The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.814 W Main St.A051-03'90/4,Â£.i--' 42737-182-02-002 Case A051-03 Topof..3111 4 VIVÂ® Y\An DC.- 4 9 *JJ IS. 9 (6 2 -1 4% h- 7- 6 W . hu kÂ» <Cl CL-4:n.Lf'~~Cfb 0/1 /fu~ L June 17.2003 Mr. John Galambos. President Galambos Architects, Inc. 300 AABC Unit D Aspen. Colorado 81611 Dear John: I am responding to your two (2) letters dated June 5,2003, regarding two different Four Peaks Development projects in which you are involved and to which you are seeking minor architectural changes. These projects are the Aspen Mountain Subdivision PUD, specifically Parcel 2, known as the Top of Mill Affordable Housing; and the Bavarian Inn Affordable Housing PUD, specifically the South, West and North buildings. I will address the projects separately below. G 1 7, 3 AÂ®Â·if Regarding the Aspen Mountain PUD, Top of Mill Affordable Housing project. you are seeking to change the roof pitch from 16: 12 for the four principle gables on the project to 12:12. This change would lower the overall height of the structure and does not compromise or deviate in any significant way from the approved architecture for this project. I find this change to be insubstantial in nature, in keeping with the PUD standards and intent of the original PUD and is hereby approved administratively. Regarding the Bavarian Inn Affordable Housing PUD, you are seeking to make minor changes to the exterior siding design on Buildings S, W and N. The project was granted Insubstantial PUD Amendment approval by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission for minor architectural design changes via Resolution No. 33, Series of 2002. I have reviewed the approved architecture for the development and find the now proposed amendments to be insubstantial in nature and still in keeping with the approved plans. The changes, including milder color choices, will allow for a more simplified exterior design that still fulfills the intent of the original PUD and is compatible with the neighborhood. This letter shall serve as confirmation from the Community Development Department that the requested amendments hs put forth in your letters dated June 5,2003 (attached) are approved. All other conditions and requirements of the original PUD approval will remain in full force and effect. I hope this satisfactorily addresses your request. Please let me know if I can be of further assistance. Sincerely, .... /lid - Joyce A. Allgaier Deputy Director of Community Development 9 â€¢'.2=4/I'l: .36Â·2k. E A 63 OF) 80 8 < -< -<f ~ 97 GALAMBOS ARCHITECTS INC. 7 74| ~ ASPEN, CO 8I6II 300 D AABC (970)429-1286 16:12 1642 4:12 4:12 /1 - -Eglfâ‚¬3.-i~j~ TO. PL. LF=141 \ m EE EFEE dpip. EFBEE EHEB EL110 -0 EX/SISTING GRADE T.O. FLY , Uum 000 uum num , , Uum num UNU UCU , - ------ 1 1 - -- ~ -- 2549022" -~- TD.SLAB c NE-W GRADE --- UNIT'D' UNIT 'C UNIT '5' UNIT'A' E I Zct - OVER ALL NORTH ELEVATION (1- LL LL' C ~ 1/8" = 1'-0" r., . 000 CL < z 0 8 63 0 0 w T 1 i 00 a \ 1- [t < (0 ~EE //A3-3 ~ SEE 2/Aj.3) < /6.-/2 1 Ax 4:/2 4#2 ~,~h L.L \642 /// \ANX ~52>111 U \0/642 EL /23'-496 ~~ind' ,Â»~ li 211~30fÂ» I -H ~~AL4.1 L ~1 TO. PL. ./. Ve=r===~rl L-,r - 1 EM--Imi 4 *0 +11Â«Iht.Â£44.-Ai~~~A -- --70,72-9 EL //9/-00/Jh 111'llililiBEE===300/0./.V EXISISTING GRADE NEW GRADE- - ~* EL. lIO 11 11 11 2- --- ]-1 -------- 73. 42-0 11 0~ -_ 1 FEE=========1 _10327 e,"1 i 11 li 11 n Hit*dil lt*jill---____ ~14--14-'~ 1 48* ISSUED FOR DATE 111114 ill All liE. iIi jill -t~ - -ARTilr.fr - -*, ~'!- ------ il 'IR. iII .31 11[.- iii ji li 11 11 H 11 .4-#=49; 1*r*'Â«#11 1 D. D. SET 2-27-03 IL ~ ~---------|| ' PERMIESEr 4-1-41.- IL- itri_.5--ril li--JI a. /00/-0# AL 1 k===========11 - r --------- JL ir-----------ir----------11 1 9===========*tz-rrib- --------TRiffaj---~p - C_Z-LILI-LINIZ-LE-NU .3 9 0.-----------0 11 1 0 0 - UNIT'A' UNIT '5' In E.ir> UNIT 'C UNIT'D' - 0 - OVEK ALL SOUTH ELEVATION - (2 - - 1/8. = r-o" DRAWING ~ ~ NORTH AND SOUTH . E OVERALL ELEVATIONS* DATE 3~ fEE:EEBCM=E{EL___E-2-3- A'Â°+ f*'4 PROJECT- 1~ ~ TOP OF MILL ~ EACH UNIT TO HAVE HORN & STROBE. ' INVESTORS, LLC ~ COORDINATE LOCATION & WIRING/NOTIFICATION - REQUIREMENT WITH FIRE MARSHALL Ul 'A3. I 4 Cl Ad/N 0~9~~1~8~A~~4 now N3dSV ' 2 13OEIVd G 80 0 00 00 0 00 GALAMBOS ARCHITECTS INC. 300 D AABC *E 2/A32 SEE 1/A32. ASPEN, CO 81611 (970) 429-1286 /2:/2/2\. EL 120'-93/8" V.IF. -:00/1-N REF.1/A92 11\ ~4.42 4#2 '1 u CLEO'29%" C~~ (To.aff--6 -~ /71\1 /r~-/ \A -- U 4/ / IERIEBI \%49 ~/1. f.3. PL V 1\ 1 , SIDE DORMERS i â‚¬-IEIE EBEE-*/ 1 - .w , ~mEBI ImERY*-1#gl 4 EL 118'-2% T.O. PL. 1 0 - 1 m_44 5 m FON IT / E.Il[.21 ~ EXIS/STING GRADE, Â· ..... Z -8 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..- laila. . A .............. 9 . . . . . . . . . . . A A A . . . . . . . . . A NEW GRADE - -.O , i, EL /09'-2%7ih r /- - - TD. PLY 9r7 lili ==7 7 1 _21 , U) a 1 / :/=1 1 -1 J Eo 1. ------ 2009 0 TD. SLAB NEW GRADE- UNIT'D' UNIT 'C UNIT '5' UNIT 'A' - OVEK ALL NOK'H ELEVATION LL ~| ~ (1) 1/V = 1'-0" O m 80 0 0 0 0 0 8 1- CE U) ~EE //A3.3 SEE 2/Ai.3 ~ > LL 12:12 ELIZ.0-93/8'V.IF. 11. REF.1/A92 r. i~i 4/L /2./2 ,~ i 4:12 /5~ # - j 12:12 ,Â«722 < 4:j2 1 /\ 1\ \ - ZA i i -9-- -- b- A -+I / SIDE DORIER / 11====H /Â«7319\ Â» vm . \ J EL //8'-2.34" ~ / // c~1 1 -,4 11 i 301 1--- T.O. PE. 4 01=Juy I l y L 1 1 1 1 1 EXAS/STING GRADE - -- ='- -~ j ""- - - 1 I i / 7 .......--U- 1 I i I NEW GRADE---- li . - EL.109'-234Â·,L 11 11 4. 11 EEEEEEEEEEEE1 n --D-*-** er-- -17' T.O.Ply ~ "thlf- lf-%$217n...... ISSUED FOR DATE 1 --- - I--1 0/1 - 4/El------ -Brit fitil 11 lilE. iII hit Ilk ill jill 1 - =IFT"rer i i lEilll 3111 liE. Ill hill 1 D.D. SET 2-27-03 || I lkÂ·*'4=%# UkÂ»'4* 11 1 2*Â»2@04*T | 0 n f 1 111-lf#7 1*,9#11 --- | | | ~ EL. /00'-0 ~ PERMIT SEr 4- 1 -03 il o L'J i I I I i . iN L__ _11 T.O. SLAB r \ 7 I r 1 0 7 100% C.D. SET 5-23-03 ch WALL Â© BEDROOM I Cl , UNIT 'C UNIT'A' UNIT '13' o UNIT 'C BEYOND UNIT'D' 0 WALL e LIGHT- WALL Â© UGHT / WELL WELL - OVER ALL SOUTH ELEVATION (2) 1/8" = 1'-0" DRAWING NORTH AND SOUTH 1 OVERALL ELEVATIONS~ DATE (-5-23-03 J NOTE: LfÂ°PU 120,4- i/4-* A 40 1 1'. IL â‚¬ PROJECT TOP OF MILL EACH UNIT TO HAVE HORN & STROBE. INVESTORS, LLC ~ COORDINATE LOCATION & WIRING/NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENT WITH FIRE MARSHALL 4 bl A3 and/NOISIAI 3dSV ' 2 13OhIVd Â¥801 0 .. CASE NUMBER A051-03 PARCEL ID # 2737-182-02-002 CASE NAME Top of Mill/Bavarian PUD Amendment PROJECT ADDRESS 814 W Main/821 W Bleeker PLANNER James Lindt CASE TYPE PUD Amendment OWNER/APPLICANT Four Peaks Development REPRESENTATIVE same DATE OF FINAL ACTION 12/08/03 CITY COUNCIL ACTION ORD 57-03 PZ ACTION ADMIN ACTION APPROVED W/COND BOA ACTION DATE CLOSED 12/10/03 BY D DRISCOLL .. Â·WÂ·*At.: PARCEL ID: ~2737-182-02-002 DATE RCVD: |09/11/03 #COPIES:] CASE NO~A051-03 CASE NAME:~Top of Mill/Bavarian PUD Amendment PLNR:]James Lindt PROJ ADDR :~ 814 W Main/821 W Bleeker CASE TYP:~PUD Amendment STEPSi OWN/APP: Four Peaks Develop ADR~1000 S. Mill St. - C/S/Z: ~Aspen/CO/81611 PHN:~970-925-2114 REP:~same ADR:| C/S/Z:1 PHNi FEES DUE:~All Due-Bill FEES RCVD:~ STAT: F REFERRALS~ REF:| BY|D Driscoll DUE:~ 1.6,30 MTG DATE REV BODY PH NOTICED .26-4 DATE OF FINAL ACTION:' 12/ 4-0 3, CITY COUNCIL:: t ; , A--1 7- c 3 REMARKS~ PZ: BOA: CLOSED: | BY: | DRAC: 1 , PLAT SUBMITD: ~ PLAT (BK,PG):1 ADMIN: Apa/ci-Â·Â«-F u,0 6-,&1(vi NO .1.1 . Ar , ~11 . 1.482.1.....1 , .. ORDINANCE N0.57 (SERIES OF 2003) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING PUD AND GMQS AMENDMENTS TO THE TOP OF MILL (LOT 3, ASPEN MOUNTAIN PUD) AND BAVARIAN INN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS TO ALLOW FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE APPROVED AFFORDABLE HOUSING CATEGORIES WITHIN BOTH DEVELOPMENTS, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-182-02-202 Parcel ID: 2735-123-08-004 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Four Peaks Development, represented by Scott Writer. requesting approval of a PUD amendment and a GMQS amendment to the Bavarian Inn and Top of Mill Planned Unit Developments to allow for 1) the affordable housing unit at 821 W. Bleeker to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 3 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit 204 in the former Bavarian Inn building to convert from a Category 3 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit; and to allow for 2) the affordable housing unit at 814 W. Main Street to convert from a Category 4 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit D. Parcel 2, of the Top of Mill PUD to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 4 affordable housing unit; and. WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.445, Planned Unit Development and Section 26.470, Growth Management Quota System, City Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny the land use requests made by the applicant during a duly noticed public hearing after taking and considering comments from the general public, and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission, Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Director recommended approval of the proposed amendments; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Housing Board recommended approval of the proposed amendments; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on October 21,2003, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 22, Series of 2003, by a five to one (5-1) vote. recommending that City Council approve the PUD Amendment and GMQS Amendment to swap affordable housing categories as requested; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the -Municipal Code as identified .. herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, the Aspen/Pitkin County LIousing Board, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in City of Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.445, Planned Unit Development; and Section 26.470.110, Amendment of GMOS Development Order, City Council hereby approves a PUD Amendment and a GMQS Amendment to allow for 1) the affordable housing unit at 821 W. Bleeker to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 3 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit 204 in the former Bavarian Inn building to convert from a Category 3 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit, and to allow for 2) the affordable housing unit at 814 W. Main Street to convert from a Category 4 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit D, Parcel 2, of the Top of Mill PUD to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 4 affordable housing unit. Section 2: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3: 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 4: A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 8th day of December. 2003, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City LIall, Aspen. Colorado. .. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council ofthe City of Aspen on the 10th day ofNovember, 2003. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by a vote of five to zero (5-0), this 8th day of December, 2003. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John P. Worcester, City Attorney .. DEVELOPMENT ORDER ofthe City of Aspen Community Development Department This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070, "Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a three-year vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement, or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. Four Peaks Development, 1000 S. Mill Street, Aspen, CO 81611 Property Owner's Name. Mailing Address and telephone number Parcel 2, Top of Mill Subdivision/PUD and Bavarian Subdivision/PUD Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property Approval of a PUD Amendment and GMOS Amendment to swap Employee Housing Unit Categories Written Description ofthe Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan City Council Ordinance -No. 57, Series of 2003, December 8,2003 Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) December 20,2003 Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) December 21,2006 Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code.) th Issued this 20 day of December, 2003, by the City of Aspen Community Dqvelopment Diryctor. c L.Â«- 1 6- ?Jflie Ann Woods, Community Development Director I VI\1 C. MEMORANDUM APP/toURA TO: Mayor Klanderud and Aspen City Council Al 6-0 THRU: Julie Ann Woods. Community Development Directca>F FROM: James Lindt, Planner 43-6-_ / RE: Bavarian Inn and Lot 3, Aspen Mountain PUD Amendment and GMOS Amendment- 2nd Reading of Ordinance No. 57, Series of 2003 DATE: December 8.2003 PROJECT: BAVARIAN AND LOT 3, AMPUD PUD AMENDMENT REQUEST: The Applicant is requesting a PUD Amendment to amend the categories that were assigned to the Bavarian Inn and Top of Mill (Lot 3, Aspen Mountain PUD) Affordable Housing Units. CURRENT ZONING: Bavarian - R/MF PUD Top of Mill- L/TR PUD LAND USE PUD and GMQS Amendments for both development projects. REQUESTS: STAFF Staff recommends that City Council approve the proposed request. RECOMMENDATION: P&Z The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of the RECOMMENDATION: proposed request. BACKGROUND: The Bavarian Inn Affordable Housing Project was approved as employee housing mitigation for the redevelopment of Lot 5, of the Aspen Mountain PUD. The Bavarian Inn was approved to contain nineteen (19) units of for-sale affordable housing. Additionally. four (4) units of affordable housing were approved to be constructed on Parcel 2, of the Top of Mill Development on South Galena Street. As part of both the Top of Mill and the Bavarian Inn approvals, it was required that the mix of affordable housing units in each development maintain an average of a Category 2 maximum sale price and that the majority of the units would be sold and distributed through the general housing lottery. However, the land use approvals allowed for several of the affordable housing units to be occupied by employees of the developer's choice. LAND USE ACTIONS REQUESTED: The Applicant is requesting approval of a PUD Amendment and a GMQS Amendment to allow for 1) two of the units within the Bavarian Inn affordable housing project to swap affordable housing categories, and 2) for another of the Bavarian Inn units to swap affordable housing categories with one of the units located on Parcel 2 of the Top of Mill Development. -l- .. Review of the proposed GMQS amendment requires that City Council review the swap of affordable housing categories after considering a recommendation from the Housing Board. The Pt JD amendment requires that City Council review the proposed request after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director. STAFF COMMENTS: Iii reviewing the first request made by the Applicant to swap the unit categories between affordable units within the Bavarian Inn development, staff believes that the request is acceptable in that the development will still have the same mix of categories in comparison with what was originally approved. Additionally, both units that are to be affected by the proposed swap contain two (2) bedrooms each. Therefore, this request would not alter the number of bedrooms in each affordable housing category within the development. Moreover, the Housing Board has reviewed this request and recommended that City Council approve the swap. Similarly, in reviewing the second request made by the Applicant to swap the unit categories between one of the Category 2 units at the Top of Mill and one of the Category 4 units within the Bavarian Inn project, the Housing Board felt that that the units would still contribute to the overall goal of housing the community's workforce in the upper- valley. And therefore. the Housing Board has recommended that City Council approve the proposed request. Conversely. the Planning Staff is somewhat concerned that the Applicant would like to raise the category of the Top of Mill unit, thereby allowing for a person with a higher income to live at the base of Aspen Mountain in place of a person with a lower income. To some, this may appear to be a more desirable location and that the application would negate, if approved, the opportunity for a lower income person to have this "luxury". However, the Planning Staff does concur with the Housing Board that the request will not alter either development's ability to house a portion of the Community's workforce in the upper-valley. Both units would still remain deed restricted affordable housing units that would be sold to a qualified employee pursuant to the Affordable Housing Guidelines. Moreover, there is not a change proposed in the number of bedrooms or sizes ofthe subject units. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes that the proposed amendments are primarily housing policy decisions. That being the ease, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Board has reviewed the proposal and recommended that City Council approve the requested amendments finding that the affordable housing units and the number of bedrooms within the affordable housing units are not being altered as part of the application. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that City Council approve the proposed requests finding that the overall goal of providing affordable housing as mitigation for the associated free market developments is still met by the Bavarian and Top of Mill projects after the proposed category swap. -2- .. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No. 57, Series of 2003, approving a PUD Amendment and a GMQS Amendment to allow for the swap of affordable housing category designations between the Bavarian and Top of Mill Planned Unit Developments." CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: EXHIBIT A - REVIEW CRITERIA AND STAFF FINDINGS EXHIBIT B - APPLICATION EXHIBIT C - TOP OF MILL PUD APPROVAL ORDINANCE EXHIBIT D - BAVARIAN INN PUD APPROVAL ORDINANCE EXHIBIT E -HOUSING BOARD COMMENTS EXHIBIT F - PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION EXHIBIT G -PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES U0 .. EXHIBIT A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AMENDMENT Review Criteria & Staff Findings SECTION 26.445.050, REVIEW STANDARDS: PUD AMENDMENT Section 26.445.050 ofthe Regulations provides that development applications for a PUD amendment must comply with the following standards and requirements. A. General Requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposal is consistent with the objectives of the Aspen Area Community Plan. In the original approvals for the Bavarian Inn and the Top of Mill PUDs. it was found that the affordable housing proposed in each of the respective developments was consistent with the AACP. That being the case, staff feels that the request will not alter either development's ability to house a portion of the Community's workforce iii the upper-valley. Therefore, staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. Staff Finding The proposal is not requesting a change in the approved land uses for either of the developments. Staff does not believe that this criterion is applicable to application. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely a.ffect the t uture development (dthe surrounding area. Staff Finding Staff does not believe that the proposal will adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area iii any way. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt .from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. Staff Finding The Applicant has already obtained GMOS exemptions for all of the units that are subject to this application. Staff finds this criterion to be met. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirement~ for all properties within the PUD. The dimensional requirements of the underlying -4- .. zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensionsfor the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property: a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b) Natural and man-made hazards. c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and landforms. d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. Staff Finding This application does not propose to change the physical characteristics of either development in anyway. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity Of open space und site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. Staff Finding This application does not propose to amend the dimensional requirements that were approved for either of the developments. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. The appropriate number of qt.Pstreet parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including thosefor pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. Staff Finding This application does not propose to amend the off-street parking requirements that were established for the respective developments. Therefore. staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. -5- .. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to service the proposed development. b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance to the proposed development. Staff Finding This application does not request a reduction in the maximum allowable density of either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced it there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) The land is not suitablefor the proposed development because of ground instability or the possibility of mudflow, rock falls or avalanche dangers. b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and consequent water pollution. c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City. d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. Staff Finding This application is not requesting a reduction in the maximum allowable density of either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's physical constraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if: a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area plan to which the property is subject. b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in subparagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided, or those characteristics mitigated. c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern, land uses, and characteristics. -6- .. Staff Finding This application is not requesting an increase in the maximum allowable density of either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. B. Site Design: The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with thefollowing: 1. Existing natural or man-made features o.f the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved site plan of either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve signiticant open ,spaces and vistas. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved elevations or placement of structures. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved placement or orientation of the structures within either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. Staff Finding This application does not alter the on-site location of structures within either development. Therefore. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 5. Adequate pedestrian und handicapped access is provided. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved floor plans within either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. -7- .. 6. Site drainage is accommodated.for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved site drainage or the location of the structures within either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately de-signed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved location of the structures within either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. C. Landscape Plan: The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the.following: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designed treatment O.f exterior spaces, preserving existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety ofornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved landscaping plan for either development. Therefore. staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved landscaping plan for either development. Therefore. staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved landscaping plan for either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. -8- .. D. Architectural Character: It is the purpose of this standard to encourage architectural interest, variety, character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the building'% proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of materials, and other attributes which may significantly represent the character of the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the jinal development plan and architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed architecture o.f the development shall: 1. be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the intended use, and respect the scale und massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved elevations of either development. Therefore. staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use 0.1 non- or less-intensive mechanical systems. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved construction methods utilized in building either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. Accommodate the storage and shielding of snow, ice, and water in a safe an appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved architectural elevations or the method in which the shielding of snow is to occur. Additionally, this application does not alter the snow storage location that was set out in the respective PUDs. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. E. Lighting: The purpose of this standard is to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic concerns. Thefollowing standards shall be accomplished: 1. All lighting is proposed No as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any king to adjoining streets or lands. Lighting Of site features, structures, and access ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. Staff Finding Both developments are required to meet the City o f Aspen Lighting Code as is set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. Staff finds this criterion to be met. -9- .. 