HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ca.Church Cond Use Day Care Center.30A-87Churlia;galase.:� Offi� e Zorn �
C
ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303) 925-2020
LAND USE APPLICATION FEES
City
00113
- 63721
- 47331
GMP/CONCEPTUAL
- 63722
- 47332
GMP/PRELIMINARY
- 63723
- 47333
GMP/FINAL
- 63724
- 47341
SUB/CONCEPTUAL
- 63725
- 47342
SUB/PRELIMINARY
- 63726
- 63727
- 47343
- 47350
SUB/FINAL
ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS �, Li y D
- 63728
- 47360
ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS/
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
REFERRAL
FEES:
00125
- 63730
- 47380
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
00123
- 63730
- 47380
HOUSING
00115
- 63730
- 47380
ENGINEERING
SUB -TOTAL
County
00113
- 63711
- 47431
GMP/GENERAL
- 63712
- 47432
GMP/DETAILED
- 63713
- 47433
GMP/FINAL
- 63714
- 47441
SUB/GENERAL
- 63715
- 47442
SUB/DETAILED
- 63716
- 47443
SUB/FINAL
- 63717
- 47450
ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS
- 63718
- 47460
ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS/
CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS
REFERRAL
FEES:
00125
- 63730
- 47480
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
00123
- 63730
- 47480
HOUSING
00113
- 63731
- 47480
ENVIRONMENTAL COORD.
00113
- 63732
- 47480
ENGINEERING
SUB -TOTAL
PLANNING OFFICE SALES
00113
- 63061
- 09000
COUNTY CODE
- 63062
- 09000
COMP. PLAN
- 63066
- 09000
COPY FEES
- 63069
- 09000
OTHER
SUB -TOTAL
Name: � �/{Ar M.
,_ { TOTAL 49
wv,6 tff 74ves7nC"t/� Phone:
Address:
-D•
D D5a
Project: Ctivr(C-04d" -MAI 5e cv ft
souen,CD
A imdrotni
Check#
r ! �'
Date: AL,10)t11,j J
Additional Billing:
# of Hours:
DATE RECEIVED: �oZ/
DATE COMPLETE:
PROJECT NAME:1Z
Project Address:
APPLICANT. f /UrjL
ApplicantAddress':
CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
City of Aspen
PARCEL ID AND CASE NO_
3 Q/q -�
STAFF MEMBER: �� J
fv ih /% ��i� -e Z10" V
REPRESENTATIVE: 00-ri 2 t_ I le✓) rt0.m i t't0 Yl
Representative Address/Phone: 66/ E . Z4,407ar
TYPE OF APPLICATION: C.00�� 11)13-7 er7(.�HI erg
PAID: YES NO AMOUNT: // Zt PO • OO
1 STEP APPLICATION:
P&Z
MEETING DATE:
-/ 93
PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO
DATE REFERRED: l - INITIALS:
2%STEP APPLICATION:
CC MEETING DATE: PUBLIC HEARING:(
DATE REFERRED: INITIALS:
r�
ES NO P�
------
REFERRALS:
City Attorney Mtn. Bell School District
City Engineer
Housing Dir.
Aspen Water
City Electric
Envir. Hlth.
Aspen Consol.
S.D.
Parks Dept.
Holy Cross
Fire Marshall
Fire Chief
Roaring Fork
Transit
Rocky Mtn Nat Gas
State Hwy Dept(GW)
State Hwy Dept(GJ)
B1dg:Zon/Inspect
Roaring Fork
Energy Center
Other
-- - -------------- --------
FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: INITIAL:
City Atty City Engineer ✓ Bldg. Dept.
Other: /
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION:
Iorwcol .i:\►Dili W,
TO: Aspen City Council
THRU: Robert S. Anderson, Jr., City Manager
FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office AK
RE: Second Reading of Municipal Code Amendment: Church and
Daycare Center in Office Zone District
DATE: December 14, 1987
SUMMARY: The Planning Office and Planning and Zoning Commission
recommend Council to approve Ordinance 56- (Series of 1987) on
second reading.
PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT: Mary Webster is requesting that a church
be added as a conditional use for designated historic landmarks
in the O - Office Zone District. This privately initiated code
amendment was sponsored by the Planning and Zoning Commission for
the purpose of relief from the semi-annual application dates.
City Council initiated a code amendment to add a daycare center
as a conditional use for all structures in the O - Office Zone
District.
PRIOR COUNCIL AND COMMISSION ACTIONS: On October 20, 1987 the
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously recommended to
City Council to amend the Zoning Code to add church as a condi-
tional use for historic landmarks in the Office Zone Dsitrict and
make daty care center a condtional use in the office Zone
Dsitrict for all structures. City Council approved first reading
of Ordinance 55 (Series of 1987) on November 9, 1987.
PROBLEM DISCUSSION:
A. CHURCH CONDITIONAL USE: The Planning Office has the follow-
ing comments in response to the rezoning and zoning code amend-
ment evaluation criteria stated in Section 24-12.5(d) of the
Municipal Code:
1. Criteria: Compatibility of the rezoning proposal with the
surrounding zone districts and land use in the vicinity of
the site, considering the existing neighborhood characteris-
tics, the applicable area and bulk requirements, and the
suitability of the site for development in terms of on -site
characteristics.
Response: The Office Zone District encompasses Main Street
and approximately four blocks flanking the commercial core
on the east and west (see map attached). The intent of the
zone district is "... to preserve the visual scale and
character of formerly residential areas that now are
adjacent to commercial and business areas and along Main
Street..." Historic structures within the O zone are
principally along Main Street. A mix of uses - including
residences, offices, lodges, boardinghouses, and a variety
of generally low intensity retail commercial uses - occur
both within historic structures and in adjacent non -historic
structures.
Staff agrees with the applicant that the church use is
principally compatible with both the residential and
nonresidential uses in the zone district. The use should
lend itself to preservation and maintenance of historic
structures. While a church is not a commercial use, it can
have some of the same impacts as commercial uses, such as
traffic generation, parking demand, noise generation and
special signage or lighting. However, churches are typical-
ly not intensively used on a daily basis; and they can be
fairly low-keyed in both the size of operation and degree of
advertising/image display. Churches are a traditional
component of a residential neighborhood; and, in this
respect, they may contribute to or be compatible with the
residential character of Main Street. In general, we find
that a church should not negatively impact the visual
character or use intensity of Main Street.
