HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.19941101
AGENDA
==--=============================
ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
November 1, 1994, Tuesday
4:30 P.M.
2nd Floor Meeting Room
city Hall
-
==========================
I. COMMENTS
Commissioners
Planning Staff
Public
II. MINUTES
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. 205 W. Main st. Conditional Use Review for an
Accessory Dwelling Unit, Mary Lackner
B. 624 E. Hopkins GMQS Allotment & Special Review, Kim
Johnson
IV. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Aspen Youth Center SPA Anlendment, Leslie Lamont
(continued from September 25)
V. ADJOURN
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Suzanne Wolff, Administrative Assistant
RE: Upcoming Agendas
DATE: November 1, 1994
Overlay Special Review - November 2
Regular Meeting - November 22
303 E. Main St. GMQS Exemption, Special Review, View Plane (KJ)
Chesapeake Bagel Conditional Use Review (KJ)
Ajax Tavern/Little Nell SPA Amendment (KJ)
204 E. Durant PUD Variance (ML)
Langley Subdivision, Rezoning & Special Review (LL)
Allen Conditional Use Review for an ADU (LL)
Overlay Special Review - November 29
December 5, 12:00 PM - City Council Brown Bag Lunch
Small Lodge Discussion
Regular Meeting - December 6
Kraut Property Special Review Amendment (LL)
Ritz/City Conditional Use Review for Commercial Parking (KJ)
a.nex
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Mary Lackner, Planner
RE: Chisholm Conditional Use for an Accessory Dwelling Unit -
Public Hearing
DATE: November 1, 1994
SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends approval of the Chisholm
620 sq.ft. accessory dwelling unit with conditions.
APPLICANT: Edith, Heather and Karen Chisholm own the parcel. They
are represented by Gerd Zeller.
LOCATION: 205 West Main Street. Block 52, Lots H and I, City and
Townsite of Aspen.
ZONING: The 6,000 sq.ft. parcel is zoned Office.
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The applicant requests Conditional Use
approval to convert the basement of an existing residence to an
accessory dwelling unit. The conversion of the applicant's present
unfinished basement to an accessory dwelling unit is being provided
voluntarily. A copy of the floor plan and site plan are included
in Exhibit "A".
REFERRAL COMMENTS: Comments from the Housing Office are included
as Exhibit "B" and Engineering comments Exhibit "C".
STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant has received HPC approval to
construct the stairway and window wells for the basement unit.
These improvements are presently being made to the residence.
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 mixed
single family residences, office buildings, and lodges. The
appearance of this residence will remain compatible with the
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: There is no requirement for off-street parking to be
provided with an accessory dwelling unit. The applicant is not
providing an off-street parking space.
Trash areas will need to be designated on the final plan.
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.
D. There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the
conditional use including but not limited to roads, potable
water, sever, 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 accessory dwelling unit.
E. The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the
incremental need for increased employees generated by the
conditional use; and
Response: 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.
2
IPA
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Planning staff recommends approval of the
Chisholm Conditional Use for an approximately 620 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
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. A minimum of a two -burner stove with oven, standard sink, and
6-cubic foot refrigerator plus freezer shall be provided in
the accessory dwelling unit.
5. 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
6. 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.
7. Based on the comments submitted by the Engineering Department
in their referral memo dated October 19, 1994 the applicant
shall comply with the following:
a. The final development plan shall indicate a trash area
out the public right-of-way.
b. 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).
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
15
conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other
conditions.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the Conditional Use for a
620 sq. ft. accessory dwelling unit for the Chisholm property at 205
West Main Street, subject to the conditions recommended in the
Planning Office memo dated November 1, 1994."
Exhibits:
"A" - Application Information
"B" - Housing Office memo
"C" - Engineering referral memo
4
ki
Exhibit A
Aspen, CO 81611
October 6, 1994
To Whom It May Concern:
The proposed Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) will be located in
the basement of our private existing residence located at
205 West Main Street, or legal description: East 15' of Lot G
and all of Lots H and I in Block 52 in the City and Townsite
of Aspen.
The present unfinished basement (921 sq. ft.) is being used as
a combination family -recreation room, a maintenance/utility
room and storage area.
The proposed (ADU) will consist of a 1-bedroom unit to* be
occupied per Housing Authority Regulations.
Sincerely,
�thEdS . Chisholm
04
cc
.
�s E u t2 y 7r' G
Ic
�•: �.Y .� .; %. yyt3• �FTH SIR w w r f, �. N= ,l.•
F uw
„: �e ,F r, : •fir } — W _ ¢ ui
W
ui
UJ
ui
►" ^� o �, U H STREET
A,—
:.in
�
' STREET THIRp-116
Ad
Lo
�. 'V. -5 STREET
"�+-•.NLJ_ 8 y- SECOND :+,1
oc
00,
rAM R
FIRST STREET �` •' - �''+• =� ' •<1
�•..�•,� i S 3'•'�' r� ,''t-..L ='� � c' �a r i. � ..,.i f-rti - �' -,, �4s.+..
���a••yyi�''-. r _ -t _ _ ,�`_• •� �r � iyy � � J :� { j '� Zr. +.Z� � ;:i � � "p� +/ -
3' ® 4 W
13381S H�SIWdbJM ��. ' T
^! r '�' Ci►Z .r r' _' — __ f" _ 1- .:r t� � .. - ,. , f, t S .,. r- �`^ h� '�• f -� 'a•t , •�%•
• _ _ ^"'' to .. ,46
y 'w _ �-.'•A•., - ,,, _ RW Q _ d= 3Y va�a i%��� Y'' r}, S tt��.•I�. v ; >
`^ �"�dr •• 7` �` m : _ s �Qy (, Q �) i►t> n. j'.�i'1!r} ,� `r� Aa \-1.
Ila7 .� ' .� + �— `fit• z = + i. n, ? '� �j•yt}4, r,N h"!! `y t �'�
133d1S N3dSb�t 1i a •:1, �iyt ry it`h yrl�
W W '� �? , r nlr tea• t ^err
�L - �' rt.•j r.- j"'•r' .il ^r 2 tl, .1� e W - Z A i . -te {". ''t •_ _Ll +r*': 's
)T `-�l`" '"i•-••�. - Y '�'. �; `a O+< 'y� W r; :ring : ;�y� a r'i�.� , v�t';�,�•��. -? 7,
Ci
133d1S H�EivN 0 ®* �;' `��` _ ;�' 'fit : + �• ,v
At-
. —tea �.. rrY Q .' -. ',tiyi''.Or•Oi. 'i �"r•�•n,Y-�.�•
�,� _ -' rl • :�'� '•e` i Y+'s -M e j,'t�t. aR,,m Ny,� a,�.'L`,•�� ,� Y.-L�'�- r-�'"j'.?•
1 �` .>- = •_ �47�" _ rri�f . _. O , �k 5 7 r S t�, �K3', .�r :: �
dt't
�� :-.�. +.� � _ -. - . t . .: �•' � `a � .`1� }. w .,M. .a. M�
,n rti '• ;1 !'=•'�- _ r• , : • _ • -.• 0 ,rT�,'� ' r �t O ti t++ H ,,i .. c A i � �� l ♦=�' +► .ice y _ �+ :i ��+, 'i' 1 � 33ajS D � � ,j1 "\y'Y•'� . t � . t .i ,� to �%- y {. far •�•-' rr C :�Il lf, Tl Do .'•,
,. _ .lN ��_,._,'Z -s_ - .. - ,'� p �t.... i�•,�� 2�+�:•r•r s'i1 'y,: t•�'j+•'' ,'•ii `' 1 Q�
� .. � �� w�•-•asv .� `�^ fr � �' aa• '+ �� a! . � '�y� �1- "t�{j...y ".�' � n � V.� •'�' Y'T ♦ , 1 � ` yr
'► i, 'I-ALI&
•' o ..�+ .. : Yti f r s�C'y.-�" 'Q 7!+, •3,r '�'� : , � ';... - •i.,'j.'; ,' t jD'. .'..2'•',
410
Yo
y - - W N,'. i�y'�.4-�•' r+ 3r� ,{ ��� - ' '!7�'!_ 4 �� i y;.: ," t'vi'',�`•' . y •... J way.
-,�. .•. Z 'I .rr.a ,:C. '"' �::. '�.i.�' t' :fir E','f.. -''� •c' .-
' r'.` {!• .e1R- _ - z W �'� v r ` t r a•r �''-• `t �r4ti�f� �• .•,,, •�y,,,- ' r y', . •r, 4
�. s �. J � 1� �. r !i � _ � '-2 . i � a- `7 1 �"R i, • + - r : t . F .f -:� 'i �'' (, ♦ j �'bF; � •''{� -a
T `gju+t� b �E 1 }hJ i '�'' jTa1 0 •C if`„�.
4 •A 't�'�` . 2� Fes•,- "r. , �+� . � d
,^`SSG". �.,.._ 13 �,f �-.�� �- $ 'aft >•'.. �;/ # �, �°• � �;�„ . ¢ S �° z''�
�vf , ♦!. 3e1� A�r.. •,�- 4 �'i�� .�•y,' �t•1 =r. 1I '�' Jt-. +'�
► .'c 7 !t 4 a .',•' 'r '�,,s. ��i".'. , � •�-:• �:.:5. � r:, M�'t �! '''c.IS Tl' -'fit+, 1. ' u',�a_ `Y
Ar9r;;ti
'. •.�. ?. .� R,r - •.-;r, ...Y r yW7 �"'rl. r. t.� �► t• (,�a ri��-�'i �t ?' � il� / `"`il �•. '`i t t• , `
,i '� . !_L �_ 1% ,a' r t. -b • •..' . ,y: Q, -` - Z. ,.L.,:',
UA
IA
''- _•q� ,a.e--rie-',;,� j•{-'. �fr'T 3`•,''� vVS`.: CM;..il'' =It?r'.." , :(�yt y, !,i •. ,il�• •"t- �' •.
"1•. � ~} � ''vy..: "1_ 1 •i:.'.x:5. ;t./,�,);� •r %} { W ,>•�. +.rife• •R'y 'r�}''r .f,,.
.Qy' "=ate" •_ ` + ' -a -`�r= ��V1g x.t" I'� `' !►,.. ••` - .4w i• " „ .� f ,,t
F y. -. rya'. i, R '1` �;,. wy, ' f`• (��r 1r.
-- �•-� .nr !., � .._ ��.�. � ���b�'�'q ^�� � T,�.II � ' •; '�. �a ���yfr�tlq^. ,�t. �f ,�, .�,��� �• I (' �i -' e•ga '�i
•� • f=,, R' - �' `` ,). VQi�'! f`�r r al C' ?JVL:'1't+z S ,. tR ,:e' ti r t, - b
�` i s 1"+i, :} c ,':� 3' �"Xr _ -.fir • 'A.
i�•�� �s ?�� . • �' . r.
r, 1
t. o+' h"• �,� rid.. _ _ '%.�,�> 13 •`i. Y~i �'.� ,�4 .}�F:a-�v.�..ry0?r,:i�.�r �la`i�'`.r.••. ,t :f• �
$ �� r �.y* _ a• t 1 = y�� tyywt ♦�\0 XAt�' ♦ tr. j r J: L o'� ,
J^ v*�r.�' ` v►..� f, � � ,.t i.Y t• 4 .1y� Yf `r, �r ,�^:.'41 , + t��,n.7F, t-� 7 ��y r r .q: i,
IAP
.. _ r. ,., • �.: .• � ! � _ s • • S� - .,r, a �'�,► • t% v � �
al _ '' ,T�s'" M-`�'' ,. � fi • j ,* $` tr � .:�� ni Tarr• D , ,
t r t '� ,4%.; 1 1, t'.• ' fi
t 3�► , �..} ,•, _ �.(:� %$ t' 1fi�.t. ?I :. :ark. "4n �.c''
i - �s�'•- . __AL,9" .} %y , ;• i',: ♦�.ttt� r A` . r
i'4jk
d, w'
Tr �
��� , � .,�.�(`.��.. �T0.'W 1 �.dt?, r.�: �� ••L%r ve''. ���.. ��-:11'A'�?' ���,..�. .�+` I, �.. •,i :x'.•�'- `-'s �?r ��!�+•� ,O - ,
WITNESS CIORNER SET S/G'STEEL ROD WITH
lTS�O! 11 E PLASTIC CAP MARKED
2.361 'NUETTIVEll, 131416 WC" N 75' 09'1 ib
(iS.) (30')
0
/Ta[r ll{MT
SET °/!" STEEL HOC WITH
PLASTIC CAP MARKED
75.00' "fUETTNER 131sG wC'
(30)
.
r
WITNESS CORNER
000 F[NCf
S 73.0!'.11" E 0.46'
CONCRETE
.
