Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutresolution.apz.005-84 RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOmmENDING CONCEPTUAL PUD/SUBDIVISION APPROVAL FOR THE TOP OF MILL, SUMMIT PLACE AND 700 SOUTH GALENA CONDOMINIUM COMPONENTS OF THE ASPEN MOUNTAIN PUD AND RECOMMENDING A REZONING TO R-15(PUD)(L) FOR THAT PORTION OF THE TOP OF MILL SITE CURRENTLY ZONED PUBLIC AND O¥~NED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN Resolution No. 5 (Series of 1984) WHEREAS, American Century Corporation, Commerce Ssvin~s Association, Alan R. ![ovak and Robert Callaway (hereinafter referred to as the "Applicants") ~ have submitted an application for conceptual PUD/sub- division approval for the Top of Mill and Summit Place condominium components of the Aspen I~ountain PUD; and WHEREAS, the application requests certain additional reviews and approvals including 8040 Creenline and Hountain View Plane review and a rezoning to L-2 for those portions of the Top of Eitl site currently zoned Public and E-15 (PUD)(L); and ¥~EREAS, the Applicants have withdrawn their recuest for rezonJng currently zoned R- to L-2 of that portion of the Top of 15 (PUD) (n); and WHEREAS~ the Aspen Planning and Rill site Zoning Commission (hereinafter referred to as the "Commission") did consider the Applicants' requests for conceptual PUD/subdivision approval of the Top of [[ili and Summit Place condominiums~ 8040 Greenline and Mountain View Plane review~ and rezoning from Public to L-2 at meetings held on ~[arch 20th. ITarch 27th and Ar. ril 17, !984~ and at a duly noticed public hearing conducted on April 10~ 1984; and ¥~EREAS, the Commission wishes to defer formal action with respect to the Applicants' request for ~040 Greenline and ~[ountain View Plane review until its consideration of the Applicants' preliminary PUD/sub- division submission, given the technical nature of the various review criteria and the need for raore detailed information in order to adequately assess project impacts; and WHEREAS~ pursuant to any project needing PUD or Section 24-11.3(f) of the [~unicipal Code, subdivision approval which has received a development allotment may be deemed by the Planning Office to have satisfied the conceptual presentation re(~uirements of the City's PUD and subdivision regulations; and P. esolution 1,7o. 84-_5__ Page 2 V~EREAS~ the Aspen City Council did allocate~ pursucnt to Section z4-1!.4(g) of the I[unicipal ~o¢!e a development allotment of twelve (12) residential units to the 700 South Galena condominium component of the Aspen Mountain PUD, as set forth in ~esolution ]~o. 7, Series of 19~4; and WHEREAS~ the Commission did review, Section 24-].1.3(f) of the Municipal Code notwithstanding, the 700 South Galena condominium component of the Aspen !.?ountain PUD with respect to the conceptnal PUD/subdivision criteria of the Municipal Code at meetings held on April 24th, May 1st and [:ay 8, 198~; and W~EREAS, the Applicants have revised the Top of [~;i!l and 700 South Galena _on¢.omzn~um components of the Aspen !'lountain PUD in response to various concerns identified by the Plannimg Office and Commission~ including a significant reduction in the overall height of both projects. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen.~ Colorado: Section 1 That it does hereby recommend that the Aspen City Council grant conceptual PUD/subdivision approval~ pursuant to Sections 20-10 and 24-8.7 of the Dunicipal Code, to the Top of !]il!~ Summit Place and 700 South Galena condominium components of the Aspen Uountain PUD subject to the following conditions: 1. The Applicants' ac¢~uisition of that portion of of Mill site currently owned bv the Citv.~ ~ the Top The AQplicants' resolution of the Engineering Department's concerns with respect to the accessibility of certain internal areas of the Top of ~7ill site for fire protection purposes. The Applicants' sub~aission to the Aspen Ski Club, for facilities. of a detailed proposal~ acceptable the relocation of the Ski Club's The vacation of Mill Street being conditioned upon the retention of all utility rights~ the provision of appropriate utility easements, and each utility franchised in the City signing off on the proposed vacation so as to insure that the loss of the right-of-way will not interfere with each utility's current or future needs· The Applicants' submission of an acceptable detailed storm drainage plan for the Top of Mill site~ including information with respect to the eztent and nature of the grading required to construct the proposed retention ponds. Resolution ~o. 84- 5 Page 3 6. The height of the Top of ~[ill condominium units not exceeding thirty-three (33) feet as measured from the lowest floor elevation to the midpoint of the roof. The Applicants' revision of the Top of Mill site plan so as to increase the distance between the two single-family units located at the southern terminus of ~%i!l Street in order to expand the view through the project from the Street to the ski area. The retention, to the maximum extent feasible, of existing mature vegetation on the Top of Mill site and the installation of adequate landscaping so as to minimize the visual impact of the project, in particular as viewed from Mill Street, Lift !