HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.ca.textamendments.A56-94
1""'.
YtJ-b
,-..,
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor and City Council
THRU:
Amy Margerum, City Manager
THRU:
stan Clauson, City community
Development Direc~
FROM:
Kim Johnson, Planner
DATE:
May 22, 1995
RE:
staff Initiated Amendments to the Land Use Regulations,
Round II - Secona Reading of Ordinance 22, Series of 1995
-----------------------------------------------------------~-----
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Planning commission recommends approval of several
amendments to the land use regulations found in Chapters 18 and 24
of the Municipal Code. Some of the proposed changes are intended
to clarify or define code sections. Other amendments are
substantial in nature.
Each Council member has a code book. It might be helpful for you
to refer to the specific sections for detailed context.
First reading was hela on April 24, 1995, Council discussed the
amendments with staff and directed some changes. These have been
incorporated into Ordinance 22 and discussed in the body of this
memo.
PROCESS: Code amendments follow a two step review process for
ordinance adoption of text changes. The Planning and zoning
commission considered the amendments at public hearings on February
21, March 21, and April 4, 1995. At the March 21 meeting, the
Commission passed Resolution 95-7 (Exhibit "A"), which contained
all but four of the individual amendments presented to Council in
this memo. By adoption of this resolution, any land use
applications submitted between March 21 and second
reading/enactment of the amendments must comply with the revised
text language.
STAFF COMMENTS: This review is the second round of amendment
reviews initiated by staff to improve the land use regulations.
This memo is formatted to present and discuss each proposed
amendment individually. Deleted text is shown as strikeout and new
text is boldface. The list of recommended changes as amended at
first reading are as follows:
1) Definition of "buildinq envelope" There are several instances
where the land use regulations or specific approvals refer to
development within a building envelope. However, there is no
definition in the regulations to provide consistency in use of this
1
,-..,
,-..,
term. During the last couple of years this has caused some
confusion for a . few projects in dealing with the concept of
"building envelope" versus the existing code prov~s~ons for
"setbacks". staff and the P&Z wish to eliminate interpretive
discrepancies by proposing the following new definition:
building envelope: that area on a lot which encompasses all
development including but not limited to excavation, fill,
grading, storage, demolition, structures, building heights,
decks, roof overhangs, porches, patios and terraces, pools,
access ways and parking. planting of landscape materials on
natural grade and approved walkways and driveways may occur
outside of a building envelope. For purposes of site specific
development plans, building envelopes may be established to
restrict development to protect slopes, important vegetation,
water courses, privacy or other considerations. Building
envelopes shall be described on recorded plats, site specific
development plans, ordinances, resolutions, and building
permit site plans.
2) Subdivision Protection of Siqnificant Natural Features -
The current subdivision regulations are silent on the opportunity
and responsibility to identify and protect significant natural
features on a parcel being reviewed for subdivision. Language
contained in the PUD section of the code addresses this issue.
staff and the P&Z are proposing that the following similar language
be transferred into the purpose statement and subdivision standards
because not all subdivision actions include PUD review. This new
language will not impose a new level of review within a subdivision
process.
At first reading, the Council directed staff to augment the
proposed language to be more specific as to the type of features
which could be considered. The amended language is as follows:
section 7-1001. Purpose.
The purpose of this division is to :
A. Assist in the orderly and efficient development of the
city;
B. Ensure the proper distribution of development;
r
C. Encourage the well-planned subdivision of land by
establishing standards for the design of a sUbdivision;
D. Improve land records and survey monuments by establishing
standards for surveys and plats;
E. Coordinate the construction of public facilities with the
need for public facilities;
2
,-..,
..-,
F. Safeguard the interests of the public and the subdivider
and provide consumer protection for the purchaser;
G. Acquire and ensure the maintenance of public open spaces
and parks;--aftli
H. Provide procedures so that development encourages the
preservation of important and unique natural or scenic
features, including but not limited to mature trees or
indigenous vegetation, bluffs, hillsides or similar geologic
features, or edges of rivers and other bodies of water; and
I. Promote the health, safety and general welfare of the
residents of the City of Aspen.
Section 7-1004 Subdivision Approval
C. Review Standards
4. Design Standards. The following design standards shall
be required for all subdivisions. (all remain the same
a. through g.)
h. The design and location of any proposed structure,
building envelope, road, driveway, trail or similar
development is compatible with important and unique
natural or scenic features of the site.
3) site specific Development Plan - In consideration of the land
use code I s vested rights section, staff wanted to update the
definition of "site specific development plan". This definition
is important because it establishes what reviews may become vested
(or secure from code changes) beyond eighteen months from approval.
In order to have the City's definition concur with State
regulations, the P&Z recommends the following changes:
site specific development plan means a plan which has been
submitted to the city councilor the !llaFlRinq and zoninq
commission Community Development Department by a landowner or
his representative describing with reasonable certainty the
type and intensity of use for a specific parcel or parcels of
property. , incluel.inq an al'll'lication for appro...al of teo
fellmlinq: Such plan may be in the form of, but need not be
limited to, a planned unit development (PUD), SUbdivision,
specially planned area (SPA), growth management exemption
quota systelll allotlllcnt, el.evoloplllcnt in an environmentally
sensitive area review, conditional use, er special review
permit, 5i~l9.ifica.flt dc.v.cle}?1ncRt 'iithin an hioterie e.v.crlay
diatrict or to a historic lanel.mar]( or aClllolition of a historic
landlllark or historic landmark review. A variance shall not
constitute a site specific development plan. site specific
3
,-..,
,-..,
. development plan shall not mean or include any conceptual or
preliminary plan as defined in this chapter.
As a side note, the Commission presented a unanimous front on the
issue of strict time limits for development approvals. In
discussions with staff, City Attorney John Worcester clarified that
section 6-207.F. states that a development approval which did not
obtain vested rights at a public hearing or a building permit
within eighteen months of approval would expire.
4) Eliminate the "technical or enqineerinq considerations"
limitation for insubstantial amendments to SPAs or PUDs -
sections 7-907 A. (PUD Insubstantial Amendments) and 7-804 E.!.
(SPA Insubstantial Amendments) currently specify that any
insubstantial amendments to PUDs or SPAs must be engineering or
technical considerations. The list of criteria effectively limits
the ability to request amendments. The current language causes
applicants (and staff) to occasionally fabricate reasons why a
change would qualify as an engineering or technical consideration.
At first reading, the Council discussed that perhaps the current
percentages of change which constitute insubstantial amendments is
unnecessarily low, potentially causing many projects to be
processed through much bulkier and costly two-step reviews. Staff
has considered these statements and would support a somewhat
greater percentage of change for administrative reviews. However,
this was not part of the Planning commission's consideration of
this code section. Staff believes that this should specifically
be brought to the commission as a separate text amendment because
of the potential ramifications. Staff's major concern with this
concept is that after a major two-step review for approval of a PUD
or SPA, a project could conceivably turn around and initiate
changes administratively which could have caused P&Z or Council to
review the project differently or attach other conditions of
approval.
7-907 A. PUD Insubstantial amendment. An insubstantial
amendment to an approved development order for a final
development plan may be authorized by the community
Development Director rlanninq Director. An inS1:lJ:lOtantial
alllcnalllent shall so lilllited to technical er enqineerinq
cenaideratiens first diaco...cred durinq actual dcveloplllEmt
..RicR eeulel. net rcasenasly be anticipated aurinq the approval
preccaa. The following shall not be considered an
insubstantial amendment:
a) A change in the use or character of the development.
b) An increase by greater than three ( 3 ) percent in the
overall coverage of structures on the land.
4
,-..,
~
c) Any amendment that sUbstantially increases trip
generation rates of the proposed development, or the
demand for public facilities.
d) A reduction by greater than three (3) percent of the
approved open space.
e) A reduction by greater than one (1) percent of the off-
street parking and loading space.
f) A reduction in required pavement widths or right-of-way
for streets and easements.
g)
An increase of
approved gross
buildings.
greater than two (2)
leasable floor area
percent in the
of commercial
h) An increase by greater than one (1) percent in the
approved residential density of the propoacd development.
i) Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or
representation of the project's original approval or
which requires granting of a further variation from the
project's approved use or dimensional requirements.
7-804 E.!. SPA An insubstantial amendment to an approved
development order for a final development plan may be
authorized by the community Development Director rlanninq
Dircet.er. 1~1'i i:rH3u15st.aRtialamcndmcnt shall he limi tea te
technical er onqineerinq eenaidcrationa firat diseevercel.
el.1:lrinq actual dcveloplllcnt .:hich could Ret reasonably be
anticipated durinq the approval !lreecee. The following shall
not be considered an insubstantial amendment:
(the exact same criteria which apply to PUD amendments are
utilized for SPA amendments)
5) Lot Splits - Section 7-1003. (A) (2) (b) needs to be amended to
delete the requirement to provide an accessory dwelling unit on
each parcel created by the split. The accessory dwelling unit
requirement was enacted for lot splits several years before
Ordinance 1 of 1990 established the housing mitigation requirements
for single family and duplex development. Staff now wishes to
replace this lot split/ADUrequirement with language for compliance
with section 8-104 (A) (1) (c) which sets. forth 4 options for
affordable housing mitigation as established by Ordinance 1 of
1990. These options are the provision of an ADD, payment of cash-
in-lieu, or deed restriction of the new residence(s). Staff
believes that the flexibility of options created in 1990 by
Ordinance 1 help fund the housing program and reduces the potential
of marginal ADUs that must be created simply because of the lot
split requirement. This change should read:
5
~
~
b. No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split,
both lots conform to the requirements of the underlying zone
district. and the al'll'licant comlllita that Any lot for which
development is proposed will contain an accessory ffi;elliRq
unit. mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to section 8-
104 (A) (1) (c).
section 7-1003. (A) (2) (d) needs to be amended to clarify that the
plat must meet the technical requirements for plats as contained
in the subdivision regulations:
d. "A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this division,
and conforms to the requirements of this chapter, is submitted
and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and
recorder after approval, indicating that no further
subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional
units be built without receipt of applicable approvals
pursuant to this article and growth management allocation
pursuant to Article 8.
Staff also recommends the addition of a new criteria "e" to section
7-1003 (A) (2) which requires the lot split plat to be recorded
within 180 days of approval.
e. Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat
shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and
recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the
plat within one hundred and eighty (180) days following
approval by the city council shall render the plat invalid and
reconsideration of the plat by the city council will be
required for a showing of good cause.
In order eliminate confusion about allowable buildout and building
types resulting from a lot split action, staff recommends two new
subsections "f" and "g". This is a change from first reading where
the new language was contained in a single paragraph "f".
f. In the case where an existing single family dwelling
occupies a site which is eligible for a lot split, the
dwelling need not be demolished prior to application for a lot
split.
g. Maximum potential buildout for the two parcels created
by a lot split shall not exceed three units, which may be
composed of a duplex and single family home.:
6) Plat requirements for Lot Line Adiustments - In order to provide
consistency with all platting requirements for various subdivision
and subdivision exemption actions, the following changes are
proposed. Requiring prompt recordation of plats upon approval
reduces the potential for error. It will also reduce staff time
6
1""""-.
r-"\
necessary to process the plats. It does require an applicant to
work diligently to record necessary documents in a timely manner.
section 7-1003 A.1.d. for Lot Line Adiustment requirements shall
read:
d. "The corrected plat will meet the standards of this
division, and conforms to the requirements of this chapter,
including the dimensional requirements of the zone district
in which the lots are located, except in cases of an existing
non-conforming lot, in which the adjustment shall not increase
the nonconformity of the lot. The plat shall be submitted and
recorded in the office of the Pitkin county clerk and
recorder. Failure to record the plat within a period of one
hundred and eighty (180) days following approval shall render
the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the
community Development Director will be required before its
acceptance and recording; and
7) Insubstantial plat amendments - section 7-1006A. should allow
the Community Development Director to approve insubstantial plat
amendments where the amendment may occur between adjacent
subdivision plats rather than only within one subdivision. For
example on the rare occasion this might occur, an applicant would
not have to go the Council to change an easement or other
insubstantial element which runs between adj acent subdivisions.
Additionally, the 180 day recording deadline is a recommended
change via a new subsection D. The proposed language reads:
7-1006. Amendment to subdivision development order.
A. Insubstantial amendment. An insubstantial amendment to an
approved plat or between adjacent SUbdivision plats may be
authorized by the planRinq el.irecter Community Development
Director. An insubstantial amendment shall be limited to
technical or engineer.ing considerations first discovered
during actual development which could not reasonably be
anticipated during the approval process, or any other minor
change to a plat which the planning director community
Development Director finds has no effect on the conditions
and representations limiting the approved plat.
[B and C remain unchanged]
D. Recordation. Amended plats shall be submitted and recorded
in the office of the Pitkin county clerk and recorder.
Failure to record an amended plat within a period of one
hundred and eighty (180) days following approval shall render
the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the city
councilor Community Development Director will be required
before its acceptance and recording.
7
1""'\
.~
8) Condominium filinq deadline - In section 7-1005 E. within the
Subdivision Agreement section, staff wishes to delete the exception
for condominium maps to be recorded within 180 days. staff
believes all recording deadlines should be consistent with the
code's 180 day subdivision plat recording deadline:
e. Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat
shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and
recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the
plat within one hundred and eighty (180) days following
approval by the city Council shall render the plat invalid and
reconsideration of the plat by the commission and city council
will be required for a showing of good cause. Tee eRe hURdrcd
ana eiqhty el.ay (180) day recordation requirellIeRt centaiReel.
hcyciR ahall Re~ apply te rce6raifi~ af eeRaemiRium mapo, or
acelaratieR5 ey aRY ether deeumcflta requirea te he recorded
te aeeemplisft a eenaeminiumizatisn in the city sf hapcR.
9) Siqht distance protection at corners - staff brought forth this
proposal to insert a sight-distance requirement for visual
obstructions on corner lots into the definition of "fence". This
regulation had previously been included elsewhere in the Municipal
Code but was deleted a few years ago by the Building Department.
At first reading, the Council expressed concern that foliage should
be addressed in a separate sentence specific to viSual obstruction
for drivers, and that measurement of a sight distance triangle
should occur from corners of pavement or roadway rather than the
property lines. This would spare property owners from keeping
their front yards bare of landscape features but retain
restrictions for features in the right-of-way. currently, the
Engineering Department conditions all approvals with the statement
that "The applicant shall consult the city Engineer and Parks
Department and shall obtain permits from the streets Department for
any work or development including landscaping within the public
right-of-way." So site-by-site review of right-of-way development
is already required.
The amended language from first reading is:
Fence means a structure, including berms, which serves as a
barrier intended to prevent escape or intrusion, to mark a
boundary, to shield or screen view, or to serve any similar
purpose. Fences shall be permitted in every zone district
provided that no fence shall exceed six (6) feet above natural
grade. Fences visible from the public right-of-way shall be
constructed of wood, stone, wrought iron or masonry. On
corner lots, no fence, retaining wall, or similar object shall
be erected or maintained which obstructs the traffic vision,
nor on corner. lots shall any fence, retaining wall, or similar
obstruction be erected or maintained which exceeds a height
of forty-two (42) inches, measured from street grade, within
8
.~
I"'"
30 feet from the corner of the paved or unpaved roadway.
Plans showing proposed construction, material, location and
height shall be presented to the building inspector before a
building permit for a fence is issued.
Additionally, foliage shall be placed and maintained so that
it will not obstruct vehicular visibility at intersections.
10) Housinq Replacement requirements: This item has been deleted
from the ordinance based on Council concerns raised at first
reading specific to tenancy qualifications. Staff will allow the
Housing Board to review the issues and establish guidelines based
on prior length of residency. If this requires a code amendment
staff will return with recommended language.
11) Domestic Animals Zoning and Planning staff wish to delete
section 24-506 because it implies that domestic animals are not
allowed in any other zone districts. The Municipal Code already
addresses the maintenance of domestic animals in Article 1, Chapter
5, such that they cannot be a nuisance. The recommended deletion
is as follows:
5 506. Demcatic Animala. 'Phe lcecpinq ef aeme3tic anilllala
shall lee )?crmitte:.a. in the. I1Ce1iUffi Density Rcoidcntinl (R 6:),
Ueacrate Density Resiel.ential (R 15), (R 15A), and (R 1513), Leo;
Density Rcsiel.ential (R 30), Reaidential/Uulti Family (R/llF),
RcaiEim'ltial/!lebile Home rar]c (pmr), afid Rural Resiel.ential (RR)
ZOfie el.istric'ts, !lroviel.eel. that the lceepinq ef such afiimalC3 iC3
inciaental aHel. s1:lserainate te the !lrincipal reaidential use
af the l?rcmiacs, shall Ret ehafl~c the hnoic character of the
reC3iaential use, shall not constitute a cOllllllercial activity,
and shall not vielate any health, aanitary or other
rc~alatieRa of the eity or state, or othcr~lioc cen3titutc. a
)?uhlie HuiaaRC!c.
12) Calculation of Housinq Impact Fee section 24-5-702
establishes the calculation for cash-in-lieu payment of the
affordable housing impact fee which was created by Ordinance 1.
When Ordinance 1 was adopted, the Housing Office utilized a three
tiered system of "low", "moderate" and "middle" income categories.
In 1992 the system was changed to a four category system,
Categories 1 through 4, with Category 1 being the lowest income
level. Since the change, the Housing Office and the Planning staff
have been calculating the payment based on the average of the
payment amounts for Category 2 and Category 3. The proposed text
will codify this calculation based on the current Category system.
Also, staff has determined that recent amendment language to the
GMQS exemption section regarding remodels to create a duplex needs
to be added to this section.
At first reading, Council directed staff to simplify the language
to make it more understandable.
9
.~.
i"""'\
Sec. 5-702. Calculation of affordable housing impact fee.
The amount Of the affordable housing impact fee is based on
the pUblic cost to provide affordable housing as a result of
the activity for which the fee is required. The formula shall
utilize the cash-in-lieu payment established from time to time
by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Office for moderate income
employees and the square footage of new floor area constructed
as a result of the demolition of a single family or duplex
dwelling unit or the construction of a new single family or
duplex dwelling unit on a previously vacant lot (the floor
area of a demolished dwelling shall be subtracted from the
floor area of the replacement dwelling unit), or the remodel
or expansion of an existing single family residence into a
duplex dwelling. The formula assumes that for every three
thousand (3,000) square feet of new single family or duplex
floor area that the public will be required to provide housing
for one moderate income employee. The formula to be applied
shall be as follows:
(average of cash-in-lieu amount for category 2 and 3)
.
.. (3,000)
X (net increase in FAR of new structure)
= cash-in-lieu payment for replacement structure
13) Stream Marqin - Over the past several years the P&Z has
approved many stream margin applications which met the review
criteria but otherwise seemed inappropriate based on the
communi ty' s and Commission's sensi ti vi ties to the environment.
After all, stream margins are considered "environmentally sensitive
areas" (ESAs) within the land use code. Our concerns have centered
around requiring increased environmental assessment of sites,
initiating mandatory setbacks from the top of the bank, and
securing fisherman's access along our invaluable community river
resources. Attached as Exhibit "B" is a letter from Joan
Leatherbury in 1993 expressing her concern about protection of the
city's river areas.
The last time the Code's ESA section was amended was in 1990 with
the creation of the Hallam Lake Bluff Environmentally Sensitive
Area. This ESA overlay was intended to place reasonable limits on
where buildings could be placed on properties along the bluff to
protect the sanctity of the ACES nature preserve. What was
occurring at that time was the construction of homes on the edge
of the bluff and even partially onto the slope. Additionally,
native trees and hillside vegetation was being stripped to enhance
views of Hallam Lake. Not only were these practices potentially
harmful to the nature preserve, they were beginning to negatively
impact neighboring properties by blocking views as well as removing
substantial vegetation which is valued as a buffer between
properties.
10
t""'\
.-,
Essentially the same problems are occurring with the stream margin
developments as were happening with the Hallam Lake area. We have
seen several parcels along the Roaring Fork be developed in the
last few years where large homes are built right on the edge of
the river bank. This immediately changes the character of the
riparian vegetation and "greenway corridor" and may contribute to
the potential of failure of the riverbank itself. staff proposes
a set of dimensional requirements (setbacks and heights) similar
to the Hallam Lake Bluff ESA because of the river's similarity to
the Bluff's the environmental needs. staff also believes that the
general benefits to all riverside owners and users will be similar
to those created by the Bluff ESA.
The new language requires riverside property owners to identify
wetlands and riparian zones on their parcels and to leave all
existing vegetation on the bank slope. This is critical to retain
the stability of the riverbanks and maintain the valuable greenbelt
character of the stream corridors. Also to this end, applicants
must leave a modest (15') setback area between the top of the bank
and new development on the property. Also proposed is a
"progressive" height limit based on the distance of the structure
from the top of slope. In any case, a hardship or difficulty on
a parcel will allow an applicant to seek "special review" by the
Commission for these dimensional requirements.
As discussed at first reading, th~re needs to be a mechanism to
inform property owners and design and contraction professions of
these new regulations. The Planning Office will be working with
Community Relations Officer Barbara Umbreit to develop avenues to
disperse this information. At this time, we have discussed a FAX
mailing list for architects and contractors ass well as a GIS
generated list of property owners along the rivers and creeks. A
brochure of flyer would be developed with Ms. Umbreit's assistance
for direct mailing. .
For the most part, the other proposed requirements are codification
of items which staff and the Commission regularly place on stream
margin approvals. The revised stream margin criteria read:
7-504 Stream Margin
No development shall be permitted within the floodway, with
the exception of bridges or structures for irrigation,
drainage, flood control or water diversion, which may be
permitted by the City Engineer, provided plans and
specifications are proviel.eel. submitted to demonstrate that the
structure is engineered to prevent blockage of drainage
channels during peak flows and the Commission determines the
proposed structure complies, to the extent practical, with,all
the standards set forth below.
11
.'-'
~
No development shall be permitted within one hundred feet
(100'), measured horizontally, from the high water line
of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, or
within the Special Flood Hazard Area where it extends
beyond one hundred feet (100') from the high water line
of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams,
unless the commission makes a determination that the
proposed development complies with all the standards set
forth below:
1. It can be demonstrated that any proposed develop-
ment which is in the Special Flood Hazard Area will
not increase the base flood elevation on the parcel
proposed for development. This shall be
demonstrated by an engineering study prepared by a
professional engineer registered to practice in the
State of Colorado which shows that the base flood
elevation will not be raised, including, but not
limited to, proposing mitigation techniques on or
off-site which compensate for any base flood
elevation increase caused by the development; and
2. Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area
community Plan, parks/Recreation/open space/Trails
Plan map, or areas of historic public use or access
are 4e dedicated via a recorded easement for public
use. Dedications are necessitated by development's
increased impacts to the City's recreation and trail
facilities including public fishing access; and
3. The recommendations of the Roaring Fork Greenway
Plan are implemented in the proposed plan for
development, to the greatest extent practicable; and
4. There is no vegetation 4e removed or damaged or
slope grade changes (cut or fill) made outside of
a specifically defined building envelope ~
produce eJ:'oaion ana sedimentation of the stream
~. A building envelope shall be designated by
this review and said envelope shall be barricaded
prior to issuance of any demolition, excavation or
building permits. The barricades shall remain in
place until the issuance of Certificates of
occupancy; and
5. To the qreatest C}(tel'lt practicable, The proposed
development roducoa pollution and interference does
not pollute or interfere with the natural changes
of the river, stream or other tributary, including
erosion and/or sedimentation during construction.
Increased on-site drainage shall be accommodated
within the parcel to prevent entry into the river
12
,-..,
r'I
or onto its banks. Pools or hot tubs cannot be
drained outside of the designated building envelope;
and
6. Written notice is given to the Colorado Water
Conservation Board pr~or to any alteration or
relocation of a water course, and a copy of said
notice is submitted to the Federal Emergency
Management Agency; and
7. A guarantee is provided in the event a water course
is altered or relocatedi that applies to the
developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that
ensures that the flood carrying capacity on the
parcel is not diminished; and
8.
copies are provided of all necessary federal
state permits relating to work within the
hundred (100) year floodplain; and
and
one
9. There is no development other than approved native
vegetation planting taking place below the top of
slope or within 15' of the top of slope or the high
waterline, whichever is most restrictive. If any
development is essential within this area, it may
only be approved by special review pursuant to
section 7-404 D. of this Article 7; and
10. All development outside the 15' setback from the top
of slope does not exceed a height delineated by a
line drawn at a 45 degree angle from ground level
at the top of slope. Height shall be measured and
determined by the Zoning Officer utilizing that
definition set forth at section 3-101 of this
Chapter 24; and
11. A landscape plan is submitted with all development
applications. Such plan shall limit new plantings
(including trees, shrubs, flowers, and grasses)
outside of the designated building envelope on the
river side to native riparian vegetation; and
12. All exterior lighting is low and downcast with no
lightls) directed toward the river or located down
the slope; and
13. site sections drawn by a registered architect,
landscape architect, or engineer are be submitted
showing all existing and proposed site elements, the
top of slope, and pertinent elevations above sea
level; and
13
r'\
,-.,
14. There has been accurate identification of wetlands
and riparian zones.
14) 8040 Greenline revisions - Section 24-7-503 (C) lists eleven
review criteria for development upon slopes within 150 feet of the
8040 elevation line. Staff wishes to augment criterium number 11
as follows:
11) Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area
Community Plan: Parks/Recreation/Open Space/Trails Plan map
is dedicated for public use. Provide access to natural
resources and areas of special interest to the community.
This would allow the Commission to take into consideration unique
natural features or spaces adjacent to properties subject to 8040
review. This might include pathways not officially adopted on a
trails plan.
15) Landscape Lonqevitv requirement- In response to concerns of
the Planning and Zoning Commission and City council, staff is
proposing a new section 5-511 (Supplemental Regulations) for
maintenance and replacement of approved landscaping materials
within 45 days of notification. Currently only section 7-904 "PUD
Agreement" requires implementation and maintenance of landscaping.
Because landscape plans or representations are included in most
other types of reviews, staff believes a city-wide landscape
maintenance requirement is beneficial. Staff and the Commission
recommend the following new section:
5-511 - LandscaDe Maintenance
A. Landscaping shown on any approved site development plan
shall be maintained in a healthy mann~r. In the event that
plant material dies, the owner of the property shall replace
the plant material with equal size and variety within 45 days
of notification by the zoning Enforcement Officer. If
seasonal or cultural constraints do not allow planting of the
approved plant material within 45 days the owner may in
writing seek permission from the community Development
Director to:
1) Provide financial assurances equal to 120% of the amount
of the replacement landscaping and installation costs as
approved by the Parks Department, and in a form
satisfactory to the city Attorney. The completion of the
landscape replacement shall be accomplished no late than
June 15 of the next. planting season, otherwise the
financial assurances shall be forfeited to the city.
2) Submit for approval a revised landscape plan which meets
the design objectives and plant material sizes and
quantities of the original approved plan. An explanation
14
("""',
("""',
of the revised plan shall accompany the submission.
Failure to comply with the replanting requirement will
constitute a violation of this section and may result in
complaint(s) being filed in Municipal Court.
16) Administrative approval for small satellite dish antennas -
Staff discussed with the P&Z an administrative approval process
for small satellite dishes. The Commission agrees that the new
technology allows very small dishes to be placed "invisibly" on
parcels, and therefore should not have to go through a cumbersome
review process. For medium and large sized dishes, approval by the
community Development Director would substantially reduce the
process time. The new regulation can be readily accommodated by
creating a new section 5-512 within Division 5 Supplement
Regulations.
At first reading, council questioned whether text should be
included to address required reviews by the Historic Preservation
Committee. Historic Preservation Officer Amy Amidon informed' staff
that the addition of any satellite dish on a designated parcel or
within an Historic overlay District would automatically be required
to obtain Minor review before the HPC. To add a new subparagraph
in these proposed regulations would be redundant in her opinion.
5-512. Satellite Dish Antennas.
Satellite dish antennas twenty-four (24) inches in diameter
or less must receive building permits, if required, prior to
installation. Satellite dish antennas twenty-five (25) inches
or greater in diameter shall be reviewed and approved by the
community Development Director in conformance with the
criteria within Sections 7-304 (B) and (C). The community
Development Director may apply reasonable conditions to the
approval deemed necessary to insure conformance with said
review criteria. If the community Development Director
determines that the proposed satellite dish antennas does not
comply with the review oriteria and denies the application,
or the applicant does not agree to the conditions of approval
determined by the community Development Director, the
applicant may apply for conditional use review by, the planning
and Zoning commission.
Procedures established in Article 6 Common Development Review
Procedures shall apply to all satellite dish antennas.
For your reference, the review criteria to be used by the community
Development Director in Section 7-304 (B) and (C) read:
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
15
/""""'.
.r-,
complementary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the
parcel proposed for development.
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.
As a result of the above proposed language, the individual zone
districts I lists of conditional uses must be amended to delete
satellite dish antennas. Of the 24 zone districts in the city,
only three do not currently allow satellite dishes as conditional
uses. These zones are R-15-B Moderate Density Residential, OS Open
Space, and WP wildlife Preservation. This will not change with
this amendment. For example, the R-6 Medium Density zone will be
amended as follows:
5-201.C. Conditional Uses.
7. Gatellite di~h antennae
Additionally, staff and P&Z recommends changes to the definition
of "satellite dish antenna or satellite radio frequency signal
reception and/or transmission device":
satellite dish antenna or satellite radio frequency signal
reception and/or transmission device means a dish-shaped or
parabolic-shaped reception or transmission device, ..~ODC
antenna is llIore than t.;o (2) feet iR heiEJht anel./or "diGh"
cOlllpORent is llIore than t,;o (2) feet in diallleter, which is used
for the reception and/or transmission of satellite signals,
including but not limited to television signals, AM radio
signals, FM radio signals, telemetry signals, data
communication signals, or any other reception or transmission
signals using free air space as a medium, whether for
commercial or private use, provided:
A. Area and bulk requirements. The installation of a
satellite dish antenna shall not cause a violation of
area and bulk requirements within the zone district in
which it is located, unless a variance is granted by the
board of adjustment.
B. Right-of-way. A satellite dish antenna shall not be
placed on an easement or in the city right-of-way, unless
an encroachment permit is secured.
C. Increased danger. The installation of a satellite dish
antenna shall not cause any increased danger to
neighboring property in the event of collapse or other
failure of the antenna structure.
16
{',
r-,.
D. Visual impact. The visibility of the dish from the
public way shall be reduced to the highest degree
practical including, but not limited to, sensitive choice
in placement of the dish, screening with fencing,
landscaping, subgrade placement, or any other effective
means that both screen the dish and does not appear to
be unnatural on the site.
REVIEW STANDARDS: The proposed changes are meant to improve the
workability of the land use code by streamlining processes,
clarifying vague areas or correcting errors. Additionally, over
time there has been a need to update and strengthen our
environmentally sensitive reviews (stream margin and 8040
Greenline) and subdivision regulations. staff and the P&Z believes
therefore that the following review criteria have either been met
or do not specifically apply:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any
applicable portions of this chapter.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements
of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding
Zone Districts and land uses, considering existing land use
and neighborhood characteristics.
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation
and road safety.
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the
extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the
capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited
to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply,
parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities.
F.
Whether and the extent to
result in significantly
environment.
which the proposed amendment would
adverse impacts on the natural
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible
with the community character in the City of Aspen.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the
subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support
the proposed amendment.
I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the
public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent
of this chapter.
17
.~. ,-.."
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: None are anticipated.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning commission believes that
the proposed text amendments are within the spirit of the AACP and
comply with the review criteria A-I above, and should be approved
by the City Council.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve at second reading Ordinance
22. Series of 1995."
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS
Ordinance 22, Series of 1995
Exhibits:
"A" - Planning and Zoning commission Resolution 95-7
liB" - 6/5/93 Letter from Joan Leatherbury re: Riverside Reviews
18
(',
.,-.."
