HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.19941004
AGENDA
ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
October 4, 1994, Tuesday
4:30 P.M.
2nd Floor Meeting Room
City Hall
==========---=====================================================
I. COMMENTS
Commissioners
Planning Staff
Public
II. NO MINUTES
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. 709 W. Main Street Landmark Designation, Amy Amidon
B. No Problem Joe conditional Use Review for an
Accessory Dwelling Unit, Mary Lackner
C. KNFO Conditional Use Review for a Satellite DiSh,
Kim Johnson
IV. NEW BUSINESS
A. Morrow Stream Margin Review, Kim Johnson
V. ADJOURN
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Suzanne Wolff, Administrative Assistant
RE: Upcoming Agendas
DATE: October 4, 1994
Regular Meeting - October 4
709 W. Main Landmark Designation (AA)
West End Traffic Update (Gish)
Morrow Stream Margin Review (KJ)
No Problem Joe Conditional Use Review for ADU (ML)
KNFO-FM Conditional Use Review for Satellite Dish (KJ)
Overlay Special Review - October S
904 E. Cooper (ML/AA)
Regular Meeting - October 18
Creektree Subdivision/PUD Amendment (ML)
Independence Place SPA Designation & Conceptual SPA Plan (LL)
Condominiumization Text Amendment (KJ)
West End Traffic Update (Gish)
Regular Meeting - November 1
Youth Center SPA Amendment (LL)
303 E. Main St. GMQS Exemption, Special Review, View Plane (KJ)
624 E. Hopkins GMQS Allotment & Special Review (KJ)
a.nex
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer
RE: 709 W. Main Street, Landmark designation
DATE: October 4, 1994
SUMMARY: The applicant requests landmark designation of the
property at 709 W. Main Street. There are three structures on the
site, the Stitzer House, built in 1886 and two livestock sheds
constructed sometime before 1904.
This site lies within the Main Street Historic District.
APPLICANT: Robert Weien, owner.
LOCATION:_ 709 W. Main Street, Lot G, Block 19, City and Townsite
of Aspen.
PROCEDURE FOR REVIEW: Landmark Designation is a three -step
process, requiring recommendations from both HPC and P&Z (public
hearings), and first and second reading of a Landmark Designation
Ordinance by City Council. City Council holds a public hearing at
second reading.
HPC approved the designation unanimously on July 13, 1994.
LOCAL DESIGNATION STANDARDS: Section 24-7-702 of the Aspen Land
Use Code defines the six standards for local Landmark Designation,
requiring that the resource under consideration meet at least one
of the following standards:
A. Historical Importance: The structure or site is a
principal or secondary structure or site commonly
identified or associated with a person or an event of
historical significance to the cultural, social or
political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado of the
United States.
Response: This standard is not met.
B. Architectural Importance: The structure or site
reflects an architectural style that is unique, distinct
or of traditional Aspen character.
Response: The Stitzer house is a simple Victorian
miner's cottage with some alterations. The original
1
house had at least two rear additions built before 1904,
which are still mostly intact. A small rear addition with
a porch apparently has been demolished. The house also
originally had a shed roofed front porch which ran the
length of the building and has since been removed. A
corrugated metal roof was added and the house was
stuccoed.
Some of the traditional Victorian features retained by
this house are the gable roof form, tall double hung
windows with decorative lintels and double arched lites
in the front door.
C. Architectural Importance: The structure or site
embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a
significant or unique architectural type or specimen.
Response: This standard is not met.
D. Architectural Importance: The structure is a
significant work of an architect whose individual work
has influenced the character of Aspen.
Response: The architect or builder is unknown.
E. Neighborhood Character: The structure or site is a
significant component of an historically significant
neighborhood and the preservation of the structure or
site is important for the maintenance of that
neighborhood character.
Response: The house is one of only a few historic
residences on Main Street which remains relatively
unaltered and still functions solely as a residence.
F. Community Character: The structure or site is
critical to the preservation of the character of the
Aspen community because of its relationship in terms of
size, location and architectural similarity to other
structures or sites of historical or architectural
importance.
Response: This site is representative of the modest
scale, style and character of homes constructed during
the mining era, the community's primary period of
historic significance.
Recommendation: Staff and HPC recommend P&Z approve
Landmark Designation of Lot G, Block 19, City and
Townsite of Aspen, finding that standards B, E and F are
met.
6
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Mary Lackner, Planner
RE: No Problem Joe Conditional Use for an Accessory Dwelling
Unit - Public Hearing
DATE: October 4, 1994
SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends approval of the No Problem
Joe 444 sq.ft. accessory dwelling unit with conditions.
APPLICANT: Estate of Joseph Candreia, represented by Cunningham
Investment Company.
LOCATION: 930 King Street, a metes and bounds parcel located in
Section 7, Township 10 South, Range 84 West of the 6th PM.
ZONING: The 13,343 sq.ft. parcel is zoned R-15A.
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The applicant requests Conditional Use
approval to convert the historic miner's cabin on this parcel into
an accessory dwelling unit and to add a new free market residence
on the property. The conversion of this unit into an accessory
dwelling unit complies with the housing mitigation requirements of
Ordinance 1, Series 1990. The one bedroom accessory dwelling unit
will be approximately 444 sq.ft. and is proposed to be attached to
the main house by a breezeway. This parcel was reviewed pursuant
to the new temporary overlay, but HPC comments were only advisory
because this parcel is over 9,000 sq.ft. Please refer to
application information, Exhibit "A".