DRIVEWAY
ENCROACHMENTX
•
o
EAST 13'
LOT G LOT N
lo{.la
LOT 2
{r[r
PORCH
99.61
11,
AT
Mt*
I S.O{') '
24.{'
►RO►OSEO-0"1
W IT
1 o
_
_. WEST IS 0►
WINDOW WELLI
LOT - G..`
#
O
;
! !TORT
C
(
HOUSE WITH
—�
n
°ASEMENT
1 1elt =
29.21
NJ
•
C
1
i
99.16
OL 1. K
r
..�..
f
Y[1[II
{f.{[
M
IlLap ome
rV
DECK
129.6,
•
• SPRUCE i
0
S►RUCEj SPRUCE
IOO.a4
tls') (30') t3o') {..{o
FOUND PLASTIC CAP S 73. 0!'11"E 73.00'
PROP. CORNER MON leo.l{ ELE►HONE SET 3/!'STEEL ROD WITH
MARKED "LINES IN SPACE PEDESTAL PLASTIC CAP MARKED
fUETTNER 13166
0.15' Of, PROP, CORNER
•LocK all ALLEY
21.01' ALLEY, RECORO RIGHT—OF—WAY
FOUND PLASTIC CAP !GALE
PROP. CORNER MON. _ ..._,
L
X
1Ll
7
LH
11 t
C L 0 S - 7
L14
II
(40 Cl t
2f
040
Exhibit B
[UT 1 u � ::_► _61iiTi
To: Mary Lackner, Planning Office
From: Chuck Roth, Engineering Department eiz-1,
Date: October 19, 1994
Re: Chisholm Conditional Use for an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU)
(205 West Main Street; E. 15' Lot G, & H , I, Block 52, OAT; Parcel ID No. 2735-124-
54-003)
Having reviewed the above referenced application, and having made a site inspection, the
Engineering Department has the following comments:
1. Site Drainage - One of the considerations of a development application for conditional
use is that there are adequate public facilities to service the use. One public facility that
is inadequate is the City street storm drainage system. The new development plan must
provide for no more than historic flows to leave the ' site. Any increase to historic storm
run-off must be maintained on site. There is sufficient lawn and landscaped area to
percolate roof drains. The final development plan must indicate storm runoff, and
foundation drains if applicable, provisions . No drainage may be conveyed to the public
rights -of -way of the alley, First Street or Main Street.
2. Sidewalk. Curb and Gutter - The Main Street Sidewalk and Street Corner Handicap
Ramp Project will be installing sidewalk on the Main Street frontage and handicap ramps
at the corner. The existing curb and gutter is in satisfactory condition.
3. Driveway - I met with the applicant. There was some interest in a driveway from
Main Street similar to the adjacent property. Section 19-101(f) does not permit driveways
entering Highway 82. Apparently the adjacent property may have constructed a driveway
prior to the ordinance.
The applicant has a City permit for a driveway on First Street. The permit is not
clear, and the use is a use that is not permitted today, which is parking cars on the public
right-of-way. If the property is ever fully redeveloped, any parking needs must be
provided on the private property.
M
Page 2
Chisholm Accessory Dwelling Unit
October 19, 1994
4. Parking - A parking space is not required for an ADU. The applicant is not interested
in providing a parking space on the property, accessing from the alley, because of the
historic nature of the lot.
5. Trash - The final development plan must indicate a trash area out of the alley public
Tight -of -way. I discussed with the applicant recessing the existing trash shed into a section
of fence that will be rebuilt in the spring such that trash collection can still be provided
from the alley without entering the property.
6. Utilities - Any new surface utility needs for pedestals or other facilities must be
installed on an easement provided by the applicant and not in the public right-of-way.
7. Work in the Public Rig t-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 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 city
streets department (920-5130).
cc: Cris Caruso
Edith Chisholm, 205 W. Main St.
M94 S
\11
Exhibit C
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mary Lackner, Planning Office
FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing Office
DATE: October 19, 1994
RE: Chisholm Conditional Use Review for an Accessory Dwelling
Unit
Parcel ID No. 2735-124-54-003
The Housing Office recommends approval for the requested accessory
dwelling unit based on the following conditions:
Accessory dwelling units shall contain not less than three hundred (300) square feet of allowable
floor area and not more than seven hundred (700) square feet of allowable floor area. The unit shall
be deed restricted, meeting 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.
The application shows the unit to be approximately 619 square feet.
The actual calculation of the net liveable square footage, as
def fined by the Housing Of f ice Guidelines, will to be provided when
the applicant applies for a building permit. This is to be located
in the basement of the principal residence.
This unit needs to be a completely private unit, therefore, the
stairwell entering the unit must enter through the outside and not
through the principal residence. The plans did not show if this
was the case. All the windows shown on the plans must remain as
such for light to enter into the unit and for another means of
egress.
The kitchen must be built to the following specifications:
Kitchen - For Accessory Dwelling Units and Caretaker Dwelling Units, a minimum of a two -burner
stove with oven, standard sink, and a 6-cubic foot refrigerator plus freezer.
Before the applicant can receive building permit approval, the
applicant must provide to the Housing Office a signed and recorded
Deed Restriction, which can be obtained from the Housing Office.
The Housing Office must have the recorded book and page number
prior to building permit approval.
\word\referral\chish.adu
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner
RE: 624 E. Hopkins 1994 Commercial Growth Management Scoring
in the C-1 Commercial Zone District, Special Reviews for
Reduction of Trash/Utility Area and Parking (Public
Hearing)
DATE: November 1, 1994
SUMMARY: This application seeks a Commercial GMP allocation for
2,700 sq. ft. of net leasable space for development on a 4,500
square foot parcel in the C-1 Commercial zone district. There are
no other applications for commercial allocation in 1994.
In an initial scoring by Planning staff, the project meets minimum
scoring thresholds.
The applicant also requests Special Review for reduction of both
trash/utility area and parking. Staff recommends approval of
Special Review for trash/utility area reduction with conditions.
This would eliminate the need for parking reduction. The
Commission shall also review and forward to Council a
recommendation regarding the cash -in -lieu method by which the
applicant is mitigating for affordable housing.
Staff suggests that the Commission first consider the project's
request for Special Reviews, then begin the scoring process. Blank
scoresheets will be available at the meeting.
APPLICANT: MHS Partners, Ltd. and Richard Corriere, represented
by Kim Weil, Bill Poss and Associates, 1.,C.
LOCATION: 624 E. Hopkins Ave. (Lot Q and 1/2 of Lot R. Block 98,
Townsite of Aspen).
ZONING: C-1
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The applicant seeks a Growth Management
allotment for 2,700 sq. ft. of net leasable sq. ft. within a
proposed 3,460 s.f. building. The intent is that Poss and
Associates will relocate their architecture firm to this
development.
A Special Review approval is sought to reduce the required
trash/utility service area along the alley from the required 10
feet deep by 20 feet wide, to 10 feet deep by it feet wide (per
Engineering's discussion with the applicant). The application also
d
requests Special Review for parking reduction in case the
trash/utility Special Review is not granted. The applicant seeks
from City Council vested development rights for a period of three
years and approval of the housing mitigation program which consists
of cash -in -lieu payment for 5.67 employees (note that this figure
is disputed by the Housing Office). Please refer to the complete
application package.
PROCESS: It is suggested that the Planning Commission first review
the project's requested Special Reviews as these are critical to
the continuance of the development. If Special Reviews are
approved, the Commission shall score the project using the
criteria/point system established in the land use regulations for
commercial projects. Staff has scored the proposal and submits
this score to the Commission (Exhibit "A"). The Commission may
elect to accept staff's score as their own.
If the Commission finds that the project meets minimum point
thresholds, it will be forwarded to the City Council for GMP
allocation of net leasable area and approval of the housing
mitigation package and vested property rights.
REFERRAL COMMENTS: All referral agency comments are included as
Attachment "B".
Electric: Bill Early states that three phase power is available
at this location. A new transformer may be necessary to service
an increased load. However, no load information was presented in
the application so service needs of the new load are only an
estimate. The applicant shall pay for.any upgrades to the system
and must provide a transformer location on the site if one is
needed.
Engineering: Chuck Roth comments that the storm run-off mitigation
proposed meets Code requirements. The trash storage reduction is
acceptable with the condition that if building occupants change and
require increased dumpsters, the owner will increase the size of
the area and reduce parking upon approval of Special Review.
Sidewalk installation is required of the applicant prior to
issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy.
The applicants shall agree to join any future improvement dis-
tricts which may be formed for the purpose of constructing
improvements in the public right-of-way.
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.
Fire Marshall: Ed Van Walraven states that the project must comply
2
11
with all local fire codes and requirements.
HPC: This proposal has received full HPC approval as a residence.
If an amendment is necessary for any exterior changes including a
rooftop elevator projection, it must be reviewed by HPC.
Housing Office: Cindy Christensen forwarded comments. The
applicants intend to mitigate for 60% of the employees generated.
However, they calculated their employee generation at the low end
of the range for the C-1 zone which is 3.5 to 5.25 persons per
1,000 square feet of net leasable area. We believe that the mid-
point of this range (4.375 persons/1,000 s.f.) is more appropriate
for the architect's use or general office use. This raises the
gross employee generation to 11.81 persons. 60 percent of this
figure is 7.09 employees, the minimum mitigation requirement.
The Housing Board's policy in the Affordable Housing Guidelines
establishes the following preference hierarchy:
1) On -site Housing
2) Off -site Housing, including buydown concept
3) Cash-in-lieu/land-in-lieu
The applicants request that their housing mitigation be cash -in -
lieu at the Category 3 level. The Housing Office proposes that if
cash -in -lieu is accepted, the figure should be an average between
the Category 2 and Category 3 amounts, or $42,500 per person for
a total of $301,325 at current cash -in -lieu amounts.
Parks: The applicant shall protect the existing trees during
construction by erecting barricade fencing at the driplines of the
trees prior to any construction activity. If changes are proposed
in the right-of-way landscaping, the Parks Department must approve
the landscaping plan.
Sanitation District: Bruce Matherly states that adequate line and
treatment capacity is available to service this project. The
project will be charged a prorated share of the cost of
improvements for downstream constraints in the Galena Street line.
Total connection costs can be estimated once detailed plans are
submitted and a tap permit is completed.
Environmental Health: The project is not expected to negatively
impact air quality in the non -attainment area. Construction noise
may be a problem - construction may only occur between lam and
lopm.
STAFF COMMENTS: There is an annual allocation of 8,000 s.f. of
commercial area available for growth management competition. No
other applications were submitted for 1994.