ORDINANCE 22
Series 1995
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AMENDING
THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE TO WIT, CHAPTERS:
24-3-101 Definitions: Building Envelope, Satellite Dish Antenna,
Fence, site Specific Development Plan
24-5-201, 24-5-202, 24-5-203, 24-5-205, 24-5-206, 24-5-206.1,
24-5-206.2, 24-5-207, 24-5-208, 24-5-209, 24-5-210, 24-5-211,
24-5-212, 24-5-213, 24-5-214, 24-5-215, 24-5-216, 24-5-217,
24-5-218, 24-5-219, 24-5-220 Individual Zone Districts,
Conditional Uses
24-5-506 Domestic Animals
24-5-511 Supplemental Regulations: Landscape Maintenance
24-5-512 Supplemental Regulations: Satellite Dish Antennas
24-5-702 Calculation of Affordable Housing Impact Fee
24-7-503 8040 Greenline Review
24-7-504 Stream Margin Review
24-7-804 Specially Planned Area Insubstantial Amendments
24-7-907 Planned unit Development Insubstantial Amendments
24-7-1001 Subdivision: Purpose
24-7-1003 Subdivision Exemptions: Lot Splits and Lot Line
Adjustments
24-7-1004 Subdivision Review Standards
24-7-1005 Subdivision Agreement: Condominium Plat Recordation
24-7-1006 Amendment to Subdivision Development Order
WHEREAS, section 24-7-1103 of the Municipal Code provides that
amendments to Chapter 24 of the Code, to wit, "Land Use
Regulations", shall be reviewed and recommended for approval by the
Community Development Director and then by the Planning and Zoning
commission at public hearing, and then approved, approved with
conditions, or disapproved by the City Council at public hearing;
and
WHEREAS, the community Development Department has determined
1
I"'"
~
that certain sections of the land use regulations which are in need
of updating for current situations, are unclear, or in need of
refinement in order to codify Planning Office policies which have
been effected over time; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and. Zoning Commission reviewed the
proposed amendments and did conduct a public hearings thereon on
February 21, March 21, and April 4, 1995; and
WHEREAS, upon review and consideration of the text amendments,
agency and pUblic comment thereon, and those applicable standards
as contained in Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code, to wit, Division
11 of Article 7 (Text Amendments), the Planning and Zoning
commission has recommended approval of the text amendments
recommended by the community Development Director pursuant to
procedure as authorized by Section 24-6-205 (A) (5) of the Municipal
Code; and
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered
the text amendments under the applicable provisions of the
Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered
those recommendations and approvals as granted by the Planning and
Zoning Commission, and has taken and considered public comment at
public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the city Council finds that the text amendments meet
or exceed all applicable development standards and is consistent
with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers
and is necessary for pUblic health, safety, and welfare; and
WHEREAS, the City council finds that the proposed text
amendment will .allow and promote compatibility of zone districts
and land uses wi th existing land uses and neighborhood
characteristics and will be consistent with the public welfare and
the purposes and intent of the Municipal Code.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN COLORADO:
Section 1: Pursuant to Section 24-7-1102 of the Municipal Code,
the City Council finds as follows in regard to the text amendments:
1. The proposed text amendments as set forth in the Plan are not
in conflict with the provisions of Chapter 24 of the Municipal
Code or the Aspen Area community Plan.
2. The proposed text amendments will promote the public interest
and character of the City of Aspen.
2
r""""\
1""',
section 2: section 3-101 of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code
a new definition for "building envelope" is hereby added, which new
text shall read as follows:
Building envelope is that area on a lot which encompasses all
development including but not limited to excavation, fill,
grading, storage, demolition, structures, building heights,
decks, roof overhangs, porches, patios and terraces, pools,
access ways and parking. Planting of landscape materials on
natural grade and approved walkways and driveways may occur
outside of a building envelope. For purposes of site specific
development plans, building envelopes may be established to
restrict development to protect slopes, important vegetation,
water courses, privacy or other considerations. Building
envelopes shall be described on recorded plats, site specific
development plans, ordinances, resolutions, and building
permit site plans.
section 3: section 3-101 of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code
definition of "fence" is hereby amended, which new text shall read
as follows:
Fence means a structure, including berms, which serves as a
barrier intended to prevent escape or intrusion, to mark a
boundary, to shield or screen view, or to serve any similar
purpose. Fences shall be permitted in every zone district
provided that no fence shall exceed six (6) feet above natural
grade. Fences visible from the public right-of-way shall be
constructed of wood, stone, wrought iron or masonry. On
corner lots, no fence, retaining wall, or similar object shall
be erected or maintained which obstructs the traffic vision,
nor on corner iots shall any fence, retaining wall, or similar
obstruction be erected or maintained which exceeds a height
of forty-two (42) inches, measured from street grade, within
30 feet from the paved or unpaved roadway. Plans showing
proposed construction, material, location and height shall be
presented to the building inspector before a building permit
for a fence is issued.
Additionally, foliage shall be placed and maintained so that
it will not obstruct vehicular visibility at intersections.
section 4: section 3-101 of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code
definition of "satellite dish antenna" is hereby amended, which
new text shall read as follows:
satellite dish antenna or satellite radio frequency signal
reception and/or transmission device means a dish-shaped or
parabolic-shaped reception or transmission device, is used for
the. reception and/or transmission of satellite signals,
including but not limited to television signals,. AM radio
3
,r-,
I"'.
signals, FM radio signals, telemetry signals, data
communication signals, or any other reception or transmission
signals using free air space as a medium, whether for
commercial or private use, provided:
A. Area and bulk requirements. The installation of a
satellite dish antenna shall not cause a violation of
area and bulk requirements within the zone district in
which it is located, unless a variance is granted by the
board of adjustment.
B. Right-of-way. A satellite dish antenna shall not be
placed on an easement or in the city right-of-way, unless
an encroachment permit is secured.
C. Increased danger. The installation of a satellite dish
antenna shall not cause any increased danger to
neighboring property in the event of collapse or other
failure of the antenna structure.
D. Visual impact. The visibility of the dish from the
public way shall be reduced to the highest degree
practical including, but not limited to, sensitive choice
in placement of the dish, screening with fencing,
landscaping, subgrade placement, or any other effective
means that both screen the dish and does not appear to
be unnatural on the site.
section 5: section 3-101 of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code
definition of "site specific development plan" is hereby amended,
which new text shall read as follows:
site specific development plan means a plan which has been
submitted to the Community Development Department by a
landowner or his representative describing with reasonable
certainty the type and intensity of use for a specific parcel
or parcels of property. Such plan may be in the form of, but
need not be limited to, a planned unit development (PUD),
subdivision, specially planned area (SPA), growth management
exemption, environmentally sensitive area review, conditional
use, special review, or historic landmark review. A variance
shall not constitute a site specific development plan. site
specific development plan shall not mean or include any
conceptual or preliminary plan as defined in this chapter.
section 6: The following sections of Chapter 24 of the Aspen
Municipal Code "Conditional Uses" are hereby amended to delete
"satellite dish antennae":
24-5-201.C.7., 24-5-202.C.7., 24-5-203.C.7., 24-5-205.C.7.,
24-5-206.C.7., 24-5-206.1.C.6., 24-5-206.2.C.3., 24-5-207.C.5.,
24-5-208.C.11., 24-5-209.C.7., 24-5-210.C.4., 24-5-211.C.8.,
4
I"'"
,,-...,
24-5-212.C.10., 24-5-213.C.6., 24-5-214.C.3., 24-5-215.C.2.,
24-5-216.C.3., 24-5-217.C.7., 24-5-218.C.4., 24-5-219.C.5.,
24-5-220.C.3.
section 7: The following section of Chapter 24 of the Aspen
Municipal Code is hereby deleted:
section 5-506. Domestic Animals
Section 8: section 5-511 of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code
is hereby added, which new text shall read as follows:
section 5-511. Landscape Maintenance
A. Landscaping shown on any approved site development plan
shall be maintained in a healthy manner for a minimum three
(3) year period. In the event that plant material dies, the
owner of the property shall replace the plant material with
similar quality within 45 days of notification by the Zoning
Enforcement Officer. If seasonal or cultural constraints do
not allow planting of the approved plant material within 45
days the owner may in writing seek permission from the
Community Development Director to:
1) Provide financial assurances equal to 120% of the amount
of the replacement landscaping and installation costs as
approved by the Parks Department, and in a form
satisfactory to the City Attorney. The completion of the
landscape replacement shall be accomplished no late than
June 15 of the next planting season, otherwise the
financial assurances shall be forfeited to the city.
2) Submit for approval a revised landscape plan.
Failure to comply with the replanting requirement will
constitute a violation of this section and may result in
complaint(s) being filed in Municipal Court
section 9: Section 5-512 of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code
is hereby added, which new text shall read as follows:
section 5-512. Satellite Dish Antennas
Satellite dish antennas twenty-four (24) inches in
diameter or less must receive building permits, if required,
prior to installation. Prior to the issuance of appropriate
building permits, satellite dish antennas twenty-five (25)
inches or greater in diameter shall be reviewed and approved
by the Community Development Director in conformance with the
criteria within sections 7-304 (B) and (C). The Community
Development Director may apply reasonable conditions to the
approval deemed necessary to insure conformance with said
5
1"""\.
I"'"
review criteria. If the community Development Director
determines that the proposed satellite dish antennas does not
comply with the review criteria and denies the application,
or the applicant does not agree to the conditions of approval
determined by the community Development Director, the
applicant may apply for conditional use review by the Planning
and Zoning commission.
Procedures established in Article 6 Common Development Review
Procedures shall apply to all satellite dish antennas.
section 10: section 5-702 of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal
Code is hereby amended, which new text shall read as follows:
section 24-5-702 Calculation of affordable housing impact fee.
The amount of the affordable housing impact fee is based on
the public cost to provide affordable housing as a result of
the activity for which the fee is required. The formula shall
utilize the cash-in-lieu payment established from time to time
by the Aspen/Pitkin county Housing Office for moderate income
employees and the square footage of new floor area constructed
as a result of the demolition of a single family or duplex
dwelling unit or the construction of a new single family or
duplex dwelling unit on a previously vacant lot (the floor
area of a demolished dwelling shall be subtracted from the
floor area of the replacement dwelling unit), or the remodel
or expansion of an existing single family residence into a
duplex dwelling. The formula assumes that for every three
thousand (3,000) square feet of new single family or duplex
floor area that the public will be required to provide housing
for one moderate income employee. The formula to be applied
shall be as follows:
(average of cash-in-lieu amount for Category 2 and 3)
+ (3,000)
X (net increase in FAR of new structure)
= cash-in-lieu payment for replacement structure
section 11: section 7-503. C. 11. of Chapter 24 of the Aspen
Municipal Code "8040 Greenline" is hereby amended, which new text
shall read as follows:
section 24-7-503.C.
11) Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area
Community Plan: Parks/Recreation/Open Space/Trails Plan map
is dedicated for public use. Provide access to natural
resources and areas of special interest to the community.
section 12:
section 7-504 of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal
6
I"'"
~
Code "stream Margin Review" is hereby amended, which new text shall
read as follows:
section 24-7-504. stream Margin
No development shall be permitted within the floodway, with
the exception of bridges or structures for irrigation,
drainage, flood control or water diversion, which may be
permitted by the City Engineer, provided plans and
specifications are submitted to demonstrate that the structure
is engineered to prevent blockage of drainage channels during
peak flows and the commission determines the proposed
structure complies, to the extent practical, with all the
standards set forth below.
No development shall be permitted wi thin one hundred feet
(100'), measured horizontally, from the high water line
of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, or
within the Special Flood Hazard Area where it extends
beyond one hundred feet (100') from the high water line
of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams,
unless the Commission makes a determination that the
proposed development complies with all the standards set
forth below:
1. It can be demonstrated that any proposed develop-
ment which is in the Special Flood Hazard Area will
not increase the base flood elevation on the parcel
proposed for development. This shall be
demonstrated by an engineering study prepared by a
professional engineer registered to practice in the
State of Colorado which shows that the base flood
elevation will not be raised, including, but not
limited to, proposing mitigation techniques on or
off-site which compensate for any base flood
elevation increase caused by the development; and ,
2. Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area
Community Plan, Parks/Recreation/Open space/Trails
Plan map, or areas of historic public use or access
are dedicated via a recorded easement for public
use. Dedications are necessitated by development's
increased impacts to the City's recreation and trail
facilities including public fishing access; and
3. The recommendations of the Roaring Fork Greenway
Plan are implemented in the proposed plan for
development, to the greatest extent practicable; and
4. There is no vegetation removed or damaged or slope
grade changes (cut or fill) made outside of a
specificallY defined building envelope. A building
7
r"'.
,-..,
envelope shall be designated by this review and said
envelope shall be barricaded prior to issuance of
any demolition, excavation or building permits. The
barricades shall remain in place until the issuance
of Certificates of occupancy; and
5. The proposed development does not pollute or
interfere with the natural changes of the river,
stream or other tributary, including erosion and/or
sedimentation during construction. Increased on-
site drainage shall be accommodated. within the
parcel to prevent entry into the river or onto its
banks. Pools or hot tubs cannot be drained outside
of the designated building envelope; and
6.
written notice is giv~n to
Conservation Board pr~or to
relocation of a water course,
notice is submitted to the
Management Agency; and
the Colorado Water
any alteration or
and a copy of said
Federal Emergency
7. A guarantee is provided in the event a water course
is altered or relocated, that applies to the
developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that
ensures that the flood carrying capacity on the
parcel is not diminished; and
Copies are provided of all necessary federal
state permits relating to work within the
hundred (100) year floodplain; and
9. There is no development other than approved native
vegetation planting taking place below the top of
slope or within 15' of the top of slope or the high
waterline, whichever is most restrictive. If any
development is essential within this area, it may
only be approved by special review pursuant to
Section 7-404 D. of this Article 7; and
and
one
8.
10. All development outside the 15' setback from the top
of slope does not exceed a height delineated by a
line drawn at a 45 degree angle from ground level
at the top of slope. Height shall be measured and
determined by the Zoning Officer utilizing that
definition set forth at section 3-101 of this
Chapter 24; and
11. A landscape plan is submitted with all development
applications. Such plan shall limit new plantings
(including trees, shrubs, flowers, and grasses)
outside of the designated building envelope on the
river side to native riparian vegetation; and
8
1""'.
r--.
12. All exterior lighting is low and downcast with no
light(s) directed toward the river or located down
the slope; and
13. site sections drawn by a registered architect,
landscape architect, or engineer are be submitted
showing all existing and proposed site elements, the
top of slope, and pertinent elevations above sea
level; and
14. There has been accurate identification of wetlands
and riparian zones.
section 13: Section 7 -8 04 . E. 1. of Chapter 24 of the Aspen
'Municipal Code "specially Planned Area Insubstantial Amendment" is
hereby amended, which new text shall read as follows:
7-804 E.1. SPA Insubstantial Amendments
An insubstantial amendment to an approved development order
for a final development plan may be authorized by the
Community Development Director. The following shall not be
considered an insubstantial amendment:
a) A change in the use or character of the development.
b) An increase by greater than three (3) percent in the
overall coverage of structures on the land.
c)
Any amendment that substantially increases
generation rates of the proposed development,
demand for public facilities.
trip
or the
d) A reduction by greater than three (3) percent of the
approved open space.
e) A reduction by greater than one (1) percent of the off-
street parking and loading space.
f) A reduction in required pavement widths or right-of-way
for streets and easements.
g)
An increase of
approved gross
buildings.
greater than two
leasable floor
(2)
area
percent in the
of commercial
h) An increase by greater than one (1) percent in the
approved residential density of the development.
i) Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or
9
r".
.r\
representation of the project's original approval or
which requires granting .of a further variation from the
project's approved use or dimensional requirements.
Section 14: section 7-907.A. of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal
Code "Planned unit Development Insubstantial Amendment" is hereby
amended, which new text shall read as follows:
section 24-7-907.A. PUD Insubstantial Amendments
An insubstantial amendment to an approved development order
for a final development plan may be authorized by the
community Devlopment Director. The following shall not be
considered an insubstantial amendment:
a) A change in the use or character of the development.
b) An increase by greater than three (3) percent in the
overall coverage of structures on the land.
c) Any amendment that substantially increases trip.
generation rates of the proposed development, or the
demand for public facilities.
d) A reduction by greater than three (3) percent of the
approved open space.
e) A reduction by greater than one (1) percent of the off-
street parking and loading space.
f) A reduction in required pavement widths or right-of-way
for streets and easements.
An increase of
approved gross
buildings.
h) An increase by greater than one (1) percent in the
approved residential density of the development.
greater than two
leasable floor
(2)
area
percent in the
of commercial
g)
i) Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or
representation of the project's original approval or
which requires granting of a further variation from the
project's approved use or dimensional requirements.
section 15: section 7-1001 of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal
Code, "Subdivision, Purpose" is hereby amended by adding a new
section "h", which new text shall read as follows:
section 7-1001. Purpose.
The purpose of this division is to
10
1""'.
,,-,
A. Assist in the orderly and efficient development of the
City;
B. Ensure the proper distribution of development;
C. Encourage the well-planned subdivision of land by
establishing standards for the design of a subdivision;
D. Improve land records and survey monuments by establishing
standards for surveys and plats;
E. Coordinate the construction of public facilities with the
need for public facilities;
F. Safeguard the interests of the public and the sUbdivider
and.provide consumer protection for the purchaser;
G. Acquire and ensure the maintenance of public open spaces
and parks; and
H. Provide procedures so that development encourages the
preservation of important and unique natural or scenic
features, including but not limited to mature trees or
indigenous vegetation, bluffs, hillsides or similar geologic
features, or edges of rivers and other bodies of water; and
1. Promote the health, safety and general welfare of the
residents of the City of Aspen.
section 16: Sections 7-1003.A.2.b. and d. of Chapter 24 of the
Aspen Municipal Code "Lot Split" are hereby amended, and new
sections 7-1003.A.2.e., 7-1003.A.2.f. and 7-1003.A.2.g. are added,
which new text shall read as follows:
section 7-1003 Exemptions (A) (2) Lot Split.
a. The land is not located in a sUbdivision approved by
either the Pitkin County Eloard of County commissioners
or the City Council, or the land is described as a metes
and bounds parcel which has not been subdivided after
adoption of subdivision regulations by the City of Aspen
on March 24, 1969; and
b. No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split,
both lots conform to the requirements of the underlying
zone district. Any lot for which development is proposed
will mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to Section
8-104 (A) (1) (c) .
c. The lot under consideration, or any part thereof, was not
previously the subject of a SUbdivision exemption under
11
r".
.-""",
the provisions of this article or a "lot split" exemption
pursuant to section 8-104(C) (1) (a); and
d. A sUbdivision plat which meets the terms of this
division, and conforms to the requirements of this
chapter, is submitted and recorded in the office of the
Pitkin County clerk and recorder after approval,
indicating that no further subdivision may be granted for
these lots nor will additional units be built without
receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this article
and growth management allocation pursuant to Article 8.
e. Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat
shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County
clerk and recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant
to record the plat within one hundred and eighty (180)
days following approval by the City Council shall render
the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the
City Council will be required for a showing of good
cause.
f. In the case where an existing single family dwelling
occupies a site which is eligible for a lot split, the
dwelling need not be demolished prior to application for
a lot split.
g. Maximum potential buildout for the two parcels created
by a lot split shall not exceed three units, which may
be composed of a duplex and a single family home. .
section 17: section 7-1003.A.l.d. of Chapter 24 of the Aspen
Municipal Code, review criteria for "Lot Line Adjustment" is hereby
amended, which new text shall,read as follows:
d. "The corrected plat will meet the standards of this
division, and conforms to the requirements of this chapter,
including the dimensional requirements of the zone district
in which the lots are located, except in cases of an existing
non-conforming lot, in which the adjustment shall not increase
the nonconformity of the lot. The plat shall be submitted and
recorded in the office of the Pitkin county clerk and
recorder. Failure to record the plat within a period of one
hundred and eighty .(180) days following approval shall render
the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the
Planning Director will be required before its acceptance and
recording; and
section 18: section 7-1004.C.4. of Chapter
Municipal Code "Subdivision Design Standards" is
add a new section "h", which text shall read as
2 4 of the Aspen
hereby amended to
follows:
h. The design and location of any proposed structure;
12
1""',
,~
building envelope, road,. driveway, trail
development is compatible with significant
scenic features of the site.
or similar
natural or
Section 19: section 7-1005.E. of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal
Code "Subdivision Agreement Recordation" is hereby amended, which
new text shall read as follows:
E. Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat
shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin county clerk and
recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the
plat within one hundred and eighty (180) days following
approval by the City Council shall render the plat invalid and
reconsideration of the plat by the commission and city council
will be required by for a showing of good cause.
section 20: section 7-1006.A. of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal
Code "Amendment to Subdivision Development Order" is hereby
amended, which new text shall read as follows:
A. Insubstantial amendment. An insubstantial amendment to an
approved plat or between adjacent subdivision plats may be
authorized by the Community Development Director. An
insubstantial amendment shall be limited to technical or
engineering considerations first discovered during actual
development which could not reasonably be anticipated during
the. approval process, or any other minor change to a plat
which the Community Development Director finds has no effect
on the conditions and representations limiting the approved
plat.
section 21:
This Ordinance shall not affect any existing
litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or
proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances
repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be
conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances.
section 22: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase,
or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or
unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion
shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and
shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof.
section 23: The City Clerk shall cause notice of this Ordinance
13
t"""I
r'i
to be published in a newspaper of general circulations within the
city of Aspen no later than fourteen (14) days following final
adoption hereof.
section 24: That the city Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of
this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office
of the Pitkin county Clerk and Recorder.
section 25: A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the
day of , 1995 at 5:00 in the City Council Chambers,
Aspen city Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which
hearing a public notice of the same shall be published 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
, 1995.
John Bennett, Mayor
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, city Clerk
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this
, 1995.
day of
John Bennett, Mayor
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, city Clerk
14
:.00.'''';;;'':.:';';.', ,.,.,:<,...~I" ,..;,';.~: ~;'",,;~,'~,,;'..<.'.;':;" ;,;-'~~o;:.:;:C'.,.>:::..~..:~-"..;~.;:.:.: ~;o:;i~';'--=-'""""".~<~:.._.,.-..-': ;""-;;,';',/.".-:~:~;":~.,.;.:,,i,,.~:,:..'.-:'.~.;... :-;, _~......-..~..;.::.:+:" _'~__':"~ ." _" _. _ '-"'-'._. ._. ;0";:;".:,;:'-""-,,,-":=-;:;';;:'="';;';;0.--=:0:0:-:.
-i:
1'""'\
.~y Council
ApprOved
By Ordinance
Exhibit
A-
, 19
Resolution No. 95-~
RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING TO THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL AMENDMENTS TO THE ASPEN
MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS:
18-3.3 Housing Replacement Requirements
24-3-101 Definitions: Satellite Dish Antenna, Fence
24-5-201, 24-5-202, 24-5-203, 24-5-205, 24-5-206, 24-5-206.1,
24-5-206.2, 24-5-207, 24-5-208, 24-5-209, 24-5-210, 24-5-211,
24-5-212, 24-5-213, 24-5-214, 24-5-215, 24-5-216, 24-5-217,
24-5-218, 24-5-219, 24-5-220 Individual Zone Districts,
Conditional Uses: Delete Satellite Dish Antennas
24-5-506 Domestic Animals
24-5-511 Supplemental Regulations: Landscape Maintenance
24-5-512 Supplemental Regulations: Satellite Dish Antennas
24-5-702 CalCUlation of Affordable Housing Impact Fee
24-7-503 8040 Greenline Review
24-7-504 Stream Margin Review
24-7-804 specially Planned Area Insubstantial Amendments
24-7-907 Planned Unit Development Insubstantial Amendments
24-7-1003 Subdivision Exemptions: Lot Splits and Lot Line
Adjustments
24-7-1005 Subdivision Agreement: Condominium Plat Recordation
24-7-1006 Amendment to Subdivision Development Order
WHEREAS, the Community Development Office, the Planning and
Zoning Commission, the City Council and citizens of Aspen have,
through their use of the land use regulations within the Aspen
Municipal Code, realized the need to amend sections of said Code
in order to streamline processes, remove conflicts, or otherwise
update regulations to provide for better land use decisions; and
WHEREAS, it is a continuous goal of the City Council and
Planning and Zoning Commission to make the land use regulations
respond to the changing conditions in the City of Aspen; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Office has been compiling a list of
needed code amendments to present to the Planning and Zoning
"--~'--'-'~:;,;;.:.:...::....;.. ___~~":"""7~~:;:;~:~-"- -y~-,
I"'"
~
,. '1
Commission and city Council to review in a comprehensive manner;
and
WHEREAS, section 24-7-1103 of the Municipal Code provides that
amendments to Chapter 24 of the Code, to wit, "Land Use
Regulations", shall be reviewed and recommended for approval by the
Planning Director and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission
at public hearing, and then approved, approved with conditions, or
disapproved by the city Council at public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the
proposed amendments and did conduct a public hearing thereon on
February 21 and March 21, 1995; and
WHEREAS, upon review and consideration of the text amendments,
agency and public comment thereon, and those applicable standards
as contained in Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code, to wit, Division
11 of Article 7 (Text Amendments), the Planning and Zoning
Commission recommends approval of the text amendments recommended
by the Planning Director pursuant to procedure as authorized by
Section 24-6-205 (A) (5) of the Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning commission finds that the
text amendments meet or exceed all applicable development standards
and is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area
Community Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning commission finds that these
amendments further and is necessary for public health, safety, and
welfare and the proposed text amendments will allow and promote
compatibility of zone districts and land uses with existing land
uses and neighborhood characteristics and will be consistent with
the public welfare and the purposes and intent of Chapter 24 of the
Municipal Code.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that it does hereby
adopt Resolution No. 95- , amending the Municipal Code of the City
of Aspen. --
AND, NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that is does
hereby recommend to the City Council of the City of Aspen approval
of Resolution No. 95-__
AND, NOW THEREFORE BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED by the Commission that
it does hereby recommend the fOllowing amendments to the Aspen
Municipal Code:
I) Section 18-3.3 Housing Replacement Requirements.
(a) minimum replacement reguirement (unchanged)
(b) location of replacement housing (unchanged)
(c) timing and quality of replacement unit (unchanged)
2
~,.>>,..:,L;);:::~'.i;-:';';''';''''';.~..~:i~:~:S~,;,_'..:.'"'';'~'_''';'''-:::';:::.::::.:~.:..
. ~.~.. _ _';";':;:;:; .;...:.:.:;;>..:.-~.,~.;.,~..4::';.A;"';';';~""":l::'" .
I"'"
.-,
IV. Rental and Resale Restrictions
Replacement units shall be subject to deed restriction in a
form and substance acceptable to the City Council. Such deed
restricted units may only be rented or sold to tenants or
buyers who meet the City's qualifications in effect at the
time of sale or rental, and at sale prices or rental rates
which are also in compliance with the City's current
regulations. Thcewnt.r ia . 6n"ei t.lea t.e ac.les"t te:.l'ia:r.l.'E:.s' er
purehaaera aaejeet te the afercmea~ieRea ~alifieatiafla.
First priority for rental or sale occupancy of replacement
units shall qo to the tenants who rent the units at the time
of demolition of said units. Prior to the approval of any
building permits for demolition or reconstruction of units
required by this section, the applicant shall provide a list
of all units and their occupants, and a statement signed by
each occupant which apprises said persons of their priority
to rent or buy replacement units so long as they qualify under
the Rousing Guidelines and deed restrictions. The mix of
afford.able housing units, as between 10.., moaerate, ana lIIiel.el.lc
income categories 1 through 4, or resident occupied, may be
determined by the owner, provided that no less than 20% of the
bedrooms qualify as la.1 ineellle Category 1 and no more than
20% of the units are available as resident occupied units.
2) Section 24-3-101 Definitions:
a) Fence means a structure, including berms and foliage, Which
serves as a barrier intended to prevent escape or intrusion,
to mark a boundary, to shield or screen view, or to serve any
similar purpose. Fences shall be permitted in every zone
district provided that no fence shall exceed six (6) feet
above natural grade. Fences visible from the public right-
of-way shall be constructed of wood, stone, wrought iron or
masonry. On corner lots, no fence, retaining wall, or similar
ol:lject shall be erected or maintained which obstructs the
traffic vision, nor on corner lots shall any fence, retaining
wall, or similar obstruction be erected or maintained which
exceeds a height of forty-two (42) inches, measured from
street grade, within 30 feet from the lot corner. Plans
showing proposed construction, material, location and height
shall be presented to the building inspector before a building
permit for a fence is issued.
b) satellite dish antenna or satellite radio frequency signal
reception and/or transmission device means a dish-shaped or
parabolic-shaped reception or transmission device, whose
ant.enlla i3 marc than t.'.~e (2) feet in heiEJht ana/er "di3h"
ea~eRcnt. is mere t.han t~le (2) feet in aiam~tcr, which is used
for the reception and/or transmission of satellite signals,
including but not limited to television signals, AM radio
signals, FM radio signals, telemetry signals, data
3
~~.:1:,~t0~::::"-r::::_:':::i~c!..~7:':::";. '
',"'.",,',
-- ._'*-,.._."
.." "'u,'i.': ';'":~'_'''"''''''''~IS---'."",,,,-."C-'''
,
1'""'\
1""\
communication signals, or any other reception or transmission
signals using free air space as a medium, whether for
commercial or private use, provided: [the rest of the section
remains the same]
3) sections: 24-5-20~, 24-5-202, 24-5-203, 24-5-205, 24-5-206, 24-
5-206.1, 24-5-206.2, 24-5-207, 24-5-208, 24-5-209, 24-5-210, 24-
5-2~1, 24-5-212, 24-5-2~3, 24-5-214, 24-5-215, 24-5-216, 24-5-2~7,
24-5-218, 24-5-2~9, and 24-5-220: Individual Zone Districts, lists
of Conditional Uses: delete Satellite Dish Antennas as conditional
Uses (numbers vary per section)
4) section 24-5-506. Delete as follows:
Demcat.ie ]..nimala. The ]t.e6.!,iR~ af ,aeft\(;.:]tie arlimals shall be.
pc.~9ftit.tcaift the Ueaiulll DCRSit.y Re:sidential (It G), Uederat.e.
DCRSity Resiel.efitial (It 15), (It ~5A), anel. (It ~SB), Le"of DCRsitly
ResiEl:ential (It :10) , Resiel.eRtial/U1:llti Family (It/UF) ,
ResiEl:efitialjr1alsile. HOIDe rarlt (UIIr), anel. Rural Reaidcntial (RR)
aene distriet.$, l?re7ide:.a that. the. ]tc.c19iR13 af ouch animal:] i;3
incident.al and :]uberainat.e. te the ~ri~eipal resiaent.ial use
ef 'the proiBis6s,sflall net chan~e the: basic character sf the:
residential usc, shall net. een3titut.ea cemmcrcial acti~i~y,
ana. shall net. 7ielat.e: any health, sanitary er ether
rc~ula'tien3 af thacity or state, or ethcr~isc canst-ltute a
l'luslie RuisaRee.
5) add Section 24-5-511. Landscape Maintenance
A. Landscaping shown on any approved site development plan
shall be maintained in a healthy manner for a minimum three
(3) year period. In the event that plant material dies, the
owner of the property shall replace the plant material with
similar quality within 45 days of notification by the Zoning
Enforcement Officer. If seasonal or cultural constraints do
not allow planting of the approved plant material within 45
days the owner may in writing seek permission from the
community Development Director to;
1) Provide financial assurances equal to 120% of the amount
of the replacement landscaping and installation costs as
approved by the Parks Department, and in a form
satisfactory to the city Attorney. The completion of the
landscape replacement shall be accomplished no late than
June 15 of the next planting season, otherwise the
financial assurances shall be forfeited to the city.
2) SUbmit for approval a revised landscape plan.
Failure to comply with the replanting requirement will
constitute a violation of this section and may result in
complaint(s) being filed in Municipal Court.
4
__....:.::":::::.:::::-:,:""~.~;..:.::-';~.:;:"s';':',', "
,
.1"'"
r-,
6) add Section 5-512. Sa~ellite Dish Antennas
Satellite dish an~ennas twenty-four (24) inches in diameter
or less mus~ receive appropriate building permits prior ~o
installa~ion. sa~elli~e dish an~ennas ~wenty-five (25) inches
or grea~er in diameter shall be reviewed and approved by the
Communi~y Development Director in conformance with the
criteria within sections 7-304 (B) and (C). The Community
Developmen~ Direc~or may apply reasonable condi~ions to the
approval deemed necessary to insure conformance with said
review criteria. If the Community Developmen~ Direc~or
determines that ~he proposed satellite dish an~ennas does no~
comply with the review criteria and denies the application,
or the applicant does no~ agree ~o the conditions of approval
determined by the Community Development Director, the
applicant may apply for conditional use review by the Planning
and Zoning commission.
Procedures established in Article 6 Common Development Review
Procedures shall apply to all satellite dish antennas.
7) Section 24-5-702 Calculation of affordable housing impact fee.