REFERRAL COMMENTS: Comments from the Housing Office are included
as Exhibit "B", Parks Department comments Exhibit "C", Engineering
comments Exhibit "D", and Zoning Office Exhibit "E".
STAFF COMMENTS: Staff has received a letter from a neighboring
property owner who has concern regarding fill material 'that has
been placed on the property over time (Exhibit "F"). In order to
address this concern, staff has added a condition of approval to
this review that requires an evaluation of the site by the Building
Inspector, Zoning Officer and Planning to determine the natural
grade.
The Planning and Zoning Office has addressed the use of breezeways
and similar connectors many times. Such connections are not
permitted for connecting duplex units, as these require a 20%
common wall. The breezeway connection in this project is not being
used to avoid any land use regulations as the ADU for this project
may be either attached or detached to the main residence.
The Historic Preservation Committee reviewed and approved the
project at their September 1, 1994 meeting, however they had
limited review capabilities over this project because the property
is not historically landmark.ed and the applicant was doing a
partial demolition and relocation.
The Commission has the authority to review and approve development
applications for conditional uses pursuant to the standards of
Section 7-304:
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; and
Response: The proposed dwelling unit has the potential to house
local employees, which is in compliance with the Aspen Area
Community Plan and the underlying zone district.
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; and
Response: The accessory dwelling unit is compatible with the
character of the surrounding neighborhood, which consists of duplex
and single family residences. Staff would like to see the ADU
redesigned to be free standing, which would make it more consistent
with the historic residential use, scale, and appearance of the
cabin in this neighborhood.
C. The location, size, design and operating characteristics of
the proposed conditional use minimizes adverse effects,
including visual impacts, impacts on pedestrian and vehicular
circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise,
vibrations and odor on surrounding properties; and
Response: The main house is required to provide four parking
spaces. Off-street parking can be provided within the garage and
on the driveway. No parking is required to be provided for the one
bedroom accessory dwelling unit, however there is space available
on the parcel.
As mentioned under item B, staff believes that the ADU would be
more consistent in character with the neighborhood if it were
redesigned to free standing, thereby reducing bulk and mass. Two
to three smaller structures would be more visually appealing than
the one larger structure that is proposed.
The 1990 Pedestrian Walkway and Bikeway System plan identifies King
Street as a primary pedestrian route and off -road bicycle route.
MAP
The applicant has not offered to provide a pedestrian/bikeway space
along the property on King Street. Staff recommends that the
applicant sign a sidewalk, curb and gutter agreement that would
require the applicant to provide these improvements at a later
date. A commuter sidewalk constructed this summer along Neale
Avenue on the western side of this property.
The proposed circular driveway is inconsistent with the road design
standards of the City. The applicant will need to redesign this
driveway, prior to the issuance of any building permits.
As per past P&Z concerns, a recommended condition of approval
requires that the unit be identified on building permit plans as
a separate dwelling unit requiring compliance with U.B.C. Chapter
35 for sound attenuation. The applicant has proposed a roof design
that will shed snow away from the ADU's entrance. No significant
impacts are anticipated.
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 medical services, hospital and medical services,
drainage systems, and schools; and
Response: All public utilities are adequate and in place
throughout the neighborhood and for the proposed residence and ADU.
The applicant will be required to pay additional tap fees for water
and sewer service with the new residence.
E. The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the
incremental need for increased employees generated by the
conditional use; and
Response: The proposed ADU will satisfy the requirements of
Ordinance 1 for new residences. The applicant must file the
appropriate deed restrictions for resident occupancy, including a
six month minimum lease. Proof of recordation must be forwarded
to the Planning Office prior to issuance of any building permits.
F. The proposed conditional use complies with all additional
standards imposed on it by the Aspen Area Community Plan and
by all other applicable requirements of this chapter.
Response: This use complies with the Aspen Area Community Plan
and all other applicable conditional use standards.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Planning staff recommends approval of the
No Problem Joe Conditional Use for a 444 sq.ft. one bedroom
accessory dwelling unit subject to the following conditions:
1. The owner shall submit appropriate deed restrictions to the
Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority for approval. The
3
3
accessory dwelling unit shall be deed restricted to resident
occupancy with a minimum six month lease. Upon approval by
the Housing Authority, the Owner shall record the deed
restriction with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's
Office.
2. Prior to issuance of any building permits, a copy of the
recorded deed restriction for the accessory dwelling unit must
be forwarded to the Housing Office and Planning Office.
3. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall
provide the Housing Office actual floor plans showing the net
liveable calculation of the accessory dwelling unit.
4. The accessory dwelling unit shall be clearly identified as a
separate dwelling unit on building permit plans and shall
comply with U.B.C. Chapter 35 sound attenuation requirements
5. During building permit plan review, the Zoning Enforcement
Officer shall make the final determination that the unit meets
the minimum size requirement of 300 sq.ft. net liveable as
defined in the Housing Authority Guidelines. The accessory
dwelling unit cannot be less than 300 sq.ft.
6. Based on the comments submitted by the Engineering Department
in their referral memo dated September 27, 1994 the applicant
shall comply with the following:
a. The applicant shall submit a drainage plan to be reviewed
and approved by the Engineering Department, prior to the
issuance of any building permits.
b. The applicant shall enter into a sidewalk, curb and
gutter agreement for the portion of the property that
fronts King Street, prior to the issuance of any building
permits.
41 C. The applicant shall redesign the proposed driveway plan
to tLLQ- . S is c o f 1,
d. The applicant shall consult City Engineering (920-5080)
for design considerations of development within public
rights -of -way, Parks Department (920-5120) for vegetation
species, and shall obtain permits for any work or
development, including landscaping, within public rights -
of -way from the city Streets Department (920-5130).