It should be noted that the conditional use review requires
case by case determination by the Planning and Zoning
Commission of the use's appropriateness for a specific
location and historic structure. Consequently, at a public
hearing specific aspects of compatibility would be reviewed.
This zoning code amendment would allow application to be
made, but should not be construed as approval for any
particular conditional use.
2. Criteria: Impacts of the rezoning upon expected traffic
generation and road safety, availability of on- and off-
street parking and ability to provide utility service in the
vicinity of the site, including an assessment of the fiscal
impact upon the community of the proposed rezoning.
Response: Churches can be high traffic generators and
require significant parking. The parking requirement in the
O zone district is 3 spaces/1,000 square feet for non-
residential uses, with as few spaces as 1.5 spaces/1,000
square feet permitted by special review of P&Z. A higher
parking requirement may be needed for a church use, to be
considered as a part of the conditional use review depending
on number of pews, proximity to congregation members who
would walk, and alternative transportation. As noted by the
2
applicant, churches on Main Street would be accessible by
RFTA mass transit; and this may alleviate some automobile
traffic. Acceptability of road safety impacts depends also
on adequate drop-off and pick-up. Staff believes that these
impacts can be adequately reviewed during the condit-
ional use review.
3. Criteria: Impacts of the rezoning upon expected air and
water quality in the vicinity of the site.
Response: Impacts on air quality depend upon traffic aspects
of a project and solid -burning stoves and fireplaces. This
matter can be addressed at conditional use review. No water
quality impacts are anticipated from a church.
4. Criteria: Analysis of the community need for the proposed
rezoning and an assessment of the relationship of the
rezoning proposal to the goal of overall community balance.
Response: To our knowledge, all existing church facilities
in Aspen are occupied. Churches are a conditional use in all
residential zone districts and in the CC zone district. It
appears that the need for churches is fairly minimal,
depending on the organization, location, and availability of
property. Considering the intent of an application, there
appears to be some need for a church on Main Street.
5. Criteria: Compatibility of the proposed rezoning with the
Aspen Area General Plan of 1966, as amended.
Response: One of the objectives of the Aspen Area
Comprehensive Plan: Historic Preservation Element is to
encourage productive and economically attractive uses of
historic structures. The historic preservation incentives
program has added the bed and breakfast conditional use to
the Office Zone District, in an attempt to find other
appropriate uses for historic structures on Main Street. We
believe adding a church to the conditional use table is also
consistent with the plan as it can be an appropriate
"adaptive reuse" for a historic residence. Another aspect of
the Aspen Area General Plan, as amended, pertains to the
intent to not allow Main Street to become a commercial
strip. This is addressed in the compatibility discussion
above.
6. Criteria: Whether the proposed rezoning will promote the
health, safety and general welfare of the residents and
visitors to the city of Aspen.
Response: If the church conditional use assists efforts to
preserve historic structures, we assert that this promotes
Aspen's general welfare.
3
B.DAYCARE CENTER CONDITIONAL USE: The following comments on the
daycare use pertain to criteria for rezoning and zoning code
amendments. The criteria has been abbreviated since it is recited
in full above.
1. Criteria: Compatibility with surrounding zone districts and
land use in the vicinity.
Response: Issues of compatibility of a daycare center in the
Office Zone District include: traffic generation, parking,
safe drop-off and pick-up, hours of operation, and size of
operation. At the present time, daycare center is already a
conditional use in the Office Zone District for designated
historic landmarks. Issues of compatibility can be dealt
with through the conditional use review as effectively for
nonhistoric structures as for only historic structures.
2. Criteria: Impacts of rezoning upon expected traffic
generation and road safety, availability of on- and off-
street parking, utility service, and fiscal impacts.
Response: Impacts on traffic, parking, utilities and the
City's fiscal situation would not be substantially greater
by making daycare center a conditional use for both historic
and non -historic structures.
3. Criteria: Impacts on air and water quality.
Response: No change in air and water quality should result
from the proposed code amendment.
4. Criteria: Analysis of the community need for the proposed
rezoning and an assessment of the relationship of the
rezoning proposal to the goal of overall community balance.
Response: Daycare center service has been identified as a
very important, necessary and undersupplied service to the
community. For this reason, City Council has proposed the
code amendment so to allow daycare centers to occupy
nonhistoric structures in the Office Zone District as well
as historic structures. Community balance in terms of the
growing number of young children would be served by loosen-
ing the regulations on where daycare centers can be located.
A question came up at the Planning and Zoning Commission
hearing with regard to liquor license proximity to daycare
centers. Kathryn Koch researched the matter and concluded
that "preschools", including daycare centers, do not fall
under the State Statutes that limit proximity between liquor
license holders and daycare centers. (See memorandum
4
0`0" NO C4P000-I
POA UM wttw CIPLOA ADO AtOtOrr ArKtr ICA% LAMD TV?LI Arac _sArVOM aMVr[a'a rot. ►rr-pose ♦ tow taw"Lwo .O .1 70
� I If f.'I I' 1 F. A
nn...unlnf$ 241,000.0U 1'..I.:)1.• "/SOU%Ut,
Itatrofl..It.% October 12, 1978+ 1 0l 3
!:01 P.M.
