HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.1461 Ute Ave.A065-03
n
f""J
CASE NUMBER A065-03
PARCEL ill #
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
ADMIN ACTION Approved
BOA ACTION
DATE CLOSED 10/29/03
BY D Driscoll
,....,.
r--}
mAIN PM PERMANENT RECORD
1*'1
~
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director
FROM:
James Lindt, Planner JL--
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.l00(A),
PUD Insubstantial Amendments.
BACKGROUND:
Peter McClain, the owner of Unit #4, Building No. I, of the Ute Park Townhomes has
requested approval of a POD 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.
I
f'""'l
!'\
/
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
limited 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 POD to
allow for the existing snow retention wall to be maintained with the following condition:
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 8 2003
4 date 1"(d-2./O::i
1\nn Woods, Community Development Deputy Director
, . .' .,.::~T lJiHE>h>-;
'U. MM' i \1\11'"'(".1 Dr::\J ':.,_v, .~l:.l-"
\J .1,,,\11
Cn-{ OF p,SPEH
ACCEPTANCE:
I, as a person being or representing t
approval and certify the informatio
knowledge.
e Applicant, do hereby agree to the condition of this
. rovided in;~} application is correct to the best of my
. Kiil.e..UcvA< /' date 10 - 7-'1 ,() 3
eter McClain, Owner of 1461 Ute Avenue
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings
Exhibit B -. Application
2
1*'1
r'i
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 Finding:
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.
3. 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.
^ ,I"")
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.
tI'"
f'""'l
!'\
fxh J'/tJ /f \'Ill/
.
ATTACHMENT 2 -LAND USE APPLICATION
APPLICANT:
Parcel ID #
Name:
/LIC
Location:
REPRESENTATIVE:
.
Name:
Address:
Phone#:
PROJECT:
Name: Yt:.h L Ie 11/1c..C.-J._A-; L(
Address: 0: I L.uh. H-u:r. . ~
Phone#: eCho J.\". 3g~
TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply):
,
l.J-./ c,..
3(0, (/
0 Conditional Use 0 Conceptual PUD 0 Conceptual Historic Devt.
0 Special Review g Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) 0 Final Historic Development
0 Design Review Appeal Conceptual SPA 0 Minor Historic Devt.
0 GMQS Allotment 0 Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) 0 Historic Demolition
0 GMQS Exemption 0 Subdivision 0 Historic Designation
0 ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream 0 Subdivision Exemption (includes 0 Small Lodge Conversion!
Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion
Mountain View Plane
0 Lot Split 0 Temporary Use 0 Other:
0 Lot Line Adiustment 0 Text/Man Amendment
RDD!Ti 0 I--l
Xu'" crF
,
IL>-i.. f 5 Per N G;
lA.-h. AuL,
Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $
o Pre-Application Conference Su=ary
o Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement
o Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form
o 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. REl'AINFORPERfIANE1IT~
r"
r',
I"")
CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Al!reement for Pavment ofCitv of Aspen Development Application Fees
-l-~ TTiZ- Ie, JA A ,. /' L",,:y.
CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and ;-:'.. .. VVl ~ L-
(hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
l:--:L:> APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for
i E_~e... !<::. VlA('(, CFr/'''-i .
(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 compieteness.
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 andlor
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 snfficient information to the Planning Commission andlor City Council to enable the
Planning Commission andlor City Council to make legally required fmdings 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 compIeteuess, APPLICANT shall pay an initial
deposit in the amount of$ Z(O.~which is for.-12NE. 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
accrue.d costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issned
until all costs associated with case processing have been paid.
CITY OF ASPEN
By:
Julie Ann Woods
Community Development Director
RETAIN FOR PERIIANBIT RECORD
g: Isnpportlformslagrpayas.doc
6/05/03
By:
:XI;a.~
/'
ate:
Billing Address and Telephone Nnmber:
Reauired
/<(fcf ?i;f-i- fluL
11-'5(3< A.I ( G-. 0 I b I I
(9;0) 7))' 5 8'~'l
,
"
I
I w
I
I =
I i
. "I.
I
I
I -j\
I
I
i
,
,
,
I
I
c--.
'\j'
'(J
-,..::, \..Jv~
>! I~
;;:.
i
I
,
I
~.
1\ ~I
, ,
I'
,
f'""'l
....-..".,.....'...>.
-.t
f !
1 j;
I' !
i I I !
WI I , ! i
. .; . \ 1
_ --'--1--'
I
I
!"
'1
\'~
v
~
1'-,
~V\ ~ \) -\:>< "I"-
,
t'-
"l-.
\J
VI
I:J.
~
~
,.
~..
0'.
~
~
,
~
\
. ! I
'-
E>-_
-D
-_._....~"-"-,-,-
Q:O
!~
I
"~-"--"---"-_._--~.--'-
\J
\J
"'"
I
~
\J ,..,).,X"'"
I I
11'--.
I
,
-'"r----.....-.."..
l
I
I
I
I
,.~.=:..=::-_.~
o
""'b
{'vt
t
~
c;;::.