2. AH exterior lighting shall be in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD documents. Up-lighting of site.features, buildings, landscape elements, and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. Staff Finding Both developments are required to meet the City of Aspen Lighting Code as is set forth iii Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. Staff finds this criterion to be met. G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area: If the proposed development includes a common park, open space, or recreation area for the mutual beneÂ® of all development in the proposed PUD, the following criteria shall be met: 1. The proposed amount, location, and design Of the common park, open space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural landscape .features of the property, provides visual relief to the property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses and property users of the PUD. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved amount, location, or design of the approved open space. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas is deeded in pei*petuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unil owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar manner. Staff Finding This application does not alter the method in which the common park and recreation areas in each development are owned and maintained. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through legal instrument Â·for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Staff Finding This application does not alter the method in which the common park and recreation areas in each development are owned and maintained. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. - 10 - .. H. Utilities and Public Facilities: The purpose c}f this standard is to ensure the development does not impose any undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. Staff Finding Staff believes that sufficient public infrastructure exists to amend the respective PUDs as requested in that there is no additional development proposed by this application. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. Adverse impacts mi public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. Staff Finding This application will not require public infrastructure improvements and will not have adverse impacts on the public infrastructure of either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. Staff Finding This application is not proposing to install nor is being required to install oversized utilities to swap housing categories. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. I. Access and Circulation (Only standards 1&2 apply to Minor PUD applications): The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: 1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through and approved private road, u pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved access within either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking arrangement do not create traftic congestion on the roads surrounding the - 11 - .. proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. Staff Finding Staff does not believe that the approved parking arrangement within either of the developments would need to be amended due to the request to swap affordable housing categories between units because the use of the units is not changing. Staff finds this criterion to be met. J. Phasing of Development Plan. The purpose of these criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted.final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shan comply with thetollowing: 1. All phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. 2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent practical, occupants o.f initial phases from the construction of later phases. 3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees und fees-in-lieu, construction Of any .facilities to be used jointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. Staff Finding Construction of the subject units is nearing completion. This application is not proposing to amend the approved phasing for either of the respective developments. Staff finds this criterion to be met. - 12 - .. EXHIBIT A AMENDMENT TO GMQS DEVELOPMENT ORDER Review Criteria & Staff Findings SECTION 26.470.110, REVIEW STANDARDS: GMQS AMENDMENT Section 26.470.110 of the Regulations provides that development applications for a GMQS amendment must comply with the following standards and requirements. A. Exception. The following activities shall be exempt from these amendment procedures, provided they are reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director prior to construction, except as allowed for during actual development under (2), below: 1. Any change required to be made to a development order to respond to conditions imposed upon the proposed development by the Growth Management Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission, or the City Council during the review of other development applications relevant to the proposed development; and, Staff Finding Staff believes that the general affordable housing use of the units subject to this application will not change. Moreover. staff feels that the affordable housing units that are subject to this proposal will still contribute the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) goal of housing the Community's workforce in the upper valley. Thus, staff believes that the proposed request is consistent with the representations made by the Applicant during the original review of the respective planned unit developments. Staff finds this criterion to be 1-net. 2. Any insubstantial modification to the development order, which shall be limited to technical or engineering considerations first discovered during actual development that could not reasonably be anticipated during the review process, or any other minor change that the Community Development Director finds has no effect on the conditions and representations made during the original project review. Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposed request is a minor change to the approved Top of Mill and Bavarian PUDs in that tlle affordable housing use of the units subject to this amendment will not change. Staff finds this criterion to be met. -13- 40~ fie~v9 -1- { 14 ~ 0 bau ?59 Ex h & b ; 1 *u Four Peaks Development 1000 South Mill St. Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-2114 July 24,2003 City off\.spen Department of Community Development, c/o Joyce Allgier 530 E. Main Street, 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Joyce: I am wnting to request to swap some category designations between units iii the Bavarian : Inn and Top of MillÂ·affordable housing projects. This has no impact to the bottom line number ofbedrooms, FTE's or any other quantifiable criteria. -We are asking for this simply to help us place potential designated buyers in units that they both desire and for which they qualify. The following table summarizes our request. Bavarian and Top Of Mill API New Proposed Category Changes Current New Current Proposed PUD Proposed Max sales Max sales PUD APCHA APCHA . 2003 2003 Addresses - Beds Bath Category Category APCHA APCHA BI South Buildihg - 814 W Main - Â· 3 3 -4~-~ ~ 2 -$~ 133,500 $ 133,500 . Â· . TOM Parcel 2 - Unit D - East most unit 3 3 2 4 . . $- 271,200 $ 271,200 . BI North Building -- 821 W Bleeker 2- 2 2 3 $ 108,700 $. 159,900 1.- BI Original Building - Unit 204 2 2 3 2 $ 159,900 $ 108,700 Â·~ Total Gross Sales $ 673,300 S 673,300 APCHA staff supported the recluest and the APCHA Board voted unanimously to appro.ve the request on july 16,2003. Per your request, attached are plans showing the unit locations in each project. Thank you, ---7 Scott Writer Four Peaks 1 1-HDKER ST. Bavarian Inn Affordable Housing - _r-,â€¢i.11. - - PARCEL 1 1-ir i 14 1 " 2403 1 1 == r 1 . ' r.-4'.....&- UN INN 1 1 10 lib rim --1, f\\ g=.4-1 7///- L - 8 73 =C 21A -121Â« \ L==21__ 'r- 7 . 11.â€žU , C u 0 41 2Â° 4- 4*EY 1 '- L_ L___ - tuze-- 1 -- U~bk-AM,9 - Â»---------*3-- lf*6424~ 9*40.-L -1 9 2 l iD . B lee Rb.0-. 5*. Id, ~Ec Â£9. 'â€¢ 1' r ~ Â·Â·:9~ - .e.: ,.~_.Â·t.,9-2:.e,6~ ALLKY ALLU râ€¢-r-9 U-- 1.... -04 14 1 â„¢- 8-1.-- Lu u- =AL i .-9-1 PE~~#R kpim~ 14 1. f--22 UL---~~~~~7~-. 1--3 -6 -" 'll_*_'lliy_ M 1 - El=1-11 1-Â©-5 1 r. 'h *' UZBf: C - - Ull 74 + .-I - 112|11 f=] Mill ,=. - 1 1 - r. ,-, 67~ ER CE= U ! . r '- R En]7313'-- 1 F_Â¤/L~~ =2 6= =u IMI Ea~tr- --3 11.-6- E 51 1 r- -- L.-------- 1,461 W trt<- im.CY !-Lf -- rÂ»-, li -'*1- Ell L..,.1 ~Ef L= 11 L__ _! 4 LZM = 4 - AA - 1 -00--~ '_4 le__j L ~ _J PARCHL 2 1 1 ! i h.-0 - -pill-.I-%-i--------R - F t.i .c) . M.*1 54.- MAIN ST. MAIN ST. ..~.. ,_ .-,7. 1*Â«â‚¬42* Â»Toâ‚¬ / NOR 11 1 T /lt' i/ SCALE: 1516'-<1" ~~1 Cwl .,4, P60 '1'op of Mill Affordable Housing 7-004 "l SEEXgL=_ELMI, IA l .i- 8 99 - 0 (944 4>F~ (3--+1 06 Cjh sw 1 N 251312__-x------ 2,Â·Â·r . 1 ---------- ----4---- --ii -7---7---t----------------___.-____ tZZ -0 21 3 54 _Â«__L_,1.2 ~_\ 2r r 1 -_1_________ i 1 -_ -1 1 C , 21 ---t - ,Â«3 kÂ», L ~~ _ 1.- (3 ( - - 4337 3 1 C Â· 1 3 45 V t fl-*ff- F r=11 _ 1*11* . 9 --7 41#1 3/3 3 - *.: tr, -14 11=94Â« r===- --1~ 7-1 412 Emt-Â«449 Al 2 R -- * Fi ---- 03 i - 6Â»1 7*LF--1-7- - EL-- iJ , E- 11'- -1 ---11%.-CO f I 41 J 1/ 25'-3 4, 1 Lt .*fl.(0 1-221*-1- 25- r p'*- '8/-L---1- 43%41. _ O 4 â‚¬) 4 4-6~24-110~->------gj 1 --- -~.4,4.411~!149-:,1 .@ - -1 ," 4 614 5/1, N UNIT 'A' UNE_IE__ UNIT 'C' UNI-1- 'D' - UC .15'K . Crâ‚¬ 'OC - 1-1 lim E *1 1111 illi 111111'lli lli Page: 1 0 - 466392 a 01 T 14- 9 v 04/19/2001. _1:44 P62 SILVIA DAVIS PI-KIN COUNTY Co R 35.00 D 0.00 ORDINANCE No. 7 SERIES OF 2002 AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE FINAL PLA-NNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION INCLUDING SUBDIVISION, CONDOMINIUMIZATION, MOUNTAIN VIEW PLANE, SPECIAL REVIEW, GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA EXEMPTIONS (GMQS), 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW, AND REZONING FOR THE TOP OF MILL SITE TO LODGE / TOURIST RESIDENTIAL PUD AND CONSERVATION, LOT 3 OF THE ASPEN MOUNTAIN- SUBDIVISION / PUD, CIT-Y AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO PARCEL NO. 2737-182-85-003 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Top of Mill Investors, LLC c/o Four Peaks Development, LLC (Applicant), represented by Vann Associates, requesting Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval for Lot 3 of the Aspen Mountain Subdivision / PUD (hereinafter ".AMPUDD; and WHEREAS, Top of Mill Investors, LLC c/o Four Peaks Development, LLC requested specific land use approvals as part of the Final PUD including Final PUD Development Plan, Subdivision, Condominiunization, Mountain View Plane, Special Review, GMQS Exemption, 8040 Greenline Review, and Rezoning; and WHEREAS, Savanah Limited Partnership, owner at the time of Lot 3 of - AMPUD, received Conceptual PUD approval from City Council for AMI?UL) on December 6,1999 which is memorialized through Resolution No. 93, Series of 1999; and WHEREAS, Top of Mill Investors, LLC, received an Amended Conceptual . Approval from City Council for Lot 3 AMPUD on May 29,2001 which is memorialized through Resolution No. 50, Series 2001; and WHEREAS, the Housing Office, the City Zoning Officer, the City Engineer, the Parks Department, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, the Environmental Health Department, the City Fire Deparunent, the City Streets Department, the City Parking Department, the City Water Department, and the City Electric Deprtment reviewed the development proposal for Lot 3 and provided written referral comments as a result of the Development Review Committee meeting; and WHEREAS, the Applicant appropriately applied for specific land use approvals pursuant to the June 1996 repint of Title 26, Land Use Regulations, of the 1995 .Aspen Municipal Code for the Final PUD for Lot 3 AMPUD including Final PUD Development Plan, Subdivision, Condominiumization, Mountain View Plane, Special Review, Growth Management Quota Exemptions, 8040 Greenline Review, and Rezoning; and h. .1111111111~ 1111111 ~111111111111~111~, 466392 P63- Page: 3 of 7 04/19/2002 11:466 SILV-A DAVIS PI-KIN COUNTY CO R 35.00 D 0.00 Section 1 Pursuant to this Ordinance and consistent with condition no. 3, of Resolution No. 93, Series of 1999, the City Council approves the allowable FAR for each Lot 3 parcel and allocated as shown in the matrix below. Thydel No.-1.-:.IJ-r -4- f .L-Â·-~ ?5.-- j.~3.-DY*-r .1 . - L.~.2. 1.12.j.imum AI1owable FAR : i-- 1-1....1.-4 --.1432.Â· - -.- ~ Parcel 1 1 27,000 square feet ofFAR I Parcel 2 ~ 8,000 square feet ofFAR Parcel 3 1 9,000 square feet of FAR Parcel 4 1 6,200 square feet of FAR Parcel 5 15,200 square feet Â·of FAR Parcel 6 5200 square feet of FAR Parcel 7 ~ 6,500 square feet of FAR ~ Parcel 8 ~ 6,500 square feet of FAR i ~ Parcel 9 ~ No FAR shall be allocated to this parcel Section 2 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the requests for the Final PUD including Final PUD Development Plan, Subdivision, Condominiumization, Mountain View Plane, Special Review, GMQS Exemption, 8040 Greenline Review, and Rezoning for Lot 3 of- AMPUD is hereby approved with the following conditions: 1. The development shall comply with the most recent municipal engineeing practice standards and the "Best Management Practices" (BMPs) identified for water quality control requirements. 2. Regarding the concerns assÂ®ia.ted with *.e_type of units of 41-6 fÂ®r (4) deed-restricted - i .multi-Iarnily hbusing-units.-on PartelÂ·2, should itnot bepossible id'chan/ the-~uf.it type, Staff.~~recomme.I)ds ybe- Ap-plicant/meet with Housing Althority' Staff to ~ maintain the I -7- : P -9 2 --ofthe Category 2, but to pric; ind-Bfrhe three bedroom units bet@e@E Card*bry '3 1-and-2.--and.to price the 4-bedroom unit between Category 2 and 3,-and mirket as a get.-2-=-0Â«1 3. Three of the units on Parcel 2 shall be distributed and sold under the general lottery through the Housing Office. The Applicant shall be able to choose-a buyer for one of the units. However, the buyer must be a fully qualified employee under the category for the . Unit chosen by the applicant; i.e., the potential buyer must meet income and asset requirements, meet minimum occupancy, rot own any other property in the Rearing Fork Drainage System, and have worked in Pitkin County 1500 hours per year for the last four years. 4. The Applicant shall submit Infrastructure and Removal of Fill Material Permits for Lot 3 A.MPUD within 30 (30) days after recordation of all Final PUD documents. The. Applicant may submit building permit applications at the Applicant's discretion, but no sooner than the issuance of a building permit for the Bavarian Inn affordable housing project. The Applicant shall be eligible for a Certificate of Occupancy for the free market i-~'DjU;MMI'IN_ ~Co~~~ 1 1111 11~ 1 ~ L , r 66392 EF R 35.00 0 0.00 11. The Applicant shall formally establish the Top of Mill Trail across Lot 3 ANG?UD. This trail shall have a legal description, be shown on the Final Plat and be dedicated/conveyed to the City of Aspen. Further, the Applicant shall memorialize in the. Final PUD / Subdivision Agreement for Lot 3 and associated condominium (or planned community) documents, the obligation by the master homeowner's association or Applicant to improve the Tob of Mill Trail, at such time the connection is realized, Â·Dursuant to the Parks Department's design criteria. If the trail has not been improved to the satisfaction of the Parks Department within 5 years of the recordation of the Final Plat for AMPUD Lot 3, the master hombowner's association for Lot 3 shall make a cash payment to the City of Aspen equal to a sum defined by the Parks Department for the improvement of the trail. 12. Fire sprinklers and alarm systems shall be installed in Â·all the proposed buildings on Lot 3 as required by the City of Aspen Fire Marshal. Appropriate "booster pumps" (if required) rather than pressure tanks for the sprinkler system shall be used to gain the necessary water pressure as required by the City Fire Department. The owner of each parcel shall be responsible for ensuring that any buildings constructed thereon shall comply with this condition of approval. In addition, the Applicant shall submit a fire safety plan for the demolition to be preformed by the Applicant of the existing structures and the construction of the proposed development of Lot 3 to the Engineering Department at the time of building permit application. 13. The Applicant shall execute a "Line Extension Request" and a "Collection System Agreement" with Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD) prior to building permit application. In addition, forty percent (40%) of the estimated total Connection fees must be paid to ACSD by the applicant for service lines that are to be stubbed off Â·the main line into the specific parcels of this development. 14. The Applicant shall be required to show to the ACSD all service locations at the station numbersÂ· on the final utility plans for this development prior to building permit application. Additionally, the Applicant shall indicate to the ACSD if main line easements in the ROW are to be dedicated by plat or by description. 15.Â· The Applicant shall record the approved condominium (or planned community) subdivision plat for Parcels 1,2, and 3 of AMPUD Lot 3 in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder within one hundred eighty (180) days of its approval by the Community Development Director. Failure on the part of the Applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty (180) days following approval by the Community Development Director shall render the plat invalid and a new application and approval will be required. 16. The Applicant shall record a PUD Agreement and the Final PUD Plans within 180 days of the final approval by City Council with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder binding this property to this development approval. 17- The development of the free market single-family dwellings proposed for Parcels 4-8 of AMPUD Lot 3 shall be subject to a site and design specific 8040 Greenline Review prior to their development. These Parcels shall only be required to respond to review srandards .11 Ill H lilli 111 LI'l 3 1% 12111 111 11&H klli 6 . Page: 7 of 7 P65 ~466392 04/19/2002 11:46F SELVIA DAVIS PI-KIN COUNT' CO R 35.00 D 0.00 Section 3 All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Aspen City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 4 This Ordinance shall I10t effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or , amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 5 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, disinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validityof the remaining portions thereof. Section 6 A Dublic hearing onthis Ordinance .was held on the 1 lth day of March at 5:00 pm in the Council Chambers Room, Aspen City Hall3 Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulation L within the City of Aspen ~ INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City - Cbuncil of the City of Aspen on this 2501 day of February, 2002. +1.''f:fteh,ttl ,[44/ 1 1 I. fiC:dhâ‚¬4 St }46Â·th, City Clerk Helen kaliA'KPEcQXud, Mayor -- 1, : I i 9---FINALLY, adbpted, passed and approved this 11 th Day of March, 2002. Rfee <-- 3. h 1 0 0 'ry f f x - 1 \ t,id//4 ~-1 / U Kathi-yri; 5 1#ch, City Clerk He]4 Itatfnklai:d.~ud, Mayor E Approve-d,Â·hs to form: r .. 27--/ ---7h- 1/ 4 00.,-%M 1 1 21 ot.4,3~ jiliiAÂ¥drceitor, City Attorney , Â·Â·Git\tk.2-- 3 1- -~- I - l!111'1111~1~1~1~11111 ~1111-1111111111,11~111~1l ~--1 10/01/2001 10:46f 459214 Page: 1 of 8 SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 40.00 D 0.00 ORDIN.Â©ICE NO. 21, SERIES OF 2001 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN APPROVING THE FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) FOR THE BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, SUBDIVISION TO CREATE NINETEEN AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS, REZONING TO RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY WITH A PLA-NNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICT, A GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM EXEMPTION, AND VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS ON LOTS D THROUGH I ' AND LOTS K THROUGH P, BLOCK 12, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No. 2735.123.08.004 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Bavarian Affordable Housing LLC, owner, as represented by Vann Associates, LLC, for a Final Planned Unit Development Plan, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review, Growth Management Quota System Exemption and Vested Property Rights approval of a for-sale, deed-restricted, residential affordable housing development of 19 units, 40 bedrooms and 31 parking spaces on two (2) parcels located between W. Main Street, Seventh Street, Eighth Street, and W. Bleeker Street; and, WHEREAS, the application was submitted pursuant to Sections 26.52.080, 26.64.040, 26.84.030, 26.88.040,26.92.030 and 26.102.040 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations (the June 1996 reprint of Title 26 of the 1995 Aspen Municipal Code, including all amendments thereto enacted prior to September 15, 1998, and hereinafter called the "1995 Aspen Municipal Code") as was in effect at the time of submission of the conceptual PUD application; and WHEREAS, Parcel 1 of thÂ¢ subject site is located at the southwest comer of the -' intersection of Seventh Street and West Bleeker Street, and is legally described as Lots D through I, Block 12, and Parcel 2 of the subject site is located at the northeast corner ofN. Eighth Street and West Main Street, and is legally described as Lots K through P, Block 12, both of the City and Townsite of Aspen; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the above-cited sections of Title 26 of the 1995 Aspen Mulcipal Code, land use applications requesting land use review for Final Planned Unit Development, Subdivision, Rezoning, Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemption from the scoring and competition for affordable housing development may be approved by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Community Development Director, the Planning and Zoning Commission made at a duly noticed public hearing and the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Board made at a duly noticed public hearing, and the appropriate referral agencies; and, Bavarian Final PUD Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2001, Page 1 .. P67 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.100.050 of the 1995 Aspen Municipal Code, the Housing Board made a recommendation to the City Council to approve the affordable housing development, with conditions, and exempt the development from the scoring and competition process of GMQS, after conducting a public hearing on March 7, 2001; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.04.100 of the 1995 Aspen Municipal Code; the Planning and Zoning Commission made a recommendation to the City Council 0 regarding the application requests for Final Planned Unit Development (PUD), Subdivision, Rezoning, and Growth Management Quota System Exemption approval after conducting a hearing public hearing on March 6 and March 20,2001, regarding the proposal; and have forwarded their recommendations through Resolution No. 12, Series of 2001, by a vote of five (5) to zero (0); and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.32 of the 1995 Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning ahd Zoning Commission approved through Resolution No. 12, Series of 2001, a request for Speci-al Review to establish thirty-one (31) off-street parking requirements for affordable housing; and, WHEREAS, the Fire Marshal, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District,.the City Water Department, City Engineering, Parks Department, Environmental Health Department, the City Transportation Planner, the City Zoning Officer, the Roaring Fork Transit Agency, tht Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authoity, and the Community Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has 7 - . reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, Planning and Zoning Commission, -Housing Boatd, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion ofpublic health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY T-HE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows: 459214 1 \11% 11% lilli ittimillill %11\ %114 \\1\ rill 10/01/2001 10:46~ Page- 2 of 8 SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 40.00 D 0.00 Bavarian Final PUD Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2001, Page 2 459214- P68 10/01/2001 10:466 Page: 3 of 8 SILVIA DAVIS PI-KIN COUNTY CO R 40.00 D 0.00 Section 1: Pursuant zo the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the 1995 Aspen Municipal Code, the Bavarian Inn Affordable Housing Final PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning, and Growth Management Quota System Exemption for the development of a "for-sale" deed-restricted affordable housing development consisting of 19 housing units, 40 bedrooms, and 31 parking spaces and apputtenant improvements, all as put forth specifically in the Bavarian Affordable Housing Final PUD Application dated December 1, 2000, prepared by Vann Associates, LLC, and as amended and/or conditioned through this Ordinance is hereby approved, subject to the conditions of approval described hereinafter. Section 2: Conditions of.Approval: 1. A Final PUD Plan shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval granted by City Council and shall include: a) A final plat meeting the requirementh of the City Engineer and showing g easements, encroachment agreements and licenses with reception numbers for physical improvements, and location of utility pedestals. b) An illustrative site plan of the project showing the proposed improvements, landscaping plan, utility plan, grading/drainage plan, parking layout, and the dimensional requirements as approved. c) A drawing representing the project's architectural character. d) Within 180 days after final -approval by City Council and prior to applying for a buildink pennit, the applicant shall record a Subdivision/PUD Agreement with the ~ , Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder binding this property to this development approval. 