially increases trip generation rates of the proposed development, or the demand for public facilities. Staff Finding: Trip generation and demand for public infrastructure are not affected by this alteration to the PUD. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable. 4. A reduction by greater than three (3) percent of the approved open space. Staff Finding: The amount of open space will not be reduced by greater than three (3) percent as a result of the proposed amendment. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 5. A reduction by greater than one (1) percent of the off-street parking and loading space. Staff Finding: The Applicant is not requesting an amendment to the existing or required number of parking spaces. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable. 6. A reduction in required pavement widths or rights -of -way for streets and easements. Staff Finding: The Applicant is not proposing changes to right-of-way widths or existing easements. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 7. An increase of greater than two (2) percent in the approved gross leasable floor area of commercial buildings. Staff Finding: The Applicant is not proposing changes to a commercial building. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable. 8. An increase by greater than one (1) percent in the approved residential density of the development. Staff Finding: The Applicant is not proposing a change in the residential density. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable. 9. Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or representation of the project's original approval or which requires granting a further variation from the project's approved use or dimensional requirements. Staff Finding: The proposed amendment is consistent with the project's original approval. The snow retention walls that were constructed simply solve a drainage problem that was not anticipated in the original PUD design. Staff finds this criterion to be met. ATTACHMENT 2 -LAND USE APPLICATION APPLICANT: Name: L A- � �l Location: (Indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) REPRESENTATIVE: Name: Address: Phone #: PROJECT: Name: f f i C LA-,. tl Address: I I LLB Phone #: �17 v� 'l'YPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): ❑ Conditional Use ❑ Conceptual PUD ❑ Conceptual Historic Devt. ❑ Special Review Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) ❑ Final Historic Development ❑ Design Review Appeal ❑ Conceptual SPA ❑ Minor Historic Devt. ❑ GMQS Allotment ❑ Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) ❑ Historic Demolition ❑ GMQS Exemption ❑ Subdivision ❑ Historic Designation ❑ ESA — 8040 Greenline, Stream ❑ Subdivision Exemption (includes ❑ Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane ❑ Lot Split ❑ Temporary Use ❑ Other: ❑ Lot Line Adjustment ❑ Text/Map Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) P-'4 I,T- to,� f-� f f a u S 'ROPOSAL: (description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) c kJ T ( Z ` P 2c H 7M 1< _ f S Pe «r -r- �-oc>> r`�" C7Trl i �e.lTn �� I tk}-L)L, Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ ❑ Pre -Application Conference Summary ❑ Attachment #l, Signed Fee Agreement ❑ Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form ❑ Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements- Including Written Responses to Review Standards All plans that are larger than 8.5" x 11" must be folded and a floppy disk with an electronic copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format) must be submitted as part of the application. KTANMRKIRAMMFECM CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Aereement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1"-RE APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for f £+£ '2- K . 1/uc C Lf4; w (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of 2000) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size, nature or scope of the proposed project, it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council to make legally required findings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $ 7 1 O. `�' which is for. __L N E hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $205.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. CITY OF ASPEN By: Julie Ann Woods Community Development Director RETAIN FOR IM MAW MM g:\support\forms\agrpayas.doc 6/05/03 APPLIC71 T ate: Billing Address and Telephone Number: Required 0 P Aloe r A71 Petti Z414 ITI Y. PiAli q 3,08 uv i OCT-14-2003 TUE 10:46 AM 6Q6663329 FAX NO, 9""049216 P. 02 I;,ri: I'Altf,: "I'(')%�;,14110'.�ll:�; I10MEOWNI.Ia AsS�(K IA VIOLA October 8, 2003 Mr. James Lindt, Planner Dept. of Community Development City of Aspen 130 South Galena St. Aspen, CO 81611 Dear James, On Monday, September 29, 2003, a special meeting of the Ute Park Townhomes Flomeowners Association was held at 1467 Ute Avenue. The purpose of this meeting was to request formal approval for the exterior wall that Pete McClain added to his entry area several years ago at his residence at 1467 Ute Avenue. As you are aware, Pete presented his request to the existing homeowners at that time and received their approval to add the wall. However, no written documentation of their approval exists. At September's meeting, the present homeowners unanimously approved this wall, Pete was thorough in his explanation of why the wall was added and that because it does not have doors or windows and is not permanently attached it does not constitute an addition. We sincerely hope this agreement with the current Ute Park homeowners will meet with the City's satisfaction. If you require more inrormation, please feel free to contact either Gina Pogliano at 923.0401 or Rick Head at 925.21311. Sincerely, Rick I -lead Vice president cc: Muriel Ganz Jovita Contreras Peto McClain Kevin Smiddy Rick Head Gi Pogliano Se etary/Treasurer OCT-14-2003 TUE 10:46 AN `663329 FAX NO, 4 049216 P. 01 FAX: To: James Lindt Fax: 920,5439 Date: October 14, 2003 James, ASPEN'bSNOWMASS Aspen Skiing Company . P.O. Box 1248 . Aspen, CO 81612 Phone: 970,923,0401 Fax: 970,923.0488 gpogliano@aspensnowmass.com From: Gina Pogliano Pages: 2 (including cover) RE: Letter of Approval re: Pete McClain Many thanks for your patience — let me know if there is anything we need to "tweak" on this letter, please let me know. You can also keep in touch with me via email, if it is more convenient. Sincerely, Gina Pogliano