Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.19960416AGENDA ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, APRIL 16, 1996, 4:30 PM SISTER CITIES MEETING ROOM, CITY HALL I. COMMENTS A. Commissioners B. Planning Staff C. Public II. MINUTES III. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. 971 Ute Conditional Use for ADU, Bob Nevins IV. NEW BUSINESS A. Smuggler Affordable Housing Conceptual PUD/Rezoning, Suzanne Wolff B. Waterplace Conceptual PUD, Dave Michaelson (C. Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Stream Margin Review, Dave Michaelson D. ADU Update, Dave Michaelson V. ADJOURN MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Rhonda Harris, Administrative Assistant RE: Upcoming Agendas DATE: April 10, 1996 April 23 - Special Meeting Aspen Mountain PUD, Dave Michaelson Small Lodge Work Session May 7 - Regular Meeting Rocky Mountain Pie Company (tabled from 4/2), Suzanne Wolff Zupancis Subdivision, Bob Nevins Work Session - Shadow Mountain View Plane, Dave Michaelson Braden Duplex Conditional Use for ADU and Stream Margin Review, Bob Nevins MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Bob Nevins, City Planner RE: Bass/Cahn Accessory Dwelling Unit Conditional Use Review - Public Hearing Parcel ID No. 2737-182-95-029 DATE: April 16, 1996 SUMMARY: The applicant proposes to construct a 410 sf accessory dwelling unit which will contain approximately 343 sf of net livable area. The studio unit is to be located within the partially, below -grade level of a reconstructed single-family residence. Attached are the application as exhibit A, and the referral comments as exhibit B. Planning staff recommends that the conditional use for an accessory dwelling unit at 971 Ute Avenue, City of Aspen be approved with conditions. APPLICANT: Bass/Cahn Properties, as represented by Stuart Lusk of Lusk Design LOCATION: 971 Ute Avenue; Lot 2 and West 13 feet of Lot 1, Ute Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen ZONING: Moderate -Density Residential (R-15 PUD) APPLICANT'S REQUEST: To construct a studio accessory dwelling unit containing approximately 410 sf in lieu of a cash payment pursuant to the conditions set forth in Section 26.100.050(A)(5)(c)(1)(a) of the Land Use Regulations. REFERRAL COMMENTS: Attached as exhibit B are the comments from the City Engineer, Housing Office, and Parks Department. The reviews are summarized below: 1. City Engineer a. engineering memorandum is included as part of exhibit B. 2. Housing Office a. size of the proposed accessory dwelling unit is within the guidelines of the Code; b. kitchen must meet minimum requirements established for accessory dwelling units; c. a deed restriction for the unit must be recorded prior to building permit approval. 3. Parks Department a. recommend preserving the multi -stemmed 8" diameter willow tree; b. removal of the existing spruce (8-1/2") and/or two aspens (8") shall require mitigation as per Code; c. trees to remain shall be protected during construction; d. submission of a landscape plan for the property. STAFF COMMENTS: Pursuant to Section 26.60.040, a development application for a conditional use approval shall meet the following standards: A. The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives, and standards of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, and with the intent of the zone district in which it is proposed to be located; RESPONSE: Included within the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan is the Housing Action Plan which establishes a policy of promoting, marketing, and implementing the Accessory Dwelling Unit program. The Moderate -Density Residential (R-15) zone district is designated to provide areas for long term residential purposes with customary accessory uses. This conditional use request for the approval of an accessory dwelling unit within a single-family residence is consistent with the intent, philosophy, and policies of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and complies with the intent of the Moderate -Density Residential (R-15) zone. B. The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and surrounding land uses, or enhances the mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development; RESPONSE: The immediate neighborhood surrounding the parcel contains a variety of land uses, densities, building types, and architectural styles. The site is located on the south side of Ute Avenue which is comprised primarily of detached, single-family, contemporary -style residences. Ajax Park and the Gant tennis courts are nearby. Across the street are the Gant condominiums and Ute Place, a private, single-family enclave. The existing residence is a dilapidated, single -story log structure that it is being rented to local residents/employees. The proposal to reconstruct the single-family residence with an accessory dwelling unit is consistent and'compatible with the land uses and character of the Ute Avenue neighborhood. By providing an accessory dwelling unit, there will continue to be an opportunity for local employees to reside and enliven in the area. C. The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed conitional use minimizes adverse effects, including visual impacts, impacts on pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise, vibrations, and odor on surrounding properties; RESPONSE: The accessory dwelling unit is contained within the footprint of the proposed, reconstructed, single-family residence. It is located at the rear of the residence in the partially below -grade level and should not create a visual impact from the street. The studio unit is 410 sf with approximately 343 sf of net livable area. The main living space measures about 200 sf and has a southwest orientation offering a private and comfortable living situation. The unit is designed to have a separate walkway and covered entry. The access stairway is proposed to be snowmelted for the resident's safety. An off-street parking space for the studio unit is provided in the driveway. Automobile trips should be minimized since the site is within walking distance of downtown Aspen, City Market, the gondola, Aspen Club, and several parks. The approval of an accessory dwelling unit within the proposed single-family residence should not adversely impact the surrounding properties. Planning staff recommends that the proposed walk/path be extended from the driveway to the entry of the accessory dwelling unit. The street in front of the property is a posted "no parking" zone. Therefore, the driveway width may need to be increased from the proposed fourteen (14) feet to seventeen (17) feet to provide two (2) additional off-street parking spaces, one (1) space for the accessory dwelling unit and one (1) guest space. The proposed single-family residence has a two -car garage. D. There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use including but not limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks, police, fire protection, emergency, hospital and medical services, drainage systems, and schools; RESPONSE: There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the proposed unit. E. The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental need for increased employees generated by the conditional use; RESPONSE: According to Section 26.40.090, Accessory dwelling units, the unit shall be deed restricted, meet the Housing Authority's guidelines for resident occupied units and shall be limited to rental periods of not less than six (6) months in duration. Owners of the principal residence shall have the right to place a qualified employee or employees of his or her choosing in the accessory dwelling unit. F. The proposed conditional use complies with all additional standards imposed on it by the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and by all applicable requirements of this title; RESPONSE: The proposed conditional use for an accessory dwelling unit within a single-family residence is in conformance with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and complies with all other applicable requirements. RECOMMENDATION: Planning staff recommends that the conditional use for the proposed accessory dwelling unit at 971 Ute Avenue in the City of Aspen be approved with the following conditions: 1. Prior to the issuance of any building permits the applicant shall: a. verify with the Housing Office that the net livable area of the accessory dwelling unit is a minimum of three hundred -forty (340) square feet; _ b. verify with the Housing Office that the unit will be built with a kitchen having a minimum of a two -burner stove with oven, standard sink, and a 6-cubic foot refrigerator plus freezer; c. upon approval of the deed restriction by the Housing Office, the applicant shall record the deed restriction with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's Office and provide proof of recordation to the Community Development Department. The deed restriction shall state that the accessory dwelling unit meets the housing guidelines for such units, meets the definition of Resident Occupied Unit, and if rented, the unit shall be rented for periods of six (6) months or longer; d. clearly identify the accessory dwelling unit on building permit plans as a separate studio unit having a private, exterior entrance and being in compliance with U.B.C. Chapter 35 sound attenuation requirements; e. provide a drainage plan to confirm that the historic surface run-off shall be maintained on -site; f. submit a landscape plan, preserving the existing willow if possible, to the Park's Department for review; g. apply for a tree removal permit two (2) weeks prior to the issuance of a building permit if the existing willow (8" diameter multi -stemmed), spruce (8-1/2" diameter), and/or two (2) aspen trees (8" diameter) are removed. The required mitigation for the removal of any of these trees shall be as per Section 15.04.450 of the municipal code. APR 09 '96 02=16PM SANTA ROSA HOLDINGS 415 3B9 4964 P . 2/2 itesponses to Attachment 5 of review standards for development of conditional use. A..) Zone is appropriate for ,A,DU conditional use approval. The proposal is consistent with the goals of the Aspen area comprebensive plan, 13.) The proposed ADU should blend- in with the character of the single - f=nily/bi,gh density condoniinium neighborhood, thus whancin-R the mixture of uses in the immediate vicinity. C.) The ADU conditional use, if approved, should pose no adverse effects on surrounding properties , such as the following factors: 1. Visual impact - (entrance located on side yard) 2. pedestrian - ( no obstruction to pedestrian traffic; finished ADU is excellent location fox pedestrian tenant 3. Vehicular circulation - (no adverse impacts are vehicular mac) 4_ parking - (on -site space provided) 5. Trash - (service provided) 6. Service/Delivery - (turn around & walkway provided.) 7. Noise - (Lower level & sidelocation of ADIJ should minimize noise impact; adjacent neighbor to west has garage as noise buffer between main house and ADU) S. No vibration or odor impacts. D.) The location on 971 UTE Ave shall provide an excellent location for access of public facilities and services. Such as: Roads Water Sewer Trash Parks Police Fire Department Emergency Hospital & Medical Drainage Schools E.) Approval of ADU shall assist in supplying affordable housing. F_) Said ADU proposal is consistent and compatible with all other Applicable requirement of Aspen .Area Comprehensive Plan. f-;:XMP1T' R ' t4-Wr)VDVM 2. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the Community Development Department shall inspect the accessory dwelling unit to determine compliance with the conditions of approval. 3. The applicant shall consult with various City departments in regards to the following: a. City engineering for design considerations and any development within public rights -of -way; b. Parks department for tree removal, landscaping, and vegetative species; c. City streets department for any work or development, including landscaping, within public rights -of -way. 4. Any new surface utility needs including pedestals must be installed on -site. 5. The applicant shall agree to join any future improvement districts which may be formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in the public right-of-way. 6. All material representations made by the applicant in this application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. 7. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the Community Development Department shall inspect the accessory dwelling unit to determine compliance with the conditions of approval. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the conditional use for the accessory dwelling unit at 971 Ute Avenue with the conditions as outlined in the Community Development Department memo dated April 16, 1996." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A) Application Exhibit B) Referral comments INDEX 971 UTE AVE PG 1 LAND USE APPLICATION FORM PG 2 COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INS. (OWNERSHIP) PG 9 REPRESENTATIVE AUTHORIZATION FORMS PG 11 AGREEMENT FOR PAYMENT PG 13 CONDITIONAL USE DESCRIPTION OF ADU PG 14 AREA MAC' LOCATING PROPERTY PG 15 EXISTING SURVEY (ALPINE 95 - 65) PG 16 PROPOSED SITE PLAN (ADU ACCESS) PG 17 PROPOSED ADU FLOOR PLAN 1/411= 1' PG 18 LOWER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN (REDUCED) PG 19 ENTRY LEVEL FLOOR PLAN (REDUCED) PG 20 UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN (REDUCED) PG 21 NORTH ELEVATION (STREET FACADE) PG 22 WEST ELEVATION (ADU ENTRY) 12,,tM USE APPLS=-CN FORM 1 j ?) P-of ec` Name �7 71 2) Pro ec - ir�tion 1 -I Lj V - 5 (ir ic:3tr I street- address , lot & block number, ler}al desc ziption whe e J 3) Present Zoning 1t ( 4) Lot Size 5) Applicant's Name, .dress & Phone -Ta PF-M F-S �lZ-O-DOO 6 R.eoreszritative' s Name, Address & Phone LusV, 7) Type c f Application (please dieck all that apply) A-0 U Cori. tional Use C=nceptual SPA Co _ H istoric Der. SCe~ia1 R-riew Fire SPA Final His',.oric Dee. 8040 �.riline CO,-)c l PM Msnor Hs.storr.c D!f- Firma l am Historic D=li ticn Mk=tain View Plane subdivision Hisst-oric Cesigrnati on C.-r)dcm i n i t 1m i za tion Text./Map Amerr -it- Q S AllotDexIt Lot SC-I-1 ZtIT-zt: Idne ��' t' m Adj l'si=Derlt 8) � �ptiCll of a-,ci ; -, rq Uses (m=be- and type of e�si, Irq a r-pr-,— ia=te sq- ft- : rv-�T of beck— a S ; anY pr--ricos appr-vals 9=ted to the - rr P ice= G ePC'�-� 9) Lam.` 4 pt ion of Ce-✓eI -'it A ZiQti-an je -f&�A Gam. W iTit 5- o 6CA5f+ PA-Jri ti-r�T P s i-i 6 �-r a N 10) L a v ` you at"tta�3 the follCL-Lj�? ✓ to At:+,--ac� .z 2, Mi n i ram Sl _I -I i sS is n Ccrrte+nts +/ R--,-:;:Dor tse to Att'tac-m�=,. 3, S ezi Fic lit'mi s, ion Ccrrterrts ✓� to At,_act=e:-.t- 4, Reviow S tanda.rzis for Your Apolicaticn e Commitment for Title Insurance Issued by 0 Nations Title Insurance Company Nations Title Insurance Company, a Kansas corporation, herein called the company, for a valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A, in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provisions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof. This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commitment or by subsequent endorsement. This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obligations hereunder shall cease and terminate six months after the effective date hereof or when the policy or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is not the fault of the Company. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Nations Title Insurance Company has caused this Commitment to be signed as of the effective date of Commitment shown in Schedule A, the Commitment to become valid when countersigned by an authorized signatory. Coun ttic d. By V oceror Authorizedgent Nations Title Insurance Company By. President Attest: Uz- Secretary F& 1550 ALTA Commitment Form NM 6 V2 NTI COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE SCBEDULE A Effective Date: 11/01/95 at 08:30 A.M. Case No. PCT10228C4 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: (a) ALTA Owner's Policy -Form 1992 Amount$ 625,000.00 Premium$ 1,462.00 Proposed Insured: Rate:STANDARD BASS CAHN PROPERTIES, A COLORADO GENERAL PARTNERSHIP (b) ALTA Loan Policy -Form 1992 Amount$ 316,000.00 Premium$ 70.00 Proposed Insured: Rate:COMPANION ALPINE BANK, ASPEN Tax Certificate $20.00 3. Title to the FEE SIMPLE estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is at the effective date hereof vested in: LINDA D. EDWARDS 4. The land referred to in this Commitment is situated in the County of PITKIN, State of COLORADO and is described as follows: ALL OF LOT 2 AND THE WEST 13 FEET OF LOT 1, UTE ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN. Countersigned at: PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC. Schedule A-PG.1 601 E. HOPKINS This Commitment is invalid ASPEN, CO. 81611 unless the Insuring 970-925-1766 Provisions and Schedules 970-925-6527 FAX A and B are attached. P G. __3 NTI SCHEDULE B - SECTION 1 REQUIREMENTS The following are the requirements to be complied with: ITEM (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. ITEM (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record to -wit: 1. Deed from : LINDA D. EDWARDS To : BASS CAHN PROPERTIES, A COLORADO GENERAL PARTNERSHIP 2. Deed of Trust from : BASS CAHN PROPERTIES, A COLORADO GENERAL PARTNERSHIP to the Public Trustee of the County of Pitkin for the use of : THE LENDER TO BE INSURED HEREUNDER to secure : $316,000.00 3. Evidence satisfactory to the Company that the Real Estate Transfer Tax as established by Ordinance No. 20 (Series of 1979) and Ordinance No. 13 (Series of 1990) has been paid or exempted. 4. Certificate of nonforeign status executed by the transferor (s) . (This instrument is not required to be recorded) 5. Completion of Form DR 1079 regarding the witholding of Colorado Tax on the sale by certain persons, corporations and firms selling Real Property in the State of Colorado. (This instrument is"not required to be recorded) G. Evidence satisfactory to the Company that the Declaration of Sale, Notice to County Assessor as required by H.B. 1288 has been complied with. (This instrument is not required to be recorded, but must be delivered to and retained by the Assessors Office in the County in which the property is situated) Pc 4 NTI SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, enchroachments, any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. S. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. 6. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessment, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer service or for any other special taxing district. 7. Right of way for ditches or canals constructed by the authority of the United States as reserved in United States Patent recorded August 26, 1949 in Book 175 at Page 299. This commitment is invalid unless the Insuring Provisions and Schedules A and B are attached. Schedule B-Section 2 Commitment No. PCT10228C4 pc;- 5 NTI ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND DISCLOSURES The Owner's Policy to be issued, if any shall contain the following items in addition to the ones set forth above: (1) The Deed of Trust, if any, required under Schedule B-Section 1. (2) Water rights, claims or title to water. (NOTE: THIS EXCEPTION WILL APPEAR ON THE OWNER'S AND MORTGAGE POLICY TO BE ISSUED HEREUNDER) Pursuant to Insurance Regulation 89-2; NOTE: Each title entity shall notify in writing every prospective insured in an owner's title insurance policy for a single family residence (including a condominim or townhouse unit) (i) of that title entity's general requirements for the deletion of an exception or exclusion to coverage relating to unfiled mechanics or materialmens liens, except when said coverage or insurance is extended to the insured under the terms of the policy. A satisfactory affidavit and agreement indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanics' and/or Materialmen's Liens executed by the persons indicated in the attached copy of said affidavit must be furnished to the Company. Upon receipt of these items and any others requirements to be specified by the Company upon request, Pre-printed Item Number 4 may be deleted from the Owner's policy when issued. Please contact the Company for further information. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing contained in this Paragraph shall be deemed to impose any requirement upon any title insurer to provide mechanics or materialmens lien coverage. NOTE: If the Company conducts the owners' closing under circumstances where it is responsible for the recording or filing of legal documents from said transaction, the Company will be deemed to have provided "Gap Coverage". Pursuant to Senate Bill 91-14 (CRS 10-11-122); (a) The Subject Real Property may be located in a Special Taxing District; (b) A Certificate of Taxes Due listing each taxing jurisdiction may be obtained form the County treasurer of the County Treasurer's Authorized Agent; (c) Information regarding Special Districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. NOTE: A tax Certificate will be ordered from the County Treasurer by the Company and the costs thereof charged to the proposed insured unless written instruction to the contrary are received by the company prior to the issuance of the Title Policy anticipated by this Commitment. This commitment is invalid unless Schedule B-Section 2 the Insuring Provisions and Schedules Commitment No. PCT10228C4 A and B are attached. PCB (b CONDITIONS -AND STIPULATIONS 1. The term mortgage, when used herein, shall include deed of trust, trust deed, or other security instrument. 2. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter affecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing, the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or damage resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge. If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Company, or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to Paragraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations. 3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or (c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered bythis Commitment. In no event shall such liability exceed the amount stated in Schedule A forthe policy or policies committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring provisions and the Conditions and Stipulations, and the Exclusions from Coverage of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by reference and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly modified herein. 4. Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed Insured may have or may bring against the Company arising out of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the status of the mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be based on and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment. P& 7 NM 6 V2 Commitment for Title Insurance Issued By Nations Title Insurance Company 6800 College Blvd. / Suite 700 / overland Park, Kansas 66211 913-491-5585 P&r 8 NM 5 1550 V2 FROf'1 : MARv15 �,36v�11:30A IDRYTR4JL' Pf-iONE M]. 1 68395.4 Mar. 15 1596 P. 1134AM P01 P1AR 2-4 ' 916 01; (KIP 1 P.1 BASS CAEN PRO 7ES ' P.O. 80X $075 AS . =QUM 816E TEL: M00,0047 MAmh K1"6 City of Aspm Pf ara inz & Zonins c=rdiIjfcgt 130 S. Oak= $treat Aspdi, Colorado 8 1611 Re, Authc6z46m to make Dow 5frNad m; By the countersipauro hereunder, IJI2da :Edw#rd4 (also known so Linda Jobmr) mar of Lot 2 and the wolt 13 fet of Lot 1, t7t6 Addition to the City and .Towngi% of Aspen, FiWn County, CplarW (the `Proport-/' , does hereby authorizeSass c PrOPC4tiCS1 COntr"t Purchaser ofthR PiOparty, to ICAO IPPECa90tt befbre tho ApPen Plv:6ng � �o �osnr>u�ss�ri. 1 hereby ooAmt to the ragoing suthe=' a Son Linda Edwards, also knmmas Linda Johnson, z�~ ASPEN/PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Aiireement for Pavcnent of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: I. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for V --- 10 T ?- ilts; y�1 r 1 ':� (hereinafter, THE PROJECT o L�o�' -- W it f 0 N CC. ► r-Y o r In5-32-i:-;,r4, ?. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance an(ishc:s a tee structure For Planning applications and No. 53 (Series of 1995) est the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size. nature or scope of the proposed project. it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involves: !n processing the application. APPLIC A, and CITY further acre- that it is in the interest of the parties to allow .APPLICANT to make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional casts to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification h_v the CITY when thev are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefit-d through the greater certainty of recoverin�T its full costs togprocess APPLIC ANT' S app I icatio n. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY staff to complete processing or present Sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City Council to enahle the Planncn17 Commission arid/or City Council to make legally required Findings for project appro%"al, unless current billings arc paid in (Lill prier to decision. 5. Therefore, APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of a&5 which is for hours of Planning staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit, APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above, including post approval review. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing. CITY OF ASPEN �..�� By: + _ Stan 0auson Community Development Director APPLICANT Bv: Date: flailing Address: PC.-r 12- c� N �--> T- I O N I'-- �- U 9 - 1 W r" r° i C,6-�j T J-F— Y j PC PaS i S To 3 � 5; o a v t �..� Ar L o'�4 C-r T1t� �t �s T ► F- o � T K-K- o A 5► tJU Ft�*t A i Env �-� �-�-- a TIC S T T--P5 p O N TCD N 17 i t�r-T� Afp p-ox , S�5 FT �1 t ©r V -rT c cam. F-! 5 Ls To 10 FT W Q �F Ttt �;PS f�R '� r� i �T`i • i1'P. W IL L- \j r t � Q -o 7t� Pr--C PC -SF- a U N i T rho C'_ �-p5 �= - / N s iU c t T-' (VI t�-T r-fc S L-L P F-S TD T 7tC f�S TF-N h-Q I N TEI2 I c C F Ti+f U N i T- C D N T D fl i 1-� �-T L-1 V F L- =- -F- v 6-L S -54 Q- r T, A h- i K3 1 �J &- C F- T 1 tom_ -S I u Q � c r I E:-Q k-) A-'L S 2��(, �G► . rT� OF �t I+iC,}� 2� '% 1 S fI LL�4 b�-�-T- ( I ��0 /`� �v� �P4 upo C . -5Tii-�jCYW � E c.r- �3 t � rFt 9, Zo o F:- NTBY rE- k O F TFW S Fee - - iN �Pt-IIDI kP P L) C.l\--N W I To 0 ti I lJ LT cxvv1, m 1 'P( �� _ � i � (� XCA Pc�- I Co- i NSo °s?'45 yov �sr 6Frosu2� �I P E ` A, P-D kOuA-Q r3ELDV-) _ caUC2Ea ENrfL`C wa&-IL pac K Imo_ ZS Fr tbvSE 1 Wht_i� VJ W 2 9 7 1 1-1 TI. ? i W 1 - P1 S` N - L hS�EN t�\w I I A21 v EVV A-`i I F6-�, 1 (Q 40 4z VN Ir. D,7 IF Dcc (5 i3 N N -Z-,f! � t,5 F; 2c) �y -i) IL X �i jg �= g 1 0 �� I LL �? o� z r � � K = W I 1 i J � I I d U 1 r FCT- 2-2- .r- L i- •• P.1 r 1 , TO: Bob Nevins, Community [development Dept. FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing Office DATE: April 5, 1996 RE: BeaWCahn Conditional Use Review for an ADU Parcel ID No. 2737-4 s2-WO29 ISSUE: The applicant is requesting to build a studio ADU to be located in the lower level of a singl"mily residence located at 971 Ute Avenue. BACKGROUND: The size of the accessory unit falls within the guidelines of the Code, as it is 343.2 net liveable square feet: Accessory dwelling units shah contain not less than three hundred (300) square feet of al weble floor Ares and not more than seven hundred (700) square feet of allowabie floor area. The unit shag be deed restr'cted, meeting the housing authority's guidelines for resident occupied unks and $halt be RmUd to rental periods of riot teas than six (IB) months in duration. owners of the principal residence shall have the right to ptaoe a qualified employee or employees of his or her Choosing in the accessory dwelling miL The applicant states that the unit will have a private entrance which is to be a sidewalk along the west side of the proposed single-family residence, with steps going down to the unit. The kitchen must also be built to the following specifications', Kitehein - For Accessory Dwelling Units and Catetsker Dwelling Units, a minimum of a two -burner stout with oven, standard sink, and a s-cubic foot refrigerator plus freezer. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval as long as the following conditions are met: 1, the kitchen meets the definition as stated above; and 2. an accessory dwelling unit deed restriction needs to be recorded before building permit approval; this form is provided by the Housing Office. M+et "WW71uteadu pq `ew r rP 0 Memorandum TO: Bob Nevins, Community Development FROM: Rebecca Baker, Parks Department DATE: April 4, 1996 RE: Bass/Cahn Conditional Use for an ADU CC: Ross Soderstrom, Engineering Department APR 5 P1, We have reviewed the application submitted by Bass/Cahn Properties and have a few concerns regarding trees on the property. It is not clear whether the existing trees are remaining or will be removed by development. There is a multi -stemmed willow approximately 8" in diameter per stem, an approximate 8 lrz" Spruce tree, and two 8" Aspens that may be impacted by the house. If these trees are proposed for removal they must be mitigated per the Aspen Municipal code and a tree permit must be applied for two weeks prior to issuance of a building permit. We would recommend preserving the willow which is rather unique for this area. Trees proposed to remain must be protected during construction, including placing snow fencing or other protective barriers around the drip line of the tree, no excavating within the dripline of the tree or placement of fill around the base of the tree. There is some reference to a sidewalk on the West elevation drawing but does not show up on the other site plan drawing. We would like to see a landscape plan for the property. A final comment on this application is that the application was fairly incomplete and did not review any of the land use issues. MEMORANDUM To: Bob Nevins, Planner Thru: Nick Adeh, City Engineer From: Chuck Roth, Project Engineer Date: April 8, 1996 Re: Bass/Cahn Conditional Use Review for an Accessory Dwelling Unit (971 Ute Avenue; West 13 feet of Lot 1 and all Lot 2, Ute Addition; Parcel ID No. 2737-182-95- 029) Having reviewed the above referenced application, and having made a site visit, the Engineering Department has the following comments: 1. Parking - The application states that a parking space will be provided although none is required. The Engineering Department recommends that parking spaces be required for the ADU because on - street parking in the Ute Avenue area continues to be a problem both for quantity and for snow removal. It is preferable to have an unused parking space on site rather than not to provide for parking on site and have development parking needs being met on streets in the Ute Avenue area. 2. Drainage - It should be a condition of approval that the final development plans provide for storm runoff to be maintained on site and not discharged to Ute Avenue as well as providing erosion and sediment control both during and after construction. 