2. The dimensional requirenients of the PUD shall not be in excess of the Residential/Multi-Family Zone District's dimensional requirements and are established as specifically put! forth in the application. The Residential Design Standards of the City are found to be met through the PUD process and no additional approval is required. The approved setbacks are as follows: a) A 4-foot variance in the 10-foot fear yard setback for the existing Bavarian Inn on Parcel l. ' b) A 7-foot variance in the 10-foot rear yard setback for the proposed duplex -on Parcel -1. c) A 2-foot and 4-foof variance in the required 10-foot front yard setback of the proposed Main Street and Eighth Street multi-family structures, respectively, on Parcel 2. d) A 2-foot variance in the 5-foot side yard setback on the west side of the proposed multi-family structure along Eighth Street on Parcel 2. Bavarian Final PUD Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2001, Page. 3 ' 33 - 1 lf-- 11\%11% 11\1-1 45921 069 Page: 4 of 8 10/01/2001 10:46f SILLIA DAVIS PIT IN COUNTY 2 0 R 40.00 D 0.00 e) All buildings will have flat roofs. f) The N1 /142 and Sl-S5 building complexes will be limited to twenty (20) feet in height measured to the top of the roof. g) The W2-W5 building complex will be limited to twenty-five (25) feet in height measured to the top of the roof. 3. The Applicant shall implement the cabin relocation plan as put forth in the application. 4. The existing Bavarian Inn structure shall be subject to the requirements of Part VI[, Section 14, Deed Restricting Existing Dwelling Units of APCHA. Existing units must be upgraded in accordance with the following criteria and specific provisions: a) The interior walls of all units must be freshly painted. b) The interior appliances must be purchased within the last five years and be in good working condition. c) Carpet mlist be less than five years old and be in good condition and repair, or be replaced. d) The exterior building walls shall be freshly binted within one year of dedication. An alternative to painting would be the application of a new stucco skim coat to the exterior, subject to approval by APCHA. e) Â· A general level of upgrade to yards and landscaping shall be provided. 0 Windows, heating, plumbing, electrical systems, fixtures, and equipment shall be in good and working order. g) The roof must have a remaining useful life of at least ten (10) years and any necessary repair or replacement shall occur to-ensure the ted (10) year life span. h) All units shall meet Uniform Building Code minimum standards, any applicable housing code or, in the absence of an adequatd code, the housing code acceptable to the APCHA. i) All Units shall be approved by the APCHA and verified by h qualified Building Inspector accepted and approved by the APCHA. j) Applicant shall bear the costs and expenses ofany required upgrades to meet the : above standards as well as any structural/engineering reports required by the APCHA to assess the suitability for occupancy and compliance with the APCHA standards of the proposed units. k) Any broken window glass shall be replaced. Window sills or frames in disl-epair shall be repaired or replaced. 1) Any fascia, soffit and exterior woodwork shall be repaired, replaced and repainted as necessary . m) Rain gutters shall be repaired or replaced as necessary. n) The property grounds shall be cleaned of debris materials, be upgraded to a grassy condition, and be landscaped in accordance with the Final PUD plan except that additional landscaping shall be installed along the 7th Street in the parking lot island. Bavarian Final PUD Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2001, Page 4 459214 0 11- lilli lilli 1111 QI lilli,11111 1111 111 Page: 5 of 8 P70 10/01/2001 10:46F SILVIA DAVIS PI-KIN COUNTY Co R 40.00 D 0.00 5. The Applicant, or the applicant's representative, must meet with tile Housing Office pior to listing the units for sale to identify the units that would amount to 13 FTE's. These units may be used to house fully qualified employees chosen by the applicant for the initial sale only of the unit. Any sale after the initial sale of these units would be required to be listed with the Housing Ofice and sold under the lottery process. The employees must qualify pursuant to APCHA Guidelines defining .a "qualified employee," 6. A deed restriction, provided by the Housing Office, shall be placed on all of the units pnor to building permit application. 7. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy, the Housing Office shall have the ight to inspect all units for compliance. 8. A construction management plan that addresses the preservation of the existing landscaping and vegetation on the site and within the public right-of-ways adj acent to the subject property shall be submitted and approved by the City Forester prior to issuance ofa building permit. 7 9. The landscape plan shall be amended to show four (4) Cottonwood trees along Main Street and landscaping within the landscape island. The revised landscape plan must be submitted, showing exact location and spacing, with the official tree removal permit with the required amendments in this approval for the proposed plantings and approved by the City Forester prior to the issuance of a building permit. 10. The Main Street sidewalk design and location shall be amended to align the sidewalk along the property line to allow for the maximum space for trees and a buffer zone for potential future Main Street iniprovements. The sidewalk shall curve around the 12-inch cottonwood proposed to be saved on the Main Street frontage. 11. Any irrigation design proposed for installation in the public right-of-way must be approved by the Parks Department prior to installation and should be included as part of a right-of-way permit. 12. The building permit application shall include: a) A copy of the final Ordinance and recorded Planning and Zoning Conunission - Resolution. b) The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. c) A completed tap permit for service with the Aspeh Consolidated Sanitation District. d) A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and documenting required approvals noted above in Conditions No. 10 and 11 from the City Forester for mitigation of removedÂ·trees and existing tree preservation. e) A fugitive dukt control plan. . Bavarian Final PUD Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2001, Page 5 459214 11111111111111111'j 1111:11 11111111 lili 111 10/01/2001 10:45; Page: 6 of 8 P71 S.LVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 40.00 D 0.00 13. The building permit plans shall demonstrate.an adequate fire sprinkler system and alarm system for the development as required by the Aspen Fire Marshal. 14. Prior to issuance of a building pennit: a) The primary contractor shall submit a letter to the Community Development Director stating that the conditions of approval have been read and understood. b) All tap fees, impacts fees, and building permit fees shall be paid. If an alternative agreement to delay paymentÂ· of the Water TapÂ·~and/or Parks Impact fee is finalized, those fees shall be payable according to the agreement. 15. No excavation or storage of dirt or material shall occur within tree diplines or outside of the approved building envelope and access envelope. 16. All construction vehicles, materials, and debis shall be maintained on-site and not within public rights-of-way unless specifically approved by the Director of the Streets Department. 17. The applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. 18. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed rock or other style mud rack must be installed duing construction. 19. All uses and construction shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards and -with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code as they pertain to utilities. 20. The Applicant or owher shall mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. 21. The site plan shall be amended to show the dumpster (on the alley) relocated from the west end of the parking area to east end of the parking area. 22. The Home Owner's Association Declarations, Restrictions and covenants shall include a provision disallowing dogs. Such provision in the Declarations, Restrictions and Covenants may be amended only with a vote of 100% unanimous approval by the homeowners. 23. The sign plan as described in the Final PUD application shall be amended as follows: a). Re. Sign A-strike the word, "Affordable" from the sign, b) Re. Sign F-add the words, "Do Not Enter . c) Install an additional Sign F at the west end of the parking court. Bavarian Final PUD Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2001, Page 6 459214 â€¢ 1Â®mlEEâ€¢@~ Page: 7 of 8 10/01/2001 10:462 SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 40.00 D 0.00 24. The Home Owner's Association is advised (not required) to set aside a special reserve ftom the Home Owner's Association funds for the replacement of landscaping and vegetation on the site, including that which was located on the site prior to development. Section 3: The Official Zone District Map of the City of Aspen shall be, and is hereby amended by the Community Development Director to reflect rezoning of Parcel 2, legally described as Lots K through P, Block 12, of the City and Townsite of Aspen, to Residential/Multi- Family with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay Zone District. Section 4: A waiver of the Park Development Impact Fee is herdby granted in accordance with the provisions of Section 26.44.060, Affordable Housing/Historic Landmark, of the 1995 Aspen Municipal Code. Section 5: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 6: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any actibn or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the.ordinances repealed or . amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 7: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or port-ion 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. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBISHED as provided by law, by the City Council ofthe City of Aspen on this 25th day of June, 2001 and set for public hearing and Second Reading on the 23rd day of July, 2001- 11,-,?.07-~1. jÂ« #9-<f12-429riLVA ELLCi ery Clerk Hilen Kail I<~ancite-De, Mayor - 1 2.1 47 1 4 , >di '. / Col .84.k D o / Bavarian Final PUD Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2001, Page 7 .. P73 .rd FINALLY, adopted, passed, and approved by a vote of four to one (4 tol),this b day of Julv, 2001. Approved as to form: Approved as to content: U .1 vÂ» U John j*orcester, City Attorney Hefen tiffin klan~*Gd,-Ma-yor ATTEST: 4~19143 ~641-_ Kathryn S. 106h, City Clerk - C:home/Joyce/BavFinalPUDCouncOrdII 111- 111-1 lili- 111 - --1-1111- 111111 111 lilli 1 11 11-1 10/01/2001 10:46~ 459214 Page, 8 of 8 SILVIA DAVIS PI-KIN COUNTY CO R 40.00 D 0.00 Ravarian Final PILD Ordinance No. 21. Series of 2001, Page 8 . 1 PIA 4411 4)7.-- 12' MEMORANDUM TO: Housing Board FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing Office THRU: - Maureen Dobson, Executive Director , DATE: July 16,2003 RE: REQUEST TO SWAP CATEGORIES BETWEEN BAVARIA-N AND TOP OF MILL ISSUE: Four Peaks Development is requesting that between the two properties that they are h developing for affordable housing -- the Bavarian site between 800 West Main and 800 West f Bleeker, and the Top of Mill site (behind the old Grand Aspen) -- they would like the ability to i switch the categories between the two properties. BACKGROUND: The attached shows the breakdown of what is currently approved for both properties and what is being proposed. As you can see from the attached, the amount of units per 0 category does not change which means that the applicant's bottom line also does not change. The develop-er is allowed to place a qualified employee of their choice for a specific number of units. The employees that they would like to recognize for their service to their company and offer a unit to does not "fit".the current approval. The bottom line does not change. The housing program is still getting just as many units and because they can choose the qualified household of their choice, the same category-type units that would have been in the lottery prior to this change would still be the same. R Staff is currently checking with the City Attorney to see if this request, if approved by the Board, E- would then need to be approved by the City Council. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending the Board approve this request due to the following: 1. The bottom line remains the same. This means that the request has no monetary value to the applicant. Their only "value" is recognizing the employees whom they would like' to give the opportunity to purchase a unit. 1.- 2. The same type of categories and unit sizes remain the same, theyjust change between the two properties. .. P75 3. The.units that they are requesting to switch will go to qualified households of their choice. Each qualified household not only has to meet income, assets and occupancy requirements, but also the four-year priority requirement. 2 0 . Dll'~h it lf'" RESOLUTION N0.22 (SERIES OF 2003) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE PUD AND GMQS AMENDMENTS TO THE TOP OF MILL (LOT 3, ASPEN MOUNTAIN PUD) AND BAVARIAN INN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS TO ALLOW FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE APPROVED AFFORDABLE HOUSING CATEGORIES WITHIN BOTH DEVELOPMENTS, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-182-02-202 Parcel ID: 2735-123-08-004 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Four Peaks Development, represented by Scott Writer, requesting approval of a PUD amendment and a GMQS amendment to the Bavarian Inn and Top of Mill Planned Unit Developments to allow for 1) the affordable housing unit at 821 W. Bleeker to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 3 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit 204 in the former Bavarian Inn building to convert from a Category 3 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit; and to allow for 2) the affordable housing unit at 814 W. Main Street to convert from a Category 4 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit D, Parcel 2, of the Top of Mill PUD to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 4 affordable housing unit; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Housing Board recommended approval o f the proposed amendments; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on October 7,2003, the Planning and Zoning Commission continued the public hearing until October 21, 2003; and, WHEREAS, during a continued public hearing on October 21, 2003, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein and approved this resolution, by a five to one (5-1) vote; recommending that City Council approve the proposed amendment; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval o f the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: .. Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in City of Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.445, Planned Unit Development; and Section 26.470.110, Amendment of GMQS Development Order, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends that City Council approve the proposed amendments to allow for 1) the affordable housing unit at 821 W. Bleeker to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 3 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit 204 in the former Bavarian Inn building to convert from a Category 3 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit, and to allow for 2) the affordable housing unit at 814 W. Main Street to convert from a Category 4 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit D, Parcel 2, of the Top of Mill PUD to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 4 affordable housing unit. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or ( amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity o f the remaining portions thereo f. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 21st day of October, 2003. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: 4-114 4/ 6-79 1.2- ~ City/Attorney Jasmine Tygre, Chair l.0/ u~f ATTEST: L*2269 65*30Â«D ~fAckie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 611 i b'-I-,4// ASPEN PLANNING &~NING COMMISSION Min~ October 21, 2003 operations of the structure were great but the one issue was still a problem for him. Kruger agreed with the other commissioners about the appropriateness of this location in town, the zoning was appropriate and it was not a residential neighborhood. Kruger had reservations about the queuing but believed that people would unload at the gondola; she said the applicant should not be penalized for the deliveries in the neighborhood. Rowland said this project was dubious and uncertain what was going to happen; they were not even considering some o f the growth potentials in population of Colorado as the third fastest growing state in the country. Rowland gave the growth potential statistics for Pitkin, Eagle, Garfield and Denver; he said this was a regional problem and the counties needed to get together to alleviate the problems. Rowland asked if we were encouraging people to bike, walk, or use public transportation; these were key ingredients to what makes this town and valley beautiful. Tygre added the concern about the queuing was a sticking point for many of the commissioners and queuing was not in the applicant's control. Hoefer clarified that the applicant may go forward to Council with the negative recommendation from P&Z. PUBLIC HEARING: TOP OF MILL BAVARIAN/ PUD and GMOS AMENDMENTS Jasmine Tygre opened the public hearing for the Bavarian and Top of Mill PUD and GMQS amendments. David Hoefer stated that the notice was sufficient to proceed. James Lindt explained this was for a PUD and GMQS amendment to the Bavarian Inn and Top of Mill PUD; the request has the ability to swap categories. The Bavarian Inn was to switch one unit from a category 3 unit to a category 2 unit and balance that within the PUD to switch one of the duplex units to the west of the Bavarian Inn from category 2 to a category 3 unit; there would be no loss in the number o f bedrooms or units in either of the categories. Lindt said that in the five- plex to convert one unit from a category 4 to a category 2 unit and in order to balance it out they proposed the Top of Mill to take one of the category 2 aftbrdable housing units and convert it to a category 4 unit. Staff agreed with the housing board because no units would be lost in any category and recommended approval of the proposed resolution. Scott Writer, Four Peaks Development, stated the basis was they were allowed to select qualified employees to put into certain units and one employee would like a certain unit, which was a category 2 but doesn't qualify for a 2 but rather a 4 so they would just switch with the Top of Mill units that were slightly larger with garages. Writer said housing found it hard to filllarger 3 bedroom category 2 6 ASPEN PLANNING ,~ONING COMMISSION Mi~es October 21,2003 units; there was no specific employee in mind for the Top of Mill (they get to place one at the Top of Mill). The other 3 Top of Mill units will remain category 2. Bendon said that the specific categories were referenced in the original PUD therefore the PUD amendment must go through P&Z to City Council for housing policy recommendations. Eric Cohen referenced Section 2 li 2 in the ordinance regarding the 4-bedroom unit. Writer replied that one of 2 units was a 4-bedroom but that was not the subject of this application. Cohen asked the number of square feet for the category 2-bedrooms. Writer replied it was a minimum of 800. Dylan Johns asked i f they were still averaging category 2. Lindt answered that because the PUDs were linked in terms of mitigation requirements the average category 2 was still maintained. Johnson asked the number of category 2s and 4s would be at the Top of Mill and the Bavarian Inn. Lindt replied that there were 3 category 2s and 1 category 4 at the Top of Mill and Writer and Lindt did not have the exact number for the Bavarian Inn. No public comments. MOTION: Eric Cohen moved to recommend City Council approve Resolution #22, 2003 recommending City Council approve a PUD amendment and a GMQS amendment to the Bavarian Inn and Top of Mill Planned Unit Developments to allow for 1) the affordable housing unit at 821 W. Bleeker to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 3 a#ordable housing unit and to allow for Unit 204 in the former Bavarian Inn building to convertfrom a Category 3 a#ordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit, and to allowfor 2) the afordable housing unit at 814 W, Main Street to convertfrom a Category 4 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit and to allowfor Unit D, Parcel 2, ofthe Top of Mill PUD to convert from a Category 2 alfordable housing unit to a Category 4 affordable housing unit; seconded by Dylan Johns. Roll call vote: Johnson, no; Skadron, yes; Johns, yes; Ro-wland, yes; Cohen, yes; Tygre, yes. APPROVED 5-1. Discussion: Cohen asked that the housing guideline information be more accessible for the P&Z commission. Johnson said the AACP encourages a mix in the affordable housing project and he was reluctant to switch things around because of loose interpretations from the past; he said that he could entertain support for the Bavarian Inn switch but not the Top of Mill. Writer answered that replacement housing as it was originally written in the code was category 2; he said that the mix that they have is actually better and more diversified. Tygre asked for a meeting with the Housing Board sometime in the future. 7 .. 130 S. Galena St. Aspen CO 81611 Aspen Community (970) 920-5090 (970) 920-5439, fax Development Department mX To: Scott Writer From: James Lindt Fax: 925-1036 Pages: Phone: Date: 12/2/03 Re: Bavarian Amendment 2nd Reading CC: U Urgent C] For Review C] Please Comment C] Please Reply [3 Please Recycle â€¢ Comments: H i Scott, Here is our Staff Memo for 2rd Reading. It will be held this Monday (December 8th) evening at around 5:20 PM or so. Please attend. Also, please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. . .. 130 S. Galena St. Aspen CO 81611 Aspen Community (970) 920-5090 (970) 920-5439, fax Development Department 3X To: Scott Writer From: James Lindt Fax: 925-1036 Pages: Phone: Date: 11/14/03 Re: Bavarian PUD Amendment Notice CC: C] Urgent E] For Review C] Please Comment 0 Please Reply C] Please Recycle â€¢ Comments: Hi Scott, Here is the public notice for mailing to property owners within 300 ft of both the Bavarian and Top of Mill Properties. Also, I have made up two public notice signs for posting if you would like to have someone come in and pick them up. You need to have mailing and posting done by November 22nd. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, James . 0 0 130 S. Galena St. Aspen CO 81611 Aspen Community (970) 920-5090 (970) 920-5439, fax Development Department 1X To: Scott Writer From: James Lindt Fax: 925-1036 Pages: Phone: Date: 11/4/03 Re: Bavarian Amendment 1 St Reading CC: E Urgent C] For Review [3 Please Comment [3 Please Reply Â£ Please Recycle â€¢ Comments: H i Scott, Here is the staff memo and ordinance for 1St Reading of the Bavarian Amendment. 1St Reading will be held this coming Monday evening at around 5 PM. Please be there for first reading if you can. Thanks, James . .. ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: ~cl/<A (/ 5 0 /.1 1 Tots r,0 2 2C 1 , Aspen, CO < 1 V . ' SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 9 17 lox , 200_ STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) I. t> < 4-+z to w ( 4Â»_ (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) o f the Aspen Land. Use Code in the following manner: (/~ Publication oj notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an o fficial paper or a paper of general circulation ill the City ofAspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy ofthe publication is attached hereto. v- Posting of notice: By posting o f notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproo f materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (1~) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the~/4 day of /l)*LF,9 -4- , 200 3 , to and including the date and time o f the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. J<-Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subj ect to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records o f Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) .. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is iii any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title. or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement o f an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses o f owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection iii the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. -~ Signature The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this day of .200_,by WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: Notary Public ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL I \\ Â£ . 1 1 , litil , h K UAL - + ... j. t ..1. ..3. 1 4. 1 -' U 411 tic 0 ,...r p . T ..4 4 3. m & Â·. 1 r.' 2Â·1'Â·. Â·Â·"Â·4* 2 61&1/: ./. 1 DATE ./t , TIME ' ). pâ€ž PLACE PURPOSE 1,3(j L . *%'A{Att.6' .. a 41 4, i 'la 4144 â€¢-_1 ' M..f 24(~--(dite'**i.16-t 11 .. 2~'Â£.3~;t79â‚¬~ r Â¥* it,1.6. ..9 h /1 , ..54 Â· 2-2. I . 1 fl 9 ' 31 + 0> ~ f.,3 - 11.1 . 9. 9/ r.....4 10 PUBLIC NOTICE i ..910 3-, . DATE 14Â¢ t c 1- TIME i â€ž,u A P L ACE ~ 42"" PURPOSE ,4 At. ..,r, 4'' 4 1 RBI 300 1 . r 'f '4 1; A 1.1 1 THAW MACHINE FOG 1,0Â©rt- / 970-925-6777 la W -- . 11 $- 223:j - ---~~-* - -- .-*. 1 % :5 â€¢ --1 -- - ~ I. -......I---Le'lligill::Ili/62- - 'flaar-".11 *Cl . 5......... ..4/h e , i, i,i,Â·, Â¢*y:~*' _ 1/.1 , 21*828649Â£ -7.-1 1- -11 *t> - I.,It' LÂ· e' -'22J'" â‚¬9 t.4 f ~ 2.2 :I Xt. 29 24%5'tu i ' Â·, ff la i.' j .i .~9 1 R#:1... 1BI 300 V MACHINE Â¥OI HAE >-925-6777 - L PUBLIC NOTICE ji' :,44' DATE 1/ TIME PLACE 11 - ...5 4 - PURPOSE P 01 - AA.le.212. Â·1,41/4 4'i x.' G.14:~ -4- AL...5*AP Af,014!)4>LE i ~ -.@2- HOO 11AG CATEARL L. ~-~ ~ --- - 9 - - 4 Â¢ -. .. - + 3 3 1. i t; IN* 4 L , 141 1 j , 191(TA f 4 0 1 0 1 1. # 1 4. 3 4% Â·49. . -9- 1 1 4 i 1 *3 4 - Id 1 PUBLIC NOTICE .:.. tgr - DATE I 1/ 16,4 TIME WL#1 . L.t 94.41 l < HA,44 4 PLACE ( 1 191 IAL. l PURPOSE 1 )(Al j Awl j c,~114> 4,4 4/*414/1 1 l LAC Al' 4/ fol'/jj-1/i, f 11&12/1 0 (All,BeR}Â£1_ -" /1 4.* 03 9#40 k .. ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: f-ri ,)8 R ou / 7-ly /3.<A 4~,Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARiNG DATE: )-7 -1Â£8 2 9 , 200_ - 1 1 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) I, 1.47 1 44(()- <=6 (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) o f the Aspen Land. Use Code in the following manner: P<~ Publication of notice. By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting ofnotice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, , Waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide f and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed o f letters not ; less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days 1 .... 