HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.regular.20081110CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
November 10, 2008
5:00 P.M.
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Scheduled Public Appearances
IV. Citizens Comments & Petitions (Time for any citizen to address Council on issues
NOT on the agenda. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes)
V. Special Orders of the Day
a) Mayor's and Councilmembers' Comments
b) Agenda Deletions or Additions
c) City Manager's Comments
d) Board Reports
VI. Consent Calendar (These matters maybe adopted together by a single motion)
a) Minutes -October 14, 27, 2008
b) Resolution #107, 2008 -Colorado Climate Action Plan
VII. First Reading of Ordinances
a) Ordinance #35, 2008 -Extension of Building Permit in CC Zone and Commercial
Mix P.H. 12/8
b) Ordinance #36, 2008 -Commercial Core Moratorium/Historic Interiors
Preservation P.H. 12/8
VIII. Public Hearings
a) Ordinance #33, 2008 -Supplemental Appropriations
b) .Ordinance #32, 2008 - Paepcke Auditorium Aspen Institute/SPA Amendment
c) Ordinance #34, 2008 -Lift One Master Plan
IX. Action Items
a) 210 West Francis Ordinance #48 Negotiation Continue to 11/24
X. Adjournment
Next Regular Meeting November 24. 2008
COUNCIL SCHEDULES A 15 MINUTE DINNER BREAK APPROXIMATELY 7 P.M.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Council
Vlb
FROM: Phil Overeynder, Public Works Director `
CC: Steve Barwick, City Manager
CC: John Worcester, City Attorney
DATE OF MEMO: October 28, 2008
MEETING DATE: November 10, 2008
RE: Colorado Climate Action Plan Resolution
SUMMARY: The Governor's Climate Action Plan calls for greenhouse gas emission reductions
from all sectors of the State's economy to address the threat of climate change. One of the stated
goals of the Governor's plan is to reduce emissions from the electric sector by 20% below 2005
levels by 2020. The Governor has requested that electric utilities (including municipalities)
develop a plan to achieve the goals stated above. The attached resolution supports this plan and
commits the City to identify specific measures it will take to achieve these goals. The plan is due
by June 1, 2009.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: In March 2005 the City adopted the Canary Initiative. In
May, 2007, the City adopted the Canary Action Plan, with goals that parallel the statewide
Climate Action program. For the electric sector, the City's stated end goal is to reach 100%
renewable energy by 2015.
DISCUSSION: The request to adopt the attached resolution comes from the Colorado
Association of Municipal Utilities (CAMU). CAMU represents 29 municipal electric systems
operating throughout the state, which cumulatively serve approximately 25% of the states'
electric needs. CAMU has historically been supportive only of statewide initiatives for climate
control that allow for local control over the methods to achieve results in reducing greenhouse
gas emissions. Because the majority of utilities in Colorado rely on coal to produce electric
energy and because there have been questions regarding the availability of technology to control
carbon emissions from coal fired plants, many utilities have been reluctant to move forward with
development of plans to reduce emissions. Only a handful of utilities are large enough to fall
under the "Renewable Portfolio Standards" and are therefore subject to mandatory standards on
the amount of renewable energy purchased or produced. Adoption of this resolution by the City
1
and other CAMU members would send a clear message to the Governor that municipalities
support the Governor's plan, but want to retain their own discretion in how to achieve the results.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: Adoption of the proposed resolution will have no additional
financial consequences. Preparation of the plan can be accomplished with existing resources.
Financial resources necessary to take the next steps in reducing electric utility emissions to the
stated goals have been requested beginning with the 2009 budget. Each project contained in the
AMP for the renewable energy fund will need a business plan including an analysis of revenue
sources and expenditures before proceeding to the design and construction phase.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPLICATIONS: Passing the resolution of support for the Governor's
emission reduction targets will not have any direct environmental effect. When the plan
contemplated in the resolution is developed, more specific information on the environmental
effects on a set of proposed projects will be available.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the resolution support of the
Governor's Climate Action plan as it pertains to electric utilities.
ALTERNATIVES: Council could elect not to support the resolution or to request the Governor
to identify a more specific program to directly identify a strategy for limiting emissions from
existing and potential future use of coal fired power.
PROPOSED MOTION: I move to approve Resolution #~ of 2008.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
2
RESOLUTION
Series of 2008
WHEREAS, on November 7, 2007, Colorado Govemor Bill Ritter issued the Colorado Climate
Action Plant that identified climate change as a vitally important issue impacting present and
future citizens of the state, and
WHEREAS, the Climate Action Plan presents a call for greenhouse gas emission reductions
from all sectors of the state economy as a mechanism to address the threat of climate change,
and
WHEREAS, according to the State of Colorado's calculations, greenhouse gas emissions from
the state's electric power sector represent approximately 36 percent of total greenhouse gas
emissions economy wide, and
WHEREAS, the stated goals of the Climate Action Plan is a statewide reduction in greenhouse
gas emissions of 20 percent below 20051evels by 2020, and an 80 percent reduction below 2005
levels by 2050, and
WHEREAS, the Climate Action Plan proposes a similar goal of 20 percent reduction of
greenhouse gas emissions below 2005 levels by 2020 for the utility sector, and
WHEREAS, on page twenty of the Climate Action Plan, the Governor requests that public
utility entities submit plans showing how they propose to meet the goals, and
WHEREAS, the Governor's Energy Office, the Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment and the Colorado Department of Regulatory Agencies have requested that public
utilities propose a plan to achieve these reductions based on each utilities' unique energy profile
by June 1, 2009 and
WHEREAS, this resolution does not prescribe specific measures that utilities must take to
achieve the Climate Action Plan goals, now
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Aspen supports the goals of the Climate
Action Plan and commits to develop a plan outlining how the utility proposes to achieve the
goals. These plans will be submitted to the Governor's Energy Office by June 1, 2009.
Furthermore, the City Council recognizes that this plan is non-binding and is intended to propose
a method for achieving the goals of the Climate Action Plan based on the unique circumstances
of our utility. These plans will be submitted as part of a voluntary, statewide cooperative effort
on the part of Colorado's public utilities.
Dated:
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing is a true
and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, at a
meeting held October 27, 2008
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
vu ~t
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
THRU:
DATE OF MEMO:
MEETING DATE:
RE:
Mayor and City Council
Ben Gagnon, Special Projects Planner ~~
Chris Bendon, Director, Community Development
November 3, 2008
November 10, 2008
Extension of Moratorium on Building Permits in the CC Zone
District; and Commercial Mix Issue
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: To consider possible methods of addressing the commercial mix
issue and/or extending the temporary moratorium on building permits for commercial space in
the Commercial Core Zone District, pursuant to Ordinance No. 51, Series of 2006.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Council has held numerous work sessions on this issue
during the last two years, and has extended the moratorium to continue discussion on this issue.
BACKGROUND: At Council direction, staff has organized a 6-person subcommittee made up
of Aspen Chamber Resort Association board members. This group met last week and is
scheduled to meet again at least one before 2"d Reading on December 8, in order to come up with
concepts to address the commercial mix issue, and potentially to bring recommendations to
Council.
At the same time, the update of the Aspen Area Community Plan has included small group
meetings, continuing through Nov. 14, that address this issue in a small group format. The
question of commercial mix will also be the topic of review by large community meetings in
February and is expected to be the subject of policy statements in the updated AACP.
DISCUSSION: Staff may bring recommendations for addressing this issue at 2"d Reading on
December 8, 2008. At the same time, there are public expectations of addressing this issue as
part of the update of the AACP. Although this moratorium has been extended several times, the
Council has shown flexibility by amending Ordinance 51, Series of 2008, several times in order
to accommodate reasonable types of commercial building alterations that are within the spirit of
this ordinance.
Page 1 of 2
FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: There is approximately $5,000 left in the original budget
for the commercial mix issue. There have been no requests for additional funds since this budget
was allocated in 2007, and staff does not have any further requests. A substantial amount of
research and information has been generated so far, and should suffice to bring this issue to a
decision-making point with the input of ACRA, the public, relevant boards' or commission and
the Council.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: If specific steps to address the commercial mix issue are
recommended by staff on December 8, Council is asked to provide feedback and potentially vote
if code changes are proposed. At the same time, Council will be asked to consider code changes
on the subject of preserving historic interiors (please see memo from Sara Adams). Both of these
issues (commercial mix and preserving historic interiors) have been explored during the
moratorium period. If Council comes to an agreement on how to address both these issues on
Dec. 8, Council may extend the moratorium for 30 days to allow such changes to take effect.
If Council does not come to agreement on how to address both these issues on Dec. 8, and
believes additional time is necessary to review these topics either through the AACP or the
Historic Preservation Task Force, Council may extend the moratorium for a longer period. The
attached ordinance allows Council to "fill in" the date to extend the moratorium.
Considering that the topic of commercial mix is .being considered as part of the update of the
AACP, staff recommends extending the moratorium by six months until June 12, 2009, allowing
for the revised AACP to be adopted in April, and allowing some time to implement code changes
guided by the revised AACP.
ALTERNATIVES: If Council chooses not to extend the moratorium, the ACRA subcommittee
will continue to examine the commercial mix issue, the update of the AACP will contain vision
and broad policy statements on the issue, and the Council may address this issue without a
moratorium. Also, the Historic Preservation Task Force may develop recommendations on the
issue of preserving historic interiors without a moratorium in place.
PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No. ~, Series of 2008."
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
Page 2 of 2
ORDINANCE NO.
(Series of 2008)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,
COLORADO, EXTENDING A TEMPORARY MORATORIUM ADOPTED
PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NUMBER 51, SERIES OF 2006, AS AMENDED
PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE N0.2, SERIES OF 2007, AS AMENDED
PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NUMBER 26, SERIES OF 2007, AS AMENDED
PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NUMBER 37, SERIES OF 2007, AS AMENDED
PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE 46, SERIES OF 2007, AND AS AMENDED BY
ORDINANCE NO.15, SERIES OF 2008.
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen (the "City") is a legally and regularly created,
established, organized and existing municipal corporation under the provisions of Article
XX of the Constitution of the State of Colorado and the home rule charter of the City (the
"Charter"); and
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen currently regulates land uses within the City limits
in accordance with Chapter 26.104 et seq. of the Aspen Municipal Code pursuant to its
Home Rule Constitutional authority and the Local Government Land Use Control Enabling
Act of 1974, as amended, §§29-20-101, etseq. C.R.S; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Aspen enacted a temporary
moratorium pursuant to Ordinance Number 51, Series of 2006, as amended pursuant to
Ordinance Number 2, Series of 2007, and as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 26,
Series of 2007, and as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 37, Series of 2007, and as
amended pursuant to Ordinance 46, Series of 2007, and as amended pursuant to Ordinance
15, Series of 2008; and,
WHEREAS, Section 7 of Ordinance Number 51, Series of 2006, allows for the
termination date of the moratorium to be extended by City Council through the adoption of
an ordinance; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council reaffirms the reasons for implementing the
moratorium, specifically that recent land use applications seeking Development Orders in
various City Zone Districts do not appear to be consistent with the goals and vision as
expressed by the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan and are having the following negative
effects upon the community:
• Recent development activity indicates potential negative impacts on the
preservation of the unique historic character of certain structures, including
their interiors and current uses;
• Recent development activity indicates potential negative impacts on the
unique character of the uses of buildings and structures within the
commercial core of the City of Aspen; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Community Development Department
require an additional period of time in which to review all existing land use codes and
regulations as they affect land use development in certain Zone Districts within the City of
Aspen to ensure that all land use development proceeds in a manner that is consistent with
the Aspen Area Community Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Community Development Department
require an additional period of time in which to conduct a thorough analysis and assessment
of the Land Use Code and regulations affecting the development of land within certain Zone
Districts of the City of Aspen with particular attention to the preservation of historic interior
elements, and with particular attention to a diverse, healthy and vibrant mix of commercial
uses; and
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Community Development Department
require an additional period of time in which to investigate methods and procedures to
insure the preservation of historic interior elements, and to insure a diverse, healthy and
vibrant mix of commercial uses; and,
WHEREAS, an extension of the moratorium termination date will enable a
reasoned discussion of the desired character and rate of development and redevelopment and
consideration of amendments to the Land Use Code without creating a rush of development
applications and the related impacts upon the community.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1-Extension of Moratorium Termination Date:
The termination date of the temporary moratorium enacted through the adoption of
Ordinance Number 51, Series of 2006, as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 2, Series
of 2007, and as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 26, Series of 2007, and as amended
pursuant to Ordinance Number 37, Series of 2007, and as amended pursuant to Ordinance
46, Series of 2007, and as amended pursuant to Ordinance 15, Series of 2008, is hereby
extended to terminate on 200
Section 2 -Changes to Moratorium:
Ordinance Number 51, Series of 2006, as amended pursuant to Ordinance Number 2, Series
of 2007, shall continue in its full force and effect and nothing in this Ordinance shall be
construed to alter the substantive content of Ordinance Number 51, Series of 2006;
Ordinance Number 2, Series of 2007; Ordinance Number 26, Series of 2007; and Ordinance
Number 37, Series of 2007, and as amended pursuant to Ordinance 46, Series of 2007, and
as amended by Ordinance 15, Series of 2008, except as follows:
^ The termination date shall be extended as described in Section 1, above.
Section 3•
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 4•
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 5•
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 6•
A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 14~' day of April, 2008, 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.
Section 7•
'This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final adoption.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City
Council of the City of Aspen on the 10~' day of November, 2008.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2008.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
Approved as to form:
John Worcester, City Attorney
Vll~
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council
FROM: Sara Adams, Preservation Planner
THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director
DATE OF MEMO: October 28, 2008
MEETING DATE: November 10, 2008
RE; Commercial Core Moratorium/ Historic Interior Preservation
Code Amendments, First Reading of Ordinance eries of
2008.
Second Reading is scheduled for December 8, 2008.
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff requests action from Council regarding designation of historic
interior landmarks as part of the Commercial Core Moratorium. Staff proposes that Council
consider taking action on one of the following three options:
1.) Adopt an amendment to the Land Use Code authorizing the designation of interior
Landmarks;1
2.) Extend the Moratorium six months to allow the Historic Preservation Task Force
more time to discuss interior designation; or
2.) Not take any action and permitting the Moratorium to expire on December 10, 2008.
SUMMARY OF MORATORIUM: Owners of historic landmarks located in the Commercial
Core Historic District who need to submit an interior building permit during the interior
moratorium have the option to enter into a written agreement with the City to preserve specific
interior historic elements. The Red Onion is the only interior that entered into a written
agreement with the City to gain exemption from the moratorium. Work is currently underway to
restore specific historic elements in the bar area. Staff compiled case studies from other
municipalities, and continues to work on the restoration of the Red Onion. This research and
experience are the basis for the specific criteria that Staff developed.
BACKGROUND: On December 12, 2006, City Council adopted Ordinance #51, Series of
2006, a moratorium on obtaining a building permit for interior work in the Commercial Core
' This would require a one month extension of the Moratorium to allow adequate time for the Ordinance to take
affect.
Revised 10/29/2008
councilfirstreadingINTERIORSnov 10. doc
Page 1 of 6
Historic District. One aspect of Ordinance #51 included "preserving current vitality, character,
and history of the City's central business area." At that time, Council directed Staff to research
interior landmark designations. Staff introduced interior designation criteria during two City
Council worksessions in the first quarter of 2007.. Code amendments regarding interiors were
put on hold during the Ordinance #30/48 discussions. Council's disposition on Ordinance #48
was to postpone further designations until the Task Force completes its work.
The Historic Preservation Commission and the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed and
unanimously recommended approval of the Code Amendments in December 2007 and January
2008.2 Staff met with City Council on January 8, 2008 during a worksession to determine how
to proceed before the expiration of the moratorium on June 10, 2008.3 Council requested that the
Task Force make a recommendation to City Council regarding the designation of interiors in
Aspen. The Task Force began meeting in March of this year.
The first three months of the Task Force involved education on historic preservation.
Subsequently, they developed their work program and broke into subcommittees that deal with
different topics. The subcommittee charged with historic interiors, among many other issues,
formulated in September. A recommendation from the subcommittee is expected on November
6, 2008,4 and the full Task Force is asked to make a recommendation to City Council regarding
interior designation during the November 13`" and November 20`" scheduled meetings.5
DISCUSSION: In 1972 a citizen's group named "Save the Victorians" encouraged City
Council to adopt an historic preservation ordinance. Aspen became one of the first communities
in the state, and municipalities in the nation, to adopt historic preservation regulations. Since
1972, Aspen has been at the forefront of preservation practice: for example, Aspen and Pitkin
County adopted the first mandatory historic preservation contractor licensing program in the
country in 1999.6
Amending the Code to permit interior designation is a logical next step to preserving Aspen's
heritage. There do not seem to be many qualitative distinctions between interior and exterior
spaces, with the exception that many interior spaces often provide better examples of technical
skill and architectural excellence. Interiors have the ability to convey a more defined sense of
place than many exteriors.
Staff believes that only a few intact potentially historic interiors with public accessibility exist in
Aspen.
z Planning and Zoning Resolution No. 3, Series of 2008, Exhibit B. Minutes from the Planning and Zoning
Commission meetings are attached as Exhibit C.
s The moratorium was extended another 6 months. It is set to expire on December 10, 2008.
a Staff will present subcommittee comments to City Council on November 10, 2008.
s Second reading of this Ordinance is scheduled for December 10, 2008.
b Exhibit D includes a timeline of Aspen's Historic Preservation. Program.
A comprehensive survey of interiors that may have historic significance should be undertaken as soon as possible,
as well as, the development of design guidelines for historic interiors.
Revised 10/29/2008
councilfirstreadingINTERIORSnov 10. doc
Page 2 of 6
INTERIOR DESIGNATION CONCEPTS:
Interior designation addresses specific architectural elements, construction techniques and
defined spaces (i.e. floor plans) within an already designated exterior landmark. Based on
previous court decisions, a designated historic interior must be customarily accessible to the
public in order to have a valid public purpose. Staff examined interior designation criteria
adopted by other municipalities and the recent experience with the Red Onion interior to develop
the proposed code amendments. Telluride, in terms of a small Colorado town with Victorian era
heritage, is the most relevant example to Aspen.
Telluride: Telluride currently has four designated interiors- two are City owned (courthouse and
Telluride historic museum) and two are privately owned (Sheridan Hotel and Sheridan Opera
House). Comprehensive surveys were completed for each interior in 1988 and again in 1997 to
identify important historic elements. The Historic and Architectural Review Committee (HARC)
has purview over the entire interior, and uses the National Park Service Rehabilitation standards
in conjunction with the comprehensive surveys to review alterations and renovations of the
interior.
Unlike Aspen, the entire town of Telluride is an historic district with one specific period of
significance, 1878 - 1913. Simplicity and consistency with Victorian era style are general
philosophies in Telluride for alterations. The HARC is more flexible with changes to portions of
an interior that are not historic; however, they must be compatible with the historic elements.
Red Onion, Aspen: Staff has been working with the property owners of the Red Onion since
spring 2007 to rehabilitate the historic Red Onion bar. Using historic photographs, Staff
identified the historic elements in the bar area, which were subsequently included in the building
agreement made between the City of Aspen and the property owners. The HPC made a
recommendation regarding the preservation and conservation (i.e. techniques used for
preservation) of these elements. Unlike Telluride's regulations, HPC's purview was limited to
specific elements in the historic bar area at the front of the building and did not include the
elements or layout of the rear area of the building. New York City designates specific interior
spaces, for example: the lobby and a few of the lounges in the Plaza Hotel are designated interior
landmarks, while the remainder of the interior is not designated. The New York City Landmark
Preservation Commission does not have purview over the non-designated rooms in the Plaza
Hotel.
The Red Onion is a good working example of the details required for interior designation. Each
specific historic element was identified, documented and is currently being restored. New light
fixtures, tables and benches are designed for both the historic bar and the rest of the restaurant,
which will replace many non-historic elements. Because the Red Onion owners entered into a
building agreement with the City regarding the preservation of specific elements, the HPC and
Staff did not have purview over the new fixtures in the historic space. There is currently no
authority for the designation of interior in Aspen. It is important to maintain consistency in an
Revised 10/29/2008
councilfirstreadingINTERIORSnov l O.doc
Page 3 of 6
historic space by introducing new compatible fixtures and furnishings. Many municipalities
accomplish consistency and compatibility through the interior designation review process.
OVERVIEW OF PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS: Staff developed criteria for interior designations
based on other municipalities and the National Park Service Secretary of the Interior's Standards
for interior rehabilitation. There must be a certain degree of intact integrity for an interior to
qualify for designation. The exterior must be a designated landmark and the interior must be
customarily accessible to the public. In terms of process, the landmark review process for
interiors mirrors the process for exteriors, as does the review process for alterations and
additions.
PROPOSED CODE AMENDMENTS: Staff developed criteria for interior designations based on other
municipalities. Below is a summary of the primary Code amendments proposed in the
Ordinance.g
26.415.20 Definitions: Staff proposes to add three definitions to clarify new language
included in the proposed code amendments.
26.415.030.0 Criteria for Designation of an Interior Landmark. To be eligible for interior
designation the interior must meet part 1 and part 2 of this section: the property must
already be a designated exterior landmark and the interior must be accessible to the
public. According to previous court decisions, an interior must be accessible to the
public to have a valid public purpose. Part 3 of this section addresses the integrity
and significance of the interior space to local, state and national heritage. The
proposed criteria are adapted from municipalities with developed interior designation
programs.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that HPC have the ability to add
significant elements to the designation report that are discovered during construction,
rehabilitation, or restoration, and are not otherwise identified in the designation report
through the adoption of a resolution. This was the approach undertaken with the Red
Onion renovation.
The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that the language proposed in
Section 26.415.030.0.2 be clarified to include language such as: "The interior is
customarily open or accessible to the public, or to which the public is customarily
invited, which may include but is not limited to hotel rooms and members only
dining clubs." The intent of adding this language is to offer examples that may help
people understand how the regulation applies.
26.415.030.E Review, Public Hearings and Notice. In terms of process, the landmark review
a Staff proposes some clerical changes to Chapter 26.415 that are included in the attached Resolution.
Revised 10/29/2008
councilfirstreadingINTERIORSnov l O.doc
Page 4 of 6
process for interiors mirrors the process for exteriors. The main difference between
interior and exterior designations. is that HPC shall define the interior space to be
designated in a recommendation to City Council, while exterior designation is
typically defined by the parcel boundaries: It is important to define both the space
that is designated historic and the historic finishes significant to the interior to clearly
distinguish the purview of the HPC for future alterations and restorations to the
designated interior.
The Historic Preservation Task Force is currently addressing whether landmark
designation should be voluntary or involuntary. At this point in time, Staff
recommends that the proposed Code Amendment reflect the language currently in the
Land Use Code, which states that the designation process can be initiated by
Community Development Director, HPC or City Council. This language already
exists in the Land Use Code for historic exterior landmarks. Adopting the
amendment as proposed will grant authority to designation interior landmarks.
Currently, there are no plans to designate any interior landmarks.
26.415.060. B. Effect of Designation. Design Guidelines. Staff proposes to use the National
Park Service Rehabilitation Standards and Preservation Briefs9 for guidance
regarding alterations until the Historic Preservation Design Guidelines are updated to
include interiors. Many municipalities use the National Park Service documents in
place of Design Guidelines.
26.415.070 Development Involving Designated Historic Property. Staff proposes that
interior alterations be considered a Minor Development application, unless the
project includes exterior modifications, which would then be considered a Major
Development application. Alterations that do not adversely impact the character or
features of the historic interior can be processed administratively as a "Certificate of
No Negative Effect." This type of administrative approval expedites specific interior
changes by eliminating the requirement of a formal HPC hearing.
26.415.100.A Demolition by neglect. Standards for reasonable care and upkeep.. This
section of the Code outlines standards for the reasonable maintenance of a designated
landmark. Staff proposes to add a section specific to the maintenance of historic
elements within an interior landmark to protect the significant features from
destruction.
NEXT STEPS: A consultant needs to be contracted to inventory interiors that potentially qualify
for interior designation. After a survey is complete and depending on Council policy direction,
each interior will need to go through a designation process to gain landmark status. This process
is similar to exterior landmark designation process: a recommendation from HPC to City
9 Exhibit E is one of the National Park Service publications typically used for changes to historic interiors.
Revised 10/29/2008
councilfirstreadingINTERIORSnov l O.doc
Page 5 of 6
Council. Interior designation is not limited to the Commercial Core Historic District; it applies
to the entire City of Aspen.
LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: Staff is requesting the following
from City Council:
^ Determination if application to amend Code text meets Standards of Review
pursuant to Land Use Code Chapter 26.310.040 Standards of Review
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of this Ordinance as presented because Staff believes that only a few
intact, publically accessible interiors exist in Aspen. Currently, there is no authority for interior
landmark designation that would allow an owner to voluntarily designate an interior. The
proposed amendments would provide basic framework to allow interior landmarks. The
Moratorium has been in place for two years, slowing down many projects in the Commercial
Core. Staff suggests any extensive further analysis be done after adopting the framework for
interior designation.
Exhibits:
A - Standard of Review for Code Amendments, Section 26.310.404.
B - Planning and Zoning Resolution No. 3, Series of 2008.
C - Minutes from the Planning and Zoning Commission meetings.
D - Timeline of Aspen Historic Preservation Program.
E - National Park Service Publication, Preservation Brief # 18 "Rehabilitating Interiors in
Historic Buildings: Identifying and Preserving Character Defining Elements."
Revised 10/29/2008
councilfirstreadingINTERIORSnov l O.doc
Page 6 of 6
ORDINANCE No.
(Series of 2008)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,
COLORADO, APPROVING AMENDMENTS CHAPTER 26.415
"DEVELOPMENT INVOLVING THE ASPEN INVENTORY OF HISTORIC
LANDMARK SITES AND STRUCTURES OR DEVELOPMENT IN AN `H'
HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT" OF THE CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE
OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the Planning Director of
the Community Development Department to propose amendments to the Land Use Code
related to the designation of interior landmarks, pursuant to sections 26.415; and,
WHEREAS, the amendments requested relate to the following Chapter of the
Land Use Code, Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code:
26.415 -Development Involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark
Sites and Structures or Development in an "H" Historic Overlay
District; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the text of Title 26 of
the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval with condi-
tions, or denial by the Community Development Director and then by the Planning and Zon-
ing Commission at a public hearing. Final action shall be by City Council after reviewing
and considering these recommendations; and,
WHEREAS, the amendments requested relate to Chapter 26.415 "Development In-
volvingthe Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures or Development in
an `H' Historic Overlay District" of the Land Use Code, Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal
Code; and,
WHEREAS, the purpose of Chapter 26.415 of the Land Use Code, Title 26 of the As-
pen Municipal Code is to promote the public health, safety and welfare through the protec-
tion, enhancement and preservation of those properties, areas and sites which represent dis-
tinctelements ofAspen's cultural, educational, social, economic, political and architectural
history; and,
WHEREAS, the designation of interior landmarks in the City of Aspen promotes the
public health, safety and welfare through the protection, enhancement and preservation of
those properties, areas and sites which represent. distinct elements of Aspen's cultural, edu-
cational, social, economic, political and architectural history; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the text of Title 26 of
the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval with condi-
tions, or denial by the Community Development Director and then by the Planning and Zon-
ing Commission at a public hearing. Final action shall be by City Council after reviewing
and considering these recommendations; and,
Ordinance No. Series 2008
Page 1 of 19
WHEREAS, the amendments proposed herein are consistent with the Aspen
Area Community Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommended approval of the
proposed amendments, as described herein; and,
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission, during their regular meeting on
January 9, 2008, by a vote of seven to zero (7 - 0) recommended approval of the proposed
amendments, as described herein; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened the public hearing to
consider the proposed amendments to Chapter 26.415 on January 15, 2008 took and consid-
ered public testimony and the recommendation of the Community Development Director
and recommended, by a seven to zero (7 - 0) vote, City Council adopt the proposed amend-
ments to the Land Use Code by amending the text of the above noted Chapter of the Land
Use Code, as described herein; and,
WHEREAS, the amendments to the Land Use Code are delineated as follows:
^ Text being removed is bold red and strikethrough.
^ Text being added is bold green and underline. Text being added looks like
this.
^ Text which is not highlighted is not affected.
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the recommended
changes to the Land Use Code under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code identi-
fiedherein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development
Director, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and has taken and considered public comment
at a public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed text amendments to the Land
Use Code meet or exceed all applicable standards and that the approval of the proposal 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
the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADO as follows:
Section 1
Pursuant to Section 26.310 of the Municipal Code, the Aspen City Council amends Chapter
26.415- "Development Involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and
Ordinance No. _ Series 2008
Page 2 of 19
Structures or Development in an `H' Historic Overlay District" by the inclusion of the fol-
lowing terms and definitions (indicated in green and underlined):
26.415.020 Definitions.
As used in this Code, unless the context otherwise requires, the following terms shall be
defined as follows:
Interior: Any element situated within the exterior walls of a building, which in-
cludes and is not limited to interior exposed structural systems, room/floor layout
and visible surfaces.
Interior designated landmark: An interior that is listed on the Aspen Inventory of
Historic Landmark Sites and Structures.
Interior elements: Interior elements important in defining the overall character of
the building include but are not limited to: bar, safe, fixed furniture, columns, cor-
nices, baseboards, fireplaces and mantles, trim, sins, ceiling materials, paneling,
light fixtures, hardware, flooring, wallpaper, plaster, paint, finishes such as stencil-
ing, marbling, graining, historic graffiti, and other decorative materials that accent
interior features.
Section 2: Section 26.415.030 of the Aspen Municipal Code shall be amended as follows:
Sec. 26.415.030. Designation of historic properties.
A. Establishment of the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures.
The Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures has been established
by City Council to formally recognize those districts, buildings, structures, sites, inte-
riors and obj ects located in the City that have special significance to the United States,
Colorado or Aspen history, architecture, archaeology, engineering or culture. The loca-
tion of properties listed on the inventory shall be indicated on maps on file in the
Community Development Department.
B. Criteria or des nation of a property or district. To be eligible for designa-
tion onthe Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, an individual
building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or objects
must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The significance of properties will
be evaluated according to the following criteria. When designating an historic district,
the majority of the contributing resources in the district must meet the criteria de-
scribed below:
1. A property or district is deemed significant for its antiquity, in that it is:
a. In whole or in part more than one hundred (100) years old, and
b. It possesses an appropriate degree of integrity of location, setting, de-
sign, materials, workmanship and association, given its age; or
Ordinance No. _ Series 2008
Page 3 of 19
2. A property or district is deemed significant as a representation of Aspen's
20th Century history, was constructed in whole or in part more than thirty (30)
years prior to the year in which the application for designation is being made, pos-
sesses sufficient integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship and
association and is related to one (1) or more of the following:
a. An event, pattern or trend that has made a significant contribution to lo-
cal, state, regional or national history,
b. People whose specific contribution to local, state, regional or national
history is deemed important and the specific contribution is identified and
documented, or
c. A physical design that embodies the distinctive characteristics of atype,
period or method of construction or represents the technical or aesthetic
achievements of a recognized designer, craftsman or design philosophy that is
deemed important.
3. A property that was constructed less than thirty (30) years prior to the year in
which the application for designation is being made may be considered under Para-
graph 2 above, if the application has been filed by the owner of the property at the
time of designation or, when designating an historic district, the majority of the
contributing resources in the district meet the thirty-year age criterion described
above.
4. The construction date of a property shall be established by the date of issu-
ance of the earliest building permit for the subject structure found in the records of
the Community Development Department. If there are no building permit records
available, the building shall be assumed to be, in whole or in part, at least thirty (30)
years old.
5. The Historic Preservation Commission shall adopt, maintain and make avail-
able to the public guidelines, score sheets and other devices used by the Commis-
sion to apply the criteria set forth in this Chapter to properties potentially eligible for in-
clusion on the inventory.
C. Criteria, for Designation of an Interior Landmark To be eligible for interior
designation on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures an indi-
vidual building must. have a demonstrated qualityof significance. The significance of
interior spaces shall be evaluated according to the following criteria below:
1. The subject property is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark
Sites and Structures; and,
2. The interior is customarilypen or accessible to the public, or to which the
public is customarily invited; and,
3. The interior demonstrates adequate integrity of design, materials, and
workmanship, and is related to one or more of the following:
Ordinance No. _ Series 2008
Page 4 of 19
a. Contains physical interior spaces, features, finishes and/or struc-
tural systems representative as part of the development, heritage or
cultural characteristics in local, state, or national history, such as:
i. Exposed structural systems (i.e. wood beams, posts, stone
foundation walls) that are characteristic of construction and
contribute to the overall significance of the buildings his-
toric character; or
ii. A significant amount of historic interior finishes, as de-
scribed in the definition of interior finishes, which contrib-
ute tothe overall significance of the building's character; or
b. Represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a reco nized
designer, craftsman or design philosophy that is deemed important;
or
c. Represents an important event, pattern, or trend in local, state or
national history.
D. Application. The property owners, the Community Development Director,
the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) or the City Council may file an ap-
plication for designation of a building, district, site, structure or object on the As-
pen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. The application for the
designation of a property, interior or collection of properties shall include the fol-
lowing:
1. The applicable information required in Paragraphs 26.304.030.B.1., 2., 3.
and 4.
2. Site or historic district boundary map.
3. Property, interior or district description, including narrative text, photo
graphs and/or other graphic materials that document its physical characteristics.
4. Written description of how the property meets the criteria for designation.
5. Identification of the character-defining features that distinguish the entity
which should be preserved.
6. Detailed floor plans and photographs are required for interior designation
applications.
~- E. Review, Public Hearings and Notice.
4. The HPC shall evaluate the application to determine if the property, interior
or district meets the criteria for designation. At the public hearing the property
owner parties of interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to provide informa-
tionabout eligibility for designation. When desi ng ating an interior, the HPC shall
identify the specific interior finishes, elements and spaces that are considered his-
Ordinance No. _ Series 2008
Page 5 of 19
toric and meet the criteria listed in 26.415.030.0.3. The HPC may recommend ap-
proval, disapproval or continuance of the application to request additional informa-
tion necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. Their recommendation shall
be forwarded to City Council.
Section 3: Section 26.415.040 of the Aspen Municipal Code shall be amended as follows:
Sec. 26.415.040. Recordation of designation.