7. The applicant shall meet with the Building Inspector, Zoning
Officer and Planning Office to determine the natural grade of
the property. This meeting shall take place prior to the
issuance of any building -permits for the property.
4
ki
8. 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.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the Conditional Use for a
444 sq.ft. accessory dwelling unit for the No Problem Joe property
at 930 King Street, subject to the conditions recommended in the
Planning Office memo dated October 4, 1994."
Exhibits:
"A" - Application Information
"B" - Housing Office memo
"C" - Parks Department referral memo
"D" - Engineering referral memo
"E" - Zoning Office memo
"F" - Public comment letter
5
6�
�h �9d age Rd
Nu,�rP
r
<yr� 5.�
01 �Ao, o
Get
Hunter Gt
A°arin '-
Fo�K R oc
v
a�
'e St
;111aIII �
-I r/ St
5
r
m ti
Vine St
k G '(o
7
-0,01 °Arm .r a
S co c
C Race St
Smuggler Mtn Rd
Aspen
c
a/n Sr Pk
5
Bay St c S E
a Pk 82 „ /b / I T
H°
e�N
q t j Qv�n S t Q�
ea`, c` ct Re enr Sr
✓men Sl Q 3 a Mail C O . D
Sl b 4
y/// St ✓ n/g S Ovranf � �c �
y
Summit t cn a ya fers �� b5
SKI
s
o �? q �� RNe �t 90 Westview
O ru
o DrO
_ R ?
Crystal
� Leke Ad
LP
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner
RE: KNFO Conditional Use for Two Satellite Dish Antennas
- Public Hearing
DATE: October 4, 1994
SUMMARY: The Planning office recommends approval of the KNFO radio
station's Conditional Use for two 2.8 meter satellite dish antennas
located at 225 N. Mill Street with conditions.
APPLICANT: L & B Broadcasting, LLC, represented by Sunny Vann
LOCATION: The dishes will be located on the southwest corner of
the building located at 225 N. Mill Street. The specific site is
the one story section of the building. Please refer to the site
sketch and application information, Exhibit "A".
ZONING: NC Neighborhood Commercial
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The applicant requests Conditional Use for
the construction of the two 2.8 meter (91) diameter dishes which
will be used for satellite link for a new radio station. The
building currently houses KSPN FM radio by virtue of an SPA
amendment to allow "radio broadcast station" at this location.
PROCESS: The Planning Commission shall make a determination on the
Conditional Use for the dish antennae.
REFERRAL COMMENTS:
Zoning: Planning and Zoning staff visited the site together.
Zoning Officer Bill Drueding believes that the visual impact of the
proposal will be fairly limited from the residential structures to
the west because the dishes are proposed for the one story section
of the existing commercial building. The dishes should be painted
a deep color which matches the brick or window trim on the
building.
STAFF COMMENTS: The Commission has the authority to review and
approve development applications for conditional uses pursuant to
the standards of Section 7-304:
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.
N
RESPONSE: The proposed dishes are not specifically addressed in
the plan.
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 site is commercially zoned as are the properties
immediately south (the Jerome Professional Building) and north (the
Truman Canter.) Because of their location on the site and
building, the proposal is not inconsistent or impactive with the
three residential properties to the west. These parcels are zoned
R-6 and may also install dish antennae with conditional use
approval.
C. The location, size, design and operating characteristics of
the proposed conditional 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 location on the f irst floor substantially blocks the
view from uphill and street views. The homes to the west will have
full or partial view of the dishes, but the bulk of the existing
structure and parking lot is already very prominent in the views
to the east. Staff is conditioning an approval with the
requirement to paint the dishes to match the building materials.
We considered whether to require a screen fence around the dishes
but concluded that a screen fence tall enough to hide the dishes
would be a much greater visual impact because of bulkiness than
painted dishes.
No other significant neighborhood impacts are anticipated.
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 medical services, hospital and medical services,
drainage systems, and schools.
RESPONSE: All public facilities are already in place for the
existing home and neighborhood. No additional needs are required.
E. The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the
incremental need for increased employees generated by the
conditional use.
RESPONSE: No additional employees are generated by the antennae.
2
/V
F. The proposed conditional use complies with all additional
standards imposed on it by the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan
and by all other applicable requirements of this chapter.
RESPONSE: The AACP does not address dish antennae.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Planning recommends approval of the KNFO
Conditional Use for two 2.8 meter satellite dishes to be located
on the southwest portion of the 225 N. Mill Street building with
the following conditions:
1. Thmmaeria
mrepre=sentations
ed to match the brick or t im colors
of�-e-- v,nL��re�� 2. ions made by the applicant in the
application and during public meetings with the Planning and
Zoning Commission and Historic Preservation Committee shall
be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless
otherwise amended by other conditions.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move approve a Conditional Use for two 2.8
meter satellite dish antennae for KNFO radio located at 225 N. Mill
Street with the conditions recommended in the Planning Office memo
dated 10/4/94."
Exhibits:
"A" - Site Plan and application information
3
— ,1Lf's 4-� 7 ' •saO i y ���'' t'"\r-r Y' .` r }•1 ^�A..ft 1.
' J.,• " ��:3 I' . ,� �. =.'r. r 1 ` I,�',ti � •jig?,
lb
°t �� ai_ off. ;� �;:: ,.. ' �`�; .. �• � ,�, 1 -
01
tu
CIO
it
40
' W
o ^
H Z
b '-- -
f 0 cC
•' y�
W \ -i 1 a
t f •1 •
19
k.