The amount of the affordable housing impact fee is based on
the public cost to provide affordable housing as a result of
the activity for which the fee is required. The formula shall
utilize the cash-in-lieu payment established from time to time
by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Office for moderate income
employees and the square footage of new floor area constructed
as a result of the demolition of a single family or duplex
dwelling unit or the construction of a new single family or
duplex dwelling unit on a previously vacant lot (the floor
area of a demolished dwelling shall be subtracted from the
floor area of the replacement dwelling unit), or the remodel
or expansion of an exis~ing single family residence into a
duplex dwelling. The formula assumes that for every three
thousand (3,000) square feet of new single family or duplex
floor area that the public will be required to provide housing
for one moderate income employee. The formula to be applied
shall be as follows: cash-in-lieu fee for meaerate the average
of Category 2 and Category 3 income employees in effect at
the time the affordable housing impact fee is due, divided by
three thousand (3,000), and times the new square footage.
S) Section 24-7-503 (C) 8040 Greenline, augment criterium number
11 as follows:
11) Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area
Community Plan: Parks/Recreation/open Space/Trails Plan map
is dedicated for public use. provide access to natural
resources and areas of special interest to the community.
5
_._,_____.............::~..;,;..;..~..,:...:.......;..;:.:..__o;;.. .::.0.";..,;..., . ....
....,-_...,.._,~-""'-~~-
,
~
r-..
9} Section 24-7-504. stream Margin
No development shall be permitted within the floodway, with
the exception of bridges or structures for irrigation,
drainage, flood control or water diversion, which may be
permitted by the City Engineer, provided plans and
specifications arc !lre7iaeel. submitted demonstrating the
structure is engineered to prevent blockage of drainage
channels during peak flows and the Commission determines the
proposed structure complies, to the extent practical, with all
the standards set forth below.
No development shall be permitted within one hundred feet
(lOO'), measured horizontally, from the high water line
of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, or
within the special Flood Hazard Area where it extends
beyond one hundred feet (100') from the high water line
of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams,
unless the Commission makes a determination that the
proposed development complies with all the standards set
forth below:
1. It can be demonstrated that any proposed develop-
ment which is in the special Flood Hazard Area will
not increase the base flood elevation on the parcel
proposed for development. This shall be
demonstrated by an engineering study prepared by a
professional engineer registered to practice in the
State of Colorado which shows that the base flood
elevation will not be raised, including, but not
limited to, proposing mitigation techniques on or
off-site which compensate for any base flood
elevation increase caused by the development; and
2. Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area
Community Plan, Parks/Recreation/Open Space/Trails
Plan map, or areas of historic public use or access
are ie dedicated via a recorded easement for public
use. Dedications are necessitated by development' s
increased impacts to the City's recreation and trail
facilities including public fishing access; and
3. The recommendations of the Roaring Fork Greenway
Plan are implemented in the proposed plan for
development, to the greatest extent practicable; and
4. There is no vegetation ie removed or damaged or
slope grade changes (cut or fill) made outside of
a specificallY defined building envelope ~
preauaa creaien ana Zlcelimcntatiel'l of the. .3tre.am
~. A building envelope shall designated by this
6
.__..________.....;.~,,;;.;;;;;;:;;~:;;,;';;,;;,,"l.i(~.~~2;;::.:r..:~._~-~"_:~:~..
"'.'---.".,,'
I~
,-."
review and said envelope shall be barricaded prior
to issuance of any demolition, excavation or
building permits. The barricades shall remain in
place until the issuance of Certificates of
Occupancy; and
s. '1'6 'E;ae '!Jreateat elf'te!\'t praetieaJele, The proposed
development zea-ueea pelh:ltiafi aRa ill'terfers.fies. does
Dot pollute or interfere with the natural changes
of the river, stream or other tributary, including
erosion and/or sedimentation during construction.
Increased on-site drainage shall be accoDllllodated
within the parcel to prevent entry into the river
or onto its banks. Pools or hot tubs cannot be
drained outside of the desiqnated building envelope;
and
6. Written notice is given to the Colorado Water
conservation Board prior to any alteration or
relocation of a water course, and a copy of said
notice is submitted to the Federal Emergency
Management Agency; and
7. A guarantee is provided in the event a water course
is altered or relocated, that applies to the
developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that
ensures that the flood carrying capacity on the
parcel is not diminished; and
8. Copies are provided of all necessary federal and
state permits relating to work within the one
hundred (100) year floodplain; and
9. There is no development other than approved native
vegetation planting taking place below the top of
slope or within lS' of the top of slope or the high
waterline, whichever is most restrictive. If any
development is essential within this area, it may
only be approved by special review pursuant to
Section 7-404 D. of this Article 7; and
10. All development outside the lS' setback from the top
of slope does not exceed a height delineated by a
line drawn at a 4S degree angle from ground level
at the top of slope. Height shall be measured and
determined by the Zoning Officer utilizing that
definition set forth at section 3-101 of this
Chapter 24; and
11. A landscape plan is submitted with all development
applications. Such plan shall limit new plantings
(including trees, shrubs, flowers, and grasses)
7
-----.-.-- ~~.
-:;-';':;;;;-::.!:-};'
,--,,,;,",'':'',:~'::':'.~';..;..ic;', 0; _-..'. '
'-> --.,.....-....
....;.--"~.:::-::~~~:"::' ',., ::.., >,,--.:..'::'':=':::::'/:::._*..
",';:.''':~~' :.~:'::-.:.L'::';:~,;;':i::;::..::.:,d!l;.:.i~'~-;:;:::.';':,.
,..-.."
1""':
outside of the designated bui~ding enve~ope on the
river side to native riparian vegetation; and
12. A~~ exterior lighting is low and downcast with no
~ight(s) directed toward the river or located down
the slope; and
13. site sections drawn by a registered architect,
landscape architect, or engineer are be submitted
showinq a~~ existing and proposed site elements, the
top of s~ope, and pertinent elevations above sea
~eve~; and
14. There has been accurate identification of wetlands
and riparian zones.
10) 7-804 E.1. SPA Insubstantial Amendments
An insubstantial amendment to an approved development order
for a final development plan may be authorized by the
community Development Director. An in3ub3tantial alllenMlent
ohall B6 limited te taehnical 6r eRginccrinq eeR6iacratien~
firat aisee.,,~crca auria~ aatual ac.....clepmcflt l~"'hich eeuld nat
rcasana~ly Be antieipatca aarin~tflc appre7al preec3s. The
following shall not be considered an insubstantial amendment:
a) A change in the use or character of the development.
b) An increase by greater than three (3) percent in the
overall coverage of structures on the land.
c) Any amendment that SUbstantially increases trip
generation rates of the propOsed development, or the
demand for public facilities.
d) A reduction by greater than three (3) percent of the
approved open space.
e) A reduction by greater than one (1) percent of the off-
street parking and loading space.
f) A reduction in required pavement widths or right-Of-way
for streets and easements.
An increase of
approved gross
buildings.
h) An increase by greater than one (1) percent in the
approved residential density of the propes eel development.
greater than two (2) percent in the
leasable floor area of commercial
g)
i) Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or
8
- "',.' ",,_""'"""'-;"~-"..'., .;".":__"....,.',\.,A..,,.,...~;.,..~,'..-,: ,
.,-, ",.W.:~_'~~...,' "".,.'i-t'Q:;.~" ,..,;....
~
~.
representation of the project's original approval or
which requires granting of a further variation from the
project's approved use or dimensional requirements.
II) Section 24-7-907 A. PUD Insubstantial Amendments
An insubstantial amendment to an approved development order
for a final development plan may be authorized by the
Community Development Director. ~H iHs~Bs~aH~ial allleH8meH~
ahall Be limi~ea to tceftnieal ercfl~inccring eaftBiaera~ie~s
firs't aisee":CY6a &tiring ae~ual ae-\'--elepmc.n-e whies eatild fle"t
raaaeBasly Be antieipatca durin~ the a~preval preesas. The
following shall not be considered an insubstantial amendment:
a) A change in the use or character of the development.
b) An increase by greater than three (3) percent in the
overall coverage of structures on the land.
c) Any amendment that substantially increases trip
generation rates of the proposed development, or the
demand for public facilities.
d) A reduction by greater than three (3) percent of the
approved open space.
e) A reduction by greater than one (1) percent of the off-
street parking and loading space.
f) A reduction in required pavement widths or right-of-way
for streets and easements.
g)
greater than two (2) percent in the
leasable floor area of commercial
An increase of
approved gross
buildings.
h) An increase by greater than one (1) percent in the
approved residential density of the l"rel"osea development.
i) Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or
representation of the proj ect 's original approval or
which requires granting of a further variation from the
project's approved use or dimensional requirements.
12) Section 7-1003 Exemptions (A) (2) Lot split.
b. No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split,
both lots conform to the requirements of the underlying zone
district. aHa the al"!llicaRt eemmits that Any lot for which
development is proposed will eeRtaiH aR aeecssery elwelliRq
uHi~. mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to section 8-
104 (A) (1) (c) .
9
-_.-~-_........;..",_...._,....:....~._",_._'.
.__.n._.
-,-'""'--"
.._'._-::....--;..~..:..'~:.;;;.
I"'"
I"'"
d. "A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this division,
and conforms to the requirements of this chapter, is submitted
and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and
recorder after approval, indicating that no further
subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional
units be built without receipt of applicable approvals
pursuant to this article and growth management allocation
pursuant to Article 8.
add new "e"
e. Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat
shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin county clerk and
recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the
plat within one hundred and eighty (180) days followinq
approval by the city council shall render the plat invalid and
reconsideration of the plat by the City Council will be
required by for a showing of good cause.
add new "f"
f. In the case where an existing single family dwelling
occupies a site which is eligible for a lot split, the
dwelling need not be demolished prior to application for a lot
split. Maximum potential buildout for the two parcels created
by a lot split shall not exceed three units, which may be
composed of a duplex and single family home.
13) section 7-1003 A.1. Lot Line Adjustment
d. "The corrected plat will meet the standards of this
division, and conforms to the. requirements of this chapter,
including the dimensional requirements of the zone district
in which the lots are located, except in cases of an existing
non-conforming lot, in which the adjustment shall not increase
the nonconformity of the lot. The plat shall be submitted and
recorded in the office of the Pitkin county clerk and
recorder. Failure to record the plat within a period of one
hundred and eighty (180) days following approval shall render
the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the
Community Development Director will be required before its
acceptance and recording; and
14) Section 7-1005 t. Subdivision Agreement
e. Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat
shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and
recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the
plat within one hundred and eighty (180) days following
approval by the City Council shall render the plat invalid and
reconsideration of the plat by the commission and city council
will be required by for a showing of good cause. The enc
hundred aHd ~iqhty da~f (180) day rcceraa'tion rcqairemc.nt
cORtaiReel. fierein ahall not apply to recordinq af cOfiaemifiium
10
_..,-""..~'".'<.
",.,,-,.:- '-. -':",.::;:'.,-".-',.,
'-' """:..~.~...",:,,,- " .
::.. -:,'.~::';_...__.,:-:~::' 2',' '::"-=:7.:::::t~':::::~.:. ";::;;:;'.;::::'~=::~;,j",;, ~.~\o:,:.:~."c'.-".::::
~ ..., rII
~
,-..,
mapa, er acelara~iens or aHY ether aecumcnto r~~irea ~e be
reeeraca 'be aeasmpliBh a, esndeminiumisat.iel1 in the City af
Aapcn.
15) 7-1006. Amendment to Subdivision Development Order.
A. Insubstantial amendment. An insubstantial amendment to an
approved plat or l:Ietween adjacent subdivision plats may be
authorized by the plaliliili\J el.ireet;er COlDllluni ty Development
Director. An insubstantial amendment shall be limited to
technical or engineering considerations first discovered
during actual development which could not reasonably be
anticipated during the approval process, or any other minor
change to a plat which the l'lanl'liRlJ airee'ter cOlDlllunity
Development Direetor finds has no effect on the conditions
and representations limiting the approved plat.
[B and C remain unchanged)
D. Recordation. Amended plats shall be submitted and recorded
in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder.
Failure to record an amended plat within a period of one
hundred and eighty (180) days following approval shall render
the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the city
councilor cOlDlllunity Development Director will be required
before its acceptance and recording.
APPROVED by the Commission at their regular meeting on March 21,
1995.
ATTEST:
ASPEN PLANNING AND
~H-
Bruce Kerr, a~rman
Date Signed 1/;~h.f
~1~_
7~ 3/zr/,5
Jan Carney, Deputy City Clerk
_.~:_,~,;,:",:':'~:::,:",:"-,;;;",,~,---:,,:;,,,;,
';',--,-,..,.~.,
.._,,--::;::..;j:;.2:;;;l;;;,'~'
,-,...._. _'~h2T~'.b~t3'i2~;:}~,";;~~:~'"'.:~L;,-'
MEMORANDUM
dJr .
.Yv~~'
IV
\
.
I"'"
TO:
Mayor and City council
THRU:
Bill Efting, Acting City Manager
THRU:
stan Clauson, city Community Development Director
FROM:
Kim Johnson, Planner
DATE:
April 24, 1995
RE:
staff Initiated Amendments to the Land Use Regulations,
Round II - First Reading of Ordinance ___, Series of 1995
======:==========================================================
SUMMARY: The Planning commission recommends approval of this list
of amendments to the land use regulations found in Chapters 18 and
24 of the Municipal Code. Some of the proposed changes are
intended to clarify or define code sections. Other amendments are
substantial in nature.
Each Council member has a code book. It might be helpful for you
to refer to the specific sections for detailed context.
PROCESS: Code amendments follow a two step review process for
ordinance adoption of text changes. The Planning and Zoning
Commission considered the amendments at public hearings on February
21, March 21, and April 4, 1995. At the March 21 meeting, the
Commission passed Resolution 95-7 (Exhibit "A"), which cont:ained
all but four of the individual amendments presented to Council in
this memo. By adoption of this resolution, any land use
applications submitted between March 21 and second
reading/enactment of the amendments must comply with the revised
text language.
The City Council will also hold public hearing at second reading.
STAFF COMMENTS: This review is the second round of amendment
reviews initiated by staff to improve the land use regulations.
This memo is formatted to present and discuss each proposed
amendment individually. Deleted text is shown as strikeout and new
text is boldface. The list of recommended changes is:
~
1) Definition of "buildina envelope" There are several instances
where the land use regulations or specific approvals refer to
development within a building envelope. However, there is no
definition in the regulations to provide consistency in use of this
term. Staff and the P&Z propose the following new definition:
building envelope: that area on a lot which encompasses all
development including but not limited to excavation, fill,
'1~~~"",,+'.J: S~ ~-..tre'1~ 1 lf1.S",b51a...f.,,(; IgD!:P::JPeCOl/~ ~1a4ir
~hk. bt~t. W~ - ~'l"'l"j Cortttr"ilff 7)ISf.-..-~ ~J;..... f
~"t Yr.""."\) .for rt(lt.'ct-tAt lfs&. d......sf.c ..."\",,,~l;
~"'.eb~(t\Q.wt~ ~,. 11% eI\U{,\D~ ",,~k 41o\ID!h.r. / f1o.l>/SfJ'I de.\,.J"IlJ ''''f''LtJ;~e;
,.,.-.."-'._,.,'..,_....~...:...;-~.;,._;. ,~.:.~,.,
. ".. " ,,';::";;~'",';:.'
,... ", ".'"
.,.".,'..-......'-...-'''.,"",
.;._.-,-i2:,;;.;"-':i'.~~,,,':,:;::.~:::<:__ ,;:~;'-,";::'~~~::::::-,~,,~,""',:"i-~~~:-~~~;:&:::illii:~~_
,-.,
.~
grading, storage, demolition, structures, building heights,
decks, roof overhanqs, porches, patios and terraces, pools,
access ways and parking. planting of landscape materials on
natural grade and approved walkways and driveways may occur
outside of a building envelope. For purposes of site specific
development plans, ~uilding envelopes may be established to
restrict development to protect slopes, important vegetation,
water courses, privacy or other considerations. Building
envelopes shall be described on recorded plats, site specific
development plans, ordinances, resolutions, and building
permit site plans.
2) Subdivision Protection of Siqnificant Natural Features -
The current subdivision regulations are silent on the opportunity
and responsibility to highlight and protect significant natural
features on a parcel being reviewed for subdivision. Language
contained in the PUD section of the code addresses this issue.
staff and the P&Z are proposing that the following similar language
be transferred into the purpose statement and subdivision standards
because not all subdivision actions include pun review.
section 7-1001. Purpose.
The purpose of this division is to :
A. Assist in the orderly and efficient development of the
City;
B. Ensure the proper distribution of development;
C. Encourage the well-planned subdivision of land by
establishing standards for the design of a subdivision;
D. Improve land records and survey monuments by establishing
standards for surveys and plats;
E. Coordinate the construction of public facilities with the
need for public facilities;
F. Safeguard the interests of the public and the subdivider
and provide consumer protection for the purchaser;
G. Acquire and ensure the maintenance of pUblic open spaces
and parks;--aftli
H. Provide procedures so that development encourages the
preservation of natur.al and scenic feature~; and,
" ~P~-4' 4 \MV..~ ~~ 44,..- . . .
I. Promote the ftealth, safe\t;y and general welfare of the
residents of the City of Aspen.
2
_,: :._~-:;.:,::.~~' - ~~..'i").~:;:.~:;:..:;.:-::;;,.;:_;.2'S:.;.;',, ~;,i~.
-.........-".-"..;....
..
1"""",
,-..,
section 7-1004 Subdivision Approval
C. Review Standards
4. Design Standards. The following design standards shall
be required for all subdivisions. (all remain the same
a. through g.)
h. The design and location of any proposed structure,
building envelope, road, driveway, trail or similar
development is compatible with significant natural or
scenic features of the site.
3) site Specific Development Plan - In consideration of the land
use code's vested rights section, staff wanted to update the
definition of "site specific development plan". This definition
is important because it establishes what reviews may become vested
(or secure from code changes) beyond eighteen months from approval.
In order to have the City's definition concur with state
regulations, the P&Z recommends the following changes:
site specific development plan means a plan which has been
submitted to the oity celineil Elr tfie !llanninEj aRa 13o'l'liRq
cElmmis~ion community Development Department by a landowner or
his representative describing with reasonable certainty the
type and intensity of use for a specific parcel or parcels of
property. , incluaiRq aR a!lj!3lication for ap!lreval of the
felle.;inq: Such plan may be in the form of, but need not be
limited to, a planned unit development (PUD), subdivision,
specially planned area (SPA), growth management exemption
quota SYCltCIlI alletllleRt, aeveloj!3mel'lt in an environmentally
sensitive area review, conditional use, er special review
!lorllli t, siq'l'lifica'l'lt ae-..elel'lIlent ,:i thi'l'l an histel: it:) o-..erlay
aiatriet Elr te a hiClteric landmark or acmeli tion of a historiC!
lanalllark or historic landmark review. A variance shall not
constitute a site specific development plan. Site specific
development plan shall not mean or include any conceptual or
preliminary plan as defined in this chapter.
As a side note, the Commission presented a unanimous front on the
issue of strict time limi ts for development approvals. In
discussions with staff, City Attorney John Worcester clarified that
Section 6-207.F. states that a development approval which did not
obtain vested rights at a public hearing or a building permit
within eighteen months of approval would expire.
4) Eliminate the "technical or enqineerina considerations"
limitation for insubstantial amendments to SPAs or PUDs -
Sections 7-907 A. (PUD InSUbstantial Amendments) and 7-804 E.1.
(SPA Insubstantial Amendments) currently specify that any
insubstantial amendments to PUDs or SPAs must be engineering or
3
.1"'-,
~
,
technical considerations. The list of criteria effectively limits
the ability to request amendments. The current language causes
applicants (and staff) to conjure up reasons why a change would
qualify as an engineering or technical consideration.
~"~
d}.~ c)
~1 d)
;;.
tJf\
: ~\'t f)
~31A g)
o...rl\(f~
1)/0 (J -to '
<1fl;~ h)
t i)
7-907 A. pun Insubstantial amendment. An insubstantial
amendment to an approved development order for a final
development plan may be authorized by the Community
Development Director rlaRninq Direeter. AR inSl:lSstaRtial
amendment 3hall Be limited ~e tcehnieal or ca~incerinq
eORsiacra"tisft6 firs't eliaeevcrcd d1:iriR~ aet.l:lal ac-,,-clspll\cnt.
\Hiiek sauld Rat rcaaenaely Be antieipatca duriR~ t.he app~e7al
preeesB. The following shall not be considered an
insubstantial amendment:
a)
b)
A change in the use or character of the development.
An increase by greater than three (3) percent in the
overall coverage of structures on the land.
Any amendment that substantially increases trip
generation rates of the proposed development, or the
demand for public facilities.
A reduction by greater than three
approved open space.
(3)
percent of the
e)
A reduction by greater than one (1) percent of the off-
street parking and loading space.
A reduction in required pavement widths or right-of-way
for streets and easements.
An increase of
approved gross
buildings.
An increase by greater than one (1) percent in the
approved residential density of the l'rOl'6Sea development.
greater than two
leasable floor
percent in the
of commercial
(2)
area
Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or
representation of the project's original approval or
which requires granting of a further variation from the
project's approved use or dimensional requirements.
7-804 E.1. SPA An insubstantial amendment to an approved
development order for a final development plan may be
authorized by the Community Development Director rlanRiRq
Dircetor. ..\R insuDstaFrtio.l amcnamcnt ahall be limi tea to
tcehnieal er anqiRceriR~ eSRsidcratioR3 first ai3ee~crca
eh:lriflEj aettial ac-y-clepmont \;hich e:t0\:lla flet rcaaenably be
antieipatcd a~rinEJ the approval precess. The following shall
4
;',;"';:<::. -/;';';:,,~~;;.:0;;_':,:;;'i._'i.'~ '~,L;>;.0Ji.:'~:l,t.:
,.._. '._~-._-~c.."_:'...,_,
I"'"
r,
not be considered an insubstantial amendment:
(the exact same criteria which apply to PUD amendments are
utilized for SPA amendments)
5) Lot Splits - section 7-1003. (A) (2) (b) needs to be amended to
delete the requirement to provide an accessory dwelling unit on
each parcel created by the split. The accessory dwelling unit
requirement was enacted for lot splits several years before
Ordinance 1 of 1990 established the housing mitigation requirements
for single family and duplex development. Staff now wishes to
replace this lot split/ADU requirement with language for compliance
with section 8-104 (A) (1) (c) which sets forth 4 options for
affordable housing mitigation as established by Ordinance 1 of
1990. These options are the provision of an ADU, payment of cash-
in-lieu, or deed restriction of the new residence (s) . Staff
believes that the flexibility of options created in 1990 by
Ordinance 1 help fund the housing program and reduces the potential
of marginal ADUs that must be created simply because of the lot
split requirement. This change should read:
b. No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split,
both lots conform to the requirements of the underlying zone
district. aRa the ap!llioant oamlllit~ that Any lot for which
development is proposed will oontain an acccssery a.wlling
unit. mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to section 8-
104 (A)(l)(C).
section 7-1003. (A) (2) (d) needs to be amended to clarify that the
plat must meet the technical requirements for plats as contained
in the subdivision regulations:
d. "A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this division,
and conforms to the requirements of this chapter, is submitted
and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and
recorder after approval, indicating that no further
subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional
units be built without receipt of applicable approvals
rsuant to this article and growth management allocation
pu ant to Article 8.
new criteria "e" to section
split plat to be recorded
. Reco ation. The sUbdivision exemption agreement and plat
s e recorded in the office of the Pitkin county clerk and
recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the
plat within one hundred and eighty (180) days following
approval by the city council shall rende,f the jllat invalid and
reconsideration of the plat by the ~ity ~uncil will be
required )( for a showing of good cause.
5
_c......=:;;:~~~j;;;..:;,..:i, ~...::.::.;:;:;~.i..::;:.~;.
1"'.
,-.,
1~
Cb'
In order eliminate confusion about allowable buildout and building
types resulting from a lot split action, staff recommends a new
subsection (f) which will read:
f. In the case where an existing single family dwelling
occupies a site which is eligible for a lot split, the
dwellin need not be demolished prior to application for a lot
spli. aximum potential buildout for the two parcels created
ot split shall not exceed three units, which may be
composed of a duplex and single family home.
6) Plat reauirements for Lot Line Adiustments - In order to provide
consistency with all platting requirements for various subdivision
and subdivision exemption actions, the following changes are
proposed. Requiring prompt recordation of plats upon approval
reduces the potential for error. It will also reduce staff time
necessary to process the plats.
Section 7-1003 A.1.d. for Lot Line Adiustment requirements shall
read:
d. "The corrected plat will meet the standards of this
division, and conforms to the requirements of this chapter,
including the dimensional requirements of the zone district
in which the lots are located, except in cases of an existing
non-conforming lot, in which the adjustment shall not increase
the nonconformity of the lot. The plat shall be submitted and
recorded in the office of the Pitkin county clerk and
recorder. Failure to record the plat within a period of one
hundred and eighty (180) days following approval shall render
the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the
Community Development Director will be required before its
acceptance and recording; and
7) Insubstantial plat amendments - Section 7-1006 A. should allow
the Community Development Director to approve insubstantial plat
amendments where the amendment may occur between adjacent
subdivision plats rather than only within one sUbdivision. For
example on the rare occasion this might occur, an applicant would
not have to go the Council to change an easement or other
insubstantial element which runs between adjacent subdivisions.
Additionally, the 180 day recording deadline is a recommended
change via a new subsection D. The proposed language reads:
7-1006. Amendment to subdivision development order.
A. Insubstantial amendment. An insubstantial amendment to an
approved plat or between adjacent subdivision plats may be
authorized by the plaRfiiRq EHl!E::otor community Development
Director. An insubstantial amendment shall be limited to
technical or engineering considerations first discovered
6
~~~.'"""",~~;&,;",,,...,c...'...8,':;;,;:. '........,..;;.-::..::... ..."._,....~.<:;.....
. .:' ,....,:....".,:--:' :.".': '- '~... .-
," . ..,..........___,.. '...' '_. .:-._,....."._. "~" .....c _.....__..._..;..:-.-'....'-_.,..,
1"""\
,-..,
during actual development which could not reasonably be
anticipated during the approval process, or any other minor
change to a plat which the ~lanRinq el.ireetor community
Development Director finds has no effect on the conditions
and representations limiting the approved plat.
[B and C remain unchanged]
D. Recordation. Amended plats shall be submitted and recorded
in the office of the Pitkin county clerk and recorder.
Failure to record an amended plat within a period of one
hundred and eighty (180) days following approval shall render
the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the city
councilor community Development Director will be required
~efore its acceptance and recording.
8) Condominium filinq deadline - In Section 7-1005 E. within the
Subdivision Agreement section, staff wishes to delete the exception
for condominium maps to be recorded within 180 days. Staff
believes all recording deadlines should be consistent with the
code's 180 day subdivision plat recording deadline:
e. Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat
shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and
recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the
plat within one hundred and eighty (180) days following
approval by the City Council shall render the plat invalid and
reconsideration of t e plat by the commission and city council 1h
will be requir~d for a showing of good c;ause. 'Fhc one
cOfitaincel. herein shall net a~!lly to recordiRq of condollliniullI
llIaps, or dcclaratioRs sr any other docullIenta rcquired to be
reeorel.eel to aeealftI3lieh a csnel.ellliniulllizatien in the City sf
~1'....s~cn.
9) Siqht distance protection at corners - Staff brought forth this
proposal to insert a sight-distance requirement for visual
obstructions on corner lots into the definition of "fence". This
regulation had previously been included elsewhere in the Municipal
Code but was deleted a few years ago by the Building Oepartmen~1 ~~
The P&Z forwards this recommended language: ~~r-~
n~\ ._ Fence means a structure, including berms a d foliage, WhiChoJt~.
~~.. serves as a barrier intended to prevent esc e or int usion,~~
~. . to mark a boundary, to shield or screen view, 0 erve any
"C._.... JPR- similar purpose. Fences shall be permitted in every zone "''''''-)-
1\'~A".^.f"It-" v district provided that no fence shall exceed six (6) feet ~~_\
~~~ above natural grade. Fences visible from the public right- .
~-A~ of-way shall be constructed of wood, stone, wrought iron or <_
~. masonry. On corner lots, no fence, retaining wall, or similar ~
. object shall be erected or maintained which obstructs the
traffic vision, nor on corner lots shall any fence, retaining
7
""".'
.__, ."_'M~~.'~_""-'~.
1""".
,..-.."
wall, or similar obstruction be erected or maintained which
exceeds a height of forty-two (42) inches, measured from
street grade, within 30 feet from the lot corner. Plans
showing proposed construction, material, location and height
shall be presented to the building inspector before a building
permit for a fence is issued.
10) Housina Replacement reauirements: The Commission directed
staff to include an amendment which gives priority to displaced
tenants of projects being demolished and replaced under
Ordinance 1. Also, this section is being updated to reflect the
four category deed restriction system. The following change to
subsection IV. is proposed:
C ~-3 .9sing Replacement Requirements.
(a) minimum replacement requirement (unchanged)
(b) ocation of replacement housing (unchanged)
(c) t ing and quality of replacement unit (unchanged)
IV.
and Resale Restrictions
Replacemen units shall be sub'ect to deed restriction in a
form and su stance acceptable 0 the City Council. Such deed
restricted its may only rented or sold to tenants or
buyers who m t the City' qualifications in effect at the
time of sale r rental, d at sale prices or rental rates
which are al in co pliance with the City's current
regulations. '
1.0: '. First priority f sale occupancy of replacement
~ units shall go to who rent the units at the time
~~ of demolition of Prior to the approval of any
tJ-~' ..... building permits 0 demolition or reconstruction of units
o ~ required by thi . sec 'on, the applicant shall provide a list
~ /'. AOf all units a is thei occupants, and a statement Sign~d b ./hcc.
~ :1t( Ueach occupant hich ap rises said persons of their prio ty ~ u..;,t-
n..~. lA. to rent or b replaceme t units so long as they qualify nder ,)
YJI"'~ the 1I0usin Guidelines nd deed restrictions. The mix of .
~ "- "II. "It- affordable ousing units, as between lao;, JlIoaeratc, ana llIiaale
i: ~;a ~ income C egories 1 throu h 4, or resident occupied, may be
jV ~ determi d by the owner, p vided that no less than 20% of the
~6' bedroom qualify as Ie,; incolllc Category 1 and no more than
\t~~ 20% of the units are available as resident occupied units.
11) Domestic Animals Zoning and Planning staff wish to delete
Section 24-506 because it implies that domestic animals are not
allowed in any other zone districts. The Municipal Code already
addresses the maintenance of domestic animals in Article 1, Chapter
5, such that they cannot be a nuisance. The recommended deletion
t::.. as follows:
~~\.! ~~
8
,..'.....'"'".,... ..c:. ;_.':.._.;.;~;.i~:..:.~' _.'~_c;.,
... - ,...- ,..~.. .~..._,'" ..-..,.. .-..-,. ,......-....'-".--'
1"""\
,..-.."
5 SSiS. Dalllestie Anilllals. The l,esliliRq of aelllE:stio anilllalB
shall be peFllli'etea iR 'ehe Ueel.iulll Density Resiel.E:R'eial (R 6),
Ueel.eFate DeRsity Rcsiel.e:!'ltial (R 15), (R lSM, ana eR lSB), LEY..
Dcnaity ResiaeR'tial (R 30), Rcaiel.eM.ial/l~ulti Family (Rfl1F),
ResiaeR'tial/Mabile Hollte: raFk (liHH?), and RliFal R6aiEkntial (RR)
ZOlle. Eiis'triet.3, pro"l',,-idca that. the. lte.e:.ping of such animalo i;J
ineident.al ana 6ueerdiRa~c t.e thc priaeipal rcsidential uac
at 'ehe pFE:llliseB, shall nat chaRqe the basic ehaFaeter at the
resiel.eR'tial liSE:, shall !'let cORstit~te a c6ll\lllercial aetivity,
ana Beall Ret violate aRY health, sa!'litaFY or ether
:rt.~ulat.ioll;J af t.he ci t:f er st.at.e., or ethCr\li3C eenati t"tltc a
publie RuiaaRce..
12) Calculation of Housinq Impact Fee Section 24-5-702
establishes the calculation for cash-in-lieu payment of the
affordable housing impact fee which was created by Ordinance 1.
When Ordinance 1 was adopted, the Housing Office utilized a three
tiered system of "low", "moderate" and "middle" income categories.
In 1992 the system was changed to a four category system,
Categories 1 through 4, with Category 1 being the lowest income
level. Since the change, the Housing Office and the Planning staff
have been calculating the payment based on the average of the
payment amounts for category 2 and Category 3. The proposed text
will codify this calculation based on the current category system:
Also, staff has determined that recent amendment language to the
GMQS exemption section regarding remodels to create a duplex needs
to be added to this section.
Sec. 5-702. Calculation of affordable housing impact fee.