Upon the effective date of an ordinance by City Council designating a property and/or
interior on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, the City
Clerk shall record with the real estate records of the Clerk and Recorder of the County, a
certified copy of the ordinance including a legal description of the property.
Section 4: Section 26.415.050 of the Aspen Municipal Code shall be amended as follows:
Sec. 26.415.050. Rescinding designation.
A. Application and review. An application for the removal of a property and/or interior
from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures shall follow the
same submission requirements and review procedures as for designation described in
this Chapter except that with respect to Subsection 26.415.030.0.4 an explanation shall
be provided describing why the property no longer meets the criteria for designation.
The HPC and City Council shall determine if sufficient evidence exists that the property
no longer meets the criteria for designation and, if so, shall remove the property and/or
interior from the inventory. A parcel created through an historic Landmark lot split can-
not be de-listed unless there is a finding that the resource which originally caused the site
to be landmarked meets the criteria for removal from the historic inventory.
B. Reapplication. If a request for rescinding designation is denied, an application can-
not be filed again for a period of two (2) years from the date of the denial by the City
Council. The time limitation of this Subsection maybe waived by a majority vote of the
City Council when such action is deemed necessary to prevent injustice or to facilitate
the proper development of the City. (Ord. No. 1-2002, §7 [part]; Ord. No. 43, 2004, § 1)
Section 5: Section 26.415.060 of the Aspen Municipal Code is amended as follows:
Sec. 26.415.060. Effect of designation.
A. Approvals required. Any development involving properties or interiors designated
on the. Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, as an individual build-
ing, interior or located in an historic district, unless determined exempt, requires the ap-
proval of a development order and either a certificate of no negative effect or a certificate
of appropriateness before a building permit or any other work authorization will be issued
by the City.
B. Design guidelines.
1. The HPC has adopted design guidelines, hereinafter referred to as the City of
Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, in accordance with the procedures
Ordinance No. _ Series 2008
Page 6 of 19
for notice and public hearings set forth in Section 26.304.06(E)(3) Paragraph (a).
These guidelines set forth the standards necessary to preserve and maintain the his-
toric and architectural character of designated properties and districts. The stan-
dards apply to the exterior features and/or notable streetscape and landscape ele-
ments of the designated historic property and/or district. These guidelines are in-
tended to offer assistance to property owners undertaking construction, rehabilita-
tion, alterations, changes in exterior appearance or any other development involving
designated historic properties or districts. The guidelines will be periodically re-
viewed by the HPC and amended at a public hearing, as needed.
2. The "City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines," as amended,
which are on file with the Community Development Department, will be used in
the review of requests of certificates of no negative effect or certificates of appro-
priateness. Conformance with the applicable guidelines and the common develop-
ment review procedures set forth in Chapter 26.304 will be necessary for the ap-
proval of any proposed work.
3. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Historic
Preservation Briefs published by the United States Department of the Interior Na-
tional Park Service shall apply to designated interior landmarks until such time that
design guidelines ~ecific to interior preservation are adopted.
C. Special consideration.
1. To preserve and maintain the historic and architectural character of desig-
natedproperties and/or interiors, the HPC or City Council may approve variations
from the dimensional requirements set forth in the Land Use Code and may make
recommendations to the Chief Building Official who has the authority to grant cer-
tainexceptions from the International Building Code (IBC) through the provisions
of the International Existing Building Code (IEBC). These modifications may not
change the applicable safety and permit requirements and must also follow the
procedures provided for modifications set forth in the IEBC.
2. Designated historic properties are eligible for and have priority to participate
in City programs related to financial, developmental or technical assistance that will
serve to preserve, maintain or enhance their historic and architectural character.
3. All City authorities, including City Council, are authorized to grant eco-
nomic and developmental benefits to designated historic properties or grant these
benefits conditional upon the subsequent designation of the property. (Ord. No. 1-
2002, § 7 [part]; Ord. No. 43, 2004, § 2)
Section 6: Section 26.415.070 of the Aspen Municipal Code shall be amended as follows:
Sec. 26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property.
No building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relo-
cated orimproved involving a designated historic property, interior or district until plans
or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director
Ordinance No. Series 2008
Page 7 of 19
and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. An appli-
cation for a building permit cannot be submitted without a development order.
A. Exempt development.
1. The following, exemptions that do not require development review proce-
dures apply onlyproperties that are not designated interior landmarks:
+• •+• r+va rr,,.,, +~.o ao.,oi,,,,,,,o„+r ...,. oa,,,.o~ ; ,.i„a;,,n interior
remodeling, paint color selection, exterior repainting or replastering similar to the
existing finish or routine maintenance such as caulking, replacement of fasteners,
repair of window glazing or other such minimally intrusive work.
2. If there is any question if a work activity qualifies as exempt, the Com-
munityDevelopment Director shall make the determination as to its eligibility.
B. Certificate of no negative effect.
1. An application for a certificate of no negative effect may be made to the
Community Development Director for approval of work that has no adverse effect
on the physical appearance orcharacter-defining features of a designated property
or designated interior. An application for a certificate of no effect may be approved
by the Community Development Director with no further review if it meets the re-
quirements set forth in the following Subsection 26.415.070.B.2:
2. The Community Development Director shall issue a development order
based upon a certificate of no negative effect within fourteen (14) days after re-
ceipt of a complete application i£
a. It is determined that the activity is an eligible work item and meets the
City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and
b. Any modifications to the proposed work requested by the Community
Development Director are agreed to by the owner/applicant and
c. The proposed work will not diminish, eliminate or adversely affect the
significant historic and/or architectural character of the subj ect property or
Historic District in which it is located.
3. An application for a certificate of no negative effect shall include the follow-
ing:
a. The general application information required in Section 26.304.030.
b. Elevations or drawings of the proposed work.
c. Photographs, building material samples and other exhibits, as needed, to
accurately depict location, extent and design of proposed work.
d. Verification that the proposal complies with Chapter 26.410, Residential
design standards.
Ordinance No. Series 2008
Page 8 of 19
4. The following work shall be considered for a Certificate of No Negative Ef-
fect:
a. Replacement or repair of architectural features which creates no change
to the exterior physical appearance of the building, designated interior land-
mark or structure.
b. Replacement or repair of architectural features that restores the build-
ing or structure to its historic appearance.
c. Installation of awnings or similar attachments provided no significant
feature is damaged, removed or obscured by the installation.
d. Fencing that has no adverse effect on the historic or architectural char-
acter ofthe property.
e. Mechanical equipment or accessory features that have no impact on the
character-defining features of the building or structure.
f. Signs which have no effect on the character-defining features of the
historic property.
g. Alterations to noncontributing buildings within historic districts that
have no adverse effect on its historic or architectural character.
h. Alterations to no more than two (2) elements of nonprimary facades of
a designated building.
i. Installation of site improvements, such as walkways, patios, pools or
hot tubs, or similar significant features.
j Additions or alterations to nonhistoric elements within a designated inte-
riorlandmark such that there is no adverse impact on the historic character of
the interior.
5. The development order and associated certificate of no negative effect shall
expire and become null and void after three (3) years from the date of issuance by
the Community Development Director unless a building permit is issued within
that time.
6. In the event that the Community Development Director determines that the
issuance of a certificate of no negative effect is not appropriate, the owner may ap-
ply for a certificate of appropriateness from the HPC.
C. Certificate of appropriateness for a minor development.
1. The review and decision on the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness
for minor development shall begin with a determination by the Community De-
velopment Director that the proposed project constitutes a minor development.
Minor development work includes:
Ordinance No. _ Series 2008
Page 9 of 19
a. Expansion or erection of a structure wherein the increase of the floor
area of the structure is two hundred and fifty (250) square feet or less or
b. Alterations to a building facade, windows, doors, roof planes or mate-
rial, exterior wall materials, dormer porch, exterior staircase, balcony or or-
namental trim when three (3) or fewer elements are affected and the work
does not qualify for a certificate of no negative effect or
c. Erection or installation of a combination or multiples of awning, cano-
pies, mechanical equipment, fencing, signs, accessory features and other at-
tachments to designated properties such that the cumulative impact does not
allow for the issuance of a certificate of no negative effect or
d. Alterations that are made to non-historic portions of a designated his-
toric property or designated interior landmark that do not qualify fora cer-
tificate of no negative effect or
e. The erection of street furniture, signs, public art and other visible im-
provementswithin designated historic districts of a magnitude or in numbers
such that the cumulative impact does not allow for the issuance of a certifi-
cate of no negative effect.
f Alterations reconstruction rehabilitation, or removal of elements
within designated interior landmarks when the work does not qualify for a
certificate of no negative effect.
The Community Development Director may determine that an application
for work on a designated historic property involving multiple categories of
minor development may result in the cumulative impact such that it is con-
sidered amajor development. In such cases, the applicant shall apply for a
major development review in accordance with Subsection 26.415.07.D.
2. An application for minor development shall include the following:
a. The general application information required in Section 26.304.030.
b. Scaled elevations and/or drawings of the proposed work and its relation-
ship to the designated historic buildings, structures, sites and features within
its vicinity.
c. An accurate representation of all existing andproposed building materi-
als, site improvements, li hg tiny and finishes. + '' °a ~^ +''° ''°"°'^'^"'°"}.
d. Photographs and other exhibits, as needed, to accurately depict location,
extent and design of proposed work.
e. Verification that the proposal complies with Chapter 26.410, Residential
design standards or a written request for a variance from any standard that is
not being met.
3. The procedures for the review of minor development projects are as follows:
Ordinance No. Series 2008
Page 10 of 19
a. The Community Development Director will review the application ma-
terials and if they are determined to be complete, schedule a public hearing
before the HPC. The subject property shall be posted pursuant to Paragraph
26.304.060.E.3.b.
b. Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that ana-
lyzesthe project's conformance with the design guidelines and other applica-
ble Land Use Code sections. This report will be transmitted to the HPC with
relevant information on the proposed project and a recommendation to ap-
prove, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for the recom-
mendation. The HPC will review the application, the report and the evidence
presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with the City
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines.
c. The HPC shall approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or con-
tinue the application to obtain additional information necessary to make a
decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved, the HPC shall is-
sue acertificate ofappropriateness and the Community Development Direc-
tor shall issue a development order.
d. The HPC decision shall be final unless appealed by the applicant or a
landowner within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property in accor-
dance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 26.316.
D. Certificate of appropriateness for major development.
1. The review and decision on the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness
for major development shall begin with a determination by the Community De-
velopmentDirector that the proposed project constitutes a major development. A
major development includes one or more of the following activities:
a. The construction of a new structure within a historic district; and/or
b. Alterations to more than three (3) elements of a building facade includ-
ing its windows, doors, roof planes or materials, exterior wall material, dor-
mers, porches, exterior staircase, balcony or ornamental trim; and/or
c. The expansion of a building increasing the floor area by more than two
hundred and fifty (250) square feet; and/or
d. Any new development that has not been determined to be minor devel-
opment.
2. The procedures for the review of maj or development proj ects include atwo-
stepprocess requiring approval by the HPC of a conceptual development plan and
then a final development plan. If a major development project involves additional
City Land Use approvals, the Community Development Director may consolidate
or modify the review process accordingly, pursuant to Subsection 26.304.060.B.
3. Conceptual development plan review.
Ordinance No. _ Series 2008
Page 11 of 19
a. An application for a conceptual development plan shall include the fol-
lowing:
(1) The general application information required in Section
26.304.030.
(2) A site plan and survey showing property boundaries, the loca-
tion and orientation of existing and proposed improvements and
predominant site characteristics.
(3) Scaled drawings of all proposed structure(s) or addition(s)
depicting their form, including their height, massing, scale, propor-
tions and roof plan; and the primary features of all elevations.
(4) Preliminary selection of primary building materials to be used
in construction represented by samples and/or photographs.
(5) Supplemental materials to provide a visual description of the
context surrounding the designated historic property or historic dis-
trict including at least one (1) of the following: diagrams, maps,
photographs, models or streetscape elevations.
(6) Verification that the proposal complies with Chapter 26.410,
Residential design standards or a written request for a variance
from any standard that is not being met.
b. The procedures for the review of conceptual development plans for ma-
jor development projects are as follows:
(1) The Community Development Director shall review the ap-
plication materials submitted for conceptual or final development
plan approval. If they are determined to be complete, the applicant
will be notified in writing of this and a public hearing before the
HPC shall be scheduled. Notice of the hearing shall be provided
pursuant to Section 26.304.060.E.3 Paragraphs a, b and c.
(2) Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report
that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines
and other applicable Land Use Code sections. This report will be
transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed
project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or
approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation.
The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and
the evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's
conformance with the City Historic Preservation Design Guide-
lines.
Ordinance No. _ Series 2008
Page 12 of 19
(3) The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions
or continue the application to obtain additional information neces-
sary to make a decision to approve or deny.
c. The effect of approval of a conceptual development plan is as fol-
lows:
(1) Approval of a conceptual development plan shall not con-
stitute final approval of a major development project or permis-
sion to proceed with the development. Such authorization shall
only constitute authorization to proceed with the preparation of
an application for a final development plan.
(2) Approval of a conceptual development plan shall be binding
upon HPC in regards to the location and form of the envelope of
the structure(s) and/or addition(s) as depicted in the conceptual
plan application including its height, scale, massing and propor-
tions. No changes will be made to this aspect of the proposed de-
velopment by the HPC as part of their review of the final devel-
opment plan unless agreed to by the applicant. If the applicant
chooses to makes substantial amendments to the conceptual de-
sign after it has been approved, a new conceptual development
plan hearing shall be required.
(3) Unless otherwise specified in the resolution granting con-
ceptual development plan approval, a development application
for a final development plan shall be submitted within one (1)
year of the date of approval of a conceptual development plan.
Failure to file such an application within this time period shall
render null and void the approval of the conceptual development
plan. The Historic Preservation Commission may, at its sole dis-
cretionand for good cause shown, grant aone-time extension of
the expiration date for a conceptual development plan approval
for up to six (6) months provided a written request for extension
is received no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration
date.
4. Final development plan review.
a. An application for a final development plan shall include:
(1) The general application information required in Section
26.304.030.
(2) Final drawings of all proposed structures(s) and/or addition(s)
included as part of the development at 1/4" = 1.0' scale.
Ordinance No. _ Series 2008
Page 13 of 19
(3) An accurate representation of all major building materials to
be used in the development, depicted through samples or photo-
graphs.
(4) A statement, including narrative text or graphics, indicating
how the final development plan conforms to representations made or
stipulations placed as a condition of the approval of the conceptual
development plan.
(5) A detailed site plan and landscape plan illustrating existing
and proposed walkwayplanting, and site rag dingy.
b. The procedures for the review of final development plans for major de-
velopment projects are as follows:
(1) The Community Development Director shall review the ap-
plicationmaterials submitted for final development plan approval. If
they are determined to be complete, the applicant will be notified in
writing of this and a public hearing before the HPC shall be sched-
uled. Notice of the hearing shall be provided pursuant to Paragraphs
26.304.060.E.3.a, band c.
(2) Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report
that analyzes the project's conformance with the design guidelines
and other applicable Land Use Code sections. This report will be
transmitted to the HPC with relevant information on the proposed
project and a recommendation to continue, approve, disapprove or
approve with conditions and the reasons for the recommendation. The
HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the evi-
dencepresented atthe hearing to determine the proj ect's conformance
with the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines.
(3) The HPC may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions,
or continue the application to obtain additional information necessary
to make a decision to approve or deny. If the application is approved,
the HPC shall issue a certificate of appropriateness and the Commu-
nity Development Director shall issue a development order.
(4) A resolution of the HPC action will be forwarded to the City
Council in accordance with Section 26.415.130 and no permit will be
issued for construction of the project until the thirty (30) day "call up"
period by City Council has expired.
(5) Before an application for a building permit can be submitted,
a final set of plans reflecting any or all required changes by the HPC
or City Council must be on file with the City. Any conditions of ap-
proval or outstanding issues which must be addressed in the field or
at a later time shall be noted on the plans.
Ordinance No. _ Series 2008
Page 14 of 19
E. Amendments, insubstantial and substantial. There are two processes foramend-
ingplans approved pursuant to a development order and an associated certificate of ap-
propriateness. All requests for amendments, insubstantial or substantial, must be in writ-
ing and accompanied by drawing(s) and elevations as specified below.
1. Insubstantial amendments.
a. Insubstantial amendments are minor modifications to HPC approved
plans that:
(1) Address circumstances discovered in the course of construc-
tion that could not have been reasonably anticipated during the ap-
proval process or
(2) Are necessary for conformance with building safety or acces-
sibility codes and do not materially change the approved plans or
(3) Approve specific building materials, finishes, design of or-
namental trim and other such detail not provided in the HPC ap-
proved plans or
(4) Change the shape, location or material of a building element
or feature but maintains the same quality and approximate appearance
of that found in the approved plans.
b. The Community Development Director may authorize insubstantial
amendments to approved plans.
c. Monitoring committees established by the HPC, composed of up to two
(2) members of the Commission and the Historic Preservation Officer or as-
sign, may also authorize insubstantial amendments.
d. Decisions of the Community Development Director or monitoring
committee are binding. The Community Development Director or monitoring
committee may determine that the proposed changes qualify as a substantial
amendment and remand the matter to the HPC.
e. Disapproval of a request for an insubstantial amendment may be ap-
pealed to the HPC to be considered in accordance with the procedures for sub-
stantial amendments.
f. Approval of insubstantial amendments of plans will be reported to the
HPC at their regularly scheduled meetings.
2. Substantial amendments.
a. All changes to approved plans that materially modify the location, size,
shape, materials, design, detailing or appearance of the building elements as
originally depicted must be approved by the HPC as a substantial amendment.
Ordinance No. _ Series 2008
Page 15 of 19
b. An application for a substantial amendment shall include the following
materials, as determined appropriate by the Community Development Direc-
tor:
(1) A revised site plan.
(2) Revised scaled elevations and drawings.
(3) Representations of building materials and finishes.
(4) Photographs and other exhibits to illustrate the proposed
changes.
c. The Community Development Director shall review the application ma-
terials submitted for approval of a substantial amendment and waive any sub-
mittalsnot considered necessary for consideration. If they are determined to be
complete, the applicant will be notified in writing of this and a public hearing
before the HPC shall be scheduled.
d. Notice for the review of an application for a substantial amendment will
include publication, posting and mailing pursuant to Section 26.304.060.E.3
Paragraphs a, b and c.
e. Staff shall review the submittal material and prepare a report that ana-
lyzesthe extent of the changes relative to the approved plans and how the pro-
posedrevisions affect the project's conformance with the design guidelines and
other applicable Land Use Codes. This report will be transmitted to the HPC
with relevant information on the proposed revisions and a recommendation to
continue, approve, disapprove or approve with conditions and the reasons for
the recommendation.
f. The HPC will review the application, the staff analysis report and the
evidence presented at the hearing to determine the project's conformance with
the City Historic Preservation Design Guidelines. The HPC may approve, dis-
approve, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain addi-
tional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. (Ord. No.
1-2002, § 7 [part]; Ord. 43, 2004, § 3)
Section 7: Section 26.415.100 of the Aspen Municipal Code shall be amended as follows:
Sec. 26.415.100. Demolition by neglect.
A. Standards for reasonable care and upkeep.
1. The owner or such other person who may have legal possession, custody and
control thereof of a designated property shall, upon written request by the City,
repair the following exterior features if they are found to be deteriorating or if
their condition is contributing to deterioration such that it is likely to compro-
mise the building's structural integrity or as to create or permit the creation of
Ordinance No. _ Series 2008
Page 16 of 19
any hazardous or unsafe condition to life, health or other property. These fea-
tures include, but are not limited to:
a. Deterioration of exterior walls, foundations or other vertical supports
that causes leaning, sagging, splitting, listing or buckling.
b. Deterioration of flooring or floor supports or other horizontal mem-
bers that causes leaning, sagging, splitting, listing or buckling.
c. Deterioration of external chimneys that cause leaning, sagging, splitting,
listing or buckling.
d. Deterioration or crumbling of exterior plasters or mortars.
e. Ineffective waterproofing of exterior walls, roofs and foundations, in-
cluding broken windows or doors.
f. Defective protection or lack of weather protection for exterior wall and
roof coverings, including lack of paint or weathering due to lack of paint or
other protective covering.
g. Rotting, holes and other forms of decay.
h. Deterioration of exterior stairs, porches, handrails, window and door
frames, cornices, entablatures, wall facings ornamental trim and other archi-
tectural details that cause delamination, instability, loss of shape and form or
crumbling.
i Deterioration decay or damage of historic elements within a designated
interior landmark that compromise the historic character of the interior and
could result in the loss of the historic element.
B. Enforcement procedures.
1. The HPC may file a petition listing specific defects, in accordance with Sub-
section 26.415.110.A, with the Chief Building Official, requesting that the offi-
cial act under the following procedures to require the correction of the defects or
repairs to designated properties.
2. Whenever a petition is filed, the Chief Building Official shall attempt to
make direct personal contact with the owner or other such persons having legal
possession or custody and/or his representative. If personal contact cannot rea-
sonably be accomplished, then written notification of the specific defects pur-
ported bythe HPC and a request to inspect the property within ten (10) days will
be mailed to the owner and other such persons having legal possession, custody
and control and will be posted at a conspicuous location appropriate to the identi-
fied defects. In the written notification the Chief Building Official shall docu-
ment the nature of the specific defects and the corrective action ordered.
3. After receiving agreement from the owner, his representatives or other such
persons having legal possession, custody and control of the property for an in-
Ordinance No. _ Series 2008
Page 17 of 19
spection, the Chief Building Official and the HPC Officer shall within ten (10)
working days conduct an investigation and prepare a written report determining
whether the property requires work to address conditions set, forth in Subsection
26.415.100.A.1.
4. If the property is found to contain conditions needing correction, the owner,
his representative or other such persons having legal possession, custody and
control of the property will be served within fourteen (14) days with a complaint
identifying the property deficiencies and providing notice that a hearing will be
held before a Hearing Officer of the City within forty-five (45) days. The pur-
pose of the hearing is to:
a. Receive evidence concerning the charge of deterioration and
b. Develop a plan and schedule for making the needed repairs in a timely
fashion, such that the building is stabilized and the deterioration is arrested
and
c. Ascertain whether the owner or other parties intend to make application
for financial assistance from the City to correct the building defects.
5. Following such notice and hearing, the Hearing Officer will make a deter-
mination if there are any corrections required pursuant to Subsection
26.415.110.A.1 and shall state in writing the findings of fact in support of that
determination. If it is determined that the building or structure is undergoing
deterioration or if its condition is contributing to deterioration, the owner or
other parties of interest will be served an order to repair those defective ele-
ments of the structure within a reasonable specified time frame.
6. If the owner fails to make the necessary repairs within the identified time
frame, the City may undertake the work to correct the deficiencies that create
any hazardous and unsafe conditions to life, health and property. The expense
of this work will be recorded as a lien on the property.
C. Appeal. Within thirty (30) days, the owner may appeal the decision of the Hear-
ingOfficer to the Board of Appeals.and Examiners pursuant to the process established
in Chapter 8.08 of this Municipal Code. (Ord. No. 1-2002 § 7 [part])
Section 8•
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 ordi-
nances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and
concluded under such prior ordinances.
Section 9•
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
Ordinance No. _ Series 2008
Page 18 of 19
portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not af-
fect the validity of the remaining portions thereof.
Section 10:
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 11
A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 8th day of December, 2008, at
5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15)
days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper
of general circulation within the City of Aspen.
Section 12:
This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final adoption.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City
Council of the City of Aspen on the 10th day of November, 2008.
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this th day of , 2008.
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
Ordinance No. _ Series 2008
Page 19 of 19
Exhibit A
Land Use Code Section 26.310.040. Standards of Review. In reviewing an amendment
to the text of this Title or an amendment to the official zone district map, the City council
and the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this
Title.
Staff Response: The proposed amendment is consistent with the purpose and intent of
Land Use Code Chapter 26.415 "Development Involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic
Landmark Sites and Structures or Development in an "H," Historic Overlay District,"
which states that the purpose of the preservation program is to "promote the public
health, safety, and welfare through the protection, enhancement and preservation of those
properties, areas and sites, which represent the distinctive elements of Aspen's cultural,
educational, social, economic, political and architectural history." Staff finds that
adopting framework to authorize the designation of interior landmarks meets the purpose
and intent of the historic preservation program.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area
Community Plan.
Staff Response: The proposed amendment is consistent with the AACP, specifically the
Historic Preservation chapter that emphasizes the connection between tourism and
Aspen's unique heritage and the idea that we are stewards of our heritage for future
generations. Adopting criteria to authorize the designation of interior landmarks creates a
framework to protect the few remaining examples of historic interiors for education and
enjoyment of present and future generations.
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and
land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics.
Staff Response: N/A
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety.
Staff Response: N/A
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.
Staff Response: N/A
F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in
significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment.
Staff Response: N/A
councilExhibit A.doc
Page 1 of 2
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community
character in the City of Aspen.
Staff Response: Staff finds that interior designation is consistent and compatible with
Aspen's community character. The Amendment will permit the preservation of historic
interiors that can perpetuate the understanding and experience of Aspen's history.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the
surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment.
Staff Response: N/A
1. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest and
whether it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this Title.
Staff Response: The Amendment before Council creates the framework and authority for
the designation of interiors. For a property to be listed as a designated interior, a formal
review process is required with public hearings at the Historic Preservation Commission
and the City Council. Staff finds that the Amendment is in harmony with the purpose
and intent of the Land Use Code and is not in conflict with the public interest. The
Historic Preservation Task Force is working toward a recommendation to City Council
regarding the entire historic preservation program. Staff recommends that the
Amendment be adopted now, since the moratorium has been in place for two years and
expires on December 10, 2008. Changes to the Historic Preservation Chapter of the Land
Use Code that result from Task Force recommendations can address or "clean up" the
proposed new interior designation section.
councilExhibit A.doc
Page 2 of 2
Exhibit B
Planning and Zoning Resolution No. 3 of 2008
Resolution No. 3
(Series of 2008)
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL ADOPT
AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 26.415 "DEVELOPMENT INVOLVING THE
ASPEN INVENTORY OF HISTORIC LANDMARK SITES AND STRUCTURES
OR DEVELOPMENT IN AN `H' HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT" OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUNICIPAL
CODE:
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the Community Develop-
ment Director to propose amendments to the Land Use Code; and,
WHEREAS, the amendments requested relate to Chapter 26.4 ] 5 "Development In-
volvingthe Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures or Development in
an `H' Historic Overlay District" of the Land Use Code, Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal
Code; and,
WHEREAS, the purpose of Chapter 2b.415 of the Land Use Code, Title 26 of the As-
pen Municipal Code is to promote the public health, safety and welfare through the protec-
tion, enhancement and preservation of those properties, areas and sites which represent dis-
tinctelements ofAspen's cultural, educational, social, economic, political and architectural
history; and,
WHEREAS, the designation of interior landmarks in the City of Aspen promotes the
public health, safety and welfare through the protection, enhancement and preservation of
those properties, areas and sites which represent distinct elements of Aspen's cultural, edu-
cational, social, economic, political and architectural history; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the text of Title 26 of
the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval with condi-
tions, ordenial by the Community Development Director and then by the Planning and Zon-
ing Commission at a public hearing. Final action shall be by City Council after reviewing
and considering these recommendations; and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommended approval of the
proposed amendments, as described herein; and,
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission, during their regular meeting on
January 9, 2008, by a vote of seven to zero (7 - 0) recommended approval of the proposed
amendments, as described herein; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened the public hearing to
consider the proposed amendments to Chapter 26.415 on January 15, 2008 took and consid-
ered public testimony and the recommendation of the Community Development Director
and recommended, by a seven to zero (7 - 0) vote, City Council adopt the proposed amend-
ments to the Land Use Cade by amending the text of the above noted Chapter of the Land
Use Code, as described herein; and,
Resolution 3 Series 20(}8
G:\city\Saraalinteriors\interiorResolutionPZ.doc
Page 1 of 8
Exhibit B
Planning and Zoning Resolution No. 3 of 2008
WHEREAS, the amendments to the Land Use Code are delineated as follows:
Text being removed is bold red and strikethrough. '1'east-being-r+eetf~Fed~-l~~Hlc-4
like this:
^ Text being added is bold green and underline. Text being added looks like
this.
^ Text which is not highlighted is not affected.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT:
Section 1
Pursuant to Section 26.310 of the Municipal Code, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Com-
mission hereby recommends City Council amend Chapter 26.415-- "Development Involving
the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures or Development in an `H'
Historic Overlay District" by making the following deletions (indicated in orange with a
strikethrough} and additions {indicated in green and underlined):
26.415.020 Definitions.
As used in this Code, unless the context otherwise requires, the following terms shall be
defined as follows:
Interior: Any element situated within the exterior walls of a building, which in-
cludesand is not limited to interior exposed structural systems, floor plans and visi-
ble surfaces.
Interior designated landmark: An interior that is listed on the Aspen [nventory of
Historic Landmark Sites and Structures.
Interior finishes: Interior finishes important in definine the overall character of the
building include but are not limited to: built in features, columns, cornices, base-
boards, fireplaces and mantles, trim, signs, ceiling materials, paneling, light fixtures
hardware, flooring, wallpaper. plaster. paint, finishes such as stenciling. marbling,
Graining, historic graffiti, and other decorative materials that accent interior fea-
tures.
Sec. 26,415.030. Designation of historic properties.
A. Establishment of the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Site and Structures.
The Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures has been estab-
lished by City Council to formally recognize those districts, buildings, structures,
sitesLnteriors and objects located in the City that have special significance to the
United States, Colorado or Aspen history, architecture, archaeology, engineering or
Resolution 3 Series 2008
G:lcitylSaraalinteriorslinteriorResolutionPZ.doc
Page 2 of 8
Exhibit B
Planning and Zoning Resolution No. 3 of 2008
culture. The location of properties listed on the inventory shall be indicated on maps
on file in the Community Development Department.
B. Criteria or• clc+si~nalian ofaPr~rperty car disd•ict. To be eligible for designation
on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, an individual
building, site, structure or object or a collection of buildings, sites, structures or ob-
jects must have a demonstrated quality Qf significance. The significance ofproper-
tieswill be evaluated according to the following criteria. When designating anhis-
toricdistrict, the majority of the contributing resources in the district must meet the
criteria described below:
C'. C'riter•ia-for Designation of ~un irrter•ior landmark "1'o be clitrible for interior des-
ignation onthe Aspen Inventory ofHistoric Landmark Sites and Strucri~res an indi-
vidual building must have a demonstrated quality of significance. The significance
of interior spaces shall be evaluated according to the following criteria below:
1. The subject pro~ertY is listed on the Aspen Im~entory of Historic Landmark
Sites and Structures: and,
2. The interior is customarily open or accessible to the public, or to which the
public is customaril~ed; and,
3. The interior demonstrates adequate irate rrity of design, materials, and
workmanship, and is related to one or more of the following:
a. Contains physical interior spaces features. finishes and/or struo-
rural systems representative as part of the development, heritage or
cultural characteristics in local, state. or national history, such as:
i. E~,.nased structural stems (i.e. wood beams, posts, stone
ti~undaUon walls)`that are characteristic of construction and
contribute to the overall significance of the building 5 hjS_
toric character; or
ii. A si~niticant amount of historic interior finishes, as de-
scribed in the detinition ofinterior finishes which contrib-
ute to the overal l si gnificance ofthe building's character: or
b. Represents the technical or aesthetic achievements of a reco ml, ized
designer, craftsman or design philosophy that is deemed important:
cn•
c. R~resents an important event, pattern, or trend in local, state or
national history.
~'. D. Application. The property owners, the Community Development Director,
the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) or the City Council may file an ap-
plication for designation of a building, district, site, structure or object on the As-
pen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures. The application for the
designation of a property, interior or collection of properties shall include the fol-
lowing:
1. The applicable information required in Paragraphs 26.304.030.8.1., 2., 3.
Resolution 3 Series 2008
G:lcity\SaraalinteriorslinteriorResolutionPZ.doe
Page 3 of 8
Exhibit B
Planning and Zoning Resolution No. 3 of 2008
and 4.
2. Site or historic district boundary map.
3. Property, interior or district description, including narrative text, photo-
graphsand/or other graphic materials that document its physical characteristics.
4. Written description of how the property meets the criteria for designation.
5. Identification of the character-defining features that distinguish the entity
which should be preserved.
6. Detailed tloor plans are required for interior desi~~nation applications.
J~ .E. Review, Public Hearings and Notice.
4. The HPC shall evaluate the application to determine if the property, interior
or district meets the criteria for designation. At the public hearing the property
owner parties of interest and citizens shall have an opportunity to provide informa-
tionabout eligibility for designation. When designatin~~ a~i interior. the HPC shall
identify the specific interior finishes, elements and spaces that are considered his-
toricand meet the criteria listed. iu 26.415.030.0.3. The HPC may recommend ap-
proval,disapproval or continuance of the application to request additional informa-
tion necessary to make a decision to approve or deny. Their recommendation shall
be forwarded to City Council.
Sec. 2b.415.040. Recordation of designation.
Upon the effective date of an ordinance by City Council designating a property and/or
interior on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, the City
Clerk shall record with the real estate records of the Clerk and Recorder of the County, a
certified copy of the ordinance including a legal description of the property.
Sec. 2b.415.450. Rescinding designation.
A. Application and review. An application for the removal of a property and/or interior
from the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures shall follow the
same submission requirements and review procedures as for designation described in
this Chapter except that with respect to Subsection 26.415.030.0.4 an explanation shall
be provided describing why the property no longer meets the criteria for designation.
The HPC and City Council shall determine if sufficient evidence exists that the prop-
erty no longer meets the criteria for designation and, if so, shall remove the property
and/or interior from the inventory. A parcel created through an historic Landmark lot
split cannot be de-listed unless there is a finding that the resource which originally
caused the site to be landmarked meets the criteria for removal from the historic inven-
tory.
Resolution 3 Series 2008
G:\citylSaraa\interiors\interiorResolutionPZ.doc
Page 4 of 8
Exhibit B
Planning and Zoning Resolution No. 3 of 2008
Sec. 26.415.060. Effect of designation.