9,prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of , 200 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses o f property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) .. Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title. or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of. and the notice to and listing of names and addresses o f owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. 0044 23340 6 @inature V The forqgoing "Affidavit o f Notice" was acknowledged befc\Te me thisAN day of d\)ov . 200-3 by 34..6 ,>Â© r,cbF~ PUBLIC NOTICE , RE: AMENDMENT TO BAVARIAN INN AND TOP 6 OF MILL PUD AND GM(,3 AMENDMENT. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on December 8,2003, at a meeting to WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL begin at 5:00 RM. before the Aspen City Council, Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., As- pen, to consider an application submitted by Four Peaks Development requesting approval of a My commission expires: 4 /13// 03- PUD amendment and a GMQS amendment to al- low for two of the affordable housing units within the Bavarian Inn PUD to swap affordable housing categories. Additionally, the application requests frARYPU â‚¬779 W th / approval to swap affordable housing categories Notary Public between one of the affordable housing units lo- cated in the Bavarian Inn PUD and one ot the af fordable housing units located in the Top of Mill PUD. The properties subject to the proposed amendments are legally described as follows: Parcel 2, Lot 3, of the Aspen Mountain PUD and 1~1~ OATES ..:C# ~ Lots D-1 and Lots K-P, Block 12, City and Townsite .i O 21,0~ of Aspen. 4 *Â»........ .:-TUJ For further information contact James Lindt at ---*/ <2, the City of Aspen Community Development De- 1422;29Â§5:0 2 partment, 130 South Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920-5095. james[@ci.aspen.co.us s/Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor ATTACHMENTS: Aspen City Council Published in The Aspen Times on November 22, 2003.0973) COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL Bavarian and Top of Mill Affo rdable Housing Unit Type and Category Analysis December-03 New PUD Proposed PUD APCHA APCHA Bavarian Subdivision Beds Baths Category Category FTE West Building (Starting North, Going South) 3 3 4 4 3 106 N. 8th 3 3 4 4 3 104 N. 8th 3 3 4 4 3 102 N.8th 3 3 4 4 3 12 South Building (Starting West, Going East) 822 W. Main 3 3 4 4 3 820 W. Main 2 2 3 3 2.25 818 W. Main 1 1 2 2 1.75 816 W. Main 2 2 3 3 2.25 (314 w. Maj~ 3 - 3_ 4 2 -3- 11 North Building (Starting North, Going Southeast) ~823 W~ 3 3 4 4 _-1 (823 W. Bleeker 2 2 2 3___2-22) 5 Original Building (Starting North, Going South) 107 N. 7th Unit 101 3 2 2.5 2.5 3 Unit 102 studio 122 1.25 Unit 103 studio 122 1.25 Unit 104 1 1 1 1 2.25 Unit 201 3 2 2.5 2.5 3 Unit 202 studio 1 2.5 2.5 1.25 Unit 203 studio 122 1.25 21 Mit-204- 2 3-- 2 2.25 3 13 -- -- Total Bedrooms 41 Total FTE 45.0 TOM Parcel 2 3 3 1.5 1.5 3 33223 4 3 2.5 2.5 3.5 Â£ 3 '3 2 4 -1 3 12.5 I ... .. Bavarian and Top Of Mill AH New Proposed Category Changes Current New Current Proposed PUD Proposed Max sales Max sales PUD APCHA APCHA 2003 2003 Addresses Beds Bath Category Category APCHA APCHA South Building - 814 W Main 3 3 4 2 $ 133,500 $ 133,500 TOM Parcel 2 - Unit TBD 3 3 2 4 $ 271,200 $ 271,200 North Building.- 821 W Bleeker 22 2 3$ 108,700 $ 159,900 Original Building - Unit 204 22 3 2 $ 159,900 $ 108,700 Total Gross Sales $ 673,300 $ 673,300 'Vt; b MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Cout~filiLA THRU: Julie Ann Woods. CorREN~ty Development Director FROM: James Lindt, Planner <Tt_ _ RE: Bavarian Inn and Lot 3, Aspen Mountain PUD Amendment and GMQS Amendment- 1St Reading of Ordinance No.9~, Series of 2003 DATE: November 10,2003 PROJECT: BAVARIAN AND LOT 3, AMPUD PUD AMENDMENT REQUEST: The Applicant is requesting a PUD Amendment to amend the categories that were assigned to the Bavarian Inn and Top of Mill (Lot 3, Aspen Mountain PUD) Affordable Housing Units. CURRENT ZONING: Bavarian - R/MF PUD Top of Mill- L/TR PUD LAND USE PUD and GMQS Amendments for both development projects. REQUESTS: STAFF Staff recommends that City Council approve the proposed request. RECOMMENDATION: P&Z The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of the RECOMMENDATION: proposed request. BACKGROUND: The Bavarian Inn Affordable Housing Project was approved as employee housing mitigation for the redevelopment of Lot 5, of the Aspen Mountain PUD. The Bavarian Inn was approved to contain nineteen (19) units of for-sale affordable housing. Additionally, four (4) units of affordable housing were approved to be constructed on Parcel 2. of the Top of Mill Development on South Galena Street. As part of both the Top of Mill and the Bavarian Inn approvals. it was required that the mix of affordable housing units in each development maintain an average of a Category 2 maximum sale price and that the majority of the units would be sold and distributed through the general housing lottery. However, the land use approvals allowed for several of the affordable housing units to be occupied by employees of the developers choice. LAND USE ACTIONS REQUESTED: The Applicant is requesting approval of a PUD Amendment and a GMQS Amendment to allow for 1) two of the units within the Bavarian Inn affordable housing project to swap affordable housing categories. and 2) for another of the Bavarian Inn units to swap affordable housing categories with one of the units located on Parcel 2 of the Top of Mill Development. -1- .. Review of the proposed GMQS amendment requires that City Council review the swap of affordable housing categories after considering a recommendation from the Housing Board. The PUD amendment requires that City Council review the proposed request after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director. STAFF COMMENTS: In reviewing the first request made by the Applicant to swap the unit categories between affordable units within the Bavarian Inn development, staff believes that the request is acceptable in that the development will still have the same mix of categories in comparison with what was originally approved. Additionally, both units that are to be affected by the proposed swap contain two (2) bedrooms each. Therefore, this request would not alter the number of bedrooms in each affordable housing category within the development. Moreover, the Housing Board has reviewed this request and recommended that City Council approve the swap. Similarly. in reviewing the second request made by the Applicant to swap the unit categories between one of the Category 2 units at the Top of Mill and one o f the Category 4 units within the Bavarian Inn project, the Housing Board felt that that the units would still contribute to the overall goal of housing the community's workforce in the upper- valley. And therefore the Housing Board has recommended that City Council approve the proposed request. Conversely, the Planning Staff is somewhat concerned that the Applicant would like to raise the category of the Top of Mill unit, thereby allowing for a person with a higher income to live at the base of Aspen Mountain in place of a person with a lower income. To some, this may appear to be a more desirable location and that the application would negate, if approved, the opportunity for a lower income person to have this "luxury". However, the Planning Staff does concur with the Housing Board that the request will not alter either development' s ability to house a portion of the Community's workforce in the upper-valley. Both units would still remain deed restricted affordable housing units that would be sold to a qualified employee pursuant to the Affordable Housing Guidelines. Moreover, there is not a change proposed in the number of bedrooms or sizes of the subject units. STAFFRECOM]MENDATION: Staff believes that the proposed amendments are primarily housing policy decisions. That being the case, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Board has reviewed the proposal and recommended that City Council approve the requested amendments finding that the affordable housing units and the number of bedrooms within the affordable housing units are not being altered as part of the application. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that City Council approve the proposed requests finding that the overall goal of providing affordable housing as mitigation for the associated free market developments is still met by the Bavarian and Top of Mill projects after the proposed category swap. -2- .. RECOMMENDED MOTION: 1 move to approve Ordinance No. 5* Series of 2003, upon first reading, approving a PUD Amendment and a GMQS AmGIdment to allow for the swap of affordable housing category designations between the Bavarian and Top of Mill Planned Unit Developments.' CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: EXHIHIT A - REVIEW CRITERIA AND STAFFFINDINGS F\HIBIT B - APPLICATION E\HIBIT C - TOP OF MILL PUD APPROVAL ORDINANCE EXHIBIT D - BAVARIAN INN PUD APPROVAL ORDINANCE E\HIBIT E - HOUSING BOARD COMMENTS EXHIBIT F - PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RESOLUTION Uj .. ORDINANCE N0. f)Â·~~ (SERIES OF 2003) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING PUD AND GMQS AMENDMENTS TO THE TOP OF MILL (LOT 3, ASPEN MOUNTAIN PUD) AND BAVARIAN INN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS TO ALLOW FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE APPROVED AFFORDABLE HOUSING CATEGORIES WITHIN BOTH DEVELOPMENTS, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-182-02-202 Parcel ID: 2735-123-08-004 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Four Peaks Development, represented by Scott Writer, requesting approval of a PUD amendment and a GMQS amendment to the Bavarian Inn and Top of Mill Planned Unit Developments to allow for 1) the affordable housing unit at 821 W. Bleeker to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 3 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit 204 in the former Bavarian Inn building to convert from a Category 3 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit; and to allow for 2) the affordable housing unit at 814 W. Main Street to convert from a Category 4 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit D, Parcel 2, of the Top of Mill PUD to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 4 affordable housing unit: and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.445. Planned Unit Development and Section 26.470, Growth Management Quota System, City Council may approve. approve with conditions, or deny the land use requests made by the applicant during a duly noticed public hearing after taking and considering comments from the general public, and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Community Development Director. and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Community Development Director recommended approval of the proposed amendments; and. WIIEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Housing Board recommended approval of the proposed amendments; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on October 21,2003, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 22, Series of 2003, by a five to one (5-1) vote. recommending that City Council approve the PUD Amendment and GMQS Amendment to swap affordable housing categories as requested; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified .. herein. has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Community Development Director, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Board, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan: and. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety. and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in City of Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.445, Planned Unit Development; and Section 26.470.110, Amendment of GMQS Development Order. City Council hereby approves a PUD Amendment and a GMQS Amendment to allow for 1) the affordable housing unit at 821 W. Bleeker to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 3 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit 204 in the former Bavarian inn building to convert from a Category 3 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit, and to allow for 2) the affordable housing unit at 814 W. Main Street to convert from a Category 4 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit D. Parcel 2, of the Top of Mill PUD to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 4 affordable housing unit. Section 2: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3: 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 4: A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 8th day of December, 2003, in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado. .. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council ofthe City of Aspen on the 10th day ofNovember, 2003. Ilelen Kalin Klanderud. Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted. passed and approved by a vote of to (_-_3, this 8th day of December, 2003. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John P. Worcester, City Attorney .. EXHIBITA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AMENDMENT Review Criteria & Staff Findings SECTION 26.445.050, REVIEW STANDARDS: PUD AMENDMENT Section 26.445.050 of the Regulations provides that development applications for a PUD amendment must comply with the following standards and requirements. A. General Requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposal is consistent with the objectives of the Aspen Area Community Plan. In the original approvals for the Bavarian Inn and the Top of Mill PUDs. it was found that the affordable housing proposed in each of the respective developments was consistent with the AACP. That being the case, staff feels that the request will not alter either development's ability to house a portion of the Community's workforce in the upper-valley. Therefore, staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. Staff Finding The proposal is not requesting a change in the approved land uses for either of the developments. Staff does not believe that this criterion is applicable to application. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the Â·future development of the surrounding area. Staff Finding Staff does not believe that the proposal will adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area in any way. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt .from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with,.final PUD development plan review. Staff Finding The Applicant has already obtained GMQS exemptions for all of the units that are subject to this application. Staff finds this criterion to be met. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The.final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements .for all properties within the PUD. The dimensional requirements of the underlying -4- .. zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. During review c,f the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with thefollowing influences on the property: a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected .future land uses in the surrounding area. 19 Natural and man-made hazards. c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and landforms. d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. Staff Finding This application does 11Ot propose to change the physical characteristics of either development in anyway. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and ofthe surrounding area. Staff Finding Tliis application does not propose to amend the dimensional requirements that were approved for either of the developments. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. The appropriate number of offistreet parking spaces shall be established ba~ed on the following considerations: a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. Staff Finding This application does not propose to amend the off-street parking requirements that were established for the respective developments. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. -5- .. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Speci.fically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to service the proposed development. b) There are not adequate roads to ensure Jire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance to the proposed development. Staff Finding This application does not request a reduction in the maximum allowable density of either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground instability or the possibility of mudflow, rockfalls or avalanche dangers. b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runojf, drainage, soil erosion, and consequent water pollution. c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City. d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. Staff Finding This application is not requesting a reduction in the maximum allowable density of either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a signijicant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's physical constraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if: a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed iii the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area plan to which the property is subject. b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in subparagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided, or those characteristics mitigated. c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern, land uses, and characteristics. -6- .. Staff Finding This application is not requesting an increase in the maximum allowable density of either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. B. Site Design: The purpose qf this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and saft?ty. The proposed development shall comply with the.following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity o.f the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved site plan of either development. Therefore. staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved elevations or placement of structures. Therefore. staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement ot vehicular and pedestrian movement. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved placement or orientation of the structures within either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle acces.w. Staff Finding This application does not alter the on-site location of structures within either development. Therefore, Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. Staff Finding ['his application does not alter the approved floor plans within either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. -7- .. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved site drainage or the location of the structures within either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately de-signed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved location of the structures within either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. C. Landscape Plan: The purpose (4- this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features Of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designed treatment of exterior spaces, preserving existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity und variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved landscaping plan for either development. Therefore. staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. Signijicant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved landscaping plan for either development. Therefore. staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved landscaping plan for either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. -8- .. D. Architectural Character: It is the purpose Of this standard to encourage architectural interest, variety, character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the building's proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of materials, and other attributes which may significantly represent the character of the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the jinal development plan and architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development shall: 1. be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative Of, the intended use, and respect the scale and massing Of nearby historical and cultural resources. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved elevations of either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage Of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less-intensive mechanical systems. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved construction methods utilized iii building either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. Accommodate the storage and shielding of snow, ice, and water in a sate an appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved arcliitectural elevations or the method in which the shielding of snow is to occur. Additionally, this application does not alter the snow storage location that was set out in the respective PUDs. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. E. Lighting: The purpose of this standard is to ensure the exterior ofthe development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic concerns. TheD}Ilowing standards shall be accomplished: 1. All lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any king to adjoining streets or lands. Lighting of site features, structures, and access ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. Staff Finding Both developments are required to meet the City of Aspen Lighting Code as is set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, ()utdoor Lighting. Staff finds this criterion to be met. -9- .. 2. AN exterior lighting shall be in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the Jinal PUD documents. Up-lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements, and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited .for residential development. Staff Finding Both developments are required to meet the City of Aspen Lighting Code as is set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. Staff finds this criterion to be met. G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area: 4 the proposed development includes a common park, open space, or recreation areafor the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD, the.following criteria shall be met: 1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural landscape .features Of the property, provides visual relief to the property's built .form, and is available to the mutual benefit o.f the various land uses and property users ofthe PUD. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved amount, location, or design of the approved open space. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in aN common park and recreation areas is deeded in perpetuity (not .for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar manner. Staff Finding This application does not alter the method in which the common park and recreation areas in each development are owned and maintained. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through legal instrument .ft,r the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Staff Finding This application does not alter the method in which the common park and recreation areas in each development are owned and maintained. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. - 10 - .. H. Utilities and Public Facilities: The purpose of this standard iN to ensure the development does not impose any undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustitied financial burden. The proposed utilities and public .facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public in.frastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. Staff Finding Staff believes that sufficient public infrastructure exists to amend the respective PUDs as requested iii that there is no additional development proposed by this application. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost ofthe developer. Staff Finding This application will not require public infrastructure improvements and will not have adverse impacts on the public infrastructure of either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. Oversized utilities, public Â·facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. Staff Finding This application is not proposing to install nor is being required to install oversized utilities to swap housing categories. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. I. Access and Circulation (Only standards 1&2 apply to Minor PUD applications): The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use Of security gates. The proposed accexs and circulation of the development shall meet the folic}wing criteria: 1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through and approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved access within either development. Therefore staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the -11- .. proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. Staff Finding Staff does not believe that the approved parking arrangement within either of tlie developments would need to be amended due to the request to swap affordable housing categories between units because the use of the units is not changing. Staff finds this criterion to be met. J. Phasing of Development Plan. The purpose of these criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing ofthe development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted.final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with the.billowing: 1. AH phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as a complete development und shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. 1 The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent practical, occupants Of initial phases from the construction of later phases. 