3
This project received extensive design review by the Historic
Preservation Committee a few years ago prior to the demolition of
the residence which occupied the parcel. At that time, the new
structure was to be a single family home. The replacement of one
residential unit for another did not have to go through growth
management competition. Since the structure is now seeking to be
commercial space, it must receive a growth management allotment by
City Council after scoring by the Commission.
Special Reviews: Trash/utility area required by the Code for the
C-1 zone must be a minimum of 20 feet in length, parallel to the
alley, and at least 10 feet deep. The project site is 45 feet
wide, and the applicant desires to accommodate as much parking on -
site as possible. A 20 foot wide trash area would eliminate two
of the four parking spaces that the project requires.
Pursuant to Section 24-7-404 C. a Special Review for reduction of
the dimensions of a utility/trash service area shall be approved
only if:
1. There is a demonstration that given the nature of the
potential uses of the building and its total square
footage, the utility/trash service area proposed to be
provided will be adequate.
2. Access to the utility/trash service area is adequate.
3. Measures are provided for enclosing trash bins and making
them easily movable by trash personnel.
4. When appropriate, provisions for trash compaction are
provided by the proposed development and measures are
taken to encourage trash compaction by other developments
on the block.
5. The area for public utility placement and maintenance is
adequate and safe for the placement of utilities.
6. Adequate provisions are incorporated to ensure the
construction of the access area.
The applicant has discussed the issue with the City engineering
staff and determined that a trash area it feet wide would still
allow four parking spaces, trash space and utility functions. As
the proposed use is office and the trash needs of office space is
not as great as restaurant use, staff supports the request to
reduce the area to 11 feet in width and 10 feet in depth, with the
condition that no restaurants may occupy the structure without
providing additional trash/utility space pursuant to special review
by the P&Z.
Parking Reduction / Cash -in -lieu The C-1 zone requires 1.5 parking
4
spaces per 1,000 s.f. of net leasable area. This project proposes
2,700 s.f. of net leasable for a parking requirement of 4.05
spaces. As discussed above, if the Commission approves the
reduction of trash/utility area, this project can place 4 of the
4.05 required parking spaces on the property. The fractional
parking space may be provided in cash ($750.00) by the applicant
rather than providing an entire fifth space. This allowance was
recently created by a text amendment within Ordinance 56, 1994.
If the Commission does not grant the trash/utility reduction..
Section 24-7-404 B. allows the Commission to grant a reduction of
required off-street parking. If parking is provided via a payment -
in -lieu, the applicant shall make a one time payment to the city
in the amount of $15,000 per space. The applicant shall
demonstrate that the parking needs of the residents, customers,
guests and employees of the project have been met, taking into
account potential uses of the parcel, the projected traffic
generation of the project, the projected impacts onto the on -
street parking of the neighborhood, its proximity to mass transit
routes and the downtown area, and any special services, such as
vans, provided for residents, guests and employees.
In determining whether to accept mitigation or whether to require
that the parking be provided on -site, the Commission shall take
into consideration the practical ability to place parking on -site,
whether parking needs of the development have been adequately met
on -site, and whether the City has [plans for) a parking facility
which meet the needs of the development and the community than
would location of the parking on -site.
Response: The Planning Office does not recommend a reduction of
parking on this site for the following reasons:
1. The community is experiencing critical parking needs in the core
area and surrounding commercial and residential areas. An
extensive paid parking program will begin this winter. Each site
should construct as much parking for its own use as possible.
2. The Engineering staff has considered the trash area reduction
and finds that the reduced space can meet the building's office
needs without reducing on -site parking.
Growth Management Staff Score: Planning staff jointly reviewed the
project pursuant to the scoring criteria contained in Section 24-
8-106 F. of the land use regulations. The Planning Office forwards
the following recommended score for the 624 E. Hopkins Commercial
GMP project:
Scoring Minimum
5
Categories
1) Quality of Design
2) Public Facilities
and Services
3) Affordable Housing
1) Combined 1 & 2
Threshold Points
7.2 (40%) 12
4 (40%) 5
10 (60%) 10
27
16.8 (60%)
17
Pursuant to Section 24-8-106 F.(5) to be eligible for an
allocation, a development application shall be required to meet the
thresholds of each category and a combined threshold for categories
1 & 2. Individual and combined categories have been met as shown
in the table above. The Commission may accept staff's score or do
its own scoring procedure. Blank score sheets will be available
at the meeting.
Affordable Housing - The project is proposing to meet their
affordable housing mitigation by paying cash -in -lieu for 60% of the
employees generated. The Commission shall make a recommendation
to the Council with regard to the method by which an applicant
calculates employee generation, and how the mitigation will be
accomplished. As mentioned by the Housing Office,, the project
generation is expected to be higher than the application presents.
The Housing Office made the determination that 4.375 employees per
1,000 s.f. will be generated rather than 3.5 per 1,000 s.f. The
range established for the C-1 zone is 3.5 to 5.25 employees per
1,000 s.f. of net leasable area.
Also, the Housing Office believes that the employees generated by
an off ice use will be a mix of Category 2 and Category 3 employees
rather than all Category 3 as stated in the application.
Staff recognizes that the applicant is proposing all cash
mitigation because they are trying to work within a ready -approved
building shell. The HPC approved this size and design because of
its compatibility with the surrounding buildings and neighborhood.
To incorporate affordable housing within this structure will
effectively eliminate its commercial viability. The Council and
Housing Office have an established priority to acquire actual
housing units through the growth management process. If the site
cannot realistically handle housing, the applicant should be
expected to look for housing units in Aspen to buy and deed
restrict at Category 2 and 3.
6
V
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends approval of
Special Review for reduction of trash/utility area per the
Engineering Department's dimensions of 10 feet deep by it feet
wide. The Planning Office also recommends approval of a threshold
score for GMP allocation. The following are recommended conditions
for this project:
1. The two trees that are to be preserved on -site shall be
protected by sturdy barricade fencing at the drip lines.
Debris and excavation material shall not be stockpiled under
the trees.
2. The applicant shall submit an application for electric service
providing load information for review by the Electric
Department prior to issuance of any building permits.
3. The applicant shall agree to join any future improvement dis-
tricts which may be formed for the purpose of constructing
improvements in the public right-of-way.
4. 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.
5. No restaurants shall occupy the structure without providing
additional trash/utility space pursuant to special review by
the Planning and Zoning Commission."
6. All material representations made by the applicant in the
application and during public meetings with the Planning and
Zoning Commission and City Council shall be adhered to and
considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended
by other conditions.
RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: "I move to approve the Special Review for the
reduction in trash/utility area floor area for a space 10 feet deep
by 11 feet wide with the conditions recommended in the Planning
Office memo dated November 1, 1994."
"I move to score the 624 E. Hopkins Commercial Growth Management
project at points, finding that required thresholds have been
met for growth management allocation."
additionally:
"I move that City Council accept a housing mitigation package which
addresses the Housing Office's concerns that the minimum threshold
employee generation is 7.06 persons and that the Category level be
a mix of Category 2 and Category 3 employees. The applicant's
affordable housing package must contain the acquisition of dwelling
7
units in Aspen to deed restrict prior to the issuance of any
building permits."
Application Booklet
Exhibits:
"A" - Planning Staff Scoring Sheet / Recommended Score
"B" - Complete Referral Memos
8
I
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
EXHIBIT � APPROVED r
19 BY RESOLUTION
CITY OF ASPEN
COMMERCIAL/OFFICE GROWTH MANAGEMENT SCORE SHEET
PROJECT: 624 E. Hopkins DATE: November 1, 1994
1. QUALITY OF DESIGN (maximum 18 points). Each development
application shall be rated based on the quality of the
exterior of its buildings and site design and assigned points
according to the following standards and considerations:
0 -- A totally deficient design;
1 -- A major design flaw;
2 -- An acceptable (but standard) design; or
3 -- An excellent design.
The following features shall be rated accordingly:
(a) ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN (maximum 3 points). Considering the
compatibility of the proposed development (in terms of scale,
siting, massing, height, and building materials) with existing
neighboring developments.
RATING: 2.75
COMMENTS: Staff has found that there is good compatibility with
the adjacent modern structures. The HPC has made Conceptual and
Final design review of the building for specific details.
(b) SITE DESIGN (maximum 3 points). Considering the quality and
character of the proposed landscaping and open space areas,
the amount of site coverage by buildings, the extent of
underground utilities, and the arrangement of improvements for
efficiency of circulation, including access for service,
increased safety and privacy, and provision of snow storage
areas.
RATING: 3
COMMENTS: The project meets its 25% open space requirement and
retains the existing trees on the parcel. The entry walk is
inviting. The trash area and parking work well along the alley.
(c) ENERGY CONSERVATION (maximum 3 points). Considering the use
of passive and/or active energy conservation techniques in the
construction of the proposed development, including but not
limited to insulation, glazing, passive solar orientation,
efficient heating and cooling systems and solar energy
devices; the extent to which.the proposed development avoids
wasting energy by excluding excessive lighting and inefficient
woodburning devices; and the proposed development's location,
relative to whether solar gain can be expected to reasonably
V
result in energy conservation.
RATING: 2.25
COMMENTS: The applicant commits to meeting the Model Energy Code,
but does not commit to exceeding any specific elements of that code
with details we can score upward. No fireplaces or gas appliances
are proposed. Natural light is admitted on the south side of the
basement through sizable light wells. Fairly large windows on the
southern side will allow solar warming in the winter.
(d) AMENITIES (maximum 3 points). Considering the provision of
usable open space, pedestrian and bicycle ways, benches,
bicycle racks, bus shelters, and other common areas for users
of the proposed development.
RATING: 0
COMMENTS: The application states that benches, tables and bike
racks will be installed, however nothing is noted on the plans or
in the text to indicate where or how many of these improvements
will be added. It is unknown whether the site size can accommodate
such amenities.
(e) VISUAL IMPACT (maximum 3 points) . Considering the scale and
location of the buildings in the proposed development to
prevent infringement on designated scenic viewplanes.
RATING:2.5
COMMENTS: There are no designated viewplanes in the vicinity of
the building therefore the standard score is recommended. The
structure is 6 feet below the maximum height allowed in the zone.
The design attempts to act as a step-down from the taller Stewart
Title Building on the west to the office building on the east.
(f) TRASH AND UTILITY ACCESS AREAS (maximum 3 points). Considering
the extent to which required trash and utility access areas
are screened from public view; are sized to meet the needs of
the proposed development and to provide for public utility
placement; can be easily accessed; allow trash bins to be
moved by service personnel, and provide enclosed trash bins,
trash compaction or other unique measures.
RATING: 1.5
COMMENTS: The applicant has discussed the trash area question with
Engineering who is comfortable with the reduced area of 9' by 11'
on the condition that a restaurant cannot occupy this building
without readdressing the trash area size. The Electric Department
comments that a larger transformer may be necessary to serve this
project. All upgrades to power, if necessary, will be
E
\0
automatically charged to the applicant. Access to the building,
using the concrete walkway, will be difficult when the parking
spaces are full.
2. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES (maximum 10
points). Each development application shall be rated on the
basis of its impact upon public facilities and services by the
assigning of points according to the following standards and
considerations:
0 -- Proposed development requires the provision of new
public facilities and services at increased public
expense;
1 -- Proposed development may be handled by existing
public facilities and services, or any public
facility or service improvements made by the
applicant benefits the proposed development only,
and not the area in general; or
2 -- Proposed development improves the availability of
public facilities and services in the area.
In those cases where points are given for the simultaneous
evaluation of two (2) services (i.e., water supply and fire
protection) the determination of points shall be made by
averaging the scores for each feature.