A. Approvals required. Any development involving properties or interiors designated on
the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures, as an individual build-
ing, interior or located in an historic district, unless determined exempt, requires the ap-
proval of a development order and either a certificate of no negative effect or a certifi-
cate of appropriateness before a building permit or any other work authorization will be
issued by the City.
B. Design guidelines.
3. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Historic
I'rescrvation Briefs published by the United States Department of the Interior Na-
tional Park Service shall apply to designated interior landmarks until such time that
design guidelines specific to interior preservation are adopted.
C. Special consideration.
l . To preserve and maintain the historic and azchitectural character of desig-
natedproperties and/or interiors, the HPC or City Council may approve variations
from the dimensional requirements set forth in the Land Use Code and may make
recommendations tothe Chief Building Official who has the authority to grant cer-
tainexceptions from the International Building Code (IBC) through the provisions
ofthe International Existing Building Cade (IEBC). These modifications may not
change the applicable safety and permit requirements and must also follow the
procedures provided for modifications set forth in the IEBC.
Sec. 26.415.070. Development involving designated historic property.
No building or structure shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, altered, repaired, relo-
cated orimproved involving a designated historic property. interior or district until plans
or sufficient information have been submitted to the Community Development Director
and approved in accordance with the procedures established for their review. All devel-
opment involving a designated historic.propert~ interior or district shall apply efficient
building technology and LEED standards whenever possible. An application for a
building permit cannot be submitted without a development order.
A. Exempt development.
1. The li~llowin~, exen~tions that do not require development review proce-
dures apply only to properties that are not designated interior landmarks: se-
It,t..t~~ri+~-~''t~+tieti z~~°t~<?~e~~}l~trE} t+~n-t{~e-i~t-eh~}~tttc~jl rev+~' ~~-ecl+.+t~:-in~i-
ir~~~ interior remodeling, paint color selection, exterior repainting or replaster-
ing similar to the existing finish or routine maintenance such as caulking, re-
placement of fasteners, repair of window glazing or other such minimally in-
trusive work.
Resolution 3 Series 2008
G:\city\Saraalinteriors\interiorResolutionPZ.doc
Page 5 of 8
Exhibit B
Planning and Zoning Resolution No. 3 of 2008
B. Certificate ofno negative effect.
1. An application for a certificate of no negative effect may be made to the
Community Development Director for approval of work that has no adverse ef-
fect on the physical appearance orcharacter-defining features of a designated
property or designated interior. An application for a certificate ofno effect may
be approved by the Community Development Director with no further review
if it meets the requirements set forth in the following Subsection
26.415.070.B.2:
4. The following work shall be considered for a Certificate of No Negative Ef-
fect:
a. Replacement or repair of architectural features which creates no change
to the exterior physical appearance of the building, designated interior
landmark or structure.
j. Additions or alterations to nonhistoric elements within a designated inte-
riorlandmark such that there is no adverse impact on the historic character
of the interior.
C. Certificate of appropriateness for a minor development.
l .The review and decision on the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness
for minor development shall begin with a determination by the Community
Development Director that the proposed project constitutes a minor develop-
ment. Minor development work includes:
d. Alterations that are made to nonhistoric portions of a designated historic
property or designated interior landmark that do not qualify fora certifi-
cate ofno negative effect or
f Alterations, reconstruction rehabilitation and removal of elements
within designated interior landmarks when the work does not clualifv far a
cerlilicate ofno ne~tLtive effect.
2. An application for minor development shall include the following:
c. An accurate representation of all existing, and proposed building materi-
als, site improvements, li hg lino and finishes.-tE~~-u~I-:TTY#'°~~n~T
1~}r+}E-.
D. Certificate of appropriateness for major development.
4. Final development plan review.
a. An application for a final development plan shall include:
(SZA ,detailed site plan and landscape plan illustrating existing,
and. proposed walkways. planting. and site rr~ aciin~
Resolution 3 Series 2008
G:\city\SaraalinteriorslinteriorResolutionPZ.doc
Page 6 of 8
Exhibit B
Planning and Zoning Resolution No. 3 of 2008
Sec. 26.415.100. Demolition by neglect.
A. Standards for reasonable care and upkeep.
1, The owner or such other person who may have legal possession, custody and
control thereof of a designated property shall, upon written request by the City,
repair the following exterior features if they are found to be deteriorating or if
their condition is contributing to deterioration such that it is likely to compro-
mise the building's structural integrity ar as to create or permit the creation of
any hazardous or unsafe condition to life, health or other property. These fea-
tures include, but are not limited to:
i. Deterioration, deeav or damage of historic elements within a desis~nated
interior landmark that compromise the historic character of the interior and
could result in the loss of the historic element.
Section 2•
The Planning and Zoning Commission also recommends the following to City Council:
1. That HPC have the ability to add significant elements to the designation report that
are discovered during construction, rehabilitation, or restoration, and are not otherwise
identified in the designation report through the adoption of a resolution.
2. That the language proposed in Section 26.415.030.0.2 be clarified to include lan-
guage such as: "The interior is customarily open or accessible to the public, or to which
the public is customarily invited, which may include but is not limited to hotel rooms and
members only dining clubs; and,"
Section 3•
This Resolution 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 4•
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any rea-
sonheld 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.
APPROVED by the Planning and Zoning Commission during a public hearing on January
15, 2008.
signatures on the following page]
Resotution 3 Series 2008
G:\citylSaraalinteriorslinteriorResolutionPZ.doc
Page 7 of 8
Exhibit B
Planning and Zoning Resolution No. 3 of 2008
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
ames R. True, Assistant City Attorney
ATTEST:
ckie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION:
Dyl Johns, Chair j
..~ ~.., t7 ~~ ~, r+ r~ s h N S
...----
Resolution 3 Series 2008
G:\city\SaraalinteriorslinteriorResolutionPZ.doc
Page 8 of S
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING -
MINUTES -JANUARY 08, 2008
COMMENTS ............................................................................................................ 2
MINUTES ...............................:................................................ 2
.................................
DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ............................................. 2
RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION FOR JOHN ROWLAND ....................... 2
INTRODUCTION TO COMMERCIAL CORE HISTORIC INTERIORS CODE
AMENDMENT ......................................................................................................... 2
INTRODUCTION TO SERVICE/COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL ....................... 3
RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRPERSON AND
VICE-CHAIRPERSON ............................................................................................ 4
Exhibit C
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutest
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING -
MINUTES -JANUARY 08, 2008
Dylan Johns opened the Special Meeting of the Aspen Planning & Zoning
Commission at 4:35 pm in the Library. Commission members Michael Wampler,
Cliff Weiss, Stan Gibbs, Dina Bloom, Jim DeFrancia, LJ Erspamer, Brian Speck
and Dylan Johns were present. Staff in attendance: James True, Special Counsel;
Jennifer Phelan, Sara Adams, Ben Gagnon, Community Development; Jackie
Lothian, Deputy City Clerk.
COMMENTS
Dylan Johns said that he went under contract and maybe moving.
Jennifer Phelan said that there would be a special meeting on January 29~h and not
the 22"d. Fhelan noted there were full meetings coming up through May.
MINUTES
MOTION.' Jim DeFrancia moved to approve the minutes from December 4`h
November 20`'` and November 6`'' as amended by Jim DeFrancia, Stan Gibbs and
Dylan Johns. Seconded by LJErspamer, all in favor, approved.
DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
None stated.
AGENDA ITEM:
RESOLUTION OF COMMENDATION FOR JOHN ROWLAND
Resolution of commendation for John Rowland was postponed to the next meeting.
AGENDA ITEM:
INTRODUCTION TO COMMERCIAL CORE HISTORIC INTERIORS
CODE AMENDMENT
Sara Adams said that this meeting was to introduce the commission to the concept
of interior designation; December 12, 2006 the previous City Council adopted a
moratorium on obtaining a building permit to do interior changes for commercial
building in the commercial core. Currently there is no authority for interiors. This
moratorium will expire on June 12`t'. Adams said that she would be going to City
Council for a work session tonight to gain some direction regarding this code
amendment in light of Ordinances 30 and 48. The actual public hearing of this
code amendment will be held on January 15~h; exhibit B is attached regarding the
amendments proposed by staff.
Exhibit C
Planning and Zoning Commission Minut~s
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING -
MINUTES -JANUARY 08, 2008
Adams said there were two main concepts for interior designations throughout the
country; one is that the property is already exterior landmark designation and that
the property is customarily accessible to the public; there has to be a valid public
purpose. Adams stated that this does not apply to residences. The Red Onion
sparked this portion of the moratorium; the historic interior portion of it; page 2 of
the memo discussed the Red Onion and how this code amendment will be applied.
Adams said that she was also presenting to HRC this week and she will bring the
discussions back to P&Z next week. Adams said that next week P&Z would adopt
a resolution to forward onto Council. Adams said that there has to have historical
integrity in order to have designation.
Adams reiterated that the public hearing would be next week.
AGENDA ITEM:
INTRODUCTION TO SERVICE/COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL
Ben Gagnon stated that he was special projects for the community development
department and the public hearing for this would be January 29~'. Gagnon
provided the history of the S/C/I Zone District and there was a moratorium from
2006 that expires May 29``'. Gagnon said that this SCI zone was created in 1975 in
response to the ABC being built; the city responded that they did not want all of
the businesses moving to the ABC.
Gagnon said the SCI zone district allowed very specific types of uses in that area.
This make for a challenging zoning enforcement situation; businesses can often
morph and change in response to the market around them. Gagnon said that if you
were in an area where retail was allowed you could shift your retail profile in one
way or another and nobody cares but if you are in the SCI district and you are
morphing from TV Repair to TV Sales now you are out of bounds; that becomes a
zoning enforcement issue. In 1980 or so Council added artist studio to the SCI
zone district and a few years later Harry Teague came in said that he was an artist
because he did models and other architects came in after that. Gagnon said those
were some of the phenomenon that you see and Obermeyer Place was the biggest
redevelopment with a fair amount of light industrial uses; many of the Obermeyer
businesses own their space, which is different than Puppy Smith where everyone is
leasing. Gagnon said that they wanted to keep the traditional Service/Commercial
uses rather than opening the door for interpretation.
Exhibit C
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes3
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING -
MINUTES -JANUARY 08.2008
Michael Wampler said that morph was a perfect word to explain this district
because he has been in that zone district for 22 years and his shop is mostly a rental
shop at this time.
Gagnon said that Neighborhood Commercial (NC) was established at the same
time as SCI but the NC allows everything.
AGENDA ITEM:
RESOLUTION MEMORIALIZING APPOINTMENT O_ F CHAIRPERSON
AND VICE-CHAIRPERSON
Jennifer Phelan stated that the first meeting of the year a chair and vice chair needs
to be appointed for a year long term. The commission discussed keeping Dylan as
the chair and LJ as the vice-chair.
MOTION.• Jim DeFrancia moved to appoint Dylan Johns as Chair and LJ
Erspamer as Vice-Char; seconded by Cliff Weiss. All in favor, approved.
Adjourned at 5:51 pm.
J ckie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
Exhibit C
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes
4
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
JANUARY 15, 2408
Dylan Johns opened the regular meeting in Sister Cities Meeting Room at 4:30 pm.
Commissioners Cliff Weiss, Stan Gibbs, Dina Bloom, Jim DeFrancia, LJ
Erspamer, Dylan Johns and Brian Speck were present. Michael Wampler was
excused. Staff in attendance included Jim True, Special Counsel; Jennifer Phelan,
Sara Adams, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk.
COMMENTS:
Cliff Weiss asked if they could get a heads up when packets are so large. Jennifer
Phelan replied that she would email the staff memos when the packets were large.
Jennifer Phelan stated there was an issue with the public notice for 300 Puppy
Smith Street; she requested a special meeting for the re-noticed Puppy Smith. The
commissioners agreed to meet on February 26`" in the Library for Puppy Smith;
Jim DeFrancia and Michael Wampler will be excused on the 26`".
The commissioners discussed having special meetings and/or longer meetings.
MINUTES
Dina Bloom made corrections to the minutes' on page 3. MOTION.• LJ
Erspamer moved to approve the meeting with corrections; seconded by Jim
DeFrancia. All in favor, approved.
DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None stated.
PUBLIC HEARING:
HISTORIC INTERIORS CODE AMENDMENT
Dylan Johns opened the public hearing for Historic Interiors Code Amendment.
Sara Adams provided the notice and Jim True said that the notice met the
requirements.
Adams said that the resolution was attached and highlighted for P&Z review.
Adams stated that City Council requested a recommendation from HPC and after
tonight's recommendation she will go to the task force, which should be
formulated in the beginning of February. They will go back to City Council in late
April; the moratorium expires on June 12t" and it takes 30 days for an ordinance to
go into effect.
Cliff Weiss said that the information that Sara attached was illuminating.
Exhibit C
Planning and Zoning Commission Minute
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
JANUARY_ 15, 2008
Sara Adams began on page 2 of the resolution adding definitions of interior,
interior designated landmark and interior finishes. Adams said there were about
2781andmarked buildings plus the historic district and overlay. A consultant
would come in and inventory the historic interiors. Page 3 Criteria number 2 Sara
Adams discussed the public benefit "as the public is customarily invited". The
commission discussed hotel rooms as part of the public benefit or not. Dylan
Johns suggested tightening up the language regarding hotel rooms and restaurants.
Jennifer Phelan said that P&Z could make a recommendation with clarifications.
Jim True asked if P&Z would want to exclude hotel rooms or include them. Cliff
Weiss said that hotel rooms were his concern also and the element of floor plans
and historic spatial relationships worried him because back in the 1880s hotel
rooms were small and doesn't necessarily fit with today's demand. Weiss said in
order to keep the Aspen lodging competitive we need to be more flexible on their
behalf rather than limiting them and their floor plans; a lot of hotels are putting in
spas. Adams said that she understood Cliff's point but the reason for the interior
designation was to explain the spaces and educate people about what it was like in
the period that the building was built.
LJ Erspamer asked if there was a process to go through to apply for a variance
from this restriction or was the restriction hard and fast. Adams replied that she
would go through changes to an interior; obviously you are allowed to develop the
landmark but it is case by case and hard to generalize preservation. Each building
is different and explains a different time period.
Jim True asked if the recommendation to City Council would include hotel rooms
or not; he has not heard the direction. Stan Gibbs said that someone would have
some judgment down the road of what "customarily invited" means. Gibbs said
that you have to trust that process. True noted that P&Z should have a right to
express an opinion on that; if you think that hotel rooms and membership
restaurants should be included in the recommendation. Adams thought it should
remain broad because you don't know what will be designated in 20 or 30 years
and it has to have a sense of place for someone to walk in and understand what was
there previously, which was the point of the preservation program. Adams
explained that the criteria used for historic designation was modeled almost
directly off the National Register Criteria.
Jim DeFrancia said that this is necessarily an ambiguous field all the time; it's not
hard and fast. DeFrancia said that this will involve individual buildings, individual
spaces within buildings, subjective judgments and the best that we, the City, can do
is can create some broad boundary around it.
Exhibit C
Planning and Zoning Commission Minute
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
JANUARY 15.2008
Adams stated that on page 3, Criteria #3, that this was standard language and HPC
would be looking at language. The idea of the score sheet was what the task force
would also be looking at. On page 4 E Adams noted this was the process for
designation. Page 5 under Sec.26.415.060 B Design Guidelines; Adams stated
there were not guidelines for changing interior landmark but we want people to be
able to change their interiors. On page 6 Certificate of no negative effect was an
administrative approval that could be granted for exterior landmarks. C. The
Certificate of appropriateness for a minor development would be for people who
just want to change their interior not their exterior. Adams said on page 7
Demolition by neglect was already in the code for exterior landmarks; it relates to
reasonably caring and upkeep for your property.
DeFrancia suggested recommending the Resolution as written and adding the
commentary rather than trying to re-write the resolution. Erspamer asked about
historic graffiti. Adams stated that her master's degree was in historic graffiti.
Johns asked if they want to make a recommendation to specifically say may
include hotel rooms, members dining facilities and whatever else.
Gibbs said if a wall was taken down and they find the last will and testament
written on the wall; the questions was if you believe in preservation and the public
having an authority to say something that is significant to the community it (the
wall) needs. to be preserved, which is what this is all about. Gibbs said he thought
it's really hard to start trying to put too fine a point on every little piece so you
have to trust the process and the intent that it has to be historic property, it has to
have some value to the public. Gibbs noted it was a space by space thing so you
don't have to worry about one room being designated doesn't mean all the rooms
will be designated. Gibbs said the language was clear enough and this was a case
by case piece meal approach and to go with the spirit of the resolution. DeFrancia
shared Stan's sentiment and it would be better to be all encompassing and broadly
defined.
Weiss asked how far back these interiors go back. DeFrancia said Council and the
public process would ascertain the number for that designation and this Language
would incorporate the interior within that definition. Johns said this topic of years
was a different ordinance. Adams said P&Z will get to make a recommendation on
that ordinance.
Erspamer asked if they were going to designate the rooms or not. Johns said his
personal feeling was when you make things too vague you can open a prett bi,~,
door sometimes for people to come into with a cer~j~„}fi~:~R~b'li~tC~~~~' 't c
mutes
3
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES
JANUARY 15, 2008
cover and then find out that is was completely counter from what they thought it
aught have been. Johns said if it is too specific then certain other things are going
to go past it but he felt there should be more specificity about the types of things
that this may apply to so if there is a historic suite it would be preserved. True said
there was a difficulty in narrowing and figuring out what you were really
recommending. Erspamer said to use words "but not included". Adams replied
"include but not limited to" was in the interior finishes section. Erspamer
summarized that we have the parameters and narrows down to some specifics that
gives the decision makers the criteria and then they have an appeal process.
Erspamer asked if furnishings were included. Adams responded that it was not
because it was movable. Bloom asked if a bar was removable could it be moved
around the room. Adams answered that the applicant could always go to HPC; the
way that interior finishes were defined was that most of those features were not
movable.
MOTION: Dylan Johns moved to include the recommended language to the
resolution; seconded by L.I Erspamer. All in favor, approved.
Johns asked about the score sheet. Adams said the score sheet was not included in
the resolution but it was in the code.
MOTION.• Jim DeFrancia moved to approved Resolution #003-08 including the
recommendations as follows: 1. HPC has the ability to add significant elements to
the designation report that are discovered during construction, rehabilitation, or
restoration, and are not otherwise identified in the designation report through the
adoption of a resolution. 2. Proposed Section 26.41 S. 030. C. Z will be changed to
include the following: "The interior is customarily open or accessible to the
public, or to which the public is customarily invited, which may include but is not
limited to hotel rooms and members only dining clubs; and, "; seconded by Stan
Gibbs. Roll call vote: Speck, yes; Bloom, yes; Weiss, yes; Erspamer, yes; Gibbs,
yes; DeFrancia, yes; Johns, yes. All in favor approved 7-0.
Adjourned at 6:20 pm.
s,~.-~~.
ckie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
Exhibit C
Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes
4
A History of Asuen's Historic Preservation Program
(A work in progress)
1972 Encouraged by a citizen's group called "Save the Victorians," City Council
adopts a historic preservation ordinance establishing a process for the designation
and review of historic structures, and the creation of the Historic Preservation
Committee. Aspen is one of the first communities in the state, and among the
earliest cities in the nation, to adopt historic preservation regulations.
1973 The first designations take place in 1973 and 1974. They were: Wheeler Opera
House, Ute Cemetery, Wheeler-Stallard House, Pitkin County Courthouse, Lift 1,
City Hall, and the Community Church. These public or non-profit properties have
high significance to the community. The criteria for landmark designation is a
finding that the property has historic importance, architectural importance, or
geographic importance to the City. Owner consent is sought, but not needed for
designation. Additional designation findings must be made that the designation is
appropriate with relation to the Aspen Area General Plan, effects on the
neighborhood and other relevant planning considerations.
HPC has review over demolition and relocation of these landmarked properties,
and review over alterations in terms of assuring appropriate features are
preserved. It appears that there are no' design guidelines, and none existed for
another 10 years.
1974 Commercial Core Historic District created. HPC's review is expanded to include
new construction in the historic district in terms of assuring that new work is
"complimentary" to adjacent historic resources.
1976 Main Street Historic District created. HPC's purview is expanded to include this
area.
1980 The City completes its first comprehensive "Inventory of Historic Sites and
Structures." 306 properties are identified, 287 of which are still standing after the
research and documentation is completed.
The Land Use Code in effect at the time discusses the process for designation of
districts and landmark properties. If the HPC identifies a property as qualifying
for designation, and the owner agrees to designation, the matter proceedes directly
to Council for approval. If the owner does not agree, the HPC's recommendation
is forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission, and then on to Council.
Council can approve nonconsensual designation.
HPC continues to have purview only over designated landmarks or properties in
the historic districts. Most of the historic resources are essentially unprotected
since at this point only about 24 properties, or less than 10% of the sites identified
by the inventory have been landmarked.
Properties included on the Inventory were rated using a 1-18 point scoring system
in order to evaluate their significance. Points were allocated based on the
building's association with important persons or notable architectural styles. The
Exhibit D
Historic Preservation Timeline
Page 1 of 4
point value was then used to categorize the properties as "notable," "excellent," or
"exceptional." Through the process of surveying and studying each property,
some were discounted and considered to have minimal historic value due to poor
integrity. It was noted that these properties could eventually qualify for one of the
categories stated above if appropriate documentation and restoration of the
structure could be developed.
The 1980 Inventory study suggested the creation of other historic districts,
including the Community Church Historic District, Hallam Lake Historic District,
West Bleeker/Hallam Street Historic District and Lift 1 Historic District. The
districts were not adopted.
1986 The City adopts the "Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: Historic Preservation
Element." The Plan addresses the creation of more incentives and special
development options for historic properties. The "Issues and Concerns" section
of the Plan states that, "The HPC needs to look at some of the outstanding
modern residences by Bayer, Benedict, and other recent architects for designation
to ensure preservation."
During the drafting of the Comprehensive Plan, a 6 month moratorium is enacted
on demolition of any structure included in the 1980 Inventory, presumably due to
the continued loss of historic structures. The idea of adopting a townsite wide
"river to river, mountain to mountain" historic district is included in the
ordinance. The townsite wide district never comes about.
During the moratorium, the city expands the HPC review from just landmarks to
include the highest rated structures on the inventory.
An update of the inventory is completed.,
The first HPC design guidelines are .completed.
The Land Use Code is amended to state that everything built before 1910, and all
other buildings identified by HPC as outstanding examples of more modern
architecture should be on the inventory.
HPC continues to only have full purview over the historic districts and landmarks
which is a limited percentage of the inventory.
The first incentives for historic properties were developed.
1987 The City hired its first professional Historic Preservation Officer.
Aspen becomes a "Certified Local Government," agreeing to operate its historic
preservation program according to certain standards established by the National
Parks Service and Colorado Historical Society.
1988 HPC begins presenting annual awards for excellent projects.
1989 Demolition review is expanded to cover the entire inventory.
The numerical scoring system that rated the significance of the property is
dropped, although the terms "significant, contributing, and supporting" are
retained.
More incentives are added.
Exhibit D
Historic Preservation Timeline
Page 2 of 4
1991 The historc inventory is updated. 28 properties are recommended to be added,
some of which are Post World War II buildings. Most of these properties are
added to the inventory through ordinances adopted over the following four years.
1993 The Aspen Area Community Plan is adopted. The Historic Preservation Element
goals included expanding the HPC's purview to cover all alterations to properties
on the inventory.
1995 Amendments to the historic preservation ordinance are approved, including
changing the criteria for listing on the inventory from properties built before 1910
or otherwise identified as outstanding examples of more modern architecture to
properties which are at least 50 years old or otherwise identified as outstanding
examples of more modern architecture.
1998 The City holds a "Historic Preservation Symposium," attended by City Council,
the Planning and Zoning Commission, the Historic Preservation Commission, the
Community Development Department, historic preservation experts from Crested
Butte, Telluride, Nantucket, the Colorado Historical Society, and the National
Trust for Historic Preservation, the Aspen Historical Society, former members of
the Aspen HPC, and citizens at large following the demolition of the Paepcke
House. Numerous goals were established at the symposium, including the
direction to designate more recent structures.
Code amendments are adopted giving HPC full review over alterations to any
property listed on the inventory, as described in 1993 AACP.
1999 Committees form to work on an update of the AACP. The HPC's philosophy
statement, as adopted into the plan, states that "Aspen's distinctive history is
irreplaceable whether it be the late nineteenth-century miners' cottages, the
Bauhaus buildings introduced by architect Herbert Bayer, or the faux-chalets built
by ski instructors in the 1950's and 60's." The action plan for the AACP includes
the direction to "Protect all buildings aid sites of historic significance," and to
update the inventory.
The City and County adopt the first mandatory historic preservation contractor
licensing program in the country.
2000 Fieldwork for an update to the historic inventory is completed. Approximately 50
properties, primarily built after World War II are recommended for adoption.
Ordinances are brought forward, causing controversy. Action is stopped on
adding Post-War properties to the inventory.
Numerous community meetings, tours, lectures and meetings are initiated over the
next two years in order to revise problematic aspects of the historic preservation
ordinance and bring about a common understanding of the importance of
recognizing Aspen's post-war history.
Updated historic preservation design guidelines are adopted.
Exhibit D
Historic Preservation Timeline
Page 3 of 4
2001 A Historic Preservation Community Forum is held as part of the ordinance re-
write.
2002 Council adopts a new historic preservation ordinance and increases historic
preservation benefits.
The City receives an award from "Colorado Preservation, Inc." for its state of the
art ordinance.
HPC and Council hold a worksession to finalize the integrity scoring system and
post-WW2 research papers, integral elements of the newly adopted designation
process.
2005 HPC and Council hold a worksession to discuss an update on the progress of
designating post-war resources through owner cooperation.
As of this time the City has approximately 300 designated historic resources and
review within two historic districts.
2007 Council adopts emergency ordinance #30 requiring a potential historic review for
all properties over 30 years of age seeking a demolition permit or significant
alteration. Council replaces Ordinance #30 with Ordinance #48 that adopts a list
of specific properties that are required to go through a 90 day demolition stay and
negotiation period before demolition is granted.
2008 An Historic Preservation Task Force made up of citizens begin to analyze the
entire historic preservation program.
Exhibit D
Historic Preservation Timeline
Page 4 of 4
Preservation Brief 18: Rehabilitating Interiors in Historic Buildings
$(NI61T
Page 1 of 9
•
1 Technical P~aservatlon Services
P' r e s e r w a t i a n Briefs National Park 5ervlce
u.5. Department of the Interior
Rehabilitating Interiors in Historic
Buildings
Identifying and Preserving
Character-Defining Elements
H. Ward ]andl
»Identi_fyng_ a_nd_Eyal_uatin_g._._._
»Recommended Approaches....
»MeetingBuildin_g,__Life Safety__and Fire Codes
»Sources of Assistance
»Protecting_Interior Ele,ments.,..
»Summary
»Selected_R_e__a_d__i_ng_ List
A NOTE TO OUR USERS: The web versions of the Preservation Briefs differ somewhat from the printed versions.
Many illustrations are new, captions are simplified, illustrations are typically in color rather than black and white, and
some complex charts have been omitted.
A floor plan, the arrangement of spaces, and features and applied finishes may be
individually or collectively important in defining the historic character of the building and
the purpose for which it was constructed. Thus, their identification, retention, protection,
and repair should be given prime consideration in every preservation project. Caution
should be exercised in developing plans that would radically change character-defining
spaces or that would obscure, damage or destroy interior features or finishes.
While the exterior of a building may be its most
prominent visible aspect, or its "public face," its
interior can be even more important in conveying
the building's history and development over time.
Rehabilitation within the context of the Secretary of
the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation calls for
the preservation of exterior and interior portions or
features of the building that are significant to its
historic, architectural and cultural values.
The interiors of mills and industrial
buildings are frequently open,
unadorned spaces with exposed
structural elements. While these spaces
can serve many new uses, the floor to
ceiling height and exposed truss system
are character-defining features that
should be retained in rehabilitation.
Interior components worthy of preservation may
include the building's plan (sequence of spaces and
circulation patterns), the building's spaces (rooms
and volumes), individual architectural features, and
the various finishes and materials that make up the
walls, floors, and ceilings. A theater auditorium or
sequences of rooms such as double parlors or a
lobby leading to a stairway that ascends to a
http://www.nps.l;ov/historv/hps/tps/briefs/briefl 8.htm 10/28/2008
Preservation Brief 18: Rehabilitating Interiors in Historic Buildings
Page 2 of 9
Photo: NPS files. mezzanine may comprise a building's most
important spaces. Individual rooms may contain
notable features such as plaster cornices, millwork, parquet wood floors, and hardware.
Paints, wall coverings, and finishing techniques such as graining, may provide color,
texture, and patterns which add to a building's unique character.
Virtually all rehabilitations of historic buildings involve
some degree of interior alteration, even if the buildings
are to be used for their original purpose. Interior
rehabilitation proposals may range from preservation of
existing features and spaces to total reconfigurations. In
some cases, depending on the building, restoration may
be warranted to preserve historic character adequately;
in other cases, extensive alterations may be perfectly
acceptable.
This Preservation Brief has been developed to assist
building owners and architects in identifying and
evaluating those elements of a building's interior that
contribute to its historic character and in planning for
the preservation of those elements in the process of
rehabilitation. The guidance applies to all building types
and styles, from 18th century churches to 20th century
office buildings. The Brief does not attempt to provide
specific advice on preservation techniques and
treatments, given the vast range of buildings, but rather
suggests general preservation approaches to guide
construction work.
Not only are the features of this
early 20th century interior worthy
of preservation, the planned
sequence of spaces impart a
grandeur that is characteristic of
high style residences of the period.
Photo: Jack E. Boucher, HAGS
collection.
Identifying and Evaluating the Importance of Interior
Elements Prior to Rehabilitation
Before determining what uses might be appropriate and before drawing up plans, a
thorough professional assessment should be undertaken to identify those tangible
architectural components that, prior to rehabilitation, convey the building's sense of time
and place--that is, its "historic character." Such an assessment, accomplished by
walking through and taking account of each element that makes up the interior, can
help ensure that a truly compatible use for the building, one that requires minimal
alteration to the building, is selected.
Researching The Building's History
A review of the building's history will reveal why and when the building achieved
significance or how it contributes to the significance of the district. This information
helps to evaluate whether a particular rehabilitation treatment will be appropriate to the
building and whether it will preserve those tangible components of the building that
convey its significance for association with specific events or persons along with its
architectural importance. In this regard, National Register files may prove useful in
explaining why and for what period of time the building is significant. In some cases
research may show that later alterations are significant to the building; in other cases,
the alterations may be without historical or architectural merit, and may be removed in
http://www.nps. Gov/historv/hbs/tns/briefs/briefl 8.htm 10/28/2008
Preservation Brief 18: Rehabilitating Interiors in Historic Buildings
the rehabilitation.
Identifying Interior Elements
Page 3 of 9
Interiors of buildings can be seen as a series
of primary and secondary spaces. The goal of
the assessment is to identify which elements
contribute to the building's character and
which do not. Sometimes it will be the
sequence and flow of spaces, and not just the
individual rooms themselves, that contribute
to the building's character. This is particularly
evident in buildings that have strong central
axes or those that are consciously
asymmetrical in design. In other cases, it may
be the size or shape of the space that is
distinctive.
The importance of some interiors may not be
readily apparent based on a visual inspection;
sometimes rooms that do not appear to be
architecturally distinguished are associated
with important persons and events that
occurred within the building.
Primary spaces, are found in all buildings, both monumental and modest. Examples may
include foyers, corridors, elevator lobbies, assembly rooms, stairhalls, and parlors. Often
they are the places in the building that the public uses and sees; sometimes they are
the most architecturally detailed spaces in the building, carefully proportioned and
finished with costly materials. They may be functionally and architecturally related to the
building's external appearance. In a simpler building, a primary space may be
distinguishable only by its location, size, proportions, or use. Primary spaces are always
important to the character of the building and should be preserved.
Secondary spaces are generally more utilitarian in
appearance and size than primary spaces. They may
include areas and rooms that service the building,
such as bathrooms, and kitchens. Examples of
secondary spaces in a commercial or office structure
may include storerooms, service corridors, and in
some cases, the offices themselves. Secondary
spaces tend to be of less importance to the building
and may accept greater change in the course of work
without compromising the building's historic
character.
The interior of this 19th worker's
house has not been properly
maintained, but it may be as important
historically as a richly ornamented
interior. Its wide baseboards, flat
Spaces are often designed to interrelate both visually window trim, and four-panel door
and functionally. The sequence of spaces, such as should be carefully preserved in a
rehabilitation project. Photo: NPS files.
vestibule-hall-parlor or foyer-lobby-stair-auditorium
or stairhall-corridor-classroom, can define and express the building's historic function
and unique character. Important sequences of spaces should be identified and retained
in the rehabilitation project.
Floor plans may also be distinctive and characteristic of a style of architecture or a
Many institutional buildings possess distinctive
spaces or floor plans that are important in
conveying the significance of the property. This
grand hall, which occupies the entire floor of
the building, could not be subdivided without
destroying the integrity of the space. Photo:
NPS files.
Preservation Brief 18: Rehabilitating Interiors in Historic Buildings Page 4 of 9
region. Examples include Greek Revival and shotgun houses. Floor plans may also reflect
social, educational, and medical theories of the period. Many 19th century psychiatric
institutions, for example, had plans based on the ideas of Thomas Kirkbride, a
Philadelphia doctor who authored a book on asylum design.
In addition to evaluating the relative importance of the various spaces, the assessment
should identify architectural features and finishes that are part of the interior's history
and character. Marble or wood wainscoting in corridors, elevator cabs, crown molding,
baseboards, mantels, ceiling medallions, window and door"trim, the and parquet floors,
and staircases are among those features that can be found in historic buildings.
Architectural finishes of note may include grained woodwork, marbleized columns, and
plastered walls. Those features that are characteristic of the building's style and period
of construction should, again, be retained in the rehabilitation.
Features and finishes, even if machine-made and not exhibiting particularly fine
craftsmanship, may be character defining; these would include pressed metal ceilings
and millwork around windows and doors. The interior of a plain, simple detailed worker's
house of the 19th century may be as important historically as a richly ornamented, high-
style townhouse of the same period. Both resources, if equally intact, convey important
information about the early inhabitants and deserve the same careful attention to detail
in the preservation process.