The amount of the affordable housing impact fee is based on
the public cost to provide affordable housing as a result of
the activity for which the fee is required. The formula shall
utilize the cash-in-lieu payment established from time to time
by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Office for moderate income
employees and the square footage of new floor area constructed
as a result of the demolition of a single family or duplex
dwelling unit or the construction of a new single family or
duplex dwelling unit on a previously vacant lot (the floor
area of a demolished dwelling shall be subtracted from the
floor area of the replacement dwelling unit), or the remodel
or expansion of an existing single family residence into a
duplex dwelling. The formula assumes that for every three
thousand (3,000) square feet of new single family or duplex
floor area that the public will be required to provide housing
for one moderate income employee. The formula to be applie
shall be as follows: cash-in-lieu fee for moderatc the average
of category 2 and Category 3 income employees in effect at
the time the affordable housing impact fee is due, divided by
three thousand (3,000), and times the new square footage.
13) stream Marqin - Over the past several years the P&Z has
~ klttie
Jf\\1ft~
9
~~.._~,.
"",.' "-,',,'
''',-'- ,....
.--, ,.... '--:""'" '~~;'"':"---
.. :::~.-;"~:5};_
- ". _ :__.:.~.:.. ;;~~~,.;':~:~_.-:;".>;';';.:;/"'>;,i':00:S''-2~},-_.
~
,-..,
approved many stream margin applications which met the review
criteria but otherwise seemed inappropriate based on the
community's and Commission's sensitivities to the environment.
After all, stream margins are considered "environmentally sensitive
areas" (ESAs) within the land use code. Our concerns have centered
around requiring increased environmental assessment of sites,
initiating mandatory setbacks from the top of the bank, and
securing fisherman's access along our ,invaluable community river
resources. Attached as Exhibit "B" is a letter from Joan
Leatherbury in 1993 expressing her concern about protection of the
city's river areas.
The last time the Code's ESA section was amended was in 1990 with
the creation of the Hallam Lake Bluff Environmentally Sensitive.
Area. This ESA overlay was intended to place reasonable limits on
where buildings could be placed on properties along the bluff to
protect the sanctity of the ACES nature preserve. What was
occurring at that time was the construction of homes on the edge
of the bluff and even partially onto the slope. Addi tionally,
native trees and hillside vegetation was being stripped to enhance
views of Hallam Lake. Not only were these practices potentially
harmful to the nature preserve, they were beginning to negatively
impact neighboring properties by blocking views as well as removing
substantial vegetation which is valued as a buffer between
properties.
Essentially the same problems are occurring with the stream margin
developments as were happening with the Hallam Lake area. We have
seen several parcels along the Roaring Fork be developed in the
last few years where large homes are built right on the edge of
the river bank. This immediately changes the character of the
riparian vegetation and "greenway corridor" and may contribute to
the potential of failure of the riverbank itself. Staff proposes
a set of dimensional requirements (setbacks and heights) similar
to the Hallam Lake Bluff ESA because of the river's similarity to
the Bluff's the environmental needs. Staff also believes that the
general benefits to all riverside owners and users will be similar
to those created by the Bluff ESA. The revised stream margin
criteria read:
7-504 stream Margin
No development shall be permitted within the floodway, with
the exception of bridges or structures for irrigation,
drainage, flood control or water diversion, which may be
permi tted by the ci ty Enginliler, provided pljps and
specifications are ~reviel.eel. submitted demonstra~ the
structure is engineered to prevent blockage of drainage
channels during peak flows and the Commission determines the
proposed structure complies, to the extent practical, with all
the standards set forth below.
10
.. "... _._.~.' ,._~._-.-.'-""'; ~'.";"';''''''''',"~''-' -=:..",i"ii..'.;.<::;'::,~,"':':'::;~:..i..':i:i.:.::;;'.f:.i~;";.;'2;,-:;":,;",
. f"',;'~"'"""'-:,,.
."_'.h"'~_~''-..''_
. .,._ "~.. ~.;.;--'..;:.~ >~'o::L:E;:~~~'~~,:,
1""'.
,-.,
No development shall be permitted within one hundred feet
(100'), measured horizontally, from the high water line
of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, or
within the Special Flood Hazard Area where it extends
beyond one hundred feet (100') from the high water line
of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams,
unless the Commission makes a determination that the
proposed development complies with all the standards set
forth below:
1. It can be demonstrated that any proposed develop-
ment which is in the Special Flood Hazard Area will
not increase the base flood elevation on the parcel
proposed for development.. This shall be
demonstrated by an engineering study prepared by a
professional engineer registered to practice in the
State of Colorado which shows that the base flood
elevation will not be raised, including, but not
limited to, proposing mitigation techniques on or
off-site which compensate for any base. flood
elevation increase caused by the development; and
2. Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area
Community Plan, Parks/Recreation/Open Space/Trails
Plan map, or areas of historic public use or access
are ~ dedicated via a recorded easement for public
use. Dedications are necessitated by development' s
increased impacts to the City's recreation and trail
facilities including public fishing access; and
3. The recommendations of the Roaring Fork Greenway
Plan are implemented in the proposed plan for
development, to the greatest extent practicable; and
4. There is no vegetation ~ removed or damaged or
slope grade changes (cut or fill) made outside of
a specifically defined building envelope ~
preauoe ereclien aRa seel.illleRta\i..eR of the stream \./
~. A building envelope shallP!esignated by this ~
review and said envelope shall be barricaded prior
to issuance of any demolition, excavation or
building permits. The barricades shall remain in
place until the issuance of Certificates of
occupancy; and
5. Te the qrcateat exteRt praoticable, The proposed
development reauoes pollutioR ana interference does
not pollute or interfere with the natural changes
of the river, stream or other tributary, including
erosion and/or sedimentation during construction.
Increased on-site drainage shall be accommodated
within the parcel to prevent entry into the river
11
_'. ",,-,__::.,~;:,,;;:.:::..,,'.;;:.';{,.",:.:.o:.:.<..';;[G.;,:::~.~;:;,;:;:;~,:.;,' ,li.h':':'''':',:':'""",''':; .,;l.;.:.,.
fO.
~,4f
\\~
.~ .;JIP~ ..
~~
~
~
t.
11.
11.
12.
13.
.-. ..,~. .-.......'"",'--....
1"""'1
~
or onto its banks. Pools or hot tubs cannot be
drained outside of the designated building envelope;
and
Written notice is given to the Colorado Water
Conservation Board prior to any alteration or
relocation of a water course, and a copy of said
notice is submitted to the Federal Emergency
Management Agency; and
A guarantee is provided in the event a water course
is altered or relocated, that applies to the
developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that
ensures that the flood carrying capacity on the
parcel is not diminished; and
Copies are provided of all necessary federal and
state permits relating to work within the one
hundred (100) year floodplain; and
There is no development other than approved native
vegetation planting taking place below the top of
slope or within 15' of the top of slope or the high
waterline, whichever is most restrictive. If any
development is essential within this area, it may
only be approved by special review pursuant to
section 7-404 D. of this Article 7; and
All development outside the 15' setback from the top
of slope does not exceed a height delineated by a
line drawn at a 45 degree angle from ground level
at the top of slope. Height shall be measured and
determined by the Zoning Officer utilizing that
definition set forth at section 3-101 of this
Chapter 24; and
A landscape plan is submitted with all development
applications. Such plan shall limit new plantings
(including trees, shrubs, flowers, and grasses)
outside of the designated building envelope on the
river side to native riparian vegetation; and
All exterior lighting is low and downcast with no
light(s) directed toward the river or located down
the slope; and
site sections drawn by a registered architect,
landscape architect, or engineer are be submitted
showing all existing and proposed site elements, the
top of slope, and pertinent elevations above sea
level; and
12
.,-. . ,-,-'..-- ..,...~,;,.,-, ~,--~.._. -"~~,,,-,,-':-,',,:,:,,,~.,,.:;.;.. :".;....;;.;..;:~.~~-
I"'"
~
14. There has been accurate identification of wetlands
and riparian zones.
14) 8040 Greenline revisions - Section 24-7-503 (C) lists eleven
review criteria for development upon slopes within 150 feet of the
8040 elevation line. Staff wishes to augment criterium number 11
as follows:
11) Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area
Community Plan: Parks/Recreation/Open Space/Trails Plan map
is dedicated for public use. Provide access to natural
resources and areas of special interest to the community.
This would allow the Commission to take into consideration unique
natural features or spaces adjacent to properties SUbject to 8040
review. This might include pathways not officially adopted on a
trails plan.
15) Landscape Lonqevitv requirement - In response to concerns of
the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council, staff is
proposing a new section 5-511 (Supplemental Regulations) for
maintenance and replacement of approved landscaping materials
within 45 days of notification. Currently only section 7-904 "PUD
Agreement" requires implementation and maintenance of landscaping.
Because landscape plans or representations are included in most
other types of reviews, staff believes a city-wide landscape
maintenance requirement is beneficial. The Commission recommends
the following new section:
5-511 - LandscaDe Maintenance
A. Landscaping shown on any approved site development plan
shall be maintained in a healthy manner. In the event that
plant material dies, the owner of the property shall replace
the plant material with equal size and variety within 45 days
of notification by the Zoning Enforcement Officer. If
seasonal or cultural constraints do not allow planting of the
approved plant material within 45 days the owner may in
writing seek permission from the community Development
Director to:
1) Provide financial assurances equal to 120% of the amount
of the replacement landscaping and installation costs as
approved by the Parks Department, and in a form
satisfactory to the City Attorney. The completion of the
landscape replacement shall be accomplished no late than
June 15 of the next planting season, otherwise the
financial assurances shall be forfeited to the city.
2) Submit for approval a revised landscape plan Which meets
the design objectives and plant material sizes and
quantities of the original approved plan. An explanation
13
'.' " .: ....,';:;,~:.:':.'.', .,'; :"".
.. ._~,~----'""..-_.,
1"'"'\
r'\
of the revised plan shall accompany the submission.
Failure to comply with the replanting requirement will
constitute a violation of this section and may result in
complaint(s) being filed in Municipal Court.
16) Administrative approval for small satellite dish antennas -
staff discussed with the P&Z an administrative approval process
for small satellite dishes. The Commission agrees that the new
technology allows very small dishes to be placed "invisibly" on
parcels, and therefore should not have to go through a cumbersome
review process. For medium and large sized dishes, approval by the
Community Development Director would substantially reduce the
process time. The new regulation can be readily accommodated by
creating a new section within Division 5 Supplement Regulations:
5-512. satellite Dish Antennas. /,fr,Ull<ED
Satellite dish antennas twenty-four (24) inches in~!~~eter
or less must receive rlvl-fwf-t~ building permits prior to
. . .'~ ~.._- . ..
1nstallation. satel11te d1sh antennas twenty-f1ve (25) 1nches
or greater in diameter shall be reviewed and approved by the
community Development Director in conformance with the
criteria within sections 7-304 (B) and (C). The community
Development Director may apply reasonable conditions to the
approval . deemed necessary to insure conformance with said
review criteria. If the community Development Director
determines that the proposed satellite dish antennas does not
comply with the review criteria and denies the application,
or the applicant does not agree to the conditions of approval
determined by the community Development Director, the
applicant may apply for conditional use review by the Planning
and Zoning commission.
Procedures established in Article 6 Common Development Review
Procedures shall apply to all satellite dish antennas.
For your reference, the review criteria to be used by the Community
Development Director in section 7-304 (B) and (C) read:
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
complementary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the
parcel proposed for development.
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.
14
"".'r~',~', ""~"""~~,.__,,,,,,,,''''"''"'"'''''':;.:.;,,,,,,,,_..:..:.,,-,,,--_,,.......___^._ .. __ .........;,-""~l"'.=','~.,.,'
~
.~
As a result of the above proposed language, the individual zone
districts' lists of conditional uses must be amended to delete
satellite dish antennas. Of the 24 zone districts in the city,
only three do not currently allow satellite dishes as conditional
uses. These zones are R-15-B Moderate Density Residential, OS Open
Space, and WP wildlife Preservation. This will not change with
this amendment. For example, the R-6 Medium Density zone will be
amended as follows:
5-201.C. Conditional Uses.
7. aa~elli~e sian antennae
Additionally, staff and P&Z recommends changes to the definition
of "satellite dish antenna or satellite radio frequency signal
reception and/or transmission device":
satellite dish antenna or satellite radio frequency signal
reception and/or transmission device means a dish-shaped or
parabolic-shaped reception or transmission device, ..heBC
ant.enBa ia Blore than t,.~e (2) feet in fleig-at and/ or tI aioh tI
eeml'eRent is mere thaR t,JO (2) feet in aiameter, which is used
for the reception and/or transmission of satellite signals,
including but not limited to television signals, AM radio
signals, FM radio signals, telemetry signals, data
communication signals, or any other reception or transmission
signals using free air space as a medium, whether for
commercial or private use, provided:
A. Area and bulk requirements. The installation of a
satellite dish antenna shall not cause a violation of
area and bulk requirements within the zone district in
which it is located, unless a variance is granted by the
board of adjustment.
B. Right-of-way. A satellite dish antenna shall not be
placed on an easement or in the city right-of-way, unless
an encroachment permit is secured.
C. Increased danger. The installation of a satellite dish
antenna shall not cause any increased danger to
neighboring property in the event of collapse or other
failure of the antenna structure.
D. Visual impact. The visibility of the dish from the
public way shall be reduced to the highest degree
practical including, but not limited to, sensi ti ve choice
in placement of the diSh, screening with fencing,
landscaping, subgrade placement, or any other effective
means that both screen the dish and does not appear to
be unnatural on the site.
~q
I!. . .
15
.r"'\
,-..,
REVIEW STANDARDS: The proposed changes are meant to improve the
workability of the land use code by streamlining processes,
clarifying vague areas or correcting errors. Additionally, over
time there has been a need to update and strengthen our
environmentally sensitive reviews (stream margin and 8040
Greenline) and subdivision regulations. Staff and the P&Z believes
therefore that the following review criteria have either been met
or do not specifically apply:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any
applicable portions of this chapter.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements
of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding
Zone Districts and land uses, considering existing land use
and neighborhood characteristics.
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation
and road safety.
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the
extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the
capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited
to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply,
parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities.
F.
Whether and the extent to
result in significantly
environment.
which the proposed amendment would
adverse impacts on the natural
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible
with the community character in the City of Aspen.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the
subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support
the proposed amendment.
I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the
pUblic interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent
of this chapter.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: None are anticipated.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning commission believes that
the proposed text amendments are within the spirit of the AACP and
comply with the review criteria A-I above, and should be approved
16
M' ._~__'_.:';' _? _ ,"".."'~'"_'~'::::'-:._~' <
. _,.......c.....:::... ., "::,.':':..::~o:.~;;':;-",;.:""""h"<'i .),:';:;':,:!:;.-.;:.~-,,';';':j;:"";"':;";.....:.:;::;';..'.:.! ,,-.., "':''''~~':._>';';;;'''_~.;...~:':;.::,~~-,,~~..:,.<..;;i:'':'';''''':;;'.i;;;._..
I"'"
,..-.."
by the City Council.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to have first reading of Ordinance
Series of 1995."
"I move to approve on first reading Ordinance series of 1995
for adoption of amendments to the land use regulations contained
in Chapters 18 and 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code."
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS
Ordinance
, 1995
Exhibits:
"A" - Planning and Zoning commission Resolution 95-7
"B" - 6/5/93 Letter from Joan Leatherbury re: Riverside Reviews
17
,
,
I"'"
,-..,
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM:
Kim Johnson,'. Planner
"'-....
March 21, 1995
DATE:
RE:
Round II Staff Initiated Amendments to the Land Use
Regulations (continued Public Hearing from March 7,1995)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are returning to P&Z to finish a list of amendments
first introduced at the February meeting. Also added is an
amendment to the subdivision regulations for the preservation of
significant natural and scenic features. This addition was noticed
in the newspaper separately from the other amendments.
The amendments still under consideration are stream margin review,
satellite dish antennas, building envelope, 8040 greenline rev~ew,
and a landscape longevity requirement. Further information will
be presented on vested rights and trigger mechanisms for affordable
housing deferral fees. Items completed in the February review were
insubstantial SPA/PUD amendments, condominium, lot split, and lot
line adjustment requirements, insubstantial plat amendments, sight
distance at corners (fences) I domestic animals, and housing
replacement priorities.
This memo is only presenting the outstanding items forwarded from
February 21. Staff will review any of last meetings items with the
Commission if necessary.
The Commission will be presented with a resolution approving the
amendments on March 21. This action will enact the "pending
legislation doctrine" which allows the new code sections to be
implemented in anticipation of City Council approval of an
ordinance.
The Planning Office recommends approval of these amendments to the
land use regulations. These proposed changes include simple code
clean-up as well as more substantive changes. Each Commissioner has
a code book. It might be helpful for you to refer to the affected
sections for more detailed context.
PROCESS: Code amendments follow a two step review process.
Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider the amendments
pUblic hearing, then forward its recommendations to the
Council for ordinance adoption (also a public hearing).
The
at a
city
STAFF COMMENTS: This review is the second in a series of amendment
reviews proposed by staff to improve the function of the land use
1
'\
I"'"
,-",
regulations. This memo is formatted to present and discuss each
proposed amendment individually. The recommended changes are:
1) Stream Marqin - Over the past several years the P&Z has
approved many stream margin applications which met the review
criteria but otherwise seemed inappropriate based on the
Commission's sensitivities to the environment. After all, stream
margins are considered "environmentally sensitive areas" (ESAs)
within the land use code. Our concerns have centered around
requiring increased environmental assessment of sites, initiating
mandatory setbacks from the top of the bank, and securing
fisherman's access along our invaluable community river resources.
There is also pUblic support for better protection of the stream
margin as presented in a letter received by Planning from Joan
Leatherbury. This letter is a response to the Winnerman project
in 1993 and is attached as Exhibit "A".
The last time the city's ESA code was amended was in 1990 with the
creation of the Hallam Lake Bluff Environmentally sensitive Area.
This ESA overlay was intended to place reasonable limits on where
buildings could be placed on properties along the bluff to protect
the sanctity of the ACES nature preserve. What was occurring at
that time was the construction of homes on the edge of the bluff
and even partially onto the slope. Additionally, native trees and
hillside vegetation was being stripped to enhance views of Hallam
Lake. Not only were these practices potentially harmful to the
nature preserve, they were beginning to negatively impact
neighboring properties by blocking views as well as removing
substantial vegetation which is valued as a buffer between
properties.
Essentially the same problems are occurring with the stream margin
developments as were happening with the Hallam Lake area. We have
seen several parcels along the Roaring Fork be developed in the
last few years where large homes are built right on the edge of
the river bank. This immediately changes the character of the
riparian vegetation and "greenway corridor" and may contribute to
the potential of failure of the riverbank itself. Staff proposes
a set of dimensional requirements (setbacks and heights) similar
to the Hallam Lake Bluff ESA because of the river's similarity to
the Bluff's environmental needs. Staff also believes that. the
general benefits to all riverside owners and users will be similar
to those created by the Bluff ESA. The revised stream margin
criteria read:
section 7-504. No development shall be permitted within the
floodway, with the exception of bridges or structures for
irrigation, drainage, flood control or water diversion, which
may be permitted by the City Engineer, provided plans and
specifications are provided demonstrating the structure is
engineered to prevent blockage of drainage channels during
peak flows and the Commission determines the proposed
2
~
/'""'"I
.~.
structure complies, to the extent practical, with all the
standards set forth below.
No development shall be permitted within one hundred feet
(100'), measured horizontally, from the high water line
of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, or
within the Special Flood Hazard Area where it extends
beyond one hundred feet (100') from the high water line
of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams,
unless the Commission makes a determination that the
proposed development complies with all the standards set
forth below. Reviews shall only be conducteQ after
accurate identification of wetlands and riparian zones
has been accomplisheQ by a qualified wildlife/vegetation
consultant.
1. It can be demonstrated that any proposed develop-
ment which is in the Special Flood Hazard Area will
not increase the base flood elevation on the parcel
proposed for development. This shall be
demonstrated by an engineering study prepared by a
professional engineer registered to practice in the
state of Colorado whi.ch shows that the base flood
elevation will not be raised,. including, but not
limited to, proposing mitigation techniques on or
off-site which compensate for any base flood
elevation increase caused by the development.
2. Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area
community Plan, parks/Recreation/open .Space/Trails
Plan map, or areas of historic public use or access
are ~ dedicated via a recorded easement for pUblic
use. Dedications are necessitated by development's
increased impacts to the City's recreation and trail
facilities including public fishing access.
3. The recommendations of the Roaring Fork Greenway
Plan are implemented in the proposed plan for
development, to the greatest extent practicable.
4. No vegetation is removed or damaged or slope grade
changes (cut or fill) made outside of a specifically
defined building envelope that produce erosion aRd
aedilllentatielR elf the stream sank. A building
envelope shall designated by this review and said
envelope shall be barricaded prior to issuance of
any demolition, excavation or building permits. The
barricades shall remain in place until the issuance
of certificates of occupancy.
5. 'Po the 9'reatest cl,teRt practicablc, the proposed
development rccluees pollutioR and interference does
3
~
/"""'.
~
not pollute or interfere with the natural changes
of the river, stream or other tributary, including
erosion and/or sedimentation during construction.
Increased on-site drainage shall be accommodated
within the parcel to prevent entry into the river
or onto its banks. Pools or hot tubs cannot be
drained outside of the designated building envelope.
6. Written notice is given to the Colorado Water
Conservation Board prior to any alteration or
relocation of a water course, and a copy of said
notice is submitted to the Federal Emergency
Management Agency.
7. A guarantee is provided in the event a water course
is altered or relocated, that applies to the
developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that
ensures that the flood carrying capacity on the
parcel is not diminished.
8. Copies are provided of all necessary federal and
state permits relating to work within the one
hundred (100) year floodplain.
9. No development other than approved native vegetation
planting, shall take place below the top of slope
or within 15' of the top of slope or the high
waterline, whichever is most restrictive. If any
development is essential within this area, it may
only be approved by special review pursuant to
section 7-404 D. of this Article 7.
10. All development outside the 15' setback from the top
of slope shall not exceed a height delineated by a
line drawn at a 45 degree angle from ground level
at the top of slope. Height shall be measured and
determined by the Zoning Officer utilizing that
definition set forth at section 3-101 of this
Chapter 24.
11. A landscape plan shall be submitted with all
development applications. Such plan shall limit new
plantings (including trees, shrubs, flowers, and
grasses) outside of the designated building envelope
on the river side to native riparian vegetation.
12. All exterior lighting shall be low and downcast with
no light(s) directed toward the river or located
down the slope.
13. site sections drawn by a registered architect,
landscape architect, or engineer shall be submitted
4
~
r-.
,-..,
showing all existing and proposed site elements, the
top of slope, and pertinent elevations above sea
level.
2) 8040 Greenline
review criteria.
follows:
revisions - Section 24-7-503 (C) lists eleven
Staff wishes to augment criterium number 11 as
11) Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area
Community Plan: Parks/Recreation/open Space/Trails Plan map
is dedicated for public use. Provide access to natural
resources and areas of special interest to the community.
This would allow the Commission to take into consideration unique
natural features or spaces adjacent to properties SUbject to 8040
review. This might include pathways not officially adopted on the
trail master plan. .
3) Landscape Lonqevitv requirement - In response to concerns of the
Planning and Zoning commission and City Council, staff is proposing
a new section 5-511 (Supplemental Regulations) for maintenance and
replacement of approved landscaping materials within 45 days of
notification. Currently only section 7-904 "pun Agreement"
requires implementation and maintenance of landscaping. Because
landscape plans or representations are included in most other types
of reviews, staff believes a city-wide landscape maintenance
requirement is beneficial.
5-511 - Landscane Maintenance
A. Landscaping shown on any approved site development plan
shall be maintained in a healthy manner. In the event that
plant material dies, the owner of the property shall replace
. the plant material with equal size and variety within 45 days
of notification by the Zoning Enforcement Officer. If
seasonal or cultural constraints do not allow planting of the
approved plant material within 45 days the owner may in
writing seek permission from the community Development
Director to:
1) Provide financial assurances equal to 120% of the amount
of the replacement landscaping and installation costs as
approved by the Parks Department, and in a form
satisfactory to the city Attorney. The completion of the
landscape replacement shall be accomplished no late than
June 15 of the next planting season, otherwise the
financial assurances shall be forfeited to the city.
2) Submit for approval a revised landscape plan which meets
the design objectives and plant material sizes and
quantities of the original approved plan. An explanation
5
I
'0
(""'\
~
of the revised plan shall accompany the submission.
Failure to comply with the replanting requirement will
constitute a violation of this section and may result in
complaint(s) being filed in Municipal Court.
4) Administrative aporoval for small satellite dish antennas ~
Staff has considered and discussed with the P&Z an administrative
approval process for satellite dishes of 2.5 feet or less in
diameter. Approval by the community Development Director would
substantially reduce the process time for small dish approvals.
Staff still believes that dishes larger than 2.5 feet in diameter
should follow the current conditional uSe public hearing process.
The new regulation can be readily accommodated by creating a new
section within.Division 5 supplement Regulations:
5-512. Satellite Dish Antennas.
Satellite dish antennas larger than 2.5 feet in diameter shall
be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission
as conditional uses pursuant to Division 3. Conditional Uses.
Satellite dish antennas 2.5 feet or less in diameter may be
reviewed and approved without a public hearing by the
community Development Director in conformance with the
criteria. within sections 7-304 (B) and (C). The community
Development Director may apply reasonable conditions to the
approval deemed necessary to insure conformance with said
review criteria. If the community Development Director
determines that the proposed satellite dish antennas does not
comply with the review criteria and denies the application,
or the applicant does not agree to the conditions of approval
determined by the community Development Director, the
applicant may apply for conditional use review by the Planning
and zoning commission.
.Procedures established in Article 6. Common Development Review
Procedures shall apply to all satellite dish antennas.
For your reference, the review criteria to be used by the Community
Development Director in section 7-304 (B) and (C) read:
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
complementary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the
parcel proposed for development.
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,
6
\\)
r"'.
,,-..,.
development to protect slopes, important vegetation, water
courses, privacy or other considerations. Building envelopes
shall be described on recorded plats, site specific
development plans, ordinances, resolutions, and building
permit site plans.
6) Subdivision Protection of Siqnificant Natural Features -
The current subdivision regulations are silent on the requirement
to highlight and protect significant natural features on a parcel
being reviewed for subdivision. Language contained in the PUD
section of the code addresses this issue. staff is proposing that
the fOllowing similar language be transferred into the purpose
statement and subdivision standards because not all subdivision
actions include PUD review:
section 7-1001. Purpose.
The purpose of this division is to :
A. Assist in the orderly and efficient development of the
City;
B. Ensure the proper distribution of development;
C. Encourage the well-planned subdivision of land by
establishing standards for the design of a sUbdivision;
D. Improve land records and survey monuments by establishing
standards for surveys and plats;
E. Coordinate the construction of public facilities with the
need for public facilities;
F. Safeguard the interests of the public and the subdivider
and provide consumer protection for the purchaser;
G. Acquire and ensure the maintenance of public open spaces
and parks;--aftli
H. Provide procedures so that development encourages the
preservation of natural and scenic features; and
I. Promote the health, safety and general welfare of the
residents of the City of Aspen.
Section 7-1004 Subdivision Approval
C. Review Standards
4. Design Standards. The following design standards shall
be required for all sUbdivisions. (all remain the same
a. through g.)
8
~
,-.,
'-".
.
h. The design and location of any proposed structure,
building envelope, road, driveway, trail or similar
development is compatible with and does not cause harm.ful
disturbance to significant natural or scenic features of
the site.
Items continued from February 21, 1995:
7) Mechanism to triqqer deferred housinq payment - At the last
meeting, the Commission was vocal in their concern that housing
cash-in-lieu payments, Which were deferred because of working
resident status, are not paid at the appropriate time (if at all)
because there is no way for Planning or Housing to know if a
property transfers to non-qualified owners. staff has had
conversations with Dave Tolen and the City Attorney but a final
solution has not been worked out at this time. THere may be more
to report at the March 7 P&Z meeting.
The section which stimulated the discussion is as follows:
Sec. 5-703. Deferral of affordable housing impact fee.
If the owner of a single family or duplex unit for which an
affordable housing impact fee is due is a qualified working
resident, as that term is defined herein, the obligation to
pay the impact fee !lli3:Y shall be deferred, at the owner's
request, until such time as the dwelling unit is sold to a
buyer who is not a qualified working resident. Furthermore,
the amount of the impact fee which is deferred shall be
adjusted at the time of resale in proportion to the change in
value of the subject dwelling unit from the value at the time
the obligation for the impact fee was incurred to the value
on the date of closing. The value at the time that the impact
fee is due shall be determined by the chief building official
on the basis of a current appraisal , a reliable opinion of
value, assessed valuation, or such other method as deemed
appropriate. The value on resale shall be the value of the
total consideration paid by the buyer. In no case shall the
fee be adjusted downward to an amount less than twenty-five
(25) percent, or upward to an amount greater than fifty (50)
percent, of the impact fee which was deferred. The obligation
for the impact fee and the value of the dwelling unit at the
time of the obligation is incurred shall be set forth in a
written document, signed by the owner or owners of the subject
dwelling unit, and recorded in the records of the Pitkin
County Clerk and Recorder prior to the issuance of u
certificate of eccupancy any building permits for the unit.
8) Vested riqhts - The Commission presented a unanimous front at
the last meeting on the issue of time limits for development
approvals. The discussion occurred within the context of vested
9
0\..
I"'"
~
rights, the timeframe whereby an approved deVelopment is protected
from changes in the land use regulations which would invalidate or
otherwise alter a proposed development. In discussions with staff,
City Attorney John Worcester expressed that automatic expiration
of a development approval without code changes would only cause
applicants to have to repeat a review process. Practically
speaking, absent code changes, the same project would have to
receive the same approval as originally granted.
In order to have the City's regulations concur with state
regulations, the following changes are recommended:
1) Create a new definition of site specific development plan which
is taken from the state. statute 24-68-102: .
site specific development plan means a plan which has been
submitted to the community Development Department by a
landowner or his representative describing with reasonable
certainty the type and intensity of use for a specific parcel
of property. Such plan may be in the form of, but need not
be limited to, a planned unit development (PUD), subdivision,
specially planned area (SPA), conditional use, special review,
environmentally sensitive area review, historic development
review, or growth management exemption.
2) Deletion of subsection (F) from Section 6-207 Vested Property
Rights. The eighteen month period referenced in this section is
meaningless in comparison with the state statutes. What the
deletion does to development approvals is either require a
developer to act upon his/her approvals in a timely manner to
eliminate risk of code changes or seek vested rights for three
years through the public hearing process already established in the
city's land use regulations. The following is the proposed
language to be eliminated:
F. nen -,oe6tcd develeplllent. Any de,vele!llllent. rccchoil'lq Cli te
Sl'ccific aevcloplllent !llan approval o./hich daes net estaslish
a vestea !lreperty ri~ht nor ebtain a auildinq permit shall
have its approval expire ei~fiteen (10) months 61:lbsequeRt te
the date of site specific developmeRt plaR approval.
10
~
.~
.~
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Planning and Zoning commission
FROM:
Kim Johnson, Planner
DATE:
March 7, 1995
Round II Staff Initiated Amendments to the Land Use
Regulations (Continued Public Hearing from February 21)
RE:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: We are returning toP&Z to finish a list of amendments
introduced at the last meeting. Also added is an amendment to the
SUbdivision regulations for the preservation of significant
natural and scenic features. This addition was noticed in the
newspaper separately from the other amendments.
The amendments still under consideration are stream margin review,
satellite dish antennas, building envelope, 8040 greenline rev~ew,
and a landscape longevity requirement. Further information will
be presented on vested rights and trigger mechanisms for affordable
housing deferral fees. Items completed in the February review were
insubstantial SPA/PUD amendments, condominium, lot split, and lot
line adjustment requirements, insubstantial plat amendments, sight
distance at corners (fences), domestic animals, and housing
replacement priorities.
This memo is only presenting the outstanding items forwarded from
February 21. Staff will review any of last meetings items with the
Commission if necessary.
The Planning Office recommends approval of these amendments to the
land use regulations. These proposed changes include simple code
clean-up as well as more substantive changes. Each Commissioner has
a code book. It might be helpful for you to refer to the .affected
sections for more detailed context.
PROCESS: Code amendments follow a two step review process.
Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider the amendments
public hearing, then forward its recommendations to the
Council for ordinance adoption (also a pUblic hearing).