(a) WATER SUPPLY/FIRE PROTECTION (maximum 2 points). Considering
the ability of the water supply system to serve the proposed
development and the applicant's commitment to install any
water system extensions or treatment plant or other facility
upgrading required to serve the proposed development. Fire
protection facilities and services shall also be reviewed,
considering the ability of the appropriate fire protection
district to provide services according to established response
times without the necessity of upgrading available facilities;
the adequacy of available water pressure and capacity for
providing fire fighting flows; and the commitment of the
applicant to provide any fire protection facilities which may
be necessary to serve the proposed development
RATING: 1
COMMENTS: There is capacity to serve this project without
upgrading the system or making extensions.
(b) SANITARY SEWER (maximum 2 points) . Considering the ability of
the sanitary sewer system to serve the proposed development
and the applicant's commitment to install any sanitary system
extensions or treatment plant or other facility upgrading
3
N�
required to serve the proposed development.
RATING: 1
COMMENTS: The Sanitation District has sufficient line and
treatment capacity to serve this project, but needs the applicant
to participate in a prorated share of costs of downstream
improvements.
(c) PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION/ROADS (maximum 2 points). Considering
the ability of the proposed development to be served by
existing public transit routes. The review shall also consider
the capacity of major streets to serve the proposed
development without substantially altering existing traffic
patterns, creating safety hazards or -maintenance problems,
overloading the existing street system or causing a need to
extend the existing road network and consider the applicant's
commitment to install the necessary road system improvements
to serve the increased usage attributable to the proposed
development.
RATING: 1
COMMENTS: This project is located one block off of Main Street
which is the primary transit route in the City. Review of this
project by City agencies has determined that the project will not
substantially alter the traffic patterns in this area. The on -
site parking will be located off of the alley to minimize visual
and traffic impacts.
(d) STORM DRAINAGE (maximum 2 points). Considering the degree to
which the applicant proposes to maintain historic drainage
patterns on the development site. If the development requires
use of the city's drainage system, the review shall consider
the commitment by the applicant to install the necessary
drainage control facilities and to maintain the system over
the long-term.
RATING: 1
COMMENTS: According to the comments received by the Engineering
Department, the storm drainage plan meets what is required in the
Code.
(e) PARKING (maximum 2 points). Considering the provisions of
parking spaces to meet the commercial and/or residential needs
of the proposed development as required by Article 5, Division
2, and considering the design of the parking spaces with
respect to their visual impact, amount of paved surface, and
convenience and safety.
RATING: 1
4
COMMENTS: If the project receives Special Review approval for the
reduction trash / utility area, the required 4 parking spaces can
be provided on -site along the alley. The remaining fractional
parking space (.05 space) shall be provided cash -in -lieu rather
than providing an entire space on site.
3. PROVISION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING (maximum 15 points). Each
development application shall, be assigned points for the
provision of housing which complies with the housing size,
type, income and occupancy guidelines of the city, and with
the provisions of Section 8-109.
Points shall be assigned as follows:
Zero (0) to sixty (60) percent of the additional
employees generated by the proposed development: One (1)
point for each six (6) percent housed;
Sixty-one (61) to one hundred (100) percent of the
additional employees generated by the proposed
development: One (1) point for each eight (8) percent
housed.
The following standard shall be used in calculating the number
of full-time equivalent employees generated by the proposed
development:
Commercial Core (CC) 3.50 to 5.25 employees/1,000 sq. ft.
and Commercial (C-1): (net leasable), based on review of
the city council's housing designee;
RATING: 10
COMMENTS: The applicant commits to paying cash -in -lieu for 60% of
employees generated. As previously mentioned, the Housing Office
calculated that the 60% figure would be 7.09 employees. The cash -
in -lieu proposal must be approved by City Council. The Housing
Off ice's preference for housing places the cash -in -lieu option last
behind on -site housing and purchase or construction of off -site
housing.
4. BONUS POINTS (maximum 4 points). Bonus points may be assigned
when it is determined that a proposed development has not only
met the substantive standards of Section 8-106(F)(1) through
(3), but has also exceeded the provisions of these sections
and achieved an outstanding overall design meriting
recognition. An award of additional bonus points shall not
exceed ten (10) percent of the total points awarded under
section 8-106(F)(1) through (3). Any commission member,
5
awarding bonus points shall provide a written justification
of that award for the public hearing record.
RATING:
COMMENTS: Staff does not assign bonus points.
SUBTOTAL: 27
5. TOTAL POINTS
SCORING CATEGORIES: POINTS:
1. QUALITY OF DESIGN 12
2. AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES &
SERVICES 5
3. PROVISION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING 10
4. BONUS POINTS 0
TOTAL POINTS: 27
This score meets the minimum combined threshold requirements
established in Section 8-106 F.5. which are:
Scoring Minimum
Categories Threshold Points
1)
Quality of Design
7.2 (40%)
12
2)
Public Facilities
and Services
4 (40%)
5
3)
Affordable Housing
10 (60%)
10
27
1)
Combined 1 & 2
16.8 (60%)
17
6
PLANNING Z ZONING COMMISSION
EXHIBIT ._ , APPROVED ,
19 BY RESOLUTION
MEMORANDUM
TO: Kim Johnson, Planning Office
FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing Office
DATE: October 18, 1994
RE: 624 East Hopkins GMQS Allocation
Parcel ID No. 2737-073-32-004
ISSUE: The applicant is requesting a growth management quota
allocation of 2,700 net leasable square feet. The applicant is
requesting approval for a cash -in -lieu fee to mitigate for housing
instead of providing employee housing.
BACKGROUND: The Housing Board has established policies in the
Affordable Housing Guidelines regarding mitigating affordable
housing impacts. Their preference is as follows:
1. On -site housing;
2. Off -site housing, including buydown concept;
3. Cash-in-lieu/land-in-lieu.
RECOMMENDATION: The proposed development is located in the C-1
zone district. Therefore, the Housing Office would recommend that
the applicant provide on -site housing for 7.09 employees. The Code
specifies that 3.50 to 5.25 employees/1, 000 square feet needs to be
mitigated. Because of the nature of the business, the Housing
Office recommends that the applicant mitigate for 3.50 + 5.25
employees X 500 = 4.375 X 2.7 = 11.81. Sixty percent of the 11.81
employees must be mitigated, or 7.09 employees.
A possible scenario for on -site housing would be to provide two
three -bedroom units and a studio unit.
The applicant is also requesting to mitigate the employees as
Category 3. The Housing Office contends that there should be a
split between Category 2 and Category 3 mitigation. Therefore,
should a cash -in -lieu fee be approved by City Council, the Housing
Office would recommend a fee of $51,000 + 34,000 _ 2 = $42,500 X
7.09 = $301,325.
Again, the Housing Office prefers on -site housing over a cash -in -
lieu payment.
/c1c:word\referra1\624eh.em
MEMORANDUM
To: Kim Johnson, Planning Office
From: Chuck Roth, Engineering Department a-r_
Date: October 12, 1994
Re: 624 E. Hopkins GMQS Allocation
Having reviewed the above referenced application, and having made a site inspection, the
Engineering Department has the following comments:
1. Site Drainage - The application meets minimum Code standards for subdivision design
standards for storm runoff.
2. Traffic Impacts - The traffic impact analysis is acceptable. As indicated, there will be
no significant reduction in service level of Hopkins Avenue.
f jgel C /1
3. Reduction in Trash and UtditX Area - I have discussed the sizing with the applicant's
representative. They have agreed to increase the length from 9 to 11 feet. This change
will fit on the site because four parking spaces are 34 feet total width. This would permit
storage of two dumpsters and include space for utility meters and disconnects.
There have been a number of trash area sizing problems in the commercial core,
some related to parking uses. Future owners or tenants with different uses could need
larger trash enclosures. We recommend a condition of approval that if more trash storage
area is required in the future, the applicant will increase the size of the area and pay cash -
in -lieu as necessary at such time.
4. Reduction in Parking - If reduction in the trash and utility area is not approved, and
if reduction in parking is necessary, the Engineering Department has no comments to the
contrary. The property is sufficiently close to public parking and to mass transit to permit
a reduction in parking.
5. Sidewalk, Curb and Gutter - These are not required to be discussed in a GMQS
application. The site plan does indicate a sidewalk. Installation of sidewalk is required
by City code prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The curb and gutter is in
satisfactory condition.
6. Improvement Districts - The applicant did not offer to agree to join future
improvement districts, however it is recommended as a condition of approval that 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.
7. Work in the Public Ri t-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:
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 city streets
department (920-5130).
cc: Cris Caruso
M94.348
MEMORANDUM
TO: Kim Johnson, City Planner
FROM: Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer
RE: 624 E. Hopkins GMQS Allocation
DATE: October 18, 1994
This project has received full approval from the HPC in its earlier
configuration as a residence. The project architect has indicated
that there will be no changes made to the building in its
conversion to office space that will be visible from the outside,
except possibly a small roof projection for the required elevator.
If this change is made it will be reviewed by HPC, otherwise there
are no concerns at this time.
OCT 419A
. sY.
To: Kim Johnson, Planning Office
From: Bill Earley, Electric
Date: 10/4/94
Subject: 624 E. Hopkins, GMQS Allocation
I have reviewed the information submitted from the applicant and
it does not provide information on the electric requirements for
this development. We have three phase power available in this
alley so we can meet almost any requirements by installing a new
transformer. The applicant would have to pay for any improvements
needed to our system to meet their power requirements. If a new
transformer is required, the applicant would have to provide a site
for this transformer.
Without the load information I cannot be sure, but based on my
experience we should have no problem providing electric to this
development.
ASPENTITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone 920-5090 FAX 920-5197
MEMORANDUM
City Engineer
Housing Director
Aspen Water Department
Environmental Health Department
Electric Department
Parks Department
Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District
Aspen Fire Protection District
Parking/Transportation
HPC
. R9?&.
Kim Johnson, Planning Office
RE:
624 E. Hopkins GMQ3 Allocation
Parcel ID No. 2737 0
DATE:
September 27, 1994
Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted by MHS Partners.
Please return your comments to me no later than October 15.
Thank you.
kilo ' -a ��--� � �✓a��°C,:�- �'U �`'��
1'e
TO: Kim Johnson, Planning Office
THRU: George Robinson, Parks Director
FROM: Rebecca Baker, Parks Department
DATE: October 24, 1994
RE: 624 E. Hopkins GMQS Allocation, Parcel ID No. 2737-073-32-004
We have reviewed the application submitted by MHS Partners for GMQS Allocation at 624 E.
Hopkins. The development appears to cover sufficiently those areas of concerns for the Parks
Department, including preservation of existing, significant trees on the property. During
construction of the property,'these trees should be protected from excavation impacts by setting up
some protective, temporary fencing around the dripline of the trees. The only other concern of the
Parks is landscaping in the right-of-way. No detail is given on the site plan indicating whether any
changes are proposed as part of this development to the ROW area. If changes are proposed, a
detailed landscape plan should be submitted to the Parks Department for review and approval.
ASPEN#PITKIN
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
To: Kim Johnson, Planning Office
From: Chris Chiola, Environmental Health Department►r'G
Through: Lee Cassin, Senior Environmental Health Officer A t C---
Date: October 7, 1994
Re: 624 E. Hopkins GMQS Allocation
The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department has reviewed the 624 E. Hopkins
land use submittal under authority of the Munici*Ral Code of the City of Aspen, and has
the following comments.
SEWAGE TREATMENT AND COLLECTION: Section 11-1.7 -it Shan be unlawful for the owner or owupant of
any building wed for residence or business purposes within the city to construct or reconmurt an on -site sewage dspcwt device.'
The plans to provide wastewater disposal for this project through the central collection
lines of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD) meet the requirements of this
department. The ability of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District to handle the
increased flow for the project should be determined by the ACSD. The applicant has
indicated in the documentation that the applicant and the service agency are mutually
bound to the proposal and that the service agency is capable of serving the development.