The location and condition of the building's existing heating, plumbing, and electrical
systems also need to be noted in the assessment. The visible features of historic
systems--radiators, grilles, light fixtures, switchplates, bathtubs, etc.--can contribute to
the overall character of the building, even if the systems themselves need upgrading.
Assessing Alterations and Deterioration
In assessing a building's interior, it is important to ascertain the extent of alteration and
deterioration that may have taken place over the years; these factors help determine
what degree of change is appropriate in the project. Close examination of existing fabric
and original floorplans, where available, can reveal which alterations have been additive,
such as new partitions inserted for functional or structural reasons and historic features
covered up rather than destroyed. It can also reveal which have been subtractive, such
as key walls removed and architectural features destroyed. If an interior has been
modified by additive changes and if these changes have not acquired significance, it may
be relatively easy to remove the alterations and return the interior to its historic
appearance. If an interior has been greatly altered through subtractive changes, there
may be more latitude in making further alterations in the process of rehabilitation
because the integrity of the interior has been compromised. At the same time, if the
interior had been exceptionally significant, and solid documentation on its historic
condition is available, reconstruction of the missing features may be the preferred
option.
It is always a recommended practice to photograph
interior spaces and features thoroughly prior to
rehabilitation. Measured floor plans showing the existing
conditions are extremely useful. This documentation is
invaluable in drawing up rehabilitation plans and
specifications and in assessing the impact of changes to
the property for historic preservation certification
purposes.
Preservation Brief 18: Rehabilitating Interiors in Historic Buildings
This corridor has glazed walls,
oak trim, and marble
wainscotting, typical of those
found in the late 19th and early
20th century office buildings.
Corridors such as this, displaying
simple detailing, should be a
priority in rehabilitation projects
involving commercial buildings.
Photo: NPS files.
Drawing Up Plans and Executing Work
Page 5 of 9
If the historic building is to be rehabilitated, it is critical
that the new use not require substantial alteration of
distinctive spaces or removal of character-defining
architectural features or finishes. If an interior loses the
physical vestiges of its past as well as its historic function,
the sense of time and place associated both with the
building and the district in which it is located is lost.
The recommended approaches that follow address
common problems associated with the rehabilitation of
historic interiors and have been adapted from the
Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation
and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings.
Adherence to these suggestions can help ensure that
character-defining interior elements are preserved in the
process of rehabilitation. The checklist covers a range of
situations and is not intended to be all-inclusive. Readers
are strongly encouraged to review the full set of
guidelines before undertaking any rehabilitation project.
Recommended Approaches for Rehabilitating Historic
Interiors
1. Retain and preserve floor plans and interior spaces that are important in
defining the overall historic character of the building. This includes the size,
configuration, proportion, and relationship of rooms and corridors; the relationship of
features to spaces; and the spaces themselves such as lobbies, reception halls, entrance
halls, double parlors, theaters, auditoriums, and important industrial or commercial use
spaces. Put service functions required by the building's new use, such as bathrooms,
mechanical equipment, and office machines, in secondary spaces.
2. Avoid subdividing spaces that are characteristic of a building type or style or
that are directly associated with specific persons or patterns of events. Space
may be subdivided both vertically through the insertion of new partitions or horizontally
through insertion of new floors or mezzanines. The insertion of new additional floors
should be considered only when they will not damage or destroy the structural system
or obscure, damage, or destroy character-defining spaces, features, or finishes. If rooms
have already been subdivided through an earlier insensitive renovation, consider
removing the partitions and restoring the room to its original proportions and size.
3. Avoid making new cuts in floors and ceilings where such cuts would change
character-defining spaces and the historic configuration of such spaces.
Inserting of a new atrium or a lightwell is appropriate only in very limited situations
where the existing interiors are not historically or architecturally distinguished.
4. Avoid installing dropped ceilings below
ornamental ceilings or in rooms where high
ceilings are part of the building's character. In
addition to obscuring or destroying significant
httn://www.nns.Gov/historv/hns/tns/briefs/briefl 8.htm 10/28/2008
Preservation Brief 18: Rehabilitating Interiors in Historic Buildings
Furring out exterior walls to add
insulation and suspending new
ceilings to hide ductwork can change a
room's proportions and cause interior
features to appear fragmented. The
interior character of this school
classroom that was converted to
apartment use has been destroyed.
Drawing: Neal A. Vogel
Page 6 of 9
details, such treatments will also change the space's
proportions. If dropped ceilings are installed in
buildings that lack character-defining spaces, such
as mills and factories, they should be well set back
from the windows so they are not visible from the
exterior.
5. Retain and preserve interior features and
finishes that are important in defining the
overall historic character of the building. This
might include columns, doors, cornices, baseboards,
fireplaces and mantels, paneling, light fixtures,
elevator cabs, hardware, and flooring; and
wallpaper, plaster, paint, and finishes such as
stenciling, marbleizing, and graining; and other
decorative materials that accent interior features and
provide color, texture, and patterning to walls,
floors, and ceilings.
6. Retain stairs in their historic configuration and to location. If a second means
of egress is required, consider constructing new stairs in secondary spaces. The
application of fire-retardant coatings, such as intumescent paints; the installation of fire
suppression systems, such as sprinklers; and the construction of glass enclosures can in
many cases permit retention of stairs and other character-defining features.
7. Retain and preserve visible features of early mechanical systems that are
important in defining the overall historic character of the building, such as
radiators, vents, fans, grilles, plumbing fixtures, switchplates, and lights. If new
heating, air conditioning, lighting and plumbing systems are installed, they should be
done in a way that does not destroy character-defining spaces, features and finishes.
Ducts, pipes, and wiring should be installed as inconspicuously as possible: in secondary
spaces, in the attic or basement if possible, or in closets.
8. Avoid "furring out" perimeter walls for insulation purposes. This requires
unnecessary removal of window trim and can change a room's proportions. Consider
alternative means of improving thermal performance, such as installing insulation in
attics and basements and adding storm windows.
9. Avoid removing paint and plaster from
traditionally finished surfaces, to expose
masonry and wood. Conversely, avoid painting
previously unpainted millwork. Repairing
deteriorated plasterwork is encouraged. If the
plaster is too deteriorated to save, and the walls and
ceilings are not highly ornamented, gypsum board
may be an acceptable replacement material. The use
of paint colors appropriate to the period of the
building's construction is encouraged.
10. Avoid using destructive methods--propane
and butane torches or sandblasting--to remove paint or other coatings from
historic features. Avoid harsh cleaning agents that can change the appearance of
wood.
Plaster has been removed from
perimeter walls, leaving brick exposed.
The plaster should have been retained
and repaired, as necessary. Photo: NPS
files.
Preservation Brief 18: Rehabilitating Interiors in Historic Buildings Page 7 of 9
Meeting Building, Life Safety and Fire Codes
Buildings undergoing rehabilitation must comply with existing building, life safety and
fire codes. The application of codes to specific projects varies from building to building,
and town to town. Code requirements may make some reuse proposals impractical; in
other cases, only minor changes may be needed to bring the project into compliance. In
some situations, it may be possible to obtain a code variance to preserve distinctive
interior features. (It should be noted that the Secretary's Standards for Rehabilitation
take precedence over other regulations and codes in determining whether a
rehabilitation project qualifies for Federal tax benefits.) A thorough understanding of the
applicable regulations and close coordination with code officials, building inspectors, and
fire marshals can prevent the alteration of significant historic interiors.
Sources of Assistance
Rehabilitation and restoration work should be undertaken by professionals who have an
established reputation in the field.
Given the wide range of interior work items, from ornamental plaster repair to marble
cleaning and the application of graining, it is possible that a number of specialists and
subcontractors will need to be brought in to bring the project to completion. State
Historic Preservation Officers and local preservation organizations may be a useful
source of information in this regard. Good sources of information on appropriate
preservation techniques for specific interior features and finishes include the Bulletin of
the Association for Preservation Technology and The Old-House Journal; other useful
publications are listed in the bibliography.
Protecting Interior Elements During Rehabilitation
Architectural features and finishes to be preserved in the process of rehabilitation should
be clearly marked on plans and at the site. This step, along with careful supervision of
the interior demolition work and protection against arson and vandalism, can prevent
the unintended destruction of architectural elements that contribute to the building's
historic character.
Protective coverings should be installed around architectural features and finishes to
avoid damage in the course of construction work and to protect workers. Staircases and
floors, in particular, are subjected to dirt and heavy wear, and the risk exists of incurring
costly or irreparable damage. In most cases, the best, and least costly, preservation
approach is to design and construct a protective system that enables stairs and floors to
be used yet protects them from damage. Other architectural features such as mantels,
doors, wainscoting, and decorative finishes may be protected by using heavy canvas or
plastic sheets.
httn~//vvww_nns.Gov/history/hns/tns/briefs/briefl 8.htm 10/28/2008
Preservation Brief 18: Rehabilitating Interiors in Historic Buildings Page 8 of 9
Summary
In many cases, the interior of a historic
building is as important as its exterior. The
careful identification and evaluation of interior
architectural elements, after undertaking
research on the building's history and use, is
critically important before changes to the
building are contemplated. Only after this
evaluation should new uses be decided and
plans be drawn up. The best rehabilitation is
one that preserves and protects those rooms,
sequences of spaces, features and finishes
that define and shape the overall historic
character of the building.
Selected Reading List
There are few books written exclusively on preserving historic interiors, and most of
these tend to focus on residential interiors. Articles on the subject appear regularly in
The Old-House Journal, the Bulletin of the Association for Preservation Technology, and
Historic Preservation Magazine.
Ferro, Maximilian L., and Melissa L. Cook. Electric Wiring and Lighting in Historic
American Buildings. New Bedford, Massachusetts: AFC/A Nortek Company, 1984.
Fisher, Charles E. "Temporary Protection of Historic Stairways During Rehabilitation
Work." Preservation Tech Note. Washington, D.C.: Preservation Assistance Division,
National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1985.
Jennings, Jan, and Herbert Gottfried. American Vernacular Interior Architecture 1870-
1940. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, 1988.
Johnson, Ed. Old House Woodwork Restoration: How to Restore Doors, Windows, Walls,
Stairs and Decorative Trim to Their Original Beauty. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey:
Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1983.
Labine, Clem, and Carolyn Flaherty (editors). The Old-House Journal Compendium.
Woodstock, New York: The Overlook Press, 1980.
The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for
Rehabilitating Historic Buildings. Washington, D.C.: Preservation Assistance Division,
National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior, rev. 1983.
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Rehabilitation Guidelines, volume
111. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 1980-84.
Winkler, Gail Casket', and Roger W. Moss. Victorian Interior Decoration: American
Interiors 1830-1900. New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1986.
After rehabilitation, this Beverly deteriorated
space was returned to its original elegance.
Plaster was repaired and repainted; scagliola
colums were restored to match marble; and
missing decorative metalwork was re-installed
in front of the windows. Photo: Carol M.
Highsmith.
Preservation Brief 18: Rehabilitating Interiors in Historic Buildings Page 9 of 9
Acknowledgements
This Preservation Brief is based on a discussion paper prepared by the author for a National Park Service regional
workshop held in March, 1987, and on a paper written by Gary Hume, "Interior Spaces in Historic Buildings,"
October, 1987. Appreciation is extended to the staff of Technical Preservation Services Branch and to the staff of NPS
regional offices who reviewed the manuscript and provided many useful suggestions.
Washington, D.C. October, 1988
Home page logo: Detail of carving on interior shutter. Hammond-Harwood House, Annapolis, Maryland.
Photo: NPS files.
This publication has been prepared pursuant to the National Historic Preservation Act of
1966, as amended, which directs the Secretary of the Interior to develop and make
available information concerning historic properties. Technical Preservation Services
(TPS), Heritage Preservation Services Division, National Park Service prepares
standards, guidelines, and other educational materials on responsible historic
preservation treatments for a broad public.
Order Brief ~ Technical Preservation_Services. ~ Preservatlon_Brefs ~ Sea.rch ~ Questions/Answers
KDW
i~~tl~
.f~ fit/ • ~
~t ~ fi•
1 ~ ~ ~ '~
1 ,~ ~~
~ ~ ~
~ _ ~ ~,
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor & City Council
THRU: Don Taylor, Finance Director
FROM: Don Pergande, Budget Officer
DATE: November 3~d, 2008
vuia.
RE: Second Reading: Adoption of Budget Supplemental -Ordinance No~(Series 2008)
Item will be discussed on November 10th, 2008
Staff is requesting an amendment to the City's 2008 budget that increases the city-wide total expenditure appropriation
from $127.9 to $130.7 million. Net of inter-fund transfers, the budget authority will increase from $101.1 to $102.8 million.
This supplemental is comprised of new requests, formal appropriations of work session approved projects and technical
adjustments. The majority of these requests will be funded by cash reserves.
CITY DF ASPEN - 2008 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET
Description Amount Attachment
2008 ADOPTED BUDGET $127,858,950 A
New Requests $1,648,350 B
Technical Adjustments $1,200,770 C
Total Supplemental Request $2,849,120
TOTAL ORDINANCE $130,708,070 A
Less Inter-fund Transfers $27,925,778 D
NET APPROPRIATIONS $102,782,292 A
Categories of requests include:
• Attachment B: "New Requests" include requests for formal appropriation of funding issues previously reviewed by
Council, first time requests and capital requests. Detail of each new request is provided.
• Attachment C: This attachment details all technical adjustments. These requests create additional transparency,
distribute fund balances. back to the contributing funds and reflect change in capital funding needs.
• Attachment D: This attachment details all budgeted inter-fund transfers of the City. Inter-fund transfers are required
appropriations between City funds that do not reflect the true cost of operations.
New Requests
In the General Fund, new requests to be reviewed total $452,610.
City Council- The $11,.000 request is for the costs associated with the change of venue and scope of the community
picnic. In 2008, the community picnic was moved to the golf course and incorporated into a St. Andrew's Day outing
format. This ongoing request will be funded by the General Fund cash reserves.
Human Resources- The $9,260 request is comprised of $7,580 for employee payouts per city policy and $1,680 for a
training seminar. The cost of the training seminar will be reimbursed 100% through CIRSA.
Community Development- The $221,670 is comprised of four requests. The $24,670 is for the formal appropriation
of funding approved in the June 9th work session for the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP). See memo for details. The
$60,000 is for the formal appropriation of funding approved in the June 8th work session for the History of the Aspen Area
Economy. As part of an information gathering effort prior to the revision of the AACP, the City is seeking a report to educate
the public on the drivers of the economy. The $12,000 is for the Historic Preservation documentary contract addendum.
The $125,000 is for the City's portion of the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan reviewed at a July work session. See memo
for details. These requests will be funded from General Fund cash reserves.
Police- The $3,930 request is for a police vehicle that sustained damage in a traffic collision on June 25th. The driver
of the other vehicle was found at fault. Repairs to the police vehicle totaled $11,970. This request is for a reimbursement
to be appropriated back into the police budget. This request is 100% offset by a reimbursement from CIRSA.
GIS Department- The $1,500 request is for an emergency laptop. See memo for details. This request is 100% offset
by a state grant.
Recreation/ARC/Ice Garden Department- The $162,250 is comprised of four requests. Due to a successful
gymnastics program additional contractual obligations have been incurred. The $20,000 request is to pay for the excess
contractual obligations. This request is 100% offset by revenues. The $15,000 request is to purchase additional merchandise
for sale at the ARC. This request is 100% offset by revenues. The $88,250 request is for rising utility costs. See memo for
details. The $39,000 request is for employee payouts per city policy. See memo for details. These last two requests will be
funded by the General Fund cash reserves.
Asset Management Department- The $43,000 request is for increased fuel and utility costs. During 2007 budget
deliberations for 2008, staff utility estimations were conservative and actuals have been higher. This request will be funded
from General Fund cash reserves.
In all other funds, new requests to be reviewed total $1,195,740.
Water- The $25,000 request is for the relocation of the Global Warming staff from the Asie office space to city
owned office space. Hatf of this request will be funded from Water's fund balance and the other half will be funded from a
transfer from the Electric Fund. See memo for details.
Electric- The $35,400 request is for the formal appropriation of funds for a contact awarded to Red Oak Consulting
for tiered electric study. The Finance Department has determined that the Electric. Fund has sufficient cash balances to
support this request.
Renewable Energy- The $130,000 request is for the formal appropriation of the Hydro Electric Bond issuance costs.
This request will be funded by the Renewable Energy Fund cash reserves.
Parking/Transportation- The $411,260 is comprised of four requests. The $60,000 request is for a Transportation
Development Plan (TDP) for the local transit system to evaluate performance and plan for the future. See memo for details.
The next three requests are formal appropriations of funding approved on July 28th. The $242,630 is for the purchase of the
pay and display meters. These will be put in the residential area to act as day pass dispensers. The $10,000 is for signage to
communicate the new parking ordinance to the general public. The $98,630 is for the purchase of the License Plate
Recognition (LPR) system. The LPR system will be used to better enforce residential timed zones. These requests will be
funded by the Parking/Transportation Fund cash reserves.
Truscott- The $123,000 is comprised of three requests. The $34,000 is to fund the roof repair due to excessive snow
and ice. See memo for details. The $15,000 is to fund unexpected repairs to the plumbing system. See memo for details.
The $74,000 is to fund elevator and cement repairs. See memo for details. The Finance Department has determined that
the Truscott Fund has sufficient cash balances to support this request.
City Employee Housing- The $110,500 request is for roof repair due~to excessive snow and ice. This project was
scheduled for 2009 but was accelerated due to the severe winter weather. See memo for details. The Finance Department
has determined that the City Employee Housing Fund has sufficient cash balances to support this request.
Housing Administration- The $117,250 is comprised of two requests. The $22,250 request received informal
approval on June 3~d. Information is being tallied to update and create a methodology for the payment-in-lieu fee as
stipulated in the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Guidelines. The survey is being partially paid for by the Community
Development Department to update the Aspen Area Community Plan. See memo for details. The $95,000 is for the formal
appropriation of funding to fund an aggressive enforcement program for the deed restrictions on affordable housing units.
See memo for details. The Finance Department has determined that the Housing Administration Fund has sufficient cash
balances to support this request.
Asset Management- The $243,330 is comprised of two requests. The $85,250 is for City owned building roof repairs
incurred during the past winter's heavy snows. See memo for details. This request will be funded from a change in project
composition in the AMP Fund. The $158,080 is for the Main Street Streetscape project. Council identified pedestrian
improvements along Main Street as one of ten goals. See. memo for details. This request is 100% funded by the pedestrian
amenity fees collected in past years.
Technical Adjustments
General- The $230,280 excess is comprised of $169,000 for a reduction in the transfer of funds from the General
Fund to the AMP Fund and $61,280 for a reduction in a transfer from the General Fund to the Internal Health Insurance
Fund. This funding is not needed in 2008 due to an excess cash reserve in the Internal Health Insurance Fund.
Housing Development- The $50,000 excess is from the Truscott Commons landscaping project which will be able to
be completed without additional funding.
Debt Service- The $313,890 is an accounting adjustment that distributes the fund balance back to the contributing
funds. The consolidation of the Debt Service Funds at the end of 2004 created a fund balance in the Debt Service Fund. The
distribution is as follows: $18,590 to the General Fund, $269,460 to the Parks Fund and $25,840 to the Truscott Fund.
Electric- The $127,270 is comprised of two requests. The $114,770 request allows for a more transparent method of
budgeting for the utility billing service in the Electric Fund. Also this request allows for more accurate long range planning
in the Water and Electric Fund. See memo for details. The $12,500 request is for half of the relocation of the Global
Warming staff from the Asie office space to city owned office space.
Internal Health Insurance- The $1,039,890 request is an accounting transaction that distributes accumulated fund
balance back to contributing funds. A fund balance has built up in the Internal Health Insurance Fund that exceeds the stop
loss liability. See Attachment D for details.
ORDINANCE NO. ~_~
(Series of 2008)
AN ORDINANCE APPROPRIATING AN INCREASE IN THE ASSET
MANAGEMENT PLAN FUND EXPENDITURES OF $243,330, AN INCREASE
IN THE GENERAL FUND OF $222,330, A REDUCTION IN THE HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT FUND OF ($50,000), AN INCREASE IN THE DEBT SERVICE
FUND OF $313,890, AN INCREASE IN THE WATER FUND OF $25,000, AN
INCREASE IN THE ELECTRIC FUND OF $162,670, AN INCREASE IN THE
HYDROELECTRIC FACILITY FUND OF $130,000, AN INCREASE IN THE
PARKING AND TRANSPORTATION FUND OF $411,260, AN INCREASE IN
THE TRUSCOTT HOUSING FUND OF $123,000, AN INCREASE IN THE
HEALTH INSURANCE INTERNAL SERVICE FUND OF $1,039,890, AN
INCREASE IN THE CITY EMPLOYEE HOUSING FUND OF $110,500 AND AN
INCREASE IN THE HOUSING AUTHORITY FUND OF $117,250.
WHEREAS, by virtue of Section 9.12 of the Home Rule Charter, the City Council may
make supplemental appropriations; and
WHEREAS, the .City Manager has certified that the City has unappropriated current year
revenues and/or unappropriated prior year fund balance available for appropriations in
the following funds: ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN FUND, GENERAL FUND,
HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND, DEBT SERVICE FUND, WATER FUND,
ELECTRIC FUND, HYDROELECTRIC FACILITY FUND, PARKING AND
TRANSPORTATION FUND, TRUSCOTT FUND, HEALTH INSURANCE
INTERNAL SERVICE FUND, CITY EMPLOYEE HOUSING FUND AND THE
HOUSING AUTHORITY FUND.
WHEREAS, the City Council is advised that certain expenditures, revenue and transfers
must be approved.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
Section 1 '
Upon the City Manager's certification that there are current year revenues and/or prior
year fund balances available for appropriation in the: ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN
FUND, GENERAL FUND, HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FUND, DEBT SERVICE
FUND, WATER FUND, ELECTRIC FUND, HYDROELECTRIC FACILITY FUND,
PARKING AND TRANSPORTATION FUND, TRUSCOTT FUND, HEALTH
INSURANCE INTERNAL SERVICE FUND, CITY EMPLOYEE HOUSING FUND
AND THE HOUSING AUTHORITY FUND: the City Council hereby makes
supplemental appropriations as itemized in the Attachment A.
Section 2
If any section, subdivision, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for
any reason invalid or unconstitutional by any court or competent jurisdiction, such
portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding
shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion thereof.
INTRODUCED, READ, APPROVED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED AND/OR
POSTED ON FIRST READING on the 14th day of October, 2008.
ATTEST:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
FINALLY ADOPTED AFTER PUBLIC HEARING on the 27th of October, 2008.
ATTEST:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
John Worcester, City Attorney
Attachment A
Total City o f Aspen 2008 Appropriations by Fund
Fund Name 2008 Amended
Expenditure Budget
as of November 10th
2008
Supplemental # 2 2008 Amended
Expenditure Budget as
of November 10th
General Government Fr;nds
Asset Management Plan $8,870,280 $243,330 $9,113,610
General Fund _ $28.782.410 $222.330 _
$29.004.740
Subtotal General Gov't Funds: $37,652,690 $465,660 $38,118,350
Special Revenue Funds
Parks and Open Space $9,627,400 $0 $9,627,400
Wheeler Opera House $4,967,410 $0 $4,967,410
Lodging Tax Fund __ _ $1,330,360 $0 _
$1,330,360
Parking Improvement Fund $1,745,120 $0 __
$1,745,120
Housing Development $17,721,690 ($50,000) $17,671,690
Early Childhood Educ. Initiative -
AVCF
$347,950
$0
$347,950
Kids First /Yellow Brick $1,878,350 $0 $1,878,350
Storm water Fund $815.900 ~Q $815.900
Subtotal Special Rev. Funds: $38,434,180 ($50,000) $38,384,180
Debt Service Funds
Debt Service Fund $4.044.480 $313.890 $4.358.370
Subtotal Debt Service Funds: $4,044,480 $313,890 $4,358,370
Parks Capital Improvement Fund
Parks Capital Improvement Fund $4,991.370 $Q $4.991.370
Subtotal Parks Cap. Imp. Fund: $4,991,370 $0 $4,991,370
Enterprise Funds
Water Utility $10,098,410 $25,000 $10,123,410
Electric Utility $8,148,170 $162,670 $8,310,840
Hydroelectric Facility $4,361,250 $130,000 $4,491,250
Parking/Transportation Fund $5,706,120 $411,260 $6,117,380
Municipal Golf Course $1,318,320 $0 $1,318,320
Truscott Housing $6,043,920 $123,000 $6,166,920
Marolt Housing $1.191.360 ~Q $1.191.360
Subtotal Enterprise Funds: $36,867,550 $851,930 $37,719,480
Internal Service Funds
Health Ins. Intemal Service Fund $3,662,430 $1,039,890 $4,702,320
City Employee Housing Fund $1,043.890 $11Q,500 $1.154.390
Subtotal, Internal Service Funds: $4,706,320 $1,150,390 $5,856,710
Trust 8~ Agency Funds
Housing Authority $1,085,680 $117,250 $1;202,930
Smuggler Mountain Fund $76:680 $Q $76.680
Subtotal Trust ~ Agency Funds: $1,162,360 $117,250 $1,279,610
ALL FUNDS: $127,858,950 $2,849,120 $130,708,070
Less Interfund Transfers $26,725,008 $1,200,770 $27,925,778
EQUALS NET ALL FUNDS
APPROPRIATIONS:
$101,133,942
$1,648,350
$102,782,292
Attachment B
2008 Supplemental # 2
Requests -Detail
Department/Fund
Total
Dne Time
Ongoing
Justification
City Council
Community Picnic
_$11,000 The community picnic was moved to the golf course. This added
$11,000. Staff is requesting $11,000 in ongoing budget authority.
Subtotal $11,000
Total Supplemental $11,000 -- - - ---
Human Resources
Employee Payout $7,580 . Per city policy -employee payout
PRIMA Institute
Training
_
1 8 This is a training seminar regarding safety systems. The cost is
going to be reimbursed 100%through CIRSA.
Subtotal $9,260
Total Supplemental $9,260
Com Dev -Planning
AACP
$24,670 On June 9th, the Council approved additional funding for the
AACP. Staff is requesting formal appropriations of $24,667. See
attached memo for additional details.
onomic White Paper -
AACP
0,000 As part of an informatiori gathering effort prior to the revision of
the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP), the City of Aspen is
seeking a report on the History of the Aspen Area Economy. The
underlying intent of this report is to educate the public with regard
to the unique economy in the Aspen Area, the underlying drivers
of that economy with regard to sources of capital and related
demographic trends and projections for the future. Council
approved the expenditure on July 8th, 2008. Staff is requesting
the formal appropriations of this funding.
HP -Documentary $12,000 HP documentary contract addendum
Lift One Neighborhood
Master Plan
~125.OOD The Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan is progressing forward.
See memo for additional details.
Subtotal $221,670
Total Supplemental $221,670
Police
ehicle Repair Costs -
CIRSA Reimbursement
3.930 On June 25th, 2008 a police vehicle sustained substantial
damage as the result of a traffic collision. The driver of the other
vehicle was found at fault. Repairs to the police vehicle totaled
$11,968.77. This request is for a reimbursement of $3929.60 to
be appropriated back into the police budget to cover repair costs.
This request is 100% offset by a reimbursement from CIRSA
Subtotal $3,930
Total Supplemental $3,930
GI5
Emergency laptop
$1,500 State Grant for the implementation of a GIS emergency laptop.
This request is 100% offset by the state grant.
Subtotal $1,500
Total Supplemental $1,500
Attachment B
2008 Supplemental # 2 ~
Requests -Detail l
--- - --- - -- _ i
J
----- -
_- -- - --- _ _ ---------
Recreation/ARC/lce
Garden
The Gymnastics program is so successful this year that it will
exceed contractual obligations to the coach by $20,000. This
Gymnastics Program
$20,000
j additional contractual pay will be offset by revenues in excess of
the $20,000 expended.
The ARC will need $15,000 in additional funding for the purchase
of merchandise for sale at the ARC. The additional expenses will
be offset by revenues in excess of $15,000. The merchandise
includes swimsuits, goggles, play toys, towel rental, etc. at the
ARC Merchandise $15,000 ARC front desk.
~ While the mechanical retro-fit seems to be reducing the utility
consumption at the ARC, increases in utility costs have risen to a
point which cannot be absorbed. That and the fact that the
mechanical retro-fit which was supposed to be completed in 2007
is not yet complete and operation at 100% costs will outweigh the
Utilities $88,250 provided funding substantially.
_
Employee Payout X39 000 Per City Policy -employee payout
Subtotal $162,250
Total Supplemental $162,250
~
~ _
Asset Management ~ ~
During 2007 budget deliberations staff utility estimations were
conservative, and actual have come in much higher due to
Utilities and Fuel Costs $43.000 general cost increases and higher fuel costs.
Subtotal $43,0
00 _
Total Supplemental $43,000 _
Total General Fund $452,610 $441,610 $11,000
Attachment B
2008 Supplemental # 2
Requests -Detail _ _ L
~ ~ ~ ~
Water
This request is for the relocation of the Global Warming staff from
the Asie office space to city owned office space. The expense
Global Warming will be shared 50/50 with the Water and Electric Funds. The
Relocation of Office Electric Fund will transfer in $12,500 in 2008 to offset 50% of
Space $25.000 this expense.
Subtotal $25,000
Total Supplemental $25,0 0 _
_ __
Electric ~ ~ ~
Contract award to Red Oak Consulting for a Tiered Electric Rate
Study. The goal of this study is to provide an inverted block rate
system for the electric utility that will encourage energy
conservation and additional revenue sources to pay for expanded
Tiered Electric Rate customer efficiency programs and community renewable energy
Study $35 400 projects.
Subtotal $35,400
Total Supplemental .$35,400
Renewable Energy
Hydro Electric Bonds This a request for the formal appropriations of the Hydro Electric
issuance cost $130.000 Bonds issuance costs.
Subtotal $130,000
Total Supplemental $130,000
Parking /
Transportation
Council requested a Transportation Development Plan (TDP) be
done for the local Aspen transit system to evaluate its
performance and to plan for the future. This plan may be used by
Transportation a citizens advisory group to make recommendations to Council.
Development Plan $60,000 See memo for details.
City Council approved on July 28th 2008. These will be put in the
Pay and Display Meters $242,630 Residential area to act as day pass dispenser.
City Council approved on July 28th, 2008. New signage to reflect
Signs _ $10,000 new ordinance
City Council approved on July 28th, 2008. License Plate
Recognition system to better enforce residential timed zones.
LPR'System $98.630 This will be used to eliminate the car shuffle .
Subtotal $411,260
Total Supplemental $411,260
Truscott
Truscott has budgeted $180,000 for the roof replacement and
$6,000 for heat tape at Truscott in the 2008 capital plan. After'the
bids closed, the lowest bidder came in at $219,477. The cost of
materials has gone up significantly since the project was first out
into the AMP plan in 2006. Truscott management is requesting
Truscott 100 Building additional budget authority of $34,OOD to fund the full costs of roof
Roof Replacement $34,000 replacement project.
Truscott has made a number of unexpected repairs to the
Truscott Plumbing plumbing systems in the 100 and 400 buildings. Truscott is
Repairs $15,000 requesting $15,000 to cover these unanticipated expenses.
Attachment B
2008 Supplemental # 2
l
~
~
Requests -Detail ---- ----- _ -
___-__ _- - --
The 500-700 buildings at Truscott are continuing to settle causing
significant damage to the elevator mechanical room and cement
walkways. To shore up these buildings and stop the settling,
cement must be pumped under the existing walks and
Truscott Elevator and
Cement Repairs
$74,t)~•
~ foundations. Council approved the contract on 9/23/08 in a
Council work session. This is the request for formal
appropriations of these funds.
Subtotal
Total Supplemental __
$123,000 $123,000 _ __________ __ __
_
-
_
-
City Employee '
Housing
During the winter of 2007/2008 heavy snows inflicted significant
damage to a number of roofs on City owned buildings. See
Roof Repairs $11 D-50D attached memo for additional details. _
Subtotal $110,5D0 _
Total Supplemental $110,500 _ __
Housing Authority
Informal approval was received from City Council and BOCC on
June 3, 2008. Information is being tallied to update and create a
methodology for the payment-in-lieu fee as stipulated in the
Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Guidelines. The survey is being
Survey to update PIL partially paid for by the Community Development Department to
and AACP $22,250 update the Aspen Area Community Plan.
Additional legal fees for An aggressive enforcement program is bringing positive results
enforcement $ss,ooo regarding violations of deed restrictions.
Subtotal _
$117,250
Total Supplemental $117,250
Asset Management
During the winter of 2007/2008 heavy snows inflicted significant
City Hall and Red Brick damage to a number of roofs on City owned buildings. See
Roof Repairs $85,250 Attached Memo for additional details
Council identified pedestrian improvements along Aspen's Main
Street an on of the ten Best Year Yet goals. See attached memo
for additional details. This request is 100% funded by the
Main Street Streetscape 5158,080 pedestrian amenity fees collected in the past years.
Subtotal $243,330
Total Supplemental $243,330
One Time Ongoing
Total Supplemental -
All Funds $1,648,350 $1,637,350 $11,000
Attachment C
City Of Aspen ~
2008 Technical /Accounting -Adjustments
L2~partmentlFund Technical Adjustment Descri to ion Amount
General Fund
001.95.
001.95."` Reduction in the AMP transfer due to changes in the AMP
project composition.
Reduction in Transfer to the Internal Health Insurance Fund -
This amount of funding is not needed in 2008 due to an excess
in cash reserves in the Internal health Insurance Fund.
($169,000)
($61
,280)
Subtotal, General Fund _
_ ~ ($230,280)
Housing Development Fund
150.95.` Reduction in the Transfer to Parks for the Truscott Commons
Landscaping Project. The third year of the three year transfer is
not needed to complete this project.
($50,000)
Subtotal, Parks Fund __ ($50,000)
Debt Service Fund
50.95.' Consolidation of the Debt Service Funds at the end of 2004
created a fund balance in the 250 Debt Service Fund. This
accounting adjustment distributes the fund balance back to the
contributing Funds. The distribution is as follows: $18,590 to the
General Fund, $269,460 to the Parks Fund, and $25,840 to the
Truscott Fund. See attachment D for details.