STAFF COMMENTS: This review is the second in a series of amendment
reviews proposed by staff to improve the function of the land use
regulations. This memo is formatted to present and discuss each
proposed amendment individually. The recommended changes are:
The
at a
City
1) Stream Marqin - Over the past several years the P&Z has
approved many stream margin applications which met the review
criteria but otherwise seemed inappropriate based on the
1
I'""',
r-,
commission's sensitiviti~to the envi~on~+ Aftp.r ~llv stream
margins are considered 'environmental v "j ti ve areaq)! (ESAs}
within t land use code. Our concerns have centered around
equirin 'ncreased environmenta f sites, initiating
andato se ac s from the top of the bank, and securing
erman's access along our invaluable community river resources.
ere ~s a so public support for better protection of the stream
margin as presented in a letter received by Planning from Joan
Leatherbury. This letter is a response to the Winnerman project
in 1993 and is attached as Exhibit "A".
The last time th iry's F.SA code was amended was in 1990 with the
creation of the m Lake Bluff nv' onmentally Sensitive Area.
This ESA overlay was inten e to place reasonable limits on where
buildings could be placed on properties along the bluff to protect
the sanctity of the ACES nature preserve. What was occurring at
that time was the construction of homes on the edge of the bluff
and even partially onto the slope. Additionally, native trees and
hillside vegetation was being stripped to enhance views of Hallam
Lake. Not only were these practices potentially harmful to the
nature preserve, they were beginning to negatively impact
neighboring properties by blocking views as well as removing
substantial vegetation which is valued. as a buffer between
properties.
Essentially the same problems are occurring with the stream margin
developments as were happening with the Hallam Lake area. We have
seen several parcels along the Roaring Fork be developed in the
. last few years where large homes are built right on the edge of
the river bank. This .j.mmediately changes the character of the
riparian vegetation and "qreenway corridor" and may contribute to
the potent~al of failure of the riverbank itself. Staff proposes
a set of dimensional requirements (setbacks and heights) similar
to the Hallam Lake Bluff ESA because of the river's similarity to
the Bluff's environmental needs. Staff also believes that the
general benefits to all riverside owners and users will be similar
to those created by the Bluff ESA.. The revised stream margin
criteria read:
section 7-504. No development shall be permitted within the
floodway, with the exception of bridges or structures for
irrigation, drainage, flood control or water diversion, which
may be permitted by the city Engineer, provided plans and
specifications are provided demonstrating the structure is
engineered to prevent blockage of drainage channels during
peak flows and the Commission determines the proposed
structure complies, to the extent practical, with all the
standards set forth below.
No development shall be permitted within one hundred feet
(100'), measured horizontally, from the high water line
of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, or
2
I'""
~
within the Special Flood Hazard Area where it extends
beyond one hundred feet (100') from the high water line
of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams,
unless the Commission makes a determination that the
proposed development complies with all the standards set
forth below. Reviews. shall only be conducted after
accurate identification of wetlands and riparian zones
has been accomplished by a qualified wildlife/vegetation
consultant.
I. It can be demonstrated that any proposed develop-
ment which is in the Special Flood Hazard Area will
not increase the base flood elevation on the parcel
proposed for development. This shall be
demonstrated by an engineering study prepared by a
professional engineer registered to practice in the
State of Colorado which shows that the base flood
elevation will not be raised, including, but not
limited to, proposing mitigation techniques on or
off-site which compensate for any base flood
elevation increase caused by the development.
2. Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area
community Plan, Parks/Recreation/open space/Trails
Plan map, or areas of historic public use or access
are ~ dedicated via a recorded easement for public
use. Dedications are necessitated by development's
increased impacts to the City's recreation and trail
facilities including public fishing access.
3. The recommendations of the Roaring Fork Greenway
Plan are implemented in the proposed plan for
development, to the greatest extent practicable.
4. No vegetation is removed or damaged or slope grade
changes (cut or fill) made outside of a specifically
defined building envelope that produce erosion and
aedilllentatiol'l of tac st:ream sal'lk. A building
envelope shall designated by this review .and said
envelope shall be barricaded prior to issuance of
any demolition, excavation or building permits. The
barricades shall remain in place until the issuance
of Certificates of occupancy.
5. 'Po the .ljJreatest extent practicable, the proposed
development reel.uoes l'ellutiofl and intcrference does
not pollute or interfere with the natural changes
of the river, stream or other tributary, including
erosion and/or sedimentation during construction.
Increased on-site drainage shall be accommodated
within the parcel to prevent entry into the river
or onto. its banks. Pools or hot tubs cannot be
3
(""'\
'-'.
drained outside of the designated building envelope.
6. written notice is given to the Colorado Water
Conservation Board prior to any alteration or
relocation of a water course, and a copy of said
notice is submitted to the Federal Emergency
Management Agency.
7. A guarantee is provided in the event a water course
is altered or relocated, that applies to the
developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that
ensures that the flood carrying capacity on the
parcel is not diminished.
8. Copies are provided of all necessary federal and
state permits relating to work within the one
hundred (100) year floodplain.
9. No development other than approved native vegetation
planting, shall take place below the top of slope
or within 15 I of the top of slope or the high
waterline, whichever is most restrictive. If any
development is essential within this area, it may
only be approved by special review pursuant to
section 7-404 D. of this Article 7.
10. All development outside the 15' setback from the top
of slope shall not exceed a height delineated by a
line drawn at a 45 degree angle from ground level
at the top of slope. Height shall be measured and
determined by the Zoning Officer utilizing that
definition set forth at section 3-101 of this
Chapter 24.
11. A landscape plan shall be submitted with all
development applications. Such plan shall limit new
plantings (including trees, shrubs, flowers, and
grasses) outside of the designated building envelope
on the river side to native riparian vegetation.
12. .All exterior lighting shall be low and downcast with
no light(s) directed toward the river or located
down the slope.
13. si te sections drawn by a registered archi tect,
landscape architect, or engineer shall be submitted
showing all existing and proposed site elements, the
top of slope, and pertinent elevations above sea
level.
2) 8040 Greenline revisions - section 24-7-503 (C) lists eleven
review criteria. Staff wishes to augment criterium number 11 as
4
I"'"
~
follows:
11) Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area
Community Plan: Parks/Recreation/open Space/Trails Plan map
is dedicated for public use. Provide access to natural
resources and areas of special interest to the community.
This would allow the Commission to take into consideration unique
natural features or spaces adjacent to properties SUbject to 8040
review. This might include pathways not officially adopted on the
trail master plan.
3) Landscape Lonqevitv requirement - In response to concerns of the
Planning and Zoning Commission and City council, staff is proposing
a new Section 5-511 (Supplemental Regulations) for maintenance and
replacement of approved landscaping materials within 45 days of
notification. Currently only section 7-904 "PUO Agreement"
requires implementation and maintenance of landscaping. Because
landscape plans or representations are included in most other types
of reviews, staff believes a city-wide landscape maintenance
requirement is beneficial.
5-511 - LandscaDe Maintenance
A. Landscaping shown~. on any approved site development plan
shall be maintained in a healthy manner. In the event that
plant material dies, the owner of the property shall replace
the plant material with equal size and variety within 45 days
of notification by the Zoning Enforcement Officer. If
seasonal or cultural constraints do not allow planting of the
approved plant material within 45 days the owner may in
writing seek permission from the Community Development
Director to:
1) Provide financial assurances equal to 120% of the amount
of the replacement landscaping and installation costs as
approved by the Parks Department, and in a form
satisfactory to the city Attorney. The completion of the
landscape replacement shall be accomplished no lat~than
June 15 of the next planting season, otherwise the
financial assurances shall be forfeited to the city,
2) Submit for approval a revised landscape plan which meets
the design objectives and plant material sizes and
quantities of the original approved plan. An explanation
of the revised plan shall accompany the submission.
Failure to comply with the replanting requirement will
constitute a violation of this section and may result in
complaint(s) being filed in Municipal Court.
5
r"\.
~
4) Administrative approval for small satellite dish antennas -
Staff has considered and discussed with the P&Z an administrative
approval process for satellite dishes of 2.5 feet or less in
diameter. Approval by the Community Development Director would
substantially reduce the process time for small dish approvals.
Staff still believes that dishes larger than 2.5 feet in diameter
should follow the current conditional use public hearing process.
The new regulation can be readily accommodated by creating a new
section within Division 5 Supplement Regulations:
5-512. satellite. Dish Antennas.
Satelli te dish antennas larger than 2.5 feet in diameter shall
be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Zoning commission
as conditional uses pursuant to Division 3. Conditional Uses.
Satellite dish antennas 2.5 feet or less in diameter may be
reviewed and approved without a public hearing by the
Community Development Director in conformance with the
criteria within Sections 7-304 (B) and (C). The community
Development Director may apply reasonable conditions to the
approval deemed necessary to insure conformance with said
review criteria. If the community Development Director
determines that the proposed satellite dish antennas does not
comply with the review criteria and denies the application,
or the applicant does not agree to the conditions of approval
determined by the Community Development Director, the
applicant may apply for conditional use review by the Planning
.and Zoning Commission.
Procedures established in Article 6 Common Development Review
Procedures shall apply to all satellite dish antennas.
For your reference, the review criteria to be used by the Community
Development Director in section 7-304 (B) and (C) read:
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
complementary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the
parcel proposed for development.
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.
As a result of separating the applicable reviews for satellite
dishes based on size, the individual zone districts' lists of
conditional uses must be amended. Of the 24 zone districts in the
6
~
..-.,
city, only three do not currently allow satellite dishes as
conditional uses. These zones are R-l5-B Moderate Density
Residential, OS Open Space, and WP Wildlife Preservation. This
will not change with this amendment. For example, the R-6 Medium
Density zone will be amended as follows:
5-20l.C. Conditional Uses.
7. Satellite dish antennae over 2.5 feet in diameter
Additionally, because of the new amended language described above,
the definition of "satellite dish antenna or satellite radio
frequency signal reception and/or transmission device" needs to be
amended as follows:
satellite dish antenna or satellite radio frequency signal
reception and/or transmission device means a dish-shaped or
parabolic-shaped reception or transmission device, .<hese
antenRa ia IlIO'E"e thaR t.l0 (2) feet in heiqht. ana/E),!; "el.isfi"
cEllllpencnt iB mere than t..oo (2) feet iR el.iallleter, which is used
for the reception and/or transmission of satellite signals,
including but not limited to television signals, AM radio
signals, FM radio signals, telemetry signals, data
communication signals, or any other reception or transmission
signals using free air space as a medium, whether for
commercial or private use, provided: [the rest of the section
remains the same)
5) Definition of "buildinq envelope" There are several instances
where the land use regulations or specific approvals refer to
development wi thin a building envelope. However, there is no
definition in the regulations to provide consistency in use of this
term. Last fall staff presented the following definition to the
Commission. It was not well received because it "didn't say what
we meant it to say." In an effort to simplify the definition,
staff now proposes the following:
buildinq envelope: that area on a lot which encompasses all
development including but not limited to excavation, fill,
grading, storage, demolition, structures, decks, roof
overhangs, porches, patios and terraces, pools, access ways
and parking. Planting of landscape materials on natural grade
and approved walkways and driveways may occur outside of a
building envelope. For purposes of site specific development
plans, building envelopes may be established to restrict
development to protect slopes, important vegetation, water
courses, privacy or other considerations. Building envelopes
shall be described on recorded plats, site specific
development plans, ordinances, resolutions, and building
permit site plans.
7
1""".
~.
6) Subdivision Protection of Siqnificant Natural Features -
The current subdivision regulations are silent on the requirement
to highlight and protect significant natural features on a parcel
being reviewed for subdivision. Language contained in the PUD
section of the code addresses. this issue. staff is proposing that
the following similar language be transferred into the purpose
statement and subdivision standards because not all sUbdivision
actions include PUD review:
section 7-1001. Purpose.
The purpose of this division is to :
A. Assist in the orderly and efficient development of the
City;
H. Provide procedures so that development encourages the
preservation of natural and scenic features; and
I. Promote the health, safety and general welfare of the
residents of the city of Aspen.
section 7-1004 SUbdivision Approval
C. Review Standards
4. Design Standards. The following design standards shall
be required for all subdivisions. (all remain the same
a. through g.)
h. The design and location of any proposed structure,
building envelope, road, driveway, trail or similar
development is compatible with and does not cause harmful
disturbance to significant natural or scenic features of
the site.
8
,
,-..,
( .
,-.."
Items continued from February 21, 1995:
7) Mechanism to triqqer deferred housinq payment - At the last
meeting, the Commission was vocal in their concern that housing
cash-in-lieu payments, which were deferred because of working
resident status, are not paid at the appropriate time (if at all)
because there is no way for Planning or Housing to know if a
property transfers to non-qualified owners. Staff has had
conversations with Dave Tolen and the City Attorney but a final
solution has not been worked out at this time. THere may be more
to report at the March 7 P&Z meeting,
The section which stimulated the discussion is as follows:
Sec. 5-703. Deferral of affordable housing impact fee.
If the owner of a single family or duplex unit for which an
affordable housing impact fee is due is a qualified working
resident, as that term is defined herein, the obligation to
pay the impact fee lll8:Y shall be deferred, at the owner's
request, until such time as the dwelling unit is sold to a
buyer who is not a qualified working resident. Furthermore,
the amount of the impact fee which is deferred shall be
adjusted at the time of resale in proportion to the change in
value of the subject dwelling unit from the value at the time
the obligation for the impact fee was incurred to the value
on the date of closing. The value at the time that the impact
fee is due shall be determined by the chief building official
on the basis of a current appraisal, a reliable opinion of
value, assessed valuation, or such other method as deemed
appropriate. The value on resale shall be the value of the
total consideration paid by the buyer. In no case shall the
fee be adjusted downward to an amount less than twenty-five
(25) percent, or upward to an amount greater than fifty (50)
percent, of the impact fee Which was deferred. The obligation
for the impact fee and the value of the dwelling unit at the
time of the obligation is incurred shall be set forth in a
written document, signed by the owner or owners of the subject
dwelling unit, and recorded in the records of the Pitkin
county Clerk and Recorder prior to the issuance of fr
eertificate of ece~aRey any building permits for the unit.
8) Vested riqhts - The Commission presented a unanimous front at
the last meeting on the issUe of time limits for development
approvals. The discussion occurred within the context of vested
rights, the timeframe whereby an approved development is protected
from changes in .the land use regulations which would invalidate or
otherwise alter a proposed development. In discussions with staff,
city Attorney John Worcester expressed that automatic expiration
of a development approval without code changes would only cause
applicants to have to repeat a review process. Practically
9
I"'"
~
speaking, absent code changes, the same project would have to
receive the same approval as originally granted.
In order to have the City's regulations concur with state
regulations, the following changes are recommended:
1) Create a new definition of site specific development plan which
is taken from the state statute 24-68-102:
site specific development plan means a plan which has been
submitted to the Community Development Department by a
landowner or his representative describing with reasonable
certainty the type and intensity of use for a specific parcel
of property. Such plan may be in the form of, but need not
be limited to, a planned unit development (PUD), subdivision,
specially planned area (SPA), conditional use, special review,
environmentally sensitive area review, historic development
review, or growth management exemption.
-j
!
2) Deletion of subsection (F) from section 6-207 Vested Property
Rights. The eighteen month period referenced in this section is
meaningless in comparison with the state statutes. What the
deletion does to development approvals is either require a
developer to act upon his/her approvals in a timely manner to
eliminate risk of code changes or seek vested rights for three
years through the pUblic hearing process already established in the
City's land use regulations. The following is the proposed
language to be eliminated:
F. Usn .y.ca'tca ac..~clol'mcnt. Any aevelopment rc.eci "y-iR~ site
e3)?ceifie Eic.y-elepmcRt plan appr(v.;al ".-Riea. aocs net osta131iah
a vested prepcr~y ~i~ht nerobtain a suilain~ permit shall
ha7C ita approval expire ci~htccfJ. (10) mantha ausacqtlcnt to
the date af ~it6 specific dc~clepmcnt plan appre~al.
.
j
10
MEMORANDUM
i~.?~OZJ.~'
ycw1 cf ~
,-.."
TO:
Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: .
Kim Johnson, Planner
DATE:
February 21, 1995
Round II Staff Initiated Amendments to the Land Use
Regulations (Public Hearing)
RE:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends approval of this list of
amendments to the land use regulations. These proposed changes
include simple code clean-up as well as more substantive changes.
Each Commissioner has a code book. It might be helpful for you to
refer to the affected sections for more detailed context.
PROCESS: Code amendments follow a two step review process.
Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider the amendments
public hearing, then forward its recommendations to the
Council for ordinance adoption (also a public hearing).
The
at a
City
STAFF COMMENTS.: This review is the second in a series of amendment
reviews proposed by staff to improve the function of the land use
regulations. This memo is formatted to present and discuss each
proposed amendment individually. The recommended changes are:
1) Vested riqhts - In order to have the city's regulations concur
with state regulations, the following changes are recommended:
Create a~ definition)of\\ite specific development Pla~\which is
taken from the State statute 24-68-102:
site specific development plan means a plan which has been
submitted to the Community Development Department by a
landowner or his representative describing with reasonable
certainty the type and intensity of use for a specific parcel
of property. Such plan may be in the form of, but need not
be limited to, a planned unit development (PUD), subdivision,
specially planned area (SPA), cOnditional use, special review,
environmentally sensitive area review, historic development
review, or growth manaqeJl\ent exemption.
Deletion of subsection (F) from Section 6-207 Vested Property
Rights. The eighteen month period referenced in this section is
meaningless in comparison with the state statutes. What the
deletion does to development approvals is either require a
developer to act upon his/her approvals in a timely manner to
eliminate risk of code changes or seek vested rights for three
'{ ~io~~~tt f~~l)\1M&tbe.t~
/ Mat A S'7D?:~~rte.rr~
/. . L. nt/LJ
wi jJVljfJur~ ~
I. years through the public hearing process already established in the
V' Ci ty' s land use regulations. The fOllowing is the proposed
language to be eliminated:
of1~
~
f""1
(\
F. }Teft ....;cat.ca. acvc.lepmcnt. ARY aC'v.clepmcRt rccci vinq site
spceific acvalepmcat plan appreval ,_~ieh dec5 not catahliah
a vestea !lroperty riqfit nor eetaiR a builel.inq !lermit shall
ha~ci~5 appr6val c}~pirc ci~htccR (13) MaRtha aabacqucnt to
the date af site 6~ceifieac7clepmcnt plan appreval.
2) Stream Maroin - Over the past several years the P&Z has
approved many stream margin applications which met the review
criteria but otherwise seemed inappropriate based on the
~ommiSSion's sensitivities to the environment. After all, stream
margins are considered "enviro. nmentally sensitive areas" (ESAs)
. ,ithin the land use code. Our concerns have centered around
. requiring increased environmental assessment of sites, initiating
~~~mandatory setbacks from the top of the bank, and securing
~'^'^"Jil1~ fisherman's access along our invaluable community river resources.
l~~ The last time the City's ESA code was amended was in 1990 with the
~U1~~ ~c.reation of the Hallam Lake Bluff Environ. mental ly .sensitive Area.
~. This ESA overlay was intended to place reasonable limits on where
WN buildings could be.Placed on properties along the bluff to protect
/ the sanctity of the ACES nature preserve. What was occurring at
that time was the construction of homes on the edge of the bluff
and even partially onto the slope. Additionally, native trees and
hillside vegetation was being stripped to enhance views of Hallam
Lake. Not only were these practices potentially harmful to the
nature preserve, they were beginning to negatively impact
neighboring properties by blocking views as well as removing
substantial vegetation which is valued as a buffer between
properties.
Essentially the same problems are occurring with the stream margin
developments as were happening with the Hallam Lake area. We have
seen several parcels along the Roaring Fork be developed in the
last few years where large homes are built right on the edge of
the river bank. This immediately changes the character of the
riparian vegetation and "greenway.corridor" and may contribute to
the potential of failure of the riverbank itself. Staff proposes
a set of dimensional requirements (setbacks and heights) similar
to the Hall~ake Bluff ESA because of the river's similarity to
the Bluff's t environmental needs. Staff also believes that the
general bene its to all riverside owners and users will be similar
to those created by the Bluff ESA. The revised stream margin
criteria read:
section 7-504. No development shall be permitted within the
floodway, with the exception of bridges or structures for
irrigation, drainage, flood control or water diversion, which
may be permitted by the City Engineer, provided plans and
2
11/
r".
"-,,
specifications are provided demonstrating the structure is
engineered to prevent blockage of drainage channels during
peak flows and the Commission determines the proposed
structure complies, to the extent practical, with all the
standards set forth below.
No development shall be permitted within one hundred feet
(100'), measured horizontally, from the high water line
of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams, or
within the Special Flood Hazard Area where it extends
beyond one hundred feet (100') from the high water line
of the Roaring Fork River and its tributary streams,
unless the commission makes a determination that the
proposed development complies with all the standards set
forth below. Reviews shall only be conducted after
accurate identification of wetlands and riparian zones
has been accomplished by a qualified wildlife/vegetation
consultant.
1. It can be demonstrated that any proposed develop-
ment which is in the Special Flood Hazard Area will
not increase the base flood elevation on the parcel
proposed for development. This shall be
demonstrated by.an engineering study prepared by a
professional engineer registered to practice in the
state of Colorado which shows that the base flood
elevation will not be raised, including, but not
limited to, proposing mitigation techniques on or
off-site which compensate for any base flood
elevation increase caused by the development.
ny trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area
o ive Plan, Parks/Recreation/Open
Space/Trails n map, or areas of historic public
use or access are ~ dedicated via a reCorded
easement for public use. Dedications are
necessitated by development's increased impacts to
the City's recreation and trail facilities including
public fishing access.
3. The reconunendations of the Roaring Fork Greenway
Plan are implemented in the proposed plan for
development, to the greatest extent practicable.
4. No vegetation is removed or damaged or slope grade
changes (cut or fill) made outside of a specifically /,{pI'-
defined building envelope that preel.uee ereeien ana /.r~
eeaillleRtatien. of thc stroam saRk. A building/"' I
envelope shall designated by this review and said 1?~C8~d
envelope shall be barricaded prior to issuance of /IV,
any demolition, excavation or building permits. The 15 c.
barricades shall remain in place until the issuance~eB~~~
3
~
Copies are provided of all necessary federal .and
state permits relating to work within the one
hundred (100) year floodPlain.&\ tv:d.A~~4.tJJ
1 eo R reme .. r" ~~~+..t'
No development ther than approved native ~
vegetation pi ing, shall take place below the
top of slope or within 15' of the top of slope.
If any development is essential within this
area, it may only be approved by special review
pursuant to section 7-404 D. of this Article
7.
r"',
~
of Certificates of Occupancy.
5. CPa the qrcatest elltent l'raetieasle, the proposed
development reaaees l'ellutiaR aRel. iRterfereRee does
not pollute or interfere with the natural changes
of the river, stream or other tributary, including
erosion and/or sedimentation during construction.
Increased on-site drainage shall be accommodated
within the parcel to prevent entry into the river
or onto it.s banks. Pools or hot tubs cannot be
drained outside of the designated building envelope.
6. Written notice is given to the Colorado Water
Conservation Board prior to any alteration or
relocation of a water course, and a copy of said
notice is submitted to the Federal Emergency
Management Agency.
7. A guarantee is provided in the event a water course
is altered or relocated, that applies to the
developer and his heirs, successors and assigns that
ensures that the flood carrying capacity on the
parcel is not diminished.
8.
9.
~ fJ:~ J
Y~f\rJJP j: ~11)
'\j)Vv to ~
~~ \~~~~
~
~J\
All development outside the 15' setback from
the top of slope shall not exceed a height
delineated by a line drawn at a 45 degree angle
from ground level at the top of slope. Height
shall be measured and determined by the Zoning
officer utilizing that definition set forth at
Section 3-101 of this Chapter 24.
A landscape plan shall be submitted with all
development applications. Such plan shall
limit new plantings ~. 'ng trees, shrubs,
flowers, and grasses) ~utsid of the designated
building envelope native riparian
vegetation.
4
~
~$f4-
\\
.,,-.....
".-,.
(1-' Ibt.
\? ,.,.
All exterior lighting shall below and downcast
with no light(s) directed toward the river or
located down the slope.
site sections drawn by a registered architect,
landscape architect, or engineer shall be
submitted showing all existing and proposed
site elements, the top of slope, and pertinent
elevations above sea level.
3) 8040 Greenline
review criteria.
follows:
rev~slons - section 24-7-503 (C) lists eleven
Staff wishes to augment criterium number Ii as
11) Any trail on the parcel designated on the Aspen Area
Community Plan: Parks/Recreation/Open Space/Trails Plan map
is dedicated for public use. Provide access to natural
resources and areas of special interest to the community.
This would allow the Commission to take into consideration unique
natural features or spaces adjacent to properties subject to 8040
review. This might include pathways not officially adopted on the
trail master plan.
4) Eliminate the "technical or en in
limitation for insubstantial amendments to
nSl erations"
or PUDs
sections 7-907 A. (PUD Insubstantial Amendments) an 7-804 E.!. .
(SPA Insubstantial Amendments) currently specify that any ~/m"'~
insubstantial amendments to PUDs or SPAs must be eng~neer~ng or ~~-Q
technical considerations. The list of criteria effectively limits 1,0 ~
G 1) the abili.ty to request amendment.s. The current language causes ~ j-
~/ applicants (and staff) to c onjure up reasons why something ~~.
qualifies as an engineering or technical consideration. ~j:O
7-907 A. [PUD]Insubstantial amendment. An insubstantial ~
amendment to an approved development order for a final 0L' ~
development plan may be authorized by the Planning Director. ~
hn insubstantial am~namcRt ahall he limitcdte tcehnical or
cR~iflccriR~ eefloielcratieR6 first eliaee~."'crcd. aurillCj actual
dcvcle~m6Rt \ffiichce~ld Ret rcaaenaaly ec antieipatcd dHriR~
the al'!lre~al !lreeess. The following shall not be considered
an insubstantial amendment:
a) A change in the use or character of the development.
b) An increase by greater than three (3) percent in the
overall coverage of structures on the land.
c)
Any amendment that substantially increases
generation rates of the proposed development,
trip
or the
5
/
'J
,-..,
,-.."
demand for public facilities.
d) A reduction by greater than three (3) percent of the
approved open space.
e) A reduction by greater than one (1) percent of the off-
street parking and loading space.
f) A reduction in required pavement widths or right-of-way
for streets and easements.
g)
An increase of
approved gross
buildings.
greater than two
leasable floor
(2)
area
percent in the
of commercial
h) An increase by greater than one (1) percent in the
approved residential density of the propesed development.
i) Any change which is inconsistent with a condition or
representation of the project's original approval or
which requires granting of a further variation from the
project's approved use or dimensional requirements.
7-804 E.1. [SPA] An insubstantial amendment to an approved
development order for a final development plan may be
authorized by the Planning Director. An ins~s:3tantial
amenament ahall ~c limited te tcehnical ey cnginccrin~
eensidcratie1l6 first. aiaeevc.re:.a eh:lriR~ actual development
~.~ieh ceala net rcaeenasly ee anticipatea durin~ the appre7al
!lrOeesB. The following shall not be considered an
insubstantial amendment:
(the exact same criteria which apply to PUD amendments are
utilized for SPA amendments)
5) Deferral of Housino Impact Fee - section 24-5-702 establishes
the calculation for cash-in-lieu payment of the affordable housing.
impact fee. which was created by Ordinance 1. When Ordinance 1 was
adopted, the Housing Office utilized a three tiered system of
"low", "moderate" and "middle" income categories. In 1992 the
system was changed to a four category system, Categories 1 through
4, wi th Category 1 being the lowest income level. Since the
change, the Housing Office and the Planning staff have been
calculating the payment based on the average of the payment amounts
for Category 2 and Catego ed tex~ will codify this
calculation based on the rrent category s e: . Also, staff has
determi 0 e GMQS exemption
sectio egarding remodels to create a eeds to be added to
this sec
Sec. 5-702. Calculation of affordable housing impact fee.
6
~
~~
)(rYteJl
~.~
5~
1""".
.~
The amount of the affordable housing impact fee is based on
the PUblic cost to provide affordable housing as a result of
the activity for which the fee is required. The formula shall
utilize the cash-in-lieu payment established from time to time
by the Aspen/Pitkin county Housing Office for moderate income
employees and the square footage of new floor area constructed
as a result of the demolition of a single family or duplex
dwelling unit or the construction of a new single family or
duplex dwelling unit on a previously vacant lot (the floor
area of a demolished dwelling shall be subtracted from the
floor area of the replacement dwelling unit), or the remodel
or expansion of an existing single family residence into a
duplex dwelling. The formula assumes that for every three
th@usand (3,000) square feet of new single family or duplex
floor area that the public will be required to provide housing - ()
for one moderate income employee. The formula to be applied
shall be as follows: cash-in-lieu fee for moel.erate the average
of Category 2 and category 3 income employees in effect at
the time the affordable housing impact fee is due, divided b
three thousand (3,000), and times the new square footage.
There is no. real discretion that the housing impact fee is waived
if the owner duly qualifies as a working resident and requests such
a waiver. staff recommends that the word "may" is replaced with
"shall" as follows:
Sec. 5-703. Deferral of affordable housing impact fee.
If the owner of a single family or duplex unit for which an
affordable housing impact fee is due is a qualified working
resident, as that term is defined herein, the obligation to
pay the imp ct fee !ll€tY shall be deferred, at the owner's
request, unt'l such time as the dwelling unit is sold to a
buyer who is ot a qualified working resi~~ryt lrthermore,
the amount 0 the impact fee Vlh.j"'>.'.'~f;; shall be
adjusted .at th time of reSale\<.~...~~~....... '.'. ....... change in
value of the su ject dwelling Ii fJO'\'~~."'.' .. t the time
the obligation for the impact ....~r.\. .....~....... ..... ........ the value
on the date of losing. The val..............\...'l....~............It..... ............... . he impact
fee is due sha 1 be determined l:. ....... .... I .. . ......... .. official
on the basi$. f a current appr, ..' '. . " .... ..0. ,inion of
va.lue, assessed valuation,. .o.r....~........L..~......~...........;1P....... ~ s deemed
appropriate. The value on resa~ ...~...... .. ...... " . ... . ...... a of the
total consideration paid by the j. .... ...... ... ... lall the
fee be adjusted downward to an a:.< .. 0, .lty-five
(25) percent, or: upward to a~ amCt\~.~... ~y (~O)
percent, of the J.mp..act fee whwh WlV. ....1...:.....:..... ........ .. . ... J.gatJ.on
for the impact fee and th. e. valu.e (......0 ...... ... "1:.' ..If.................. .... ...... ........ ...........a. t the
time of the obligation is incurrE;r~..tl in a
7 . ." \\. . _----'
1\
I"""
~
dwelling unit, and recorded in the records of the Pitkin
County Clerk and Recorder prior to the issuance of a
eer~ifieate af eccupancy any building permits for the unit.
6) Landscape Lonqevitv reauirement - In response to concerns of the
Planning and Zoning commission and City Council, staff is proposing
a new section 5-511 (Supplemental Regulations) for maintenance and
replacement of approved landscaping materials within 45 days of
notification. Currently only section 7-904 "PUD Agreement"
requires implementation and maintenance of landscaping. Because
landscape plans or representations are included in most other types
of reviews, staff believes a city-wide landscape maintenance
requirement is beneficial.
5-511 - LandscaDe Maintenance
A. Landscaping shown on any approved site development plan
shall be maintained in a healthy manner. In the event that
plant material dies, the owner of the property shall replace
the plant material with equal size and variety within 45 days
of notification by the Zoning Enforcement Officer. If
seasonal or cultural constraints do not allow planting of the
approved plant material within 45 days the owner may in
writing seek permission from the community Development
Director to:
1) Provide financial assurances equal to 120% of the amount
of the replacement landscaping and installation costs as
approved by the Parks Department, and in a form
satisfactory to the City Attorney. The completion of the
landscape replacement shall be accomplished no late than
June 15 of the next planting season, otherwise the
financial assurances shall be forfeited to the city.
2) Submit for approval a revised landscape plan which meets
the design objectives and plant material sizes and
quantities of the original approved plan. An explanation
of the revised plan shall accompany the submission.
Failure to comply with the replanting requirement will
constitute a violation of this section and may result in
complaint(s) being filed in Municipal Court.
7) Lot Split - section 7-1003. (A) (2) (b) needs to. be amended to
delete the requirement to provide an accessory dwelling unit on
each parcel created by the split. Instead, staff wishes to replace
this with the requirement to comply with Section 8-104 (A) (1) (c)
which sets forth 4 options for affordable housing mitigation as
established by Ordinance 1 of 1990. These options are the
provision of an ADU, payment of cash-in-lieu, or deed restriction
8
4J
,p<;;,
. "J
~
\0
~
r',
"-',
of the new residence(s). Staff believes that the flexibility of
options created in 1990 by Ordinance 1 help fund the housing
program and reduces the potential of marginal ADUs that must be
created simply because of the lot split requirement. This change
shou dread:
b. No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split,
both lots conform to the requirements of the underlying zone
district. aHa the a!l!llicant esmmits that Any lot for which
development is proposed will eSHtaiR an acccssory a\;ellinEj
uHit. mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to section 8-
104 (A) (1) (c) .
section 7-1003. (A) (2) (d) needs to be amended to clarify that the
plat must meet the technical requirements for plats as contained
in the subdivision regulations:
d. "A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this division,
and conforms to the requirements of this chapter, is submitted
and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and
recorder after approval, indicating that no further
subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional
units be built without receipt of applicable approvals
pursuant to this article and growth management allocation
pursuant to ArticleS.