3. Utilities - Any new surface utility needs for pedestals or other equipment must be installed on an easement provided by the applicant and not in the public right-of-way. 4. Driveway_ - The new driveway design must meet City Code, Section 21.16.060 with a maximum width of 18 feet and located no closer than 25 feet to the next driveway, except for common driveways on adjoining properties. The maximum permitted slope is 12%. The applicant must refer to City Code for other driveway design details. 5. Landscaping in the Public Right-of-way - The final development plan must indicate proposed landscaping in the public right-of-way which must conform with City Code as discussed below and without encumbrances such as boulders and fences. Tree canopies extending into the right-of-way must be pruned up 9' . EKN1r3+T't P / 6. Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter - There is no sidewalk, curb and gutter on the south side of Ute Avenue. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant must provide a signed sidewalk, curb and gutter agreement, together with recording fees, as provided for in Section 21.16.030 et seq. The final development plans must indicate a five foot wide pedestrian usable space in the public right-of-way adjacent to the property. 7. Easements - The improvement survey that is submitted with the building permit application must include a statement that all easements of record as indicated on Title Policy No. , dated , have been shown. 8. Comments from other City Departments a. Water Department - No comments. b. Streets Department - The applicant must be aware of their and the City's snow removal needs. The street snow is plowed to their side of the street. Snow from private property and parking areas and driveways may not be plowed into the street. c. Electric Department - The street lights in the area meet current standards. d. Parks Department - There is an existing willow tree to be maintained as is. There are some spruce and aspen trees which may be relocated or removed, but a permit must be obtained from the Parks Department. 9. Work in the Public Right-of-way - Given the continuous problems of unapproved work and development in public rights -of -way adjacent to private property, we advise the applicant as follows: M96.132 The applicant must receive approval from city engineering (920-5080) for design of improvements, including landscaping, within public rights -of -way, parks department (920-5120) for vegetation species, and streets department (920-5130) for street and alley cuts, and shall obtain permits for any work or development, including landscaping, within public rights -of -way from the city community development department. 2 Attachment 8 County of Pitkin } } State of Colorado } I, AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT ss• TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATIONS SECTION 6-205.E. being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requirements pursuant to Section 6-205.E. of the Aspen Land Use Regulations in the following manner: FW r A ki. *AM. - DATE 6 �CI ..�� wct CITY hN-11 pF W4,A•.�E ��-7. •;' CONDITIONAL USE fvr a`� AcLE5�2RY ��i�� w `F By mailing of notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, by first-class postage prepaid U.S. Mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property, as indicated on the attached list, on �•� 199_ (which is days hearing date of s .i a conspicuous place on the subject ld be seen from the nearest public said sign was posted and visible e _ day of i�' %f 5 19 91""-, of199 L . (Must be en (10) full days before the hearing )h of the ,pq4' te�U" sign is attached e5" . 11 ignature / " I" iw ' g ed be ore me this - day of f , 199_L. by bowWITNE S MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL ission expi a c n .`-s � Public • i j • � • '•.PC1 B LV••o PUBLIC NOTICE RE: BASS/CAHN CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW FOR AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, April 16, 1996 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 pm before the Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission, Sister Cities Meeting Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena, Aspen to consider an application submitted by Bass/Cahn Properties, Aspen, CO, requesting approval of a Conditional Use Review for an approximately 410 square foot Accessory Dwelling Unit attached to the proposed single family residence. The property is located at 971 Ute Avenue and is described as all of Lot 2 and the west 13 feet of Lot 1, Ute addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen. For further information, contact Bob Nevins at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920- 5102. s/Sara Garton. Chair Planning and Zoning Commission [V. A. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Suzanne Wolff RE: Smuggler Affordable Housing Conceptual PUD Review and Rezoning DATE: April 16, 1996 SUMMARY: The applicants are requesting to develop a 100% affordable housing project on two parcels in the Williams Addition which are located at the corner of South and Spruce Streets. Fifteen deed -restricted affordable housing units (12 one -bedroom Category 4 units, 2 one - bedroom Category 2 units, and one two -bedroom Category 4 unit) are proposed within 7 structures. The application, proposed site plan, floor plans and elevations were provided to the Commission with the April 2 packet. [If you don't have a copy, please call Vicki Chavka at 920-5090.1 APPLICANTS: Ted Guy and David Guthrie LOCATION: 810 South Avenue; Lots 13, 14, 15 & 16, Block 3, Williams Addition. The property is located on the corner of South and Spruce Streets, across from the entrance to the Smuggler Trailer Park. ZONING: R-6, Medium Density Residential LOT AREA: 13,465 square feet REQUEST: The applicants are requesting Conceptual PUD approval and approval to rezone the property to the AH1/PUD (Affordable Housing) zone district. PROCESS: The project is being processed as a four -step application, as determined by the Community Development Director, based on the recommendation made by the Planning Commission at the work session on April 2, 1996. Rezoning of the property would not formally occur until the Final PUD Plan is approved; however, staff has included the rezoning criteria with this Conceptual Review for the Commission to consider at this time. Special Review for parking and compliance with the Design Review standards will be considered during the Final PUD review. Public hearings will be held at Council during the Conceptual PUD Review, and at the Commission during the Final PUD Review. Per Section 26.100.060(C)(3)(b), all affordable housing deed restricted in accordance with the housing guidelines of the City Council and its housing designee, shall be exempt from growth management competition and scoring procedures by the City Council. If approved, the units will be deducted from the affordable housing pool. REFERRAL COMMENTS: The Planning Office received referral comments from the following d,,partments. Complete referral memos are attached as Exhibit "A" with summaries as follows: Parks Department: Rebecca Baker noted concerns with the distance of the existing and proposed spruce trees from buildings and sidewalks. A detailed landscape plan will be required to be submitted as part of the Final PUD Review. Ms. Baker also notes that sidewalk maintenance must be performed by the owners of the development. Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD): Bruce Matherly, District Manager, states that ACSD currently has sufficient capacity to service the proposed development. Engineering: Chuck Roth notes that Race Street was originally platted as an alley between Spruce and Walnut Streets, however, it functions as a street, and several residences access only from Race Street. Roth notes that head -in parking off of Race Street is acceptable, and that access from Race Street is preferable to access from South or Spruce Streets, due to traffic volumes on those streets. He adds that the Final PUD application should discuss the increase in trip generation that would result from this project, and should include a trip generation report by a traffic/transportation engineer registered to practice in Colorado. The applicant will be required to pay an impact fee for the Smuggler area roadway system improvements on the same basis as that required for the Williams Ranch project. Other concerns include: maintaining all drainage on -site; completion of the Spruce Street sidewalk; providing street lights at intersections and with maximum spacing of 150' between lights; and providing snow storage on -site. The applicants shall provide will -serve letters from utilities with the Final PUD application. A tap fee waiver may be granted by the Water Department for 100% affordable housing projects. Housing: Cindy Christensen states that the Housing Board has discussed the project with the applicants, but has not taken any formal action. The Board agreed that the location is appropriate for affordable housing; however, the Board was divided on the issue of whether the density of the project was appropriate. The Board requested that the applicants meet with the neighbors to determine whether any type of affordable housing development would be acceptable in this location. Dave Tolen and a few members of the Housing Board met with the applicants on April 10, 1996, and recommended that the applicants scale down the project by decreasing the square footage and the number of units. STAFF COMMENTS: The.project must comply with the review standards for rezoning (26.92.020), PUD review (26.84.030), and the specific requirements of the AHl/PUD zone district. Staff's analysis is divided into two separate sections based on these requirements. 2 PUD CONCEPTUAL REVIEW: Pursuant to Section 26.84.030 of the Aspen Municipal Code, a development application for PUD review shall comply with the following standards and requirements. Ceneral Requirements A. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP). Response: One of the goals of the AACP is to create affordable housing throughout the metro area. The AACP includes several policies applicable to the proposal, including the following: • Develop small scale residential housing which fits the character of the community and is interspersed with free market housing throughout the Aspen Area and up valley from Aspen Village. • Encourage infill development within the existing urban area so as to preserve open space and rural areas and allow more employees to live close to where they work. • Whenever appropriate, work with landowners whose property is well suited and well located to develop affordable housing projects. • The public and private sectors. together should develop 650 new affordable housing units. B. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. Response: The lots to be developed are part of the Williams Addition, which is zoned R-6, and is comprised of approximately 19 single-family and duplex lots (including the two subject lots). The lots are directly across the street from the Smuggler Trailer Park which is zoned MHP, Mobile Home Park. Williams Addition is bounded to the north and east by the Hunter Creek and Centennial projects, which are zoned R/MFA, Residential/Multi-Family. The proposed development is consistent with the mixed residential character of the neighborhood; however, staff is concerned with the scale and the number of buildings. C. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Response: Based on the existing mixed residential development in the area, development of affordable housing on this site will not adversely affect future development in the area. The existing single-family residence to the north is impacted considerably by Buildings 1 and 2 due to the height and minimum setbacks. The proposed Buildings 1, 6 and 7 do not address Race Street at ground level. The visual, noise and air quality impacts would affect the existing single-family residences to the west. D. Final approval shall only be granted to the development to the extent to which GMQS allotments are obtained by the applicant. 3 Response: Affordable housing deed restricted in accordance with the housing guidelines is exempt from growth management competition and scoring procedures. Additional PUD Standards Density: The proposed units comply with the AHl/PUD requirements for minimum lot area per dwelling unit: at least 400 square feet for a one -bedroom unit and 800 square feet for a two - bedroom unit. Sufficient lot area is available to accommodate this density. The proposed one - bedroom units range in size from 700-729 square feet; the two -bedroom unit contains 1096 square feet. No reduction in density is required due to the presence of slopes in excess of 20%. Existing R-6 zoning would allow two detached single-family residences to be constructed. One lot is 5,965 square feet and the adjoining lot is 7,500 square feet, which would allow the construction of two residences of 3,240 square feet and 3,450 square feet of floor area, respectively. Assuming that each residence contained 4 bedrooms and an attached studio ADU, the parcel would accommodate two single-family residences with a combined FAR of 6,690 square feet, 8 bedrooms, 2 ADUs, and 6 parking spaces. The current proposal includes 7 buildings containing 15 units with a total of 16 bedrooms. The following chart compares potential development under the existing R-6 zoning with the proposed development: Existing R-6 Zoning AH1/PUD Proposal Net Result Buildings 2 7 +5 Bedrooms 8 + 2 ADU 16 +6 Parking Spaces 6 16 (minimum) +10 Proposed FAR 6,690 sf 11,250 sf +4,565 2. Land Uses: Multi -family dwellings are not permitted under the existing R-6 zoning. Under the AHl/PUD zoning, 70% of the units created are required to be deed restricted as category 1-4 or resident occupied units and 30% may be free-market units. The applicants do not propose any free-market or resident occupied units. 