3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate improvements to public facilities, payment Of impact fees and .fees-in-lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents o.f the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. Staff Finding Construction of the subject units is nearing completion. This application is not proposing to amend the approved phasing for either of the respective developments. Staff finds this criterion to be met. -12- .. EXHIBIT A AMENDMENT TO GMQS DEVELOPMENT ORDER Review Criteria & Staff Findings SECTION 26.470.110, REVIEW STANDARDS: GMQS AMENDMENT Section 26.470.110 of the Regulations provides that development applications for a GMQS amendment must comply with the following standards and requirements. A. Exception. The following activities shall be exempt from these amendment procedures, provided they are reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director prior to construction, except as allowed for during actual development under (2), below: 1. Any change required to be made to a development order to respond to conditions imposed upon the proposed development by the Growth Management Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission, or the City Council during the review of other development applications relevant to the proposed development; and, Staff Finding Staff believes that the general affordable housing use of the units subject to this application will not change. Moreover. staff feels that the affordable housing units that are subject to this proposal will still contribute the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) goal of housing the Community's workforce in the upper valley. Thus, staff believes that the proposed request is consistent with the representations made by the Applicant during the original review of the respective planned unit developments. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. Any insubstantial modification to the development order, which shall be limited to technical or engineering considerations first discovered during actual development that could not reasonably be anticipated during the review process, or any other minor change that the Community Development Director finds has no effect on the conditions and representations made during the original project review. Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposed request is a minor change to the approved Top of Mill anci Bavarian PUDs in that the affordable housing use of the units subject to this amendment will not change. Staff finds this criterion to be met. -13- . D cgi v* 3-(14 I 0 3.JAA Exh<bit obv 00 Four Peaks Development 1000 South Mill St. Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-2114 July 24,2003 City o f Aspen Department of Community Development, c/o Joyce Allgier 530 E. Main Street, 3rd Floor Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Joyce: I am writing to request to swap some category designations between units in the Bavarian Inn and Top of Mill affordable housing projects. This has no impact to the bottom line, number of bedrooms, FTE's or any other quantifiable criteria. We are asking for this simply to help us place potential designated buyers in units that they both desire and for which they qualify. The following table summarizes our request. Bavarian and Top Of Mill AH New Proposed Category Changes Current New Current Proposed PUD Proposed Max sales Max sales PUD APCHA APCHA 2003 2003 Addresses Beds Bath Category Category APCHA APCHA BI South Building - 814 W Alain 3 3 4 2 $~ 133,500 $ 133,500 TOM Parcel 2- Unit D- East most unit 3 3 2 4 $ 271,200 $ 271,200 BI North Building - 821 W Bleeker 2 2 2 3 $ 108,700 $ 159,900 BI Origtnal Building - Unit 204 2 2 3 2 $ 159,900 $ 108,700 Total Gross Sales $ 673,300 $ 673,300 APCHA staff supported the request and the APCHA Board voted unanimously to approve the request on July 16, 2003. Per your request, attached are plans showing the unit locations in each project. Thank you, Scott Writer Four Peaks 1 LEEKER ST. Bavarian Inn Affordable tiousing - PARCEL 1 ~-lt Elia--U - 1 1 1 1 --iuu... 1: 11 1 -2816-I 1-Â£J ! ' .1 1 1 ~~~~IAN INN ~ryl * 21.J a~:el 11 I to U li186Nce , , 71' 2 1 1 =. 1 29=. . 1 - \ .. i - Â£ 1-1 ~\Cru 1-, ~ ~ (POE-2-, 4:1 ,[ 1 - I. e 1 20 of r---I 1 Â£ U 'A < ,~-1.L~.~ 1, i A o ( 4 E>L h __=~Etf~__ M- 3 # 2, 4 ALLEY 44~ 1 +â€¢ 3 ALLEr /.9-- U- 2,10â€¢A MI-...0.-- 1 1 - 1 - - I 1= /A14-1 ]E[612.O7 547/1it'Imi k 1 '=,ed =rl 1 < [14*1 L ZEÂ«13 G 11 1 -9- 1 F i > LEE - d/1 -fl 0.- Â£ 1 D ' ]LI-~h (6&1 ~:~4- 4 / t LF-Li g~143@~lip 1,- 1 L Iii,=up' i E.- n. 2 1 -a LM. _ th# * .* /1 - E Y -. IPTIfil P = ---~~~---y g~Ib--4172 1 _ It:--- Lt_J M....1 - IF li PARCEL 2 1 i ...r - 8' 4 U. MAJA 747-0/7 0/ NORTH 4.â€¢24- tv 1. MAIN Er. _ MAIN ST. All SCALE: 1 '=16'.10" i'~1 C 'f 1 1/3-1 ff J Top of Mill Affordable Housing 7-oK - I SEE AU . SEE A2.4 Ul/1Â£ (2*1) 43 5 00 (38/ ~pu-jzrs -1 2rÂ·S 5'Â·372' 15'-10 5Â·372' 2r r 1 22Â£2223-- -2;2-- -, /> Iii 1 11 1--I ' < __-3 - 4~ <3 0 - 1: , 1 9 1 /31 hax y c 9 4 12 h rt --fÂ·- (D vt ~ rvI rv-1 t T D. SLAB i / 92.31 U 1119 9 1, 6, 0. IL{Illr. E-3 1111 C 11 [ITTTU -5 - li-3 OvE f ,--Â» 11*8 - 1 45 lulll' -- 03 ____ FUU - 1=UU if-"- .v v. C L_ 1 . . Z/ M; r r-- : -Â·r- i (4 ~ la=]1 25'- y 25-3 15-5Â· | 25'- r 'L- L'*4' F-x 119-9 -- - y.1 2 Â¥0.1- I) L 13 00 /h A Oh (2) /13 9, (3 /3 (23 La 441 - '\21.7 - 491 ADA Al' -/4 1 4 60 7 5/1, T UNIT 'A' UNIT '13' UNIT 'C' UNE[ 'D' ..r Aol Aol - - llI 11 i III Ill Ilili ill lilli Ill Ell Page: 1 ~ Erh & lort t f 46639i 04/19/2001 -1 :46; 2 SIlk-A DAVIS PITKIN Couk-1 Y CO R 35.00 D 0.00 ORDINANCE No. 7 SERIES OF 2002 AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION INCLUDING SUBDIVISION, CONDOMINIUMIZATION, MOUNTAIN VIEW PLANE, SPECIAL REVIEW, GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA EXEMPTIONS (GMQS), 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW, AND REZONING FOR THE TOP OF MILL SITE TO LODGE / TOURIST RESIDENTIAL PUD AND CONSERVATION, LOT 3 OF THE ASPEN MOUNTAIN SUBDIVISION / PUD, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO PARCEL NO. 2737-182-85-003 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Top of Mill Investors, LLC c/o Four Peaks Development, LLC (Applicant), represented by Vann Associates, requesting Final Planned Unit Development (PUD) approval for Lot 3 of the Aspen Mountain Subdivision / PUD (hereinafter "AMPUD"); and WHEREAS, Top of Mill Investors, LLC c/o Four Peaks Development, LLC requested specific land use approvals as part of the Final PUD including Final PUD Development Plan, Subdivision, Condominiumization, Mountain View Plane, Special Review, GMQS Exemption, 8040 Greenline Review, and Rezoning; and WHEREAS, Savanah Limited Partnership, owner at the time of Lot 3 of AMPUD, received Conceptual PUD approval from City Council for AMPUD on December 6, 1999 which is memorialized through Resolution No. 93, Series of 1999; and WHEREAS, Top of Mill Investors, LLC, received an Amended Conceptual Approval from City Council for Lot 3 AMPUD on May 29, 2001 which is memorialized through Resolution No. 50, Series 2001; and WHEREAS, the Housing Office, the City Zoning Officer, the City Engineer, the Parks Department, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, the Environmental Health Department, the City Fire Department, the City Streets Department, the City Parking Department, the City Water Department, and the City Electric Department reviewed the development proposal for Lot 3 and provided written referral comments as a result of the Development Review Committee meeting; and WHEREAS, the Applicant appropriately applied for specific land use approvals pursuant to the June 1996 reprint of Title 26, Land Use Regulations, of the 1995 Aspen Municipal Code for the Final PUD for Lot 3 AMPUD including Final PUD Development Plan, Subdivision, Condominiumization, Mountain View Plane, Special Review, Growth Management Quota Exemptions, 8040 Greenline Review, and Rezoning; and 0 i Ill 1 li ill 1 l i mÂ®: 04/19/2002 11:45 466392 Page: 3 of 7 SILLIA CARES PI-KIN COUNTY CJ R 35.00 D 0.00 Section 1 J Pursuant to this Ordinance and consistent with condition no. 3, of Resolution No. 93, Series of 1999, the City Council approves the allowable FAR for each Lot 3 parcel and allocated as shown in the matrix below. 41?arcel No. : 11"- : 9...~ 9,123 7 7 Maximum Allowable FAR=.. Â·0Â·Â· '1: 1 I Parcel 1 27,000 square feet ofFAR Parcel 2 8,000 square feet of FAR- Parcel 3 9,000 square feet of FAR Parcel 4 6.200 square feet of FAR Parcel 5 5.200 square feet of FAR Parcel 6 5,200 square feet ofFAR Parcel 7 6,500 square feet ofFAR Parcel 8 6,500 square feet of FAR , Parcel 9 No FAR shall be allocated to this parcel. Section 2 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the requests for the Final PUD including Final PUD Development Plan, Subdivision, Condominiumization, Mountain View Plane, Special Review, GMQS Exemption, 8040 Greenline Review, and Rezoning for Lot 3 of AMPUD is hereby approved with the following conditions: 1. The development shall comply with the most recent municipal engineering practice standards and the "Best Management Practices" (BMPs) identified for water quality control requirements. 2. Regarding the concerns associated with the type of units of the four (4) deed-restricted j multi-family housing Units on Parcel 2, should it not be possible to change the unit type, - Staff recommends the Applicant meet with Housing Authority Staff to maintain the ' average of the Category 2, but to price one of the three bedroom units between Catdkofy- -) 1 and 2,- and to price the 4-bedroom unit between Category 2 and 3, and market as a Category 3,t 3. Three of the units on Parcel 2 shall be distributed and sold under the general lottery through the Housing Office. The Appiicant shall be able to choose a buyer for one of the units. However, the buyer must be a fully qualified employee under the category for the i unit chosen by the applicant; i.e., the potential buyer must meet income and asset requirements. meet minimum occuparicy, not own any other property in the Roaring Fork Drainage System, and have worked in Pitkin County 1500 hours per year for the last four years. 4. The Applicant shall submit Infrastructure and Removal of Fill Material Permits for Lot 3 AMPUD within 30 (30) days after recordation of all Final PUD documents. The Applicant may submit building permit applications at the Applicant's discretion, but no sooner than the issuance of a building permit for the Bavarian Inn affordable housing project. The Applicant shall be eligible for a Certificate of Occupancy for the free market 1 i . ill lili-l Mlillilli 4663 Page: 5~7 04/19/206, 11:468 SILLIA [AVIS PITKI COUNTf CO R 35.00 D 0.00 11. The Applicant shall formally establish the Top of Mill Trail across Lot 3 AMPUD. This trail shall have a legal description, be shown on the Final Plat: and be dedicated/conveyed to the City of Aspen. Further, the Applicant shall memorialize in the Final PUD / Subdivision Agreement for Lot 3 and associated condominium (or planned community) documents, the obligation by the master homeowner's association or Applicant to improve the Top of Mill Trail, at such time the connection is realized, pursuant to the Parks Department's design criteria. If the trail has not been improved to the satisfaction of the Parks Department within 5 years of the recordation of the Final Plat for AMI?UD Lot 3, the master homeowner's association for Lot 3 shall make a cash payment to the City of Aspen equal to a sum defined by the Parks Department for the improvement of the trail. 12. Fire sprinklers and alarm systems shall be installed in all the proposed buildings on Lot 3 as required by the City of Aspen Fire Marshal. Appropriate "booster pumps" (if required) rather than pressure tanks for the sprinkler system shall be used to gain the necessary water pressure as required by the City Fire Department. The owner of each parcel shall be responsible for ensuring that any buildings constructed thereon shall comply with this condition of approval. In addition, the Applicant shall submit a fire safety plan for the demolition to be preformed by the Applicant of the existing structures and the construction of the proposed development of Lot 3 to the Engineering Department at the time of building permit application. 13. The Applicant shall execute a "Line Extension Request" and a "Collection System r Agreement" with Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD) prior to building permit application. In addition, forty percent (40%) of the estimated total connection fees must be paid to ACSD by the applicant for service lines that are to be stubbed off the main line into the specific parcels of this development. 14. The Applicant shall be required to show to the ACSD all service locations at the station numbers on the final utility plans for this development prior to building permit application. Additionally, the Applicant shall indicate to the ACSD if main line easements in the ROW are to be dedicated by plat or by description. 15. The Applicant shall record the approvel condominium (or planned community) subdivision plat for Parcels 1,2, and 3 of AMPUD Lot 3 in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder within one hundred eighty (180) days of its approval by the Community Development Director. Failure on the part of the Applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty (180) days following approval by the Community Development Director shall render the plat invalid and a new application and approval will be required. 16. The Applicant shall record a PUD Agreement and the Final PUD Plans within 180 days of the final approval by City Council with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder binding this property to this development approval. 17. The development ofthe free market single-family dwellings proposed for Parcels 4-8 of AMPUD Lot 3 shall be subject to a site and design specific 8040 Greenline Review prior to their development. These Parcels shall only be required to respond to review standards 466392 Page: 7 of 7 .ill Il 11 Elll 111 1 11Il 11 Ill lilli I'll, 04/19/2002 11:46~ SILVIA DAFIS PITKIN COUNTY CD R 35.00 D 0.00 Section 3 All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Aspen City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 4 This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 5 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 o f the remaining portions thereo f. Section 6 A public hearing on this Ordinance was held on the 11 th day o f March at 5:00 pm in the Council Chambers Room, Aspen City HaII, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general circulatior within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Â· Council of the City of Aspen on this 25th day of February, 2002. - 1 114 j 111 u A. 111.â€¢â€¢ . HelelifioiA#3%(d, Mayor 5.KEhNTS..5684, City Clerk i. 4 --.FINALLY, adOpted, passed and approved this 11 th Day of March, 2002. 74 l. 47<...6 h .A D b z... Attet:, ~.-0.ALLL Heldn I<atfnY;Ilaq*!1~ud, Mayor 42 0- Kat~iryli~ $~Ah, City Clerk i~, (3 EA f- t. APPEoved.as to form: Â£ 4.-<5 .2/U 1 ine,cctn ioinN,drce;tor, City Attorney Â».hibu- 38' 0 0 d 11 lilli lili l l lili l- 1 lilli 111 lilli l li ll i 10/01/2001 10:46Â¢: 459214 Page: 1 of 8 S LVIA DAVIS PI-KIN COUN ' CO R 40.00 D 0.00 ORDINANCE NO. 21, SERIES OF 2001 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN APPROVING THE FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) FOR THE BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, SUBDIVISION TO CREATE NINETEEN AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS, REZONING TO RESIDENTIAL MULTI-FAMILY WITH A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICT, A GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM EXEMPTION, AND VESTED PROPERTY RIGHTS ON LOTS D THROUGH I AND LOTS K THROUGH P, BLOCK 12, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No. 2735.123.08.004 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Bavarian Affordable Housing LLC, owner, as represented by Vann Associates, LLC, for a Final Planned Unit Development Plan, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review, Growth Management Quota System Exemption and Vested Property Rights approval o f a for-sale, deed-restricted, residential affordable housing development of 19 units, 40 bedrooms and 31 parking spaces on two (2) parcels located between W. Main Street, Seventh Street, Eighth Street, and W. Bleeker Street; and, WHEREAS, the application was submitted pursuant to Sections 26.52.080, 26.64.040,26.84.030,26.88.040,26.92.030 and 26.102.040 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations (the June 1996 reprint o f Title 26 0 f the 1 995 Aspen Municipal Code, including all amendments thereto enacted prior to September 15, 1998, and hereinafter called the "1995 Aspen Municipal Code") as was in effect at the time of submission of the conceptual PUD application; and WHEREAS, Parcel 1 of the subject site is located at the southwest corner of the intersection of Seventh Street and West Bleeker Street, and is legally described as Lots D through I, Block 12, and Parcel 2 of the subject site is located at the northeast corner ofN. Eighth Street and West Main Street, and is legally described as Lots K through P, Block 12, both of the City and Townsite of Aspen; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the above-cited sections of Title 26 of the 1995 Aspen Municipal Code, land use applications requesting land use review for Final Planned Unit Development, Subdivision, Rezoning, Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemption from the scoring and competition for affordable housing development may be approved by the City Council at a duly noticed public hearing after considering recommendations by the Community Development Director, the Planning and Zoning Commission made at a duly noticed public hearing and the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Board made at a duly noticed public hearing, and the appropriate referral agencies; and, Bavarian Final PUD Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2001, Page 1 rEVI=:Â»yw=â„¢ .. WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.100.050 of the 1995 Aspen Municipal Code, the Housing Board made a recommendation to the City Council to approve the affordable housing development, with conditions, and exempt the development from the scoring and competition process of GMQS, after conducting a public hearing on March 7, 2001; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.04.100 of the 1995 Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission made a recommendation to the City Council regarding the application requests for Final Planned Unit Development (PUD), Subdivision, Rezoning, and Growth Management Quota System Exemption approval after conducting a hearing public hearing on March 6 and March 20,2001, regarding the proposal; and have forwarded their recommendations through Resolution No. 12, Series of 2001, by a vote of five (5) to zero (0); and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.32 of the 1995 Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved through Resolution No. 12, Series of 2001, a request for Special Review to establish thirty-one (31) off-street parking requirements for affordable housing; and, WHEREAS, the Fire Marshal, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, the City Water Department, City Engineering, Parks Department, Environmental Health Department, the City Transportation Planner, the City Zoning Officer, the Roaing Fork Transit Agency, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority, and the Community Development Department reviewed the proposal and recommended approval with conditions; and, WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, Planning and Zoning Commission, Housing Board, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion ofpublic health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows: 459214 1 ill'11111111111111111111 lilli il'111 ill lilli lili lili 10/01/2001 10:466: Page: 2 of 8 SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 40.00 D 0.00 Bavarian Final PUD Ordinance No. 21, Series o f 2001, Page 2 459214 - 1-11111- 11 11 lf'.11 11111111111 lili Page: 3 of 8 10/01/2001 10:46f SILLIA CAVIS PITKIN C.JNTY CJ R 40.00 D 0.00 Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 0 f the 1995 Aspen Municipal Code, the Bavarian Inn Affordable Housing Final PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning, and Growth Management Quota System Exemption for the development of a "for-sale" deed-restricted affordable housing development consisting o f 19 housing units, 40 bedrooms, and 31 parking spaces and appurtenant improvements, all as put forth specifically in the Bavarian Affordable Housing Final PUD Application dated December 1, 2000, prepared by Vann Associates, LLC, and as amended and/or conditioned through this Ordinance is hereby approved, subject to the conditions of approval described hereinafter. Section 2: Conditions of Approval: 1. A Final PUD Plan shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval granted by City Council and shall include: a) A final plat meeting the requirements o f the City Engineer and showing easements, encroachment agreements and licenses with reception numbers for physical improvements, and location of utility pedestals. b) An illustrative site plan of the project showing the proposed improvements, landscaping plan, utility plan, grading/drainage plan, parking layout, and the dimensional requirements as approved. c) A drawing representing the project's architectural character. d) Within 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for a building permit, the applicant shall record a Subdivision/PUD Agreement with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder binding this property to this development approval. 2. The dimensional requirements of the PUD shall not be in excess of the Residential/Multi-Family Zone District's dimensional requirements and are established as specifically put forth in the application. The Residential Design Standards of the City are found to be met through the PUD process and no additional approval is required. The approved setbacks are as follows: a) A 4-foot variance in the 10- foot rear yard setback for the existing Bavarian Inn on Parcel 1. b) A 7- foot variance in the 10- foot rear yard setback for the proposed duplex on Parcel 1. c) A 2-foot and 4-foot variance in the required 10- foot front yard setback o f the proposed Main Street and Eighth Street multi-family structures, respectively, on Parcel 2. d) A 2-foot variance in the 5-foot side yard setback on the west side of the proposed multi-family structure along Eighth Street on Parcel 2. Bavarian Final PUD Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2001, Page 3 459214 1 filill ilill li ill 1 li illm- 1 1 li ill 11111 lill lill Page: 4 of 8 10/01/2001 10:46A SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY 30 R 40.00 D 0.00 e) All buildings will have flat roofs. f) The Nl/N2 and S1-S5 building complexes will be limited to twenty (20) feet in height measured to the top of the roof. g) The W2-W5 building complex will be limited to twenty-five (25) feet in height measured to the top o f the roof. 3. The Applicant shall implement the cabin relocation plan as put forth in the application. 4. The existing Bavarian Inn structure shall be subject to the requirements of Part VII, Section 14, Deed Restricting Existing Dwelling Units of APCHA. Existing units must be upgraded in accordance with the following criteria and specific provisions: a) The interior walls of all units must be freshly painted. b) The interior appliances must be purchased within the last five years and be in good working condition. c) Carpet must be less than five years old and be in good condition and repair, or be replaced. d) The exterior building walls shall be freshly painted within one year of dedication. An alternative to painting would be the application of a new stucco skim coat to the exterior, subj ect to approval by APCHA. e) A general level o f upgrade to yards and landscaping shall be provided. f) Windows, heating, plumbing, electrical systems, fixtures, and equipment shall be in good and working order. g) The roof must have a remaining useful life of at least ten (10) years and any necessary repair or replacement shall occur to ensure the ten (10) year life span. h) All units shall meet Uniform Building Code minimum standards, any applicable housing code or, in the absence of an adequate code, the housing code acceptable to the APCHA. i) All units shall be approved by the APCHA and verified by a qualified Building Inspector accepted and approved by the APCHA. j) Applicant shall bear the costs and expenses of any required upgrades to meet the above standards as well as any structural/engineering reports required by the APCHA to assess the suitability for occupancy and compliance with the APCHA standards o f the proposed units. k) Any broken window glass shall be replaced. Window sills or frames in disrepair shall be repaired or replaced. 1) Any fascia, soffit and exterior woodwork shall be repaired, replaced and repainted as necessary . m) Rain gutters shall be repaired or replaced as necessary. n) The property grounds shall be cleaned of debris materials, be upgraded to a grassy condition, and be landscaped in accordance with the Final PUD plan except that additional landscaping shall be installed along the 7th Street in the parking lot island. Bavarian Final PUD Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2001, Page 4 . 1111 11 1 1 illi ~1*Ill ilillill lill il Page: 5 of 8 ~ 459214 10/01/2001 10:46A SILVIA DAVIS PI-KIN COUNTY CO R 40.00 D 0.00 5. The Applicant, or the applicant's representative, must meet with the Housing Office prior to listing the units for sale to identify the units that would amount to 13 FTE's. These units may be used to house fully qualified employees chosen by the applicant for the initial sale only of the unit. Any sale after the initial sale of these units would be required to be listed with the Housing Office and sold under the lottery process. The employees must qualify pursuant to Al?CHA Guidelines defining a "qualified employee." 6. A deed restriction, provided by the Housing Office, shall be placed on all of the units prior to building permit application. 7. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy, the Housing Office shall have the right to inspect all units for compliance. 8. A construction management plan that addresses the preservation of the existing landscaping and vegetation on the site and within the public right-of-ways adjacent to the subject property shall be submitted and approved by the City Forester prior to issuance of a building permit. 