i \�mr of In.nn d
MAPY M. WL•BSTLJ: AND L'; G. SORENSFN
lbr .•.141r .n .rur-1 .n Ih, land d. •• . 1L 1 h. rr.n and %htrh u 4-n%rrr4 h% thit, yo10" is
IN FEE SIMPLE
3 The ..letr at taterr•a* rrf, rr.-rl +o herrut t. at Datr of Policy rued on:
KARY M. WF.BSTER, as to an undivided ei..t,ty ppr-cent interest and
LIS C. SORENSEN, as to an undivided twenty per -cent interest,
as tenants in common
► IME No C-Otlo0.1
"p VW FIT" OOLOYOO IMGIC04 AMWIIICAN LAAf4 TITLE A&SC, '.IATION LOAN ►OI.KT t*Vo .AriMeC M IT !O
PON %M Wl�" COLONA00 WMICY '..IwICAN LAMO TITLE ANOCIATIOM OWfta* S `OLKTVOM 6-99100 IAWiA tD N fT90,
�, 1 11 F [1 1 I. F. A Con(inurd
i iI. iaod rr6�rr..1 tII in thl. p.11• � I. AIInAI..; uI tl.. •.t, c! (s.totar!.I. (.c.ut::� a!
r' t t it l ft An.l t. cir. rlbN as 64.1boms
LOM. R A?C) L , E1UrK 18, C I n' AND '1[at 16 I ti. OF XcZ M
FORM 01e16) C-00w 3
,Or. U" WITH C..I OA.DCI "r :i0., AYERICAM LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION LOAM COIKV Ta1O Ca' rEMOSO Ia r1.}OI
MO VRE W!TM COLORADO ALC,N AWLR.CAN LAND TITLE AaaOCIA-1{Hr OIAMER e M :- iomw ♦9910 IAAsUBeMCO /0 IT-t101
� 1 11 1 11 1 1 1 11
'I I... Vol., A.,. e)..t In•Itn alcr.u•r low. (r .Irn:..t., ! r. A.•.,I ..l rhr f�IhIwIR!
I Hlethlp or rlaim..11 I..rr1.• Ie) p....rs...a n.•1 .h... e) /,. 16r I•IJ•.Ic r•• ord..
2. 1 asrrrlr•nl., o► claim. c•1 ra•rmr• IA. not ooisw ., Ir 16- pufillr r.•rr W .
S. Dow rrpancira. "veto,. I. In lomw1Ar% hrer•.-1,twavr It, arra. no and am farts whirls a rov
rrcI .unrI elect Itv{... I1..11 14 1Iw p,rol. wwIl.I .11•, I. an., .• hI. h Are n"I sh••T.rl M tlw public re -cord,
4. Ani lien. n► right le) A fire). Inc .. nWo. . lal"., got nulrrul herrl.d..rr IH hrrr.(1••1 furrlish►d, iwlprrrd h%
law and not Amio,it h% the pubhc rr.or.l-
5. Iaare JII• and pa%ahl• . and any IA.. •I••-IAI n.. I.t.. •4.rc• fir., klIq...-.{ [.or wA1.r ur .rwr,
ruin, or for am ollo r .1w. ul 14%11k; dl.Irr. I
6. fisservaticns and wcepti ns as rJOnt3:"I"I 1-1 thesl< ".:..U.
prc erty in the City and Tteraite of Aspen, as fnl lo6--
"provided, that m title shall be hereby arrgaired tc. arry R:r>le of gold, silver,
cirviabar, or x;lper o: w any vajid nurun:l claim or possession helea rder exist-
utKj laws; and provided further that the grant h-•reloy ie is hytld and declared
t) be suhjWt tD all conditions, limitations rixl 1esu actions, conta!nlPd in Soctit
2386 of the Aevised Statutes of the United States, so far as tlx.san+r are applicable
Lhcreto."
7. Terr> vis:ons, txr-dens and obli0at ions as ccnitairvw' in Cr, riinanor No. 60, (Ser iss
of 1976) in Record of Proceedings designating sub)er--t prjW-xy as :n Historic District
rocorded Deccrlber 9, 1976 in DoLA 321 at Page 51.
g . D)eet) of Trust fnw : TwTle W. Allen
to the Public ':hate a of the Oamty of Pitkin
for the use of Rocky Maintain Dquity anti Mortgage Co.
to secure $25,000.00
cis tEKi April 10, 1978
_Vrx9_je1? April 1J, 1978 L, Book 345 at Pane 94n.
�`:�
,rc .
r
MEMORANDUM
NOV 21987 ,
TO: Steve Burstein, Planning Office
FROM: Kathryn Koch, City Clerk
DATE: November 3, 1987
RE: Liquor License Proximity to Schools
The liquor license division's rule of thumb regarding
schools and proximity to liquor licenses is if the school is
accredited by the Board of Education, it is a school. The
division says preschools do not fall under C.R.S. 12-47-111 (2).
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen City Council
THRU: Robert S. Anderson, Jr., City Manager
FROM: Steve Burstein, Planning OfficeZ
RE: Municipal Code Amendment: Church and Daycare Center in
Office Zone District (Public Hearing)
DATE: October 20, 1987
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Planning Office and Planning and Zoning Commission
recommend Council to approve Ordinance SS (Series of 1987) on
first reading.
PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENT: Mary Webster is requesting that a church
be added as a conditional use for designated historic landmarks
in the O - Office Zone District. This privately initiated code
amendment was sponsored by the Planning and Zoning Commission for
the purpose of relief from the semi-annual application dates.
City Council initiated a code amendment to add a daycare center
as a conditional use for all structures in the O - Office Zone
District.
PROBLEM DISCUSSION:
A. CHURCH CONDITIONAL USE: The Planning Office has the follow-
ing comments in response to the rezoning and zoning code amend-
ment evaluation criteria stated in Section 24-12.5(d) of the
Municipal Code:
1. Criteria: Compatibility of the rezoning proposal with the
surrounding zone districts and land use in the vicinity of
the site, considering the existing neighborhood characteris-
tics, the applicable area and bulk requirements, and the
suitability of the site for development in terms of on -site
characteristics.
Response: The Office Zone District encompasses Main Street
and approximately four blocks flanking the commercial core
on the east and west (see map attached). The intent of the
zone district is "... to preserve the visual scale and
character of formerly residential areas that now are
adjacent to commercial and business areas and along Main
Street..." Historic structures within the O zone are
principally along Main Street. A mix of uses - including
residences, offices, lodges, boardinghouses, and a variety
of generally low intensity retail commercial uses - occur
both within historic structures and in adjacent non -historic
structures.