Staff .also recommends the addition of a new criteria "e" to section
7-1003 (A) (2) which requires the lot split plat to be recorded
within 180 days of approval.
e. Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat
shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin county clerk and
recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the
plat within one hundred and eighty (180) days following /
approval by the City council shall render the plat invalid and
reconside3:~tion of the plat by the city council will be
required ~ for a showing of good cause.
In order~liminate confusion about allowable buildout and building
types resulting from a lot split action, staff recommends a new
subsection (f) which will read:
f. In the case where an existing single family dwelling
occupies a site which is eligible for a lot split, the
dwelling need not be demolished prior to application for a lot
split. Maximum potential buildout for the. two parcels created
bya lot split shall not exceed three units, which may be
composed of a duplex and single family home.
8) Plat requirements for Lot Line Adiustments - In order to provide
consistency with all platting requirements for various subdivision
and subdivision exemption actions, the fdllowing changes are
9
C\
0A)
(g))
,-..,
,-".
proposed. Requiring
reduces the potential
process the plats.
Section 7-1003 A.1.d. for Lot Line Adiustment requirements shall
read:
prompt recordation of plats upon approval
for error as well as staff time necessary to
d. "The corrected plat will meet the standards of this
division, and conforms to the requirements of this chapter,
including the dimensional requirements of the zone district
in which the lots are located, except in cases of an existing
non-conforming lot, in which the adjustment shall not increase
the nonconformity of the lot. The plat shall be submitted and
recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and
recorder. Failure to record the plat within a period of one
hundred and eighty (180) days following approval shall render
the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the
Planning Director will be required before its acceptance and
recording; and
9) Insubstantial plat amendments - section 7-1006 A. should allow
the Community Development Director to approve insubstantial plat
amendments where the amendment may occur between adjacent
subdivision plats rather than only within one subdivision. For
example on the rare occasion this might occur, an applicant would
not have to go the Council to change an easement or other
insubstantial element which runs between adjacent subdivisions.
Additionally, the 180 day recording deadline is a recommended
change via a new subsection D. The proposed language reads:
7-1006. Amendment to subdivision development order.
A. Insubstantial amendment. An insubstantial amendment to an
approved plat or between adjacent subdivision plats may be
authorized by the !llanRiRq el.irector Community Development
Director. An insubstantial amendment shall be limited to
technical or engineering considerations first discovered
during actual development which could not reasonably be
anticipated during the approval process, or any other minor
change to a plat which the !llanRil'lq el.ireetor Community
Development Director finds has no effect on ~~ conditions
and representations limiting the approved Plat~
[B and C remain unchanged]
D. Recordation. Amended plats shall be submitted and recorded
in the office of the Pitkin county clerk and recorder.
Failure to record an amended plat within a period of one
hundred and eighty (180) days following approval shall render
the plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the city
councilor community D,evelopment Director will be required
before its acceptance and recording.
10
\{)
,r:"
(~'"
....,,)-\
'::''':''/
DIf-
:;/0
~
~
10) Condominium filinq deadline - In section 7-1005 E. within the
Subdivision Agreement section, staff wishes to delete the exception
for condominium maps to be recorded within 180 days. Staff
believes all recording deadlines should be consistent with the
code's 180 day subdivision plat recording deadline:
e. Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat
shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and
recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the
plat within one hundred and eighty (180) days following
approval by the City Council shall render the plat invalid and
reconsideration of the plat by the commission and city council
will be required by for a showing of good cause. Tfie enc
hUllsre.a aRa c.ig-hty aa)- (18 e) day rceerdatiefi rC€ll.:lirCmsRt
cefitaiftcd herein shall Bet apply to rceerdiR~ efeeHdeminium
maps, er declarations or allY ethcrdeeUMcnts rcquizca to be
rceerdcd to aocemplish a cendiminiumizatieR ill the City of
AspeR.
11) Administrative approval for small satellite dish antennas -
Staff has considered and discussed with the P&Z an administrative
approval process for satellite dishes of 2.5 feet or less in
diameter. Approval by the Community Development Director would
SUbstantially reduce the process time for small dish approvals.
Staff still believes that dishes larger than 2.5 feet in diameter
should follow the current conditional use pUblic hearing process.
The new regulation can be readily accommodated by creating a new
section within Division 5 Supplement Regulations:
5-512. Satellite Dish Antennas.
Satelli te dish antennas larger than 2.5 feet in diameter shall
be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Zoning commission
as conditional uses pursuant to Division 3. Conditional Uses.
satellite dish antennas 2.5 feet or less in diameter may be
revie~ed and approved without a pUblic hearing by the
community Develo~ment Director in conformance with the
criteria within Sections 7-304 (B) and (C). The Community
Development Director may apply reasonab~e conditions to the
approval deemed necessary to insure cOJ!.formance with said
review criteria. If the Community Development Director
determines that the proposed satellite disb antennas does not
comply with the review criteria and denies the application,
or the applicant does not agree to the conditions of approval
determined by the Community Development Director, the
applicant may apply for conditional use review by the Planning
and zoning commission.
Procedures established in Article 6 Common Development Review
11
\'
:~~)
.
r".
,..-.."
procedures shall apply to all satellite dish antennas.
For your reference, the review criteria to be used by the Community
Development Director in section 7-304 (B) and (C) read:
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
complementary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the
parcel proposed for development.
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.
As a result of separating the applicable reviews for satellite
dishes based on size, the individual zone districts' lists of
conditional uses must be amended. Of the 24 zone districts in the
city, only three do not currently allow satellite dishes as
conditional uses. These zones are R-15-B Moderate Density
Residential, OS Open space, and WP wildlife Preservation. This
will not change with this amendment. For example, the R-6 Medium
Density zone will be amended as follows:
5-201.C. Conditional Uses.
7. Satellite dish antennae over 2.5 feet in diameter
Additionally, because of the new amended language described above,
the definition of "satellite dish antenna or satellite radio
frequency signal reception and/or transmission device" needs to be
amended as follows:
satellite dish antenna or satellite radio frequency signal
reception and/or transmission device means a diSh-shaped or
parabolic-shaped reception or transmission device, wh6se
aRteFII'la ia lIIorc than t.1e (2) fcct in heiqht aRel./or "aish"
C61l1l'6nent is lIIorc than t..'o (2) fect in dialllcter, which is used
for the reception and/or transmission of satellite signals,
including but not limited to television signals, AM radio
signals, FM radio signals, telemetry signals, data
communication signals, or any other reception or transmission
signals using free air space as a medium, whether for
commercial or private use, provided: [the rest of the section
.............. remains the same]
~) Siaht distance protection at corners - Last fall, staff
brought forth a proposal to insert into the definition of "fence"
a sight-distance requirement for visual obstructions on corner
lots.
This regulation had previously been included elsewhere in the
12
\1/
1"1t'~'
, ~n
-
o~;:;
~o
&<\
~/V
f\
r\
Municipal Code but was deleted a few years ago by the Building
Department. The P&Z voiced considerable opposition to the language
which included trees and shrubs the prohibition. upon
consideration of the concerns of e Commission, staff has decided
to eliminat re erence to lands . g in the proposed
definiti of "fence": , ,nJw:b\~ \:Jif\N\5 t e J
ence means a structureAwWiCtl a barrier intended'to
prevent escape or intrusion, to mark a boundary, to shield or
screen view, or to serve any similar purpose. Fences shall
be permitted in every zone district provided that no fence
shall exceed six (6) feet above natural grade. Fences visible
from the public right-of-way shall be constructed of wood,
stone, wrought iron or masonry. on corner lots, no fence~
retaining wall, or similar object shall be erected or
maintained which obstructs the traffic vision, nor on corner
lots shall any fence, retaining wall, or similar obstruction
be erected or maintained which exceeds a height of forty-two
(42) inches, measured from street grade, within 30 feet from
the lot corner. Plans showing proposed construction,
material, location and height shall be presented to the
building inspector before a building permit for a fence is
issued.
13) Housinq Replacement reauirements: The Commission directed
staff to include an amendment which gives priority to displaced
tenants of projects being demolished and replaced under
Ordinance 1. Also, this section is being updated to reflect the
four category deed restriction system. The following change to
subsection IV. is proposed:
18-3.3 Housing Replacement Requirements.
(a) minimum replacement requirement (unchanged)
(b) location of replacement housing (unchanged)
(c) timing and quality of replacement unit (unchanged)
IV. Rental and Resale Restrictions
Replacement units shall be subject to deed restriction in a
form and substance acceptable to the City Council. Such deed
restricted units may only be rented or sold to tenants or
buyers who meet the city's qualifications in effect at the
time of sale or rental, and at sale prices or rental rates
which are also in compliance with the city's current
regulations. Tfie OO;f\er ia cnti tIed to aclect tcnant:] or
purcfiasers :]usject to the aforementioned qualificatiens.
First priority for rental or sale occupancy of replacement
units shall go to the tenants who rent the units at the time
of demolition of said units. Prior to the approval of any
building permits for demolition or reconstruction of units
13
<"?
-
D~
1/0
r"\
,'-"',
required by this section, the applicant shall provide a list
of all units and their occupants, and a statement signed by
each occupant which apprises said persons of their priority
to rent or buy replacement units so long as they qualify under
the Housinq Guidelines and deed restrictions. The mix of
affordable housing units, as between lm;, 1lI0aerate, aftd lllidEUe
income Categories 1 through 4, or resident occupied, may be
determined by the owner, provided that no less than 20% of the
bedrooms qualify as le..- ifteelll€; category 1 and no more than
20% of the units are available as resident occupied units.
14) DomesticAnimals Zoning and Planning staff wish to delete
Section 24-506 because it implies that domestic animals are not
allowed in any other zone districts. The Municipal Code already
addresses the maintenance of domestic animals in Article 1, Chapter
5, such that they cannot be a nuisance. The recommended deletion
is as follows:
5 50G. Delllestie Anilllals.. The kee!linlJ ef aSllIestic aftilllals
shall be perlllitteel. in the UeailHll Density Residential (R G),
Ueaerate DeRsity Residential (R 15), (R 15.".), anel. (R 15B), Le.;
DCl'Iaity Rcsiel.el'lt.ial. (R 30), ReEliel.eFltial/11lalti Yalllily (RIMY),
ResiaeRtial/Uasile HeIDe rark (PHlr), aRd Rural RcsideRtial (RR)
zeno aistriets, pro-..iacd that the keopiRq of aU8h anilllals ia
iFlciel.eRtal eRel. s~13ordil'late to the pril'lcipal residential use
of the prelllises, shall not chanlJe the Basic character efthe
reBiel.eRtial ~se, shall !'lot conatitute a cOIll!llercial aotivity,
and shall Rot vielate any health, aanitary or other
requlations of the eity or state, or othen:isc conBtitute a
puslie nuiaance.
15) Def-ini tion. of "buildinq envelope" There are several instances
where the land use regulations or specific approvals refer to
development wi thin a building envelope. However, there is no
definition in the regulations to provide consistency in use of this
term. Last fall staff presented the following definition to the
Commission. It was not well received because it "didn't say what
we meant it to say." I.n an effort to simplify the definition~
staff now proposes the following: ~~~
building envelope: that area on a lot Wh~' encompasses all
development including but not limited t excavation, fill,
grading, st~rage, demolition, structures, porches, patios and
terraces, .p'ool.s, access ways and parking. Planting of
landscape materials on natural grade and approved walkways and
driveways may occur outside of a building envelope. For
purposes of site specific development plans, building
envelopes may be established to restrict development to
protect slopes, important vege~ation, water courses, privacy
or other considerations. Building envelopes shall be
described on recorded plats, development ~lans, ordinances,
reSOlutions, and building peit site plans.
14
\~
~~
..
-
1""""..
1""""..
MEMORANDUM
Te:
Plannin~ an. Z.nin~ c.mmissi.n
neM:
Planning staff
'ATE:
January 17, 1"5
U:
Jiscussi.n .f Upc.min~ C..e Amendments and Future Work
Objectives
==========:=========================================~============
Because of a lack of regular case load items for the meeting on
January 17, staff and the Commission will be able to spend a couple
of hours discussing near-range and medium-range planning projects.
To this end, this memo contains a list of code amendments which
will be forthcoming formally as "round 2" of staff initiated cod
changes. As you may recall, round 1 dealt mostly with code clea
up and codification of planning office policies. Round 2 will b
more substantive in nature. Because the list of contemplate
changes is long and seems to continually grow, staff seeks the
Commission's input on prioritizing the list. We may discuss or add
any other amendments to this list.
We will also discuss some planning related projects which will be
discussed. Among these are the survey of occupancy of ADUs
(accessory dwelling units) will be presented by Housing Office and
Planning staff. This survey is expected to provide background
information for an upcoming review and amendment of our ADU
program. Of course, any other projects or concerns of the
commission are open for discussion.
Code Amendments:
11 Removal of ADUs - A new provision would allow an owner to
request elimination of an ADU if other housing mitigation is.
provided. This change would likely be incorporated into a more
comprehensive overhaul of the ADU provisions.
2) Satellite dish antennas - Staff approval for any dish less than
30" in diameter. Any larger dish would still be approved by P&Z
as a conditional use.
31 Vested riahts - Revise language to provide automatic three years
of vested rights to conform with state statutes.
4) Stream Marain - provide for mandatory setbacks of structures,
height limitations, riparian and wetlands identification and
protection, mandatory fisherman's access along rivers.
1
-_'-""-:";~-".,""-".~...,
1J~
o/j,?
...
\
~
~
J
~\
..
~\~~Gc O~ I
~~~ ~~
5) 8040 Greenline - strengthen public access language.
J
6) FAR Reductions for sloped prooerties -
reductions, this would lessen structure size
on steeper sites.
7) SPA and PUD insubstantial amendments - eliminate the requirement
that these amendments be limited only to technical or engineering
considerations.
similar to density
(and related impacts)
8\ .Housinq impact fee deferral - update the code to set the fee at
the average of Category 2 and Category 3 cash-in-lieu amounts.
This would reflect the current 4 category system rather than the
old 3 category system.
9) Refine definitions of demolition. oartial demolition.
relocation. and remodelinq - Amy Amidon will be packaging these
changes for review partially to assist our Historic Preservation
~program as well as add clarification for zoning and planning
('AJProjects. Eliminate the "last standing wall" situation specific
to complete demolition and subsequent mitigation requirements.
10) Landscape lonqevitv requirements - to establish a requirement
for continued maintenance and survival of landscape materials.
Also, create a notification procedure and 45 day replacement
timeframe for any plants which die.
11) Lot Splits - add a 180 day plat recordation requirement. Also
replace mandatory ADU requirement with options to provide housing
mitigation as established by Ord.1.
12) Lot Line Adiustments
requirement.
add a 180 day plat recordation
13) Insubstantial Plat Amendments - to allow these between adjacent
lots in different subdivisions.
14) Condominiumization - correct a code conflict to require a 180
day plat recordation deadline.
IS) Domestic Animals - eliminate Section 5-506 which specifies
certain residential zones where domestic animals may be kept. THis
section implies that such animals are excluded from other zone
districts.
Outstandinq Amendments from round 1 - There were two proposed
amendments which were not forwarded by the P&Z for Council's
consideration, and one which was sent back to staff by Council.
These amendments need to be refined and proceed with round 2
amendments:
amend definition of fence (sight distance protection):
~~~2
(ft~"),,~ ~
~\,
The P&Z
<'._,.,"_ _. _-., ~ "'.' ,:.C''-.'-.>''.'',''.:'."'_..', 'n ...,,-; C':;,.',X,:,-"~,,,:~:;"';'4><..r.;.-(
;;.:"',:~;:'-;'
"",::.j-!"...,:;::,:.'j}'I...;.,:~~ i"~~';':;
_.~.,;~'.!""'--, r-";/":'",':;:~;J';::;~"":"':~:';;,i.'~'";::,,-,,,:,;&.,,,.,.
.
-'
,I""'\.
,-.."
was concerned that staff's
corners would promote cutting
landowners.
create a definition of building envelope: The P&Z wanted staff to
revise the proposed definition of building envelope before it
proceeded to Council.
language regarding landscaping on
of mature vegetation by the City or
amend definition of kitchen: The Council was concerned that the
proposed definition forwarded from P&Z was a conflict with housing
guidelines and other municipal definitions.
3
r-..
.,-."
\och.1.. 1l.
l ' l~)"
@
-;@
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: AMENDMENTS TO THE TEXT OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE
REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 24 AND CHAPTER 18 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL
CODE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on
Tuesday, February 21, 1995 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 pm before
the Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission, 2nd Floor Meeting Room,
City Hall, 130 S. Galena, Aspen, Colorado, to consider amendments
to the following sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code:
1. Section 24-3-101 , DefiiPfiinitions
, 0 Demolition . Ifd '
., ~~~;~~.. E..~ope ~ li!;Z ~
~:h ~4-5-506, Domestic Animals
3. ~ection 24~5- 509, Miscellaneous prov~'sions.
. Satellite Dish Antennas
. Landscape Maintenance Requirements
. Sight Distance Protection at Corners~
Section 24-5-702, Housing Impact Fee Calculation
Section 24-6-207, Vested Rights ~
Section 24-7-503, 8040 Greenline & Stream Margin. . .
Section 24-7-504, Stream Margin
Section 24-7-S04(E), SPA Insubstantial Amendments
Section 24-7-907(A), PUD Insubstantial Amendments
Section 24-7-1003, Subdivision Exemptions for Lot Splits
Section 24-7-1003(A), Recordation Requirements for
Condominiumiz~ ?' .
Section 24-7t100~) i Recordation Requirements for Lot Line
Adjustments '
Section 24-7-1006(A), Insubstantial Plat Amendments
Section 1S-3.3, Housing Replacement Requirements
further information, contact Kim Johnson at the Aspen/Pitkin
Planning Office, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, Colorado 920-5100
s/Bruce Kerr. Chairman
Planning and Zoning commission
Published in the Aspen Times on February 3, 1995
=================================================================
City of Aspen Account
o ( s)q 3
~ rl~ Y- 2()~
~.oUJ
~U)
i.r~\~ ~ ~;W:!n
I L .IU
...' Ii
OU{, (O~01A..000: -,
I OfVrlew4 J,uclte{Je1 1- ~ 0/ /;1 ~ lJ /b-
U'q LT ~ lXc1cili otU? t1J 1kR K ()~ ~ IUi-e1
b~ dutAt ~ ~ dattel6~ a1 p~&c_
T LWf CIA 1lu 1U1ieA) M it11 citIwt (l! Jv of 1tM
vlt~e I + ~~ ~aw T UavY lJ)~J U(01ofJdJ.4
OC(CV~ 1 (R. UuJdw11 ~ VUJ} dOuJytr{lJ
\lu ~ ~ P I ~ t 0P UJp 10 I7,M/'ef
1D t~d fL26~ ifIIi OvuAtii C fUcUW). I ~rwe
~j riD ~ iiM0 -to iL otbtd7oi1 tt- C:tr
GqvWA1 kAt vM~!I ioU; IJCQ) I ~
n~ w:e ~ J<; ~ d IJ/a). r ltdMf
~ 141 aU JkJfu l&JtJ ilJ'V/.1 ) IrJ- l lvvuAJ ~
WW .MV, r @11~ ~orze ~at fV!OCQe& U)'Jtr
't!W ~ C{ati Vt1 +- ~ ilM [aAJtJ ~t JD wi.
~W~l
JOCUL ~.lw~
'"..,
'.'''-..
\
L,/
fi .........'-
y
f~
'.
1""*1.
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: AMENDMENT '1'0 THE TEXT OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE
REGULATIONS, CHAPTER 24 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on
Tuesday, October 18, 1994 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before
the Aspen Planning and zoning Commission, 2nd Floor Meeting Room,
city Hall, 130 S. Galena st., Aspen, amending city of Aspen
Municipal Code. section 24-7-1007, condominiumization, to
differentiate processes for airspace and land condominiums. For
further information, contact Kim Johnson at the Aspen/pitkin
Planning Office, 130 S. Galena st., Aspen, CO 920-5100
s/Bruce Kerr. Chairman
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
Published in the Aspen Times on September 30, 1994
==========================================~======================
City of Aspen Account
:~..'
r'\
r"\
MESSAGE DISPLAY
TO Kim Johnson
From: Chuck Roth
Postmark: Feb 17,95
6:26 PM
Subject: Sec. 24-7-1004.C.4.a(17)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message:
We have discussed the deletion of this section with public works, and
we agree with you that it should be deleted. Thank you for
consulting with us.
-------========x========-------
'."~~
,,_;;.;.;,,;:,;;;;'<;S~,c'.';':;';_:.
~
~
1/4fte
Remainina Code Amendments - Round !I
1) Definition of "buildinq envelooe" There are s'everal instances
where the land use regulations or specific approvals refer to
development wi thin a building envelope. However, there is no
definition in the regulations to provide consistency in use of this
term. Last fall staff presented the following definition to the
Commission. It was not well received because it "didn't say what
we meant it to say." In an effort to simplify the definition, _iff
staff now proposes the following: p~t.br-l
~~ building envelope: that area on a lot which ~~mpasses all
development including but not limited to exrv~tion, fill,
~ grading, storage, demolition, structures, decks, roof
. . overhangs, porches, patios and terraces, pools, access ways
and parking. Planting of landscape materials on natural grade
. U and approved walkways and driveways may occur outside of a
.4.... building envelope. For purposes of site specific development
plans, building envelopes may be established to restrict
development to protect slopes, important vegetation, water
courses, privacy or other considerations. Building envelopes
shall be described on recorded plats, site specific
development plans, ordinances, resolutions, and building
permit site plans.
/
2) Subdivision Protection of Sianificant Natural Features -
The current subdivision regulations are silent on the requirement
to highlight and protect significant natural features on a parcel
being reviewed for subdivision. Language contained in the PUD
section of the code addresses this issue. Staff is proposing that
the following similar language be transferred into the purpose
statement and subdivision standards because not all subdivision
actions include PUD review:
section 7-1001. Purpose.
B
9
flY t.f/ ()
The purpose of this division is to :
A. Assist in the orderly and efficient development of the
City;
B. Ensure the proper distribution of development;
C. Encourage the well-planned subdivision of land by
establishing standards for the design of a SUbdivision;
D. Improve land records and survey monuments by establishing
standards for surveys and plats;
E. Coordinate the construction of public facilities with the
need for public facilities;
1.
~
r'\
...,
".. ,~' .
fee is due all be determined by the
on the basis of a current appraisal a reliable opinion of
value, assesse valuation, or suc other method as deemed
appropriate. T~ value on resal shall be the value of the
total consideratio paid by th uyer. In no case shall the
fee be adjusted dow ard to n amount less than twenty-five
(25) percent, or upwa to n amount greater than fifty (50)
percent, of the impact f which was deferred. The obligation
for the impact fee and h value of the dwelling unit at the
time of the obligati is' curred shall be set forth in a
written document, s' ned by t owner or owners of the subject
dwelling unit, a recorded I the records of the Pitkin
County Clerk a Recorder pr r to the issuance of u
, any buil inC] permits for the unit.
~ Vested riqhts - The Commission presented a unanimous front at
-1!he last meeting on the issue of time limits for development
approvals. The discussion occurred within the context of vested
rights, the timeframe whereby an approved development is protected
from changes in the land use regulations which would invalidate or
otherwise alter a proposed development. In discussions with staff,
City Attorney John Worcester expressed that automatic expiration
of a development approval without code changes would only cause
applicants to have to repeat a review process. Practically
speaking, absent code changes, the same project would have to
receive the same approval as originally granted.
1)
. \~iS
~D(\)
In order to have the City's regUlations concur with state
regulations, the following changes are recommended:
d f.1:\--:\().\ f 't 'f' d 1 t I h' h
Create a new e Inl~lon 0 SI e specl IC eve opmen p an w IC
taken from the state statute 24-68-102:
site specific development plan means a plan which has bee~
submitted to the Community Development Department by a \.
landowner or his representative describing with reasonable \ /
certainty the type and intensity of use for a specific parcel ~
of property. Such plan may be in the form of, but need not I
be limited to, a planned unit development (PUD), subdivision, i
specially planned area (SPA), conditional use, special review, .
environmentally sensitive area review, historic development
review, or growth management exemption.
of subsection (F) from Section 6-207 Vested Property
e eighteen month period referenced in this section is
s in comparison with the! state statutes. What the
does to development approvals is either require a
to act upon hiS/her approvals in a timely manner to
e risk of code changes or seek vested rights for three
th ugh the public hearing process already established in the
s la d use regulations. The following is the proposed
uage to e eliminated:
1.
)
~.
r-,.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AMENDING
CHAPTER 24 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE TO WIT:
SECTION 3-101 DEFINITIONS FOR FOOD MARKET, LOT AREA, NET
LIVABLE AREA, AND FLOOR AREA RATIO;
SECTION 5-210 (B) COMMERCIAL C-1 ZONE DISTRI~T PERMITTED USES;
SECTION 5-212 (B) NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONE DISTRICT PERMITTED
USES;
SECTION 5-301 (E) FRACTIONAL PARKING SPACES;
SECTION 5-302 (A) CHARACTERISTICS OF OFF-STREET PARKING SPACES;
SECTION 5-510 (A) (1) NET LIVABLE AREA FOR ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS;
/ SECTION 6-202 (B) APPLICATION MATERIALS;
SECTION 6-205 (E)(4)(d) PUBLIC NOTICE;
SECTION 8~103 (D) (1) GMQS MULTI-YEAR ALLOTMENTS;
SECTION 8-104 (A) (1) (C) HOUSING MITIGATION FOR SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENCES AND DUPLEXES;
SECTION 8-104 (B) (1) GROWTH MANAGEMENT EXEMPTION BY THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
ORDINANCE 56
Series 1994
WHEREAS, section 24-7-1103 of the Municipal Code provides that
amendments to Chapter 24 of the Code, to wit, "Land Use
Regulations", shall be reviewed and recommended for approval by
the Planning Director and then by the Planning and zoning
commission at public hearing, and then approved, approved with
conditions, or disapproved by the City Council at public hearing;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Office has determined that .certain
sections of the land use regulations which are in error, are
Jlnclear, or in need of refinement in order to codify Planning
Office policies, or to address current situations within the City;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Office wishes to have certain sections
of the Code amended to allow clearer application of the regulations
.
regarding land use; and
)
1
:)
.)
r'\
r'\
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning commission reviewed the
proposed amendments and did conduct a public hearing thereon on
August 16, 1994; and
1
WHEREAS, upon review and consideration of the text amendments,
agency and public comment thereon, and those applicable standards
as contained in Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code, to wit, Division
/
11 of Article 7 (Text Amendments), the Planning and Zoning
commission has recommended approval of the text amendments
recommended by the Planning Director pursuant to procedure as
authorized by Section 24-6-205 (A) (5) of the Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the Aspen City council has reviewed and considered
the text amendments under the applicable provisions of the
Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered
those recommendations and approvals as granted by the Planning and
zoning Commission, and has taken and considered pUblic comment at
public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the text amendments meet
or exceed all applicable development standards and is consistent
with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area community Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers
and is necessary for public health, safety, and welfare; and
WHEREAS, the city Council finds that the proposed text
amendment will allow and promote compatibility of zone districts
and land uses with existing land uses and neighborhood
characteristics and will be consistent with the public welfare and
the purposes and intent of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code.
.
2
I"'.
,
.r'\
NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN COLORADO:
section 1: Pursuant to section 24-7-1102 .of the Municipal Code,
the City Council finds as follows in regard to the text amendments:
I.The proposed text amendments as set forth in the Plan are not in
conflict with the provisions of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code
or the Aspen Area Community Plan.
/
2.The proposed text amendments will promote the public interest
and character of the City of Aspen.
section 2: section 3~101 of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code
definition of "floor area ratio" subparagraph "C" is hereby
amended, which text shall read as follows:
)
./
(C) Garages and carports. For the purpose of calculating floor
area ratio and allowable floor area for a lot whose principal
use is residential, garages and carports shall be excluded up
to a maximum area of five hundred (500) square feet per
dwelling unit; all garage or carport space in excess of five
hundred (500) square feet per dwelling unit shall be included
as part of the residential floor area calculation, provided
however that on residential properties containing historic
landmarks that do not meet applicable minimum lot area
requirements, garages and carports shall be excluded up to a
maximum of five hundred (500) square feet for the property.
For any dwelling unit which can be accessed from an alley or
from a private road entering at the rear of the dwelling unit,
the garage shall only be excluded from floor area calculations
if it is located on the alley or at the rear of the unit.
There shall be no exemption of floor area for garage or
carport parking for accessory dwelling units.
section 3: section 3-101 of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code
definition of "floor area ratio" subparagraph "G" is hereby
amended, which text shall read as follows:
Accessory dwelling unit. For the purposes of calculating floor
area ratio and allowable floor area for a lot whose principal use
is residential, the fOllowing shall apply: The allowable floor
area of an attached accessory dwelling unit shall be excluded up
to a maximum of two hundred and fifty (250) square feet of
allowable floor area or fifty (50) percent of the size of the
accessory dwelling unit, whichever is less; a detached accessory
.
\
/
3
'J
.J
\
j
(*"\
/""';
dwelling unit shall be excluded up to a maximum of three hundred
and fifty (350) square feet of allowable floor area. In the event
that the unit has limited below grade space, the floor area
exclusion only applies to the above-grade living space of an
accessory dwelling unit. For purposes of measuring the floor area
exclusion, the definition of floor area as contained in this
chapter shall be used. Floor area exclusions shall be subject to
review and approval by the planning and zoning commission pursuant
to conditional use review and approval, section 7-304 of Chapter
24 of this code.
section..4: section 3-101 of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code
is amended to add a new definition for "food market", which text
shall read as follows:
food market means a store which primarily sells packaged, bulk and
fresh foods, which may have indoor seating up to ten (10) seats,
and no wait service.
Section 5: Section 3-101 of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code
is hereby amended to change the definition of "lot area" which text
shall read as follows:
lot area means the total horizontal area within the lot lines of
a lot. When calculating floor area ratio, lot area shall exclude
that area beneath the high water line of a body of water and that
area within an existing dedicated right-of-way or surface easement,
but shall include any lands dedicated to the City of Aspen for the
public trail system, lands covered by an open irrigation ditch
easement, or any lands subject to an above or below surface
easement. When calculating density, lot area shall have the same
exclusions and inclusions as for calculating floor area ratio, but
shall also exclude any lands subject to slope density reduction,
pursuant to section 7-903 B.2.b.
section 6: Section 3-101 of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code
is hereby amended to change the definition of "net livable area"
which text shall read as follows:
net livable area means that area calculated on interior living area
and is measured interior wall to interior wall, including interior
partitions. Also included, but not limited to, are habitable
basements and interior storage areas, closets, and laundry area.
Exclusions include, but are not limited to, uninhabitable
basements, mechanical areas, exterior storage, stairwells, garages
(either attached or detached), patios, decks, and porches.
.
4
)
/
",
\
j
~.
,......."
section 7: section 5-210 B. of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal
Code is hereby amended to add a new use to the "permitted uses" in
the commercial C-l zone district, which text shall read as follows:
B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in
the Commercial (C-l) zone district.
1. Medical clinics and dental clinics, professional and
/ business offices;
2. Open-use recreation site, recreation club, assembly ha.ll,
theatre;
3. Church;
4. PUblic building for administration;
5.
Retail commercial establishments limited to the following
and similar uses: Antique store, appliance store, art
supply store, bookstore, photo and camera shop, art
gallery, clothes store, florist, hobby or craft shop,
jewelry store, pet shop, furniture store, hardware store,
paint and wallpaper store, shoe store, video sales and
rental store;
service commercial establishments limited
following and similar uses: Catering service,
institution, office supply store, shop-craft
parking garage, and personal service shops
barber shop and beauty shop;
7. Accessory storage for the above uses if located within
the structure;
6.
to the
financial
industry,
inCluding
8. Accessory residential dwellings restricted to affordable
housing guidelines; ,
9. Detached residential dwellings and multifamily dwellings;
10. Broadcasting stations;
11. Home occupations; and
12. Accessory buildings and uses.
13. Food Market
>>
Section 8: section 5-212 B. of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal
5
)
\
)
, ,/
~
,,,........,
Code is hereby amended to add a new "permitted use" in the NC
Neighborhood Commercial zone district, which text shall read as
follows:
B. Permitted uses. The fOllowing uses are permitted as of right in
the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zone district.