3. Dimensional Requirements: Setback requirements for AH1/PUD are established through the PUD review. For comparison, the adjacent R-6 zone has the following minimum setback requirements: • Front yard - 10' • Rear yard - 10' • Side yard - 15' (each side) • Minimum distance between buildings - 5' Since the lot is located on a corner, the applicant may designate the front yard. The proposed setbacks are: • Spruce St. lot line to structure - 10' 0 • South St. lot line to structure - 6'8" • Race St. lot line to structure - 10' • North lot line to structure - 5' • Minimum distance between buildings - 5' The proposed height of the structures complies with the 25' height requirement in the R-6 zone district. Staff recommends that the proposed side yard setback of 5' along the northern property boundary should be increased due to the proximity of the adjacent residence and the height of the proposed buildings. In addition, the distance and relationship between buildings appears to need further study. Due to the heights of Buildings 1, 2, '5, 6 and 7, additional space between buildings is appropriate. 4. Off-street Parking: The maximum parking requirement in the AH1/PUD zone district is 1 space/bedroom or 2 spaces/dwelling unit, whichever is less, for affordable units. Therefore, 16 off-street parking spaces must be provided for the proposed 15 units. 19 surface parking spaces are proposed, at least 6 of which are "stacked" parking stalls, which will require special review approval by the Planning Commission during the Final PUD review. Staff questions whether allowing stacked parking for separate units is appropriate. A RFTA bus stop is located across South Street, and an existing paved sidewalk links the site to the Clark's Market/post office area and the trail along the Roaring Fork River. 5. Open Space: AH1/PUD does not have a specific open space requirement, however, the amount of open space should be compatible with the adjacent neighborhood. The applicants represent that 44.5% of the property complies with the Code's definition of open space. The R-6 zone district does not have an open space requirement, however, if the two parcels were developed separately, the smaller parcel would allow 40% site coverage and the larger parcel would allow 35% site coverage. Common open space is designated on the site plan, and is accessible to all of the units. However, as proposed, there is no "meaningful" or usable open space, and .the open space would appear to be difficult to maintain (if lawn area). 6. Landscape Plan: A detailed landscape plan will be reviewed with the Final PUD application. 7. Architectural Site Plan: The architectural site plan will be reviewed with the Final PUD application. Based on the initial conceptual review, the floor plans, orientation/inter- relationships, and storage areas need further study and refinement. 8. Lighting: A detailed lighting plan will be reviewed with the Final PUD application. 9. Clustering: The units have been divided into 7 separate structures. The scale of the project (2 1/2 story maximum) is generally very good. However, it may be advantageous to 5 consolidate more of the units into fewer buildings which would possibly create more usable open space and separation between structures. 10. Public Facilities: Existing facilities are adequate to service the project. The buildings have been arranged to allow emergency vehicle access to all buildings. 11. Traffic and Pedestrian Circulation: The units are all linked to the adjacent public streets and the proposed parking area by a system of walkways through the common open space. No building is farther than 60' from the driveway area on Race Street. As noted in the comments from the City Engineer, access from Race Street is preferable to access from South or Spruce Streets, due to traffic volumes on those streets. . REZONING Purpose of AHI/PUD Zone District: The AHl/PUD zone district is intended for residential use primarily by permanent residents of the community. Recreational and institutional uses customarily found in proximity to residential uses are included as conditional uses. Lands in the AH1/PUD zone district should be scattered throughout the City to ensure a mix of housing types, including those which are affordable by its working residents; at the same time, the AH1/PUD zone district can protect the City's neighborhoods from rezoning pressures that other non - community oriented zone districts may produce. Further, lands in the AH1/PUD zone district should be located within walking distance of the center of the City, or on transit routes. The City's AHI/PUD district only applies within the Aspen Municipal boundaries. Rezoning Requirements: Pursuant to Section 26.92.020, in reviewing an amendment to the zoning map, the City Council and Commission shall consider the following: 1. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of the Municipal Code. Response: The proposal is consistent with the intent of the AH1/PUD zone district, which is specifically aimed at located AH uses within walking distance of the center of the City, or on transit routes. In addition, the AH1/PUD zone district was intended to encourage the scattering of such projects throughout the City to ensure a mix of housing types, including those types which are affordable to its working residents. 2. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP). Response: This criteria is addressed above with the PUD criteria. 3. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. ,AI Response: An addition to the sidewalk on South Street is proposed, which will increase safety and convenience for pedestrians. Also, RFTA is proposing to expand bus service to this neighborhood and offer a "reverse" Hunter Creek route, which will increase the convenience of this area. 9. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the intent of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. Response: The provision of affordable housing near the central core is consistent with the both the public interest and all applicable portions of the Land Use Code. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The project is consistent with the intent of the AH1/PUD zone district and pertinent portions of the AACP, and is compatible with the mixed residential character of the neighborhood. Staff agrees with the applicant that the site is suitable for an affordable housing development, however, staff recommends that the current conceptual site plan be revised to reflect the following: • Minimize the impact of the project along the northern property boundary, by increasing the setback and decreasing building height. • Consolidate the units into fewer buildings. • Orient the unit entrances, porches, decks, etc. toward the public streets. • Provide a minimum of 15 off-street parking spaces without "stacking" spaces. • Create more usable and maintainable open space. • Increase distances between buildings. • Minimize the impacts along Race Street. RECOMMENDED MOTION: I move to recommend that the Conceptual PUD Plan and the rezoning from R-6 to AH1/PUD for the Smuggler Affordable Housing project be tabled until the revisions to the site plan as recommended in the Planning Office Memo dated April 16,1996, are incorporated into a revised conceptual plan." Attachments: Exhibit A - Referral Comments �t Response: As noted above, the proposed development is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, which is comprised of single-family and multi -family residential development. The neighbors in the Williams Addition have expressed concern with the density of the project and the "infringement" of a multi -family project into their single-family neighborhood. however, staff conceptually considers the development to be compatible with the land use, character and scale of the Smuggler neighborhood. The subject lots are located on the edge of the R-6 neighborhood and provide an effective transition/buffer zone between the Smuggler Trailer Park and the single-family residences on Race and Spruce Streets. 4. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Response: The applicants propose to develop 15 units, of which 14 are one -bedroom units. Staff does not consider that this development will create unacceptable traffic generation due to its proximity to the bus route/stop and its location within walking distance to town. The applicants will need to work with the City Engineer to ensure that the South Street/Race Street intersection is safe for pedestrians and that the sight lines are adequate for the increased traffic. 5. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Response: To staff's knowledge, the proposed development will not adversely impact public facilities. 6. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts in the natural environment. Response: The site is surrounded by existing development, and will not result in adverse impacts on the natural environment. 7. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Response: The proposed rezoning to AHl/PUD is clearly consistent with the intent of the community to provide additional housing for the local work force. In addition, the location of the parcel is consistent with the intent statement of the AH 1/PUD zone district, which states that AH1/PUD properties should be spread throughout the City, located within walking distance of the central core, and in close proximity to available transit. 8. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. N N EXHIBIT A TO: Suzanne Wolff, Community Development Dept. VIROX V Cindy Christensen, Mousing office DOLTS: April 10, 1996 RE: SMUGGLER AFFORDABLE HOUSING pUD/ R2 Z0N 1 N0 ISSIM; The applicant is proposing to rezone from Medium Density Residential (R- 6) to Affordable Housing/Planned Unit Development AHI/PUD) , which will consist of a total fifteen deed restricted affordable housing -- one Category 4 two -bedroom, 12 Category 4 one-bedrooma, and 2 Category 2cone-bedroom units. CSC iDATZDM: The Housing Board has met with the applicants twice with regards to this project. The second meeting, April 31 1996, the Board heard comments from the applicants with regard to their meeting with Planning and Zoning. No formal action wa.a taken by the Board, but the Board did feel that this was a good location for an AH project. Some of the Board members felt comfortable with the density and some felt it was too dense. The Housing Beard requested the applicants meet with the neighbors and see if they would be acceptable to any type of AH project in that Location. At this time, a formal recommendation cannot be made in conjunction with the density of the project as some members felt the density was fine but others felt .it could be lese dense, but the Board did like the idea of an AH project in this location. The applicants are meeting with Dave Tolen and a couple of the Housing Doard members to discuss this project further. APR. 8 '96 4:34PM P. 1 Memorandum TO: Suzanne Wolff, Community Development FROM: Rebecca Baker, Parks Department DATE: April 8,1996 RE: Smuggler Affordable Housing M. Ross Soderqtrom, RnSincering DepaTtment We have reviewed the application for the Smuggler Affordable Housing Project and offer the following comments. The sidewalk extension is the responsibility of the property development and becomes their responsibility for maintenance, inclmling snow removal in the winter. The City will no longer perform snow removal for any portion of the sidewalk that abuts this property. The site/landscape plan shows two spruce trees close to the sidewulk- extension. Both of these trees should be planted a minimum of 15 feet from the edge of die sidewalk to allow for tree growth. Additionelly the two existing spruce'tre-es shown along the sidewalk may need to be pruned or relocated to allow for site distances and pedestrian flow. It also appears as dwugh there are trees planted within the walkway on the north side of the property. Conifers in particular should be planted 15 feet away from 'both buildings and sidewalks to allow for growth . 2 ,Pe72 Consofia'alea"c3anlialtbt2!Z)tS.lPli:,-I 565 North Mill Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Tele. (970) 925-3601 Sy Kelly - Chairman .Albert Bishop • Treas. Louis Popish • Secy. April 4. 1996 Suzanne Wolff, Planning Department 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 FAX #(970) 925-2537 Michael Kelly Frank Loushin Bruce Matherly, Mgr. APR WWI ,=LL",AENT V Re: Smuggler Affordable Housing PUD/Rezoning Dear Suzanne: The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District currently has sufficient capacity to serve this proposed development. There is a minor downstream line constraint that will be rehabilitated through Prorated additional fees. Service for the development will be contingent upon compliance with District rules. regulations, and specifications which are on file at the District office. The design of the on -site collection system will be required to be approved by our line superintendent prior to construction. We will need to review more detailed plans as they become available. We have met with a representative of the applicant to offer our preliminary fee estimates and comment on possible connection scenarios.. Please call if you need additional information. S i nce r e I Y. Bruce Mather ly� District 11anager EPA Awards of Excellence 1976 .1986 - 1990 Regional and National MEMO To: Suzanne Wolff, Community Development Department From: Ed Van Walraven, Fire Marshal Subject: Smuggler Housing -Parcel ID #2737-073-00-027 Date: March 27, 1996 Suzanne, This project shall meet all of the codes and requirements of the Aspen Fire Protection District. This includes but is not limited to the installation of fire sprinkler systems and fire alarm systems where applicable. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. MEMORANDUM To: Suzanne Wolff, Planner Thru: Nick Adeh, City Engineer From: Chuck Roth, Project Engineer I'� Date: April 8, 1996 Re: Smuggler Affordable Housing PUD/Rezoning - Conceptual Review (810 South Avenue; Lots 13 and 14, Williams Addition; Parcel ID No. 2737-073-00-027) Having reviewed the above referenced application, and having made a site visit, the Engineering Department has the following comments: 1. Parking - The application shows head -in parking off of Race Street. City Code limits curb cuts to 18' in width, however Race Street was actually platted as an alley between Walnut and Spruce Streets. Therefore the proposed head -in parking is acceptable and is preferred to driveway access off of either South Avenue or Spruce Street where traffic volumes are relatively high. The applicant requested a meeting, and we discussed that the final development plans must indicate driveway and parking space slopes draining into the propem, and not onto Race Street. The application presents 17 parking spaces for a fifteen unit project, one unit of which is a two bedroom unit. The application is however unclear in that it states that 5 of the spaces are guest spaces. Perhaps the project covenants could provide for floating guest spaces for unused unit parking spaces. 2. Drainage - City Code requires that only historic flows be permitted to leave the site. Final development plans must include drainage calculations and on -site detention/retention design prepared by an engineer registered to practice in Colorado, as well as providing erosion and sediment control both during and after construction. As discussed above, the final development plans must indicate driveway and parking space slopes draining into the property and not onto Race Street. 