Staff agrees with the applicant that the church use is
principally compatible within the zone district. The use
should lend itself to preservation and maintenance of
historic structures and may reenforce the residential
character aspect of Main Street. While a church is not a
commercial use, it can have some of the same impacts as
commercial uses, such as traffic generation, parking demand,
noise generation and special signage or lighting. However,
churches are typically not intensively used on a daily
basis; and they can be fairly low-keyed in both the size of
operation and degree of advertising/image display. Churches
are a traditional component of a residential neighborhood;
and, in this respect, they may contribute to or be compat-
ible with the residential character of Main Street. In
general, we find that a church should not negatively impact
the visual character or use intensity of Main Street.
It should be noted that the conditional use review requires
case by case determination by the Planning and Zoning
Commission of the use's appropriateness for a specific
location and historic structure. Consequently, at a public
hearing specific aspects of compatibility would be reviewed.
This zoning code amendment would allow application to be
made, but should not be construed as approval for any
particular conditional use.
2. Criteria: Impacts of the rezoning upon expected traffic
generation and road safety, availability of on- and off-
street parking and ability to provide utility service in the
vicinity of the site, including an assessment of the fiscal
impact upon the community of the proposed rezoning.
Response: Churches can be high traffic generators and
require significant parking. The parking requirement in the
O zone district is 3 spaces/1,000 square feet for non-
residential uses, with as few spaces as 1.5 spaces/1,000
square feet permitted by special review of P&Z. A higher
parking requirement may be needed for a church use, to be
considered as a part of the conditional use review depending
on number of pews, proximity to congregation members who
would walk, and alternative transportation. As noted by the
applicant, churches on Main Street would be accessible by
RFTA mass transit; and this may alleviate some automobile
traffic. Acceptability of road safety impacts depends also
on adequate drop-off and pick-up. Staff believes that these
impacts can be adequately reviewed during the condit-
ional use review.
3. Criteria: Impacts of the rezoning upon expected air and
2
water quality in the vicinity of the site.
Response: Impacts on air quality depend upon traffic aspects
of a project and solid -burning stoves and fireplaces. This
matter can be addressed at conditional use review. No water
quality impacts are anticipated from a church.
4. Criteria: Analysis of the community need for the proposed
rezoning and an assessment of the relationship of the
rezoning proposal to the goal of overall community balance.
Response: To our knowledge, all existing church facilities
in Aspen are occupied. Churches are a conditional use in all
residential zone districts and in the CC zone district. It
appears that the need for churches is fairly minimal,
depending on the organization, location, and availability of
property. Considering the intent of an application, there
appears to be some need for a church on Main Street.
5. Criteria: Compatibility of the proposed rezoning with the
Aspen Area General Plan of 1966, as amended.
Response: One of the objectives of the Aspen Area
Comprehensive Plan: Historic Preservation Element is to
encourage productive and economically attractive uses of
historic structures. The historic preservation incentives
program has added the bed and breakfast conditional use to
the Office Zone District, in an attempt to find other
appropriate uses for historic structures on Main Street. We
believe adding a church to the conditional use table is also
consistent with the plan as it can be an appropriate
"adaptive reuse" for a historic residence. Another aspect of
the Aspen Area General Plan, as amended, pertains to the
intent to not allow Main Street to become a commercial
strip. This is addressed in the compatibility discussion
above.
6. Criteria: Whether the proposed rezoning will promote the
health, safety and general welfare of the residents and
visitors to the city of Aspen.
Response: If the church conditional use assists efforts to
preserve historic structures, we assert that this promotes
Aspen's general welfare.
B.DAYCARE CENTER CONDITIONAL USE: The following comments on the
daycare use pertain to criteria for rezoning and zoning code
amendments. The criteria has been abbreviated since it is recited
in full above.
1. Criteria: Compatibility with surrounding zone districts and
3
land use in the vicinity.
Response: Issues of compatibility of a daycare center in the
Office Zone District include: traffic generation, parking,
safe drop-off and pick-up, hours of operation, and size of
operation. At the present time, daycare center is already a
conditional use in the Office Zone District for designated
historic landmarks. Issues of compatibility can be dealt
with through the conditional use review as effectively for
nonhistoric structures as for only historic structures.
2. Criteria: Impacts of rezoning upon expected traffic
generation and road safety, availability of on- and off-
street parking, utility service, and fiscal impacts.
Response: Impacts on traffic, parking, utilities and the
City's fiscal situation would not be substantially greater
by making daycare center a conditional use for both historic
and non -historic structures.
3. Criteria: Impacts on air and water quality.
Response: No change in air and water quality should result
from the proposed code amendment.
4. Criteria: Analysis of the community need for the proposed
rezoning and an assessment of the relationship of the
rezoning proposal to the goal of overall community balance.
Response: Daycare center service has been identified as a
very important, necessary and undersupplied service to the
community. For this reason, City Council has proposed the
code amendment so to allow daycare centers to occupy
nonhistoric structures in the Office Zone District as well
as historic structures. Community balance in terms of the
growing number of young children would be served by loosen-
ing the regulations on where daycare centers can be located.
A question came up at the Planning and Zoning Commission
hearing with regard to liquor license proximity to daycare
centers. Kathryn Koch researched the matter and concluded
that "preschools", including daycare centers, do not fall
under the State Statutes that limit proximity between liquor
license holders and daycare centers. (See memorandum
attached.) Consequently, we do not believe that nearness to
a bar is a grave obstacle to daycare center location,
although it may be a general consideration during the
conditional use review.
5. Criteria: Compatibility with the Aspen Area General Plan of
1966 as amended.
4
Response: Allowing daycare centers in all structures in the
Office Zone District may have some negative effect on the
group of historic preservation incentives entailed in the
current zoning code and encouraged by the Historic Preserva-
tion Plan Element. However, provision of daycare centers in
convenient in -town locations may reduce vehicular traffic as
a Transportation Element goal.
6. Criteria: Promotion of health, safety and general welfare.
Response: Allowing for more flexibility in where daycare
centers can locate and consequently promoting more daycare
centers in Aspen would promote the general welfare of the
increasing number of young families with children in Aspen.