• : � _ _._---__: _ -- to
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner
RE: Morrow Stream Margin Review
DATE: October 4, 1994
SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends approval of the Morrow
Stream Margin Review with conditions.
APPLICANT: Darrell C. Morrow, represented by Chris Ridings, Bill
Poss and Associates
LOCATION: 1120 Black Birch Dr., Lot 12 Black Birch Estates
ZONING: R-151 PUD
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: Stream Margin Review approval for the
enlargement of a residence along Castle Creek .
PROPOSAL: The applicant wishes to expand an existing 4 bedroom
residence from 2,489 s.f. to 4,320 s.f. Included in the proposal
is a new spa, rebuilt deck and relocated irrigation ditch. The
gross lot size is 15,113 s.f. with a net lot area for FAR purposes
of 13,338 s.f. (1,775 s.f. lies below high water line.) The
building site lies within 100' of the high water line of Castle
Creek. The proposed building footprint meets the City's required
setbacks. The homeowner's association has approved variances to
the subdivision's more restrictive side yard setbacks and height
limits. A new garage will be incorporated into the proposed
addition. Please refer to Exhibit "A" for the application
information.
The project has gone through special review for the FAR overlay as
the structure is proposed at 99% of allowable FAR for the site.
The special review was advisory only because the parcel is over
9,000 s.f.
REFERRAL COMMENTS:
Engineering: The blueprints for construction must contain all
relevant information concerning drainage, erosion control and
construction techniques.
Prior to the issuance of any building permit the applicant must
submit a letter from an architect or engineer that certifies the
elevation of the proposed addition's lowest floor, including
basement, versus the elevation of the 100 year flood and certifies
il
that any relevant floodproofing requirements of the small portion
of the addition that is located in the 100 year floodplain
(compliance with Ordinance 62 of 1985 and Ordinance 32 of 1987),
and includes a revised survey with the 100 year floodplain
indicated as shown on the FEMA map. Also, a letter of
certification of as -built conditions shall be required prior to the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy
Because of the limited area between the building and the waterline
and the riparian vegetation within this space, there shall not be
construction activity outside of the building footprint and the
mean high water line.
The applicant shall consult City Engineering for design
considerations of development within public rights -of -way, Parks
Department for vegetation species, and shall obtain permits for any
work or development, including landscaping, within public rights -
of -way from City Streets Department.
Parks: In conversations with Parks staff, the proposed ditch
relocation is acceptable. Tree relocation permits are required for
any tree over six inches in diameter.
STAFF COMMENTS: Section 7-504 outlines the criteria for Stream
Margin Review as follows:
Criteria 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 to practice in the State of
Colorado which shows that the base flood elevation will not be
raised, including, but not limited to, proposing mitigation
techniques on or off -site which compensate for any base flood
elevation increase caused by the development.
Response: The proposed expansion and site improvements are located
above the 100 year flood plain so the base flood elevation will not
be affected.
Criteria 2: Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area
Comprehensive Plan: Parks/Recreation/Open Space/Trails Plan map is
dedicated for public use.
Response: The City -owned Meadows Open Space is located across the
river. No trail has been designated across the subject parcel.
Criteria 3: The recommendations of the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan
are implemented in the proposed plan for development, to the
greatest extent practicable.
Response: The Plan makes no specific recommendations for this
2
11
site. However, staff is increasingly concerned with riparian and
wetland vegetation on riverside parcels. Parks staff identified
a small wetland patch where the garage will be located. This
appears to be the result of the irrigation ditch system. Upon
further review by a consultant and Mike Claffey of the Army Corps
of Engineers, it was determined that a Nationwide Permit #26 would
be issued for purposes of placing fill in this area. This permit
is valid for two years from August 29, 1994.
Criteria 4: No vegetation is removed or slope grade changes made
that produce erosion and sedimentation of the stream bank.
Response: The application states that existing vegetation will not
be disturbed along Castle Creek and that barriers will be placed
around tree trunks. The revised deck will allow the existing trees
to remain through the deck. Staff has conditioned the project that
excavation shall take place from the "inside out" of the building
footprint (away from the river). and that a barricade must be
erected .just outside of the building footprint to prohibit
construction activity (ie. grading, filling, materials storage)
between the footprint and the river. During construction the
applicant has committed to placing straw and erosion control fabric
to prevent sedimentation into the creek.
Any disturbed areas adjacent to the structure on the river, side
shall be revegetated with native riparian species.
Criteria 5: To the greatest extent practicable, the proposed
development reduces pollution and interference with the natural
changes of the river, stream or other tributary.
Response: The improvements will be mitigated by revegetation.
Care will be taken to prevent pollution of the river. The natural
changes of the river channel will not be adversely affected.
Criteria 6: Written notice is given to the Colorado Water.
Conservation Board prior to any alteration or relocation of a water
course, and a copy of said notice is submitted to the Federal
Emergency Management Agency.
Response: Not Applicable
Criteria 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.
Response: The applicant has provided a letter to this effect
although the water course is not affected by this project.
Criteria 8: Copies are provided of all necessary federal and state
permits relating to work within the one hundred (100) year
3
floodplain.
Response: Not applicable.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends approval of
the Morrow Stream Margin Review with the following conditions:
1. A tree removal permit must be obtained from Parks prior to
issuance of Building Permit for any trees removed over 6"
diameter.
2. The blueprints for construction must contain all relevant
information concerning drainage, erosion control and
construction techniques.