,
$313,890
Subtotal, Debt Service Fund $313,890
Electric Fund
431.95.43501.95421 Transfer to fund 1/2 of the Global Warming move from Asie
office space to the Yellow Br9ck Office Space.
$12,500
31.95.` This is not a request for an increase in the UB services
expenditure; the request allows for a more transparent method
of budgeting for the UB service in the Electric Fund. Also this
request allows for more accurate long range planning in the
Water and Electric Fund. See memo for additional details.
114,770
Subtotal, Debt Service Fund $127,270
Internal Heafth Insurance Fund
01.95.' A fund balance has built up in the Intemal Health Insurance
Fund that exceeds the stop loss liability of the City of Aspen.
This accounting transaction distributes the accumulated fund
balance back to the contributing Funds and still leaves an
$800,000 fund balance in the Intemal health Insurance Fund.
See the attachment D for details.
1,039,890
Subtotal, Parks Fund $1,039,890
Total Technical Adjustment All Funds: $1,200,770 $1,200,770
Attachment D
CITY OF ASPEN _ _ _ _ _
2008 Interfund Transfer _ _
Transfer r ~ Puroose of Interfund Transfer
000 -Asset Management
Wheeler Opera House $186,470 1998 Street Improvements 10 Yr IF Loan
Wheeler Opera House __ _ _ __ $85,000 Red Brick West End Project 10 yr IF Loan_
Employee Housing Fund _ $111,049 Housing Construction Project
Kids First Fund $181,690 1998 Street Improvements 10 Yr IF Loan
Debt Service Fund $93.240 Transfer to Debt Service Fund
Subtotal, Transfers From Asset Management Fun $657,449
001 -General Fund
Parks and Open Space Fund: $85,240 Annual Partial Subsidy of Food Tax Refund
AMP Fund
$1,067,840 Transfer to fund budgeted AMP Capital
improvement projects.
Housing Development Fund $125,000 Re-class Revenue Recorded in the GF in 07
City Employee Housing Fund $529,260 Transfer -Employee Housing Fund
Water Utility Fund $72,640 1/3 of Global Warming Program
Electric Fund $7,500 Transfer -Energy Star Homes Program
Housing Development Fund $580,000 Transfer - Zupancis Property Re-purchase
Transportation Fund $147.240 Operations Subsidy
Subtotal, Transfers from General Fund: $2,614,720
100 -Parks and Open Space Fund
Parks and Open Space Capital Fund
$2,617,570 Transfer to fund budgeted 340 Capital
improvement projects.
General Fund $13,860 Transfer to furid Manger's Savings
Debt Service Fund $847,650 Parks 2005 Open Space Bonds
Debt Service Fund
$856,110 Parks Portion, 2001 Sales Tax Revenue
Bonds
Golf Fund
$75,000 2005 Parks and Open Space Revenue
Bonds -refunding 1999 bonds
Debt Service Fund
$951,290 2005 Parks and Open Space Revenue
Bonds -refunding 1999 bonds
General Fund
$706,250 Overhead Payment -General Government
Support of Fund Operations
City Employee Housirig Fund $214.960 Transfer -Employee Housing Fund
Subtotal, Transfers from Parks and Open Space
Fund:
$6,282,690
12D -Wheeler Opera House Fund
City Employee Housing Fund $74,910 Transfer -Employee Housing Fund
General Fund $2,190 Transfer to fund Manger's Savings
Employee Housing Fund $305,422 Housing Construction Project
General Fund
$251.950 Overhead Payment -General Government
Support of Fund Operations
Subtotal, Wheeler Opera House: $634,472
140 -Parking Garage Fund
Debt Service Fund
$698,750 2004 Certificate of Participation (Refunded,
Originally issued in 1989 to construct Rio
Grande Parking Garage
General Fund $6,360 Transfer to fund Manger's Savings
Attachment D
PEN
CITY OF AS _ _ _ _ ____ ___
___ _
_
2008 Interfund Transfer _
r n f Purpose of Interfund Transfer __
City Employee Housing Fund
- a $21,990
------- Transfer- Employee Housing Fund __ _
-----
General Fund _
Subtotal, Parkin Garage Fund: - - i
$185,120
---~- - $912,2201 Overhead Payment -General Government
Support of Fund Operations
~-~-~--_ --_-- - --
150 -Housing Development Fund _
Truscott Housing Fund __ $749,620 Truscott I, 2001 Housing Bonds Subsidy
Truscott Housing Fund ___ $312,630 Truscott I, 2003 Housing Bonds Subsidy
Truscott Housing Fund _ $3,922,190 Truscott I, 2001 B Housing Bonds -Called
Housing Office Operations Fund
$184,150 APCHA Housing Office, Operations Subsidy
(50% of total Subsidy, split with Pitkin
County
General Fund
$522.730 Overhead Payment -General Government
Support of Fund Operations
Subtotal, Housing Development Fund: $5,691,320
151 -Early Childhood Education. Initiative
Kids First Fund
$20.31D Payment to Kids First Fund for
Administration Services
Subtotal, Earl Childhood Fund: $20,310
152 -Day Care (Kids First /Yellow Brick) Fund
City Employee Housing Fund $30,940 Transfer -Employee Housing Fund
General Fund $4,550 Transfer to fund Manger's Savings
_
General Fund
$66.680 Overhead Payment -General Govemment
Support of Fund Operations
Subtotal, Kids First Fund: $102,170
160 -Storm water Fund
General Fund
$60,000 Overhead Payment -General Government
Support of Fund Operations
250 -Debt Service Fund
General Fund $18,590 Distribution of fund balance
Parks Fund $269,460 Distribution of fund balance
Truscott Housing Fund $25.840 Distribution of fund balance
Subtotal, Debt Service Fund: $313,890
340 -Parks and Open Space Capital Fund
Employee Housing Fund $136,785 Housing Construction Project
General Fund
$32.720 Overhead Payment -General Government
Support of Fund Operations
Subtotal, Parks and Open Space: $169,505
421 -Water Utility Fund
General Fund
$1,000,000 Return on Investment Payment, General
Fund Sale of Land to Water Utility for
Operations Facilities
General Fund $15,350 Transfer to fund Manger's Savings
Hydroelectric Fund
$877,800 Fund Capital Projects moved from the Water
Fund to the Hydroelectric Fund
City Employee Housing Fund $40,720 Transfer -Employee Housing Fund
Parks and O en Space Fund $150,000 , Water usage Conservation Programs
Attachment D
CITY OF ASPEN _ _
2008 InterFund Transfer
Transfer Tr PurROSe of Interfund Transfer
Employee Housing Fund _ $469,483 Housing Construction Project
General Fund _
$649.560 Overhead Payment -General Government
Support of Fund Operations
Subtotal, Water Utility Fund: $3,202,913
431 -Electric Utility Fund
General Fund $408,990 Franchise Fee Transfer to General Fund
General Fund _ $1,010 Transfer to fund Manger's Savings
General Fund
$330,360 Overhead Payment -General Government
Support of Fund Operations
City Employee Housing Fund $18,730 Transfer -Employee Housing Fund
Hydroelectric Fund
$240,000 Fund Capital Projects moved from the Water
Fund to the Hydroelectric Fund
Hydroelectric Fund
$414,100 Purchase of Hydroelectric power from City-
owned Generating Facility
Hydroelectric Fund
$76,000 Purchase of Hydroelectric power from City-
owned Generating Facility
General Fund $72,640 1/3 of Global Warming Program
Water Utility Fund
$12,500 1/2 funding of the Global Warming office
move
Water Utility Fund
$280.000 Electric Utility portion of Utility Billing
Services
Subtotal, Electric Utility Fund: $1,854,330
444 -Hydroelectric Fund
General Fund
$11.990 Overhead Payment -General Govemment
Support of Fund Operations
Subtotal, H droelectric Fund: $11,990
450 -Transportation Fund
General Fund
$453,050 Overhead Payment -General Govemment
Support of Fund Operations
General Fund $1,280 Transfer to fund Manger's Savings
General Fund $150,000 Use Tax Administration
City Employee Housing Fund $40,720 Transfer -Employee Housing Fund
Parks and Open Space Fund
$354.330 Contribution for Mall Rubey Park Mall
Maintenance
Subtotal, Transportation Fund: $999,380
471 -Golf Course Fund
City Employee Housing Fund $18,730 Transfer -Employee Housing Fund
General Fund
$115.720 Overhead Payment -General Government
Support of Fund Operations
Subtotal, Golf Course Fund: $134,450
491 - Truscott Rental Housing Fund
General Fund
$23,540 Overhead Payment -General Govemment
Support of Fund Operations
City Employee Housing Fund $30,940 Transfer -Employee Housing Fund
Housing Operations Fund
$47.520 Overhead Payment -Housing Operations
Support of Fund Operations
Subtotal, Truscott Housin Fund: $102,000
Attachment D
CITY OF ASPEN __
2008 Interfund Transfer
Transfer ___ _ ___
Amount of Transfe ___ _ _ _ _____
Purpose of Interfund Transfer _
492 -Marolt Ranch Seasonal Housing Fund
General Fund
City Employee Housing Fund
Housing Operations_Fund __
Subtotal, Marolt Ranch Fund: _ __ ___
$18,620
$21,990
$61.400
$102,010 __ _ _
Overhead Payment -General Govemment
Support of Fund Operetions
Transfer- Employee Housing Fund
Overhead Payment -Housing Operations
Support of Fund Operations ___ _
501 -Internal Health Insurance Fund
General Fund ___$609,660 _Distribution of fund_balance _
_ _
Parks Fund $104,330 Distribution of fund balance
_
Wheeler Opera House $45,930 Distribution of fund balance _
Parking Garage Fund $8,880 Distribution of fund balance
Housing Development Fund $15,950 Distribution of fund balance
Early Childhood Fund $2,670 Distribution of fund balance
Kids First Fund $10,000 Distribution of fund balance
Water Utility Fund $90,460 Distribution of fund balance
Electric Fund $17,080 Distribution of fund balance
Parking /Transportation Fund $64,180 Distribution of fund balance
Golf Fund $20,520 Distribution of fund balance
Truscott Housing Fund $7,200 Distribution of fund balance
Marolt Housing Fund $9,390 Distribution of fund balance
Housing Administration Fund $32,570 Distribution of fund balance
Smuggler Housing Fund $1.070 Distribution of fund balance
Subtotal, Intemal Heatth Ins. Fund: $1,039,890
620 -Housing Office Operations Fund
General Fund:
$100.690 Overhead Payment -General Government
Support of Fund Operations
Subtotal, Housing Operations Fund: $100,690
Smuggler Housing Fund
General Fund
$8,010 Overhead Payment -General Govemment
Support of Fund Operations
Housing Operations Fund $2.620 Housing Overhead
Subtotal, Smuggler Fund $10,630
501 -City Employee Health Insurance Fund
Health Care Internal Service Bud et
$2,908,750 Insurance Fund -Health Insurance
Premiums
2008 TOTAL INTERFUND TRANSFERS $27,925,778
_~
~;•<.
F~:-
THE CITY OF ASPEN
Back Up Documentation For:
Second Reading Memos
Detail Descriptions for New Requests
MEMORANDUM
TO: - Mayor and City Council
FROM: Kim Peterson, Global Warming Project Manager
THRU: Phil Overeynder, Director of Public Works
DATE OF MEMO: October 29, 2008
MEETING DATE: November 10, 2008
RE: Supplemental Budget Request -Canary Initiative office space
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: City Council is asked to approve a supplemental budget request
in the amount of $34,720. to provide new office space for the Global Warming staff beginning
in December of 2008. $25,000 will be a one-time capital expense in the 2008 budget year with
funding to be allocated 50/50 from both the water and electric funds. The additional $9,720
represents annual operating funds in the Global Warming program starting in 2009, with of
funding allocation of 1/3 water fund; 1/3 electric fund; and, 1/3 general fund.
BACKGROUND: For the past two years, the Canary Initiative staff has been housed in
rented office space above the Asie restaurant. Funding to pay the rent on .this space was
included in Asset Management's budget. However, starting in 2009, this money will no longer
be included in the Asset Management budget.
DISCUSSION: The lease on the Asie office space is up for renewal as of January 1, 2009. In
an effort to cut costs, the Canary Initiative staff will move to the Yellow Brick Building.
There will be startup costs to accommodate the Global Warming/Canary Initiative staff in the
Yellow Brick Building and reconfigure the space to accommodate existing staff in
Transportation and Special Events. $25,000 is needed in the 2008 capital budget to improve
the air handling equipment in the basement, configure IT to accommodate three new
employees, buy furniture for existing staff, and move from the Asie space to the Yellow Brick.
This sum will be paid 50 % of out the water .fund and 50 % out of the electric fund. Work on
the new office space will begin in November and be completed and occupied by staff prior to
the end of 2008.
The total rent for the space in 2009 will be $8,320 (462 sq ft. at $17.48 per foot x 3 % increase
for 2009). Utilities will total $1,400 yearly based on comparable space and its associated,
Page 1 of 2
allocated utility costs. Therefore the total operating budget supplemental request for 2009 is
$9,720. The supplemental operating budget request for 2009 will be funded to match the
existing funding arrangement of the Global Warming operating budget-1/3 water fund; 1/3
electric fund; and, 1/3 general fund.
FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: This move will result in cost savings for the city as a
whole. The burden for Global Warming/Canary Initiative staff rent will shift from the Asset
Management budget to the Public Works budget. The total annual rent on the Asie space for
2009 would be $50,277.
Therefore, savings in the 2009 budget year alone will be $40,557.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The environmental impacts will be lowered as a result of
housing more city staff in existing city buildings rather than maintaining extra office space.
This will have a positive impact on the greenhouse gas budgets of the Public Works, Human
Resources, Transportation and Special Events departments as no energy will be used to heat,
cool and light the current Asie office space.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that Council approve this budget request so
that the Canary Initiative can move over to the Yellow Brick building prior to the end of 2008.
ALTERNATIVES: The short term alternative is for the Canary Initiative to stay at the Asie
office space and seek one or two more employees to share the costs of the space. The Canary
Initiative has asked the Pitkin County Energy Manager and CORE if they could share the
current Asie office space but neither party was willing to share in the rent (approximately $800
per organization per month). There also may not be sufficient funds within City budgets to
accommodate the rent. If the Canary Initiative were to stay at the Asie space for another year,
there would be some necessary IT upgrades to accommodate the staff.
There are two long-term options to house the Canary Initiative. The first is to move staff up to
the Water Plant when the addition is completed on the Administration building. The second is
to seek space in collaboration with other groups (e.g. Pitkin County, CORE, the Forest
Service, RFTA) to create a community "eco-center" .
PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve a supplemental budget request in the total
amount of $34,720 to provide office space for the Canary Initiative in the Yellow Brick
Building prior to the city's lease renewal deadline of January 1, 2009. $25,000 of the total
supplemental request represents a 2008 capital program allocation with a 50/50 split between
the water and electric funds and the remaining $9,720 represents a 2009 operating budget
allocation with a 1/3 split between three funds-water, electric and general."
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
Page 2 of 2
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Jeff Pendarvis
THRU: Stephen Kanipe
DATE: October 31, 2008
MEETING DATE: November 3, 2008
RE: Red Brick Roof Repair Contract
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff recommends that Council approves the contract with
D&D Roofing Co. for $23,993.00 to repair and replace the Recreation Department
entrance roof at the Red Brick Building, plus contingencies. A 25% contingency is
prudent as the roof and dormer condition is uncertain until uncovered. The budget of
$29,991.25 has been established for this project and includes $23,993.00 for the contract
plus $5,998.25 contingency is asked for in the fall supplemental ordinance.
BACKGROUND: Wintertime leaks into the entry way and service counter damaged
the walls, ceiling, floors and electrical panel. The leaks are caused by ice and snow
damaging the roofs membrane. The water leaks under the membrane and finds its way
into the building. Asset and maintenance increased snow and.ice removal efforts last
winter but shoveling and chipping exposes to roof to more damage, is expensive and
does not fix the problem.
DISCUSSION: Roof Tec Consultants evaluated the roof to determine the cause of the
leaks and prescribe remedies. The contract work will include removing the existing roof
membrane, replacing damaged decking, installing waterproofing, and flashing.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: This expense is not included in the 2008 budget and is
requested to be paid from the General Fund. A supplemental funding request including
roof repairs at Water Place Housing and the Cemetery Lane Duplex will be presented to
Council during an upcoming session as part of the fall supplemental ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approves the contract for
repairing the Red Brick Recreation Department entrance roof $23,993.00.
ALTERNATIVE: If the roof repair is not approved the snow and ice removal schedule
can be accelerated with no assurance that the leaks will not happen again this winter.
PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No. ,Series of 2008".
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
MEMORANDUM
"~ TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Jeff Pendarvis
THRU: Stephen Kanipe
DATE: September 29, 2008
MEETING DATE: October 6, 2008
RE: City Hall Roof Repair Contract
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff recommends that Council approves the contract with
D & D Roofing for $43,851 to repair and replace the north side (alley side) roof, plus
contingencies. A 25% contingency is prudent as the roof and dormer condition is
uncertain until uncovered. The budget of $54,000 has been established for this project
and includes $43,851 for the contract plus $10,149 contingency is asked for in the fall
supplemental ordinance.
BACKGROUND: Wintertime leaks into the second floor manager and attorney offices
damage the walls, ceiling, floors and decrease productivity. The leaks are caused by ice
dams forming on the cold lower exposed eves and backing up to the warm interior roof
surface. The water leaks under the shingles and finds its way Sally's, Steve's and Jim's
offices. Asset and maintenance increased snow and ice removal efforts last winter but
shoveling and chipping exposes to roof to more damage, is expensive and does not fix
the problem.
DISCUSSION: Roof Tec Consultants evaluated the roof to determine the cause of the
leaks and prescribe remedies. The contract work will include removing the existing roof
shingles, replacing damaged decking, installing waterproofing, and a wider flashing
strip on the eve, re-shingling, heat tape and gutters. This remedy has been discussed
with the building staff and agrees that it is a good, reasonable approach and solution.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: This expense is not included in the 2008 budget and is
requested to be paid from the General Fund. A supplemental funding request including
roof repairs at Water Place Housing and the Cemetery Lane Duplex will be presented to
Council during an upcoming session as part of the fall supplemental ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approves the contract for
D & D Roofing for repairing the north side roof of City Hall for $43,851.
ALTERNATIVE: If the roof repair is not approved the snow and ice removal schedule
can be accelerated with no assurance that the leaks will not happen again this winter.
PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No. ,Series of 2008".
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and Council
FROM : Tyler Christoff, Project Manager, Engineering
THRU: Tricia Aragon, P.E., City Engineer
DATE OF MEMO: October 16"' 2008
MEETING DATE:
RE: Main Street Streetscape Project Engineering Design Services Supplemental
SUMMARY: Staff recommends a supplemental in the amount of $158,076.00 for Engineering
Design Services of the Main Street Streetscape Project.
BACKGROUND: City Council identified pedestrian improvements along Aspen's Main Street
as one of the ten Best Year Yet Goals to be complete by the end of 2009. Staff is pursuing
development of the project in an accelerated time frame based on Council direction to construct a
one (1) block "test" section of an enhanced pedestrian crossing area to Main Street as soon as
possible.
DISCUSSION: The Engineering Consultant, Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc.(SGM) proposes to
complete the Scope of Services covered under this Engineering Professional Services Contract
for One hundred Fourteen Thousand Seventy six Dollars ($114,076.00). A significant portion of
the fee will pay for a thorough survey of the 14 block Main Street corridor, something the City
does not currently have for design purposes related to the proposed pedestrian crossings and
potential stormwater improvements. ($45,160.00 shown below)
The Pedestrian Amenity Fund has been collected by Community Development and will be
deposited into a separate interest bearing account. Payments to this fund have been on a cash-in-
lieubasis for public amenities on subject development sites. These Funds are available;
however staff is requesting formal appropriation of the funds for the Main Street Streetscape
Engineering Design Services. _
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Funding
Pedestrian Amenity Fund (600.13.15012.31036) $ 782 900 00
Total Funding $ 782,900.00
Expenditures
Schmueser Gordon Meyer Inc. Design Services $ 52,176.00
Schmueser Gordon Meyer Inc. Survey `Masterplanning' $ 45,160.00
Schmueser Gordon Meyer Inc. Survey `One Block Enhancement' $ 16,740.00
Staff Project Management $ 30,000.00
Contingency $ 14,000.00
Total Design Expenditures $ 158,076.00
Supplemental Request
Pedestrian Amenity Fund
Appropriated for Main Street Streetscape Design) $ 158,076.00
RECONIlVIENDATION: Staff recommends a supplemental in the amount of $158,076.00 for.
Engineering Design Services of the Main Street Streetscape Project.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
TxE Crrx of Asr~
Back Up Documentation For:
First Reading Memos
Detail Descriptions for New Requests
__
•`/
via "
MEMORANDUM
TO; Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council
THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director
FROM: Jessica Garrow, Long Range Planner~~~j•
COPY: Cindy Houben, County Community Development Director
Ellen Sassano, County Long Range Planner
Don Taylor, City Finance Director .
gE; AACP Public Process Report -Contract for Prafessiional
Services
MO: Ma 34, 2008
DATE OF ME y
MEETING DATE: June 4, 2008
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff is requesting Council approval for the AACP public process
contract. Attached is a contract for professional service to conduct the public process for the
update of the Aspen Area Community Plan, and to produce the AACP write document. Design
Workshop will be working with City and County Community Development staffs to conduct a
public process for the AACP update and to write the AACP document. ~A detailed scope of
services is included as Exhibit A. The contract is far $250,000, which includes at least three
check-in meetings with City Council and the Board of ~ ty Commissioners. Info ~.tio on the ~~
consul is in Inc ded in Exhibit B. - ~~~ ~ p.~0
€ ~ ~~~
DISCUSSION: The sections below outline the consultant selection process, the topics to be
included in the regort, and the timeline.
Selection Process: In December, the City and County released an RFQ to gather ideas and
information from potential planning consultants. Staff received RFQ responses from fourteen
. (14) firms from across the country. From each of these responses, staff chose process
approaches that seemed like the best fit for the Aspen area and for the goals envisioned for this
i~~d,~te,.~id reviewed this with the Council and Comriiis5ioriets `at the Febraary 5, 2008 Loin
work session. Based on that meeting the City and County released an RFP for the' public
process. Nine (9) firms responded to the public process 1tFP. The subnuttals came from
national firms, as well as regional and local firms. The processes proposed wer~..interesting,
outlined specific techniques to engage a broad spc~trum of the population, ~ antl~. outIin
innovative ways to make the process fun and engaging.
The Aspen office of Design Workshop submitted a detailed proposal that addressed alI of the
as ects discussed with the City Council and the Board of.Cou~aty_, Comm_ issio~ers •~~'
a-sy~:.. ~c~-~,~3~' ~°.~.:~c~:~~~:.~.:N,..v._ic;"_.y;:ts;~r..;= 3-~i: ~.:y.~si,~ -~..-~;~~%`~ ~~e-'•~-"',`~.~*.~:' : ~imz _'~`:+-'"
p ---.,~..v~--~-.z+~.....~~.,.. ~'~;r. . _ T-C`....~_ L5-.::':s~~'i4 ,~rebt~ersisss_.a:*'F1TYaa'i''T1P.[YTC~1FKit.:.(.1 a._ ~::`
Page 1 of 5
P2
.~.._.
Lei :aged Their process includes meeting directly with organizations in the community an
nei~ or ood groups, engaging in small group meetings with individuals from all of Aspen's
neighborhoods as well as its workers, providing survey opportunities for those who cannot attend
meetings, and a set of large group meetings based off of the format of the Core Values meetings
held in 2006. Staff selected Design Workshop's proposal because of its comprehensive nature
and its good fit with the process discussed at the February 5, 200$ joint work session. The
detailed scope of the proposal is attached in Exhibit A. ~~
Report Topics: The AACP Update will include all of the topics from the 2000
~~~-
some minor modifications.„ g~~~ ;~ e: `_ . ~eaffs assoc
Aspenite."
--~ ~ h"' a '~`~' ""~" `~ ''es~~;x a'~the~ap The final re ort will rovide information
~apYCS asVwell. gas ~e xnterte ~ . __ ` ` P p
on these individual topics and discuss the interconnectedness of all of the topics. The topics are
listed below. Those with a * next to them are new for this update.
• Growth Management;
• Parks and Open Space;
• Environmental Quality;
• PedestrianBicycie Network;
• Economic Sustainability;
• Transportation;
As part of planning the update to the AACP and the Existing Conditions Report, Staff examined
the topics included in the 2000 AACP. All of the topics included in that plan remain important
and valid. However, the organization of those topics does not reflect how these topics are
discussed today. For instance, the 2000 AACP includes ~ Parks, Open Space, and the
Environment in the same section. While these topics are related, staff does not believe that the
Environment is any more connected to Parks and Open Space than. it is to Affordable Housing or
our Economy. Therefore, staff has directed the consultants to include a separate topic in this
update called "Environmental Quality" which will examine information on Air Qu~ali ~, mater
Quality, Global Warming, and Stormwater Q_ualty_. E~u~ti~.n~sec
• Design Quality;
• Sustaining the Aspen Idea;
• Planning for the Lifelong Aspenite*;
• Philosophy of~Governance*;
• Historic Preservation; and
Affordable Housing.
In addition, the 2000 AACP did not focus on social services provided in our community. In an
effort to fill that gap and .reflect current conversations in the community,, staff has directed the
are mcruded in the topic "Planning for
---
"Philosophy of Governance" ~ to outline the xoles and responsibilities
govemmental and quasi-governmental entities in the Aspen Area.
~:~
`REPORT TIR~LINE:
The scope of work included in Exhibit A includes a detailed timeline. In 3uly through .August the
consultants will work on a website dedicated to the AAGP Update. During that same tune; Staff
Page 2 of 5
P3
will be finali7in~ the Existing Conditions Reports and preparing for community outreach and
education around those reports. 'T'his will take the form of interactive features on the website, media
outreach, a speakers series where staff discusses the Existing Conditions Reports with civic
organizations, homeowners associations, etc, intercept interviews at public places, coordination with
Grassroots to tape intercept interviews with residents and visitors on the street, and public surveys
(if funded. :.
The next stage of the process wiIl be holding small group meetings that are modeled after the small
group meetings for the Core Values process'in 2006. These meetings will involve ail interested
residents and visitors, and will be held at different times in an. effort to engage a lazge number of
people. The contract also includes targeting the youth and Latino members of the community, as
well as down valley workers. At this time Staff envisions holding separate meetings for down
valley workers so they can be targeted for participation in the process, and so the responses can be
tracked through the process. The meetings are scheduled to occur -between September and
December 2008.
Following the small group meetings, staff and the consultants will compile all of the feedback
received from the meetings as well as the other community outreach work. The large group
meetings will use the community feedback from these events. The meetings will include keypad
voting on values statements. The questions wi.Il be asked in a way that Can target the tradeoffs and
interrelatedness of the many community values. In addition to the large group keypad voting, break
out sessions and small group discussions will be help. The various formats for the large group
meetings are intended to allow all different learning and communication styles an ogpartunity to
~;
~~== ~ participate, The Iazge group meetings w~11 be held in late January or early February.
Following the large group meetings, staff and the consultants will work together to draft the AACP
document. The document will be brought to the Council and Commissioners and the City and
County Planning & Zoning Commissions in March or April for public review and_adoption.
FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: Both the City and County have established separate
budgets for the update, and have agreed to a 2/3 City 1/3 County cost split. The contract will go
through the City contracts process, and the County Community Development will provide a
letter of intent to the City to formalize this cost sharing agreement.
The proposed public process contract is for a total of $250,000, which includes developing a
website, commurity outreach and education around the existing conditions reports, small and
large group meetings, document writing, and adoption. Pursuant to the cost-sharing agreement,
$83,333 will be paid for by the County and $156,667 will be paid for by the City. There are
$37,000 in additional optional expenses that the City and County can opt to fund
jointly or individually. These include:
1. $2,000 for interactive map capability on the website {for instance, to show where
respondents live, and to correlate responses to geographic location).
2. $21,000 for public surveys that will be conducted via the web, mail, and phone. The
`~s-~ surveys will supplement the small group meetings, and provide individuals who do not
have the time to attend a small group meeting the chance to voice their opinion.•
Page 3 of 5
P4
• Staff believes this is an important aspect to engaging a bread spectrum of the
population, and recommends including this $21,000 as an additional expenee.
3. ~;988~~e-$14,000 for additional keypad voting capabilities at the Iarge group meeting.
The $4,000 in additional expenses for the voting capabilities would fund a voting
technology expert to assist staff and the primary consultants in the preparation of
the questions to ensure they are asked in an un-biased and comprehensive manner,
to provide basic technical support for the technology at the meetings, and to
provide an additional 250 voting keypads.
The $14,000 in additional expenses wauld fund all of the assistance listed above,
as well as fund a voting technology expert to assist in writing and critiquing the
questions, to provide a detailed power point and script for the keypad question
portion of the meetings, to provide a dry run to staff and the facilitators prior to
the meetings, t0 provide set up and logistical support at the meetings, to provide
cross correlation assistance with the data from the large group meetings, and to
create a detailed separate deport that reviews, scores, and tabulates the data.
• . At this time, Staff recommends including the $14,000 option as an additional
expense in order to ensure the questions asked at the large group meetings
a appro riate for the Qrocess. , ~
Fiscal Note from Fin nce: For 2008, General fund expen i~ projected to exceed
estimated revenues by $1,337,776. This results in a reduction of the fund balance by that amount
and the estimated fund balance at the end of 2008 is approximately $8,650,OU0. The City has a
policy of maintaining a reserve equal to 25% (90 days) of its total appropriations. This. plus
restricted carry forward savings equals $8,117,700. This leaves approximately $531,000, before
we drop below the target. While there are sufficient funds to make this appropriation we need to
be cognizant of our target fund balance and other expenditure priorities that the Council may
have. .
STAFF RECOMI!',~NDATION: Staff is requesting apprg~~f thesw~~ontrac~ with
Design Workshop. Staff recommends including the additional,~$2 ,000 wo of su` ey work
and $14,404 for advanced keypad voting technology as part o~ the contract. Staff has written the
resolution to include these additional expenses. If Council does not wish to.include these .
additional expenses, the Resolution will need to be amended. Staff recommends approval of the
contract and Resolution as written.
CITX MANAGER
RECOMMEND D~~ (AL~ N3vARE PROP' SED IN TH& A~FFIRNIA~~IVE~.
"I move to approve Resolution No.~, Series of 2008, approving a contractual
professional services between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Design
3 3~,~
agre ent fo~ ?1.ks <Y
Workshop for ,. J ;`~
at
Page4of5
P5
>fessional consulting services related to AACP Public Process and Report, including $3,000
additional expenses for survey work and advanced keypad voting technology-
'TACHHMENTS:
~~~T A -Agreement for Professional Services, with Scope of Work
~iIBIT B -Consultant Qualifications
t ;>~
_~y_
,. r ... y
~l
Page 5 of S
RESOLUTION
(Series of 2008)
A RESOLUTION APPROVING A CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT FOR
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BETWEEN THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO,
AND DESIGN WORKSHOP REGARDING FUNDING FOR THE COMPLETION
OF THE AACP PUBLIC PROCESS AND REPORT .
WHEREAS, there has been submitted to the City Council an "Agreement for
Professional Services" between the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Design Workshop, a
copy of which agreement is attached hereto and made a part thereof; and
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen and Pitkin County shall enter into a cost sharing
agreement through a letter from the County Community Development Department to the
City Community Development Department for this contract. The cost sharing agreement
shall be for 1/3 payment of the $250,000 contract, or $83,333, by the County, and 2/3 of
the $250,000 contract, or $166,667, paid by the City; and
WHEREAS, the scope of services outlines additional cosfor survey work at $21,000,
and, vaned keypad votin~technol gy at $14,000; and ~vu ~ ..~-i'.eSt~u^~. ~w}~~,~,
~~ 3 0~ 1 ~f, 66 ~ ~ l~~ ~ C~7
WHEREAS, City Council approves the proposed additional expenses as part of this
contract.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
Section 1.
That the City Council of the City of Aspen hereby approves the "Agreement for
Professional Services" between~the City of Aspen, Colorado, and Design Workshop, a
copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein, and does hereby authorize the
City Manager of the City of Aspen to execute said contract on behalf of the City of
Aspen.
Section 2.
That the City Council of the Gity of Aspen hereby approves the additional survey and
keypad voting technology, as outlined in the scope of services.
Dated: ~~ aC~
Michael Irel d, Mayor
I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certify that the foregoing
is a true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of
Aspen, Colorado, at a meeting held , 2008.
Jv~te. ~
~~
Kathryn S. K ,City Clerk
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council
COPY: Finance Department
FROM: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director
RE: 2008 Supplemental Budget Request
-Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan
DATE: October 7, 2008
SUMMARY:
The Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan is progressing forward. The 27-member task
force has met every Thursday for the past 6 months and recommended in favor of a final
plan October 2na
Through the end of September, the four parties have spent approximately $405,212 on the
planning effort. This figure is expected to increase as additional bills come-in and the
more-intensive design work is accomplished. A total
planning cost of approximately $715,000 is estimated.
Staff is requesting a supplemental budget appropriation
of $125,000 to cover the City's portion of this cost.
Following is a detail of the spending to date.
As Of
Aooount Desalotions September 30.2008
Cash $ 19,926
Meeting Facilitator $ 69.813
Note Taker 16,216
Financial Advisor 6.153
Sibs Survey
Plan Renderings& Options
Site Modeling & Options 107,320
Geotechnini & Soil Analysis
Traffic Analysis 850
Phts, Agreements & Remrdations
Meeting Food 22,468
Printing 1,436
Public Noticing
Technical Support Group 161,030
Subtotal $ 385,286
Contribution-RFML-Aspen $ 112,40D
Contribution • Aspen Land Fund II "Centurion Partners° 112,400
Contribution -City of Aspen 120,620
Contribution -Aspen Skiing Company 59,793
Subtotal $ 405,212
REQUEST:
$125,000 from the General Fund allocated to the Lift One Neighborhood Master
Plan project. This is a one-time cost.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Jim Considine, IT Director
THRU: Don Taylor, Finance/Administrative Services Director
DATE OF MEMO: 8/8/08
MEETING DATE:
RE: Grant for the implementation of an emergency GIS laptop
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Approve budget authority of $1,499.35 to accept Grant funding
and re-imburse IT for 50 % of the laptop expenditure.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: n/a
BACKGROUND: GIS received a grant as part of the State Hazard Mitigation Program. This grant
paid for 50% of the costs to purchase a high quality laptop equipped with geographic information
processing .software to be used in the field as a resource in any City/County emergency incident.