ADEQUATE PROVISIONS FOR WATER NEEDS: Section 23-55 'Ali buildings, structum Wilities, paria, or the
like within the city limits which use water shall be conneeted to the municipal water utility system.'
The provision of potable water from the City of Aspen system is consistent with
Environmental Health policies ensuring the supply of safe water. The City of Aspen
Water Department shall determine if adequate water is available for the project. The City
of Aspen water supply meets all standards of the Colorado Department of Health for
drinking water quality.
WATER OUALrN IMPACTS: Section 11-1.3 V r the pwpose of a mintaining and protecting it, municipal water supply from
injury and pollution, the city shall esereise regulatory and supervisory jurisdiction within the hworporated limbs of the City of Aspen and over all streams and sources contributing
to municipal water supplies for a distance of five (5) mn'b above the points from which municipal water supplies are diverted.'
This application is not expected to impact down stream water quality.
130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 61611
1
(P-
303/820-5070
mcvckd paper
AIR QUALITY: Sections 11-2.1 -ft is tm purpae of (dw air rpawy mWoo of the MunidlW code] m achieve the matamuun practical degree
of air ley poule by s4ul&g the we of all avan" practical methods and teehnignes to control, prevent and reduce air pollution throughout the city-6 The lino Use
Regulations seek m'iwen congeWW and 'avoid transportation demantd: tint cannot be met' as well as to "provide dean air by prcoectiq the natural air sheds and reducing
polhsante.
This project is not expected to negatively impact air quality in a non -attainment area.
The applicant is not proposing the use of woodstoves or gas log fireplaces. If these plans
change the applicant must file a fireplace/woodstove permit with the Environmental
Health Department before the building permit will be issued. Metropolitan areas of Pitkin
County, which includes this site, may have two department certified devices and unlimited
numbers of decorative gas fireplace appliances per building. New buildings may NOT
have wood burning fireplaces, nor may any heating device use coal as fuel.
CONFORMANCE WITH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH LAWS:
NOISE ABATEMENT: Section 16-1 -The day council rude and acWu tine noW is a significant source of pollution that
mpnsu , a present and increasing threat m the public peace and m the health. safety and welfare of the residents of the Cary of Aspen and k its-isioots .».Jleeordingiy, k Is
the policy of eouncil to provide standards for pem!"e noise eveis in various arttns and mamsers and at various dines and to prohibit noise in excess of those kwls.'
During construction, noise can not exceed maximum permissible sound level standards,
and construction cannot be done except between the hours of 7 a.m. and 10 p.m.
It is very likely that noise generated during the construction phase of this project will
have some negative impact on the neighborhood. The applicant should be aware of this
and take measures to Sze the predicted high noise levels.
-XW:WP:LAND USE:E.HOP1aNS.GMQS
2
Aspen (Ponsolidated Sanitation District
565 North Mill Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Tele. (303) 925-3601
Sy Kelly - Chairman
Albert Bishop - Treas.
Louis Popish - Secy.
October 10, 1994
Kim Johnson
Planning Office
130 S. Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: 62.4 E. Hopkins GMQS
Dear Kim:
FAX #(303) 925-2537
Michael Kelly
Frank Loushin
Bruce Matherly, Mgr.
The Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District currently has
sufficient line and treatment capacity to serve this project.
There is a downstream constraint in the Galena street line for
which the applicant will be charged a prorated share of the cost
of improvement.
Service for the project is contingent upon compliance with the
District's Rules and Regulations which are on file at the office.
Total connection costs for the project can be estimated once
detailed plans are available and a tap permit is completed at the
District office.
Please call if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
�/
Bruce Matherly
District Manager
EPA AWARDS OF EXCELLENCE
1976 .1986 - 1990
REGIONAL AND NATIONAL
ak
I_i Al 1Jr
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Leslie Lamont, Deputy Director
DATE: November 1, 1994
RE: Aspen Youth Center - Specially Planned Area Amendment -
Continued Public Hearing
SUMMARY: The Commission tabled the public hearing of the Youth
Center in order for the applicants to refine their request for an
amendment to the final SPA development approval.
Of primary concern to the Commission, was the year round use
restaurant nature of the kitchen. In addition, the Commission was
concerned about the control of for -profit use of the building and
insurances that the uses are community oriented.
Perry Harvey has provided an attachment for Commission review. The
attachment makes additional representations that assures that no
for -profit or commerical activities shall occur in the Center
unless those activities are sponsored by the Youth Center and
intended to raise funds for the Center. In addition, Perry Is
letter spells out many caveats for the use of the kitchen. Most
importantly, this new language will be included in the master lease
between Aspen/Pitkin County and the Youth Center and all activities
and user of the kitchen must be approved by Aspen/Pitkin County
Attorney's offices.
Although use of the Center does not become black and white with
this new proposal, staff believes that it goes further to ensure
more community usage of the building. The ability for the City and
County to review the uses of the building via the master lease
reduces the potential for abuse of the building by an overzealous
Board or restauranteur.
Staff will provide final lease language as an information item to
the Commission when it has been amended by both parties.
The majority of this memo has not changed although the conditions
of approval have been amended to reflect the new information from
Mr. Harvey.
APPLICANT: Aspen Youth Center Board of Directors, as represented
by Perry Harvey
LOCATION: Rio Grande Property
ZONING: Public with a Specially Planned Area (SPA) Overlay
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The Aspen Youth Center Board (the Board)
requests to amend the final SPA plan that was approved for the
development of the Youth Center (Center). The Board requests to
expand the permitted uses in the building beyond only youth
oriented activities and to provide a building for community
oriented activities and to activate the kitchen on a year-round
basis.
Please see attached application, and the new information dated
October 26, 1994, exhibit A.
REFERRAL COMMENTS: Please see attached referral comments from the
City Attorney, County Manager, and the Recreation Department,
exhibit B.
STAFF COMMENTS: Pursuant to Section 24-7-804 E.2. - modifications
to the final development plan shall be approved pursuant to the
terms and procedures of the final development plan, provided that
the proposed change is consistent with or an enhancement of the
approved final development plan. If the proposed change is not
consistent with the approved final development plan, the amendment
shall be subject to both conceptual and final development plan
review and approval.
Staff finds that the proposed amendment is consistent with the
approved final development plan. However, due to the
representations made during the SPA review in 1990, the proposed
amendments are not insubstantial in nature and require a full
review by the Commission and City Council.
A. Background - The Youth Center received conceptual and final SPA
approval in 1990 for the development of a center for youth oriented
activities on the Rio Grande property. The Rio Grande property is
zoned public with a SPA overlay which required the four step review
process of the development proposal.
During the review, the proponents of.the Youth Center presented a
development proposal for a building that would serve as a focal
point of activities for resident and visiting youth of the
community. During the review, suggestions were made by staff,
Commission members and Council members to enlarge the scope of
activities offered in the center. The applicants consistently
responded that the building was intended only for the youth and
their activities and to permit other uses would compromise their
goals for the center.
Final approval of the Youth Center also included a full restaurant -
style kitchen with approximately 6 tables, waiver of housing
mitigation, GMQS exemption for an essential public service, and a
subsequent lease with the City and County to occupy the land.
2
I/
The Center has been open for approximately 3 years. Within that
time the Board has experimented with a variety of uses and not all
the activities have been youth oriented. However, due to the
representations made by the applicants during the initial review
process, it has been the City's policy to discourage uses in the
building on a long term basis unless it is a program for Youth.
B. Amendment - The applicants now request to amend the SPA
approval and the lease with the City to permit a more broad range
of activities in the building. The Center has functioned well in
the summer for the Youth but most activities take place away from
the Center and the Center functions primarily as a staging and
meeting place for outside events. The rest of the year the Center
is used very little.
This summer the kitchen was in full operation, which is the first
real use of the kitchen since the Center was opened. The
conditions for this summer's operations were to maintain the same
hours as the Center, close at the end of September, and employ
youth. The kitchen, operating as a restaurant, also served as an
accessory use to the activities on the Rio Grande playing field
much like the Dugout at Iselin Park.
In their request, the applicants propose a tiered use of the Center
for community recreational, educational and social events. As the
application states, "the first priority is, and will remain,
programming for and use by the youth of the Aspen community."
When the Center is not being used or has been programmed for youth
activities the Board would like to open up the use of the building
for other entities and programs. The Board would like to allow
for a wide range of community oriented programs and have the
ability to generate revenue from these uses to defray operating and
maintenance costs associated with the facility. In addition, the
new information that was provided by the applicant states that the
Center will be used for non-profit activities unless it is an event
sponsored by the Center and is intended to raise funds for the
Center.
During the summer months, the applicants propose to lease the
kitchen to an operator that will employ youth, provide box lunches
for outings that are organized by the Youth Center and serve walk-
ins particularly people using the Rio Grande playing field May
through September. During the rest of the year, the kitchen will
only be available for cooking classes, an accessory use to other
activities using the Center, staging area for Aspen School District
classes, or for private functions.
C. Staff Response - The property that the Youth Center occupies
is owned by the both the City and the County. The City and County
are in the process of finalizing a land exchange with a result that
the Center will occupy only City property. The Council has
3
2)
consented to the submittal of this application. The County has
consented to the expansion of uses in the Center provided the
activities area of a public nature such as sponsored by
organizations established under 501(c)3.
The property is zoned public. Please see the permitted and
conditional uses in the public zone, exhibit C. The proposed
activities in the Center, that are more "community center" oriented
are consistent with the intent of the public zone district. It is
imperative that recreation classes, for example, have a fee
structure similar, if not equal, to those that are offered by the
City Recreation Department and/or CMC. Due to the competitive
nature established by the Growth Management System and the
exactions that are paid by for profit entities, activities that are
also offered by private athletic clubs cannot use the Center with
similar or slightly lower fees than the private clubs.
Of note are the referral comments.from the Recreation Department.
The Recreation Department would be able to orchestrate some
activities out of the Center, but since most of the City sponsored
recreation programs are already subsidized paying rent would pose
a burden. Because the City and County lease the publically owned
property to the Center for a nominal amount, staff would recommend
that the City should not have to pay to use the building.
The use of the kitchen as a concession stand in the summer should
be operated similar to the Recreation Department's operation of
the concession stand at Iselin Park. A restaurant is not a
permitted or conditional use in the Public zone district. However,
accessory uses are allowed and if the kitchen operated as an
accessory use to the activities of the Center and the Rio Grande
park then staff would find this appropriate.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the amendment to the
Youth Center final SPA approval with the following conditions:
1. All activities shall be of a public nature or sponsored by the
Youth Center to raise funds for the Center.
2. The City and County shall not be required to pay rent for the
use of the building.
3. The kitchen will serve as an accessory use to the Youth Center
and as a concessionaire to the Rio Grande Park. The lease for the
concessionaire shall be structured pursuant to the lease used by
the City at Iselin Park and will be open to the public only from
May through September. The kitchen, on a year round basis, will
pay rent to the Aspen Youth Center, employ or provide internships
for youth during the school year, provide food for Aspen Youth
Center youth programs at cost, establish a reasonable price
structure for affordability by youth and families, provide a
4
percentage of revenues to the. Aspen Youth Center if any special
events are catered either in the Center or outside the Center.
4. Any leases or uses of the Center by other users shall be
reviewed by the City Attorneys office.
5. The fee structure to use the Center shall be similar to the
City Recreation Department fees and Colorado Mountain College fees.
6. These conditions of approval and the amendment to the SPA
approval shall be reflected in an amended lease between the
City/County and the Youth Center.
EXHIBITS
A. Applicant's Request & New Information dated October 26, 1994
B. Referral Comments
C. Permitted & Conditional Uses Public Zone
D. Public Notice
5
EXHIBIT A
REQUEST FOR S.P.A.