1. Drug store;
2. / . 'Food market;
3. Liquor store;
4. Dry cleaning and laundry pick-up station;
5. Barber shop;
6. Beauty shop;
7. Post office branch;
8. Record store;
9. ToV. sales and service shop;
10. Shoe repair shop;
11. video rental and sale shop;
12. Accessory residential dwellings restricted to affordable
housing guidelines; and
13. Accessory buildings and uses.
section 9: section 5-301 E. of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal
Code is hereby amended to change "fractional parking spaces" which
text shall read as follows:
E. Requi:i:'sd number of spaces when fractional spaces computed.
When any calculation of off-street parking results in a
required fractional space said fractional space may be paid
cash-in-lieu or an entire space may be provided on the site.
Section 10~ Section 5-302 A. of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal
Code is hereby amended to change "characteristics of off-street
parking spaces"', which text shall read as follows:
6
~
,-,
'\ A. General. Each off-str~et parking space shall consist of an
! open area measuring eight and one-half (8 1/2) feet wide by
eighteen (18) feet long and seven (7) feet high with a maximum
slope of twelve (12) percent in anyone direction. Each parking
space, except those provided for detached residential dwellings and
duplex dwellings, shall have an unobstructed access to a street or
alley. No driveway shall exceed a maximum slope of twelve (12)
percent within twenty (20) feet of a property line bordering a
public or private right-of-way. Off-street parking must be paved
with all weather surfacing or be covered with gravel. For single
family and duplex development, a grass-ring type surface may be
used. Al'l parking shall be maintained in a usable condition at all
times.
section 11: section 5-510 A.l. of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal
Code is hereby amended to change "net livable area for accessory
dwelling units", which text shall read as follows:
A. General provisions:
1.
Accessory dwelling units shall contain not less than
three hundred (300) square feet of net livable area and
not more than seven hundred (700) square feet of net
livable 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. Parking shall not be required
if the unit is a studio or one-bedroom unit, but one (1)
parking space shall be provided on-site if the unit
contains two (2) bedrooms and one (1) additional space
shall be required for each additional two (2) bedrooms
in the unit.
-j
section 12: section 6-202 B. of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal
Code is hereby amended to change "submission materials", which text
shall read as follows:
B. Application. All development applications shall include, at a
minimum, the following information and materials.
1. The applicant's name, address and telephone number,
contained within a letter signed ny the applicant stating
the name, address, and telephone number of the
representative authorized to act on behalf of the
applicant.
7
')
--)
)
.r-..
r-..
2.
The street address and legal description of the parcel
on which development is proposed to occur.
3. A disclosure of ownership of the parcel on which
development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current
certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney
li.censed to practice in the state of Colorado, listing
the names of all owners of the property, and all
lllOy:.tgages, judgments. liens, easements, contracts and
agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the
/ owner's right to apply for the Development Application.
4. An 8 1/2" X II" vicinity map locating the subject parcel
within the City of Aspen.
5. A site improvement survey including topography and
vegetation showing the current status of the parcel
certified by a registered land surveyor licensed in the
state of Colorado. (This. requirement, or any part
thereof, may be waived by the Community Development if
the project is determined not to warrant a survey
document. )
6.
A written description of the proposal and an explanation
in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed
development complies with the review standards relevant
to the development application.
section 13:
section 6-205 E.4. of Chapter 24 of the Aspen
Municipal Code is hereby amended to change "required notice", which
text shall read as follows:
4. Required notices. Notice of hearing to the public for a
development application shall take the following form.
a. Development application for permitted uses, special
.rev~ew, ESA, GMQS exemptions, subdivision exemptions
(other than for a lot split) or minor development in H.
%\ development application for a permitted use,
development subject to special review, GMQS exemption,
development in an environmentally sensitive area (ESA)
or minor development in H, Historic Overlay District
requires no notice to the public prior to review.
b.
VelTelopment application for conditional uses and
variances. A development application for a conditional
use or a variance requires mailing of notice and posting
of notice pursuant to Section 6-205(E) (3) (b) and (c).
8
("""\
.-'
c. Development application for significant development in
H; demolition in H; development in or designation of
specially planned area (SPA); planned unit development
(POD); amendments to official zone district map unless
for entire city; subdivision exemption for lot split;
designation of Historic overlay District or historic
landmarks; growth management quota system (GMQS) .
Significant development in a H, Historic Overlay District
or of a historic landmark, development, demolition of a
historic landmark or of a structure rated as a "4" or a
"5" by the HPC in its evaluation of the inventory of
/ historic sites and structures, designation of a specially
planned area (SPA), planned unit development (PUD),
amendments to the official zone district map unless for
the entire city, subdivision exemption for lot split,
designation of Historic Overlay District or historic
landmarks, and growth management quota system (GMQS)
review requires publication of notice, posting of notice
and mailing of notice pursuant to Section 6-205(E) (3) (a),
(b) and (c).
)
e.
Amendment to the text of this chapter. Amendment to the
text of this chapter requires publication of notice
pursuant to section 24-6-205 E.3.a. for planning and
zoning Commission public hearing and ordinance adoption
procedures for City Council pUblic hearing.
Development application for subdivision. Subdivision
review requires publication of notice and mailing of
notice pursuant to section 6-205(E) (3)(a) and (c) and
notice by registered mail to all surface owners, mineral
owners and lessees of mineral owners of the property
subject to the development application.
d.
f. Any development application which will cover five (5)
acres or more of land. Any development application which
will cover five (5) acres or more of land requires
publication of notice pursuant to section 6-205(E) (3) (a)
and mailing of notice to the Colorado Land Use
Commission, the state geologist, and the Pitkin County
commissioners. In addition, a development application for
subdivision approval also requires notice by registered
mail to all surface owners, mineral owners and lessees
of mineral owners of the property subject to the
development application.
section 14:
Section 8-103 D.l. of Chapter 24 of th~ Aspen
Municipal Code is hereby amended to change "multi-year allotments",
which text shall read as follows:
)
9
)
'./
p)
,
j
'\
j
r-,
r'\.
1.
The quality of the proposed development substantially exceeds
that established in the minimum threshold for the scoring
established in section 8-106 E.7, F.5, or G.8, whichever is
applicable, by receiving sixty-seven (67) percent of the
points cumulatively available at the time of its scoring by
the commission.
section 15:
section 8-104 A.1.c. of Chapter 24 of the Aspen
Municipal Code is hereby amended to change "single family and
duplex options", which text shall read as follows:
c. Detached single-family or duplex dwelling unit. The
construction of one (1) or two (2) detached residential units
or a duplex dwelling on a lot which was subdivided or was a
legally described parcel prior to November 14, 1977, which
complies with the provisions of section 7-1004(A) (5) or to
replace after demolition one (1) or two (2) detached
residential units or a duplex dwelling, or the remodel or
expansion of a single family dwelling into a duplex dwelling.
This exemption shall not be applied to any lot for which any
other development allotment is currently being sought or is
approved. This exemption shall only apply if:
(1) Single family option: The applicant provides an accessory
dwelling unit. pays the applicable affordable housing
impact fee or provides a resident occupied deed
restriction on the single-family dwelling being
constructed. All of these options are at the property
owner's discretion;
(2) Duplex option: The applicant provides one (1) free
market/one (1) resident occupied unit, the resident
occupied unit shall be a minimum of 1500 s.f.; two (2)
free market, with one (1) accessory dwelling unit, the
accessory dwelling unit must be a minimum of 600 s.f.;
two (2) resident occupied units; or pays the applicable
affordable housing impact fee. These options are at the
property owner's discretion.
section 16:
section 8-104 B.1.a. of Chapter 24 of the Aspen
Municipal Code is hereby amended to change "exemptions by planning
commission", which text shall read as follows:
B. Exemption by commission.
1. General. Development which may be exempted by the
commission shall be as follows:
10
.~
,-".
\
[
a. Expansion of commercial or office uses. The expansion
of an existing commercial or office building of two
hundred fifty-one (251) to five hundred (500) net
leasable square feet, excluding employee housing, if it
is de,termined that the expansion shall have a minimal
impact upon the city. A determination of minimal impact
shall require a demonstration that a minimal number of
additional employees will be generated by the expansion,
and that employee housing will be provided for the
additional employees generated; that a minimal amount of
additional parking spaces will be demanded by the
/ expansion and that parking will be provided; that there
will be minimal visual impact on the neighborhood from
the expansion; and, that minimal demand will be placed
on the city I s public facilities from the expans ion.
Expansion of a building which occurs in phases shall be
limited to a maximum cumulative total of five hundred
(500) net leasable square feet and shall be evaluated in
terms of the cumulative impact of the entire expansion.
The remainder of section 24-8-104 B.l. shall then be renumbered.
section 17:
This Ordinance shall not affect any existing
litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or
i"'\
'! J
".../
proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances
repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be
conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances.
section 18: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase,
or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or
unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion
shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and
shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof.
Section 19: That the City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of
this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office
of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder.
)
/
section 20: A public hearing on the
the ~ day of ~ 1994 at
Ordinance shall be held on
.
5: 00 in the city Council
11
ir~
~':v
'~'''?J''''
"'."-
(i
. ~l .
/
~
r'\
Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior
to which hearing a pUblic notice of the same shall be published in
a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen.
I
INTRODUCED, READ .AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law,
of the City of Aspen on the.,,:1h
~ Council
1994.
~I//_'
_._"~--,-~
K~.t~H,:n". ./ Koch, city Clerk
~oPted, passed
, 1994.
",I \.(.,
7'..~".,-",
Koch7 City Clerk
'/ li:I.\\ \
day of
~~- 15_. .~-
John Bennett, Mayor
and approved this ~
day of
(J I _;:41
.~ 15:
Joh~ Bennett, Mayor
,
12
~
i__.
MEMORANDUM
w"
TO:
Mayor and City council
THRU:
Amy Margerum, City Manager
THRU:
stan Clauson, City Community Development Director
FROM:
Kim Johnson, Planner
DATE:
November 22, 1994
RE:
Text Amendment to Condominium Regulations Requiring Land
Condominiums to be Reviewed Pursuant to Subdivision
Regulations - First Reading of Ordinance Series 1994
SUMMARY: The Planning and Zoning commission recommends approval
of this staff-initiated code amendment which requires parcels
undergoing condominiumization of land to be reviewed through the
full subdivision process. This amendment is initiated by staff to
close a gap in the current regulations which allow any condominium
approval through administrative Planning Director approval.
BACKGROUND: Ordinance 53 of 1993 amended the condominiumization
regulations to be in conformance with the revised state regulations
regarding condominiums (CCIOA). CCIOA does not allow condominium
ownerships to be subjected to regulations to which' similar
developments are not required to comply. Ordinance 53 eliminated
affordable housing mitigation payments and minimum lease lengths
for condominiums, and allows for condominium approval by the
Planning Director rather than city Council as a streaml ining
measure.
CURRENT ISSUES: Typically a condominium approval divides air space
within buildings and the bulk of the land would remain in common
ownership. Staff has realized that the current regulations do not
prevent a property owner from creating what has been referred to
as a "land condominium" which divides ownership of the actual
ground plane with or without division of spaces in a building or
buildings. staff believes that this "land condominiumization" is
a subdivision action taken under the guise of a shortened Planning
Director's approval without public hearing. What is at risk is the
potential that an existing development can be "condominiumized"
with certain site elements such as parking, open space or
traSh/utility facilities being owned by persons other than the
owners of the building condominium units.
In fact, a situation like this has already occurred to a degree
with the Galena Plaza parcel (currently known as Central Bank)
which received GMQS allotment in 1993. In this instance, the land
1
r'\
.'-".
was divided between two buildings. Most parking for the parcel is
on one "condo unit". Little parking remains on the other "unit."
staff attempted to condition the approval to have the parking
assigned to both of the condo units to guarantee access for
employees and users of each. Staff had several discussions with
the City Attorney's office outlining the apparent problems with the
condominium regulations currently in place. The determination was
made that code does not allow staff to consider important site or
location issues because condominiumization is a Director's approval
with very limited scope of review, relegated mostly to a list of
technical items needed on a condominium plat.
staff objects to this practice because it creates in effect a
subdivision which does not. have the benefit of being reviewed by
the Planning and Zoning Commission and the city council. It is the
subdivision regulations which require dedication of easements,
public improvements, and contains the statement that a non-
conformity cannot be "created or extended".
Section 24-7-1007 A. currently re;:,.s~#~ ~tUA~~)
"A. General. Where a pr os9Jct de~elopmenriS to include a
condominium form of ownership or if an existing
development i to be converted 0 a condominium form
of ownerShip in whole or in part, a condominium
subdivision xemption plat reflecting all of the
development to be condominiumized, shall be
submitted to the Planning Director for review and
approval as a subdivision exemption pursuant to the
terms and provisions of this section."
The following sentence is proposed to be added to the end of the
above paragraph: ot Q"j "}<te;h;,, W\( G".\-".h, o+~( -t!N.^C\'{" -s(<'ce OA{:j
"A condominiumization ~f la!ld shall be reviewed pursuant to section
24-7-1004. subdivisio"B Approval."
The review standards for text amendments and staff responses are
contained in Exhibit "A". .
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: No impacts are anticipated because of this
text amendment.
RECOMMENDATION: On October 18, 1994 the Planning and Zoning
commission voted 5-1 to recommend approval of this text amendment.
Please see Exhibit "B" for the minutes of the P&Z approval.
ALTERNATIVES: The Council could elect to deny the requested text
amendment.
PROPOSED MOTION:
"I move to approve first reading of Ordinance
2
r'\
.r"'\
, series 1994 for an amendment to Section 24-7-1007 A. of the
Aspen Municipal Code to require land condominiumization to be
reviewed through the Subdivision process."
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
Ordinance
I series 1994
Exhibits:
"A" - Text Amendment Review Criteria and Responses
"B" - P&Z Minutes from October IS, 1994
3
("""\.
,-,.
Condominiumization Code Amendment
section 24-7-1102 of the Municipal Code establishes the review
standards for amendments to the code:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any
applicable portions of this chapter.
Response: No land use code conflicts are evident for this proposed
text amendment. Currently there is the potential for dimensional
requirement non-conformi ties to be created by land
condominiumization without full review under subdivision criteria.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all
elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
Response: The adopted Aspen Area Community Plan does not address
text amendments specific to condominiums.
c. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with
surrounding Zone Districts and land uses, considering
existing land use and neighborhood characteristics.
Response: The amendment will allow specific review of land
condominiums in terms of physical needs through subdivision review.
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic
generation and road safety.
Response: Per se, this proposed amendment has no effect. However,
through subdivision review the Engineering Department will be able
to consider easements, road widths, parking and similar issues.
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment
would result in demands on public facilities, and whether
and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including
but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage
facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and
emergency medical facilities.
Response: This amendment will not have impacts on public
facilities.
F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment
would result in signif icantly adverse impacts on the
natural environment.
Response: Condominium ownership interests do not impact the
environment.
1
r"\
,
.~
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and
compatible with the community character in the City of
Aspen.
Response: This amendment is not site specific, so this criteria
does not directly apply.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the
subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which
support the proposed amendment.
Response: This condition does not apply.
I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with
the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose
and intent of this chapter.
Response: This amendment allows for simple airspace condominiums
to be approved through the streamlined Planning Director's review.
In situations where the land does not remain in common ownership,
the two-step subdivision process (with public hearing) shall be
taken, which is in the public interest.
2
....,
..-..
,--.
~
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor and city council
FROM:
Amy Margerum, City Manager
Stan claus~ Community
Kim Johnson, Planner
Development :i~;:fJ,: ~
~~
Staff Initiated Amendments to the Lana Use Regulations
- Second Reading of Ordinance 56, Series of 1994
THRU:
THRU:
DATE:
October 24, 1994
RE:
==~==~=======~===================================================
SUMMARY: The Planning commission recommends approval of a list of
amendments to the land use regulations found in Chapter 24 of the
Municipal Code. These proposed changes are intended to clarify or
define code sections or to correct errors found by staff.
Each Council member has a code book. It will be helpful to refer
to the specific sections for detailed context.
At first reading,
re
oncerni
een added to
4 of this memo.
Counc'
t m'
. Q.f.,. acce,ssory
the se .
ar s
on of the roposed
dwellIng unIts;
. e ling
econd
amendme
Ion
units on page
PROCESS: Code amendments follow a two step review process for
ordinance adoption. The Planning and Zoning commission considered
the amendments at a public hearing on August 16, 1994. city
council held first reading on September 26, 1994.
STAFF COMMENTS: This review is th~ jJJ ~. s~ri-:-: of amendme~
reviews proposed by staff to impr~ ~n~ runc~lon :: Ltie ~and u~
regulations. within this initial group of amendments there are
new definitions and changes to definitions which are unclear or
vague. Also included in this review are some items which staff
must address based on previous Council direction, errors found in
the current land use text, or items which have been standing
policies of the Planning Office which need to be codified. The
amendments are intended to address housekeeping needs.
In the near future, staff will present other groups of code
amendments which will include technical and substantive changes to
the regulations which staff believes are necessary to bring the
code up to date with current community needs.
This memo is formatted to present and discuss each proposed
amendment individually. The list of recommended changes is:
~~ ~ fflltm4J -/ii lf4CP5 ~~,(J~ ~ ~~
~~~4bU5
,-.,.
~
1) Allowance for limited seatinq (uo to 10 seats) for food stores
in the NC (Neiqhborhood Commercial) zone districts:
The NC zone permits "food store" as a use by right. There is no
definition of food store in the code, but the zoning staff has
historically interpreted that a food store primarily sells packaged
and/or bulk fresh foods. In 1989 the city Council directed staff
to formulate a text amendment which will allow limited seating with
no table service in a food service establishment in the NC zone.
This was in response to an application by Jour de Fete to add
"delicatessen" as a conditional use in that zone, and to allow up
to IS seats. During the 1989 review of Jour De Fete's proposal the
Council voted 3-2 to allow a code change, which language was to be
brought back for adoption. Staff recently realized that this had
never been~~l.~~. The P&Z is recommending the following text
changes by 6-1 ~?te:
section 24-5-212 B. 2 . (Neighborhood Commercial zone - permitted
uses) change "food store" to "food market" to be consistent with
a term used in the CC zone.
section 24-5-210 B. (C-1 Commercial zone - permitted uses) add
"food market" as a new use #13 to be consistent with the NC and CC
commercial zones and to provide an additional zone where this non-
tourist oriented use may occur.
section 3-101 (definitions) add the definition: "food market means
a store which primarily sells packaged, bulk and fresh foods, which
may have indoor seating up to ten (10) seats, and no wait service."
2) GMOS Exemotion bv the P&Z for net leasable exoansion of 251
to 500 square feet:
In 1992 the code was amended to allow the Planning Director to
approve GMQS exemptions for net leasable expansions from zero to
250 square feet in area. Previously, the P&Z reviewed net leasable
expansions from zero to 500 s.f. Because the Council changed a
portion of the wording of the text during adoption, the text ended
up failing to read (as intended) that P&Z shall continue to review
and may approve GMQS exemptions for net leasable expansions between
251 and 500 square feet. In effect, this chan e is a replacement
of the language which was in effect befor endment. The
P&Z recommends the following language b 7-0 vote.
The proposed new paragraph in section 24-8-104(B) (1) shall read:
B. Exemption by commission.
1. General. Development which may be exempted by the
commission shall be as follows:
2
.-,
-,
"a. Expansion of commerci~l or office uses. The
expansion of an existing commercial or office
building of two hundred fifty-one (251) to five
hundred (500) net leasable square feet, excluding
employee housing, if it is determined that the
expansion shall have a minimal impact upon the city.
A determination of minimal impact shall require a
demonstration that a minimal number of additional
employees will be generated by the expansion, and
that employee housing will be provided for the
additional employees generated; that a minimal
amount of additional parking spaces wil1 be demanded
by the expansion and that parking will be provided;
that there will be minimal visual impact on the
neighborhood from the expansion; and, that minimal
demand will be placed on the city's public
facilities from the expansion. Expansion of a
building which occurs in phases shall be limited to
a maximum cumulative total of five hundred (500) net
leasable square feet and shall be evaluated in terms
of the cumulative impact of the entire expansion."
(The remainder of Section 24-S-104 (B) (1) shall then be renumbered.)
3) Clarification of the affordable housinq mitiqation
requirements for conversion of a sinqle familY residence to
a duolex. includinq deletion of the word "vacant" from section
24-S-104(A) (1) (c):
Ordinance 1 of 1990 began the affordable housing mitigation
requirements for new and demolished/replaced single family and
duplex development. The text currently requires mitigation for
new duplexes only if a single family dwelling or a duplex had been
demolished or if the new unites) is built on a vacant parcel.
Staff has seen a loophole develop in that the code does not address
mitigation when an existing single family dwelling is expanded to
create a duplex. Because it was the intent of Ordinance 1 to
require mitigation for new residential units which are GMP exempt,
staff formed a policy early on to require mitigation for a new unit
which it created by the expansion or remodel of an eXisti~':::~
f ' ... sidence. At this time staff and the Commission y a 5-
~~~elieve this policy should be codified with the fo .
S-104 A.loc. - Detached single-family or duplex dwelling unit.
The construction of one (1) or two (2) detached residential
units or a duplex dwelling on a lot which was subdivided or
was a legally described parcel prior to November 14, 1977,
which complies with the provisions of section 7-1004(A) (5) or
to replace after demolition one (1) or two (2) detached
residential units or a duplex dwelling, or the remodel or
expansion of a single family dwelling into a duplex dwelling.
3
..".- ""-.
~
,~\
This exemption shall not be applied to any lot for which any
other development allotment is currently being sought or is
approved. This exemption shall only apply if:
(1) Single family option: The applicant provides an accessory
dwelling unit, pays the applicable affordable housing
impact fee or provides a resident occupied deed
restriction on the single-family dwelling being
constructed. All of these options are at the property
owner's discretion;
(2) Duplex option: The applicant provides one (1) free
market/one (1) resident occupied unit, the resident
occupied unit shall be a minimum of 1500 s.f.; two (2)
free market, with one (1) accessory dwelling unit, the
accessory dwelling unit must be a minimum of 600 s.f.;
two (2) resident occupied units; or pays the applicable
affordable housing impact fee. These options are at the
property owner's discretion.
4) Clarification of "net livable area" versus "allowable floor
area" for measurement of accessory dwellinq units (ADUs):
Ordinance 1 of 1990 established a limit to the size of accessory
dwelling units at 850 s.L of "net livable" area, defined basically
as the internal dimensions of the unit minus mechanical and storage
area. ordinance 60 of the same year reduced the allowable size of
ADUs to 700 s.f. For some reason, the term "allowable floor area"
was used to define the space rather than "net livable area". This
is not a satisfactory situation because it allows an ADU to be
larger than these units were contemplated to be.
A situation arose recently where a detached ADU was approved with
approximately 600 s.f. of net livable area which was located on
natural grade. When the building permit was submitted, it included
a basement level of another 600 s.f., Which effectively expanded
the unit to about 1,200 s.f. The argument was successfully made
by the architect that the project complied with the language of
Ordinance 60 because only the upper 600 s.f. counted toward the
code limitation of 700 s.f. of "allowable floor area." Thus the
basement level did not exceed the code.
Since the inception of the accessory dwelling program in 1988 it
has been the intent of City and Housing staff that the units would
be small, secondary units on single family or duplex parcels. They
would fill a niche of entry level housing or caretaker units to be
occupied by single persons or couples. That is made even more
evident by the fact that Ordinance 60 reduced the maximum size
somewhat in response to concerns from citizens that the larger
units could have too great an impact in medium density
neighborhoods. Exterior visual impacts are important, but from a
4
-.
.""",,
functional standpoint the larger interior size or net livable area
has the potential to accommodate more occupants and thus increase
the activit~...~~ ~ ~ parcel. Therefore, staff and the
commission a 7-0 vote J::l lieve that the language in section 24-
5-510 A.1. s .. ck to the original term of "net livable
area" as follows:
"Accessory dwelling units shall contain not less than three
hundred (300) square feet of net livable area and not more
than seven hundred (700) square feet of net livable area. (the
rest of the section remains unchanged)
~~
Also recommended is that the definition of "nftt livable" in the
land use code be~aced by the definition contained In the 1994
HgIolSL,':I GUIdeline . "The curreri€ language in Sec'Eion 3-101 reaas
"net livable area means the interior living area or rentable area,
as defined by the housing designee and shall include private
storage area." Staff and the Commission believe that it is more
appropriate to state the definition rather than refer to it in
another document. The proposed definition would read:
"net livable area means that area calculated on interior
living area and is measured interior waIl to interior
wall, including interior partitions. Also included, but
not limited to, are habitable basements and interior
storage areas, closets, and laundry area. Exclusions
include, but are not limited to, uninhabitable basements,
mechanical areas, exterior storage, stairwells, garages
(either attached or detached), patios, decks, and
porches."
5) Chanqe the oublic notice requirements for text amendments to
follow reqular ordinance adootion orocess:
section 24-6-205(E) (4) (d) refers to newspaper pub1ica~ion
requirements in Section 24-6-205(E) (3) (a). This requIres
publication of public notice for code amendments in addition to
ordinance adoption requirements of newspaper notice. This means
that currently the Planning Office and the City Clerk's Office are
both paying to provide newspaper notice of a code amendment being
considered by City Council.
The proposed change will require only
the entire ordinance as public notice.
unanimously recommended to read:
the Clerk's office to print
section 24-6-205 E.4.d. is
"d. Amendment to the text of this chapter. Amendment to the
text of this chapter requires publication of notice pursuant
to section 24-6-205 E.3.a. for Planning and Zoning commission
public hearing and ordinance adoption procedures for City
Council public hearing."
5
~.
r~,
6) Add the reauirement for a site imorovement survey to the
submission requirements of section 24-6-202IB):
Staff from Engineering, Zoning, Parks and other departments are
regularly asked to comment on land use applications. We frequently
hear from these departments that an improvement survey prepared by
a registered land surveyor would provide more accurate and reliable
information for their review purposes. This potentially adds some
up front costs to the application process, but a survey is
~.!.A '"a"Iil.l~ equired for building permit submittal. The Commission
voted 6-0~ recommend that Section 6-202 B. should read:
.
B. Application. All development applications shall include,
at a minimum, the following information and materials.
1.
The applicant's name, address and telephone
contained within a letter signed by the applicant
the name, address, and telephone number
representative authorized to act on behalf
applicant.
number,
stating
of the
of the
2. The street address and legal description of the parcel
on which development is proposed to occur.
3. A disclosure of ownership of the parcel on which
development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current
certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney
licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing
the names of all owners of the property, and all
mortgages, judgments. liens, easements, contracts and
agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the
owner's right to apply for the Development Application.
4. An 8 1/2" X II" vicinity map locating the subject parcel
within the city of Aspen.
5. A site improvement survey including topography and
vegetation showing the current status of the parcel
certified by a registered land surveyor licensed in the
state of Colorado. (This requirement, or any part
thereof, may be waived by the Communi tyDevelopment
Director if the project is determined not to warrant a
survey document.)
6. A written description of the proposal and an explanation
in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed
development complies with the review standards relevant
to the development application.
7)
Amend definition of "lot area"
when calculatinq lot area
allowable floor area.
to exclude ooen ditch easements
for ourooses of determininq
6
. -;,.~""-,.:_,._,...._~-~,,..-,.
~.
.-'
In an effort to promote and protect open irrigation ditches which
are an important character element in some Aspen neighborhoods,
staff wishes to codify a Planning Office policy to include the area
encumbered by ditch easements in lot area for purposes of
calculating FAR. With this policy and proposed amendment,
developers will not be inclined to fill in ditches or place water-
carrying di~ ~~~~~d in culverts to protect maximum FAR.
The, C?~iss' .,~ted 6-~ 0 recc;>mmend the language to alter the
defInItIon of In SectIon 3-101 as follows:
~.)
"lot area means the total horizontal area within the lot lines
of a lot. When calculating floor area ratio, lot area shall
exclude that area beneath the high water line of a body of
water and that area within an existing dedicated right-of-
way or surface easement, but shall include any lands dedicated
to the city of Aspen for the public trail system, lands
covered by an open irrigation ditch easement, or any lands
subject to an above or below surface easement. When
calculating density, lot area shall have the same exclusions
and inclusions as for calculating floor area ratio, but shall
also exclude any lands subject to slope density reduction,
pursuant to section 7-903 B.2.b.
New definition of "kitchen":
The current definition of kitchen found in the land use code read :
"that portion of a structure which includes a stove, re rigerat
and a sink." The Building Department uses a anoth r, si
definition of kitchen found in the Webster's dictionar . "a oom
or some other space (as a wall area or separate build:!: g) with
facilities for cooking". Also, the Housing Guidelines now c tain
specific standards for kitchens in accessory dwelling uni 1. In
order to be consistent with these othe ent and
regulations, staff and the Commission (by. 6-0 vot red.,., me~cy, '"
LI/'\, updating Section 3-101 definition of kitchen a ows:! 'UJ~
~~f "kitchen means a room or some o.ther space With.f...acilit! es or .
'1 L-- cooking . _ '. pont inS"
a minimum of a two-burner stove with oven, approprit~e ve t
hood, standard sink, and a 6 cubic foot refrigerator i cludi~
a freezer." / .
9) Fractional Darkinq SDace DrOV1S1on: section 24-5-301 E.
currently reads: "When any calculation of off-street parking
results in a required fractional space, such fraction shall be
rounded off to the next higher number of spaces if it is one-half
(1/2) or greater, but shall be disregarded if it is less than one-
half (1/2) space."
This text was written prior to the establishment of the cash-in-
lieu allowances for parking, which reimburses the parking garage
7
.'^-.~-,:",::,';;"';',-.,"
~
~.
fund and other transportation projects. staff has seen over the
years several instances where commercial projects have been
"waived" of fractional shares of less than one half of a parking
space. It would be far more equitable to have development pay for
these fractions of spaces rather than not mitigate at all. In
addition, rather than round up fractional spaces between .5 and .99
spaces, staff believes that these should pay only that proportion
of the cash value of a space. The proposed language also allows
for an entire parking space be provided rather than paying for a
fraction of a space. The Commission recommends the following text
for Section 24-5-301 E. ~y a 6-0 ;bl1~.Jl ~ ,
"When any calculatIon of /.2rf-street parkIng results In a
required fractional spaceL~may be paid cash-in-lieu or an
entire space may be proviCled on the site."
10) Characteristics of off-street Darking SDaces: Section 24-5-
302.A. reads: "Off-street parking must be paved with all weather
surfacing or be covered with gravel and maintained in a usable
condition at all times."
A
Staff has been asked on occasion to allow the use "grass-ring" or
"grass-crete" paving systems as an alternative to paving or gravel.
These systems call for open-cell cast concrete units which are
installed on graded ground, spread with soil, then seeded so that
grass grows in the soil pockets. We see this as an acceptable
situation on single family or duplex properties in order to soften
the visual impact of multiple parking spaces in residential
neighborhoods. Designers are very supportive of this amendment.
By a 6-0 vote, the Commission recommends the fOllowing text:
. "Off-street parking must be paved with all weather surfacing
or be covered with gravel. For single family and duplex
development, a grass-ring type surface may be used. All
parking shall be maintained in a usable condition at all
times."
11) Correction of Code Citations: Staff has encountered the
following necessary correction which is an error in citation of
code sections. The commission voted 6-0 for the amendment.
Section 24-S-103 0.1 should read:
"1. The quality of the proposed development SUbstantially
exceeds that established in the minimum threshold for the
scoring established in Section 8-106 E.7, F.5, or G.8,
whichever is applicable..."
12) Floor Area Ratio Definition - Clarifications for ADUs (Section
3-1011:
Subsection C. - Staff has maintained as a policy the position that
covered parking for an accessory dwelling unit is not exempt from
S
,.....,
,.....,
FAR because there is no assurance that the ADU will.have access to
the covered parking space. The Commission (by a 5-1 vote)
recommends the following sentence be added after the text which
exempts up to 500 s.f. of garage/carport from FAR:
(C) Garages and carports. For the purpose of calculating floor
area ratio and allowable floor area for a lot whose principal
use is residential, garages and carports shall be excluded up
to a maximum area of five hundred (500) square feet per
dwelling unit; all garage or carport space in excess of five
hundred (500) square feet per dwelling unit shall be included
as part of the residential floor area calculation, provided
however that on residential properties containing historic
landmarks that do not meet applicable minimum lot area
requirements, garages and carports shall be excluded up to a
maximum of five hundred (500) square feet for the property.