-A and the adjacent ski terrain. 10. The Applicants' provision of an adequate easement, acceptable to the Engineering Department, so as to allow the extension of Su~.]it Street in the event the extension is deemed appro- priate by the City. The Applicants' granting of an acceptable trail easement across the Top of Mill site so as to provide access~ to the extent feasible, to the base of Little Dell and Lift 1-A. The Applicants' submission of a preliminary soils and water table investigation of the 700 South Galena site to include an evaluation of slope stabilitv both during and following construction. Conceptual PUD/subdivision approval of the 700 South Galena project should be expressly conditioned upon the Applicants' mitigation of any soils~ slope stability or drainage problems identified, the details of said mitigation to be included in the Applicants' preliminary PUD/subdivision submission. 12. The Applicants' identification of all easements required in conjunction with the construction of the 700 South Galena project and the acquisition of said easements, to the extent required, prior to the issuance of an excavation permit. 13. The Applicants' agreement to a completion schedule for the construction of the 700 South Galena project and the provision of an appropriate performance bond so as to prevent and minimize damage to the surrounding landowners in the form of an unsightly and/or unsafe construction area for a longer period of time than is necessary. 14. The height of the 700 South Galena condominium units not exceeding a maximum of thirty-four (34) feet along the projects' south facade~ a maximum of thirty-nine (39) feet along the north facade and a maximum of forty-three (43) feet in any other location as compared to the maximum height allowed in the underlying L-2 zone district of thirty-three (33) feet, all as measured from natural grade to the ridge of the roof and as shown on the Applicants' revised elevations dated April 27, 1984. These restrictions are to be noted and recorded on the Applicants' final PUD/subdivision plat. 15. The Applicants' realigning Galena Street in the vicinity of the 700 South Galena project, to the extent feasible, so as to improve traffic circulation and safety in the general site area. 16. The above conditions being met prior to preliminary PUD/sub- division approval. 17. The reconstruction of existing residential units being limited to the forty (40) units verified pursuant to Section Resolution ~o. 84-__--5._ Page ~ 24-1]..2(a) of the t%unicipal Code, being accom~31ished within five (5) years of the date of demolition, and being restricted to the Aspen Ilountain PUD site. 18. Ail material representations of the Applicants' conceptual PUD/subdivision and residential GMP applications not speci- fically referred to above being made a condition of this approval. Section 2 That it does hereby recomnend that the Aspen City Council deny the Applicants~ request for a rezoning from Public to L-2 of that portion of the Top of ~ill site currently owned by the City and does hereby reconmend instead that the parcel(s) be rezoned to R-15 (PUD) (L), at such time as the parcel(s) may be conveyed to the Applicants, for the following reasons: While the proposed development is consistent with the intent of the L-2 zone category and of the Recreation/Acconmodations Transition land use category applied to this area in the 1973 Aspen Land Use Plan, a rezoning to L-2 is not required to achieve the proposed development. The primary reason for the Applicants' request is to enable them to take advantage of the more favorable FAR ratio available in the L-2 zone district. Since the FAR. provisions of the ~!unicipal Code may be varied pursuant to the PUD regulations, a rezoning merely to reduce the extent of the requested variation is inappropriate. The L-2 zone district permits multi-family residential uses in addition to single-family units and duplexes and~ therefore, does not guarantee that development will occur consistent with the adopted Land Use Plan. APPROVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at their regular meeting on [~]ay 8 , 1984. ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ATTEST: Perry~rvey, Chairman,/ Barbara l~orris, Deputy City Clerk