3. Utilities - Any new surface utility needs ?or pedestals or other equipment must be installed on an easement provided by the applicant and not in the public right-of-way. There are existing aerial utilities adjacent to the parcel which are appropriate to be undergrounded when more of the neighborhood is undergrounded. The applicant should be 1 required to join any future improvement districts which are formed for improvements in the public right-of-way. All new utility service connections off the overhead lines should be required to be installed underground. The application states that there are sufficient utility capacities in place to serve the project. T'-►e final submission should include "will serve" letters from each of the utilities. 4. Alley Paving - Race Street currently is paved. I discussed alley paving with the applicant as a dust control measure addressing PM-10 issues. The existing pavement serving the parcel on Race Street should be required to be improved as needed. 5. Encroachments - The boulders which currently encroach into the public right-of-way of Race Street must be removed from the right-of-way. 6. Snow Storafe - The site design needs to be revised to indicate snow storage spaces. The snow from the parking spaces may not be plowed or shoveled into the Race Street right-of-way. 7. Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter - There is currently sidewalk, curb and gutter for much of the parcel's frontage on South Avenue and Spruce Street. The project must complete the sidewalk, curb and gutter for the remainder of the Spruce Street frontage and provide a five foot buffer space between the sidewalk and the back of curb. 8. Transformer Easement - There is an unusually large space between the property line and the sidewalk on South Avenue. Since that space is available, the applicant need not be required to provide an easement for a transformer on their property. However the applicant could be required to provide a fence or landscape screen for a transformer if one is installed at the time of aerial utility undergrounding. 9. Traffic Impacts - The application does not respond to Sec. 26.92.020.13 regarding effect on traffic generation. The final submission must discuss the increase in trip generation that would result from granting the rezoning request. Final submission should include a trip generation report by a traffic/transportation engineer registered to practice in Colorado, and the applicant should be required to pay an impact fee for the Smuggler area roadway system improvements on the same basis as the Williams Ranch project. 10. Landscaping in the Public Right-of-way - The final development plan must indicate proposed landscaping in the public right-of-way which must conform with City Code and without encumbrances such as boulders and fences. Tree canopies extending into the right-of-way must be pruned up 9' . 11. Easements - The improvement survey does not indicate the date of Title Policy as regards easement informatior)l. The final submission must include information no older than 12 months regarding any easements on the site. 2 12. Comments from other City Departments a. Water Department - There may be a 100% tap fee waiver for affordable housing. Provide separate meters for individual units and separate meter for irrigation water. b. Streets Department - The applicant must be aware of their and the City's snow removal needs. Snow from private property and parking areas and driveways may not be plowed into the street. It must be stored on site and hauled away. c. Electric Department - Provide street lights at intersections and with maximum spacing of 150 feet in between. 13. Work in the Public Right -of -wax - Given the continuous problems of unapproved work and development in public rights -of -way adjacent to private property, we advise the applicant as follows: The applicant must receive approval from city engineering (920-5080) for design of improvements, including landscaping, within public rights -of -way, parks department (920-5120) for vegetation species, and streets department (920-5130) for street and alley cuts, and shall obtain permits for any work or development, including landscaping, within public rights -of -way from the city community development department. ' M96.133 ,4 -- 14.0 �, �-�-( r coorc� . Nark de I fcrr(t a.f `the niteh I", Y' o� Public Meeting - P & Z Board April 16, 1996 Re: Smuggler Affordabl To be submitted as part Williams Addition. . nVVn Goers e �t chd 1/ olls1w 6_drl-n of the Homeowners of the 1. An ill-conceived project: The project is a project of huge mass, density and bulk on a tiny piece of land. It has 15 units, which means about 30 people living there. A possibility of 30 cars. 14 parking spots that are parked right off Race Street and some spaces are parked 2 deep - 19 spots total. There are 15 kitchens. 2. Neighborhood compatibility: This project is incompatible with the rest of the neighborhood. The neighborhood is currently a single family and duplex neighborhood. This proposal does not at all address the compatibility of the neighborhood. In fact, the density and mass of this project are totally out of character with the rest of the neighborhood. Affordable Housing zoning allows for single family homes on a 3000 sq ft lot. 3. When are other areas Qo-inQ to provide their share of emDlovee housing: In this area alone there are numerous housing projects. Centennial, Smuggler, Williams Woods, Williams Ranch, as well as older Hunter Creek, are some existing ones. Whereas we have supported a number of employee housing projects in the close vicinity, we feel it's now time for other neighborhoods to share in the responsibility 4. Traffic generation: A most critical issue! The latest count of traffic passing by Race Street taken 3 years ago was 3,842 trips. Over the last few years, there has been a huge increase of noise pollution and exhaust pollution and PM-10. Williams Ranch is the current project underway with 54+ planned units. We feel there should be a moratorium on all high -density development in the Williams Ranch/smuggler area until the Williams Ranch project is completed and its impacts are fully known. 5. Diversity: The city repeatedly claims its desire for neighborhood diversity. Walk around our neighborhood: this neighborhood is clearly an enclave in an otherwise conglomeration of apartments 1 and condominiums and provides a unique diversity for the area. In addition t-o the diversity it provides, it is already what the city is trying to achieve: people living and working here. 6. Race Street (an alley): The character of the neighborhood hinges on Race Street being a pedestrian and low traffic street, not only for our neighborhood, but also for the higher density complexes around us. Race Street is a narrow, little alley that in the winter time can not even accommodate 2 cars passing each other without one pulling off to the side. The school bus stop for the entire vicinity is at the end of Race Street. Many children walk down Race Street to catch the bus. In addition, Race street has other multiple social uses: the long alley has been used by several generations of residents of the Williams Addition as a place to teach their children how to ride their bicycles, to walk their dogs, to visit neighbors and where children play safely because there are very few automobiles. We have achieved this without road barriers, signs, and rules on Race Street; this is what the West End has tried to do with their "Local Traffic Only - Pedestrian Route" signs. This tradition would end with this high car density project. 7. Original Petition: The original petition for annexation was submitted to the City of Aspen separately from all other Smuggler Mountain Annexation petitions because we wanted to preserve the integrity of this neighborhood. As part of this annexation, we asked for specific zoning, R-6, for Williams Addition with the additional provision of 10' side setbacks. 8. Viewplain: The Williams Addition because of its low density and historical spaciousness breaks up the mass of surrounding complexes. It provides visual diversity for both auto and foot traffics that makes that part of town a little more pleasant. 2 TO: " Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Dave Michaelson, Deputy Director DATE: April 16,1996 RE: City of Aspen Water Treatment Plant and Affordable Housing Project - Conceptual SPA Review - Public Meeting SUMMARY: The proposed Water Treatment Plan and Affordable Housing Development would house essential city employees, including emergency response personnel, adjacent to the city's water treatment and distribution facilities. An additional component of the project calls for significant improvements to the both the infrastructure and office facilities of the water plant. The project has been before the Planning and Zoning Commission since 1995 in various configurations. Based on comments during a two-step submittal in March of 1995 and additional work sessions with both the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council, the applicant (City of Aspen) has re -submitted the application as a four -step review, as shown below on Figure 1. Figure 1 City of Aspen Water Treatment Plant and Affordable Housing Process Planning and Zonin Council Conceptual SPA Conceptual SPA April 16, 1996 Not Scheduled Note : Italics indicates a public hearing Staff is recommending approval with conditions. Planning and Zoning Council Final SPA Final SPA Subdivision Subdivision GMQS Exemption GMQS Exem Special Review 8040 Greenline Conditional Use PROPOSAL: The proposed development now calls for the construction of 22 fully deed restricted units plus the renovation of an existing unit, for a total of 23 units. Six units will be single-family detached and 17 units will be in a townhome configuration. Discussions with the City Manager's Office and the Water Department has widened the original scope of the project to include the following improvements to the water treatment facilities: • The expansion of the existing raw water storage reservoir from the existing 4.8 million gallon capacity to approximately 8 million gallons to address peak day demand fluctuations. • The expansion of the second floor of the existing "west plant" by approximately 2,000 sq. ft, and the remodeling and reorganization of the "east plant" office, control room and shop spaces. • The expansion of the existing chlorine storage building by approximately 250 s.f., and the existing electrical shed by approximately 450 s.f. • Grading of a platform for a new transformer storage yard. • Construction of a new 4,000 s.f. Water Department storage building for vehicle and equipment storage. • Additional surface parking and approximately 12,000 s.f. of construction material storage in two three -sided concrete structures. • Construction of a Water Plant Emergency Response Building consisting of a 500 square foot, one-story building located at the south end of the affordable housing parking lot. • Security fencing around the water treatment plant facility and the western property lines of the single-family units. • Associated infrastructure improvements including water, sewer, private utilities and Doolittle Road. The project has been significantly revised and reconfigured since the March 1995 submittal. Specific design changes for the residential component, based on several work sessions with both the Commission and Council, include the following: • The elimination of a fourplex previously proposed for the lower portion of the property adjacent to Castle Ridge. The former site of the fourplex is no longer proposed for development, and the applicant intends on dedicating the area as open space. • The units proposed near the bluff above (south) of Castle Ridge have been set back approximately 25 feet from the top of the slope to lessen the visual impacts from existing units and State Highway 82. • The proportional share of single-family detached units have been dropped in favor of more affordable smaller, attached units. • The overall site design has been revised to represent a more pedestrian -oriented neighborhood, and all parking has been isolated from the units on the east side of Doolittle. Limited access would be allowed for deliveries by way of the proposed walkway. • The density has been increased from 16 units in the original application to 23 units. 2 • The project has been designed to maximize the neighborhood relationship between the structures by proposing a "greenspace" orientation of the front facades for the units on the east side of Doolittle Road. • The proposed improvements of the water treatment plant have been widened in scope to ensure that impact of the project is minimized and to allow expected growth in the department. • The design is based on a "green" approach by minimizing the influence of vehicular traffic adjacent to the units, maximizing solar exposure, and incorporating energy efficient design and construction. • Doolittle Road has been re -engineered, and will meet all current City standards for grade, lane width and curve radius. This is a significant improvement from prior submittals. The applicant's submittal package, which includes a conceptual site plan, a description of significant revisions, a preliminary financial plan, a summary of potential chlorine hazards and evacuation radius, as well as memos addressing transportation issues were distributed to the Commission prior to the 04.02.96 work session. If members of the Commission no longer have copies, please call Vicki Chavka in the Community Development Department at 920- 5444. APPLICANT: City of Aspen Engineering Department, represented by David Hauter (Project Manager) LOCATION/ZONING: Lot 2 and 4, City of Aspen Thomas Property. The property is located at the end of Doolittle Drive, south of Castle Ridge Housing complex, and includes the City water plant. The entire parcel is approximately 54 acres, with approximately 4.95 acres proposed for residential development. The property is zoned Public (PUB) with a Specially Planned Area (SPA) overlay. The adjoining residential uses to the North are zoned R-15 PUD SPA. Referral Comments: Housing, Engineering and Environmental Health have all reviewed the project (see Exhibit A), and these comments are summarized below: HousingOffice: The Housing Board discussed the project on April 1996, and approved the both the net livable sizes and category mix as stated in the application. Engineering Department: The Engineering Department has been closely involved with the project, and was instrumental in modifications to .the road alignment, access points and infrastructure improvements. Based on the these changes, they have no further comments at the conceptual phase. Environmental Health: No comments at time of writing. 