9. The landscape plan shall be amended to show four (4) Cottonwood trees along Main Street and landscaping within the landscape island. The revised landscape plan must be submitted, showing exact location and spacing, with the official tree removal permit with the required amendments in this approval for the proposed plantings and approved by the City Forester prior to the issuance of a building permit. 10. The Main Street sidewalk design and location shall be amended to align the sidewalk along the property line to allow for the maximum space for trees and a buffer zone for potential future Main Street improvements. The sidewalk shall curve around the 12-inch cottonwood proposed to be saved on the Main Street frontage. 11. Any irrigation design proposed for installation in the public right-of-way must be approved by the Parks Department prior to installation and should be included as part of a right-0 f-way permit. 12. The building permit application shall include: a) A copy of the final Ordinance and recorded Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution. b) The conditions o f approval printed on the cover page o f the building permit set. c) A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. d) A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and documenting required approvals noted above in Conditions No. 10 and 11 from the City Forester for mitigation o f removed trees and existing tree preservation. e) A fugitive dust control plan. Bavarian Final PUD Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2001, Page 5 " M H im H 1~ ,Immm ,IM H-I 459214 Page: 6 of 8 10/01/2001 10:46F SILF IA DAVIS FITKIN COUNTY CO R 40.00 D 0.00 13. The building permit plans shall demonstrate an adequate fire sprinkler system and alarm system for the development as required by the Aspen Fire Marshal. 14. Prior to issuance of a building permit: a) The primary contractor shall submit a letter to the Community Development Director stating that the conditions o f approval have been read and understood. b) All tap fees, impacts fees, and building permit fees shall be paid. If an alternative agreement to delay payment o f the Water Tap and/or Parks Impact fee is finalized, those fees shall be payable according to the agreement. 15. No excavation or storage of dirt or material shall occur within tree driplines or outside o f the approved building envelope and access envelope. 16. All construction vehicles, materials, and debris shall be maintained on-site and not within public rights-of-way unless specifically approved by the Director of the Streets Department. 17. The applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. 18. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed rock or other style mud rack must be installed duing construction. 19. All uses and construction shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code as they pertain to utilities. 20. The Applicant or owner shall mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. 21. The site plan shall be amended to show the dumpster (on the alley) relocated from the west end o f the parking area to east end o f the parking area. 22. The Home Owner's Association Declarations, Restrictions and covenants shall include a provision disallowing dogs. Such provision in the Declarations, Restrictions and Covenants may be amended only with a vote o f 100% unanimous approval by the homeowners. 23. The sign plan as described in the Final PUD application shall be amended as follows: a) Re. Sign A-strike the word, "Affordable" from the sign, b) Re. Sign F-add the words, "Do Not Enter". c) Install an additional Sign F at the west end of the parking court. Bavarian Final PUD Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2001, Page 6 . 1 1 l ili ill' 111.i lli llill il 1 1111 10/01/2001 10:46f P...1 459214 Page: 7 of 8 6 ILL IA CAVIS PIT'-IN COUNTY CO R 40.00 D 0.00 24. The Home Owner's Association is advised (not required) to set aside a special reserve from the Home Owner's Association funds for the replacement of landscaping and vegetation on the site, including that which was located on the site prior to development. Section 3: The Official Zone District Map of the City of Aspen shall be, and is hereby amended by the Community Development Director to reflect rezoning of Parcel 2, legally described as Lots K through P, Block 12, of the City and Townsite o f Aspen, to Residential/Multi- Family with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay Zone District. Section 4: A waiver of the Park Development Impact Fee is hereby granted in accordance with the provisions of Section 26.44.060, Affordable Housing/Historic Landmark, of the 1995 Aspen Municipal Code. Section 5: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 6: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the.ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 7: 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 o f the remaining portions thereo f. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBISHED as provided by law, by the City Council o f the City of Aspen on this 25th day of June, 2001 and set for public hearing and Second Reading on the 23rd day of July, 2001. / /.414 1.-2_4j R,Â·j Katilrit& fyick, City Clerk ~ayor 4. 1. 4'f'9~ : '* - Â·l. 0 4 0 Ako a*,f Bavarian Final PUD Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2001, Page 7 .. FINALLY, adopted, passed, and approved by a vote of four to one (4 tol), this 23rd day of July, 2001. Approved as to form: Approved as to content: 1 4, ~ ~11 0 (AC 13%57 - ,1-1 ~LU_ JohnyÂ¢i#Ater, city Attorney Hefen ]Â¢:Airt kiant@*d, Mayor ATTEST: ijÂ»0 4-0 Kathryn S. I~ch, City Clerk C:home/Joyce/BavFinaTPUDCouncOrd II Ill 11 -111 -111 111111111111111 lilli 10/01/2001 10:46: 459214 Page: 8 of 8 SILVIA DAVIS FITKIN COUMY CO R 40.00 D 0.00 Bavarian Final PUD Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2001, Page 8 0 0 641/4,7 9 MEMORANDUM TO: Housing Board FROM: Cindy Christensen. Housing Office THRU: Maureen Dobson, Executive Director DATE: July 16,2003 RE: REQUEST TO SWAP CATEGORIES BETWEEN BAVARIAN AND TOP OF MILL ISSUE: Four Peaks Development is requesting that between the two properties that they are developing for affordable housing -- the Bavarian site between 800 West Main and 800 West Bleeker, and the Top of Mill site (behind the old Grand Aspen) -- they would like the ability to switch the categories between the two properties. BACKGROUND: The attached shows the breakdown of what is currently approved for both properties and what is being proposed. As you can see from the attached, the amount of units per category does not change which means that the applicant's bottom line also does not change. The developer is allowed to place a qualified employee of their choice for a specific number of units. The employees that they would like to recognize for their service to their company and offer a unit to does not "fit" the current approval. The bottom line does not change. The housing program is still getting just as many units and because they can choose the qualified household of their choice. the same category-type units that would have been in the lottery prior to this change would still be the same. Staff is currently checking with the City Attorney to see if this request, if approved by the Board, would then need to be approved by the City Council. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending the Board approve this request due to the following: 1. The bottom line remains the same. This means that the request has no monetary value to the applicant. Their only "value" is recognizing the employees whom they would like to give the opportunity to purchase a unit. 2. The same type of categories and unit sizes remain the same, they.just change between the two properties. .. 3. The units that they are requesting to switch will go to qualified households of their choice. Each qualified household not only has to meet income, assets and occupancy requirements, but also the four-year priority requirement. 2 011 1 0 ir r r 1 .1 , 1 \41/ RESOLUTION N0.22 (SERIES OF 2003) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE PUD AND GMQS AMENDMENTS TO THE TOP OF MILL (LOT 3, ASPEN MOUNTAIN PUD) AND BAVARIAN INN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS TO ALLOW FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE APPROVED AFFORDABLE HOUSING CATEGORIES WITHIN BOTH DEVELOPMENTS, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-182-02-202 Parcel ID: 2735-123-08-004 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Four Peaks Development, represented by Scott Writer, requesting approval of a PUD amendment and a GMQS amendment to the Bavarian Inn and Top of Mill Planned Unit Developments to allow for 1) the affordable housing unit at 821 W. Bleeker to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 3 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit 204 in the former Bavarian Inn building to convert from a Category 3 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit; and to allow for 2) the affordable housing unit at 814 W. Main Street to convert from a Category 4 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit D, Parcel 2, of the Top of Mill PUD to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 4 affordable housing unit: and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Housing Board recommended approval of the proposed amendments; and. WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on October 7,2003, the Planning and Zoning Commission continued the public hearing until October 21, 2003; and, WHEREAS, during a continued public hearing on October 21,2003. the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein and approved this resolution, by a five to one (5-1) vote; recommending that City - Council approve the proposed amendment: and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan: and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: .. Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in City of Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.445, Planned Unit Development; and Section 26.470.110, Amendment of GMQS Development Order, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends that City Council approve the proposed amendments to allow for 1) the affordable housing unit at 821 W. Bleeker to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 3 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit 204 in the former Bavarian Inn building to convert from a Category 3 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit, and to allow for 2) the affordable housing unit at 814 W. Main Street to convert from a Category 4 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit D, Parcel 2, of the Top of Mill PUD to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 4 affordable housing unit. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded. whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as i f fully set forth herein. unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection. sentence. clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction. such portion shall be deemed a separate distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity ofthe remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 21 st day of October, 2003. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney Jasmine Tygre, Chair .. ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk . MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Â»lA-A - Atâ€ž/--- 1 THRU: Joyce Allgaier. community Development Deputy Director FROM: James Lindt, Planner<3-1 Ceptil_14 tk~ I RE: Bavarian Inn and Lot 3, Aspen Mountain PUD Amendment and U Reft- GMQS Amendment- Continued Public Hearing , /1 A 1 2 1.w / 42-(31 60(â‚¬244 DATE: October 21. 2003 PROJECT: BAVARIAN AND LOT 3, AMPUD PUD AMENDMENT REQUEST: The Applicant is requesting a PUD Amendment to amend the categories that were assigned to the Bavarian Inn and Top of Mill (Lot 3, Aspen Mountain PUD) Affordable Housing Units. CliRRENT ZONING: Bavarian - R/MF PUD Top of Mill- L/TR PUD LAND USE PUD and GMQS Amendments for both development projects. REQUESTS: STAFF Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve RECOMMENDATION: the proposed resolution, recommending that City Council approve the proposed request. BACKGROUND: The Bavarian Inn Affordable Housing Project was approved as employee housing mitigation for the redevelopment of Lot 5, of the Aspen Mountain PUD. The Bavarian Inn was approved to contain nineteen (19) units of for-sale affordable housing. Additionally. four (4) units of affordable housing were approved to be constructed on Parcel 2. of the Top of Mill Development on South Galena Street. As part of both the Top of Mill and the Bavarian Inn approvals, it was required that the mix of affordable housing units in each development maintain an average of a Category 2 maximum sale price and that the majority of the units would be sold and distributed through the general housing lottery. However. the land use approvals allowed for several of the affordable housing units to be occupied by employees of the developer's choice. LAND USE ACTIONS REQUESTED: The Applicant is requesting approval of a PUD Amendment and a GMQS Amendment to allow for 1 ) two of the units within the Bavarian Inn affordable housing project to swap affordable housing categories, and 2) for another of the Bavarian Inn units to swap affordable housing categories with one of the units located on Parcel 2 of the Top of Mill Development. Review of the proposed GMQS amendment requires that City Council review the swap of affordable housing categories after considering a recommendation from the Housing -l- .. Board. The PUD amendment requires that City Council review the proposed request after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director. KTAFF COMMENTS: In reviewing the first request made by the Applicant to swap the unit categories between affordable units within the Bavarian Inn development. staff believes that the request is acceptable iii that the development will still have the same mix of categories in comparison with what was originally approved. Additionally, both units that are to be affected by the proposed swap contain two (2) bedrooms each. Therefore. this request would not alter the number of bedrooms in each affordable housing category within the development. Moreover, the Housing Board lias reviewed this request and recommended that City Council approve the swap. Similarly. in reviewing the second request made by the Applicant to swap the unit categories between one of the Category 2 units at the Top of Mill and one of the Category 4 units within the Bavarian Inn project. the Housing Board felt that that the units would still contribute to the overall goal of housing the community' s workforce in the upper- valley. And therefore, the Housing Board has recommended that City Council approve the proposed request. Conversely, the Planning Staff is somewhat concerned that the Applicant would like to raise the category of the Top of Mill unit. thereby allowing for a person with a higher income to live at the base of Aspen Mountain in place of a person with a lower income. To some, this may appear to be a more desirable location and that the application would negate, if approved, the opportunity for a lower income person to have this luxury". However, the Planning Staff does concur with the Housing Board that the request will not alter either development's ability to house a portion of the Community s workforce in the upper-valley. Both units would still remain deed restricted affordable housing units that would be sold to a qualified employee pursuant to the Affordable Housing Guidelines. Moreover, there is not a change proposed in the number of bedrooms or sizes of the subject units. *TAFF IZECOMMENDArl'ION: Staff believes that the proposed amendments are primarily housing policy decisions. That being the case, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Board has reviewed the proposal and recommended that City Council approve the requested amendments finding that the affordable housing units and the number of bedrooms within the affordable housing units are not being altered as part of the application. RECOMMENDED MOTION: 1 move to approve Resolution No. 22. Series of 2003, recommending that City Council approve a PUD Amendment and a GMOS Amendment to allow for the swap of affordable housing category designations between the Bavarian and Top of Mill Planned Unit ..1 Developments. -2- .. ATTACHMENTS: E\HIBIT A - REVIEW CRITERIA AND STAFF FINDINGS EXHIBIT B - APPLICATION E\HIBIT C - TOP OF MILL PUD APPROVAL ORDINANCE EXHIBIT D - BAVARIAN INN PUD APPROVAL ORDINANCE EXHIBIT E - HOUSING BOARD COMMENTS Uj .. RESOLUTION N0.22 (SERIES OF 2003) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE PUD AND GMQS AMENDMENTS TO THE TOP OF MILL (LOT 3, ASPEN MOUNTAIN PUD) AND BAVARIAN INN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS TO ALLOW FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE APPROVED AFFORDABLE HOUSING CATEGORIES WITHIN BOTH DEVELOPMENTS, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-182-02-202 Parcel ID: 2735-123-08-004 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Four Peaks Development, represented by Scott Writer, requesting approval of a PUD amendment and a GMOS amendment to the Bavarian Inn and Top of Mill Planned Unit Developments to allow for 1) the affordable housing unit at 821 W. Bleeker to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 3 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit 204 in the former Bavarian Inn building to convert from a Category 3 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit; and to allow for 2) the affordable housing unit at 814 W. Main Street to convert from a Category 4 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit D, Parcel 2. of the Top of Mill PUD to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 4 affordable housing unit: and, WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Housing Board recommended approval of the proposed amendments; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on October 7. 2001 the Planning and Zoning Commission continued the public hearing until October 21,2003; and, WHEREAS, during a continued public hearing on October 21, 2003. the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein and approved this resolution. by a to (_-_) vote; recommending that City Council approve the proposed amendment; and. WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions. is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Commitnity Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety. and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: .. Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in City of Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.445. Planned Unit Development; and Section 26.470.110, Amendment of GMQS Development Order, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends that City Council approve the proposed amendments to allow for 1) the affordable housing unit at 821 W. Bleeker to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 3 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit 204 in the former Bavarian Inn building to convert from a Category 3 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit. and to allow for 2) the affordable housing unit at 814 W. Main Street to convert from a Category 4 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit D, Parcel 2. of the Top of Mill PUD to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 4 affordable housing unit. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded. whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein. unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement o f any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided. and the sallie shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection. sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity ofthe remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 7111 day of October. 2003. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney Jasmine Tygre, Chair .. ATTEST: .Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk .. EXHIBIT A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AMENDMENT Review Criteria & Staff Findings SECTION 26.445.050, REVIEW STANDARDS: PUD AMENDMENT Section 26.445.050 ofthe Regulations provides that development applications for a PUD amendment must comply with the following standards and requirements. A. General Requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposal is consistent with the objectives of the Aspen Area Community Plan. In the original approvals for the Bavarian Inn and the Top of Mill Pt-J Ds. it was found that the affordable housing proposed in each of the respective developments was consistent with the AACP. That being the case, staff feels that the request will not alter either development's ability to house a portion of the Community's workforce in the upper-valley. Therefore, staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. Staff Finding The proposal is not requesting a change in the approved land uses for either of the developments. Staff does not believe that this criterion is applicable to application. 3. The propored development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Staff Finding Staff does not believe that the proposal will adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area in any way. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. Staff Finding The Applicant has already obtained G.MOS exemptions for all of the units that are subject to this application. Staff finds this criterion to be met. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The.final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD. The dimensional requirements of the underlying -4- .. zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions.for the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property: a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b) Natural and man-made hazards. c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation und landforms. d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. Staff Finding This application does not propose to change the physical characteristics of either development in anyway. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and ofthe surrounding area. Staff Finding This application does not propose to amend the dimensional requirements that were approved for either of the developments. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. The appropriate number of off-~treet parking spaces shall be established based on the.following considerations: a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques iii the proposed development. d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. Staff Finding This application does not propose to amend the off-street parking requirements that were established for the respective developments. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. -5- .. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) There is not sullicient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to service the proposed development. b) There are not adequate roads to ensure jire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance to the proposed development. Staff Finding This application does not request a reduction in the maximum allowable density of either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced it- there exhts natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground instability or the possibility of mudflow, rock falls or avalanche dangers. b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and consequent water pollution. c) The proposed development will have a pernici(ms effect on air quality in the surrounding area ami the City. d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail iii the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. Staff Finding This application is not requesting a reduction in the maximum allowable density of either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a signi.ficant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the Nite's physical constraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if: a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed iii the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area plan to which the property is subject. b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in subparagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided, or those characteristics mitigated. 0 The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern, land uses, and characteristics. -6- .. Staff Finding This application is not requesting an increase in the maximum allowable density of either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. B. Site Design: The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public space~, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features Of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a speci.fic reference to the past, or contribute to fhe identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate nianner. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved site plan of either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved elevations or placement of structures. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interext and engagement ofvehicular and pedestrian movement. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved placement or orientation of the structures within either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle accexs. Staff Finding This application does not alter the on-site location of structures within either development. Therefore. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved floor plans within either development. Therefore. staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. -7- .. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved site drainage or the location of the structures within either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately de-signed to accommodate any programmatic Â·functions associated with the 1/se. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved location of the structures within either development. Therefore. staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. C. Landscape Plan: The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the.following: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designed treatment of exterior spaces, preserving existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety o.fornamental plant species suitable.for the Aspen area climate. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved landscaping plan for either development. Therefore. staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. Staff Finding 1-his application does not alter the approved landscaping plan for either development. Therefore. staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved landscaping plan for either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. -8- .. D. Architectural Character: It is the purpose of this standard to encourage architectural interext, variety, character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is baxed upon the suitability Of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the building'% proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of materials. and other attributes which may significantly represent the character Of the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the .final development plan and architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development shall: 1. be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the intended use, und respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved elevations of either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less-intensive mechanical systems. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved construction methods utilized in building either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. Accommodate the storage and shielding of snow, ice, and water in a Na.fe an appropriate manner that does not require signijicant maintenance. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved architectural elevations or the method in which the shielding of snow is to occur. Additionally, this application does not alter the snow storage location that was set out in the respective PUDs. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. E. Lighting: The purpose of this standard is to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic concerns. The.following standards shal be accomplished: 1. All lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardotis interference of any king to adjoining streets or lands. Lighting of site .features, structures, and access ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. Staff Finding Both developments are required to meet the City of Aspen Lighting Code as is set forth iii Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lightin:g. Staff finds this criterion to be inet. -9- .. 2. All exterior lighting shall be in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD documents. Up-lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements, and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. Staff Finding Both developments are required to meet the City of Aspen Lighting Code as is set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, ()utdoor Lighting. Staff finds this criterion to be met. G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area: If tile proposed development includes a common park, open space, or recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD, the.fouâ€žwing criteria shall be met: 1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural landscape .tratures of the property, provides visual relief to the property'x built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land Uses and properly users of the PUD. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved amount. location. or design of the approved open space. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in u similar nianner. Staff Finding This application does not alter the method in which the common park and recreation areas iii each development are owned and maintained. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through legal instrument Â·for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Staff Finding This application does not alter the method in which the common park and recreation areas in each development are owned and maintained. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. - 10 - .. H. Utilities and Public Facilities: The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose any undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities anci public .facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. Staff Finding Staff believes that sufficient public infrastructure exists to amend the respective PUDs as requested in that there is no additional development proposed by this application. Therefore. staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. Adverxe impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. Staff Finding This application will not require public infrastructure improvements and will not have adverse impacts on the public infrastructure of either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer bi reimbursed proportionately.for the additional improvement. Staff Finding This application is not proposing to install nor is being required to install oversized utilities to swap housing categories. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 1. Access and Circulation (Only standards 1&2 apply to Minor PUD applications): The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: 1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through und approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved access within either development. Therefore staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the - 11 - .. proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. Staff Finding Staff does not believe that the approved parking arrangement within either of the developments would need to be amended due to the request to swap affordable housing categories between units because the use of the units is not changing. Staff finds this criterion to be met. J. Phasing of Development Plan. The purpose of these criteria is to ensure partially completed pro.jects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted .final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with the following: 1. All phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as a complete development ami shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. 1. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. 3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate improvements to public .facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the PUD, cmnaruction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. Staff Finding Construction of the subject units is nearing completion. This application is not proposing to amend the approved phasing for either of the respective developments. Staff finds this criterion to be met. - 12 - .. EXHIBITA AMENDMENT TO GMQS DEVELOPMENT ORDER Review Criteria & Staff Findings SECTION 26.470.110, REVIEW STANDARDS: GMQS AMENDMENT Section 26.470.110 of the Regulations provides that development applications for a GMQS amendment must comply with the following standards and requirements. A. Exception. The following activities shall be exempt from these amendment procedures, provided they are reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director prior to construction, except as allowed for during actual development under (2), below: 1. Any change required to be made to a development order to respond to conditions imposed upon the proposed development by the Growth Management Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission, or the City Council during the review of other development applications relevant to the proposed development; and, Staff Finding Staff believes that the general affordable housing use of the units subject to this application will not change. Moreover. staff feels that the affordable housing units that are subject to this proposal will still contribute the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) goal o f housing the Community's workforce in the upper valley. Thus. staff believes that the proposed request is consistent with the representations made by the Applicant during the original review of the respective planned unit developments. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. Any insubstantial modification to the development order, which shall be limited to technical or engineering considerations first discovered during actual development that could not reasonably be anticipated during the review process, or any other minor change that the Community Development Director finds has no effect on the conditions and representations made during the original project review. Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposed request is a minor change to the approved Top of Mill and Bavarian PUDs in that the affordable housing use of the units subject to this amendment will not change. Staff finds this criterion to be met. -13- .. RESOLUTION N0.22 (SERIES OF 2003) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE PUD AND GMQS AMENDMENTS TO THE TOP OF MILL (LOT 3, ASPEN MOUNTAIN PUD) AND BAVARIAN INN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS TO ALLOW FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE APPROVED AFFORDABLE HOUSING CATEGORIES WITHIN BOTH DEVELOPMENTS, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-182-02-202 Parcel ID: 2735-123-08-004 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Four Peaks Development, represented by Scott Writer, requesting approval of a PUD amendment and a GMQS aniendment to the Bavarian Inn and Top of Mill Planned Unit Developments to allow for 1) the affordable housing unit at 821 W. Bleeker to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 3 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit 204 in the former Bavarian Inn building to convert from a Category 3 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit; and to allow for 2) the affordable housing unit at 814 W. Main Street to convert from a Category 4 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit D, Parcel 2, o f the Top of Mill PUD to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 4 affordable housing unit; and, WIIEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Housing Board recommended approval o f the proposed amendments; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on October 7,2003. the Planning and Zoning Commission continued the public hearing until October 21, 2003; and, WHEREAS, during a continued public hearing on October 21, 2003, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein and approved this resolution, by a five to one (5-1) vote; recommending that City Council approve the proposed amendment; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion ofpublic health, safety, and welfare, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: .. Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in City of Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.445, Planned Unit Development; and Section 26.470.110, Amendment of GMQS Development Order, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends that City Council approve the proposed amendments to allow for 1) the affordable housing unit at 821 W. Bleeker to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 3 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit 204 in the former Bavarian Inn building to convert from a Category 3 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit, and to allow for 2) the affordable housing unit at 814 W. Main Street to convert from a Category 4 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit D, Parcel 2, of the Top of Mill PUD to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 4 affordable housing unit. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as i f fully set forth herein. unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity o f the remaining portions thereo f. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission o f the City o f Aspen on this 21 st day o f October, 2003. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: 014 1 1 Â»6214Â» Citf Attorney ~~~'V Jasmine Tygre, Chair J LJ ATTEST: .u j AUU_~ ~~Ackie Lothian, Dlputy City Clerk .. 130 S. Galena St. Aspen CO 81611 Aspen Community (970) 920-5090 (970) 920-5439, fax Development Department 3X To: Scott Writer From: James Lindt Fax: 925-1036 Pages: Phone: Date: 10/16/03 Re: Reminder of Meeting CC: U Urgent E For Review C] Please Comment C] Please Reply C] Please Recycle â€¢ Comments: Hi Scott, I just wanted to remind you that the continued Bavarian/Top of Mill Amendment Hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission will take place this coming Tuesday evening in the basement of City Hall. The meeting begins at 4:30 PM, but you are second on the agenda. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, James . . MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission \MA THRU: Joyce Allgaier, Community Development Deputy Director FROM: James Lindt, Planner VUL RE: Bavarian Inn and Lot 3, Aspen Mountain PUD Amendment and GMQS Amendment- Public Hearing DATE: October 7,2003 * PROJECT: B AVARIAN AND LOT 3, AMPUD PUD AMENDMENT REQUEST: The Applicant is requesting a PUD Amendment to amend the categories that were assigned to the Bavarian Inn and Top of Mill (Lot 3, Aspen Mountain PUD) Affordable Housing Units. CURRENT ZONING: Bavarian - R/MF PUD Top of Mill- L/TR PUD LAND USE PUD and GMQS Amendments for both development projects. REQUESTS: STAFF Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission approve RECOMMENDATION: the proposed resolution, recommending that City Council approve the proposed request. BACKGROUND: The Bavarian Inn Affordable Housing Project was approved as employee housing mitigation for the redevelopment of Lot 5, of the Aspen Mountain PUD. The Bavarian Inn was approved to contain nineteen (19) units of for-sale affordable housing. Additionally. four (4) units of affordable housing were approved to be constructed on Parcel 2, of the Top of Mill Development on South Galena Street. AAs part of both the Top of Mill and the Bavarian Inn approvals, it was required that the mix of affordable housing units in each development maintain an average of a Category 2 maximum sale price and that the majority of the units would be sold and distributed through the general housing lottery. However, the land use approvals allowed for several of the affordable housing units to be occupied by employees of the developer's choice. LAND USE ACTIONS REQUESTED: The Applicant is requesting approval of a PUD Amendment and a GMQS Amendment to allow for ]) two of the units within the Bavarian Inn affordable housing project to swap affordable housing categories, and 2) for another of the Bavarian Inn units to swap 'hffordable housing categories with one of the units located on Parcel 2 of the Top of Mill ~ Development. Review of the proposed GMQS amendment requires that City Council review the swap of affordable housing categories after considering a recommendation from the Housing -1- .. Board. The PUD amendment requires that City Council review the proposed request after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Community Development Director. STAFF COMMENTS: In reviewing the first request made by the Applicant to swap the unit categories between affordable units within the Bavarian Inn development, staff believes that the request is acceptable in that the development will still have the same mix of categories in comparison with what was originally approved. Additionally, both units that are to be affected by the proposed swap contain two (2) bedrooms each. Therefore, this request would not alter the number of bedrooms in each affordable housing category within the development. Moreover, the Housing Board has reviewed this request and recommended that City Council approve the swap. Similarly, iii reviewing the second request made by the Applicant to swap the unit categories between one of the Category 2 units at the Top of Mill and one of the Category 4 units within the Bavarian Inn project, the Housing Board felt that that the units would still contribute to the overall goal of housing the community's workforce iii the upper- valley. And therefore. the Housing Board has recommended that City Council approve the proposed request. Conversely, the Planning Staff is somewhat concerned that the Applicant would like to raise the category of the Top of Mill unit, thereby allowing for a person with a higher income to live at the base of Aspen Mountain in place of a person with a lower income. To some, this may appear to be a more desirable location and that the application would negate. if approved, the opportunity for a lower income person to have this "luxury". However, the Planning Staff does concur with the Housing Board that the request will not alter either development' s ability to house a portion o f the Community's workforce in the upper-valley. Both units would still remain deed restricted affordable housing units that would be sold to a qualified employee pursuant to the Affordable Ilousing Guidelines. Moreover, there is not a change proposed in the number of bedrooms or sizes of the subject units. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes that the proposed amendments are primarily housing policy decisions. That being the case, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Board has reviewed the proposal and recommended that City Council approve the requested amendments finding that the affordable housing units and the number of bedrooms within the affordable housing units are not being altered as part of the application. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution NogÂ® Series of 2003, recommending that City Council approve a PUD Amendment and a GMQS Amendment to allow for the swap of affordable housing category designations between the Bavarian and Top of Mill Planned Unit Developments." -2- .. ATTACHMENTS: EXHIBIT A - REVIEW CRITERIA AND STAFF FINDINGS EXHIBIT B - APPLICATION EXHIBIT C - TOP oF MILL PUD APPROVAL ORDINANCE EXHIBIT D - BAVARIAN INN PUD APPROVAL ORDINANCE EXHIBIT E - HOUSING BOARD COMMENTS Uj .. RESOLUTION NO. AA (SERIES OF 2003) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT CITY COUNCIL APPROVE PUD AND GMQS AMENDMENTS TO THE TOP OF MILL (LOT 3, ASPEN MOUNTAIN PUD) AND BAVARIAN INN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS TO ALLOW FOR AMENDMENTS TO THE APPROVED AFFORDABLE HOUSING CATEGORIES WITHIN BOTH DEVELOPMENTS, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel ID: 2737-182-02-202 Parcel ID: 2735-123-08-004 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Four Peaks Development, represented by Scott Writer, requesting approval of a PUD amendment and a GMQS amendment to the Bavarian Inn and Top of Mill Planned Unit Developments to allow for 1) the affordable housing unit at 821 W. Bleeker to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 3 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit 204 in the former Bavarian Inn building to convert from a Category 3 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit; and to allow for 2) the affordable housing unit at 814 W. Main Street to convert from a Category 4 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit D, Parcel 2, of the Top of Mill PUD to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 4 affordable housing unit; and, WIIEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards, the Housing Board recommended approval of the proposed amendments; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on October 7,2003, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and considered the development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein and approved this resolution. by a to L-_3 vote; recommending that City Council approve the proposed amendment; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS: .. Section 1: Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in City of Aspen Land Use Code Section 26.445, Planned Unit Development; and Section 26.470.110, Amendment of GMQS Development Order, the Planning and Zoning Commission hereby recommends that City Council approve the proposed amendments to allow for 1) the affordable housing unit at 821 W. Bleeker to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 3 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit 204 in the former Bavarian Inn building to convert from a Category 3 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit, and to allow for 2) the affordable housing unit at 814 W. Main Street to convert from a Category 4 affordable housing unit to a Category 2 affordable housing unit and to allow for Unit D, Parcel 2, of the Top of Mill PUD to convert from a Category 2 affordable housing unit to a Category 4 affordable housing unit. Section 2: All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council. are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. Section 3: This resolution shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity o f the remaining portions thereof. APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 7m day of October, 2003. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney Jasmine Tygre, Chair .. EXHIBIT A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) AMENDMENT Review Criteria & Staff Findings SECTION 26.445.050, REVIEW STANDARDS: PUD AMENDMENT Section 26.445.050 of the Regulations provides that development applications for a PUD amendment must comply with the following standards and requirements. A. General Requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposal is consistent with the objectives of the Aspen Area Community Plan. In the original approvals for the Bavarian Inn and the Top of Mill PUDs, it was found that the affordable housing proposed in each of the respective developments was consistent with the AACP. That being the case, staff feels that the request will not alter either development's ability to house a portion of the Community's workforce in the upper-valley. Therefore, staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. Staff Finding The proposal is not requesting a change in the approved land uses for either of the developments. Staff does not believe that this criterion is applicable to application. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect thefuture development of the surrounding area. Staff Finding Staff does not believe that the proposal will adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area in any way. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt Â·from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with,.final PUD development plan review. Staff Finding The Applicant has already obtained GMQS exemptions for all of the units that are subject to this application. Staff finds this criterion to be met. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD. The dimensional requirements of the underlying -4- .. zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. During review o.f the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the sub.ject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property: a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b) Natural and man-made hazards. c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and landforms. d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, tra#ic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. Staff Finding This application does not propose to change the physical characteristics of either development in anyway. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. Staff Finding This application does not propose to amend the dimensional requirements that were approved for either of the developments. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. Staff Finding This application does not propose to amend the off-street parking requirements that were established for the respective developments. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. -5- .. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to service the proposed development. b) There are not adequate roads to ensure jire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance to the proposed development. Staff Finding This application does not request a reduction in the maximum allowable density of either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced it there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Spectfically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) The landis not suitable for the proposed development because of ground instability or the possibility of mudflow, rockfalls or avalanche dangers. b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and consequent water pollution. c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City. d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. Staff Finding This application is not requesting a reduction in the maximum allowable density of either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's physical constraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if: a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area plan to which the property is subject. b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in subparagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided, or those characteristics mitigated. c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern, land uses, and characteristics. -6- .. Staff Finding This application is not requesting an increase in the maximum allowable density of either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. B. Site Design: The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specijic reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved site plan of either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved elevations or placement of structures. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement Of vehicular and pedestrian movement. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved placement or orientation of the structures within either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. Staff Finding This application does not alter the on-site location of structures within either development. Therefore, Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved floor plans within either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. -7- .. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved site drainage or the location of the structures within either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately de-signed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved location of the structures within either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. C. Landscape Plan: The purpose Of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features Of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designed treatment of exterior spaces, preserving existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety ofornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved landscaping plan for either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved landscaping plan for either development. Therefore. staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. The proposed method o.f protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved landscaping plan for either development. Therefore. staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. -8- .. D. Architectural Character: It is the purpose of this standard to encourage architectural interest, variety, character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the building's proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use o.f materials, and other attributes which may ,significantly represent the character of the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan and architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development shall: 1. be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the intended use, and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved elevations of either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage Of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less-intensive mechanical systems. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved construction methods utilized iii building either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. Accommodate the storage and shielding of snow, ice, and water in a safe an appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved architectural elevations or the method in which the shielding of snow is to occur. Additionally, this application does not alter the snow storage location that was set out in the respective PUDs. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. E. Lighting: The purpose of this standard is to ensure the exterior ofthe development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic concerns. The.following standards shall be accomplished: 1. All lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference Of any king to adjoining streets or lands. Lighting of site features, structures, and access ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. Staff Finding Both developments are required to meet the City of Aspen Lighting Code as is set forth iii Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. Staff finds this criterion to be niet. -9- .. 2. AH exterior lighting shall be in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD documents. Up-lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements, and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. Staff Finding Both developments are required to meet the City of Aspen Lighting Code as is set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting. Staff finds this criterion to be niet. G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area: If the proposed development includes a common park, open space, or recreation area for the mutual benejit of all development in the proposed PUD, the following criteria shall be met: 1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open space, or recreation area enhances the character Of the proposed development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses and property users of the PUD. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved amount, location, or design of the approved open space. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas is deeded in perpetuity (not .for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar manner. Staff Finding This application does not alter the method in which the common park and recreation areas in each development are owned and maintained. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through legal instrument for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Staff Finding This application does not alter the method in which the common park and recreation areas in each development are owned and maintained. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. -10- .. H. Utilities and Public Facilities: The purpose Of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose any undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified .financial burden. The proposed utilities and public .facilities associated with the development shall comply with the.following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. Staff Finding Staff believes that sufficient public infrastructure exists to amend the respective PUDs as requested in that there is no additional development proposed by this application. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost ofthe developer. Staff Finding This application will not require public infrastructure improvements and will not have adverse impacts on the public infrastructure of either development. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proronionately for the additional improvement. Staff Finding This application is not proposing to install nor is being required to install oversized utilities to swap housing categories. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. I. Access and Circulation (Only standards 1&2 apply to Minor PUD applications): The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use O.f security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: 1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through and approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. Staff Finding This application does not alter the approved access within either development. Therefore, staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to this application. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the -11- .. proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. Staff Finding Staff does not believe that the approved parking arrangement within either of the developments would need to be amended due to the request to swap affordable housing categories between units because the use of the units is not changing. Staff finds this criterion to be met. J. Phasing o.f Development Plan. The purpose of these criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with the following: 1. All phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. 1. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent practical, occupants o.f initial phases from the construction of later phases. 3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionam improvements to public .facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. Staff Finding Construction of the subject units is nearing completion. This application is not proposing to amend the approved phasing for either of the respective developments. Staff finds this criterion to be met. - 12 - .. EXHIBIT A AMENDMENT TO GMQS DEVELOPMENT ORDER Review Criteria & Staff Findings SECTION 26.470.110, REVIEW STANDARDS: GMQS AMENDMENT Section 26.470.110 of the Regulations provides that development applications for a GMQS amendment must comply with the following standards and requirements. A. Exception. The following activities shall be exempt from these amendment procedures, provided they are reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director prior to construction, except as allowed for during actual development under (2), below: 1. Any change required to be made to a development order to respond to conditions imposed upon the proposed development by the Growth Management Commission, Planning and Zoning Commission, or the City Council during the review of other development applications relevant to the proposed development; and, Staff Finding Staff believes that the general affordable housing use of the units subject to this application will not change. Moreover, staff feels that the affordable housing units that are subject to this proposal will still contribute the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) goal of housing the Community's workforce in the upper valley. Thus, staff believes that the proposed request is consistent with the representations made by the Applicant during the original review of the respective planned unit developments. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. Any insubstantial modification to the development order, which shall be limited to technical or engineering considerations first discovered during actual development that could not reasonably be anticipated during the review process, or any other minor change that the Community Development Director finds has no effect on the conditions and representations made during the original project review. Staff Finding Staff believes that the proposed request is a minor change to the approved Top of Mill and Bavarian PUDs in that the affordable housing use of the units subject to this amendment will not change. Staff finds this criterion to be met. -13- .. 130 S. Galena St. Aspen CO 81611 Aspen Community (970) 920-5090 (970) 920-5439, fax Development Department mX To: Scott Writer Frorn: James Lindt Fax: 925-1036 Pages: Phone: Date: 9/30/03 Re: Staff Memo on Amendment CC: C] Urgent C] For Review C] Please Comment C] Please Reply C] Please Recycle â€¢ Comments: Hi Scott, Here is our staff memo on the proposed category swap between Bavarian and the Top of Mill. Please contact Joyce or myself if you have any questions. Joyce will be handling the public hearing because I will be on vacation. You are first on the agenda and the meeting begins at 4:30 PM. Also, please bring your affidavit of notice that includes a picture of the postings. Thanks, Jame . .. .. ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: ~~~ , Aspen, CO SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: 88-Fobu 7, 3-0 , 2002 STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) I foof Â£ fi-4 (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen. Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) o f the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: Publication ojnotice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publicationj#glk; a.@522*12eto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form wa;4bidined fron~~11~6~ Community Development Department, which was made -8 f suitable, 10~ waterproo f materials, which was rlot less than twenty-two (22) inchekvjjd~0~ and twenty-six (26) inches high. and which was composed of lette?&4*~ less than one inch iii height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen **days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the . - day,05 4* . 200 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph Of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records o f Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) . Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is iii any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal o f this Title and enactment o f a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing o f names and addresses of owners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. S ignature The foregping "Affidavit of Notice" was ackpoyledged, before re~~ of fgo 73079~ .150 2..by 96*,E** I. 4 WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL i ~44*SA My commission expires: % 0. ix dl,h*J. /34* 0240::(411/.09Â·600 Notary Aiblic U OF COLO *Ci~mission Expires 12/02/2008 ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BY MAIL .a ' 48 114. * 0 . 1 2*)4 - 1 FINANCED BY 14=- 1~ PUBLIC NOTICE k DATE 10/7/03 . / TIME 4.30 p/ki SLSTER GIEI PLACE ciTY HALL PURPOSE PUD 3 - 7 & AN (3 6/viots AMEND lk:.I * ~17-0 AN\E/1//3- AFFORRABLE- 4 , 44 ~ ' - -<*. ~ HOUSING 6.KIEWRIES-~ r. 1,344,Z i< ..4.1*35 FOR â€¢Uthâ‚¬R **0-ATICÂ»* CONTACT THE ASPEN/Prn(- ""Â»ING Â©FFIC~ 1, C~ nOUTM G~LENA Aafe* CO {WO} ** te#1/74 ,2Â¢>:2~â€¢S - --dita,w.- ' %4..t â€¢471,Â»16* .' 3 0 .=dimt:~9*2481 -,-illl r.~-~~ * -h PUBLIC NOTICE DATE 10/7/0 TIME 4 1Â» SISTER CITZE I. PLACE CITY HALL- PURPOSE PUL ANA GAA (41 AMEA/3 TO AkIE*/3 AFFORDIL FIOUSING CATEGORIE.5 .. ATTACHMENT 7 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE p' lili /4 11 / ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: ~rk l/O 0 63 (A J-_ll kl 1-~-18~,Â£1 6 SCHEDULED PUBLIC HEARING DATE: \ 0 1 -41/ 0 76 , 200_ STATE OF COLORADO ) ) SS. County of Pitkin ) 1, ~ FoMkS L-ju~\ ru (name, please print) being or0 representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: ~~Publication of-~notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of ali official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting ofnotice, which form was obtained from the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide / and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of ,200 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted n.otice (sign) is a.ttached hereto. Mailing ofnotice. By the mailing of a notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described iii Section 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least fifteen (15) daygprior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county. municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses ofproperty owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Rezoning or text amendment. Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses o f owners o f real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. pgnature 94 The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice" was acknowledged before me this )9 -day of 4115*i7 . 200_3 by Ii~3~%~-1-IES c~~~ v-Â·Â·Â«pit*Â· WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL My commission expires: 94/73) 03- Notary Public - y537%~ :.' <2(k < ~ SARAH ~2~ ~ Utti CATES ATTACHMENTS: c 9%50 COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE OWNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED BYAiAIL .-&086 CLERK FOR WATER DIVISION 5 DUJUrru o 12. 03(W!78 PITKIN COUNTY - Little Elk L. Note. Patrick, Miller & Kropf, P.C.. 730 E. Duri Diligence. Name of stnicture: Abacus Ranch Wel ? 87CW313 (4 of 5). Water Division No. 5, Decembe SE!.4 of Section 5, T. gS.R.86W of the 6* P.M. at a line ofsaid Section 5. Source: The source of the wai to the Roaring Fork River. Appropriation date: Mari for J.H. McCabe Tract 7, domestic, fire protection: 5 is a component part of an integrated water supply conducted a review of the water supply available to I ofthe property, Water Court, Division and State Ent 1 Pennit No. 59231-F for the Abacus Ranch Well No. well'S decreed purposes. Applicant has tested wati domestic purposes. Applicant has conducted extens Applicant's propelly will be served by the same. A planning, constructing and maintaining the subject monitor and advise as to new water rights Applicatio 22. 03(W188 Pitkin County - Capital Creek; Creek; East Sopris Creek. Application for Finding Anthony Collins and Judith Cotlins Revocable Trusl Green. P.C., P.O. Drawer 790. Glenwood Springs, Make Water Rights AF;elute (In Pan). Name of stru STRUCTUM SOURCE 49 M.libe P./No I ...SOP 6 1 AkC~be Po' No 1 Cap. Sol> 01 M,{Â·.be Puâ„¢! N. 4 C..Sop 0 â€¢ RE: AMENDMENT TO BAVARIAN iNN AND TOP OF MILL PUD AND GMQS AMENDMENT. NOTICE ]S HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing ~~in at 4.30 P.M. belore the Aspen Planning and be held on Octqber 7, 2003. at a meeting to *oning Commission. Sister Cities Room. City Hall. 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an api)rica- Non submitted by Four Peaks Development re- questing approval of a PUD amendment and a GMQS amendment to allow for two of the afjorda- ble housing units within the Bavarian Inn Pli[) to swap aff<,rdable housing categories. Additional- ly. the application requests approval to swap alt fordable housing categories between one of the aff,irdable housing units located in the Bavarian Inn PUD and one of the affordable housing units located in the Top of Mill PUD. The properties subject to the proposed amendments are legally described as follows: Parcel 2. Lot 3. of the.As- pen Mountain PUD and Lots D-1 and Lots K-it Block 12. City a,]d Townsite of Aspen. For further information *ontact James Lin(It at ~ the City of Aspen Community Development De- ipartment. 130 South Galena St., Aspen. CO (970) k92(1-5095. jamest@ci.aspen.co.us , s/lasmine Tygre. Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in The Aspen Times on September 20. 2003 (0798) Cindy Christensen. 03:33 PM .../03, Swapping Categories between Top of Mill and Bavaria Page 1 of 1 .. X-Sender: cindyc@commons X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2003 15:33:31 -0600 To: joycea@ci.aspen.co.us From: Cindy Christensen <cindyc@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Swapping Categories between Top of Mill and Bavarian X-MaiIScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MaiIScanner: Found to be clean Joyce: The developer for both of these projects approached the Housing Office on switching the categories between the two properties. In other words, instead of having all Category 2 three-bedrooms at Top of Mill, one of the units will be a higher category and the higher category unit at the Bavarian will be a lower category. The Housing Board approved this request, but I was told that this needs to go to Council for approval. Maureen asked Steve Barwick to schedule this with City Council but he said to check with Com. Dev. first to see if you would determine that it needs to go to Council or if an administrative decision would take care of this. I have attached the memo that I put together for the Board. If you have questions, please let me know. Cindy L==! brdmem_tom-bav_swap.Â®c Cindy Christensen Operations Manager, Housing Office Printed for Joyce Allgaier <joycea@ci.aspen.co.us> 7/29/03 .. MEMORANDUM TO: Housing Board FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing Office THRU: Maureen Dobson, Executive Director DATE: July 16, 2003 RE: REQUEST TO SWAP CATEGORIES BETWEEN BAVARIAN AND TOP OF MILL ISSUE: Four Peaks Development is requesting that between the two properties that they are developing for affordable housing -- the Bavarian site between 800 West Main and 800 West Bleeker, and the Top of Mill site (behind the old Grand Aspen) -- they would like the ability to switch the categories between the two properties. BACKGROUND: The attached shows the breakdown of what is currently approved for both properties and what is being proposed. As you can see from the attached, the amount of units per category does not change which means that the applicant's bottom line also does not change. The developer is allowed to place a qualified employee of their choice for a specific number of units. The employees that they would like to recognize for their service to their company and offer a unit to does not "fit" the current approval. The bottom line does not change. The housing program is still getting just as many units and because they can choose the qualified household of their choice, the same category-type units that would have been in the lottery prior to this change would still be the same. Staff is currently checking with the City Attorney to see if this request, if approved by the Board, would then need to be approved by the City Council. RECOMMENDATION: Staff is recommending the Board approve this request due to the following: 1. The bottom line remains tile same. This means that the request has no monetary value to the applicant. Their only "value" is recognizing the employees whom they would like to give the opportunity to purchase a unit. 2. The same type of categories and unit sizes remain the same, they just change between the two properties. .. . 3. The units that they are requesting to switch will go to qualified households of their choice. Each qualified household not only has to meet income, assets and occupancy requirements, but also the four-year priority requirement. 2 Cindy Christensen, 12:27 PM 8/11/03, Item for City Council Page 1 of 1 .. X-Sender: cindyc@commons X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.58 Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 12:27:04 -0600 To: joycea@ci.aspen.co.us From: Cindy Christensen <cindyc@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Item for City Council X-MaiIScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MaiIScanner: Found to be clean Joyce: The owners of the Top of Mill and Bavarian approached the Housing Board to switch category units between the projects. The Board approved this. I spoke with John Worcester and he thought that City Council might need to approve this because of their interest with the two properties. I wasn't sure how to proceed on this and John said I should check with Community Development. Do you need to take this through to them? Do I? Do they even need to see this? John asked me to check with Com. Dev. on this. The sooner the better. THANKS!! Cindy Christensen Operations Manager, Housing Office Printed for Joyce Allgaier <joycea@ci.aspen.co.us> 8/11/03 .. 130 S. Galena St. Aspen CO 81611 Aspen Community (970) 920-5090 (970) 920-5439, fax Development Department 3X To: Scott Writer From: James Lindt Fax: 925-1036 Pages: Phone: Date: 9/11/03 Notice for PUD Amendment-Swap Re: Categories CC: [] Urgent U For Review U Please Comment E Please Reply C] Please Recycle â€¢ Comments: Hi Scott, Here is the notice to mail out to property owners within 300 feet of both the Bavarian PUD and the Top of Mill Property. Please mail notice out and post notice on the site at least 15 days prior to October 7 th. Also, please let me know if October 7th will not work for you. The amendment will require a recommendation from P&Zto City Council and Council's approval of an ordinance. Thanks, James . .. 130 S. Galena St. Aspen CO 81611 City of Aspen (970) 920-5090 (970) 920-5439, fax Community Development Department TO: Scott Writer - Four Peaks From: Denise Driscoll Fax: 925-1036 Pages: 4 Phone: 925-2114 Date: September 11, 2003 Re: CC: Urgent [3 For Review 0 Please Comment I] Please Reply U Please Recycle â€¢ Comments: Please complete and sign the Fee Agreement form. You may fax or mail it back to us, Thank you, . 'our Peaks Development .tÂ¢fs pOS' 000 S. Mill St. * * * 1Â§1,=~ 1111,/, ispen.-CO 81611 198 o -PB8621509 0691â€¢00.37O SEP 23 OF 6 2 1 1 MAILED FROM ASPEN CO 81611 CITY OF ASPEN 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN. CO 81611 RECEIVED SEP 2 4 2003 ASPEN BUH.DING DEPARTMENT aieii#i9O2 11â€ž11,â€žlilliâ€ž,1,1111,11â€ž,ill,1,111â€žâ€ž1111â€ž11 ..l....tt.! ii i il PUBLIC NOTICE RE: AMENDMENT TO BAVARIAN INN AND TOP OF MILL PUD AND GMQS AMENDMENT. NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on October 7.2003. at a meeting to begin at 4:30 P.M. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission. Sister Cities Room. City Hall. 130 S. Galena St.. Aspen. to consider an application submitted by Four Peaks Development requesting approval of a PUD amendment and a GMQS amendment to allow for two o f the affordable housing units within the Bavarian Inn PUD to swap affordable housing categories. Additionally. the application requests approval to swap affordable housing categories between one of the affordable housing units located in the Bavarian Inn PUD and one of the affordable housing units located in the Top of Mill PUD. The properties subject to the proposed amendments are legally described as follows: Parcel 2. Lot 3, of the Aspen Mountain PUD and Lots D-I and Lots K-P. Block 12, City and Townsite of Aspen. For further information contact James Lindt at the City of Aspen Community Development Department, 130 South Galena St.. Aspen. CO (970) 920-5095. jamesl@ci.aspen.co.us s/Jasmine Tvgre, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on September 20,2003 City of Aspen Account - ' 'll ' I .*I/&.- *-- 1Â· ', ., O G I T. 7,0003) I B/APbhk ,BLOCK 5 . Â·~ t BLOCK 11 RLOCK 17 i RECEIVED APR 1 0 2003 ASPEN BUILDING DEPARTMENr 1 inch = 20' ft. 1 Â©Ar ,~IF~@rt, - 474354 Page: 2 of 18 11/04/Z002 02:30P $1-VIA DnprS PrTKIN COUNTY CO R 181.00 D 0.00 SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER BER REV.,02/ON DATE Br NUMÂ·- 980948 Job Ne. \\ S w. STH STREET, SUm.200 BAVARIAN INN 1 343.celioneOUS R,VISiOn3 994,92.Â· 747Â· - , , 2 FWAL PLAT 97 1/01 Â· ur FINAL PUD - 22Â£:41'n ' by.Â· TJT C2 GLENWOOD SPRMOS, COLORADO 81 601 DEVELOPMENT PLAN 3 * ' (970) 945- 1004 FAX (970) 945-5945 10/23 /2Â£40--~ SCHMUESER | GORDON i MEYER AspEN, CoLORADO (970) 925-6727 SUBDIVISION / PUD lk. ENGINEERS & SURVEY'ORS E-n,all: engineer@sgm,ine.com ,,orÂ·. OF 6 -~ _ 11%13. Â·980946-site , .h 4, . . 4 ' k . . 1 .A j l \1 , 1, . I . 1 ' 60 0 j / . " m . . â€¢!Al ~ D : ' lili ?A N j W Â·0 . ,l . A A . i. 4 . - 4 -'CW~TZÂ«,3 0 5 LIA Ill_ -TE ' I -7 1 r 1 -r -_ .1 0 .11 - 11 - 1- 1 1 4 TOP OF MILL AMEND - -- 1 pil li J -1- - - rr.7 /12 -..'â€žâ€ž-4. ,.[ 11* 1 . - 111 4 4:, 1 11- g r 1 4 444 OUTDOOR LIGHTING THI? C!71~199'f:OMPLY WITH 23 2 E'â‚¬" LIGHTjNG cODE cuT)11â€¢ 26.575.150 CAT, 2 6 11 - i \/ Act= GALAMBOS * ARCHITECTS INC. 9 . N 300 D AABC ASPEN, CO 8I6II (970) 429-1286 / 14*92Â«9/A 4415*W/D .:.P.24'*ft. .Â·Â·.y.*59<. '41. I k.*491 *f-.7-,919~~ to .-- UID V - - /4, - --- -~ 44 R 9-/'-r I.x . ff:,17 4.....:.. f., r.115 '31 ...:fit :2* :>.2,-t?::Â·Â·.:.f. *-/Â· ~ j'kT.t .1,539-ry-.7 i 1 Â·, ~ fi~*i-4' *'~'10'26.:,..~.se,nrr:;14.::'*4' ff.'te:Â·ay,Â¢Â¢,3 Â·43'4Â¢' Welit."AR"903'011?2?Nk'*.0:39*%4839.-dikÂ©"12;JAD ../45~:+439#mi~5433**19+*95#21:Â©fte \ / mÂ·(66*-F#67*24.'04*ia"32,&/*36/. .-ig:Â·Â·?2*14.6 ,.Â·*prÂ·Â·bit.4:AA#-1%-f?3Â· J - ,6 I 33*U*&/~C/~.~ili ~~:192911;I~J.~~. 2 -- a.~ OL .. -4Â£*M-*i******Â¥Â·f41474423. 1 / f -i-3,344*56.9(:34--'6424IRÂ·)3454?3Â·%9.,AW::.4, 41.,tÂ· ~' ,Â·'~be...21*1'..2, 4-' TI~a...<24Â· r. %.:)-Â·92:~,4, \ U T ISLEJAYNT \ /10 "~ f i..Â»,1-'5%â‚¬9i~*it :,, Â·3.4:fâ‚¬-iÂ¢64*Â·4*&Â·'2*f~%~4:Â·.;:.Â·:Â·....jp#.4~c*,,*-444495.-.-.,.,y2p,2%43* \ r\11 / /: f~ 45Â¢lt#Aft..ft:i]*ti*~44:prij,-,Â·SkÂ·pf=Â·v 1 4-~'Â·3*~Â·4â‚¬-Â£&.~va~Â·Â·>*e,:Â·t .4-...1-:...2....<:<1:y.* Â·ofF*29%:%.itt:.i':42**4** > 15 '-< O : *Aft FIE, 0 - 0 01,42%..1. U.5492. t: ..I . 1 -0.- 1. -0./1,<134-Â·1/.0 f'?3'4.â‚¬74.0...1. / t-~4* 1 E < / ac 1 ZE O . 1 1 -1 R0 \ PARCEL 1 â‚¬- .............- .---.............-...........--.............................-..-/ 1 h - I ZZ j DW A- 00- 0 y \ 1 au) < LEGEND EXTERIOR SCONCE PER CfTY ~ Of- ASPEN UGHTING REGULATIONS PER CrTY OF ASPEN UGHTING REGULATIONS EXTERIOR RECESSED DONNUGHT EXTER/OR ACCENT UGHT PER CfTY OF ASPEN UGHTING REGUI_ATIONS K EY P LA N ' <12 -1 1:=42'L-4 \ I 9=-L ll.=-_4~4~~~ ''~ RECoi.7)0%- i) ' ,#1/ +HN WI /290-1 ~~QÂ¢*1~.,' ' 1 \1 044/\Atiffg 101 A.P.qf!,1.'trf,6 A r.---1-4\ , -j U.1.-122 -Â·il U 1 /-7 lit- 1 / 41-3fAR-(*~ * p / 11 11 1 -11 OF,=WING 1 -11- r LOT 3 - PAFICEL 2 1 f I -_ "' AUGUEr 7 20â‚¬12 2 ' 4 - , PRNECT, - Z' ~ TOP OF HILL 1 Ir INVESTOPS LLC LOT 3 - PARCEL 2 NORTH EXTERIOR LIGHTING PLAN +I 1. Al , 7~1~~1 i i V 4 2 16 32 MAR 3 1 2003 - 6 1 - NOISIAIDGIAS N3dSÂ¥ ' E 101