MAivil-A-ilki"n Alk, k-1
DULY 139 1994
CONTACT:
PERRY HARVEY
514 E. HYMAN AVE.
ASPEN, CO, 81611
(303) 925-7000
►'J
ASPEN YOUTH CENTER
SUBSTANTIAL SPA AMENDMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. BACKGROUND 2
III. CURRENT STATUS 3
IV. REQUESTS 4
V. FORMAL REQUESTS 6
VI. ATTACHMENTS 7
1. INTRODUCTION
In accordance with Article 7-804 (E), Amendment to Final Development Plan, the
Board of Directors of the Aspen Youth Center is submitting this request for an
amendment to the SPA approvals granted by Ordinance 27, series of 1990. In
connection with the successful granting of the Amendment, the Board is
requesting an amendment to the ground lease entered into on January 24, 1992
between the City of Aspen, the Board of County Commissioners and the Youth
Center.
The request is for a change in use to expand the uses of the physical building
housing the Youth Center. The building is an underutilized community asset.
Currently, the use is "exclusively for the purpose of establishing and thereafter
maintaining a meeting place for the youth of Aspen and surrounding areas."
The Youth Center Board would like to change the approval language to allow for
the use of the facility by other community groups when it is not in use by the
youth of the Roaring Fork Valley. While the emphasis is, and will remain, on the
youth of the Valley, the physical facility remains underutilized and should be
made available to other groups (Colorado Mountain College and City of Aspen
Recreation Department, for example). The formal requests are delineated
herein.
0
W
11. BACKGROUND
" a
E
r
In 1988, an Advisory Board was created to pursue the creation of a center for
Aspen youth to hold events and to meet with other valley youth and visitors to
the Aspen area. The result of the Advisory Board's efforts was a rezoning of the
site of the existing Youth Center building from Public to Public with an SPA
t�
overlay. In 1990 full SPA approval of the project and GMQS Exemption for
Essential Public Services were granted. Construction was completed in October
1991 and the Youth Center opened to serve the youth community of Aspen.
The physical improvements consist of an upper level space which is open and
is used for dances and large gatherings. The middle floor- has offices, a
television room, and a game room. The lower level, on grade with the Rio
Grande playing field, consists of restaurant seating and a full kitchen.
N
III. CURRENT STATUS
The Youth Center is now almost three years old. The current Board has had the
opportunity to analyze the utilization of the facility, the financial strength and the
annual income and expense needs.
The Youth Center building is a great community asset. It is centrally located, is
adjacent to a large amount of open space, an extensive trail system and both
parking _and public transportation. The youth that the facility serves have active
and committed schedules. During the school year, little or no activity takes
place at the Center before 3 or 4 p.m. In the late afternoons and evenings
during much of the week, there is also availability of the facility. The Summer
sees more usage, but many of the activities organized for youth take place away
from the Center. The Center is used for staging and meeting for outside events.
Since the Center opened, there have been fundamental changes in Aspen. The
Community Center, on the site of the old hospital has been razed to make way
for housing. The two school buildings in the West End have been undergoing
renovation while future uses have been debated at length. Colorado Mountain
College (CIVIC) programming has expanded greatly, requiring a constant search
for new venues for programs for youth and adults alike. These changed
circumstances, among others, have created a demand for space for many
programs from painting classes to aerobics.
Because of the extremely narrow uses allowed for the building, the Center sits
empty much of the time. This is both wasting an important community asset and
causing undue financial strain on the Center and those who are responsible for
the facility.
3
10
IV. REQUESTS
The request herein is to allow for a tiered use of the Youth Center facility for
community recreational, educational and social events. The first priority is, and
shall remain, programming for and use by the youth of the Aspen community.
When the facility is not in use for programs organized by the Center and the
Youth Board, it can be available for programs by other entities, such as the City
Recreation Department or CMC. The Youth Center wants the latitude and
freedom to allow for a wide range of community -oriented uses to maximize use
of the facility and to generate revenue from these uses to defray operating and
maintenance costs inherent in the facility.
The Youth Center Board currently raises funds throughout the year to maintain
the facility and expand the youth programming. For certain programs we charge
a minimum fee to cover transportation or other specific costs. By using the
facility more fully we can create some funds to cover some building and
operating costs. This will allow us to use a larger portion of our fund raising
proceeds to create additional youth programming.
The Youth Center is zoned Public (PUB) with a SPA overlay. The purpose of
PUB is "to provide for the development of governmental and quasi -governmental
facilities for cultural, educational, civic and other governmental purposes."
Among the permitted uses is "community recreational facility." Thus, allowing
for additional use of the facility when it is not used for youth programs is entirely
within the purpose and permitted uses of the Public Zone District.
Pursuant to Section 8-104 C.(b), the City exempted the Youth Center from
GMQS as an essential public facility. This exemption was granted because the
Youth Center "provides facilities in response to the demands for growth, is not
itself a growth generator, is available for use by the general public, and serves
the needs of the City."
Allowing for a broader use of the facility by the general public will fill the void
created by the removal of the Community Center and is in response to the
demands for added venues from groups such as the City Recreation Department
and CMC. The requests herein shall not create any additional impacts in the
following areas: employee generation, impacts on City services, the demand for
parking, road and transit services, or on the need for basic services such as
water, sewage treatment, drainage control, fire and police protection and solid
waste disposal. The facility has been approved and it has been found that the
4
impacts are negligible. This request is not for any expansion of the facility. It
is merely a request to use the building to the degree that was assumed and
anticipated at the time of the granting of the original approval.
Additionally, this request is in keeping with the original intent of the Rio Grande
SPA which is for community recreation facilities and for public and quasi -public
uses on the site. Because the facility has a great deal of vacant time when
operating costs continue, allowing use of the building will serve a community
need and provide a minimal but much -needed supplement to the ongoing
struggle to raise operating funds.
Granting the requested changes will result in no change in the uses in the
building but merely an expansion of the range of users. The top floor dance and
meeting area will be available for dance classes, art classes, group events and
other such meetings. The middle floor of the Center will remain essentially the
same. The kitchen will be leased to an operator conditioned upon use
restrictions and requirements of the Youth Center. The eating and serving area
will be used in the summer months of June through September as an accessory
use to the Rio Grande playing fields. Also, the kitchen will provide box lunches
for outings such as raft trips, hikes and bike trips being run by the Youth Center.
Youth of the area will be employed to prepare and serve food, gaining job
experience. Food and beverages will be available to participants and spectators
at the various sporting events held on the Rio Grande playing fields.. The food
service will not be advertised to the general public and will be operated in a
fashion not unlike the Dugout at the City playing fields and Moore pool.
During the remaining months of the year, the dining area will not be available for
use on a regular basis and will not be open to the public for sit down dining.
Rather it will be used for cooking classes, as an accessory to the youth using
the Center, or for private functions in connection with the use of the facility itself,
such as the end of the season hockey banquets.
4
V. FORMAL REQUESTS
Formal request is made for:
1. Approval to allow for a tiered use of the Center facility to make the
building available when not used for youth programs offered in the
community which are open to the general public. Rental rates shall be
set to cover operating, administrative, maintenance and repair
requirements.
2. A finding that the lease agreement shall be amended where necessary
to reflect the additional uses, including the right to sublet to other groups
or organizations for specific times.
3. A clarification of the restaurant and kitchen use to allow for Summer use
as an accessory use to Rio Grande playing fields and for use the rest of
the year not as a public restaurant but in connection with* classes, private
events and the youth using the Center.
Upon granting of this request, the Board will cooperate with the Planning
Department to prepare an SPA Agreement outlining the uses and intents of the
Youth Center. Further, an amendment to the lease will be prepared for
execution by the parties involved.
C�
VI. ATTACHMENTS
1. . Letter of Authorization from Aspen Youth Center.
2. - Suggested language changes in Lease.
19
?*ASPEcN�Z
July 8, 1994
Ms. Leslie Lamont
Planning Department
City of Aspen
130 South Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Leslie:
The Board of Directors of the Aspen Youth Center has authorized
Perry Harvey to submit an application for change in use and,
further, he is authorized to speak on -our behalf.
Sincerely,
Sue Smedstad
President
Board of Directors
/ss
•ASPEN•Y0UTH•CENTER l
Post Oke Box 8266 9 Aspen, Colorado 81612 a 303.925.7091 ��
LEASE AGREEMENT
6. Use of Leased Premises.
(a) The Leased Premises shall be used exclusively by
Lessee for the purpose of establishing and thereafter maintaining
a meeting place for the youth of the City of Aspen and surrounding
areas that is free of illegal dr'4gs... .non -medicinal .: ,alcohol,
.::;and
:::.:. .
ducts and.::.:.�.r...:.the..... u ::::...
c c o ro o.g e.:.c�.f � : ro�r�:::..:. n....:::a<:: ec�;mm�:�> �:
(e) Lessee shall not sell, convey, transfer, eub e-r
pledge, surrender or otherwise encumber or dispose of this Lease,
the Youth Center building, or any interest or estate created
herein, except that Lessee shall have the right to pledge or
otherwise encumber the Youth Center building in an amount not to
exceed two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000.00); provided,
however, that any such encumbrance is made only after thirty (30)
days prior written notice to the City and County; and, provided
further, that any such encumbrance is made subservient and
secondary to the City and County's interests in the Youth Center
building as set forth in this Lease.
(h) Lessee shall net perfAt any ether persen, pereener
19. Events .of Default Defined.
(e) Lessee's interest in this Lease or any part hereof
is assigned or transferred e:d'� ;::::7►e without the
written consent of the Lessors, except as 'p.rovided'herein, either
voluntarily or by operation of law or otherwise, or,
1 Cz\WP51\AYC\LRASB.AQR
MASON & MORSE
R E A L. E" S T A T E
October 26, 1994
t
Ms. Leslie Lamont
Community Development Dept.
CITY .OF ASPEN
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Leslie: .
Thank you for taking the time to meet with me regarding the request for a SPA
Amendment for the Youth Center: When the Planning and Zoning Commission tabled the
application, there were two issues of concern. The first was the potential use of the Youth
Center building for commercial and for profit events which were unrelated to the Youth
Center. Planning U Zoning wants clearer criteria for use of the Center. The second issue
Involved the food service in the diner donated and initially operated by Boogies.
Having heard these concerns, the Youth Center Board proposes the following solutions:
Regarding use of the facility we will incorporate language into the lease for the land with the
City which Will ensure that no for profit or commercial use shall be allowed other than uses
sponsored. by the AYC and intended to raise funds for the Center. Thus, the use of the
Center will be for organized youth events. Then, free time will be scheduled for classes and
events which are open to the general public and for events which are designed as fund
raising efforts for the Youth Center.
We propose to use the diner as. an accessory use to the Youth Center during the year with
use as an accessory use to the Rio Grande Park in the months of May through September:
The conditions for the restaurant use will include:
• An operator will run the kitchen and . diner paying rent to the AYC.
Youth will be employed or provided internships during the school year.
Food for AYC youth programs will be provided at cost.
The diner will have a reasonable price structure to ensure affordability by youth and
families.
- Any special events catered. by the. diner operator will provide a percentage of
revenues to the AYC as a direct funding mechanism for the center. Thus, a
percentage of profits will be returned to the AYC:
514 EAST HYMAN AVENUE ASPEN, COLORADO 8161 1 (303)925-7000 FACSIMILE: (303) 925-7027 `1
Letter To Ms. Lamont
October 26, 1994
Page Two
• The operator is offering a cooking and restaurant management class through the
Aspen School District. Attached is a letter of support from Toni Farrell,
Superintendent of the School District, and a proposed outline of the class. Item VI
Involves the real world experience of serving food, greeting customers and service. •
The lease between the AYC and the operator will be substantially In the form of that
used at Iselin Park, except for rental rates and restrictions on months of use, and will
be reviewed and approved by the. City of Aspen Attorney.