3 STAFF COMMENTS: Per Section 28.80.010, the purpose of a specially planned area (SPA) is to: A. Provide design flexibility for land which requires innovative consideration in those circumstances where traditional zoning techniques do not adequately address its historical significance, natural features, unique physical character, or location, and where potential exists for community benefit from comprehensive development. B. Allow the development of mixed land uses through the encouragement of innovative design practices which permit variations from standard zone district land uses and dimensional requirements. C. Establish a procedure by which land upon which multiple uses exist, or are considered appropriate, can be planned and redeveloped in a way that provides for the greatest public benefit. Section 26.80.040 (B) (8) provides that in the review of a Conceptual development plan, consideration will be given only to the general concept for the development, while during the review of the final development plan, detailed evaluation of the specific aspects of the development will be accomplished. The standards for review for a Conceptual SPA are summarized below, followed by staff's response. 1. Whether the proposed development is compatible with or enhances the mix of development in the immediate vicinity of the parcel in terms of land use, density, height, bulk, architecture, landscaping and open space. Response: Staff believes that the project meets the criteria in terms of density, height, bulk, architecture, landscaping and open space. This is particularly true in light of the modifications summarized earlier. The proposed density has increased from sixteen units to twenty-three, with a gross density of 5.02 units per acre (23 units/4.58 ac.). As a comparison, the adjacent Twin Ridge development represents a density of 5.55 units per acre, and the Castle Ridge apartments are significantly higher. Staff supports the density increase, based on the natural screening by the site's natural topography and existing vegetation. The applicant proposes units sizes ranging from 600 s.f. for the three studios to 1,500 s.f. for the largest single family unit. All units have been designed to fit into a neighborhood context, with front porches accessed from a common pedestrian walk. The units have a strong solar orientation, and energy efficient design is proposed, including super efficient insulation and low flow water appliances. Massing of the structures have been lowered to one story on the exterior elevations overlooking the ridge. Floor plans and elevations are included in the application packet. The associated water treatment plant improvements are generally located in an area historically used for municipal purposes, and do not represent an incompatible use. Due to the natural topography of the site, all associated improvements should not been seen from the proposed residential units, however staff is recommending that the applicant submit elevations for the water treatment plant improvements for review at Final SPA. 2. Whether sufficient public facilities and roads exist to service the proposed development. 4 Response: The residential site is located on the boundary of the City's gravity system and the pumped pressure zone of Meadowood. The site will be served by a main line located in Doolittle Drive that is fed from the Meadowood pump station. Sewer will be provided via a main line extension located in the east end of the upper loop of the Castle Ridge project. Common recycling and trash collection facilities have been provided at the north end of the proposed parking lot. Access to both the water treatment plant and the affordable housing site is via Doolittle Drive, which currently does not meet City standards for pavement width, grade, or turning radii. The improvements for this section of the road has been a major issue since the March 1995 submittal. The applicant has submitted plans for the re -alignment and widening of Doolittle, which will bring the road into compliance with all applicable City standards. Staff is suggesting that the applicant refine signage, speed limit, and traffic calming techniques at the time of Final SPA review. Off -site impacts are summarized in the Engineering Report. Improvements have been defined for lower Castle Creek Road and the Maroon Creek/SH 82 intersection. As a result of analyzing these improvements as well as projected traffic counts, a pro-rata (per unit) share of the traffic impacts generated by the project are estimated at $5,052.63. This figure must be approved by the City and County Engineer prior to final approval. 3. Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally suitable for development, considering the slope, ground instability and the possibility of mud flow, rockfalls, avalanche dangers and flood hazards. Response: Hepworth-Pawlak Geotechnical, Inc. prepared a subsoil survey of the site in May of 1995, and concluded that the project is feasible, however underdrain systems will be required due to depth to groundwater (see Geotech Report in the application). Specific recommendations regarding foundations, retaining walls, floor slabs and site grading are included in the report and must be followed during construction. The project is not located in an area having known mud flow, rock fall, avalanche or flood hazard areas. In addition, a Phase H Environmental Audit did not identify any hazardous waste on the site that would preclude either residential or municipal land uses. Staff is suggesting that the Phase II Audit be submitted at the time of Final SPA review. 4. Whether the proposed development creatively employs land planning techniques to preserve significant view planes, avoid adverse environmental impacts and provide open space, trails and similar amenities for the users of the project and the public at large. Response: The project has employed progressive and responsive land use techniques based on comments from the Commission, City Council, and City staff. The units overlooking the bluff have been set back, and the second story has been "stepped back" from the rear facade to limit the structural projection from the top of slope. In addition, none of the existing scrub oak will be disturbed. The lower portion of the site is no longer proposed for development, and is shown as open space. No concrete proposals for improvements or ownership of the park has been discussed. Due to the proximity of RFTA service, the applicant is proposing a trail that would descend to the Twin 5 Ridge intersection to provide exclusive pedestrian access. The open space component of the multi -family units on the east side of Doolittle Drive is an asset, and will provide an amenity to the entire project. S. Whether the proposed development is in compliance with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Response: The AACP Housing Action Plan policies section states: "Encourage special districts (schools, hospital, sanitation, etc..) and non -profits to provide housing for their own employees." This project is an example of the City providing housing specifically for emergency response and essential staff members. 6. Whether the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive public funds to provide public facilities for the parcel, or the surrounding neighborhood. The costs of upgrading Doolittle Road will be incorporated into the cost of the homes. However, as a direct beneficiary of the road improvements, the Water Department should pay some portion of these costs. Final approval of the proportional share for road improvements will occur at Final SPA review. 7. Whether proposed development on slopes in excess of twenty percent (20°Ic) meet the slope reduction and density requirements of Sec. 7-903(B)(2)(b). No slopes exceeding 20% will be impacted by the development. 8. Whether there are sufficient GMQS allotments for the proposed development. A GMQS exemption will be required for these residences prior to final approval. The affordable housing component will need to be reviewed by the Joint Growth Management Commission prior to a hearing before the City Council at Final SPA review. The water plant infrastructure is considered an essential public facility, and is exempt from growth management. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff supports the project in concept based on the revisions that have taken place over the last year. The project reflects thoughtful design of the site, and the associated water treatment plant improvements have been based on future demand and the need to coordinate both projects with minimal impact on water services. Staff recommends approval based on the following conditions: 1. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. 2. The applicant shall provide at final SPA review a detailed plan for retaining and revegetating the Doolittle Road cuts, disturbed areas or easements, and building envelopes. Such a plan shall include section details, plant species list and construction and planting schedules. 6 3. The trail alignment shall be staked in the field for review by Staff and the Commission at the time of Final SPA review. The trail alignment must avoid as much existing vegetation as possible. Plans submitted at Final SPA review shall include proposed surface type and width. A plan for snowplowing and maintenance must also be provided for review. 4. In no case shall the new residential structures be washed with light from any exterior light fixtures. Additional lighting needs for the trail and roadway must be specified at the time of Final SPA review. 5. Residents from adjacent residential areas should be included in planning and design of the proposed park area. At the time of Final SPA review, the applicant shall be prepared to address what level of participation is envisioned for improvements to the park area. 6. The Phase II Environmental Audit must be included in the Final SPA submittal. 7. Specific signage, speed limits, pedestrian treatments and potential traffic calming measures to address the mix of traffic on Doolittle Road shall be approved by the City Engineer and submitted at the time of Final SPA review. 8. The applicant shall submit elevations of all water treatment plant structures proposed for improvements at the time of Final SPA review. These elevations should be sufficient for Staff and the Commission to review the proposed improvements in the context of potential visual impact from proposed and existing development. Recommended Motion: "I move to approve Conceptual SPA Approval for the City of Aspen Water Treatment Plant Improvements and Affordable Housing Project with the conditions as outlined in the staff memorandum of 04.16.96: 7 �.Y MEMORANDUM TO: Dave Michaelson, Community Development Dept, FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing Office DATE: April 5, 1996 RE: WATER PLACE AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT P.i Exhibit A REQUEST: The City of Aspen is proposing a 100% affordable housing development at the end of Doolittle Drive, within the City limits of Aspen, south of the Castle Ridge housing complex. The original proposal was to.bonslst of eight single family detached homes (SFD), four duplex units (DUP) and four townhome units (TH). The applicant is now requesting to build 22 fully deed restricted units, plus renovate and deed restrict an existing unit, for a total of 23 units, The units are to be designated as predominately RO and Category 4. The applicant states that the intent of this categorization is to offer the greatest level of income and asset flexibility for the purchasing employees. ISSUES: The Housing Board discussed this proposal on April 19, 1995. There were three major issues to consider at that time: 1. Two of the single family homes are smaller than the Minimum Net Liveable for single-family detached units listed in the Guidelines. The Board approved the unit sizes as stated in the applioation. 2. Was the mix of Category 4 and RO units appropriate' The Board also approved the mix being presented as stated. Staff feels that the new mix being requested is also appropriate since the goal of the applicant is to not maximum the Bales prices but to offer the greatest level of income and asset flexibility for the purchasing employees. 3, The applicant is also proposing to sell the units only to full-time employees of the applicant and require owners to sell the units back to the applicant if the owner leaves its employment. The Housing Board approved the applicant Is request, but recommended that the owner have 180 days to sale and vacant the unit once the owner's employment changes rather than 90 days. The only other hurdle the applicant should be made aware of is that there is a three-year residency requirement to purchase a RO unit. As proposed, the applicant would have to sell the RO units to qualified employees who had been working in the community for at least three years. The three -yeah requirement was approved by City Council and the Board of County Commissioners, therefore, the Housing Roard and staff do not have the ability to waive this requirement. The Category 4 units do not have an outright requirement tar length of residency. RECO14t NDATtON.- Staff recommends that request be approved as proposed. The deed restriction will need to be reviewed by the Housing Office and approved by the Housing Office before building permit approval. IV. C - MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Dave Michaelson, Planner RE: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Stream Margin Review - Public Meeting DATE: April 16,1996 SUMMARY: The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD) is requesting stream margin review to allow for the construction of two drop structures on the Roaring Fork River. One structure is located in the Oklahoma Flats area downstream from the pedestrian bridge, and the second is about 150 feet above No Problem Bridge on Neal Street. Staff is recommending approval with conditions. APPLICANT Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, represented by Thomas Bracewell LOCATION: Roaring Fork River ZONING: Not Applicable PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD) is requesting approval to construct two.grade modification drop structure projects in the Roaring Fork River to protect its existing 12" main outfall sewer line. The line currently suffers from inadequate cover as it traverses the river. The purpose of the project is to provide protection of the pipeline to avoid the chance of a washout during peak flows. The existing pipeline will not be replaced, only protected. The Oklahoma Flats structure just downstream from the pedestrian bridge washed out in 1995, exposing the sewer pipe during the runoff event. The ACSD replaced the structure under an emergency permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, but must construct a more permanent structure to withstand a 200 year event which is required by the Corps and the Division of Wildlife. The applicant also is requesting approval to construct a permanent drop structure approximately 150 feet above the Neale Street bridge where the outfall pipe also crosses the river. The project will include drop structures consisting of approximately 20 cubic yards of boulders with an average diameter of 4-5 feet. Approximately 12-18 inches of cover material, primarily obtained from the existing stream bed, will be placed upstream of the drop structure to protect the sewer line. The work is being supervised by Allan Czencush of the Division of Wildlife, and is tentatively scheduled for Spring or Fall of 1996. Drawings of the project locations and typical details is attached as Exhibit A. A project description is attached as Exhibit B, a floodplain analysis is attached as Exhibit C, an approval letter from the Corps of Engineers as Exhibit D, and approval from Division of Wildlife is attached as Exhibit E. REFERRAL COMMENTS: The project was referred to the Development Review Committee on April 11, 1996. Comments from the Parks Department and the Engineering Department will be presented tat the public meeting. 