For any dwelling unit which can be accessed from an alley or
from a private road entering at the rear of the dwelling unit,
the garage shall only be excluded from floor area calculations
if it is located on the alley or at the rear of the unit.
There shall be no exemption of floor area for garage or
carport parking for Accessory Dwelling Units.
Subsection G. - As an incentive for property owners to develop
above-grade accessory dwelling units (thus improving livability of
the units), the code provides that a portion of an above-grade
accessory unit be exempt from being calculated into the FAR of the
principal dwelling as a bonus. There is confusion however because
the exemption language in the code speaks of the ADUs in terms of
"allowable floor area", but elsewhere in the code and Housing
Guidelines the ADUs are measured by "net livable area". Also,
based on a recent case where a split-level ADU was approved, staff
would like to clarify that an exemption is allowable for up to 50%
of the above grade living area of a split level ADU. The following
language is proposed by staff and the commission (6-0 vote) as a
clarification:
"(G) Accessory dwelling unit. For the purposes of calculating
floor area ratio and allowable floor area for a lot whose
principal use is residential, the following shall apply: The
allowable floor area of an attached accessory dwelling unit
shall be excluded up to a maximum of two hundred and fifty
(250) square feet of allowable floor area or fifty (50)
percent of the size of the accessory dwelling unit, whichever
is less; a detached accessory dwelling unit shall be excluded
up to a maximum of three hundred and fifty (350) square feet 'X' .
of allowable floor area. .::en the event that the unit has
limited below grade space, the floor area exclusion only
applies to the above-grade living space of an accessory
dwelling unit. For purposes of measuring the floor area
exclusion, the definition of floor area as contained in this
cha.pter shall be used." This floor area exclusion provision
9
-.,
,-.
applies to accessory dwelling units which are subject to
review and approval by the planning and zoning commission
pursuant to conditional use review and approval, section 7-
304 of Chapter 24 of this code."
REVIEW STANDARDS: The proposed changes are meant to improve the
workability of the land use code by clarifying vague areas or
correcting errors. Staff believes therefore that the following
review criteria have either been met or do not specifically apply:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any
applicable portions of this chapter.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements
of the Aspen Area comprehensive Plan.
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding
Zone Districts and land uses, considering existing land use
and neighborhood characteristics.
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation
and road safety.
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the
extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the
capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited
to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply,
parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities.
F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural
environment.
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible
with the community character in the City of Aspen.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the
sUbject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support
the proposed amendment.
I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the
public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent
of this chapter.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: None are anticipated.
RECOMMENDATION: The planning and Zoning commission believes that
the proposed text amendments are within the spirit of the AACP and
comply with the review criteria A-I above, and should be approved
10
\
0;
.',",..- -,-,,"-'-"
,..-......-.-,--......-...
....,.--,-...... ..
...,_.-'"'~.-----...._....
.,',.~'."...,'
,....,
~
by the City Council.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance 56, Series of 1994
for adoption of amendments to the land use regulations contained
in Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code."
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS:
Ordinance 56, Series 1994
Attachment:
Published Public Notice
/ ,r: (pr~)
tb f1~' ' f)
~* J>>j
IJ f yrrf
f1 ,~
" Ij
I' I'
{jJ/)Ji a
(J\jhJ
~ ~ I (l~'
.. /Y. ,J--c,\ 1fi'.,>"Ii'~IA.! ..
~-/ti,~~ .. >\ t"-', ~ l'
11
(
I
I /)
f {I
. I
I "
I / /'
'L//
\ \ /
'(' "/
,_/
Aspen
MEMORANDUM
.~ ~
. Wf\0/\
'-\~ t-MI
~~'\
~'
~
TO:
Planning and zoning Commission
~.... ~ r G rJp;1,.,;A.\./
_n~ 1./ '
ex . ;Lfl;f'
Regulations C; : Of\~vJ. S~,--t
-t~ '1.o'5Jj!.
FROM:
Kim Johnson, Planner
RE:
Text Amendment for Condominium
DATE:
October IS, 1994
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Staff recommends approval of an amendment to the
condominium regulations which will require that condominiumizations
for divid",d nwnership of land shall be process~p tlg'ouqh full
_subsij;\I'i ~i 00 p17Qrp"o:;. This amendment is Initiated by staff to close
a gap in the current regulations which allow any condominium
approval through administrative Planning Director approval.
STAFF COMMENTS: Ordinance 53 of 1993 amended the
condominiumization regulations to be in conformance with the
revised state regulations regarding condominiums (CCIOA). CCIOA
does not allow condominium ownerships to be subjected to
regulations to which similar developments are not required to
comply. Ordinance 53 eliminated affordable housing mitigation
payments and minimum lease lengths for condominiums, and allows for
condominium approval by the Planning Director rather than City
Council as a streamlining measure.
Typically a condominium approval would divide air space within
buildings and the bulk of the land would remain in common
ownership. Staff has realized that the current reg)ll "H nns 40 not
~revent a nrnplilr:ty ":,~J;:.,.Jr~m," '?~J;~t~nq_ ':IE-at h,a~.." b~!,,_I1...J;,~t!?I:rer1 +-q
~s a "..J,anp qo.!lQ.QJ1!\lDJam.:.' WhICh dIVIdes ownershIp of th<> ",.,t-llal
ground ~lane~~~h or without division of spaces in a building or
fulilaings. Staff believes that this "land condominiumization" is
a subdivision action taken under the guise of a shortened Planning
Director's approval without public hearing. What is at risk is the
potential that an existing development can be "condominiumized"
with ..s;;.ertain site elements ,_~"1'!..9__J2SJ;:'.l<;,l.l2g... o~en space or
trash/utility facilities being owned b~ J>,ersons. other 'Ehari the
~ers or. ~~bulld~cohdonri1Ti'''YYm'"'"'ut\"<<''ft.~~ ,~,...~, In~l "fact:' ;-'7f"""sttuation
e thIs has already occurred to a degree wIth the Galena Plaza
parcel which received GMQS allotment in 1993. In this instance,
the land was divided between two buildings. The parking for the
parcel is on one "condo unit" and little parking remains on the
other "unit." '
lVyci,.J.J ' N~ ~ \;O^J"c - w-f,)J; ~<J .' t~!i
\
Staff _objects to this pt:actice Q~9smPe it ge<;ites in eff~Q.t......a.
subdivision w 'ch does no ~efit of being reviewed by
d Zonin Co he C't Co oil. It is the
subdivis' tions which require dedication of ceasements~
pupl~c improvement, and contains the statement that a non-
"'. .c >.
"41HJTifl~.
ce"
,~ " /71
(JTI" d:...U ~
'\
"
,-.
.-'
conformity cannot be "created or extended".
The following amendment is proposed to Section 24-7-1007:
"section 24-7-1007. Condominiumization.
A. General. Where a proposed development is to include a
condominium form of ownership, or if an existing
development is to be converted to a condominium form
of ownership, in whole or in part, a condominium
subdivision exemption plat reflecting all of the
development to be condominiumized, shall be
submitted to the Planning Director for review and
approval as a subdivision exemption pursuant to the
terms and provisions of this section. A
condominiumization of land shall be reviewed
pursuant to Sec~ion 24-7-1004. SUbdivision ,
Approval." ,rijjoJ),,~. I}- .k d ^vi~"~ g/f--&. ~ 5 ~'1:;J~, \, .
A n/"J~. " ( seA < ^.,r~'" V' c, lO!:. ,'.\X' P S~
/ v/v f1r..J"~ 'J'-j\CjA. .~ wJ^ff' "'\\CySi'
section 24-7-1102 of the Municipal Code establishes!th. e li.e ei'e~ CG\t:KI
standards for amendments to the code: ~~.. ~J J(
--tD C:#2 JJ1l\'v\~!\7
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any ,
applicable portions of this chapter.
Response: No land use code conflicts are evident for this proposed
text amendment. Currently there is the potential for dimensional
requirement non-conformities to be created by land
condominiumization without full review under subdivision criteria.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all
elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
Response: The adopted Aspen Area Community Plan does not address
text amendments specific to condominiums.
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with
surrounding Zone Districts and land uses, considering
existing land use and neighborhood characteristics.
Response: The amendment will allow specific review of land
condominiums in terms of physical needs through subdivision review.
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic
generation and road safety.
Response: Per se, this proposed amendment has no effect. However,
through subdivision review the Engineering Department will be able
to consider easements, road widths, parking and similar issues.
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment
2
v
/
.
1""'-..
-
.
would result in demands on public facilities, and whether
and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including
but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage
facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and
emergency medical facilities.
Response: This amendment will not have impacts on public
facilities.
F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment
would result in significantly adverse impacts on the
natural environment.
Response: condominium ownership interests do not impact the
environment.
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and
compatible with the community character in the city of
Aspen.
Response: This amendment is not site specific, so this criteria
does not directly apply.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the
subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which
support the proposed amendment.
Response: This condition does not apply.
I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with
the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose
and intent of this chapter.
Response: This amendment allows for simple airspace condominiums
to be approved through the streamlined Planning Director's review.
In situations where the land does not remain in common ownership,
the two-step subdivision process (with public hearing) shall be
taken, which is in the public interest.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the text amendment
requiring two-step subdivision review for condominiumization of
land.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to recommend to City Council approval
of an amendment to Section 24-7-1007 of the Aspen Municipal Code
requiring condominiumization of land to be a two-step subdivision
process as recommended by the Planning Office."
3
.3
!
.~.
^
MEMORANDUM
To: Kim Johnson
From:
Chuck Roth 01<-
August 25, 1994
Date:
Re:
Staff Initiated Amendments to Land Use Regs
These comments are in response to your memorandum of August 19.
Page 4, item 6) - This is an excellent addition. The Engineering Department has
experienced difficulty on occasions when site improvement surveys were not included in
applications.
Page 5, item 7) - Another good addition. During the course of 8040 Greenline Reviews
of individual lots in the Ute Park Subdivision, we interpreted that native vegetation was
intended to be preserved outside of the building envelope.
Page 5, item 8) - Agreed; good policy.
Page 5, item 9) - It's good to see "fences" back into the code.
Page 6, item 11) - Good policy to pay cash-in-lieu for fractional parking spaces,
Page 6, item 12) - Good addition to code to permit "grass-ring" surface for parking spaces.
It looks as though I did not have a constructive comment for you. Good job, Kim -
excellent Code revisions......
cc: Cris Caruso
M94.318
,-.,
^'
MEMORANDUM
RE:
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
Leslie Lamont, Senior Plann~
Park City, Utah Visit to Aspen
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
August 8, 1994
==================================================================
A large contingent of Park City residents will be visiting Aspen this
weekend, August 12 and 13. They are interested in a variety of Aspen's
--issues as they relate to their own resort community.
As part of their site visit, the group is holding a round table discussion in
the Laughlin Seminar building at the Meadows on Saturday, August 13. The
session will begin at 9:45 and continue until noon. Lunch will follow. As
a member of the City Planning and Zoning Commission, you ar~Jnvited to
attend this round table and to join everyone for lunch. The group is
particularly interested in transportation, growth and affordabl,e - housing.
The Laughlin Seminar Building is located behind Paepke Auditorium. We
have held several different work sessions in the Laughlin Building, most
recently, the Superblock work session with Council.
. .
~'-'- '
~
Please RSVP to me, or call if you have any questions. 920-5101
,-
..
.,.....,
~
.fU'.
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: AMENDMENTS TO THE TEXT OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE
RBGULATIONS, CHAPTER 24 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on
Tuesday, August 16, 1994 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 pm before
the Aspen Planning & zoning commission, 2nd Floor Meeting Room,
City Hall, 130 S. Galena, Aspen, Colorado, to consider the
following amendments to the city of Aspen Municipal Code:
1. section 24-5-212(B) (2), Neighborhood Commercial Food store
2. section 24-8-104 (B) (1), GMQS Exemption by the Planning
Commission
3. section 24~8-104(A) (1) (c), Affordable Housing Mitigation
Requirements
4. section 24-5-510 (A) (1), Allowable Floor Area for Accessory
Dwelling Units
5. section 6-205(E) (4) (d), Public Notice Requirements
6. section 24-6-202(B), Submission Requirements
7. Section 24-6-207(F), Vested Rights
8. section 24-3-101, Definitions for: Building Envelope, Lot
Area, Fence, Kitchen, Floor Area Ratio Exemptions for
Accessory Dwelling Units and Garage/Carport Exemptions for
Accessory Dwelling Units
9. section 24-5-301(E), Fractional Parking Spaces
10. section 24-5-302 (A), Characteristics of Off-Street Parking
Spaces
11. section 24-8-103(D) (1), GMQS Multi-Year Allotment
For further information, contact Kim Johnson at the Aspen/Pitkin
Planning Office, 130 S. Galena st., Aspen, Colorado 920-5101
s/Bruce Kerr. Chairman
Planning and zoning commission
Published in the Aspen Times on July 29, 1994
=================================================================
City of Aspen Account
)
~<<
\0/\
1"""\
r*'
" - '\ ,
MEMOltANDUM
TO:
planning and Zoning Commission
Kim JOhnSO~Planner
August ~1994
Staff Initiated Amendments to the Land Use Regulations
(Public Hearing)
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends approval of a list of
technical amendments to the land use regulations. These proposed
changes are intended to clarify or define unclear code sections or
to correct errors found by staff.
Each Commissioner has a code book. It might be helpful for you to
refer to the affected sections for more detailed context.
PROCESS: Code amendments follow a two step review process.
Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider the amendments
public hearing, then forward its recommendations to the
Council for ordinance adoption (also a public hearing).
STAFF COMMENTS: This review is the first in a series of amendment
reviews proposed by staff to improve the function of the land use
regulations. Within this initial group of amendments there are
changes to definitions which are unclear or vague or new
definitions altogether. Also included in this review are some
items which staff must address based on previous Council direction,
errors found in the current land use text, or items which have been
standing policies of the Planning Office which need to be codified.
The
at a
city
Throughout the upcoming months, staff will present other groups of
code amendments which will include technical and substantive
changes to our regulations which staff believes are necessary to
bring the code up to date with current community needs or desires.
This memo is formatted to present and discuss each proposed
amendment individually. The list of recommended changes is:
1) allowance for limited seatinq (uo to 10 seats) for food stores
in the NC (Neiahborhood commercial) zone districts:
The NC zone permits "food store" as a use by right. There is no
definition of food store in the code, but the zoning staff has
historically interpreted that a food store primarily sells packaged
and/or bulk fresh foods. In 1989 the city Council directed staff
to formulate a text amendment which will allow limited seating with
no table service in a food service establishment in the NC zone.
1
'\
1"""\
,-.
. .
This was in response to an application by Jour de Fete to add
"delicatessen" as a conditional use in that zone, and to allow up
to IS seats. During the 1989 review of Jour De Fete's proposal,
the P&Z recommended denial, but Council voted 3-2 to allow a code
change, which language was to be brought back for adoption. staff
recently realized that this had never been finished and is
therefore recommending the following text changes:
() section 24-5-212 B. 2. (Neighborhood Commercial zone - permitted t J
J!. uses) change "food store" to "food market" to be consistent with."\I
rYl'tWI" ~ a term used in the CC zone.
MJV.~: Section 3-101 (definitions) add the definition: "food market means
~oJ r,1.1I'.~MO. a store which primarily sells packaged, bulk and fresh foods, which
l' uv .>>JJ.}4/. indoor seating up to ten (10) seats, and no wait service."
(J p/!J~I (> I
1f$VJ'
S Ex m ti n b the P&Z for net
s uare feet:
00
In 1992 the code was amended to allow the Planning Director to
approve GMQS exemptions for net leasable expansions from zero to
250 square feet. Previously, the P&Z reviewed net leasable
expansions from zero to 500 s.f. in area. Because the Council
changed a portion of the wording of the text during adoption, the
text ended up neglecting to read (as intended) that P&Z shall
continue to review and may approve GMQS exemptions for net leasable
expansions between 251 and 500 square feet. In effect, this change
is a replacement of the language which was in effect before the
1992 amendment.
eas ble ex ansion of 25
~
/}/O
I
The proposed new paragraph in section 24-S-104(B) (1) shall read:
"a. Expansion of commercial or office uses. The
expansion of an existing commercial or office
building of two hundred fifty-one (2S1) to five
hundred (SOO) net leasable square feet, excluding
employee housing, if it is determined that the
expansion shall have a minimal impact upon the city.
A determination of minimal impact shall require a
demonstration that a minimal number of additional
employees will be generated by the expansion, and
that employee housing will be provided for the
additional employees generated; that a minimal
amount of additional parking spaces will be demanded
by the expansion and that parking will be provided;
that there will be minimal visual impact on .the
neighborhood from the expansion; and that minimal
demand will be placed on the city'S public
facilities from the expansion. Expansion of a
building which occurs in phases shall be limited to
a maximum cumulative total of five hundred (SOO) net
leasable square feet and shall be evaluated in terms
2
I\j
~~
r/()
h" t/
,-..,
~\
of the cumulative impact of the entire expansion."
(The remainder of Section 24-S-104 (B) (1) shall then be renumbered.)
3) Clarification of the affordable housing mitiqation
reauirements for conversion of a sinqle familv residence to
a duolex. includinq deletion of the word "vacant" from section
24-8-104 (A) (1) (c):
Ordinance 1 of 1990 began the affordable housing mitigation
requirements for new and demolished/replaced single family and
duplex development. The text currently requires mitigation for
new duplexes only if a single family dwelling or ahad been
demolished or if the new unites) is built on can parcel.
Staff has seen a loophole develop in that the code ot address
mitigation when an existing single family dwelling is expanded to
create a duplex. Because it was the intent of Ordinance 1 to
require mitigation for new residential units which are GMP exempt,
staff formed a policy early on to require mitigation for a new unit
which it created by the expansion or remodel of an existing single
family residence. At this time staff believes this policy should
be codified with the following language:
8-104 A.l.c. - Detached single-family or duplex dwelling unit.
The construction of one (1) or two (2) detached residential
units or a duplex dwelling on a lot which was subdivided or J
was a legally described parcel prior to November 14, 1977,
which complies with the provisions of section 7-1004(A) (5) or '~.'
to replace after demolition one 11J. or two (21 tached
residentia . a uplex dwelling, or the remodel
expa on of a single family dwelling into a duplex dwelling
(the . nohanged)
4) Clarification of "net livable area" versus "allowable floor
area" for measurement of accessory dwellinq units (ADUs): ~.\
Ordinance 1 of 1990 established a limit to the size of accessory . .
dwelling units at 850 s.f. of "net livable" area, defined basically.'
as the internal dimensions of the unit minus mechanical and storage
area. Ordinance 60 of the same year reduced the allowable size of
ADUs to 700 s.t. For some reason, the term "allowable floor area"
was used to define the space rather than "net livable area". This
is not a satisfactory situation because it allows an ADU be larger
than these units were contemplated to be.
A situation arose recently where a detached ADU was approved with
approximately 600 s.f. of net livable area which was located on
natural grade. When the building permit was submitted, it included
a basement level of another 600 s.f., which effectively expanded
the unit to about 1,200 s.f. The argument was successfully made
by the arohiteot that the project complied with the language of
Ordinance 60 because only the upper 600 s.f. counted toward the
3
:?>
&~J
1/0
~/~
n
1/0
r--.
1'""'\
code limitation of 700 s.f. of "allowable floor area". Thus the
basement level did not exceed the code.
Since ADU's are intended to be small, secondary units on a single
family parcel, staff believes that the language in Section
24-5-510 A.I. should revert back to the original term of "net
livable area" as follows:
yI
"Accessory dwelling units shall contain not less than three
hundred (300) square feet of net livable area and not more
than seven hundred (700) square feet of net livable area. (the
rest of the section remains unchanged)
staff also recommends that the definition of "net livable" in the
land use code be replaced by the definition contained in the 1994
Housing Guidelines. The current language in Section 3-101 reads
"net livable area means the interior living area or rentable area,
as defined by the housing designee and shall include private
storage area." The proposed definition would read:
"net livable area means that area calculated on interior V
living area and is measured interior wall to interior
wall, including interior partitions. Also included, but'.. ."
not limited to, habitable basements and interior storage
areas, closets, and laundry area. Exclusions include,
but are not limited to, uninhabitable basements,
mechanical areas, exterior storage, stairwells, garages
(either attached or detached), patios, deCks, and
porches."
The current code references the Housing designee's definition.
Staff believes that it is more appropriate to cite the definition
rather than simply refer to it.
5) Chanae the oublic notice reauirements for text amendments to
follow reaular ordinance adootion orocess:
Section 24-6-205(E) (4) (d) refers to newspaper publication V"'
requirements in Section 24-6-205(E) (3) (a). This requires'.'
publication of public notice for code amendments in addition to'
ordinance adoption requirements of newspaper notice. This means
that currently the Planning Office and the city Clerk's Office are
both paying to provide newspaper notice of a code amendment being
considered by city Council.
The proposed change will require only the Clerk's office to print I'.
the entire ordinance as public notice. Section 24-6-205 E.4.d.
shall read:
"d. Amendment to the text of this chapter. Amendment to the
text of this chapter requires publication of notice pursuant
to Section 24-6-20S E.3.a. for planning and zoning Commission
4
~
,,-..
I""
public hearing and ordinance adoption procedures for city
Council public hearing."
6) Add the reauirement for a site imorovement survey to the
submission reauirements of section 24-6-202(B):
staff from Engineering, Zoning, Parks and other departments are
regularly asked to comment on land use applications. We frequently
hear from these departments that an improvement survey prepared by
a registered land surveyor would provide more accurate and reliable
information for their review purposes. Thi~~~dds some up front
costs to the application process, but WOUldc,~t~~. tely be required
for building permit submittal. Section 6-2~shoUld read:
'---'
B. Application. All development applications shall include,
at a minimum, the ~ollowing information and materials.
ivl
I. The applicant's name, address and telephone number,
contained within a letter signed ny the applicant stating
the name, address, and telephone number of the
representative authorized to act on behalf of the
applicant.
2. The street address and legal description of the parcel
on which development is proposed to occur.
3. A disclosure of ownership of the parcel on which
JJ development is proposed to occur, consisting of a current
~ ~w;certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney
~ licensed to practice in the State of colorado, listing
~1flU the names of all owners of the property, and all
if/V f 0 mortgages, judgments. liens, easements, contracts and
~/ agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the
owner's right to apply for the Development Application.
4. An 8 1/2" x 11" vicinity map locating the subject
parcel within the city of Aspen.
5. A site improvement survey, including topography and
ve etat.ion tJ...~4'~~11'lL.-f1T'<paC&f -ale RL_ ~
. '. certified by a registered
. . :1"!lllnd eyor licensed in the Stllte of Colorado. (This
, . (j)l'!f:foJ^Y're 1remen may be waived by the Planning Director if the
~w~ JI~ roject is determined not to warrant a survey document.)
~~- U 6. A wr'tten description of the proposal and an
explanat'on in written, graphic, or model form of how
~ the pr osed development complies with the review
~. ~ standa 61s rele~~ to ",the development application.
7) add a definit~ ?Of "~ding envelooe": There has been
confusion in the past about the term building envelope because
I the land use code does not specifically define it. During the
! East Cooper AH Subdivision review, building envelopes were
i platted but people involved with the project formed different
opinions on the nature of the envelopes. In order to prevent
this situation from happening again, staff proposes the
-.
5
"
/
'?
Amend definition of "lot area"
when calculating lot area
allowable floor area.
In an effort to promote and protect open irrigation ditches which
are an important character element in some Aspen neighborhoods,
staff wishes to codify a planning Office policy to include the area
encumbered by ditch easements in lot area for purposes of
calculating FAR. The recommended language alters the definition
of "lot area" in section 3-101 as follows:
~
'xi'
8)
~
9)
~.
~
following definition change in Section 3-101:
"buildina envelODe: Por purposes or subdivision, PUD, SPA or
other land use approvals, a described ~uilding envelope shall
equate to "setback" and "yard" as defined by this section and
~e sul:lject to those restrictions applicable to "setbacks" and
"yards". However, building envelopes may be further
conditioned by a land use approval to further restrict
development between the building envelope and the property
line to protect slopes, vegetation, water courses, privacy or
other considerations. Such conditions shall be described on
the recorded plats, development plans, ordinances or
resolutions, and building permit site plans."
to exclude ooen ditch easements
for oroooses of determininq
"lot area means the total horizontal area within the lot lines
of a lot. When calculating floor area ratio, lot area shall
exclude that area beneath the high water line of a body of
water and that area within an existing dedicated right-of-
way or surface easement, but shall include any lands dedicated
to the City of Aspen for the public trail system, lands
covered by an open irrigation ditch easement, or any lands
subject to an above or below surface easement. (the rest of
the paragraph remains unchanged)
Amend the definition of "fence"
A couple of years ago the Building Department revised the Municipal
code to delete a provision specific to fences and similar visual
obstructions on corner lots. This needs to be inserted into the
~ definition of fences in the land use regulations because it is an
if important safety issue. The proposed addition to section 3-101 is:
,,)'"" "Fence means a structure which serves as a barrier intended to
IjJ prevent escape or intrusion, to mark a boundary, to shield or
)(\J screen view, or to serve any similar purpose. Fences shall be --
'\ permitted in every zone district provided that no fence shall
\:~ exceed six (6) feet above natural grade. Fences visible from the
o .{/ public right-of-way shall be constructed of wood, stone, wrought
\ iron or masonry. On corner lots, no fence, retaining waIl, shrub,
tree or similar object shall be erected ~ which
~) ~~Wl) ~: ~~~.W~ ~t~~ "<. ;; cP,'~
~(~~ j ~\J (l'fJJ~ ~~"\~~,.~~~ \jJfI \1" c-- f1 J~ ~~.~
'!I'"1<I \jJ~ tft,' ~\l & dl'vI'( ~v~ f/vUi ~ frvVUJr-' .
any
r-.
.-,
retaining wall, shrub, tree or similar obstruction be erected or
maintained which exceeds a height of forty-two (42) inches,
measured trom street grade, within 30 teet from the lot corner.
Plans showing proposed construction, material, location and height
shall be presented to the building inspector before a building
permit for a fence is issued.
10) new definition of "kitchen":
The current definition of kitchen found in the land use code reads:
.0 "that portion of a structure which includes a stove, refrigerator,
wft~~ and a sink." The Building Department uses a another, simple
, definition of kitchen found in the Webster's dictionary: "a room
(jJ' . or some other space (as a wall area or separate building) with
V ,f\ facilities for cooking". Also, the Housing Guidelines now contain
f_ / V specific standards for kitchens in accessory dwelling units. In
~ order to be consistent with these other departments, staff
recommends updating section 3-101 definition of kitchen as follows:
J M~1)( "kitchen mA"JI~ room or some other space with facilities tor
. ~ 1Ifi'^ ~g. For essory Dwelling Units, a kitchen must contain
~~~ u',.K --a minimum of a wo-burner s;C'!::t:ifth oven, standard sink, and
',<I ~tlff 0 a 6 cubic toot refriqerato~~eezer."
\;~'1 ll) Fractional Darkincr space Drovision. Section 24-5-301 E. states
"When any calculation of Off-street parking results in a required \II
fractional space, such fraction shall be rounded off to the next .......
higher number of spaces if it is one-half (1/2) or greater, but
shall be disregarded if it is less than one-half (1/2) space."
~
[P/O
This text was written prior to the establishment of the cash-in-
lieu allowances for parking, which reimburses the parking garage
fund and other transportation projects. Staff has seen over the
years several instances where commercial projects have been
"waived" of fractional shares of less than one half of a parking
space. It would be far more equitable to have development pay for
these fractions of spaces rather than not mitigate whatsoever. In
addition, rather than round up fractional spaces between .5 and .99
spaces, staff believes that these should pay only that proportion
of the cash value of a space. Staff recommends the following text
for Section 24-5-301 E.:
"When any calculation of oft-s.;treet parking results in a e-;:;t;:,~'f%
required fractional space it s~~vbe paid cash-in-lieu~~on_~~
12) Characteristics of Off-street Dark1bcr SDaces: Section 24-5-
302.A. reads: "Off-street parking must be paved with all weather
surfacing or be covered with gravel and maintained in a usable
condition at all times."
Staff has been asked on occasion to allow the use "grass-ring" or
"grass-crete" paving systems as an alternative to paving or gravel.
~.. II.....
"VI
7
'\
r-.
,-'.
These systems call for open-cell cast concrete units which are
installed on graded ground, spread with soil, then seeded so that
grass grows in the soil pockets. We see this as an acceptable
situation on single family or duplex properties in order to soften
the visual impact of multiple parking spaces in residential '
In.eighbOrhoods. The recommended text is:
nlr{tkV., ')J "Off-street park~ng must be paved with all we~ther surfacing
UN I ~o,~1Ii or be covered wIth gravel. For single fam1ly and duplex
nd. development, a grass-ring type surface may be used,4li1-'1if"~lJ'-
&N. /0 ~~=-::t. ~r
La parking shall be maintained in a usable condition at all
times."
13) correction of Code Citations:
following necessary corrections:
staff has encountered the
J section 24-8-103 D.l should read:
# "1. The quality of the proposed development substantially
(),~N'j\ \ exceeds that established in the minimum threshold for the
'(,11 ,0 scoring established in Section 8-106 E.7, F.5, or G.8,
(0 whichever is applicable..."
f'6' J
~11JQ1)
(jJ
V
0'/\
14) Floor Area Ratio Definition -Clarifications for ADUs (Section
3-101):
Subsection C. - Regarding exemptions for garages and carports,
staff recommends the following sentence be added after the text
which exempts up to 500 s.f. of garage/carport from FAR:
"There shall be no exemption of floor area for garage or
carport parking for Accessory Dwelling Units."
Staff has maintained this position as a pOlicy because there is no
assurance that an ADU will have access to an exempt covered parking
space.
Subsection G. - As an incentive for property owners to develop
above-grade accessory dwelling units (thus improving livability of
the units), the code provides that a portion of an above-grade
accessory unit be exempt from being calculated into the FAR of the
principal dwelling as a bonus. There is confusion however because
the exemption language in the code speaks of the ADUs in terms of
"allowable floor area", but elsewhere in the code and Housing
Guidelines the ADUs are measured by "net livable area". Also,
based on a recent case where a split-level ADU was approved, staff
would like to clarify that an exemption is allowable for up to 50%
of the above grade living area of a split level ADU. The following
language is proposed as a clarification:
"(G) Accessory dwelling unit. For the purposes of calculating
8
J
'!I;i?!
'V
y
,
~"
.. ,f
4,
. '.", ,
I""
~
floor area ratio and allowable floor area for a lot whose
principal use is residential, the following shall apply: The
allowable floor area of an attached accessory dwelling unit
shall be excluded up to a maximum of two hundred and fifty
(250) square feet of allowable floor area or fifty (50)
percent of the size of the accessory dwelling unit, whichever
is less; a detached accessory dwelling unit shall be excluded
up to a maximum of three hundred and fifty (350) square feet
of allowable floor area. The floor area exclusion only
applies to the above-grade living space of an accessory
dwelling unit, in the event that the unit has limited below
grade space. (Allowa]:)le floor area for an accessory dwelling
('~~ unit shall be that measurement of all exterior wall dimensions
-\V, . of the unit, not the "net livable area", or interior
~..y- dimensions of the unit.)
~ # ~ This floor area exclusion provision applies to accessory
~. n, ~lling units which are subject to review and approval by the
OIJV~i) ~anning and zoning commission pursuant to conditional use
~(,N ,~. review and approval, Section 7-304 of Chapter 24 of this
- V\i code. n
. ?.::.. s""'""'"s, -~~~-~~~~~~~~--:~~::s--::;:~~t to impr=e the
workability of the land use code by clarifying vague areas or
correcting errors. Staff believes therefore that the following
review criteria have either been met or do not specifically apply:
/,&(1 )
~o
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any
applicable portions of this chapter.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements
of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding
Zone Districts and land uses, considering existing land use
and neighborhood characteristics.
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and
road safety.
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the
extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the
capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited
to transportation facilities, sewage facilities f water supply,
parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities.
F.
Whether and the extent to
result in significantly
environment.
which the proposed amendment would
adverse impacts on the natural
9
IJ\
1"""\
1"""\
. J .
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible
with the community character in the City of Aspen.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the
subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support
the proposed amendment.
I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the
public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent
of this chapter.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes that the proposed text amendments
are within the spirit of the AACP and comply with the review
criteria A-I above, and should be approved by the P&Z for
recommendation to the city council.
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to recommend adoption of the proposed
amendments to the land use regulation contained in staff's memo
dated August 16, 1994."
10
~