The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutapz.res.024-92A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION SCORING THE BELL MOUNTAIN LODGE EXPANSION GROWTH MANAGEMENT PROPOSAL FOR 22 LODGE UNITS INCLUDING FUTURE GMP ALLOCATIONS AND THREE DEED RESTRICTED AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS LOCATED AT 720 E. COOPER (LOTS K-P AND PART OF LOT Q, BLOCK 105, TOWNSITE OF ASPEN). ~esolution 92- ~~ WHEREAS, the Kappeli family , for Bell Mountain Lodge, Inc. submitted an application for 22 lodge units in the 1992 Lodge Accommodations GrOwth Management Quota System (GMQS) competition; and WHEREAS, this application was the only submission for the 10 lodge units available in the Lodge Preservation zone district's 1992 competition; and WHEREAS, the proposal included three deed restricted housing units (one each 1 bedroom, 2 bedroom, three bedroom) within the lodge for employees of the lodge; and WHEREAS, as the application did not specify the deed restriction categories for the affordable housing units, the Commission deferred discussion and approval of the specific deed restrictions to the City Council; and WHEREAS, referral comments were received from the Engineering Department, Housing Office, Water Department, Electric Department, Fire Marshal, Environmental Health Department, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, and the Roaring Fork Energy Center; and WHEREAS, the Planning Office, in consideration of these referral comments, submitted to the Commission a staff score of 81. 625 points pursuant to the standards contained in Section 24-8-106.G. of the Aspen Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, at a public hearing on December 8, 1992 the Planning and Zoning Commission accepted the Planning staff's score for the Bell Mountain Lodge Expansion project, finding that the 81.625 points meets the minimum point thresholds established within Article 8 of the Land Use Code (Growth Management Quota System); and WHEREAS, the Commission also voted 6-0 for approval of . GMQS Exemption for the deed restricted unit with conditions pursuant to Section 8-104 C.l.c. of the Land Use Code; and WHEREAS, the Commission voted 5-1 in favor of granting multi-year allotments from the 1993 (10 units) and 1994 (2 units) GMP quotas. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION that it scores the Bell Mountain Lodge Expansion GMQS proposal at 81. 625 points and recommends to City Council an allocation of 22 lodge units utilizing future GMP allotments from 1993 and 1994 and GMQS Exemption for three on-site housing units with the following conditions' 1. The owner shall submit the appropriate deed restrictions to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Office for approval. Upon ~pproval by the Housing office, the Owner shall record the deed restriction with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office. 2. Prior to issuance of any building permits for the property, copies of the recorded deed restrictions for the dwelling units must be forwarded to the Planning office. 3. Ail material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on December 8, 1992. Jan Car ne'~, p-- y ~y Clerk BEFORE THE ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION IN RE THE MATTER OF LOT 3, HOAG SUBDIVISION, A/K/A 1125 UTE AVENUE, JOSEPH S. ZALUBA, APPLICANT FINDINGS AND ORDER THIS'MATTER came before the Planning and Zoning Commission for hearing on July 21, 1992, and upon written notice to Joseph S. Zaluba, to determine whether Mr. Zaluba has fail'ed to comply with or has violated the terms and conditions of land use devel- opment approvals awarded to him on January 2, 1990. Mr. Zaluba appeared before the Commission, represented by legal counsel, and was heard. The Commission also heard evidence from interested persons and the staff of the Planning Department. Having consid- ered the testimony and the documents presented, the Commission finds as follows' 1. On June 24,. 1992, written notice to show cause was issued by the Commission to Joseph S. Zaluba alleging that grounds existed to believe~that he had violated or failed to comply with certain terms and conditions of his 8040 Greenline development approval issued by the Commission on January 2, 1990, to wit, (1) Condition 3 (a vertical tie-in wall and boulder wall shall be constructed and plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Engineering Departments); (2) Condition 4 (applicant shall adhere to the recommendations of Chen-Northern regarding slope stability during the excavation of the road and site and the plans and recommendations shall be reviewed by the Engineering Department); (3) Condition 8 (no spoils or fill shall be placed over the side of the road cut. All excavated materials shall be removed from the site if not used in construction of the residence); and (4) the applicant shall revegetate the upper road cut, beginning at the hairpin turn). 2. Mr. Zaluba received notice of the above-noted hearing on June 29, 1992. 3. Mr. Zaluba commenced development of the subject parcel in the fall of 1990 by excavating and cutting an access road and securing an excavation/foundation permit for the planned resi- dence. Mr. Zaluba also filed for a~building permit. 4. During the two yearS since Mr. Zaluba commenced devel- opment of the subject parcel, he has ceased work on the develop- ment, has allowed his permits to lapse, and has failed to com- plete construction of the access road. 5. The existing condition of the unfinished access road is hazardous, has created run-off and drainage problems, and is unsightly. 6. Spoils have been allowed to fall from the access road and accumulate below the road cut. ed. 7. The tie-wall and boulder wall have not been construct- 8. Slope stability has not been obtained. 9. Revegetation of the upper road cut has not been effec- tuated. 10. A reasonable period of time has elapsed during which Mr. Zaluba should have and could have corrected or remediated the conditions as listed above. 11. Taking all of the evidence and information together, Mr. Zaluba has failed to comply with and has violated Conditions 3, 4, 8 and 10 of the 8040 Greenline development approval awarded to him on January 2, 1990. NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the foregoing findings, IT IS ORDERED AS FOLLOWS' 1. Mr. Zaluba's 1990 8040 Greenline development approval shall not be revoked at this time, but shall be subject to his timely and satisfactory compliance with the following neW condi- tions. 2. Revegetation of the road cut, removal of all spoils from the bank of the new road cut, stabilization of the road surface, and proper drainage mitigation as approved ~by the City Engineer shall be accomplished by September 1, 1992. 3. Recommendations by Chen-Northern regarding stabiliza- tion shall be reviewed by the City Engineer and shall be adhered to. Mr. Zaluba shall secure certification frOm Chen-Northern or another licensed engineer that properties surrounding the subject parcel .shall be safe from rock fall and drainage. 4. Architectural drawings and plans for the tie-in and boulder retaining walls shall be submitted for approval to the City Engineer by September 1, 1992. 5. Revegetation of the upper road cut shall be completed by July 1, 1993. 6. Mr. Zaluba shall conspicuously post "Danger-No Tres- passing'' sign(s) to keep persons from entering or traveling upon the access road until after completion of same. 7. Mr. Zaluba shall post a performance bond, or other similar security as approved by the City Attorney, in a sum up to $300,000.00 to secure the successful completion of the revege- tation, installation of the retaining walls, slope stabilization, drainage mitigation, and road surface stabilization. The exact amount of the bond shall be determined by the City Engineer and City Attorney upon examination and approval of the plans for the work. 8. Failure to complete the slope and road stabilization work, drainage mitigation for the new road-cut, the removal of all spoils, and construction of the retaining walls by October 15, 1992, shall cause the City to access and draw down on the performance security to perform and complete all the required work as specified herein and shall, further, result in the revocation of the 1990 8040 Greenline development approval. Entered this ~~day of ~~~i~ tunc, July 2~, 1992. , 1992, nunc pro ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Jasmine Tygre, Chairper ATTEST · ~-~~~e~, '~p~t~-Ci~ Clerk jc85.4