1 STAFF COMMENTS: Stream Margin Review - Pursuant to Section 26.68.040 the criteria for stream margin review are as follows: A. No development shall be permitted in the floodway, with the exception of bridges or structures for irrigation, drainage, flood control or water diversion, which may be permitted by the City Engineer, provided plans and specifications are submitted to demonstrate that the structure in engineered to prevent blockage of drainage channels during peak flows and the Commission determines the proposed structure complies, to the extent practical, with all standards set forth below. B. No development shall be permitted within one hundred (100) feet, measured horizontally, from the high water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, or within the Special Flood Hazard Area where it extends beyond 100 feet from the high water line of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, unless the Commission makes a determination that the proposed development complies with all standards set forth below: 1. It can be demonstrated that any proposed development which is in the Special Flood Hazard Area will not increase the base flood elevation on the parcel proposed for development. This shall be demonstrated by an engineering study prepared by a professional engineer registered in the State of Colorado which shows that the base flood elevation will not be raised, including, but not limited to, proposed mitigation techniques on or off -site which compensate for any base flood elevation increase caused by the development; and Response: The HEC H model runs have indicated no actual increase in the water surface due to either drop structure. 2. Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area Community Plan, Parks/Recreation/Open Space/Trails Plan Map, or areas of historic public use or access are dedicated via a recorded easement for public use. Dedications are necessitated by development's increased impacts to the City's recreation and trail facilities including public fishing access; and Response: Not Applicable 3. The recommendations of the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan are implemented in the proposed plan for development, to the greatest extent practical; and Response: Not Applicable 4. There is no vegetation removed or damaged or slope grade changes (cut/fill) made outside of a specifically defined building envelope. A building envelope shall be designated by this review and said envelope shall be barricaded prior to issuance of any demolition, excavation or building permits. The barricades shall remain in place until the issuance of Certificates of Occupancy; and Response: Some vegetation will be disturbed to gain access to the drop structure locations. The applicant intends on revegetating any disturbed riparian areas, consistent with the 404 permitting. 13. There has been accurate identification of wetland and riparian areas. 'Response: The identification is consistent with the Army Corps of Engineers 404 process. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval on the following conditions: 1. All representations of the applicant are considered conditions of approval. 2. The project must be consistent with the 404 permit and recommendations by the Division of Wildlife. T-he-appl-ieant-��bmit-a-�leaJi t, fora it in C—eunt Qn t�ruction. le,commen"ded Motion: `move to aPP 'ro e a stream margin review for the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation � P District, with the conditions as stated in the 4.16.96 staff memorandum". G d� Exhibits: ` A - Project Location and Details B - Project Description C - Floodplain Analysis D - Army Corps of Engineers Approval E - Division of Wildlife Approval i y a f JI F e, w y� 1 �r f. b 4 19 5. The proposed development does not pollute or interfere with the natural changes of the river, stream or other tributary, including erosion and/or sedimentation during construction. Increased on -site drainage shall be accommodated within the parcel to prevent entry into the river or onto its banks. Pool or hot tubs cannot be drained outside of the designated building envelope; and Response: The HEC H analysis indicated no increased flood flow will result from the project. the applicant has agreed to use silt fencing to prevent any erosion or sedimentation from entering the Roaring Fork River. 6. Written notice shall be provided to the Colorado Water Conservation Board prior to any alteration or relocation or a water course, and a copy of said notice is submitted to the Federal Emergency Management Agency; and Response: No alteration or relocation is proposed as part of the project. 7. A guarantee is provided in the event a water course is altered or relocated, that applies to the developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that ensures that the flood carrying capacity on the parcel is not diminished; and Response: No alteration or relocation is proposed as part of the project. 8. Copies are provided of all necessary federal and state permits related to the work within the 100- year floodplain; and Response: Both the Army Corps of Engineers and the Division of Wildlife has approved the project. A floodplain permit from Pitkin County is currently in the approval process. 9. There is no development other than approved native vegetation planting taking place below the top of slope or within fifteen (15) feet of the top of slope or the high waterline, whichever is most restrictive. Response: All revegetation will meet this standard. 10. All development outside of the fifteen (15) foot setback from the top of slope does not exceed a height delineated by a line drawn at a forty-five (45) degree angle from ground level at the top of slope. Response: Not Applicable. 11. A landscape plan is submitted with all development applications. Response: Not Applicable. 12. All exterior lighting is low and downcast with no lights directed toward the river or located down the slope; and Response: Not Applicable 3 Exhibit B �s,pen Consof ofQfeo_6Qwtlallon AZri& 565 North Mill Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Tele. (970) 925-3601 FAX #(970) 925-2537 Sy Kelly • Chairman Michael Kelly Albert Bishop Treas. Frank Loushin Louis Popish Secy. Bruce Matherly, Mgr. February 27, 1996 Temple Glassier Pitkin County Project Manager 530 E. Main ST. Aspen Co 81611 RE: Drop Structures -Roaring Fork River -Aspen, Co. Dear Temple, The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District would like to request an Floodplain Development Permit from the Pitkin County to construct two grade modification drop structure projects in the Roaring Fork River to protect its existing 12" main outfall sewer line. The line currently suffers from inadequate cover as it crosses the river. The purpose of the project is to add cover over the pipe and decrease the chances of a washout during peak flows. The existing pipeline will not be replaced. I have enclosed six application packets containing a drawing showing the site location, plan, and construction details, a copy of the HEC-2 analysis, and a copy of the pre -application form from your office. We are in the process of applying for a 404 permit form the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and an insubstantial Stream Margin Review from the City of Aspen. We will keep you posted as the status of these permits. The Oklahoma Flats structure just downstream of the pedestrian bridge was washed out exposing the sewer pipe during the high runoff last year. We replaced the structure to its original state in the fall of 1995 under an emergency permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. We hope to construct a more permanent structure to withstand a 200 yr. event as required by the USACE and the Colorado Division of Wildlife in the same location. We would also like to construct a permanent drop structure approximately 150 feet above the Neale Street bridge where our Outfall sewer line again crosses the river. The work will be supervised by Allan Czencush of the Colorado Division of Wildlife. We will also work with Mr. Czencush to provide stream bank stabilization as required in the area of the drop structures. In addition, trout habitat in these areas will also be enhanced. I have enclosed drawings of the project locations and typical details of the project construction and configuration. The project will include a drop consisting of approximately 20 cubic yards of boulders with an average diameter of 2-3 feet and a maximum diameter of 4-5 feet. Approximately 12-18 inches of cover material, primarily obtained in the existing river bed, will be placed upstream of the drop structure to protect the sewer line crossing. EPA Awards of Excellence 1976 • 1986 • 1990 Regional and National We do not anticipate an actual increase in the existing water level as described in the enclosed letter from Leonard Rice Consulting Water Engineers, our Representative of the District. I have also included the HEC-2 analysis from LRCWE for your review that shows that there will be no net increase in the base flood elevation in both of these areas. We are co-ordinating our work in the Oklahoma Flats area with George Robinson of the City of Aspen Parks Department. He is going to be.replacing the pedestrian bridge immediately upstream of our drop structure. Hopefully, wecando both our projects at the same time and minimize the impact to the area and potentially realize some cost savings to each organization at the same time. Construction access to this site will be off of south Spring* street, behind the Eagles building and then along the District's easements to the river. At this point, we do not believe that it will be necessary to close the bicycle path full time during construction. Very short duration closures will be required when equipment and materials are brought on and off the site. Flaggers and warning signs will be used at that time. Access to the construction site above Neale Ave. will be off of Queen St. and then along the District's easement to the river. During construction there will be disturbance to the river bed' and the adjacent riparian areas along the shore. Sedimentation barriers will be constructed along the river edges to reduce sedimentation transport. Construction is planned for the spring of 1996 before the spring runoff and trout spawning if we are able to receive in a timely manner all the permits from the various entities having jurisdiction. If this is not possible'the construction will be delayed until late fall of 1996. We will keep you informed on the status of all these permits. Bothsites will be restored as near as possible to pre - construction grading and conditions, and the sites will be re - vegetated. The District will conduct neighborhood notification through handouts, newspaper advertisements, and signs on site. Please give me a call if you have any questions. Sincer ly, Thomas Bracew Collection Systems Superintendent cc Alan Czencush, Colorado Division of Wildlife Bill Gruenburg, Trout Unlimited Chuck Roth, City of Aspen Engineer Exhibit C Leonard Rice Gregg S. Ten Eyck Leonard Rice Consulting Water Engineers, Inc. Leslie H. Botharn 2401 Fifteenth Street. Suite 300 / Denver. Colorado 80202-1143 / (303) 455-9589 • FAX (303) 455-0115 Ross Bethel Jon R. Ford A. J. Zabbia. Jr. December 5, 1995 Mr. Tom Bracewell Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District 565 N. Mill St. Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Oklahoma Flats and Neale St. Drop Structures Dear Tom: I have enclosed the following: ten copies of the design drawing for the two drop structures; and three copies of the two output files from the HEC-2 analysis we performed to evaluate the impacts of the proposed drop structures on the Roaring Fork River. The basis for our model was the original input data from the 1985 FEMA study of the area. Printout no. 1 represents the input and output for existing conditions, as modeled by FEMA. The model is oriented with section numbers increasing in the upstream direction: the model begins at section no. 141.1, located approximately 1400 feet downstream of the Oklahoma Flats structure, the proposed drop structure at Oklahoma Flats will be located between section no.'s 142 and 143, approximately 20 feet downstream of the pedestrian bridge. Because there was no FEMA cross-section at the proposed drop structure location, we added cross-section no. 142.1 to estimate water surface elevation prior to construction of the drop structure. You can see from the output that the calculated water surface elevation ("CWSEL") at cross-section no. 142.1 is 7872.71 and the channel velocity ("VCr1") is 11.9 feet per second. The Neale St. structure is located between section no.'s 146 and 147. Section 146.1 was added to estimate conditions at this location prior to construction of the drop s#ructure. The water surface elevation and velocity at this location prior to the construction of the drop structure are 7896.38 and 12.78 feet per second, respectively. Printout no. 2 represents the analysis with the structures in place. Cross-section no.142.2 and 146.2 were added, five feet upstream of sections 142.1 and 146.2, to account for the structures. The calculated water surface elevation at section 142.2 is 7873.78;1.07 feet higher than the elevation at section 142.1. The calculated water surface at section 146.2 is 7897.18, .80 feet higher than the elevation at section 146.1. The increase in elevations accounts for the increase in the channel bottom elevation at the structures. A slight backwater effect was created by the Neale St. structure as evidenced by a minor rise in the surface elevation at section 147; 7898.62 with the structure versus 7897.90 without the structure. The backwater effect is dissipated by the time the profile reaches section 148. It is important to note that the accuracy of the modeling in this area is plus or Water Riants ��+e �y Grouna `Hater + � ^� _;vii C;:s;c^ ra '-0nstruc;,on .' .