ADVISORY COMMISSION VOTE: On October 20, 1987 the Aspen Planning
and Zoning Commission unanimously recommended to City Council to
amend the Zoning Code to add church as a conditional use for
historic landmarks in the Office Zone Dsitrict and make daty care
center a condtional use in the office Zone Dsitrict for all
structures.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "Move to read Ordinance Jr, (Series of
1987).--
"Move to approve ordinance 5'5(Series of 1987) on first read-
ing."
190M _U1
5
CITY OF ASPEN
130 south galena street
aspen, Colorado 81611
303-925 -2020
LAND USE APPLICATION FORM
DATE SUBMITTED
FEES
'),
$1,490.00
NAME Mary M. Webster _
ADDRESS P.O. Box 4052, Aspen, CO 81612
PHONE 925-4253, 923-5252
NAME OF PRO.7ECT _ Proposed new conditional use in "0" (office) zone
PRESENT ZONINS 0 (Office Zone)
LOT SIZF. n/a
LOCATION n/a _
(indicate street address, lot and block number. May require legal
description. A vicinity map is very useful.)
CURRENT BUILD -OUT n/a sq. ft. units
PROPOSED BUILD -OUT n/a sq. ft. units
DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING USES The current permitted and conditional uses for the "0"
(office) zone are set forth on Exhibit "A" attached hereto.
DESCRIPTION OF LAND USE PROPOSAL Add a church as a conditional use to the "0" office
zone.
TYPE OF APPLICATION Municipal Code of City of Aspen amendment
APPLICABLE CODE SECTION (S) 24-3.2, Chapter 24 Article XII
FLAT AMENDMENT REQUIRED - YES X _ _-__NO
DATE PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE COMPLETED _ 6/23/87
ATTACHMENTS: 1. All applicants must supply Proof of Ownership in the form of a
title insurance commitment or statement from an attorney indicating
that he/she has researched the title and verifies that the applicant
is the owner of the property (free of liens and eucumbrances.)
2. If the process requires a public hearing, a Property Owner's List
must be supplied which gives all owners within 300 feet in all
directions in some cases and adjacent owners in some cases.
3. Number of copies required (by code and/or in pre -application
conference.)
4. Plat by Registered Surveyor as X No
attached.) Consequently, we do not believe that nearness to
a bar is a serious obstacle to daycare center location,
although it may be a general consideration during the
conditional use review.
5. Criteria: Compatibility with the Aspen Area General Plan of
1966 as amended.
Response: Allowing daycare centers in all structures in the
Office Zone District may have some negative effect on the
group of historic preservation incentives entailed in the
current zoning code and encouraged by the Historic Preserva-
tion Plan Element. However, provision of daycare centers in
convenient in -town locations may reduce vehicular traffic as
a Transportation Element goal.
6. Criteria: Promotion of health, safety and general welfare.
Response: Allowing for more flexibility in where daycare
centers can locate and consequently promoting more daycare
centers in Aspen would promote the general welfare of the
increasing number of young families with children in Aspen.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "Move to approve Ordinance 575- (Series of
1987) on second reading."
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS:
sb.chda
5
71
I-1 L1 ._!_I 1A = !.L! '_4j. ! LI__I U-! :-- :._. :_L!�I I !_U o!.L!
.; ,-� �� �� i?'� ��--� (1 11TrT� ��� �r�� I—� �I(IT�IT�T
1 jk. 11--LI-i Z I. 1_� _ I _J ^ _i�� .L�_ N L L;WL
W SLEEPiR ST.
! I •�/� •I •gyp .l r' --� I
-T_T1 H t-1.• ! TT i II I -I i I I T,' ; ��
- -, - — 1
i I j I: f ; I H
LI1.: �1_ L I . > _ �1� , . Z ,1
---------'� IrI MAIN 1ST I— —1 w70CW 600IN 00'�\% tr }, ---100
1 __
;
l bi✓ ~ ♦,;'
400W 300W !'12OOW (N) V 0. 1
I I 1 ._— I I 1` --_! ._.__-L 1 �'`ao ! I �Ll I — ( — l•-_--•--+ _C—L� I O PAEPI F
T
71-Fil
PARK
-7
, 1 I � I.'Mr • 'I I I H� I I N � I I � i N
I I _1_ _ i l l 1 In ! I l 1I (i 1 L D T.
h
r— —�-- I ! —---- M' +OPKINS — AVE-- 6 1 --J r;
� � 1 Q�
t O I � �I le �
"q�^ I1
Trt O I
I I ♦ i ' I i T� i I�n' p�p p' • I] N i Ei
I t4 I
%;; QSlJF"V 111A, —AVE. i M
_~C:/.�``` -1 I IA 1 - -i 1 --�-,- f 'y = +r
fit
L--
r_ �rT I — O T_
JUAN '
17
I
vw
vpQ/5
3 0 0 E
PARK
— — — — — — :-,UAANTf— AVE.
CRIi-il ul.
7 V, 4 .6T1
.N 57
I
1 4 1 1
I NJ T
A t- —
1/424
600E 1 7 0 0 E
T T
c
Fil
I E HOPKINS AVE.
Dy �� 1
E. HYMAN 1 AVE
Ir
z
0
t,,L 'TTI-TI
i—�IT
L;
T-T-T-T-
C L
IT" t
LT
--- r-A
F7
L
I r7
TT-- T -T
PRE —APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY
6 �3 -j
PROJECT: MAL C �0(c CDn) �Onnl �St i>1 (J�Ticti � �
AAPLICANT' S REPRESENTATIVE: 71 po., �ih i �A m i� �uh
REPRESENTATIVE'S PHONE: �MAV ' �'V4ff4r
OWNERS NAME:
1. Type of Application:
SUMMARY
C, Arne
2. Describe action/type of development being requested:
C(19 j* Chv 41 tv CVIM� Ll ,,,,. D�flu �Dh� 0),tri��I ihp�
(b„j,hi+nA) Vtt Yooen 4lh Ant_4rl foYG3Afli C6;Jl"" Sov-'--
3. Areas in which Applicant has been requested to respond, types of
reports requested:
Policy Area/
Referral Agent
4. Review is: (P&Z Only)
Comments -
t ' R' f 1 ou ' 1
S �dr) d ►u a.�-�vc1�
� tr;, fi N i,1w Prr� f►c��,�
Ust intltio►w�n ,
-t t rlrn,fnt o6j', ;off I Mlai,)t.,u�r
I iMln fA c I�r � ✓� � � ,teviic�tP���;,,1.