3. Prior to the issuance of any building permit theapplicant
must submit a letter from an architect or engineer that
certifies the elevation of the proposed addition's lowest
floor, including basement, versus the elevation of the 100
ear flood and certifies that any relevant floodproofing
requirements of the small portion of the addition that is
located in the 100 year floodplain (compliance with Ordinance
62 of 1985 and Ordinance 32 of 1987), and includes a revised
survey with the 100 year floodplain indicated as shown on the
FEMA map.
4. A letter of certification of as -built conditions prepared by
the architect or engineer shall be required prior to the
issuance of a certificate of occupancy.
5. There.shall not be construction activity outside of the
building footprint closer to the mean high water line.
6. The Nationwide Permit #26 for purposes of placing fill in the
wetland area is valid until August 29, 1996. Any work taking
place in the wetland beyond this date must receive an
extension of this permit
7. Excavation shall take place from the "inside out" of the
building footprint (away from the river) and a barricade must
be erected just outside of the building footprint to prohibit
construction activity (ie. grading, filling, materials
storage) between the footprint and the river. During
construction straw and erosion control fabric must be placed
along the barricade to prevent sedimentation into the creek.
8. The applicant shall consult City Engineering for design
considerations of development within public rights -of -way,
Parks Department for vegetation species, and shall obtain
permits for any work or development, including landscaping,
within public rights -of -way from City Streets Department.
4
NO
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the Morrow Stream Margin
with the 8 conditions of approval presented in the staff memo dated
October 4, 1994."
Exhibits:
"A" - Application Information
"B" - Referral Memo
"C" - 8/29/94 Letter from Army Corps of Engineers
5
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
EXHIBIT _ , APPROVED
19 BY RESOLUTION
MORROW RESIDENCE
STREAM MARGIN REVIEW PROJECT DESCRIPTION
AUGUST 26, 1994
As stated on the Land Use Application Form, the proposal consists of a single story
addition on the south side of the existing house, second floor addition above the
existing single story, remodel of the existing deck , exterior spa, paved driveway,
relocation of ditch and new landscaping. Compliance with Stream Margin Review
Guidelines are as follow:
1. Erosion Control. Snow fence with a minimum of 10" straw and erosion
control fabric will be located along Castle Creek. Culverts will be located in
existing ditches and covered with erosion control fabric during construction.
2. Vegetation. Existing vegetation along Castle Creek will not be disturbed.
Barriers will be placed around tree trunks. Vegetation removed during
construction will be replaced with native plants and grasses except for areas
at the edge and center of the driveway which may include flower beds.
3. Setbacks. The existing structure lies within the front setback. This non-
conformance will be reduce with partial demolition of the existing structure.
Approval from the homeowners association has been granted to exceed
neighborhood association setbacks which are more restrictive than city codes.
4. Building Height. Approval from the homeowners association has been
granted to exceed neighborhood association height limits which are more
restrictive than city codes.
Please refer to the attached Item #11 for explanation of compliance with review
standards as a response to Attachment 4 of the Stream Margin Review submittal
requirements.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
ITEM 8 \0
Ronald D. Austin
Frederick F. Peirce
Thomas Fenton Smith
Rhonda J. Bazil
HAND DELIVERED
AUSTIN, PEIRCE & SMITH, P.C.
Attorneys At Law
600 East Hopkins Avenue
Suite 205
Aspen, Colorado 81611
October 4, 1994
Ms. Amy Amidon
Pitkin County Historic Preservation Officer
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
RE: 709 W. Main Street
Dear Amy:
Telephone (303) 925-2600
FAX (303) 925-4720
This firm represents Wes and Susan Anson, who are the owners
of 701 West Main Street, Aspen, Colorado, which is the neighboring
property to 709 W. Main Street. It has just come to my attention
today that Mr. Weien, the owner of 709 W. Main Street is seeking
Landmark Designation for his property and three structures.
Mr. and Mrs. Anson object to the designation of the property
and structures as historic since the parties are currently involved
in litigation concerning ownership issues. A copy of the complaint
is enclosed. Since an historic designation may effect the
ownership interests of Mr. and Mrs. Anson, it would be
inappropriate for the Planning and Zoning Commission or the City
Council to allow such designation without their express permission.
The issue of a landmark designation should only be addressed after
the conclusion of this litigation.
I would ask that I be notified of any further meetings on this
matter. Please call me if you have any questions.
S-LA.cerely,
AUSTIN, PEIRCE & SMITH, P.C.
By:
Rhonda J. Bazil
RJB/djw
Enclosure
cc: Mr. and Mrs. Wes Anson
�-j
1 C:\WP5I\LETTERS\AMIDON
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: NO PROBLEM JOE CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW FOR AN ACCESSORY
DWELLING UNIT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on
Tuesday, October 4, 1994 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 pm before
the Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission, 2nd Floor Meeting Room,
City Hall, 130 S. Galena, Aspen to consider an application
submitted by the Estate of Joseph L. Candreia, c/o Cunningham
Investment Co, Inc., 121 S. Galena, Aspen, CO, requesting approval
of a Conditional Use Review for an approximately 444 square foot
Accessory Dwelling Unit in the existing historic miner's cabin
which will be attached by a breezeway to a proposed new single
family residence. The property is located at 930 King Street; a
tract of land situated in the S a of Section 7, Township 10 South,
Range 84 West of the 6th P.M. For further information, contact
Mary Lackner at the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office, 130 S. Galena
St., Aspen, CO 920-5106.
s /Bruce Kerr, Chairman
Planning and Zoning Commission
This is to acknowledge notice was sent via .first class mail
f on September 19, 1994 to all persons named on the listing
issued by Aspen City Hall,
Pa/"ti Marshal
ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 S . Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303) 920-5090 FAX# (303) 920-5197
September 8, 1994
Mac Cunningham
Cunninham Investment Co.