DISCUSSION: GIS Staff are on call for any emergency incident for which mapping services
are needed.
FINANCIALBUDGET IlVIPACTS: This would reimburse IT .for 50% of the purchase.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Action recommended is to approve budget authority of
$1,499.35 to accept Grant funding and reimburse IT for 50% of the laptop expenditure
PROPOSED MOTION: This should be a brief statement for a Council member to read such
as "I move to approve Ordinance # ... "
CITY MANAGER COMII~NTS:
ATTACILVVIENTS:
Page 1 of 1
MEMORANDUM
TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL
FROM: TIM ANDERSON, RECREATION DIRECTOR
THRU: DON PERGANDE, BUDGET DIRECTOR
JEFF WOODS, MANAGER OF PARKS & RECREATION
DATE OF MEMO: AUGUST 13, 2008
MEETING DATE:
RE: 2008 BUDGET SUPPLEMENTAL
Summary: The Recreation Division is requesting supplemental funding to the 2008
operational budget in the amount of $175,000. This amount reflects the following:
• ARC Utilities: Staff is requesting an ongoing supplemental for utilities at the ARC. In
the 2008 budget a $130,000 reduction in utilities was implemented based upon
calculations from the energy audit and mechanical retro-fit. After many issues with the
contractor and failure to meet a December 31st, 2007 completion deadline, the project
is about 90% complete. Once the project is completed 'it will be much easier to
ascertain the actual savings of the retro-fit, but to date it seems that a 26% reduction is
being realized between electrical and natural gas consumption. While we are seeing a
reduction is consumption, utility costs have increased significantly to a point where the
$130,000 utility reduction has been unrealistic. The retro-fit has been good for the
Canary Initiative goals, but utility price increases have been hard on the budget. Staff is
requesting a $~~SBtJ as a onetime supplemental. Staff will be bringing an ongoing
supplemental for~tilities at the ARC during the 2009 budget development process.
3d ~~/~D
• Employee Payout Reimbursement: The Recreation Division has had two employees
resign their employment in 2008. The total payout of these two employees totaled an
amount in excess of $39,000. This is an amount that the Recreation Budget cannot
absorb without significant reductions in service levels to programs and facilities. This is
a one time supplemental request.
• Increase to Gymnastics funding: The gymnastics program is so successful that
payment to our contracted coach will exceed the current budget authority by $20,000.
This increase in expenditure will be offset by $21,000 in revenue. This is an ongoing
supplemental request to the Recreation Budget as staff feels the program will maintain
this level of participation, especially following an Olympic year.
• Increase to Merchandise Funding (ARC): Merchandise sales at the ARC front desk are
expected to exceed expenditure funding by $15,000. Merchandise sales includes; swim
suits, locks, goggles, water toys, towel rental, etc. and will be offset by $18,000 in
revenue. This would be an ongoing supplemental request to the Recreation Budget.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: John Krueger, Lynn Rumbaugh, Transportation Department
THRU: Randy Ready, Assistant City Manager
DATE: August 13, 2008
MEETING DATE: August 25, 2008
RE: 2008 Supplemental Budget Request for
City of Aspen Transit Development Plan
SUMMARY/REQUEST OF COUNCIL
This memo outlines the Transportation Department's request for supplemental funding in the amount of
$60,000 for the purposes of completing a Transit Development Plan (TDP). The TDP process addresses
both City Council's and the Citizen Budget Task Force's requests for local system analysis.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION:
• In 2001, Council approved and funded the City's most recent Transit Development Plan.
• In 2008, Council appointed a Citizen Budget Task Force to review and make recommendations
regazding departmental budgets and work programs.
• In July 2008, City Council directed the Transportation Subcommittee of the CBTF to focus on
possible improvements to local bus routes. Staff recommended a TDP as the method for
reviewing all City routes.
• In August 2008, the CBTF recommended that the City move forwazd with a TDP.
BACKGROUND
At a July 7, 2008 work session, the CBTF transportation subcommittee provided Council with
recommendations regazding RFTA's upcoming Bus Rapid Transit ballot measure. City Council
requested that the group refocus by providing recommendations on Aspen shuttle routes as well as the
implications of a "do nothing" BRT scenario. In lieu of attempting to develop meaningfizl system-wide
recommendations during the Task Force's short tenure, staff requested that City Council approve and
1
C:\Documents and Settings\donp\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.0utlook\T44Z169S\tdp sup request 8-08 (3).doc
fund the undertaking of a Transit Development Plan process. After reviewing and commenting on the
proposed scope, the Task Force recommended that the City move forward with the TDP process.
DISCUSSION
In 2001, the City of Aspen undertook a TDP process which involved extensive surveying; analysis of
routes, schedules, vehicles and facilities; suggestions for route improvements; and recommendations for
cost saving measures. The resulting study, City of Aspen Transit Plan Technical Memorandum:
Existing Conditions and Alternatives Analysis, has proven an invaluable resource for upgrading service
as evidenced by the Burlingame/Hwy 82 and Maroon Creek Road routes. The report also assisted staff
and City Council with implementing the least impactful service reductions during lean times.
In essence, a TDP (also known as a Transit Element in state transportation planning parlance) is a short-
term (5-6 year) planning tool that assesses capital, operational and fmancial needs as well as short and
long-term service options. These documents assist transit systems with:
• Reviewing existing transit services and examining alternatives;
• Projecting available revenues;
• Estimating transit needs and demand;
• Coordinating/consolidating existing services; and
• Designing/developing new services.
Conducting a TDP at this juncture is timely for a number of reasons. Council has expressed interest in
hosting transportation open houses in spring 2009 to include information on a number of issues
including but not limited to Entrance to Aspen alternatives, bus lanes, free Aspen-Snowmass bus
service, changes in residential parking regulations, Bus Rapid Transit and pedestrian/trail master
planning efforts. The proposed TDP could be completed by spring 2009, in time for these open houses.
In addition, a new TDP could take into account conditions that were not in place in 2001 including:
• Burlingame Ranch, Limelight and other developments;
• BMC"West, Aspen Valley Hospital, Lift 1-A and other planned developments;
• Hwy 82 and Main Street bus lane implementation;
• use tax and other funding sources; and
• relationship of city transit services to possible BRT system implementation.
2
C:\Documents and Settings\donp\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.0utlook\T44ZI69S\tdp sup request 8-08 (3).doc
In the interest of timeliness and cost-efficiency staff recommends retaining the firm Leigh, Scott and
Cleary (LSC) for this process. LSC has assisted with City, RFTA and CDOT transit planning efforts,
including Aspen's 2001 TDP. The firm has an extensive knowledge of City shuttle and RFTA valley
systems. Using the 2001 TDP as a starting point, LSC could undertake this process more quickly and
cost effectively than a new firm.
A citizen advisory committee, which could include members of the current transportation
subcommittee, is proposed as part of this process. The committee would meet with staff and members
of the consultant team to review and comment on the scope of work, draft and fmal reports.
FINANCIALIBUDGET IMPACTS
The Transportation Department budget does not have sufficient funds currently approved to cover the
costs of the proposed TDP.
LSC Transportation Consultants has estimated their costs at $55,490..00 based on the attached scope of
work. Staff is requesting a total of $60,000.00 in supplemental funding. The additional $4,590.00
would be used to cover internal costs such as citizen committee and open house meeting materials.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Transit Development Plans assist transit systems with the development and implementation of effective
service which, in turn, can decrease the use of single occupant vehicles.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Staff recommends that City Council approve and fund a TDP process.
ALTERNATIVES
Council could deny the undertaking of a TDP process and proceed with local transit service planning in
some other manner.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: TDP scope of work and cost estimate
3
C:\Documents and Settings\donp\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Fi]es\Content.0utlook\T44Z169S\tdp sup request 8-08 (3).doc
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Kai Ramsey
THRU: Tom McCabe, Barry Crook, and Don Pergande
DATE OF MEMO: September 3, 2008
MEETING DATE: October 6, 2008
gE; Truscott 100 Roof Replacement Contract
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: It is requested that council approve the contract for the
replacement of the roof on the 100 building at Truscott as proposed by D & D Roofing of
Denver.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: Council has approved a budget of $180,000 for the roof
replacement and $6,000 for the heat tape and gutter work. Approval for the project was first
put in the AMP plan in 2006.
BACKGROUND: The roof over the 100 building at Truscott. has reached the end of its life
cycle and after a hard winter it is necessary to replace it. The roof was originally slated for
replacement in 2009, but was moved up to 2008 because of damage this past winter.
DISCUSSION: Many areas along the roof line are missing shingles and are leaking into the
storage lockers below. The heat tape failed in many areas causing ice dams which crept into
the storage lockers and pulled the decking away from the building as the ice receded this
spring. Many areas of the roof have moss growing which is a sign that water has been
penetrating the shingles for some time. The roof has been in service somewhere between 15-20
years.
FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: The contract is for the amount of $219,377.00. The
budgeted amount for the project is $186,000. The current cost of the project is over budget by
$33,377.00. The original budgeted amount was put into the AMP plan over five years ago. Since
then, materials have skyrocketed and that figure is obsolete. A $34,000 supplemental request has
been submitted to cover the additional costs. Truscott has two other non-budgeted projects to add
into the 2008 budget at $74k and $15k for a total of $123k. If $123K was. added to the 2008
approved budget for the additional projects the Truscott Fund would be forecasted to end 2008 with a
Page 1 of 2
positive $512K fund balance. The ending balance covers the 45 day operating reserve; with an
additional $231K in unrestricted funds. Funding these projects in 2008 allows for normal operations
through December 31, 2008. Even with these additional projects in 2008 the Truscott fund is projected
to be financially stable over the next ten years.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The City Environmental Health Department has been
consulted and we have clearance to proceed as this project has no negative environmental
effects and will not affect our greenhouse gas emissions.
RECOA~~NDED ACTION: The Truscott property management staff recommends that
council approves the contract for D & D Roofing and their proposal to replace the roof at
Truscott.
ALTERNATIVES: If Council does not want to approve the staff recommendation, further
damage will occur and the cost of the project will rise.
PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance # ... "
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
ATTACIEVIVIENTS:
Page 2 of 2
MEMOx~NnuM
TO:
FROM:
THRU:
DATE OF MEMO:
MEETING DATE:
RE:
Mayor and City Council
Kai Ramsey
Tom McCabe
October 6, 2008
October 14, 2008
Truscott Supplemental Request
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: It is requested that council approve the supplemental request for
$15,000 to cover the cost of unexpected plumbing repairs at Truscott.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: There have been no previous requests in regards to this
issue.
BACKGROUND: A number of plumbing events occurred recently at Truscott including the
repair„ of numerous leaky pipes and the addition of a water softening system in the 100
building..
DISCUSSION: Many of the costly repairs occurred in the 100 building at Truscott which is
over forty years old. These necessary repairs insured proper water service to over sixty
residents. Poor water quality caused the pipes to spring leaks so a softening system was
installed. Nearly 30 feet of corroded pipe needed to be replaced
FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: Truscott is requesting $15,000 to cover the costs of the
repairs. This total of all supplemental requests for Truscott this fall will be $123k. If $123K was
added to the 2008 approved budget for the additional projects the Truscott Fund would be forecasted to
end 2008 with a positive $512K fund balance. The ending balance covers the 45 day operating reserve;
with an additional $231K in unrestricted funds. Funding these projects in 2008 allows for normal
operations through December 31, 2008. Even with these additional projects in 2008 the Truscott fund is
projected to be financially stable over the next ten years.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: The City Environmental Health Department has been
consulted and we have no negative environmental impacts.
Page 1 of 2
RECOMMENDED ACTION: The Truscott property management staff recommends that
council approves the supplemental request for $15k to cover the plumbing repair costs at
Truscott.
ALTERNATIVES: There is no alternative, the work has been completed.
PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance # ..."
CITY MANAGER COMI~~NTS:
ATTAC~IMENTS:
Page 2 of 2
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM
THRU:
DATE OF MEMO:
MEETING DATE:
RE:
Mayor and Council
Tyler A. Christoff, Project Manager, Engineering.
Tricia Aragon, P.E., City Engineer
September 15a' 2008
September _ 2008
Truscott Building C Foundation Stabilization Construction Approval
SUMMARY: Staff recommends that Council approves the contract for Hayward Baker, Inc for
Foundation Stabilization of Truscott Building C in the amount of $72,898.50.
BACKGROUND: Due to differential soil settlement occurring around Truscott Building C
damage to the building's concrete walkways and elevator structure has occurred. Without
corrective measures damage to the building will continue and eventually render the elevator un-
usable due to safety concerns. Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc (SGM) has completed a structural
analysis and repair plan for the building.
DISCUSSION: This project will help stabilize the existing soils around Truscott Building C.
Soil stabilization for this project will involve compaction grouting operations around each of the
foundation footings experiencing settlement. These improvements should stabilize the
inadequate fill material and prevent further settlement.
The City received quotes from two qualified Geotechnical construction firms. Both Hayward
Baker, and Mays Construction Specialties, Inc submitted proposals based on site observations
and the structural repair plan completed by SGM. The proposal received from Mays
Construction Specialties was not conclusive in regards to material quantities and location. May's
proposal would not provide specific quantities until after exploration was complete. Hayward
Baker was able to submit a complete proposal based on site observations and SGM's structural
repair plan. Due to the safety concerns associated with this project staff thinks that it is in the
City's best interests to award the construction contract to this vendor.
Proposals were received from two Contractors as summarized below:
Hayward Baker $63,390.00
Mays Construction Specialties $33,000.00
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Funding Source
Truscott Housing Capital Projects Fund (491.94) will fund this project. A supplemental funding
request memo will be presented to Council during an upcoming session.
Expenditures
Foundation Stabilization of Truscott Building C $63,390.00
Contingency - $' 9.508.50
TOTAL $72,898.50
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approves the contract for Hayward
Baker, Inc for Foundation Stabilization of Truscott Building C in the amount of $72,898.50.
ALTERNATIVES: If the project is not approved the City would continue to try to maintain the
area however the eventual decommissioning of the elevator would need to occur.
PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No. ,Series of 2008."
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
MEMORANDUM
TO: .Mayor and City Council
FROM: Jeff Pendarvis
THRU: Stephen Kanipe
DATE: September 29, 2008
MEETING DATE: October 6, 2008
RE: Water Place/Cemetery Lane Roof Repair Contract
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Staff recommends that Council approves the contract with
D & D Roofing for $88,374 to repair and replace roofs on residencies located in Water
Place and Cemetery Lane, plus contingencies. A 25% contingency is prudent because of
the multiple units and the fact that roof and dormer conditions are uncertain until they
are uncovered. The budget of $110,476.50 has been established for this project and
includes $88,374 for the contract plus $22,093.50 contingency is asked for in the fall
supplemental ordinance.
BACKGROUND: Wintertime leaks into the residences at Water Place were widespread
throughout the development this winter. The leaks are caused by ice dams forming on
the cold lower exposed eves and backing up to the warm interior roof surface. The
water leaks under the shingles infiltrated almost all of the units and caused interior
damage and the ice dams also caused exterior damage to the roof surfaces. Asset and
maintenance increased snow and ice removal efforts last winter but shoveling and --
chipping exposes to roof to more damage, is expensive and does not fix the problem.
DISCUSSION: Roof Tec Consultants evaluated the roof to determine the cause of the
leaks and prescribe remedies. The contract work will include removing the existing roof
shingles, replacing damaged decking, installing waterproofing, and a wider flashing
strip on the eve, and repair damaged surfaces. This remedy has been discussed with
the building staff and agrees that it is a good, reasonable approach and solution.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: This expense is not included in the 2008 budget and is
requested to be paid from the General Fund. A supplemental funding request including
roof repairs at City Hall will be presented to Council during an upcoming session as
part of the fall supplemental ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that Council approves the contract for
D & D Roofing for repairing the north side roof of City Hall for $88,374.
ALTERNATIVE: If the roof repair is not approved the snow and ice removal schedule
can be accelerated with no assurance that the leaks will not happen again this winter.
PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve Resolution No. ,Series of 2008".
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
MEmoRaNDUM
TO:
FROM:
THRU:
DATE OF MEMO:
MEETING DATE:
RE:
Mayor and City Council
Cindy Christensen
Tom McCabe
August 5, 2008
September
SUPPLEMENTS FOR THE HOUSING OFFICE
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: The Housing Office is requesting cone-time supplemental of
$117,250. The majority of this, $95,000, is for increased legal fees to cover an aggressive
enforcement program and $22,500 for a survey that will provide valuable information on the
payment-in-lieu fee structure along with updates to the Aspen Area Community Plan.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: The City Council and the BOCC reviewed this request at a
Joint Meeting held June 3, 2008, and recommended approval for the survey and the increase in
legal fees.
BACKGROUND: The Housing Operations budget has experienced a substantial increase in
legal costs for 2008. Due to the request to pursue compliance issues, there are currently seven
cases going through the court system. The legal fees that were approved for 2008 were $50,000.
Currently, the expenditure has reached around $12,000 per month; therefore, an additional
$95,000 is being requested for this year and for the next three years, with the amount decreasing
to $50,000 for 2011 and 2012 and with the hope that the costs will be decreased to $50,000 from
2012 forward. The additional supplement will come from the carry-over funds, which will not
require additional funds on top of the subsidy from the City Council and the BOCC. Staff
believes that when the APCHA prevails in court, the number ofnon-compliant businesses and/or
individuals and the need for higher legal fees will decrease back to the currently budgeted
amount.
The Housing Office approached the City Council on December 4, 2007, requesting an increase
of the payment-in-lieu fee by 80%. Questions were raised regarding the methodology used to
establish the 80 % increase. It was requested that a ,survey be conducted to establish what
methodology should be utilized in calculating payment-in-lieu fees. There was also a request
to compile information to update the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP). The survey is
Page 1 of 2
being done in conjunction with the Community Development Department. The total contract is
for $44,500 and is with RRC Associates. The cost is being shared by Housing and the
Community Development Department. Completion of the surveys should be in September.
DISCUSSION: Both of these requests will not require additional funds from the City or the
County as they will be funded by fund balance. The survey was conducted as part of the update
of the Aspen Area Community Plan and to come up with a methodology to determine the
payment-in-lieu fee and employee generation figures for residential and commercial
development and redevelopment. The total cost of the survey is $44,500. The Housing Office
and the Community Development Department will share this cost; therefore, Housing's portion
will be $22,250.
FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: The supplemental will not create a financial impact to
the Housing Administration Fund's financial outlook as there is sufficient fund balance to fund
these requests.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: Approval of this supplemental will not increase nor reduce
energy use.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Housing is requesting approval from City Council as follows:
1. Use the fund balance for the additional $95,000 needed for legal fees.
2. Use the fund balance for .the $22,500 for Housing's portion of the survey conducted in
conjunction with the Community Development Department.
PROPOSED MOTION: I move to approve the supplement request as part of Ordinance #
(Series of 2008).
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
Page 2 of 2
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Phil Overeynder, Public Works Director
THRU: Don Pergande, Budget Manager
THRU: Randy Ready, Assistant City Manager
CC: Steve Barwick, City Manager
DATE OF MEMO: August 25, 2008
RE: 2008 Fall Supplemental -
Increase Transfer from Electric Fund to Water Fund for
Utility Billing Division Services
REQUEST OF COUNCIL: Public Works staff requests that City Council approve an
increase iu the transfer from the Electric Fund to the Water Fund for Utility Billing Division
services; representing 50 percent of the overall program costs, which are fully funded
throughout the year by the Water Fund.
Note: This action would not change the funding allocation for this program. This
supplemental request simply cleans up when the actual expenditure is allocated between
funds, allowing for a more accurate Water and Electric LRP.
2008 adopted Long Range Plan (LRP) showed a transfer of $165,228. We are requesting a
revised amount of $280,000-representing an increase of $114,772.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: During budget. approval process that occurred last fall,
City Council approved both Water and Electric Funds 2008 budgets that reflected a transfer
from the Electric Fund to the Water Fund for utility billing services in the amount of
$165,228.
DISCUSSION: On Apri128, 2008 Public Works staff sent an email to Finance deparkment
requesting that the "Transfer to Water Fund - UB Services" line in the Electric LRP be
changed from $165,228 to $280,000.
Page 1 of 2
This request was based on historic program costs for utility billing division services. As an
example in 2006 and 2007 the actual transfers from the Electric Fund to the Water Fund for
Utility Billing Division services were $263,538 and $257,570 respectively; rather than the
budgeted transfers from the Electric Fund to the Water Fund shown in the LRP of $120,925
and $157,208 respectively.
FINANCIAL/BUDGET IMPACTS: The requested fund transfer increase would represent an
additional expense to the Electric Fund of $114,772 and additional revenue to the Water Fund
of $114,772.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Public Works staff recommends approval of fund transfer
increase.
ALTERNATIVES: If City Council does not approve the fund transfer increase from Electric
to Water during the 2008 Fall Supplemental process, then the additional expense for Electric
and revenue for Water will be part of the 2008 year-end journal entries in the spring of 2009.
Therefore, until next spring both the Electric and Water Fund LRP's will not correctly reflect
revenue and expenditures in connection with the utility billing division services.
PROPOSED MOTION: I move to approve an increase in the transfer from the Electric Fund
to the Water Fund for utility billing division services.
CITY MANAGER COA~~NTS:
Page 2 of 2
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen City Council
THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director
FROM: Jason Lasser, Special Projects Planner
RE: The Aspen Institute -Paepcke Auditorium -Consolidated SPA Amendment and
GMQS Review, Second reading of Ordinance No.32, Series of 2008 -Public
Hearing
MEMO DATE: November 3, 2008
,~ MEETING DATE: November 10, 2008
APPLICANT /OWNER:
The Aspen Institute
REPRESENTATIVE:
Jim Curtis, Curtis and Associates
LOCATION:
Paepcke Auditorium -Lot 1-B of
the Aspen Meadows Subdivision,
commonly known as The Aspen
Institute, 1000 N. 3`d Street, Aspen
CURRENT ZONING:
A/SPA (Academic) zone district
with a Specially Planned Area
(SPA)Overlay
SUMMARY:
The Applicant requests
consolidated SPA approval in order
to expand the existing auditorium
from 346 seats to 406 seats. The
applicants are requesting approvals
for a conceptual and final SPA
amendment and for Growth
management Quota System
(GMQS) Review at this time.
~~ ~.X
Photo: The Paepcke Building.
~_.~ ~ Q
..~
`~ ,
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval for the expansion and
remodeling of Paepcke Auditorium to City Council.
REQUEST OF THE CITY COUNCIL: The review of a Specially Planned Area is (in most
cases) a four step review process. Step one is conceptual review before the Planning and Zoning
Commission, step two is conceptual review before City Council, step three is final review before
P&Z, and step four is final review before Council. The applicant has requested a consolidated
review (The Planning and Zoning Commission or the City Council may, during review,
determine that the application should be subject to both conceptual and final plan review),
therefore in addition to consolidated conceptual and final SPA Amendment Review, the City
Council is reviewing the application for Growth Management Quota System approvals:
• ~ecially Planned Area (SPA) -Consolidated Review (Section 26.440.040 B) to allow
for an addition to Paepcke Auditorium.
• A Growth Management Review (Section 26.470.050 B6, General Requirements).
• A Growth Management Review (Section 26.470.090.4, City Council Applications
Essential Public Facilities) to determine the primary use and/or structure to be an
Essential Public Facility, and to assess, waive, or partially waive, affordable housing
mitigation requirements.
BACKGROUND:
The Paepcke Auditorium was constructed in the early 1960's, designed by Herbert Bayer and Fritz
Benedict. The Aspen Institute is one component in the Aspen Meadows Specially Planned Area (SPA)
approved through Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1991. In addition, Zoning map amendments to create
several zones including Academic (A) and Open Space (OS) Zones, and Subdivision to create 10
separate lots at the Aspen Meadows Subdivision/SPA.
The Aspen Institute was originally located on Lot 1 of the Aspen Meadows Subdivision, but in 1992,
the First Amended Plat was approved to reconfigure the subdivision and created Lot 1-B, for the
Aspen Institute. Lot 1-B is approximately 13.160 acres and has three existing buildings; the Bechter
Building (on Gillespie), The Koch Seminar Facility, and the Paepcke Auditorium building. The Aspen
Meadows SPA Development and Subdivision Agreement defines dimensional requirements (shown on
the plat), off-street parking, site improvements, trails, financial assurances, and employee housing for
each individual parcel (see pages 16 -18 for the Aspen Institute).
The 1995 Lot 1-B Second Amendment to the plat shows dimensions, setbacks, and adds a site plan
reflecting the addition and modifications to the existing Seminar Building. The amended plat states
that "the Aspen Institute shall share continued responsibility to comply with the Meadows Traffic
Mitigation Plan."
The existing Paepcke Auditorium Building is approximately 17,805 square feet, contains a 346 seat
auditorium, a public gallery, library, and administrative offices. The Aspen Institute calculates that is
has 3,885 square feet of "Floor Area" of un-built square footage remaining from the 1991 SPA Plan.
PROJECT SUMMARY:
2
The applicant is proposing to amend the SPA in order to increase seating capacity from 346 to 406 seats
by adding approximately 614 square feet (leaving 3,271 sq. ft. from 3,885) in an addition and renovation
of the existing auditorium. The applicant is requesting to consolidate its remaining un-built square footage
from the 1991 SPA Plan in this SPA amendment. The renovation will include upgrades to the energy
envelope of the building, improvements to the HVAC, electrical, and plumbing systems. Bringing the
building into ADA compliance for access to the restrooms, lobby, backstage, administrative offices, and
for seating in the auditorium is proposed. An interior reconfiguration of the lobby and audio/visual
projection room and skylight is proposed.
Also shown in the July 14~' supplement is a proposed new tent facility. The Greenwald tent application
will be reviewed at a later date as a separate application. Staff is working with the Engineering and
Transportation Departments to establish a pedestrian and transportation plan for the Greenwald
Pavilion.
The applicant is requesting that the Aspen Institute (and MMA) continue to be an Essential Public
Facility, including the Paepcke Building, as determined in the 1991 SPA Plan. The applicant is also
requesting that the City Council waive the affordable housing mitigation requirements as it is not
proposing to generate new employees (see attached employee analysis from the applicant). Staff fmds that
the Paepcke Auditorium meets the requirements of an essential public facility, and supports the request to
waive the affordable housing mitigation, if audits are performed and reviewed by APCHA prior to the
issuance of the building permit, and 2 years after issuance of a C.O. The applicant shall provide mitigation
for any increase in employees unless otherwise waived by City Council
The application is not proposing additional parking, but states; "as currently done, Paepcke events are
scheduled to minimize overlap with the MAA Music Tent events and people are encouraged to park in
the MAA main parking lot or walk or bicycle to Paepcke events."
STAFF COMMENTS:
SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA -CONSOLIDATED DEVELOPMENT PLAN:
A Specially Planned Area (SPA) is a process in which a site specific development plan is created
which encourages flexibility and innovation in the development of land and promotes objectives
outlined in the Aspen Area Community Plan by allowing the variation of the underlying zone
district's land uses and dimensional requirements for the benefit of the public. The parcel currently
exists with an SPA overlay. Based upon the new proposal, the site specific development must be
amended. Staff finds that the proposal is consistent with underlying zone district dimensional
standards, the existing use, surrounding uses, architecture, amenities, and site circulation. Staff
recommends approval of the proposal.
The underlying zone district dimensional standards show that the site can accommodate additional
development; however, allowing for additional density on Lot 1-B should be considered in the
context of the entire development. Considering whether the proposal is compatible with surrounding
land uses, density, height, bulk, architecture, landscaping and open space, and strong attention to the
relationship between the surrounding structures, pedestrian and vehicular site circulation, pedestrian
amenities, significant view planes and environmental impacts, Staff finds that the proposal is
consistent with underlying zone standards, which were established through the creation of the SPA
in 1991, and recommends approval of the proposal.
3
In the DRC comments, the City of Aspen Engineering Department "at this time is unable to
determine if there are adequate public facilities... in particular pedestrian walkway/bikeway
connections from town to events and adequate public transportation facilities. A neighborhood
safety/pedestrian study may need to be completed." Although Engineering has concerns, the DRC
comments were for both for the Paepcke Auditorium and the Greenwald tent application. Although
the addition of 60 seats at Paepcke increases capacity, Staff does not consider this a substantial
impact on transportation. Impacts related to the Greenwald Tent will be addressed when that
application comes forward.
Parks has requested a detailed tree protection plan, an approved tree permit; proper tree protection
fencing must be in place and inspected by the City Forester, drip lines of all trees must be free of any
construction, excavation materials, and foot and vehicle traffic. All new plantings will need to be
irrigated and the landscape plan reviewed by the Park Department.
Staff recommends approval for the requested expansion and renovation of the Paepcke Auditorium.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM:
The proposed development is an Academic Zone District with a Specially Planned Area (SPA)
overlay. The Academic zone district dimensional requirements "shall be set by the adoption of a
conceptual development plan and final development plan, pursuant to Chapter 26.440, specially
planned area". The consolidated GMQS review general requirements address the following; if there
are allotments available, consistency with the AACP, conformance with the zone district
requirements, HPC consistency and approvals, Employee and Affordable Housing mitigation,
demands on infrastructure. The initial SPA approvals from 1991 and amendments in 1992, and 1995
establish the development dimensions.
The City Council is requested to determine this project an essential public facility and waive the
affordable housing requirements. APCHA Staff would recommend that an employee audit be
completed prior to building permit and two years after CO. An analysis of the employees for the
Institute was requested from Staff to clarify the application, as it does not propose to add any
employees: (please see Exhibit C for the supplemental information).
Staff finds that the proposal meets the requirements of "a facility which serves an essential public
purpose is available for use by, or benefit of, the general public and serves the need of the
community ". Staff recommends approval as an essential public facility, and based on the
information provided, recommends affordable housing mitigation requirements be waived.
REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS:
The City Engineer, Zoning Officer, Parks Department, Fire Marshal, Aspen Sanitation District,
Building Department, Housing Department, Historic Preservation Officer, Utilities, Transportation,
and Parking Departments have all reviewed the proposed application and their requirements have
been included as conditions of approval when appropriate.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
In reviewing the proposal, Staff recommends the City Council approval of the consolidated plan
with conditions, specifically staff recommends the applicant:
4
The applicant shall submit an employee audit prior to building permit issuance and two years
after issuance of C.O. the form and methodology of the audit shall be reviewed by APCHA and
be consistent for both audits. The applicant shall provide mitigation for any increase in employees
unless otherwise waived by City Council.
2. Provide a neighborhood safety study; requesting that the Institute work with City Staff
(Engineering), MAA, RFTA to provide pedestrian walkway/bikeway connections from town to
events, and to provide options for adequate public transportation facilities.
RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE WORDED IN THE AFFHtMITIVE):
"I move to approve Ordinance #32, Series 2008, approving with conditions the Specially Planned
Area (SPA) Amendment to the Paepcke Auditorium."
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A -SPA Amendment, GMQS Staff Findings
Exhibit B -Applicant Supplemental Information -SPA, GMQS criteria -letter dated 6/30/2008
EXHIBIT C -Applicant Supplemental Information -Employee Analysis -letter dated 8/18/08
ExxiBIT D -Applicant Supplemental Information -Traffic & Parking Memo -email dated 8/19/08
EXHIBIT E -Applicant Supplemental Information -Floor Area Existing/New -email dated 8/8/08
EXHIBIT F -Applicant Supplemental Information - ADA seating studies -email dated 7/30/08
EXHIBIT G - DRC Comments -APCHA, Parks, Transportation & Parking, Engineering, and Zoning
ExFttB~T H -Historic Preservation Commission Minutes - 5/28/08 (continued) and 7/23/08
(approved with conditions)
EXHIBIT I -Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1991 -Final Approval of the Aspen Meadows Specially
Planned Area (SPA)
EXHIBIT J -The Aspen Meadows Specially Planned Area Development & Subdivision Agreement
EXHIBIT K -Letters from neighbors/citizens
Exhibit L -Applicant Supplemental Information -Paepcke Auditorium renovation Revised Design
-packet dated 7/14/08
Exhibit M -Application -Paepcke Auditorium Renovation -packet dated 4/2/08
Exhibit N -Specially Planned Area -Section 26.440.010 Purpose
Exhibit O -Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes -September 16, 2008
ORDINANCE N0.32,
(SERIES OF 2008)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A
CONSOLIDATED SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA (SPA) AMENDMENT AND
GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEW FOR AN EXPANSION AND RENOVATION OF
THE PAEPCKE AUDITORIUM, LOT 1-B OF THE ASPEN MEADOWS SUBDIVISION,
COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE ASPEN INSTITUTE, 1000 NORTH THIRD STREET
PARCEL ID: 2735-121-29-809
WHEREAS, the property commonly known. and referred to as the "Aspen Meadows" has
previously been designated a specially planned area (SPA) on the City of Aspen Official Zone
District Map; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 14, Series of 1991, of the City Council of the City of Aspen,
granted final approval of the Aspen Meadows Specially Planned Area (SPA) final development
plan, subdivision approval, rezoning and zoning map amendments, residential growth
management allotment, excess growth management allotment, growth management exemption
for essential public facilities, condominiumization, and vesting of development rights was
approved; and
WHEREAS, in 1992, the First Amended Plat was approved to reconfigure the
subdivision to create Lot 1-B, a parcel that is 13.160 acres and has three existing buildings; the
Bechter Building, the Seminar Facility, and the Paepcke Auditorium building.
WHEREAS, in 1995, the Second Amended Plat was approved, allowing modifications
to the Seminar Building, defining dimensions and setbacks with a supplemental site plan.