KV to u)A tip
P _z T�v_Th�{nfi►K5 ��� 1(� { 01� � b t'1 CI itfi„a
�l b I�cre 1
�o�ac,) m )��� i 1 . S�o�1� ProP01"4+ 'p 45 M Nn f�G►hPH
(CC/BOCC Only) /(ftT-Vhe�nto CC/BOCC)
5. Public Hearing: (YES) (NO)
6. Did you tell app]-jcant to submit list of ADJACENT PROPERTY
OWNERS? (YES) (NO -Disclosure of Ownership: (YES) :(NO)
7.
What fee was applicant requested to submit: 1'
8. Anticipated date of submission:
9. COMMENTS/UNIQUE CONCERNS:
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT: OFFICE ZONE DISTRICT,
CONDITIONAL USES; CHURCHES/DAY CARE CENTERS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on
Tuesday, October 20, 1987, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 P.M.
before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, in the City
Council Chambers, 1st Floor, 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen,
Colorado, to consider two code amendments to the Office Zone Use
tables: 1) Mary Webster requesting to add Church as a conditional
use for structures which received historic designation to the "O"
Office Zone District; and 2) a proposal to add Day Care Center as
a conditional use for all structures in the "O" Office Zone
District.
For further information, contact the Aspen/Pitkin Planning
Office, 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-
2020, ext. 223.
s/C. Welton Anderson
Chairman, Aspen Planning and
Zoning Commission
Published in the Aspen Times on September 17, 1987.
City of Aspen Account.
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT: CHURCH IN OFFICE ZONE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on
Tuesday, October 20, 1987, at a meeting to begin at 5:00 P.M.
before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, in the City
Council Chambers on the first floor of City Hall, 130 S. Galena
Street, Aspen, Colorado, to consider an application submitted by
Mary Webster requesting a Code Amendment to add a church as a
conditional use for structures which received historic designa-
tion to the "O" Office Zone district.
For further information, contact the Aspen/Pitkin Planning
Office, 130 S. Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-
2020, ext. 223.
s/C. Welton Anderson
Chairman, Aspen Planning and
Zoning Commission
Published in the Aspen Times on October 1, 1987.
City of Aspen Account.
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Attorney
FORM: Steve Burstein, Planning Office
RE: Municipal Code Amendment: Church in Office Zone
DATE: Sept. 3, 1987
----------------------------------------------------------------
Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted
by Mary Webster requesting a Code Amendment to add a church as a
conditional use for structures which received historic designa-
tion to the "O" Office Zone district.
Please review this material and send your comments to this office
no later than Sept. 23, 1987 in order for this office to have
adequate time to prepare for its presentation before P&Z.
Thank you.
ASPEN/PITRIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
(303) 925-2020
Date:
R E :Y�--
Dea r C�WC�k
This is to inform you that the Planning Office has completed its
preliminary review of the captioned application. We have determined
that your application IS NOT complete.
Additional items required include:
Disclosure of Ownership (one copy only needed)
Adjacent Property Owners List/Envelopes/Postage (one copy)
Additional copies of entire application
Authorization by owner for representative to submit applica-
tion
Response to list of items (attached/below) demonstrating
compliance with the applicable policies and regulations of the
Code, or other specific materials
A check in the
amount of $
A. Your applicati
complete and
��//''
we h s eduled
��
it for
We
review by the
_ on
will
call you if we
need any additional
information prior
to that
date_ Several
days prior to your
hearing, we will call and
make available
a copy of the memorandum..
Please note
that it
IS NOT your
responsibility to
post your property
with a
sign, which we
can provide you for a $3.00 fee..
B. Your application is incomplete, we have not scheduled it
review at this time. When we receive the materials we have
requested, we will place you on the next available agenda.
If you have any questions, please call �rte.�_Xz CI "' f S T
the planner assigned to your case. I
Sincerely,
ASP / ITRIN PLANNING OFFICE
CASE DISPOSITION
MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENT: CHURCH AND DAYCARE CENTER IN OFFICE
ZONE DISTRICT
On December 14, 1987 City Council approved Ordinance 55 (Series
of 1987) on second reading making church a conditional use for
designated historic landmarks in the Office zone district and
making daycare center a conditional use for all strucutres in the
Office zone district.
ORDINANCE NO.
(SERIES OF 1987)
AN ORDINANCE OF CITY COUNCIL AMENDING SECTION 24-3.2 OF THE
MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO THE TABLE OF CONDITIONAL USES IN THE
OFFICE ZONE DISTRICT TO ADD CHURCH AS A USE FOR DESIGNATED
HISTORIC LANDMARKS AND MAKE DAYCARE CENTER A CONDITIONAL USE FOR
ALL STRUCTURES
WHEREAS, the City Council of Aspen, Colorado deems it to be
in the best interests of the City of Aspen to amend the table of
conditional uses in the Office Zone to allow church as a use for
designated historic landmarks and make daycare center a use
available to all structures; and
WHEREAS, the City Council did make the following findings
with respect to the proposed code amendment:
1. The church use is principally compatible with the
existing land uses of the Office Zone Districts because
C churches are a traditional component of residential
neighborhoods, they may reenforce the residential
character aspect of Main Street and other areas in the
Office Zone District, and they can fit into the
neighborhood's visual scale and use intensity.
2. Adding church as a conditional use in the Office Zone
District for designated historic landmarks would help
realize several objectives of the Aspen Area Comprehen-
sive Plan: Historic Preservation Element, including to
encourage productive and economically attractive uses
of historic structures and encourage renovation and
maintenance of historic structures.