121 S. Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: No Problem Joe Conditional Use Review for an Accessory Dwelling Unit
Case A66-94
Dear Mac,
The Planning Office has completed its preliminary review of the captioned application. We
have determined that this application is complete.
We have scheduled this application for review by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
at a Public Hearing to be held on Tuesday, October 4, 1994 at a meeting to begin at 4: 30 p.m.
Should this date be inconvenient for you please contact me within 3 working days of the date
of this letter. After that the agenda date will be considered final and changes to the schedule
or tabling of the application will only be allowed for unavoidable technical problems. The
Friday before the meeting date, we will call to inform you that a copy of the memo pertaining
to the application is available at the Planning Office.
Please note that it is your responsibility to mail notice to property owners within 300' and to
post the subject property with a sign at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing. Please
submit a photograph of the posted sign as proof of posting and an affidavit as proof of mailing
prior to the public hearing.
If you have any questions, please call Mary Lackner the planner assigned to your case, at 920-
5106.
Sincerely,
Suzan L. Wolff
Administrative Assistant
apz.ph
Attachment 5
Public Hearing Notice Requirements
There are* three forms of notice required by the Aspen Land Use
Regulations, these being notice -by publication in the newspaper,
notice by posting -of the property and notice by mail to
surrounding landowners.. You can determine whether your
application requires notice, and the type of notice it.requires-,
from Table 1, which is attached -to this summary.
Following is a summary of the notice requirements, including
identifying who is responsible for completing the notice.
1. Publication
Publication of notice in a paper of general circulation in the
City of Aspen is- to be done at least 15 days prior to the
hearing. The legal notice will be written by the.Planning Office
Administrative Assistant and we will place the notice in the
paper within the appropriate deadline.
2. Posting
Posting of. a sign . in a conspicuous place- on the property is to .be
done 10-days prior• to the hearing. It is the applicant's
responsibility to obtain -a copy of the sign from the. Planning
Office, to fill it in correctly -and to bring proof (preferably a
photograph) to the hearing that and
place.
3. Mailing
Mailing of notice- is to be -made to all -owners -of property within
300 feet of the -subject development parcel by the applicant. It
is the applicant's responsibility to obtain a copy of the notice
from the Planning --office, to mail it according to the following
standards, and to bring proof to the hearing (in the form of a
signed affidavit) that the mailing took place.
Standards for notice shall be as follows:
a. Any federal agency, state, county or municipal
government service district or .quasi governmental agency
that owns property within 300 feet of the subject property -
must be mailed notice 15 days prior to the hearing.
b. All other landowners within 300 feet of the subject
property must be mailed notice 10 days prior to the hearing,
unless notice is given by hand delivery, in which case it
must be sent 5 days prior to the hearing.
C. Subdivision applications only also require notice by
registered mail to- all surface owners, mineral owners and
lessees of mineral owners of the.subject property.
The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the
current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more
than sixty days prior to the date of public hearing.
j.
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE
OF APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
(Pursuant to Section 6-205.E. of the Land Use Regulations)
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
COUNTY OF PITKIN )
The undersigned, being first duly sworn, deposes and says
as follows:
I, SUNNY VANN, being or representing an Applicant before
the City of Aspen, personally certify that Public Notice of the
application for conditional use approval to install two (2)
satellite dish antennae at 225 North Mill Street Street was given
by 1) posting of notice containing the information required in
Section 6-205.E.2., which posting occurred on September 23, 1994,
in a conspicuous place on the subject property and that the said
sign was posted and visible continuously from that date, and 2)
mailing Notice of said development application to all property
owners within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property,
which mailing occurred on September 23, 1994.
Applicant:
L&B BROAD ASTING, LLC
By
Vann
The foregoing Affida of Public Notice was acknowledged
and signed before me this day of October, 1994, by Sunny
Vann on behalf of L&B BROADC STING, LLC.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires: My Commission expires 9f V198
Not7ry Public
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: KNFO-FM CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW FOR A SATELLITE DISH
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on
Tuesday, October 4, 1994 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 pm before
the Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission, 2nd Floor Meeting Room,
City Hall, 130 S. Galena, Aspen to consider an application
submitted by Moss Limited Liability Company, 225 N. Mill St.,
Aspen, CO, requesting approval of a Conditional Use Review for
satellite dishes for'a new radio station. The property is located
at 225 N. Mill St.; Lots D - I, Block 78, City and Townsite of
Aspen, and an adjoining parcel of land which is part of Tract A,
Aspen Townsite Addition. For further information, contact Kim
Johnson at the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office, 130 S. Galena St.,
Aspen, CO 920-5100.
s/Bruce Kerr, Chairman
Planning and Zoning Commission
YANCO, INC.
715 WEST MAIN STREET
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
WARREN F. RYAN TELEPHONE 303-925-5889
PRESIDENT FACSIMILE 303-925-2408
SUSAN BRUCKER
CONTROLLER
ROLAND PARKER
PROPERTY MANAGER
September 27, 1994
Bruce Kerr, Chairman
Planning and Zoning Commission
Aspen Planing and Zoning Commission
Aspen City Hall
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear Mr. Kerr:
My wife and I received the enclosed Public Notice regarding KNFO-
FM'S Conditional Use Review for a satellite dish on top of their
building at 225 North Mill Street. This letter is written to you
to voice our opinion regarding this request.