WHEREAS, the applicant, The Aspen Institute, represented by Jim Curtis, Planner,
requested conceptual major development approval 'for the remodeling and renovation of the
Paepcke Auditorium, located at 1000 N. Third St., Aspen Institute, Aspen Meadows, Lot 1 B,
City and Townsite Aspen; and
WHEREAS, for Major Development Review, the HPC must review the application, a
staff analysis report and the evidence presented at a hearing to determine the project's
conformance with the City of Aspen Historic Preservation Design Guidelines per Section
26.415.070.D.3.b.2 and 3 of the Municipal Code and other applicable Code Sections. The HPC
may approve, disapprove, approve with conditions or continue the application to obtain
additional information necessary to make a decision to approve or deny; and
WHEREAS, at their regular meeting on July 23`d (after the hearing was noticed, opened,
and continued from May 28, 2008), the Historic Preservation Commission considered the
application, found the application was consistent with the review standards and "City of Aspen
Historic Preservation Design Guidelines" and approved the application with conditions by a vote
of5to0.
Ordinance No.32, Series of 2008 1
WHEREAS, the Applicant also applied fora (Consolidated) SPA amendment for the
changes to the Paepcke Auditorium, and for Growth Management Quota System to be
determined an Essential Public Facility; and,
WHEREAS, upon initial review of the application and the applicable code standards, the
Community Development Department recommended the Applicant amend the proposal to better
comply with the requirements of a Specially Planned Area (SPA); and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on September 16, 2008, upon further
public testimony, discussion and consideration, the Planning and Zoning Commission adopted
Resolution No. 29, Series of 2008 by a five to zero (5-0) vote; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all
the applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with
conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the
promotion of public health, safety, and welfare.
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on October 27, 2008, the Aspen City
Council approved a (Consolidated) SPA amendment for the changes to the Paepcke Auditorium,
and for Growth Management Quota System to be determined an Essential Public Facility, as
described herein, by a vote of to (_-~:
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADO THAT:
The consolidated SPA application shall address comments in the following sections:
Section 1
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the
City Council hereby grants approval of a Consolidated Specially Planned Area (SPA)
Amendment and Growth Management Quota System Review for an Essential Public Facility.
Additionally, The City Council recommends the City of Aspen, The Aspen Institute, MAA,
RFTA, and the West End Neighborhood work together on the components of traffic, parking,
parking enforcement, transit, pedestrian paths, and cleaning up rights-of--ways.
Section 2: Building
The Applicant shall meet adopted building codes and requirements if and when a building permit
is submitted. Accessible routes to any public right-of--way and accessible parking spaces will be
required. The proposed project will be subject to the newly adopted Use Tax on building
materials. The proposed project may be required to comply with a newly developed Efficient
Building Program for Commercial projects.
Section 3: Engineering
The Applicant's design shall be compliant with all sections of the City of Aspen Municipal Code,
Title 21, and all design and construction standards published by the Engineering Department.
Ordinance No.32, Series of 2008 2
Section 4: Affordable Housing Audit
The applicant shall submit an employee audit prior to building permit issuance and two years
after issuance of C.O. the form and methodology of,the audit shall be reviewed by APCHA and
be consistent for both audits. The applicant shall provide mitigation for any increase in employees
unless otherwise waived by City Council.
Section 5: Fire Mitigation
All codes adopted by the Aspen Fire Protection District shall be met. This includes but is not
limited to access (International Fire Code (IFC), 2003 Edition, Section 503), approved fire
sprinkler and fire alarm systems (IFC, as amended, Section 903 and 907).
Section 6: Public Works
The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and
with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of
the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water Department. Utility
placement and design shall meet adopted City of Aspen standards.
Section 7: Sanitation District Requirements
Service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications,
which are on file at the District office. ACSD will review the approved Drainage plans to assure
that clear water connections are not connected to the sanitary sewer system. On-site utility plans
require approval by ACSD. ACSD will not approve service to food processing establishments
retrofitted for this use at a later date. Oil and Grease interceptors are required for all food
processing establishment. Oil and Sand separators are required for parking garages and vehicle
maintenance establishments. Driveway entrance drains must drain to drywells, elevator shafts
drains must flow thru o/s interceptor. Below grade development may require installation of a
pumping system. Shared service line agreements may be required where more than one unit is
served by a single service line. Permanent improvements are prohibited in sewer easements or
right of ways. All ACSD fees must be paid prior to the issuance of an excavation/foundation or
access/infrastructure permit.
Section 8: Environmental Health
The state of Colorado mandates specific mitigation requirements with regard to asbestos.
Additionally, code requirements to be aware of when filing a building permit include: a
prohibition on engine idling, regulation of fireplaces, fugitive dust requirements, noise abatement
and pool designs.
Section 9: Exterior Lighting
All exterior lighting shall meet the requirements of the City's Outdoor Lighting Code pursuant to
Land Use Code Section 26.575.150, Outdoor lighting.
Section 10: Dimensional Standards
The dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the
Academic (A) zone district shall be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and
final development plan, pursuant to Chapter 26.440, Specially Planned Area; attached as Exhibit
A.
Ordinance No.32, Series of 2008
Section 11: Parks
An approved tree permit is required before submission of the building permit set. Parks requests
alternate plans for proposed on-site mitigation. Tree protection fences must be in place and
inspected by the city forester or his/her designee before any construction activities are to
commence. No excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction backfill, and storage of
equipment, foot or vehicle traffic allowed within the drip line of any tree on site. All new
plantings will need to be irrigated and the landscape plan reviewed by Parks Department
Section 12: Transportation
Transportation requests that the Institute meet with Staff prior to each summer season to discuss
their schedule of events and associated transportation/parking impacts as well as mitigation such
as increased shuttle service, etc. Transportation requests that the Institute communicate with
event staff/attendees about alternative transportation options prior to large events.
Section 13: Zoning
The applicant shall clarify the remaining or "floating" floor area within the Institute SPA. The
applicant shall verify the height and review the elevations with Zoning Staff prior to building
permit submittal, showing all proposed mechanical equipment to be located on the roof.
Section 14:
All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development
proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before
the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan
development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless
amended by an authorized entity.
Section 15:
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 16:
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 17:
A public hearing on this ordinance shall be held on the 10th day of November, 2008, at a meeting of
the City Council commencing at 5:00 p.m. 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.
[Signatures on following page]
Ordinance No.32, Series of 2008 4
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council
of the City of Aspen on the 14th day of October, 2008.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 27th day of October, 2008.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
John Worcester, City Attorney
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
List of Exhibits
Exhibit A -Approved Site Plan, Lot Area, Paepcke Auditorium Building Floor Area Dimensions
Ordinance No.32, Series of 2008 5
~_C~IJ~
~E~~~
~~ o
A C "o
y~ rn
~~ v
p y
~D G
]u C C
yT ~ O
T T
~o
A -+ en
w ~~'., c
~rn o
" ~° ~
~~
~~ ~
.._ ~
~~
e.-
«~,
N pp w
4N Y
N ~ 1G
A C
T
~~
rn
~t
m
a
SPA EXHIBIT A
Sec. 26.440.050. Review standards for development in a Specially Planned Area (SPA).
A. General. In the review of a development application for a conceptual development
plan and a final development plan, the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council shall
consider the following:
1. Whether the proposed development is compatible with or enhances the mix of
development in the immediate vicinity of the parcel in terms of land use, density, height,
bulk, architecture, landscaping and open space.
Sta Findin
The proposed development does not change the existing land use, but there will be
modifications to the height of the Paepcke Auditorium, with the addition of a mechanical
chase and associated roof assembly, but will not increase the overall height of 21 '- 4 to top
of wall. The landscape and open space proposal will be reviewed with the Greenwald tent
application. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
2. Whether sufficient public facilities and roads exist to service the proposed
development.
Sta Finding:
The addition of sixty (60) seats will increase capacity. Staff recommends that the applicant
continue to work with the Engineering and Transportation Departments to establish a pedestrian,
transportation plan that will be presented during the public hearing for the Institute's application
for the Greenwald Pavilion (permanent summer-only tent), and shall be reviewed prior to City
Council Review. Staff finds this criterion to be met for the Paepcke Auditorium.
3. Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally suitable for
development, considering the slope, ground instability and the possibility of mudflow, rock
falls, avalanche dangers and flood hazards.
Staff Finding:
The proposed Paepcke Auditorium Building expansion parcel is suitable for the addition. Staff
finds this criterion to be met.
4. Whether the proposed development creatively employs land planning techniques
to preserve significant view planes, avoid adverse environmental impacts and provide open
space, trails and similar amenities for the users of the project and the public at large.
Sta~Finding:
The proposed addition and renovation to the Paepcke Auditorium will upgrade the building to
comply with current energy code, ADA, and fire protection requirements, therefore minimizing
the current deficits in user access, environmental impacts and safety.
Staff and the applicant continue to work with the Engineering and Transportation Departments
to establish a pedestrian, transportation plan that will be presented during the public hearing for
the Institute 's application for the Greenwald Pavilion (permanent summer-only tent). Staff finds
this criterion to be met for the Paepcke Auditorium Building only.
5. Whether the proposed development is in compliance with the Aspen Area
Comprehensive Plan.
Sta~Finding:
From the AACP; "Walter Paepcke helped found Aspen as a unique community... in
which arts, culture and education provide cornerstones of our lifestyle, character, and
economy. "The Institute and the Auditorium provide a venue to facilitate many of the goals
of AACP, specifically Arts, Culture, Education, Design Quality, and Historic Preservation.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
6. Whether the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive
public funds to provide public facilities for the parcel or the surrounding neighborhood.
Sta Finding:
The proposal does not require public funds to provide public facilities for the proposed parcel.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
7. Whether proposed development on slopes in excess of twenty percent (20%) meet
the slope reduction and density requirements of Subsection 26.445.040.B.2.
Sta f Finding:
There are no slopes in excess of twenty percent on the proposed Lot. Staff finds this criterion to
be met.
8. Whether there are sufficient GMQS allotments for the proposed development.
Sta,~Finding:
Not applicable if continued to be determined an essential public facility.
B. Variations permitted. The final development plan shall comply with the requirements
of the underlying zone district; provided, however, that variations from those requirements may
be allowed based on the standards of this Section. Variations may be allowed for the following
requirements: open space, minimum distance between buildings, maximum height, minimum
front yard, minimum rear yard, minimum side yard, minimum lot width, minimum lot area, trash
access area, internal floor area ratio, number of off-street parking spaces and uses and design
standards of Chapter 26.410 for streets and related improvements. Any variations allowed shall
be specified in the SPA agreement and shown on the final development plan.
Staff Finding:
Staff does not find that there are any requests for a variation. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
GMQS
Sec. 26.470.050. General requirements.
A. Purpose: The intent of growth management is to provide for orderly development and
redevelopment of the City while providing mitigation from the impacts said development and
redevelopment creates. Different types of development are categorized below, as well as the
necessary review process and review standards for the proposed development. A proposal may
fall into multiple categories and therefore have multiple processes and standards to adhere to and
meet.
B. General requirements: All development applications for growth management review
shall comply with the following standards. The reviewing body shall approve, approve with
conditions or deny an application for growth management review based on the following
generally applicable criteria and the review criteria applicable to the specific type of
development:
1. Sufficient growth management allotments are available to accommodate the
proposed development, pursuant to Subsection 26.470.030.D. Applications for multi-year
development allotment, pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.090.1 shall not be required to meet
this standard.
Staff Finding:
If determined to be an essential public facility, the additional 614 square feet will not be
applicable. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
2. The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan.
Staff Finding:
See SPA criterion 5.
The development conforms to the requirements and limitations of the zone
district.
Staff Finding:
The Land use Code states; "the dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted and
conditional uses in the Academic (A) zone district shall be set by the adoption of a conceptual
development plan and final development plan, pursuant to Chapter 26.440, specially planned
area. The Academic (A) zone district requirements are set by the SPA, no variations from the
requirements and limitations are requested or necessary. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
4. The proposed development is consistent with the Conceptual Historic
Preservation Commission approval, the Conceptual Commercial Design Review approval
and the Conceptual Planned Unit Development approval, as applicable.
Sta Finding:
Currently, the application has received conceptual approval, as required in the Historic
Preservation Commission Resolution to proceed to the Planning and Zoning Commission. Please
refer to the HPC minutes from May 28, 2008 and July 23, 2008 in the packet.
5. Unless otherwise specified in this Chapter, sixty percent (60%) of the employees
generated by the additional commercial or lodge development, according to Subsection
26.470.100.A, Employee generation rates, are mitigated through the provision of
affordable housing. The employee generation mitigation plan shall be approved pursuant
to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable housing, at a Category 4 rate as defined in the
Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may
choose to provide mitigation units at a lower category designation.
Staff Finding:
The applicant is requesting to be determined an essential public facility (as approved in 1991),
and to have the affordable housing mitigation requirement waived. The proposal for the
Auditorium expansion does not include additional employees (see attachment from applicant). If
determined to be an essential public facility, Staff finds this criterion to be met.
6. Affordable housing net livable area, for which the finished floor level is at or
above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher, shall be provided in an amount equal
to at least thirty percent (30%) of the additional free-market residential net livable area, for
which the finished floor level is at or above natural or finished grade, whichever is higher.
Affordable housing shall be approved pursuant to Paragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable
housing, and be restricted to a Category 4 rate as defined in the Aspen/Pitkin County
Housing Authority Guidelines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide
mitigation units at a lower category designation. Affordable housing units that are being
provided absent a requirement ("voluntary units") may be deed-restricted at any level of
affordability, including residential occupied.
Staff Finding.•
Not Applicable. Staff finds this criterion to be met
7. The project represents minimal additional demand on public infrastructure, or
such additional demand is mitigated through improvement proposed as part of the project.
Public infrastructure includes, but is not limited to, water supply, sewage treatment, energy
and communication utilities, drainage control, fire and police protection, solid waste
disposal, parking and road and transit services. (Ord. No. 14, 2007, §1)
Staff Finding.•
The application is not proposing additional parking, but states; "as currently done, Paepcke events
are scheduled to minimize overlap with the MMA Music Tent events and people are encouraged to
park in the MMA main parking lot or walk or bicycle to Paepcke events. " 97 parking spaces were
approved in the 1991 SPA, prior to the construction of the parking structure under the tennis courts.
The application is not proposing additional parking, but states; "as currently done, Paepcke events
are scheduled to minimize overlap with the MMA Music Tent events and people are encouraged to
park in the MMA main parking lot or walk or bicycle to Paepcke events. "Staff and the applicant
continue to work with the Engineering and Transportation Departments to establish a pedestrian,
transportation plan that will be presented during the public hearing for the Institute's application
for the Greenwald Pavilion (permanent summer-only tent). Staff finds this criterion to be met for
the Paepcke Auditorium Building only. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
Sec. 26.470.090. City Council applications.
The following types of development shall be approved, approved with conditions or denied
by the City Council, pursuant to Section 26.470.110, Procedures for review, and the criteria for
each type of development described below. Except as noted, all growth management applications
shall comply with the general requirements of Section 26.470.050. Except as noted, all City
Council growth management approvals shall be deducted from the respective annual development
allotments and development ceiling levels.
4. Essential public facilities. The development of an essential public facility, upon a
recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, shall be approved, approved
with conditions or denied by the City Council based on the following criteria:
a. The Community Development,, Director has determined the primary use
and/or structure to be an essential public facility (see definition). Accessory uses may
also be part of an essential public facility project.
Staff Finding:
The applicant is requesting that the Aspen Institute (and MMA) continue to be an Essential Public
Facility, including the Paepcke Building, as determined in the 1991 SPA Plan. Staff finds this
criterion to be met.
b. Upon a recommendation from the Community Development Director,
the City Council may assess, waive or partially waive affordable
housing mitigation requirements as is deemed appropriate and
warranted for the purpose of promoting civic uses and in consideration
of broader community goals. The employee generation rates may be
used as a guideline, but each operation shall be analyzed for its unique
employee needs, pursuant to Section 26.470.100, Calculations.
Staff Finding:
In addition to the request that the Aspen Institute continue to be an Essential Public Facility as
determined in the 1991 SPA Plan, the applicant is also requesting that the City Council waive the
affordable housing mitigation requirements as it is not proposing to generate new employees. Please
see Exhibit C for the employee analysis provided by the applicant. Staff finds this criterion to be met
for the Paepcke Auditorium addition and renovation.
~xN ~~ 11" ~
.MEMORANDUM
TO: Jason Lasser
Aspen Community Development Office
FROM: Jim Curtis
Aspen Institute Owner Representative
DATE: June 30, 2008
RE: Supplemental Information -Paepcke Auditorium Renovation
SPA Amendment Application, Dated April 2, 2008
Parcel #2735-121-29-809
Pursuant to your email, here is the supplemental information you requested on the
above referenced application. Please email or call on any questions.
I. REVIEW STANDARDS FOR DEVELOPMENT IN A
SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA (SPA), CODE SECTION 2b 440 050 A
A. General. In the review of a development application,for a conceptual development
plan and a, final development plan, the Planning and Zoning Cornmission and City
Council shall consider the following:
Whether the proposed development is compatible with or enhances the mix of
development r.'n the immediate vicinity of the parcel in terms of land use, density,
height, bulls, architecture, landscaping and open space.
The Aspen Institute feels the proposed amendments are both consistent with
and an enhancement of the 1.991 SPA Plan and compatible with the
surrounding neighborhood for the following reasons:
A. No major work has been done on the Paepcke Building since its
construction circa 1961. The building has significant functional, energy
and Code problems which the renovation will address. The renovation will
preserve and upgrade the building for another 50 years of wonderful use far
the Aspen Institute and the community.
$. Increasing the seating capacity of the Auditorium by 60 f seats and
opening-up the new addition walls to the patio space will encourage greater
indoor/outdoor connection and greater public access and interaction for the
I'aepckeAu~iitoriumRenova.toi nQ63U8 1 06 9
building's public events which are growing in popularity.
C. The modest additions to the Auditorium which total 540 ~ sf. do not
significantly increase the bulk and mass of the building and are designed to
be compatible with the original design of the building.
D. Making the building more energy efficient and ADA compliant is
mandated/encouraged by the City of Aspen Codes and public policy.
B. Consolidating the Aspen Institute`s unbuilt 1991 SPA square footages will
benefit all parties in tracking the 1991 square footages.
2. YVhether sufficient publr'c.facilities and reads exist. to service the proposed
develvplnent..
Applicant feels file project represents minimal additional demand. on public
infrastructure. Applicant acknowledges adding 60 i seats to the Auditorium will
generate some additional traffic. however, as currently done, Paepcke events are
scheduled to minimize overlap with MAA Music Tent events and people are
encouraged. tp park in the MAA main parking lot or walk or bicycle to Paepcke
events. Applicant does not propose to add any new parking which would only
encourage more car traffic. Applicant feels the modest increase of 60 ~ seats is an
acceptable trade-off for making the Paepcke events mare open and accessible to
the public.
Whether the parcel prroposed for development is generally suitable,for
developi~~ent, considering the slope, ground instability and the possibility of
rnudflow, rvclr. falls, avalanche dangers and flood Izazcrrds.
"I'he parcel is suitable for development. The Paepcke Building sits on i7at, level
ground.
.~. Wl~ether t12e proposed development creatively employs land planning techniques
to preserve sr.'gnificant view planes, avoid adverse environmental i~~zpacts and
provide open space, trails and similar amenities, for the users vf'the project and
the public at large.
The Paepcke Building provides an intellectual amenity for the Aspen Institute and
the community. The modest expansion of the Auditorium. is proposed to facilitate
greater public access and interaction for the building's public events which are
growing in popularity. The overriding goal of the applicant is to preserve and
upgrade the building for another 50 years of wonderful use for the Aspen Institute
and the community.
Pacpcke~uditoriumiZenovatnyn06308 2 of 9
S. WhetlZer the prropvsed development is in coJnpliance with the Aspen Area
Coinprelzensive Plan.
Applicant feels the proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area
Comprehensive Plan. The Paepcke Building is a keynote stricture in the history
and culture of Aspen. The overriding goal of the applicant is to preserve and
upgrade the building for another 50 years of wonderful use far the Aspen Institute
and. the community
6. Whether the proposed development will require the expenditure of excessive
public funds to provi.'de public facilities for the parcel or the surrounding
neighborhood.
Applicant feels the proposed development will not require the expenditure of
excessive (or any) public [ands.
7. Whether proposed development on slopes in excess of twenty percent (20 0, meet
the slope reduction and density requirements of Subsection 26. ~J~15.040.B.2.
Not applicable. The Paepcke Building is on t7at, level ground.
8. Whether there are ,sufficient GMQS allotments for the proposed development.
Applicant is not clear if a GMQS allotment is applicable because the modest
expansion only totals 540 ~ sf. Moreover, the 1991 SPA Plan and subsequent C'rty
Council actions have supported the Aspen Institute activities and facilities as
I~ssential Public Facilities.
II. SPA APPLICATION, CODI4r SECTIONS 26 440 060 A & B
Contents of application. The contents of the development application for a
Conceptual Development Plan shall include the.follotiving:
a. The general application information required i.'n Common Development
Review Pi^ocedures set forth at Chapter 26.304.030.
This information is given in the application.
h. A conceptual description of the proposed development. Tlzis shall include, bzct
not he limited to a statement of the intent of tlae proposed development and a
P~e~~ekeAuditoriumRenovatom0fiat)8 3 ~P9
conceptual description of proposed land uses, densities, design concepts, access
ways and. a general time schedule for construction of the proposed development.
As described in the application. Construction is proposed to start in late August,
2009 after the MAA Music Tent season is over and be completed by June 30,
2010.
c. A statement outlined in conceptual terms lZOw the proposed development will
be served with the appropriate public facr.'lities and low assur-cr.nces will be r~zade
that those puhlic,facilities are available to serve the proposed developr~zent.
As described in t11e application. Applicant acknowledges adding GO ~ seats to the
Auditorium will generate soiree additional trai:f c. However, as currently done
Paepcke events are schedu}ed to minimize overlap with the MAA Music Tent
events and people are encouraged to park in the MAA main parking lot or walk or
bicycle to Paepcke events. Applicant does not propose to add any new parking
which would only encourage more car traffic. Applicant feels the modest increase
of GO ~ seats is an acceptable trade-off for making the Paepcke events more open
and accessible to the public.
d. A conceptual Sr'te Plan, illustrating:
Existing natuJ•al and manrnade,featacr°es.
As described in the application.
2. General configuration of proposed Cared uses, access ways and exr.'sting and
proposed utilities.
As described in the application.
Schematic drawings of proposed buildings, indicating general site design
featacres and. overall mass and Izeight of proposed. structures.
As described in the application.
B. Final Development. Plan.
Corzte-2ts of application. The contents of a development applicatr'on for a !'incr.l
Development Plan shall include the following.
a. The general application r.'nformation required in Chapter 26.31J~1.
Pacpck~AuditoriumRenovatoinOG308 4 of 9
This inforrnatioi~i is given in the application.
1~. A r~recise plan of the pr-oposed developmenC r.'ncluding but not limited tv
prvposed land uses, densities, landscaping, internal traffic circulation and access
ways. The precise plan shall be in sufficient detail to enable evaluation of the
architectural, landscaping and design features of the pr°oposed development. It
shall show the location and floor area of all existing and propvsed buildings and
other improvements including heights, dwelling unr.'t types and nonresidential
facilities.
As described in the application.
c. A statement specifying the underlying zone district. on tl~e parcel and, f
variations are proposed., a statement of how t.1~e variations comply ivitlz tl~e
.standards of Subsection 26.440.040.8.
The Aspen Institute parcel is zoned Academic -Specially Planned Area. The
auditorium, conference, educational purpose of the building is consistent with the
Academic zoning of the parcel and the Academic use oi'the surrounding Aspen
Institute buildings. To the applicant's knowledge, no zoning variations are
requested or necessary. The zoning standards of the parcel are set by the SPA
reVieW.
d.. A statement outlining a development schedule specifying the date constr°uction
is pT°oposed to be initiated and completed.
Construction is proposed to start in late August, 2009 after the MAA Music Tent
season is over and be completed by ,Tune 30, 2010.
e. A statement specking the public facilities that wr.'ll be needed to accornrnodate
the proposed development and what specific assur°unces will be made tv ensure
that public facr.'lities will be available to accommodate the proposed development.
Applicant feels no new public facilities will be needed.
f. A statement of the reasonable conformance of the frnal development plan 1-vith
tlae approval granted to the conceptual development plan crud with the or°iginal
r.'ntent of the City Coticncil in designating the parcel Specially Planned Area (SPA).
Applicant feels the proposed amendment is consistent with. and an enhancement
of the 1991 SPA Plan for the following reasons:
I'aepcl<enuditoriumReno~~atainOG30$ 5 ~F9
A. No major work has been done on the Paepclte Building since its
construction circa 1961. The building has significant ti~nctional, energy
and Code problems which the renovation will address. The renovation will
preserve and upgrade the building for another 50 years o1'wonderful use Eor
the Aspen Institute and the community.
B Increasing the seating capacity of the Auditorium by 60 i seats, and
opening-up the new addition walls to the patio space will encourage greater
indoor/outdoor connection and greater public access and interaction for the
building's public events which are growing in popularity.
G The modest additions to the Auditorium which total X40 i s1'. do not
significantly increase the bulls and mass of the building and are designed to
be compatible with the original design of the building.
D. Malting the building more energy efficient and AI7A compliant is
mandated/encouraged by the City of Aspen Codes and public policy.
E. Consolidating the Aspen Institute`s unbuilt 1.991 SPA square footages will
benefit all parties in tracking the 1991. square footages.
g. A plat which depicts the applicable informatr'an required by Subsection
26.4~a0.060.A.3.
Applicant will provide a SPA Plat post the Aspen City Council review oi'the
application as has been the procedure of the Community Development Office in
past SPA. reviews.
h. A proposed SPA agree»zent which conforms to Section 26.44q.070 below.
Applicant will provide a SPA Agreement post the Aspen City Council review oP
the application as has been the procedure of the Community Development 01~f.ice
in past SPA. reviews.
III. GMQS GENERAL REQUIREMENTS, CODE SECTION 2b.470.050.B
A. General Requirements: All development applications fo~° growth management
review shall comply with the following standards. The reviewing body .shall
approve, approve with conditions or deny are application for growth nzanage~nent
review based on the.followinggenerally applicable criteria and the review
crr.'teria applicable to the spec fc type of development:
C'aepcl.e/tudicoriumRcno~~ltoinOG3(}g b of ~)
Sufficient growth management. allotments are availulJle to accvmnzodate the
proposed development; pursicant to Sachsection 26.470.030.D. Applications for
multi year development allotment, pacrsuant to Paragraph Zb. X70.090,1 shall not.
lie required to meet this .standard.
Applicant is not clear if a GMQS allotment is applicable because the modest
expansion only totals 540 f sf. City Council Ordinance # 14 (Series'of 1991 )
which approved the 1991 SPA Master Plan found. both the MAA. & Aspen
Institute facilities to be Essential Public Facilities. Cit}~ Council approvals
thereafter have also found the facilities of the Aspen Institute to be Essential
Public Facilities. Most recently in December, 2004, the City CoLU1ci1 found the
Doerr-Hosier Center under Resolution #45 {Series of 2004} to be an Essential
Public Facility. Applicant feels the modest expansion of the Paepcke Building
qualities as an Essential Public Facility consistent with past City Council actions
to support the activities and facilities of the Aspen Institute and MAA.
2. Tl~e ptropo.sed development is consistent with the Aspen Area C~vmmuniry Plan.
Applicant feels the proposed development is consistent wish the Aspen Area
Community Plan. 'the Paepcke Building is a keynote structure in the history and
culture of Aspen. The overriding goal of t}~e applicant is to preserve and upgrade
the building for another 50 years ofwonderful use for the Aspen Institute and t11e
community.
3. The development conforms to the RequiT°ements and limr.'tutions of the zone
district.
The Aspen Institute parcel is zoned Academic -Specially Planned Area. The
auditorium, conference, educational purpose of the building is consistent with the
Academic zoning of the parcel and the Academic use of the surrounding Aspen
Institute buildings. To the applicant's knowledge, no zoning variations are
requested or necessary. The zoning standards of the parcel are set by the SPA
review.
4. The proposed development is consistent with the C:vncepttcal Historic
Preservation. Commission approval, the Conceptual Conzmercr.'al Design Revr.'erv
apps°oval and the Conceptual Planned Unit development appr°vval, as applicable.
These reviews are in progress.
S. Unless otherwise specified in this Chapter, sixty percent (60%) of the employees
generated by the additional commercial. or lodge development; according to
Pu:pcke~uditoriumRc;nov<itoi~i0fi308 7 of 9
Subsection 26.470.100. A, Employee generation rates, are mitigated thrrougl~ tl~.e
provision of affordable housing. The employee generation mitigation plan shall
be approved pursuant to 1'uragraph 26.470.070.4, Affordable hozering, at a
Categorry 4 r°ate as defined in the Aspen/Pitlcin County 1-1'ousing Authority
Guia'elines, as amended. An applicant may choose to provide mitigation units at a
lower category designation.
Tlae modest expansion of the building will not generate any new employees and
therefore the affordable housing requirement is not applicable. The Aspen
Institute respectfully requests a waiver for affordable house mitigation.
6. Affordable housing net livable area, for whiclz the finished floor level is at. or
above natural or finished gr°ade, whichever is higher, shall be provided in an
amount equal to at least tlzir°ty percent (30%) of t1~e additional,fr~ee-rrmcr.rlcet
residential net livable area, for which the,finislzed floor level is at o~° above
natural or ftnr.'shed grade, wlziclzever is l~r.'gl~er.
Not applicable.
The project. represents minimal additional der~zand. on public in~~astrLlct2lre or
such additional demand is mitigated through improvements proposed as part of
the project. Ptchlic r.'nfrastrueture includes, bact is not limited to, water supply,
sewage treatment, energy and communication utilities, drainage control,.fire and
police protection, solid waste disposal, parking, and road and trccrisr.'t
services. (Ord.. Nv. 14, 2007, ~1)
Applicant feels the project represents minimal additional demand on public
infrastructure. Applicant acknowledges adding 60 ~ seats to the Auditorium will
generate some additional traffic. However, as currently done, Paepcke events are
schedule to minimize overlap with the MAA Music Tent events and people are
encourage to park in the MAA main parking Iot or walk or bicycle to Paepcke
events. Applicant does not propose to add any new parking which would only
encourage more car use. Applicant feels the modest increase of 60 ~ seats is an
acceptable trade-off for making the Paepcke events more open and accessible to
the public.
IV. ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES CODE SECTION 26.470.490
1. .The development of an Essential Public Facility, upon cc recor~zr7zendation from
the Planning and Zoning Canrnission, shall be Essential Public Facilities
appJ°oved, approved with conditions, or denied by the City Council based on the
following criteria:
Paepckenaditc~ritunRe~tovatoin063i1K K of 9
a) The Community Development Director has determined the prr.'ma~^~~ use and/or
structacre to be an Essential Public r'acility. (see defrnitr.'on.) Accessory zrses retry
also he part of an Essential Public Facility project.
"The Code definitioal of an Essential .Public T'acility is "~ Facility which serves an
essential public purpose is available For use by or benet7t of the general 13ublic and
serves the needs of the community." City Council Ordinance # I ~ (Series 199 I )
which approved the 1991. SPA Master Plan found both the MAA and Aspen
Institute facilities (including Paepclce Building) to be Essential Public 1 acilities.
City Council approvals thereafter have also found tl~e facilities of the MAA and
Aspen Institute to be Essential Public Facilities.
b. Upon a reconzrnendation Pram the C'arnnzunity Development Drr°ector, the City
Council may assess, waive or partially waive affordable housing rnitigcction
r^equireinents as is deemed appropriate and war^ranted, for° tl~e purpose of
prrornoting civic uses an din consideration of br^oader community goals. T17e
employee generation rates may be used as a gicidelr'ne, but each operation shall
be analyzed for r.'ts unique employee needs, pursuunt to Sectr,'vn 2G.~70.1Q0,
Calculations.
7'he modest expansion of the building will not generate any anew employees and
therefore the affordable housing requirement is not applicable. The Aspen
Institute respectfully requests a waiver for affordable housing mitigation.
Pacpckenuditoriumlte~mva~oiittS6,08 9 of 9
~x~ 1~iY G
To: Jason Lasser,
From: Jim Curtis,
Date: August 18, 2008
MEMORANDUM
Aspen Community Deve. Office
Owner Representative
The Aspen Institute
Re: Aspen Institute & Aspen Meadows Employees Analysis
Exhibit A, attached, gives the Existing Employees Analysis for the Aspen Institute
& Aspen Meadows. A summary of the Employees Fu11-Time Equivalents (FTE's) is
given below based on 2,080 hrs./yr./FTE based on the Aspen/Pitkin Housing Authority
FTE standard.
A. The Aspen Institute
a. Full-Time, Year- Round Emp. 18.0 FTE
b. Part-Time Staff, Summer Season Emp. 4.9
c. Interns ,Summer Season Emp. 1.7
d. Part-Time Staff, Winter Season Emp. 0.0
e. Interns ,Winter Season Emp. 0.0
24.6 FTE
B. The Aspen Meadows
a. Full-Time, Year-Round Emp. 101.0 FTE
b. Part-Time, Summer Season Emp. 20.7
C. Part-Time, Winter Season Emp. 19.0
140.7 FTE
C. Combine Total 165.3 FTE
For background, the 1991 Specially Planned Area Master Plan (SPA Plan)
subdivided the "Meadows campus" in order that the 3non-profits (The Aspen Institute,
Music Association of Aspen and Aspen Center for Physics) could own their own land and
buildings. This ownership was critical to the 3non-profits for their sustainability and
ability to continue to operate in Aspen. Of the total "campus", the Aspen Institute owns
approximately 40 acres known as Lot lA & 1B, Aspen Meadows Subdivision. Lot lA is
LasserAspCommDeveEmpAnalysis 1 of 5
Council approvals thereafter have also found the Aspen Institute facilities to be Essential
Public Facilities. Most recently in December, 2004, the City Council found the Doerr-
Hosier Center under Resolution #45 (Series of 2004) and in November, 2005, the Health
Center facilities under Resolution #46 (Series of 2005) to be Essential Public Facilities.