The Youth Center Board feels this use program will make the kitchen and diner a true
community asset. The benefits to the youth of the valley will be many, including the level
of activity generated at the Center, the opportunity for employment, the opportunity for
real life resort training In the food service industry and the real economic potential for the
Center. The success of this asset as an accessory use to the AYC to the park will create
pride, in the youth and In the entire community.
I. hope this letter answers your concerns and those of the Commissioners'and will allow us
to move forward Into a new and exciting era for the Aspen Youth Center.
Sincerely,
Perry A.- Harvey
Broker Associate
MASON 8z MORSE REAL ESTATE
PAH:kng
f
3%
ASPEN
School District
■
October 17, 1994
To'Whom it May Concern:
The Aspen School District enthusiastically endorses the request for
a restaurant at. the Aspen Youth Center. We have discussed the
opportunity of involving some of our students in a mentoring
program at this facility. We see this as a wonderful opportunity
to add to our current curricula and to meet the needs of more
students.
Sincerely,'
-2`t, ?atztz- A,-,
Tom Farrell
Superintendent
/vd
0235 Nigh School Road • Aspen, Colorado 81611
303/925-3460 • Fax 303/925-5721
BBC COOKING/RESTAURANT EDUCATION CLASS
I. HEALTH AND SANITATION
1. Food handling
2. Employee health
II.KNOW YOUR KITCHEN
1. Equipment and utensils
2. Food terminology
3. Knife techniques
4. Weights and measures
III -MARKETING AND RESTAURANT LAW
1. Planning and zoning regulations
2. Market study
3. Advertising
4. Workers compensation
5. Labor laws
IV. SALES AND ACCOUNTING
1. Daily cash report
2. Labor: wage scales,deductions and taxes
3. City, State and Federal taxes
4. Lease agreements and utilities
5. Food pricing and menu costing
6. Purchasing and Inventory
V. COOKING BASICS
1. Butter
a. clarification
b. compound
2. Cream
3. Eggs
a. aeration
b. omelets and souffles
4. Vegetables
a. Identification and categorizing
b. Cooking Techniques
1. blanching, braising, sauteeing, roasting
5. Soups and stocks
a. Chicken stock
b. Meat stocks
c. Nage or Vegetable stocks
6. Vinaigrettes and Sauces
a. Emulsions
b. Deglazing and reductions
c. Butter and cream sauces
7. Starches
a. Types
b. Principles of cooking
8. Proteins: Identification
and cooking techniques
a. Poultry
b. Beef and Pork
c. Fish and Shellfish
d. Grilling, Poaching, Roasting, Braising
and Sauteeing
9. Baking
a.Pies and layered doughs
b.Breads and yeast formation
c.cakes
1. High altitude adjustments
2. Chemical and heat theory reactions
VI. Putting it together
1. Planning a menu
2. Reservations
3. Service
a. hosting and greeting
b. Order taking
c. service etiquette
d. table settings
e. job descriptions
VII. Diversity in the Food Industry
1. H•igh or low volume
2. Fast food or High end
3. Catering
9. Industry
5. Food.Packaging
EXHIBIT B
E
THE CITY OF ASPEN
CITY ATTORNEYS OFFICE
TO: Leslie Lamont
FROM: John P. Worcester
DATE: August 2, 1994
RE: Youth Center Lease
Just a few notes on the Youth Center's request to change their use...
The lease with the City states that:
The Leased Premises shall be used exclusively by Lessee for the purpose
of establishing and thereafter maintaining a meeting place for youth of the
City of Aspen and surrounding areas that is free of illegal drugs, non -
medicinal alcohol, and tobacco products.
It also states that:
Lessee shall not permit any other person, persons, company, corporation,
or organization to occupy or use the Leased Premises for a eriod of time
in excess of two (2) weeks without the express written consent of the City
and County.
Clearly to accomplish their new "mission" they will need to have their lease agreement amended.
I don't forsee a problem with Council allowing the amendment but want to make sure Council
gets to review any proposed amendment as part of their application.
Thanks.
1 Zv
To: Leslie Lamont, Planning Dept.
From: Tim Anderson, Recreation Dept.
Date: July 26, 1994
Re: Youth Center SPA
The only question that comes to mind with this is the concession idea to Rio Grande. In order
to make the cafe a concession stand to Rio Grande does the city and more specifically the
Recreation Dept. have to be involved in this or can the youth center open a concession stand to
serve Rio Grande park?
The youth center makes mention of the youth center becoming a community asset for all user
groups with some sort of rental rates. This probably does not matter to you, but we would not
utilize the youth center if we had to pay for the facility since most of our programs are
subsidized and there are no monies to pay for facility rental. Take this for what you think it will
be worth.
Other than these two thoughts I think it would be great to. expand that facility to allow the rest
of the community to utilize it.
Z077
RECEIVED
J U L 20 13.r14
City MaR:ger/Mayor's Uffice
61 Pitki n County
July 27, 1994
Mayor Bennett and Council Members
City of Aspen
130 S . Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Mayor Bennett and Council Members:
DISTRIBUTED TO;
AUG 17 1994 Response By:
By Oate-
- _ For.
Pitkin County is aware of the application being made by the Aspen Youth Center Board of
Directors for a substantial amendment to the SPA for the Youth Center. The County
understands the Youth :Center is seeking to expand the uses of the building beyond only youth
oriented activities in order to maximize the use of this community facility. The County concurs
with such an expansion so long as the included activities are of a public nature, e.g. sponsored
by organizations established under 501(c)3 . The County is aware that the Youth Center Board
also wishes to amend the ground lease to. reflect the final action on the application. The letter
will serve as our permission as land oumr for the Youth Center Board to process the
application, with the County reserVmg` the right to review any final approvals.
Si,
t � -
Reid Haughey
County Manager
cc: Perry Harvey, Aspen Youth Center Board
pcsem/wp/7.135
Administration
530 E. Main, 3rd Floor
Aspen, CO 81611
(303) 920-5200
FAX 920-5198-
printed on recycled paper
County Commissioners
Suite B
506 E. Main Street
Aspen, CO 81611
(303) 920-5150
County Attorney
Suite 1
530 E. Main Street
Aspen, CO 81611
(303) 920-5190
Personnel and Finance
Suite F
530 E. Main Street
Aspen, CO 81611
(303) 920-5220
OW
GYM, ilk
J� �
Transportati
Facilities
76 Service Center Road
Aspen, CO 81611
(303) 920-5390
9,4
EXHIBIT C
§ 5-219 ASPEN CODE
' E. Off-street parking requirement The following off-street parking spaces shall be pro-
vided for each use in the Park (P) zone district subject to the provisions of Article 5, Division 3.
1. Lodge use: 1 space/bedroom
2. Residential use: NIA
3. All other uses: Requires special review pursuant to Article 7, Division 4.
E
Sec. &220. Public (PUB).
A. Purpose The purpose of the Public (PUB) zone district is to provide for the develop-
ment of governmental and quasi -governmental facilities for cultural, educational, civic and
other governmental purposes.
B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Public (PUB) zone
district.
1. Library;
2. Museum;
3. Post office;
4. Hospital;
5. Essential governmental and public utility uses, facilities, services and buildings
(excluding maintenance shops);
S. Performing art center;
7. Public transportation stop;
` 8. Terminal building, and transportation related facilities;
9. Public surface and underground parking areas;
10. Community recreation facility;
11. Fire station;
12. Public school;
13. Public park; and
14. Accessory buildings and uses.
C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Public
(PUB) zone district, subject to the standards and procedures established in Article 7, Division
3.
1. Maintenance shop;
2. Affordable housing; and - _ - _ • .... _
3. Satellite dish antennae. • i�ba� ��
D. Dimensional requirements. The dimensional requirements which shall apply to all
permitted conditional uses in the Public (PUB) zone district shall be set by the adoption of a
Supp. No. 1 _
1652.10
EXHIBIT D
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: ASPEN YOUTH CENTER FINAL SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA AMENDMENT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on
Tuesday, September 20, 1994 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 pm before
the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, 2nd Floor Meeting Room,
City Hall, 130 S. Galena, Aspen, CO to consider an application
submitted by the Aspen Youth Center, P.O. Box 8266, Aspen, CO
requesting approval to amend the SPA Development Plan to allow
community groups to rent the facility when it is not in use for
youth programming and to allow summer use of the kitchen as an
accessory use to the Rio Grande playing fields. The property is
located on the Rio Grande property between the parking garage and
the Pitkin County Jail. For further information, contact Leslie
Lamont at the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office, 130 S. Galena, Aspen,
CO 920-5100
slJohn Bennett, Mayor
Aspen City Council
Published in the Aspen Times on September 2, 1994
City of Aspen Account
C� 913
The use of the kitchen as a concession stand in the summer should
be in -line with the operation of. the Recreation Department's
operation of the concession stand at Iselin Park. A restaurant is
not a permitted or conditional use in the Public zo a district.
However, accessory uses are allowed and if the kitchen operated as
an accessory use to the activities of the Center and the Rio Grande
park then staff would find this appropriate.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the amendment to the
Youth Center final SPA approval with the following conditions:
1. All activities shall be of a public nature and/or sponsored by
a organizatio25
3 �
ASprw YOUTH r-ENtIER • USE. FFESCHIEDULE
MW,121
:Rz
•
Y. are
M U M �, *41 r; _�'o
••5:
T ticio .......
Z:::�
0
!ibfit W;
gl
lIx
.. _44♦�
I-10, Any Use or Program a /
irI
loc.
L124
rcz
gip.,Youth Prograw^k;��rnA
� �Em
V�k 0"y
;;:^r�v3;r;. ...;;�;.,...5�:;'�' .r.. ��yy..,y5.y�y� A�y,�'.�r��:::sY',^h "'�: ,r�.;a'�...._• �'yfi .k+1c>;tv�. ^�_ �' ��`�`: �'' ?� •.�� }.- (■■//^.�,�.•.�� �? •�51,�: :; T'•.•.�Yb�..,�.w.•
V
�z?
6"Al NonAT6uth P.r66rim.AM, zX Youth Proorarmr D .• M
26-50
Non -Youth Program plir
-1 '_V#,^4-,A*%. vbvx,
7 wr
.:.f W43 via i m -it Wth
wn
14 V
aw
,: �•+Y i iT1, t.
Youth Program % y - 11r5'
r- �p
over 100
�-
Non-Youth Program
r
V. Fes .. - 541�5 Pv+
T V. pnove_ ever or eown cne_
up rA� r!5 move oVer or down
nime over- cr kws _1A
3 0 0 * d 3 INS 0 H InOA N 3 d S V INOa j
01
County of Pitkin f AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE BY
t ss. MAILING OF A PUBLIC HEARING
State of Colorado f FOR A CITY OF ASPEN
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
The undersigned, being first duly sworn, deposes and says as
follows:
I,
r
being or representing an Applicant for a City of Aspen Development
Permit, personally certify that the attached Exhibit 1 fairly and
accurately represents a listing of owners within three hundred feet
of the subject property and that these owners were notified via
first class mail on the day of
(Exhibit 1 attached)
A
Applicant's Signature
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this rday of Nqg�qgfA 19 ?Y
by /, L
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL.
My�ommi�on expires: !ZLIIA61
Votary P/blic's Signature
ELISA JUL IEN
Address NUTARY PUBLIC
31300 14WY 82 #11y,
ASPEN Co 81611
Jean -Paul Aube
522 Algonquin Blvd East
Timmins, Ontario PAN 1 B7
CANADA
Melvin L. and Dorthy K. Sommer
Trustees of Sommer Family Trust
Apt. 208
11939 Gorman Ave.
Los Angeles, CA 90049
Clark Ficke
PO Box 2995
Aspen, CO 81612
Gretchen and Michelle Hendricks
PO Box 9403
Aspen, CO 81612
Don Q. Lamb, Jr.