� s•r C 7 i Mr. Tom Bracewell December 5, 1995 page 2 minus .5 feet, therefore there may be no actual increase in water surface due to the structure. There is no upstream or downstream effect from the Oklahoma Flats structure. There is no change in velocity above or below the Oklahoma Flats structure. A slight decrease in velocity occurs in the section upstream (sect. no. 147) of the Neale St. structure; 12.49 fps without the structure versus 10.79 fps with the structure in place. Again, this decrease in velocity can be expected due to the backwater effect caused by the structure. As discussed on the phone, your office will handle the permitting for both projects. Let us know if you need any help! Very truly yours, LEONARD RICE CONSULTING WATER ENGINEERS, INC. t�� Kevin O'Connell Project Manager KOC/gle 874ASD35 B:1374ASDABRACE12.5 „� r ~'later `nainee,s..,�c I Exhibit D DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY U.S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, SACRAMENTO 1 CORPS OF ENGINEERS 1325 J STREET REPLY TO SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95814-2922 ATTENTION OF March 15, 1996 Regulatory Branch (199675115) Mr. Thomas R. Bracewell Collecti-,n Systems Superintendent Aspen Cor�solidated Sanitation District 656 North Mill Street Aspen, Colorado 81,61.1 Dear Mr. B r.:accwe l l. I am responding to your written request dated February 15, 1996, which we received on March 11, 1996, for a Department of the Army permit to construct two drop structures for grade control and to discharge dredged material to cover an exposed sewer line with 12" of river rock. The project is located near Neale Avenue and at Oklahoma Flats in the Roaring Fork River, Pitki.n County, Aspen, Colorado. The Chief of Engineers has issued nationwide general permit number 3 which authorizes the discharge of dredged or fill material for maintenance of certain structures or fills in wagers of the United States. You may recover the exposed sewer line with dredged material as described in your written request, under this authority provided the work meets the conditions listed on the enclosed information sheets. You must prosecute the work in a timely manner which also minimizes the release of fines to the maximum extent practicable. You may not use this opportunity for instream work to do other work which has not been specifically authorized by the Corps of Engineers. We are authorizing your two proposed drop structures under, regional general permit number GP037 (copy enclosed). You must comply with the terms and conditions of this permit. We esD cial.l.y direct your attention to pages 5 and 6 of the permit concerning drop structures. These two permit verifications will be valid for a period of two years from the date of this letter unless the nationwide permit or regional general permit are modified, reissued, or revoked. You should contact this office if work will extend beyond this date. -2- We have assigned number 199675115 to your project. Please refer to this number in any correspondence with this office. if you have any questions, please contact Mr. Mike Claffey of this office at telephone number (970) 243-1199. Sincerely, a d y&c N u r�e ef, Northwestern tern Colorado atory Office 402 Rood Avenue, Room 142 Grand Junction, Colorado 81501-215617-, E nc 1, osu res Copies Furnished: Ms. Sarah Fowler, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 8EPR-EP, 999 18th Street, Suite SOO, Denver, Colorado 80202-2466 Mr. Keith Rose~, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 764 Horizon Drive, South Annex A, Grand Junction, Colorado 81506 Mr. Paul von Guerardl Subdistrict Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, 402 Rood Avenue, Room 2213, Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 Mr. Robert Caskey, Colorado Division of Wildlife, 711 Independent Avenue, Grand Junction, Colorado 81501 Pi,tlklin County, 506 East Main Street, Aspen,Colorado 81611 NATIONWIDE PERMIT 3 MAINTENANCE (Sections 10 & 404) The Corps of Engineers has issued a nationwide general permit for the re air, rehabilitation, or replacement of any previously authorized, currently serviceable, structure or fill, or of any currently serviceable structure or fill authorized by 33 CFR 330.3 provided that the structure or fill has not been put to uses specified or contemplated for it in the original permit, or the most recently authorized modification. Minor deviations in the structurels configuration or filled area including -those due to changes in materials, construction techniques, or current construction codes or safety standards which are necessary to make repair, rehabilitation, or replacement are permitted provided the environmental impacts resulting from such repair, rehabilitation, or replacement are minimal. Currently serviceable means usable as is or With some maintenance, but not so degraded as.to essentially require reconstruction. This nationwide permit authorizes the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement of those structures destroyed bgg storms, floods, fire or other discrete events, provided the repair, rehabilitation, or replacement is commenced or under contract to commence within two years of the date of their destruction or damage. In cases of catastrophic events, such as hurricanes or'tornadoes, this two year limit may be waived by the District Engineer, provided the permittee can demonstrate funding, contract, or other similar delays. Kaintenance dredging and beach restoration are not authorized by this nationwide permit. A. GENERAL CONDITIONS. The following general conditions must be followed in order for any authorization by a nationwide permit to be valid: 1. No activity may cause more than a minimal adverse effect on navigation. 2. Any structure or fill authorized shall be properly maintained, including maintenance to ensure public safety. 3. Appropriate erosion and siltation controls must be used and maintained in effective operating condition during construction, and all exposed soil and other fills must be permanently stabilized at the earliest practicable date. 4. No activity may substantially disrupt the movement of those species of aquatic life indigenous to the waterbody, including those species which normally migrate through the area, unless the activity's primary purpose is to impound water. 5. Heavy equipment working in wetlands must be placed on mats or other measures must be taken to minimize soil disturbance. 6. The activity must comply with any regional conditions which may have been added by the Division Engineer (see 33 CFR 330.4[e]) and any case specific conditions added by the Corps. Lo vS Army corps of Engineers Sacramento District 1325 J Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Public Notice Public Notice No. GP 037 In Reply Refer to the above Public Notice No. Date: 6 January 1992 Comments Due by: N/A REGIONAL GENERAL PERMIT NUMBER GP037 STREAM STABILIZATION WESTERN COLORADO TO WIIOM IT MAY CONCERN: The District Engineer, t). S. Army, Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District, has reissued Regional General Permit (RGP) number GP037 which authorizes certain limited discharges of dredged and fill material associated with stream stabilization in western Colorado. Please refer to the enclosed copy of the RGP. This permit is issued under the authorities of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. Reissuance of this RGP was based upon an evaluation of the 40 potential individual and cumulative impacts of the regulated activities. Comments received in response to a public notice on this proposal were considered in this evaluation. The Sacramento Di st.ric:t concluded .that reissuance of the RGP complies with Environmental Protection Agency Section 404(b)(1) Guidelines for evalr,ating discharges of dredged or fill material in waters of the lln i ted S t.at.es and is not contrary to the public interest. The tic.t.i vi ties aut,hori zed by this RGP are similar in nature and similar in the i r impact upon water quality and the aquatic environment, will have only minimal adverse effects when performed separately, and will have only minimal cumulative adverse effects on water quality and the aquatic environment. Please give special attention to the notification and approval procedures, terms, conditions and restrictions of the RGP. ANYONE PROPOSING TO PERFORM WORK AUTHORIZED UNDER THIS RGP MUST OBTAIN APPROVAL FROM THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS, SACRAMENTO DISTRICT PRIOR TO BF.GINN.TNG WORK. FE For more information and furtlier assistance, please write or call the Western Colorado Regulatory Office, U. S. Army, Corps of I.ngirieer.s, Sacramento District, 402 Rood Avenue, Room 142, Grand Junction, Colorado 81501-2563. The telephone number is (303) 243-1199. I,aurenc:e R. Sadoff Colonel, Corps of Engineers Exhibit E State of Colorado DIVISION OF WILDLIFE Department of Natural Resources March 6, 1996 Mr Tom Bracewell Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District 565 N Mill St Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Tom I have reviewed the permit package you sent-- the two grade control structures on the Roaring Fork. The site visit yesterday was helpful also. Everything seems in order and I would recommend that we proceed with getting the projects permitted so that they can be done before high water. The snowpack water content is about 130% of normal, and so we could be looking at another runoff like last year. Relative to the structure above No Problem Bridge, as we talked about in the field, it may need to extend further than you planned up the right bank. This would depend on how far downstream of the pipe the structure needs to be to give Kenny room to operate. Of course, the usual recommendations apply -- minimize release of fines and avoid riparian damage. Thanks for the opportunity to comment and to assist in the construction. Sincerely, Alan Czenkusch Aquatic Habitat Biologist cc: Cote, Langlois (DOW) APPLICATIOlk- FOR A FLOODPLAIN DEVELOPM*ENT PERMIT An applicant for a permit to engage in Development in a Designated Roodplain District shall submit, P ub as a minimum, three (3) copies ofany and all information required (in— ciuding maps, requirements, data. The Technical Information and Data required shall be pre— pared and certified by a Professional Engineer, registered in the State of Colorado. NAM E OF APPLICANT, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District TELEPHONE(S): 565 N. Mill St Aspen CO 81611 970-925-3601 DATE 2'2$-96 NAME OF PROJECT: Neale Street Drop Structure S iTE LOCATION: Above No Problem Bridge, in the Roaring Fork River L__ AL DESCRIPTION (Attachf i necessary) N/A OWNERS & INTERESTS Persons holding recorded legal, equitable, contractual or option interests in the property described above) See Attached DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: Build Drop Structure IS ANY PORTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL NOW COMPLETE? ( )YES ( x )NO e YES, GIVE REASONS AND DATE r • •' The applicant may be required to submit other necessv i in order to determine if appropriate d � information design and performance stand-- `: ard� have been met. 'Th L APPLICANT — REQUESTS A PERMIT FOR A PERIOD 0D April lst. to Dec 31st., 1996 iAPPLICANT Aspen Consolidated Sanitation Dist . BY: } nem®) Collection Systems Superintendent a DATE RECEIVED APPROVED {) NOT APPROVED APPROVED ,_BY TITLE: t DATE APPROVED „ RE' ""ON(S) FOR DENIAL �PFROVAL COMMENTS AND CONDITIONS Jenard Gross Nick Coates City of Aspen Eagles Club Daryl Sandon Mountain River Manor Queen Victoria Condons Adjacent Owners 731 Bay St. 855 Bay St. 130 S. Galena 700 E. Bleeker 973 Queen St. 900 E. Hopkins 916 E. Hopkins Aspen, CO. 81611 Aspen, CO. 81611 Aspen, CO. 81611 Aspen, CO. 81611 Aspen, CO. 81611 Aspen, CO. 81611 Aspen, CO. 81611 APPLICATION FOR A FLOODPLAIN DEVELOPMENT PERMIT An applicant fora permit to engage in Development in a Designated Floodplain District shall submit, as a minimum, three (3) copies of any and all information required (in— cluding maps, requirements, data). pre— pared • • certified by • Professional • • ;_registered in the State of • • ad ► E OF APPLICANT: Aspen Consolidated Sanitatioll District MAILING ADDRESS: 565 N. Mill St. TELFPHONE(S): Aspen Co. 81611 970-925-3601 DATE 2-28-96 NAME OF PROJECT: Oklahoma Flats Drop Structure �17E LO ATIO Below Pedestrian Bridge - in the Roaring Fork River L__ L DEECRIPTiON(Attach i N A necessary) � w ER%'-7.0 INTERESTS (Persons holding de legal, equitable, contractual or option interests in the property described above) See Attached WESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: er an Emergencv Permit, issued by Mike Claffey of the USACE, the Okl Drop Structure that was washed out during the high runoff of 1995 ex2osing the sewer line, ':as �ehuilt to its original configuration. The new structure will be built to FIRM FLOODPLAIN DISTRICT INWHICH THE PROPOSED DEIVELOPMENT IS LOCATED.• F POSED DEVELOPMENT IS: ( ) AN ALLOWED USE IN DISTIRCT ( �C) A SPECIAL REVIEW USE IN THE DISTRICT. THE FOLLOWING MAPS OR DRAWINGS IDENTIFYING OR DESCRIBING THE PROJECT ARE REQUIRED: Site location map and zoning of the property; A map showing the stream and channel, the designated Fioodplain Hazard Area, the designated 100—year Floodplain District, the area to be occupied by the proposed development, and all available flood elevation studies, water surface elevations, and base flood elevations; Drawings showing the profile of the bottom of the channel and the thalweg and the water surface profiles; A ap with surface view showing elevations or contours of the ground; pertinent structures; fill or storage elevations; size; location and spatial arrangement of all proposed and existing structures on the site; and location and elevation of streets, roads, water supply systems, sanitary facilities and soil types; Descriptions of any construction activity which would affect the hy— draulic capacity of the floodplain, indicating existing and proposed base flood elevations; Specifications for channel changes, sanitary facilities; building construction materials, filling, dredging, storage of materials, water supply systems and The elevation(s) (in relation to mean sea level) of the lowest floor (including basements) of existing and proposed structures; here floodproofing is utilized for a structure, a registered profes— sional engineer or architect shall certify that the floodproofing r- ';gods are adequate to withstand the flood depths, pressures, vel— o�--.,s, impact and uplift forces and other factors associated with the basa flood; in icatin f loodproof ed ei vation=. sh ll b r�ficcTzcr�� . a '.,, t ;. t � spa w' � ;�1 '� �a � • R 4�R s M-� a a The applicant may be required to submit other necessary information in order to determine if appropriate design and performance arr4s have been met. 9 P rm®nCe stand. APPLICANT REQUESTS ESTS A PERMIT FOR A PERIOD OF: Aril 1st to Dec. 31st, 1996 A: P P LI CA T: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation L4 Distr' t . (name) Collection S stems Superintendent APPROVAL DATE RECEIVED APPROVED NOT AP . PROVED APPROVED ---,BY TITLE� 1 i / ct %l DATE APPROVED RF "'�30N(S) FOR DENIAL APPROVAL COMMENTS AND CONDITIONS Jenard Gross Nick Coates City of Aspen Eac l es Club Daryl Sandon Mountain River Manor Queen Victoria Condons Adjacent Owners 731 Bay St. 855 Bay St. 130 S. Galena 700 E. Bleeker 973 Queen St. 900 E. Hopkins 916 E. Hopkins Aspen, CO. 81611 Aspen, CO, 81611 Aspen, CO. 81611 Aspen, CO. 81611 Aspen, CO. 81611 Aspen, CO. 81611 Aspen, CO. 81611