3. Allowance of the church and daycare center conditional
uses is desireable because it provides the City the
opportunity to evaluate impacts and impact mitigation
through conditional use review. Impacts that would need
to be considered in evaluating the appropriateness of a
specific conditional use proposal include traffic
generation, parking demand, drop-off and pick-up
accommodations, noise generation, employee base, hours
of operation, external visual appearance, and special
signage or lighting.
4. Daycare center service has been identified as a very
t important, necessary and undersupplied service to the
community. Loosening regulations on where daycare
centers can be located would promote more daycare
( centers in Aspen.
f
L
WHEREAS, having received and considered the recommendations
of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission made at a public
hearing on October 20, 1987, City Council desires to amend
Section 24-3.2.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
Section 1
That Section 24-3.2 of the Municipal Code of the City of
Aspen pertaining to the Table of Conditional Uses in the Office
Zone District is hereby amended to add "church" to the list of
conditional uses for historic landmarks, to delete "daycare
center" from the list of conditional uses for historic landmarks
and add "daycare center" to the list of conditional uses for all
structures.
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or
portion of the Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or
unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such
portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent
provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions thereof.
Section 3
A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the
i
day of /� ��- , 1987, at 5: 00 P.M. in the City
Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15)
2
Cdays prior to which hearing notice of the same shall be published
once in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of
Aspen.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by
the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of
1987.
William L. Stirling, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathryn,, . Koch, City Clerk
FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this ��day of
1987.
William L. Stirring, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathryn AKoch, City Clerk
sb.chdyord
3
RONALD GARFIELD*
ANDREW V. HECHT**
WILLIAM K. GUEST, P.C.***
ROBERT E. KENDIG
1ANE ELLEN HAMILTON
"also admitted to
New York Bar
--also admitted to
District of Columbia Bar
• also admitted to
Nebraska and Texas Bar
HAND DELIVERY
bU y e ,
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
VICTORIAN SQUARE BUILDING
601 EAST HYMAN AVENUE
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
Steve Burstein, Planner
Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, CO 81611
�wv L 1 IJOI
TELEPHONE
-- (303) 925-1936
TELECOPIER
(303) 925-3008
CABL$ ADDRESS
"GARHEC"
AUG 1 9 1987
J
August 20, 1987
RE: Proposed Municipal Code Amendment
Dear Steve:
Enclosed is the Land Use Application on behalf of the
Applicant, Mary M. Webster, requesting a Municipal Code of Aspen
Code Amendment adding a church as a conditional use to the office
zone. Enclosed you will find seven copies of the following:
1. Land Use Application Form.
2. Exhibit "A", list of permitted and conditional uses in
the office zone.
3. Exhibit "B", application.
4. Check for $1,490.00 payable to the City of Aspen.
5. Signature of Applicant as a co-owner of a lot located
in the office zone.
6. Copy of a title insurance policy from Pitkin County
Title indicating the ownership interest of the Applicant.
7. Vicinity Map indicating the location of the office zone
in the City of Aspen.
GARFIELD & HEGHT, P.G.
Steve Burstein, Planner
August 18, 1987
Page -2-
Should you have any questions regarding this Application,
please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned.
Sincerely,
GARFIELD & HECHT, P.C.
0ne
as AUVj4i4 Ellen Hamilton
JEH/mms
enc
1-71
CITY OF ASPEN 211987
130 south galena street
aspen, colorado. 81611
303-925-2020
LAND USE APPLICATION FORM DATE SUBMITTED
FEES $1,490.00
NAME Mary M. Webster
ADDRESS P.O. Box 4052, Aspen, CO 81612
PHONE 925-4253, 923-5252
NAME OF PROJECT Proposed new conditional use in "0" (office) zone
PRESENT ZONING 0 (Office Zone)
LOT SIZE. n/a
LOCATION n/a
(indicate street address, lot and block number. May require legal
description. A vicinity map is very useful.)
CURRENT BUILD -OUT n/a sq. ft. _ — units
PROPOSED BUILD -OUT n/a sq. ft. units
DESCRIPTION OF EXISTING USES The current permitted and conditional uses for the "0"
(office) zone are set forth on Exhibit "A" attached hereto.
DESCRIPTION OF LAND USE PROPOSAL Add a church as a conditional use to the "0" office
zone.
TYPE OF APPLICATION Municipal Code of City of Aspen amendment
APPLICABLE CODE SECTION (S) 24-3.2, Chapter 24 Article XII
:PLAT AMENDMENT REQUIRED YES X
NO
DATE PRE -APPLICATION CONFERENCE COMPLETED 6/23/87
s
ATTACHMENTS: 1. All applicants must supply Proof of Ownership in the form of a
title insurance commitment or statement from an attorney indicating
that he/she has researched the title and verifies that the applicant
is the owner of the property (free of liens and eucumbrances.)
2. If the process requires a public hearing, a Property Owner's List
must be supplied which gives all owners within 300 feet in all
directions in some cases and adjacent owners in some cases.
3. Number of copies required (by code and/or in pre -application
conference.)
4. Plat by Registered Surveyor Yes X No
EXHIBIT "A"
Permitted Uses:
Single-family duplex and multi -family residences; professional
and business offices; accessory dwelling units recognized as
moderate income housing by an approved housing plan by special
review of the planning commission.
Conditional Uses:
Fraternal lodges, boarding houses, shop craft industry,
restaurants, antique store, bookstore, florist, visual arts
gallery, music store (for the sale of musical instruments),
nursery -day care center, art, dance and music studio, mortuary,
broadcasting station, provided, however, that the above -listed
conditional uses shall be considered (1) only for structures
which have received historic designation, (2) for no more than
two (2) such conditional uses in each structure (not including
within such limitation accessory dwelling units recognized as
moderate income housing by an approved housing plan), and (3)
only when off-street parking is provided with alley access for
those conditional uses along Main Street. Satellite dish
antennae. Commercial parking lot or parking structure that is
independent of required off-street parking, provided that it not
be located abutting Main Street.