Linda Gilkerson
University of Chicago
5640 S Ellis Ave.
Chicago, IL 60637
William A. Reilly
Jane Whitaker Reilly
600 E Main St, #204
Aspen, CO 81611
Patti Wakefield
Box 865049
Plano, TX 75086
Robert D. and Ruth Jane Miller
600 E, Main #206
Aspen, CO 81611
Steve B Brough
Deborah A. Brough
599 Trout Lake Dr.
Sanger, CA 93657
Robert H. Borcherts
Holde H. Borcherts
1555 Washtenaw
Ann Arbor, MI 48104
Linda Lee Ross
426 Handley Blvd
Winchester, VA 22601
Richard S. and Katheryn J . Arnold
14 Riverridge Trail
Ormond Beach, FL 32174
Thomas J. Hilb
4600 East 48th Ave
Denver, CO 80201
Donald R. Heys
Marie L. Heys
2495 Adare
Ann Arbor, MI 48104
Austin Financial Co.
A Minnesota Corporation
6692 Manchester Blvd
Buena Park CA 90621
Bart Maetranzi
1101 N. Western
Park Ridge, IL 60068
Kathleen A. Mann
Box 2057
Aspen, CO 81612
Joseph A. Marchetti
1526 Forest Dr.
Glenview, IL 60025
Tom J. and Jean F. Martin
Route 1, Box 269M
George West, TX 78022
Ralph Doran
2500 Woodward Way
Atlanta, GA 30305
Ruben M and Edith M Cheniak
2800 So. University Blvd #110
Boulder, CO 80303
John L Sommer
5094 Avenida Hacienda #405
Tarzana CA 91356
Glenna Foster -Seipp and Marcia U
Foster
3215 Tarry Hollow Dr
Austin, TX 78703
Robert H. Mitchell
5934 Royal Lane, Ste 255
Dallas, TX 75230
Richard P. Coppock
PO Box 44
Dexter, MI 48130
Martha Foster
PO Box 585608
Dallas, TX 75218
John Hoban
5406 N, Briar Ridge Circle
McKinney TX 75070
Gilbert W. and Patsy K. Hicks
Trustees of Trust Agreement
3674 Woodlawn Terrace Place
Honolulu, HI 96822
David S. Kidder
3928 University Blvd
Dallas, TX 75205
William D. Arnett
Bette Lee Arnett
5333N N Camino Real
Tucson, AZ 85718
Jere McGaffey
777 E Wisconsin Ave Ste 3600
Milwaukee, WI 53202
Holland and Hart
600 E Main St
Aspen, CO 81611
Aspen 600
A Colorado Joint Venture
Box 3159
Aspen, CO 81612
Hunter Square Properties
Irving Biers
2900 Las Gallinas Ave
San Rafael CA 94903
Carisch Brothers
A Minnesota General Partnership
c/o Excellence Theaters -- STE 2700
230 West Monroe
Chicago, IL 60606
Dayton Heidelberg Dist Co.
1518 Dalton St
Cincinnati, OH 45214
Philip Z. and Marian S. Altfeld
PO Box 9170
Aspen, CO 81612
Hopkins Street Venture
c/o T.L. Mularz
Box 1328
Ashland, OR 92520
Mel Seid
1104 Dale Ave
Aspen, CO 81611
Spring Street Assoc.
A Colorado Joint Venture
David A Baxter
117 S Spring St
Aspen, CO 81611
Jordan C. Block
55 East Washington St.
Chicago, IL 60602
Neal A. Grant
Donna R. Grant
1500 Nall
Stanley, KS 66224
Bass Cahn Properties
Horsefins LLC
701 Gibson Ave
Aspen, CO 81611
W.R. Walton
0625 E Hopkins
PO Box 665
Aspen, CO 81612
E. Norris and Goodrich H. Taylor
#1 602 E Hyman Ave
Aspen, CO 81611
Frank J Woods
Suite 301 A
205 S Mill St
Aspen, CO 81611
Furngulf Ltd.
A Colorado Joint Venture
616 E Hyman
Aspen, CO 81611
Dr. Jack S. and Gesine Crandall
DBA Patio Bldg Co
PO Box 1066
Aspen, CO 81612
Bohdan D. Mysko
Dominion Shipping Corp
3 Riverway, Suite 120
Houston, TX 77056
Jean V. Trousdale
601 E Hopkins
Aspen, CO 81611
Theodore E. Okie
Katherine S. Okie
10800 Paramount Blvd
Downey, CA 90241
M.B. Joint Venture
A Colorado Joint Venture
c/o Fred Martel
3 Quail Run
Old Westbury, NY 11568
Richard P. and Dorthy P. Simmons
Amy P. and Brian P. Simmons
c/o Brian P. Simmons
2018 North Orleans
Chicago, IL 60614
William F. Carr, Trustee
PO Box 341
Carbondale CO 81623
Jaelly and Assoc. Ltd.
c/o John A. Elmore III
700 E Main St
Aspen, CO 81611
Fred and Barbara Martel
3 Quail Run
Old Westbury, NY 11568
Bobert Baum Radiger Dahle
35 Mayflower Drive 1945 Zapo St
Tenafly, NJ 07670 Del Mar CA 92014
Rowald J. and Dana L. Cohen Richard Burkley
6500 Rock Spring Drive 709 E Main St # 301
Bethesda, MD 20817 Aspen, CO 81611
Stephen J. and Elissa P. Salzman
Donald D. Damerell
1501 Beacon Street - #1902
Trustee of the Damerell Trust
Brookline, MA 02146
c/o ABD Irrigation
8444 Limonite
Red River Valley Investment Comp.
Riverside, CA 92509
A Minnesota General Partnership
408 St. Peter Street Suite 440
Joan C. Schoeder
St. Paul, MN 55102
53 Pima Ct
Boulder, CO 80303
Neil Ross
100 South Spring
Bayard Y. Hovdesven
Aspen, CO 81612
PO Box 3810
Aspen, CO 81612
Lido Anthony Iacocca
27777 Franklin Rd
Edward L. Thrasher, Jr
Southfield, MI 48034
PO Box 7974
Aspen, CO 81612
Reede Co. Ltd.
PO Box 122
Christine Aubale Gerschel
Mignot Plateau
PO Box 2985
St Peter Port, Guernsey
Aspen, CO 81612
CHANNEL ISLAND
Henry R. Filip
Robert J. Appel
Box 4381 -- 205 South Third St
700 Park Ave, Ste 18A
Aspen, CO 81612
New York, NY 10021
Laurie Van Woerkom
Michael and Marcy Gribitzn
PO Box 341
13800 NW Fourth St
Woody Creek, CO 81656
Sunrise FL 33324
Shelby J. Travis
Sharon H. Tingle
208 E 28th St. Apt #2G
PO Box 4189
New York, NY 10016
Aspen, CO 81612
Mary Jo Berscheit
PO Box 1414
Aspen, CO 81612
Jonathan G. Ashton
PO Box 4038
Aspen, CO 81612
Vicki Pattersont
1500 Homestake Dr
Aspen CO 81611
Gabriella Bursten
PO Box 571
Pacific Palisades, CA
Trent E. Cowart
125 Hayward Heights
Glenrock, PA 17327
Jeffrey N Williams & Kevin G Hutchins
Box 9817
Aspen, CO 81612
Palmer C. Casey
Apartment 8
1047 Euclid Street
Santa Monica, CA 90403
William R. Dunaway
PO Box E
Aspen, CO 81612
Larry Jones
90272 PO Box 2152
Aspen, CO 81612
Bunny Olds
2010 3rd St # 209
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Thomas E. and Vivian E. Thoburn
3206 Buckingham Lane
Coca, FL 32926
Vibeke Traulsen
Box 8916
Aspen, CO 81612
Nicholas J Gubser
Box 870
Aspen, CO 81612
Sam Hill
Box 10216
Aspen, CO 81612
Ewald Rainer
409 E Cooper Ave #4
Aspen, CO 81611
Mountain States Communications, Inc
PO Box E
Aspen, CO 81612
Wayne Glover
11288 Ventura Blvd STE 710
Studio City CA 91604
Dieter & Peter Cantrup
57 Cub Ct
El Jebel , CO 81628
Leonard and Sandra Cave
1400 Tucker Lane
Ashton, MD 20861
Marilyn Oberembt
B.G. Oberembt
PO Box 1730
Pawley Island, SC 29585
Greg Sherwin
1028 E. Hopkins #26
Aspen, CO 81611
Richard N. and Mary L. Lee
Rural Route 1
Altanta, KS 67008
Nicholas Cipollino
Box 379
Stratton VT 05155
Ralph R. Devine
P.J. Sullivan
PO Box 7851
Aspen, CO 81612
Kenneth Heininger
Jeanne Heininger
PO Box 307
Charlevoix, MI 49720
Margaret A. Conner
Claude M. Conner & Warren J. Conner
534 E Hopkins Ave
Aspen, CO 81611
Aspen Plaza Co.
PO Box 1709
Aspen, CO 81612
Charles Cunniffe
520 E Hyman Ave
Aspen, CO 81611
Alpine Bank Aspen
A Colorado Banking Corp.
600 E Hopkins Ave
Aspen, CO 81611
Dennis Chookaszian
1235 Whitebridge Lane
Winnetka, IL 60093
Sheldon J. Diller
77025 Fernando Ave
La Quinta, CA 92253
Edge of Ajax, Inc.
PO Box 2202
Aspen, CO 81612
City Manager
130 South Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Pitkin County Manager
530 East Main
Aspen, CO 81611
County of P itk in t AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE BY
t s s . MAILING OF A PUBLIC HEARING
State of Colorado t FOR A CITY OF ASPEN
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
The undersigned, being first duly sworn, deposes and says as
follows:
I,
11
being or representing an Applicant for a City of Aspen Development
Permit, personally certify that the attached photograph 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 sign was posted and visible continuously from the day of
gr)uw .�( 3
19at to the k- day of , 19 - •
e
Appli an-�' s S ignaLre
Subscribed and sworn to before me
this i sr day of AW940EI2 19 iy
by 1)el ,
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL.
My ommission expires:-
otary P bl ic' s Signature
Address NOTARY P U B L IC
31300 HWY 82
ASP EN CO 81611
Attachment 8
County of Pitkin }
} Ss.
State of Colorado }
AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT
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:
1. 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 ( 3 0 0 ) feet of the
subject property, as indicated on the attached list, on
the day of �-� , 199,E (which is days
prior to the public hearing date of
2. By posting a sign 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 2 day of �C-� , 199,
to the r day of "'� ( I %� „199 (Must be
posted for at least ten (10D lull# dWo 4fore the hearing
date). A photograph of os e ign is attached
hereto.
Signature
(Attach photograph here) Signed before me this day of
Uc•-�o l e,,A—_ , 199q. by
C'�2A m- ZC IICrZ--.
VILTNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL
My (��Commiss ' on expires: Z (5 1 7
Notary Public
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: CHISHOLM CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW FOR AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on
Tuesday, November 1, 1994, at a meeting to begin at 4:30 pm before
the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission in the second floor
meeting room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado, to
consider an application submitted by Edith, Heather and Karen
Chisholm, 205 W. Main Street requesting Conditional Use Approval
for an Accessory Dwelling Unit to be located in the existing
residence at 205 W. Main Street, the East 15' of Lot G and all of
Lots H and I, Block 52, City and Townsite of Aspen. 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