Obviously, satellite dishes have no place in Aspen's residential
or commercial core, and we are strongly opposed to these
unsightly additions to the Aspen community. On the other hand,
we would have no opposition whatsoever to the satellite dishes if
the applicant could demonstrate that they would not be visible
from the pedestrian sidewalk or from surrounding neighbors'
views. ,
Thank you for c oxy-sidering our above position.
Sincerely,
Warren F. Ryan
President
WFR/nb
Enclosure
AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE BFOREPOSTING
T
OF A PUBLIC HEARING BE E CITY OF
County of Pitkin }
ss. ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
(Pursuant to S ection 6-205 (E) (3) (b) of the Municipal
State of Colorado } Code)
The undersigned, being first duly sworn, deposes and says as follows:
being or representing an Applicant
g
and Zonin Commission, personally certify that the attached
before the City of Aspen Planning
photograph rapy
hoto h fairly and accurately represents the sign posted as Notice of the public hearing on
this matter in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest
public way) and that the said sign was posted and visible continuously from the
r day re, of - HI -e-- , 1 , to the �D
)efore the hearing date) .
Ap 1 a Signature
Subscribed and sworn to before me this -
day of lQf- r- A 190(/,
bye C) `, /
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL
SEAL. My Commission expires:
--
]N:o'tar Pu is s Signature
Address
i
AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING
0 W. Ma 1I1 Laot)movk
I have complied with the notice requirements of Section 6-
205 (E) (3) (C) of the Aspen Land Use Regulations of the Aspen
Municipal Code 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
on I
STATE OF COLORADO )
) SS
COUNTY OF PITRIN )
The foregoing Affidavit of mailing was signed before me this
day o f� _
s �
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
�U� J ,
Notary bllc 4� .�
f 'l
may.