I:::>
~
Y'
\'"
tl
'\1'
~
\'
---.
\~
\~
<::::'.
\'"
,
~
~
~\
\:"\
\"
\'\
~
......\
C>
-z::.
f'""'l
1'.'<'
: "~"..",.,,,
I-
T +-....:--..---.
I .
I
...-J -'-
~ -
11
U
1"1--
Ii.
,;,..,:
r-
.0- --'
- -
<::::::::::>
\..~
E
.,--
('"
--'"J
'::J::J
!'\
s:
't
-I
i I t
! I (1'
i ~ VI
! II
"l : 1
ill
., '
~
L-:?
01
~
,
~
1'''
r
/:1
~
<:
~
...,
\
-
c
7'
--,
D I .
-".C(: 2Allfl\
,\ ,\:1
!.d<vf;" \
>
.tl
i\~'
..
~I ._~;-
, (~n
[r;~L~--/
1.1'11
II I I
11.1 I '
_L LI-bL-- _
l l...1
I ~:
:2.'
(,/)1
w i
~?
0<
g
en
I, Iii!!
[li.I,I'
l!!: il:l:1
;\:\ 'ill
'1!!'1:{
:': 'n!
-:-:--;:-._-;-.+-..~.~+'"..,'"
t; ~(~ "1\..,, i; i
:;. \f"I' Ii>':
::':'
1,'11
:1' !I
j' I! il
,l!; >: ! ~
'I,':'!"
f(j'"" .~ -. I
~~-~'~ '", " 'I
.' i
!' i
i I
, ,
I I,
\Iii
i\
"
, i
I I
! ,
BEDROOM
10'-O"X13'-r
7'-8" CEILING
----,,~.~.-:
,
I
:' ,..._~.i':'_;_>-/ ,/
I I' / /
{pi rl.;=~i=":l-if~::;~_
I ,/ I \"3! i WICK _.~-.
~/8ATII ~rl,i ;~ i 1_-....---\.
{'-o'x( HI il! ",: E.'f".lf\Y
4'-8" "--'II ;1 5'. e"X7' ~ o'
\!.~"J
, ~:'" ,~,~. _\.J !
MECHAli!CAi. Lon I -'"l
l.-OX9.-;" \ / !
, ! I
" I I
-~. I .
-----------,.-.--.-.. ~
I~
, .
1:\
.\I,A,
GlIFACE
2r-Q"X9.-~
9'-(1" C(fU~IG
~':-\.
i:J
'r,'
"':<
y:
'.
.(;'J
,.
100'-0'\
Toro\ S\It,
, ~~4:~.:-7L~E~t:.~L::..~~~;;..
" ...5
',,"!
_9.
--------.-r
---I
\ All
Y'~
/
/
J<"
-"-
""
.;J..~
/
/
"/
/~
I
",I
~I
I
1
i
/.1-\
':'~:
,~
/:
,
"/'
/\
~'!
/ i 1
i ___..,_."'n_._'__.'::';";..,
,,1
"I
,
. .._..._....1
"1
ca
..f
GROUND FLOOR PLAN
SCALE 1/"" "-0'
'!
Ij.:cC
...;PoJ
~
t. q ,z4-K ~
, -~,
i /KSl"
10.0/)<
<:2--, $ X '1,. ;/..
'3 ,~)( '0'
Iii
,
\ ::1
!:I
u
Ii:
iii
Ii!
i"
I
,.,
II
[I
,I
1'1
I..
I
ii"
I'
II:
'\
J,--
OCT:14-2003 TUE 10:46 AM ~63328
FAX NO. 9~048216
'I
P. 02
t i"rt: P^Rk TOWi~II():,l1:S! !OMEOWJ-,:I,RS ^,,~.{ I("I^ no:"
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
Homeowners Association was held at 1467 Ute Avenue. ihe purpose of this meeting
was \0 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 I,ave doors or windows and is not permanently attached it does not constitute
an addition. We sincerely hOpe tl,ls agreement with tile current Ute Park homeowners
will meet with the City's satisfaction.
If you require more information, please feel free to contact either Gina Pogliano at
923.0401 or Rick Head at 925.2811.
G
C;;i Poglrano
Se etary/Treasurer
Sir\cerely,
Rick Head
Vice President
cc: Muriel Gam:
Jovita Contreras
Pete McClain
Kevin Smiddy
RicK Head
OC~-14-2003 rUE 10:46 AM ~663329
FAX NO. ~,049216
p, 01
ASPEN~SNOWMA~S
Aspen Skiing Company. P.O. Box 1248. AspEln, CO 81612
Phone: 970.923.0401
Fax: 970.923.0488
gpogliano@aspensnowmass.com
FAX:
To;
J ames Lindt
From: Gina Pogliano
........-.,....~-,
Fax: 920.5439
_.__~. ..... ..~ages: 2 (including cover)
Date: Octobl.'Jr 14,2003
RE:
Letter of Approval re: Pete McClain
James.
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,
Q('kP.-.
Gina Pogliano