EXHIBIT "B"
I. Application.
Mary M. Webster (the "Applicant"), a co-owner of Lots K
and L, Block 18, City of Aspen, hereby requests that Section
24-3.2 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen (the "Code") be
amended to add churches as a conditional use in the office ("0")
zone. The permitted and conditional uses currently in effect in
the "0" zone are set forth on Exhibit "A" of this Application.
II. Facts.
The intention of the "0" zone is to "provide for the
establishment of offices and associated commercial uses in such a
way as to preserve the visual scale and character of formerly
residential areas that now are adjacent to commercial and
business areas and along Main Street and other high volume
thoroughfares." Thus, the "0" zone acts as a transitional zone
from the City's commercial district to its residential district,
as does the C-1 zone in which churches are permitted uses. The
"0" zone's current uses are mixed and include single family
homes, professional offices and small commercial uses.
Therefore, the zone contains some of both commercial and
residential uses.
Churches are permitted uses in the commercial zone
districts (CC, C-1, CL and C) and are conditional uses in the
residential zone districts (R-6, R-15, R-15A, R-30, R-40, R-M/F
and RR). There are churches currently located in some of Aspen's
J
residential and commercial zones. The "0" zone is completely
surrounded_ by zones in which churches are either permitted or
conditional uses, with the exception of a few blocks. Therefore,
since the "0" zone is a transitional zone from commercial to
residential uses and actually contains some of both uses, and
abuts zones allowing churches, amending the Code to allow a
church as a conditional use would be consistent with the "0" zone
neighborhood and the surrounding vicinity.
III. Impacts.
A church represents a less intensive use than the
non-residential uses currently allowed in the "O" zone.
Restaurants, professional offices, boarding houses and the like
generate traffic on a daily, and in some cases, continuous,
basis. A church, however, only generates traffic on one
particular day at times which are generally non -peak hours. A
church would typically be empty the other six days of the week
thus causing no traffic generation and therefore, no attendant
parking problems or air pollution. In addition, unlike most
other areas where churches are allowed as permitted or
conditional uses, the RFTA buses run throughout the "O" zone down
Main Street, thus locating a church in this area would further
the purposes of the Aspen Area General Plan of 1966, as amended
(the "General Plan"), for a church in the "O" zone would be
accessible by mass transit. Therefore, on a busy street like
6,1(�-
Main Street, the presence of a church in a structure rather than
od,o«y✓�?�
s;tk d�d
an office or restaurant actually eliminates some of the problems
I),,K ,
most encountered in the "O" zone (i.e. traffic and lack of
parking). Furthermore, churches are a common feature on main
streets in Pitkin County and across the state. In Pitkin County
there are churches on the town's main street in Redstone and
Marble; in Basalt there is a church on Hwy. 82; and Glenwood
Springs, Leadville and Denver are other Colorado cities with
churches located on their main downtown streets. In addition,
St. Mary's Catholic church is located on Main Street in Aspen in
the CC zone district. St. Mary's is only three blocks from the
"O" zone and is surrounded on Main Street by the same uses found
in the "O" zone (i.e. offices, single family homes, and small
commercial sites) . Therefore, even though St. Mary's is not
in the "O" its indicates that churches arel,Ok,x;N;�
oyst��ll3.,,
located zone, presence
appropriate uses on Main Street and that a church is compatible
with the most common permitted and conditional uses in the "O"
zone.
IV. Arguments.
Because churches do not represent an intensive use of a
structure on a daily basis, and therefore churches create only
low impacts on an area, and because churches traditionally exist
on such streets as Main Street, a church would be an appropriate
-2-
conditional use for structures in the "O" zone which have
historic designation. Ninety percent of the conditional uses
allowed in the "O" zone, as set forth on Exhibit "A" hereto, are
available only to structures with historic designation. The
Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: Historic Preservation Element (the
"Plan") states that due to the historic character of Main Street
it may be appropriate to examine the expansion of conditional
uses allowed in the "O" zone. Additional conditional uses
suggested by the Plan include mixed commercial/residential uses,
bakeries, small grocery stores and public and quasi -public
buildings. A church (particularly smaller churches) would also
be an appropriate conditional use to add as an incentive for
historic structures because the low intensity of such use would
aid in maintaining the integrity of an historic structure. In
addition, a church - blic .type of building in that
churches are open to the public and thus very similar to one of
the conditional uses recommended by the Plan for the "O" zone.
Furthermore, a church would not increase the r' Street
turning into a commercial shopping district and would nnt-
increase the negative factors cited by the Plan as threatening
Main Street, including dilapidation of Victorian houses,
discordant commercial and lodge facilities and excessive traffic.
A community like Aspen should not exclude churches from
an area like the "O" zone which is so accessible by bus or by
foot. The City needs such structures to be conveniently located
to not only the resident population, but to the commercial and
lodge districts where the City's tourists stay, many of whom do
not have their own cars to use to travel to a church while
visiting Aspen. Allowing churches in the "O" zone would be
consistent with the 1973 Amendment to the General Plan which
tl.k) states that "ordered yet diversified land uses, such as
,),s� resident -related commercial, residential and professional office
uses should be located on the fringe of the central area," since
�1F�Q9� churches are clearly resident -related uses which are allowed by
the Code in all residential and commercial zones in the City.
Therefore, allowing churches in the "O" zone adds to the
-3-
community balance sought by the Code's zoning laws for there is
no justification for prohibiting churcheF in a zone which is a
transitional zone from commercial to residential districts, all
of which already allow churches.
By adding a church as a conditional use to the "O"
zone, the City will have continuing control over any proposed
church site. The City would be able to control the on -site
parking, signage and lighting aspects of the development as well
as any expansion to an existing building proposed by a church.
Thus, the community can set the standards for a church in the "O"
zone by taking advantage of the checks and balances provided by
the conditional use application process.
g 11 �a
I h to
'mac Js 11 a s�tf��iln��y "'�,."". �� ✓d
Dn J J 11,I 7 w/ IIk, I) PAIo
l 41)
-4-
APPLICANT:
-F / r -, 11/ Z,
Mary/Webster
Co-owner Lots K & L, Block 18,
City of Aspen
State of Colorado