`�k-L0!1
2735-124-46-
001
B 19 / L A-C
002
B 19/L D-F
003
B 19/L G
004
B 19/L H&I
006
Skandia Condos
Unit A
007
Skandia Condos
Unit B
008
Skandia Condos
Unit C
009
Skandia Condos
Unit D
010
Skandia Condos
Unit E
Seventh & Main Venture
Box 10147
Aspen, CO 81612
Ryanco Partners XXX1
715 West Main St
Aspen, CO 81611
Rob Weien
Subject Property
Susan & Weston Anson
Box 7953
Aspen, CO 81612
Maridee Christopher
8957 E. Pershing Ave
Scottsdale, AZ 85260-7612
Col. Robert B & Lynn B. Piper
3415 Morrison T NW
Washington, DC 20015
Susan Tan
Box 12020
Aspen, CO 81612
Terry End
700 Gillespie St
Aspen, CO 81611
Finser Corp. c/o B. Keon
550 Biltmore Way
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Oil
700 W. Hopkins Condos
Unit 7 Thomas Marshall
300 Riverside Dr.
Aspen, CO 81611
012
700 W. Hopkins Condos
Unit 8
Cheryl Barker Shonk
710 W. Hopkins #8
Aspen, CO 81611
013
700 W. Hopkins Condos
Unit 2 Joan Shapiro-Hykes
710 W. Hopkins #2
Apsen, CO 81611
014
700 W. Hopkins Condos
Unit 13 Sheilah Judith Bryan
Box 976
Aspen, CO 81612
015
700 W. Hopkins Condos
Unit 9 Gale M. Parker
Box 1490
Apsen, CO 81612
016
700 W. Hopkins Condos
Unit 14 Merle Ellen Jablin
Box 778
Aspen, CO 81612
017
700 W. Hopkins Condos
Unit 11 Brian & Suzanne O'Neil
11995 SW 222 St.
Maimi, FL 33170
018
700 W. Hopkins Condos
Unit 4 John W. Taylor
31050 W. Tompson Ln.
Hartland, WI 53029
019
700 W. Hopkins Condos
Unit 1 Suzanah V.K. Reid
Box 10443
Aspen, CO 81612
020
700 W. Hopkins Condos
Unit 10 Ted Lenio
710 W. Hopkins #10
Aspen, CO 81612
021
700 W. Hopkins Condos
Unit 15 Edgar F. Barber
Box 9678
Aspen, CO 81612
022
700 W. Hopkins Condos
Unit 12 Jean T. & Janice M. Schubert
101 E. Cooper
Aspen, CO 81611
023
700 W. Hopkins Condos
Unit 3 Nancy J. Haddad
Box 11453
Aspen, CO 81612
024
700 W. Hopkins Condos
Unit 6 Christine N. & Robert A. Lester
Box 9696
Aspen, CO 81612
025
700 W. Hopkins Condos
Unit 5 Kimberly Dawn Daily
10144 Tabor St #208
Los Angeles, CA 90034
2735-124-48-
001
B 25/1, A I.F. Associates
111 W. Washington #1505
Chicago, IL 60602
003
B25/L E-G Dan B. & Lynn Levinson
Box 2012
Aspen, CO 81612
008
B25/L O&P Sheri & Robert Hirschfield
5895 SW 91st St
Miami, FL 33196
O10
B25/L B
Robert & Elizabeth Coscarello
200 W. 60th St Apt 35C
New York, New York 10023
020
617 Main Prof Bldg.
Unit A
Debbie Klein
546 McSkimming
Aspen, CO 81611
021
617 Main Prof Bldg
Unit B
Jim Iglehart
610W.Main St
Aspen, CO 81611
022
617 Main Prof Bldg
Unit C
Robert & Phyllis & Doug Throm
617W.Main St
Aspen, CO 81611
023
617 Main Prof Bldg
Unit D
Michaele S. Dundond & David A. Borkenhagen
Box 2225
Aspen, CO 81612
024
617 Main Prof Bldg
Unit E
Donald L. Young
617 W. Main St.
Aspen, CO 81612
025/026
617 Main Prof Bldg
Unit F&G
Richard E. Rudolph
Box 3080
Carefree, AZ 85377
027
617 Main Prof Bldg
Unit H
Douglas P. Allen
600 E. Hopkins Suite 305
Aspen, CO 81611
028/029
617 Main Prof Bldg
Unit I&L
Patricia J. Straight Family Trust
617 W. Main St. #200
Aspen, CO 81611
520
B 25/L M&N
Don McGill Inc. A Texas Corp.
11800 Old Katy Rd.
Houston, TX 77079
528
B 25/ L K&L
Alfred P. & Laralee S . West Jr.
12 Greenbrair Lane,
Paoli, PA 19301
2735-124-44-
- 001
B 24/L A-C
Elizabeth S . & David Kruiderier
3409 Southern Hills Dr.
Des Moines, IA 50321
002
B 24/L D-F
006
B 24/L O&P
008
B 24/L N
805
B 24/L M
2735-124-45-
001
B 18/L A&B
002
B 18/L E&F
003
B 18/ L G-I
004
B 18/ L M-P
005
B 18/ L Q
006
B 18/ L S
008
B 18/ L C&D
Anne S. Feld
1700 Pacific Ave.
Dallas, TX 75201
William A. Levin
805 3rd Ave 14th Floor
New York, NY 10022
William Lentz Jr.
Box 1098
Lincolnton, NC 28092
Aspen Mountain Rescue
630 W. Main St.
Aspen, CO 81611
Jeffery T. & Andrew C. Dolan
170 Sandy Pond Rd.
Lincoln, MA 01773
Graeme Means
Box 4956
Aspen, CO 81611
Charles L. Hall & Nancy W. Tate
Box 1819
Aspen, CO 81611
Eleanor B. & William D. & Event W. Biggs
1036 Craigland Ct.
Knoxville, TN 37919
Susan Scott & Joseph B. Krabacher
201 N. Mill Street Suite 201
Aspen, CO 81611
Stape Ltd. Co.
533 E. Hopkins
Aspen, CO 81611
Nancy Jane Mangham
9021 Dickson Rd.
Fort Worth, TX 76179
010
B 18/ L K&L Christian Science Society
734 W. Main St.
Aspen, CO 81611
2735-123-09-
005
B 12/ L Q-S Richard E. & Lois N. Long
Box 1314
Aspen, CO 81611
2735-123-29-
001
B 13/L E-I Sandunes Ltd a Tennessee Ltd. Partnership
4823 Old Kingston Pike Suite140
Knoxville, TN 37919
2735-123-15-
002
Adams Lot 2 Western Investment Unlimited
17800 W. Capitol Dr.
Brookfield, WI 53045
2735-124-47-
B 24/L K&L
Little Victorians
001
Litrle Victorians
Unit 1
Kim Amos Koepp
Box 3647
Aspen, CO 81611,
002
Little Victorians
Unit 2
Sherie Matilda Le Blanc
634 W. Main #2
Apsen, CO 81611
003,004,005,007
Little Victorians
Units 3,4,5,7 Burton D & Kathleen W. Olshan
5408 Old Leeds Rd.
Birmingham, AL 35210
006
Little Vistorians
Unit 6 Mary E. Hayes
209 E. B leeker St.
Aspen, CO 81611
008
Little Victorians
Unit 8 Institute for Env. Studies
Box 7012
Snowmass Village, CO 81615
2735-124-94-
001
002
2735-124-00-
001
Starford Properties c/o William Keon
550 Biltmore Way 9th Floor
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Shadow Mounatin Corp.
c/o Oates Hughes & Knezevich
533 E. Hopkins
Aspen, CO 81611
Hans R. Gramiger
Box 67
Apsen, CO 81612
2735-124-62-
West Hopkins Affordable Housing
001
West Hopkins
Unit Al Linda Lee Blomquist & Kurt Ian Beereboom
724 W. Hopkins
Apsen, CO 81611
002
West Hopkins
Unit A2 Nikifor Budsey & Susan Wabiszewski
Box 3923
Aspen, CO 81612
003
West Hopkins
Unit A3 Mark Pearson & Laura B. Holmes
732 W. Hopkins
Aspen, CO 81611
004
West Hopkins
Unit A4
Robert M. & Wendy S. Nevins
Box 11482
Aspen, CO 81612
005
West Hopkins
Unit B 1
Jeffery T. &Kelley J. Hanle
126 S. 7th St.
Aspen, CO 81611
006
West Hopkins
Unit B2
Mary E. Wolfer
126 S. 7th Street
Aspen, CO 81611
007
West Hopkins
Unit B3
Benjamin H. Dodge & Nancee L. Holobaugh
Box 9882
Aspen, CO 81612
008
West Hopkins
Unit B4 Danny Abbott
Box 2265
Aspen, CO 81612
009
West Hopkins
Unit Cl Mia Valley
740 W. Hopkins
Aspen, CO 81611
O10
West Hopkins
- Unit C2
Nancy E. Lavigne
Box 1901
Aspen, CO 81612
O11
West Hopkins
Unit C3
Glenda C. Knight
Box 328
Snowmass, CO 81654