There is a reason why the 1991 City Council and subsequent City Councils have
found the Aspen Institute facilities and operations to be Essential Public Facilities. The
Aspen Institute operations are a major part of the history and cultural heritage of the
community. Most of the Aspen Institute programs and lectures are open to the Aspen
public either free, by reservation or for a nominal fee. Most programs and lectures are
taped for Grassroots TV for repeat showings. The Aspen Institute 2007 Summer Events
program was submitted as part of the Paepcke Auditorium SPA application. Over 30
events are listed for the Summer of 2007, and subsequent events and lectures have been
added. These events, highlighted by the Aspen Ideas Festival, the McClosley Speaker
Series and the Dalai Lama visit, add immensely to the rich intellectual and cultural
experience of Aspen. The Aspen Institute strongly believes in its mission and its outreach
to the Aspen community, and requests the continued recognition of its operations as an
Essential Public Facility.
cc: Amy Margerum
LasserAspCommDeveEmpAnalysis 3 of 5
B. Aspen Meadows Employees'
1. Summer Season
a. 101 Full-Time Year-Round (101 FTE)
(2,080 hrs./yr./person avg.)
b. 83 Part-Time, Summer Season (20.7 FTE)
(mid-June, July, Aug., mid-Sept.)
(3 months (13 weeks) @ 40 hrs./wk. = 520 hrs./person avg.)
2. Winter Season
a. 101 Full-Time Year-Round (FTE above)
(2,080 hrs./yr./person avg.)
b. 45 Part-Time, Winter Season (19.0 FTE)
(mid-Nov., Dec., Jan., Feb., March, mid-April)
(5 months (22 weeks) @ 40 hrs./wk. = 880 hrs./person avg.)
3. Spring~& Fall Shoulder Seasons
a. 101 Full-Time, Year-Round (FTE above)
(2,080 hrs./yr./person avg.)
b. 0 Part-Time, Shoulder Seasons (0 FTE)
(late-April, May, early June &
late Sept, Oct., early Nov.)
~ ~ The Aspen Meadows will contract with a local labor pool to provide supplemental
service staff for their largest dinners, receptions or events on an as needed basis.
2. FTE's Full-Time Employee Equivalents based on 2,080 hrs./year/FTE based on
Aspen/Pitkin Housing Authority FTE standard.
LasserAspCommDeveEmpAnalysis 5 of 5
~x~i~i~ ~
To: Jason Lasser,
From: Jim Curtis,
Date: August 19, 2008
MEMORANDUM
Aspen Community Deve. Office
Owner Representative
The Aspen Institute
Re: Traffic & Parking Memo
Paepcke SPA Amendment Application, Dated Apri12, 2008
The Aspen Institute feels the renovation and modest expansion of 60 seats
to the Paepcke Auditorium will have minimal traffic and parking impacts to the
existing traffic and parking patterns in the West End. The expansion of the
Auditorium from 346 to 406 seats will primarily benefit the Aspen community by
providing more seats inside Paepcke Auditorium for popular events like the
summer season public lectures series. As you are aware, we currently provide
"overflow" in every nook and cranny of our building, using speakers and video
where possible. The additional seats inside will help us provide a more
pleasurable listening experience for the public.
Parkin
The Paepcke parking lot has 91 parking spaces. Although the parking lot is
owned by the Aspen Institute, the Institute shares the parking lot with the Music
Associates of Aspen in the summer. The MAA reserves half of the spots for their
musicians and staff.
The Music Associates of Aspen does allow the Aspen Institute to use the MAA
"big" parking lot when this lot is not being used by MAA events. This cooperative
sharing has worked well between the Institute and MAA during big events.
However, the majority of the time we encourage our participants to not drive to
our events due to the limited parking. Attached to this memo is an example of the
depths to which we go out of our way to encourage people to not drive. We go
further by providing continual shuttle service from the Meadows into town every
30 minutes and for large events we pay for additional shuttles from the Rio Grande
parking garage and from the Ruby Transit station.
In addition, we run golf carts around the perimeter of the Meadows property, rent
up to 20 electric golf carts to go back and forth on our property, offer bikes on our
property for guests, and hire peidcabs for big events.
All of our events encourage people to take transit, walk or ride bikes.
Traffic
The Aspen Institute does not have any current traffic counts for the West
End streets or the lower segment of North Third Street, which provides access to
the Paepcke parking lot. Moreover, West End traffic is a mix of traffic - - a large
amount of traffic is Main Street/Highway 82 traffic driving through the West End
to avoid the "Highway 82 Bottle Neck", MAA traffic during music events, Physics
traffic, Aspen Institute traffic during events, construction traffic, and general
tourist and homeowner traffic, especially during the summer.
Yes, Paepcke events do generate traffic on an event-by-event basis. On all
Paepcke events, but especially on the larger events, the Institute encourages, by
promotional material, people to walk, bike or take the cross-town shuttle. The
Aspen Institute feels the modest expansion of 60 seats to Paepcke Auditorium will
not increase our increment of the current overall traffic in the West End (due to the
fact that we accommodate overflow crowds now) and that the community benefit
of making Paepcke more available to the Aspen community is worth the trade-off.
~'.
:~ o
~~ .~ .~
o?`" ~~
.~
His Holiness the Fourteenth Dalai Lama
Benedict Music Tent • July 26, 2008 • 10:00 am
IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR TICKET HOLDERS
ARRIVE EARLY, ENTRANCE WILL OPEN AT 9:OOAM
No Event Parking
• Ticket holders for this event are strongly encouraged to walk, bike or utilize public transportation.
Public Transportation
Shuttle service looping between Rio Grande Parking Plaza and Rubey Park in downtown Aspen, and the
Aspen Institute campus, is available from 8 to loam and from 12 to 2pm; see detailed public and shuttle
transportation information on the back of this flyer.
Benedict Music Tent and Lawn Seating
Enter via Music Tent parking lot
• White tickets designate Benedict Music Tent seating.
• Green tickets designate lawn seating.
• Only those holding white and green tickets will be admitted to the Benedict Music Tent property.
• White and green ticket holders will enter from the Music Tent parking lot.
Music Tent Security
• Original tickets are required for entry. Lost tickets cannot be reprinted.
• All white and green ticket holders will enter through a metal detector for security purposes.
• If possible, please limit metal objects including jewelry, large belt buckles, cell phones, pagers, etc.
• No cameras or recording equipment will be admitted.
• No backpacks, briefcases, large purses, bags, lawn chairs, umbrellas, coolers, food or drink will be admitted.
Paepcke Auditorium and Doerr Hosier Center Simulcast Seating
Enter via Meadows Road
• Pink tickets designate Paepcke Auditorium simulcast seating.
• Yellow tickets designate Doerr Hosier Center simulcast seating.
• All pink and yellow ticket holders must walk, by entering at Meadows Road. No vehicles will be allowed
beyond the entrance at Meadows Road. (directional map is provided on the back of this flyer).
• There will be no public parking available.
EVENT SHUTTLE INFORMATION
Event shuttles wil run in a loop from the Rio Grande Parking Plaza, stopping at Rubey Park,
to the Benedict Music Tent, and back. Shown in red.
EVENT SHUTTLE SCHEDULE:
To the event:
8:OOam - 10:OOam Rio Grande to Rubey Park to Benedict Music Tent
From the event:
12:OOpm - 2:OOpm Benedict Music Tent to Rio Grande to Rubey Park
RUBEY PARK DuRANT
DURANT
COOPER v
v ~
2~ HYMAN ~ z = T
~ a v z v+
p z HOPKINS ~ ¢ ~ ~ n
~ ~ O
~ ~ w HOTEL ~ MAIN ~ p ~
JEROME gLEEKER
RIO GRANDE - _~ T T
PARKING PLAZA ~ FRANCIS o f
p
SMUGGLER = y
NORTH
-• • ~
.,,,,
~'. t'
GILLESPIE
BENEDICT MUSIC TENT
JULY 26TH SEATING LOCATIONS
DOERR HOSIER CENTER
Simulcast Seating
Yellow Tickets
7:24 am - 11:00 pm daily
(beginning June 8)
• :• ~
From Rubey Park to
The Benedict Music Tent
:06 and :36 past each. hour.
:• ~
From The Benedict Music Tent
to Rubey Park
:15 and :45 past each hour.
~ WALKWAY TO BUPA H~E\
® SIMULCAST
SEATING ANPARNON
WALKWAY TO
SIMULCAST pAEPCKE AUDITORIUM
SEATING
Simulcast Seating
Pink Tickets
/~
BENEDICT MUSIC TENT ~ ~
Inside Seating ~ ;
BENEDICT MUSIC TENT White Tickets 0
MEADOWS ROAD Lawn Seating
Simulcast Entrance Green Tickets O ;
(no vehicles heyond
this point) I
TH Security Entrance ~
I 70
HARRIS MAl
STREET
D
~x~~$~~ ~
Frr~m: Jim Curtis <jcurtis@sopris.neb
Subject. Paepcke Auditorium
Date: August 8, 2008 11:39:24 AM MDT
To« Jason Lasser <Jason.Lasser@ci.aspen.co.us>
Supplemental info. per your request:
Existing Building 17,805 SF +/-
Proposed Additions 614 SF +/- (Per HPC Plans dated 7/23/08 attached (307 SF per side))
Total 18,419 SF +/-
City Council SPA Ordiance #14 (Series 1991)
"The Aspen Meadows" SPA Development & Subdivision Agreement
Let me know if you need anything else.
Thanks,
Jim Curtis
~xHIgIT ~
~c~~; Jim Curtis <jcurtis@sopris.neb
S~.~h~-~~n~~~: Aspen Institute - Paepcke Seating Studies
Date; July 30, 2008 10:22:12 AM MDT
~.~=~ Jason Lasser <Jason.Lasser@ci.aspen.co.us>
Cc: Michael Schnoering <mikes@fmg-arch.com>
Jason,
Per your request, here are conceptual seating studies showing the impact of ADA accessibility on
the existing Auditorium. I feel these studies demonstrate what I told you that making the existing
Auditorium ADA accessible will result in a net lost of seats.
Please feel free to email or call Michael Schnoering of FMG Architects on any technical /
architectural questions regarding the studies. I think you met Michael at the HPC meeting
July 23. Michael is at 609-452-1777 ext 146 ph. (Princeton , NJ) &mikes@fma-arch.com
Thanks,
Jim Curtis
920-1395 ph.
N
U
sN
(Y~
~C
OU
~D
w
N
O
Q
Q
0
Q
2
c~
z
cn
X
W
O
Z
F--
(/~
x
w
O
~ ~
O o 0
r'7 r7 r7
c~
z
°~ ~ w
~ cn
Q
0
Q
c0 c.0
~ d'
r7 r7
F¢-
rn O
~-
IJ
~ ~
O N
N 0
~ ~
F
U
W
O
a
C7
LL
O
H
0
Q
w
Y
U
a
(~ Q
a
Z
~ o~
O ~ O
~ ~O
Z zv
F- z z
W ~~
cn a
N
V
V~
r
OU
C? `a
a~
3
a~
6
~~~
cn
-
~ co ~n ~
~~~
'- ~ M ~
W
Z
C7
O~ O Q Q
O O
O ~ N
CD Q
~
w ~
Q
z ~
v
O ~
Q
w
~ o ~n eo ~n
W ~ ~ N N
Z ~ ~ r7
Z ~
F
-
O _
CO Q Z
D O
W
C O
C~ ~
Z Q
(~_ Q
X
W ~
~
O
~ ~
O N
N 0
ti ~
H
U
w
O
d
LL
0
Q
W
Y
U
d
fn Q
H ~
Z ~ p
~ wo
O ~~
U Hp
J
Z z pU
I- Z Z
W ~~
~ QQ
MEMORANDUM
TO: Jason Lasser, Community Development
FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing
DATE: July 31, 2008
RE: SPA Amendment Paepcke Auditorium and Greenwald Tent
Parcel ID No.
ISSUE: These comments are not intended to be exclusive, but an initial response to the project
packet submitted for purpose of the DRC meeting.
Review Standards:
26.470.090.4 Essential Public Facilities. Upon a recommendation from the Community
Development Department, the City Council may assess, waive or partially waive affordable
housing mitigation requirements as is deemed appropriate and warranted for the purpose of
promoting civic uses and in consideration of broader community goals. The Employee
Generation Rates may be used as a guideline but each operation shall be analyzed for its unique
employee needs, pursuant to Section 26.470.100.
Section 26.470.100 lists the employee generation rates based on zone districts. The Public zone
district states that 3.9 employees are generated for every 1,000 square feet of net leasable space;
however, this code section also states that the essential public facility can be evaluated for actual
employees. Therefore, the applicant should provide information of what would be required
under the Code. If the employee mitigation requirement is to be waived, Staff would recommend
that an employee audit be completed prior to building permit and two years after CO.
I am unsure as to how many square feet the tent will involve or the additional expansion, but the
calculation should be provided.
Parks Department DRC requirements
Aspen Institute improvements
Paepcke Auditorium
1. Building permit plans shall include a detailed plan submitted for Tree Protection.
Tree protection fences must be in place and inspected by the city forester or
his/her designee (920-5120) before any construction activities are to commence.
No excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction backfill, and storage
of equipment, foot or vehicle traffic allowed within the drip line of any tree on
site. There should be a location and standard for this fencing denoted on the plan.
2. An approved tree permit is required before submission of the building permit set.
Contact the Parks Department for permit, 920-5120.
3. All new plantings will need to be irrigated and the landscape plan reviewed by
Parks Department
Page 1 of 1
Jason Lasser
From: Lynn Rumbaugh
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 5:11 PM
To: Jason Lasser
Cc: Rich Ryan
Subject: DRC -Aspen Institute
Hi Jason:
Below are comments from the Transportation & Parking Department regarding the Aspen Institute proposal. I
apologize that we could not attend today's meeting.
1. Will there be any public street impacts associated with construction such as road closures that will impact bus
routes or parking availability? If so, we need to discuss parking and transit impacts with the applicant.
2. We request that the Institute meet with Transportation staff prior to each summer season to discuss their
schedule of events and associated transportation/parking impacts as well as mitigation such as increased shuttle
service, etc. We also request that the Institute communicate with event staff/attendees about alternative
transportation options prior to large events. A good example of this is what the Institute did prior to the recent
Dalai Lama visit. Information on the Institute website regarding transit options is also requested.
Lynn Rumbaugh
Transportation Programs Manager
City of Aspen
130 South Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
voice: 970-920-5038
fax: 970-544-9447
web: www.aspenpitkin,com
81512008
Date: July 30, 2008
Project: SPA Amendment
Paepcke Auditorium and
Greewald Tent
City of Aspen
Engineering Department DRC Comments
These comments are not intended to be exclusive, but an initial response to the project
packet submitted for purpose of the DRC meeting.
Review Standards:
26.440.030(A) (2) Whether sufficient Public facilities and roads exist to service the
proposed development
26.440.030(A) (6) Whether the proposed development will require the expenditure of
excessive pubic funds to provide public facilities for the parcel, or surrounding
neighborhood:
o Application encourages people to park in the MAA main perking lot or walk or
bicycle to Paepcke events. The City at this time is unable to determine if there is
adequate public facilities to service the proposed development. In particular
pedestrian walkway /bikeway connections from town to events and adequate
public transportation facilities. A neighborhood safety/pedestrian study may
need to be completed
26.440.030(A) (3) Whether the parcel proposed for development is generally suitable
for development, considering the slope, ground instability and the possibility of mud
flow, rock falls, avalanche dangers and flood hazards.
o Where applicable, 100-yr floodplain and floodway boundaries shall be defined.
26.440.030(A) (4) Whether the proposed development creatively employs land
planning techniques to preserve significant view planes, avoid adverse environmental
impacts and provide open space, trails and similar amenities for the users of the project
and the public at large.
o The City at this time is unable to determine if the project does not have an
adverse environmental impact. A comprehensive drainage plan will need to be
submitted which shows an 80% total suspended solids reduction of the project
area. Project packet must include a discussion of anticipated and proposed
drainage patterns, detention storage and outlet concepts.
Miscellaneous
Construction Management - A construction management plan must be submitted in
conjunction with the building permit application. The plan must include a planned
sequence of construction that minimizes construction impacts to the public. The
plan shall describe mitigation for: parking, staging/encroachments, truck traffic,
noise, dust, and erosion sediment pollution.
Storm Sewer System -A Stormwater System Development Fee shall be assessed
against all properties at the time of development or redevelopment of the property.
The fee shall be assessed against the total impervious area of the development, not
simply the increased impervious area.
Detailed plans are required prior to council -please see engineering department for
specific details.
DRC
7/30/2008
PAEPCKE AUDITORIUM
1. Clarification on floating FAR, Height and setbacks. PART OF
SPA REVIEW TO BE DETERMINED
2. Review elevations with applicant. Verify height appears to be
planned to 21' - 4" - OK - I AM CONCERNED WITH ANY
HVAC EQUIPMENT PLACED ON ROOF
..__.._._..~...~....._ __.-~~ ~~t~" ~
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MAY 28, 2008
Brian, said the rhythmic standpoint Exhibit III makes more sense. Alison
and Sarah agreed.
MOTION: Brian made the motion to continue the public hearing and
conceptual development of 204 N. Monarch until June 25'''; second by
Sarah. Motion carried 4-1.
Michael said the commission is in favor of seeing an application that reflects
the design of Exhibit III.
Sarah said she would like to see a model.
Tim said for clarification the board would like to see the mimicking of the
Blue Vic gable flushed out and the recess gable filled in.
Alison asked if the board wanted the gable higher than the Blue Vic. Jeffery
said they can lower it and flush the roofs.
Sarah said there are a lot of merits to scheme II.
VOTE: Jay, no; Brian, yes; Alison, yes; Sarah, yes; Michael, yes.
Paepcke Auditorium
Ann was seated.
Amy said the main purpose of the project is to provide some mechanical
upgrades to the building for presentations and also to potentially expand
some of the seating by approximately 50 seats which is about a 540 foot
expansion. Paepcke Auditorium was built in 1961. Staff's memo refers to
the SPA plan that was adopted in 1990 and 1991 which talks about future
expansion. We did not find anything about expansion of the auditorium in
the document. HPC's purpose is to discuss design review issues and the
historic preservation guidelines. Herbert Bayer was a respective artist in
many fields and this is where his architecture career began. He was brought
to the Aspen Institute to develop the campus. He used such simple materials
such as concrete block. This building built by Herbert Bayer is significant
and we need to be sensitive to any changes. A lot of the work will be on the
interior. In terms of the auditorium itself staff has a strong objection to the
notion of demolishing a portion of the auditorium walls. Staff estimates that
45% of the wall planes would be demolished in order to create new wings to
4
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MAY 28.2008
create the extra 50 seats. The restaurant and health club have been expanded
which was easier to do because they are up against embankments and are not
visible from all four sides. This building is free standing and observed from
all four sides. Staff objects to demolishing 45% of the walls of the
auditorium in order to make the expansion. We recommend if there is
additional seating that it needs to be accommodated some how within the
interior space. There are some other issues which include replacing the
windows and an original skylight that can be handled at final. The
fundamental issue is whether the demolition and expansion can take place.
Jim Curtis, represented the Aspen Institute
Michael Scoring, F&G Architects
Jim said F&G has a track record in Theatre architecture and post 1950
preservation work.
Michael Scoring said Bayer had a desire to integrate the inside and outside
and as an environmental designer he brought real connections to the outside.
From a materials conservation standpoint we are looking at this building as a
rehabilitation and a complete overhaul. We are dealing with preservation
issues, material conservation, additions, accessibility, systems, finishes and
adaptive reuse so it runs the gamete of all the things that you can possibly do
to any particular building.
Michael did a power point presentation. The lobby is undersized by today's
code standards. There are a series of paths that connect in and out of the
building. Based on staff s recommendation we are not removing the
skylight. We do show a skylight in the back lobby area that is more of a
roof monitor to bring light into one of the walls. We have new seating areas
and are making the stage accessible which are two low sloped ramps so that
everyone can get to the stage at any given time.
Jim Curtis said where the cooler is proposed for the auditorium there is a
stand of aspen trees and behind the trees there is an opening. From the Parks
Department point of view there is no problem putting the cooler behind the
trees which makes it less visible. We have options as to where the fluid
cooler could go and how the heating and cooling for the building is handled.
Jim pointed out that the heating system is forced air set in concrete. We
have redesigned the projection room in order to create more space in the
foyer which is undersized.
5
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MAY 28, 2008
Michael Schoring said with the side walls they are trying to be respectful to
the Bayer geometry. There will be patios on either side with TV monitors so
that you can see inside from the outside. We are attempting to keep the
Bayer ceiling as close to the original as possible. Originally we had duct
work within the space and that made the ceiling drop so after further
discussion it was determined that the duct work should be out over the roof.
We are creating an enclosure to supply air to the auditorium.
Jim Curtis said there are two important questions: Why is the Institute
proposing this renovation and second why is the seating being increased.
The comprehensive renovation could be in excess often million dollars. The
intent is to make the building current and viable for the next SO years. For
the last SO years we have raised money and put band aids on. The energy
and enthusiasm at the institute under Water Isaacson and Amy Margerum
gives them the opportunity to go out and raise money. Everyone is excited
at the institute about the renovation. It would be difficult to raise money and
loose seating due to ADA requirements so that is why we are proposing to
increase the seating. The local Aspen and Roaring Fork Valley citizens
benefit from the increased seating in the summer. The institute does not
need the increased seating for their winter programs. With the TV monitors
outside you can accommodate another 50 people. Clearly the threshold
issue is any demolition of this building good, bad or permitted. If the sense
of the board is no demolition we need to know that tonight.
Amy Margerum, vice-president of the Aspen Institute.
Amy said we have been told by the Community Development department
that we have to do certain things even if we do not do any demolition. We
want to preserve this building and preserve the Paepcke and Bayer dream.
We spent a year with a community committee and there was 100%
unanimous approval of doing something like this to the building. Amy also
pointed out that there are many other Bayer buildings that have been added
onto, demolished and changed over the years. We have heard over and over
that the building should be opened up to more people. We are doing this to
open the building up to the community.
Jim Curtis said if we keep the existing footprint we will loose between 1S to
25 seats.
Amy Margerum also pointed out that in the staff memo it stated that 4S% of
the wall would be demolished. All the walls of this building are important
6
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MAY 28, 200$
and it is 9% of the entire building that will be demolished. It is only 500
square feet and a very simple and modest plan.
Sarah asked about the materials of the pushed out walls and the insulation.
Michael Shoring said they are proposing to use concrete block. Michael said
there is a four inch veneer and a 1 1/2 inch of insulation and an 8 inch block
inside.
Ann asked about the glazing. Michael Shoring said all the glazing will be
changed. We have not identified the system. The system that is there is a
thin aluminum. The windows for the theatre in the slots will get replaced
and we are also looking at having those window operable.
Michael Shoring said there are very few center isles anymore. The presenter
looks out to the audience not the isles.
Amy pointed out that in the elevation the doors to the stage are not shown.
Michael Shoring said with the new seating pattern we found it necessary to
add the doors and it is a code requirement.
Michael inquired about the demolition. Michael Shoring said ail the seats
will go away; we will build over the stage to extend it out to accommodate
the accessibility. We are also changing the entry sequence.
Alison asked when the entire roof is replaced will there be any problems
keeping the existing structure around the outside since it is concrete block.
Michael Shoring said it is a straight roofing replacement. The hard work is
in the auditorium. We have looked at the walls with an engineer and we see
no problems. The laminated beams will be left in place and we will add
structure.
Chairperson, Michael Hoffman opened the public hearing.
Lisa Markalunas said she has had a life time experience with this building.
The landscape is equally important on this site. There are some of the
largest stands of aspen trees on this property. The concern is how the
landscape relates to the building.
Jim Markalunas said he has some practical issues, the two exit doors. On
the north side of the building since it is shady there is a lot of ice buildup and
7
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MAY 28, 2008
the exit walkway should be heated. Proper position of benches on the south
wall are recommended to provide a seating area as you walk through the
institute. The natural vegetation should not be disturbed. The natural
pasque lilies only exist on the north bank, the Ute Cemetery and Aspen
Grove Cemetery.
Steve Falender said his house is right across from the exit of the music tent
parking lot. I am completely in favor of renovating the auditorium. The
seating should be expanded so that it is a function auditorium for a long
period of time. As the entities become more successful they generate an
incredible amount of traffic. We need to have the institute get involved with
having some kind of control of the parking. The open space doesn't need to
be used for parking but right now there is no control over the parking.
Amy Margerum offered to help resolve some of the parking issues.
Chairperson, Michael Hoffman closed the public hearing.
Michael said the first issue is any demolition going to be permitted by the
HPC.
Jay pointed out that we need to guide the applicant in the best way that we
can. Jay said in looking at the guidelines it is clear in 2.1, 6.1 and 10.10 that
if we allow some demolition to this building we are basically not complying
with the guidelines. If we allow demolition we need to come up with strong
reasons to do so. Jay said when we deal with residential historic structures
we preserve the historic part of that structure. This plan does not follow
that. Do we preserve something that was not the original plan by the
architect? Comparing the original building to what was actually built is
night and day. Is it our job to preserve what he actually built because of his
significance within the architectural conununity or do we allow the
renovation of his original design.
Michael pointed out that the property is not landmarked but part of the SPA.
Jim Curtis went over the procedures. HPC & P&Z will do a resolution and
then both go to city council. If we choose to enact under Ordinance #48 we
have a 90 day negotiation period with City council that will not be an appeal
hearing.
8
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MAY 28, 2008
Jim True, city attorney said if HPC applies the criteria and approves the
resolution then it moves forwazd to P&Z and City Council. If HPC denies it
they have the right to go into the Ordinance #48, 90 day period.
Ann said our mission is to preserve historic resources and the integrity of
them. To preserve them we are not just talking about brick and mortar.
There aze different dimensions. This is a performing arts center and it needs
to adapt to different circumstances and requirements. It absolutely has to
have ADA compliance. In order to preserve the historic resource in this case
you need to preserve the function and the only way to make that successfully
is to make the modifications. I do see an important need to upgrade it. In
terms of the design the original design is very elegant and exact. All the
lines are parallel and the angles are perfect. What we have now are new
angles and the outdoor relationships have been destroyed. The landscape is
as important as the building. The new design has fragmented the design.
You need to work hard to maintain the elegance and very carefully thought
relationship of the building to the landscape and to the other buildings on the
site. You need a site plan showing the existing trees etc. so that we can see
what trees we are going to loose and what trees need to be protected.
Sarah said the act of preserving this building is enabling it to live on as its
current function.
Jay said preservation is not just preserving buildings but preserving open
space and land use. That could be the swaying factor to allow the structure
to be changed. We need to be in agreement with why we are allowing some
demolition to historic resources.
Brian also agreed with everything that has been said. This campus needs to
be brought up to functionality. Incremental changes over time could be
more detrimental than a well thought out plan. There are some small things
that could be tweaked to make it better. I am in favor of bringing this
structure up to par in order to allow it to function the way it was intended to.
I am struggling with the guidelines.
Alison said ten years from if we don't make changes this structure will look
horrible. This is part of the question of Post Wazrnid-century preservation.
It is very different than the turn of the century preservation. These buildings
where built differently and a lot of time experimentally. It is important that
this building evolve and this building is a community asset. Having the
9
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MAY 28.2008
indoor outdoor relationship is necessary. Alison asked staff if we had
guidelines for commercial structures. Amy said we have the guidelines that
relate to the commercial districts. The general guidelines as to how to add
onto an historic building apply. There are still issues with limiting
demolition.
Jay said someone mentioned the windows and that they where going to be
replaced. Jay pointed out that it was HPC decision to retain the doors on the
Red Onion and why wouldn't we retain things on this building to help reach
the goals of the remodel.
Michael asked Amy to do some research on how other communities handle
these situations.
Sarah said she looked at the guidelines and found three that support the
project. Guidelines are an interpretation and everyone will interpret
differently. In this case the addition is sensitive. The landscape plan needs a
lot of help. It is up to us to interpret and we have to struggle to work
through what we have. The landscape is very significant on this campus.
2.1 We are preserving original materials. This building is intact and the
majority of original materials are remaining and being repaired.
6.1 Preserve significant architectural features. This building is not being
altered very much in its shape and form.
10.6 Design an addition to be compatible in size and scale with the main
building. Those are the three guidelines that stand out in support of this
project.
Alison said in essence they could have come forward and said they where
going to raise the entire building and build a new auditorium under today's
standards.
Michael said he is not comfortable moving forward tonight. He would like
to know what other communities do in similar situations.
Amy Margerum said HPC is just one step. We have to go through P&Z and
we are worried about process. Amy pointed out that they need a decision
tonight. Amy also agrees with the board on the landscaping and will supply
that at final.
10
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MAY 28.2008
Michael pointed out that HPC can either approve, disapprove or continue the
public hearing.
MOTION.• Sarah moved to approve Paepcke Auditorium at the Aspen
Institute based on the guidelines stated earlier; second by Alison.
Ann said she cannot approve this because the angles are discordant as to
what is going on. Jay also agreed that conditions should be placed on the
approval.
Sarah and Alison both agreed that we are going to be seeing this project
again and there is a lot of process to go through.
AMENDED MOTION.•
Sarah amended the motion and Alison second the amendment.
1. Restudy the new walls (exterior} of the addition to be more
sympathetic to the existing portion of the building.
2. Work on a landscape plan that is congruent to Herbert Bayer's
designs. The plan has to be acceptable to the HPC.
3. Existing trees to be retained as much as possible and if some need to
be removed that we are informed and are part of that process. Trees
to be removed should be indicated on a site plan.
4. That the cooler is not put in the proposed location.
S. No wall to be built on the walkway.
6. A model be presented at final for us to really understand the
mechanical implications of the raof and the new bump (humpback)
that is going to be on top of this building. We need to understand
everything in three dimensions.
Brian requested that the following condition be added to the motion and
amended motion.
7. The new overhead door to the deck be looked at more closely and do a
design that is more sensitive to the existing architecture.
Jay recommended that the windows be restudied and preserved. Jay said the
board needs to be careful because we are being asked to move away from
our guidelines. We need to be in agreement why we are allowing this to
move forward.
8. Restudy all existing materials and preserve them.
11
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MAY 28, 2008
9. Do not remove any other exterior walls over those indicated on the
plan tonight.
Jim Curtis stated for the record that they will come back to the HPC on a
voluntary basis before going to City Council.
Michael said the question is are we going to allow the back third of this
building to be demolished so that the project can meet future needs in a
better way.
Sarah said you need to look at this building as a whole and what is being
retained. The majority of this building is being retained. We are talking two
walls.
Ann pointed out that there are different ways to retain the original glazing
and preserve it and meet the energy requirements.
Brian said the question is whether we allow this portion that has been
brought to us to be demolished. The details that Sarah brought forth should
be outlined.
Sarah said in no way is this setting a precedent. This is a unique situation.
Sarah amended the amended motion to add the recommendations by Jay and
Brian, conditions 7,8,9. Alison second all the amendments and
recommendations.
Sarah made another amendment to include all the changes discussed in the
points 1 -9 to include that the applicant will come back to HPC for a
workshop that addresses these points before going to city council. Alison
second the amendment.
Michael said the meeting is for the purpose of HPC providing comments to
city council for their first review.
Sara pointed out that there is time on the agendas to adopt the proposal in a
timely fashion.
Jay said in light of what Sara said continuing this hearing and voting down
the current motion would not slow the applicant down by any means.
12
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF MAY 28, 2008
Sarah pointed out that HPC is reviewing things that Planning & Zoning is
not reviewing. The applicant cannot physically sign up for P&Z unless they
have conceptual approval from HPC.
MOTION carried 4-2. Vote: Jay, no; Brian, no; Alison, yes; Ann, yes;
Sarah, yes; Michael, yes.
Isis -Minor Development
MOTION.• Sarah moved to continue the public hearing on the Isis until June
I1, 2008; second by Alison. All in favor, motion carried.
Greenwald Tent at the Aspen Institute
Jim Curtis said the Aspen Institute is willing to table the agenda.
Public Comments:
Paul Taddune: Paul said he represents the Pitkin Reserve homeowners
association. Their concern is that this is going to be a temporary solution for
one or two years and the concern is the color and landscaping. Maybe the
color of the tent could be muted so that it doesn't stand out and harmonizes.
Amy Margerum talked about their search for a tent that will fit into the
landscaping. They are still searching.
Lisa Markalunas said in respect to the native landscaping the river bluff is
very important. In the application there where no references to trash
facilities. There is a real bear problem along the river bank. As part of their
permanent facility there should be permanent bear proof trash dumpsters that
are a sufficient size and that they fit into the landscape. Pitkin Preserve
planted trees in order to shield the irppact from the white tent. The tent is
only going to be up a couple of months of the year which is preferable than
all year round. Also on the north side of the root path catering trucks etc.
should not have full access to park along the sage meadow.
Lisa's letter was entered into the record.
MOTION.• Sarah moved to continue the public hearing on the Greenwald
Tent until July 23'd; second by Jay. All in favor, motion carried.
MOTION.• Michael moved to adjourn, second by Alison. All in favor,
mot' n carri d. Mee • _g_adjo ed at 9:00 p.m.
amt .~~ ~' ~ ---
Kathleen J. Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk
13
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008
Chairperson, Michael Hoffman called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
Commissioners in attendance: Ann Mullins, Jay Maytin, and Brian McNellis
and Sarah Broughton. Nora Berko and Alison Agley where excused.
Staff present: Jim True, Special Counsel
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk
Public, Caroline Stewart said she spent the winter here and rode Lift I in
1948. She was at Willoughby Park last week and it is a true gem. She hopes
that the HPC keeps the park if at all possible.
Paepcke Auditorium 1000 N. Third Street
Amy said at the last meeting HPC asked the applicant to come back before
they proceed to other commissions to resolve as much as possible.
Michael Shoring, architect for the Paepcke Auditorium.
Jim Curtis, representing the Aspen Institute.
August Hasz, Resource Engineering Group. Mechanical engineer working
on Geothermal for the Institute.
Amy Margerum, Executive Vice-president of the Aspen Institute.
Jim said we are working on an upgraded cooling system for the Paepcke
building. We do not want to locate it on the roof top as it is quite large. It is
six feet wide, 12 feet long and 8 to ten feet high. We have looked at
alternative ,places and the Institute wants to be a leader in the environmental
movement. The idea would be to do a geothermal that would provide
cooling and heating and size it so that we can tie into the existing Koch
building. The proposed pond location and configuration need restudied. We
also need to find out what kind of safety features are needed around the
pond. From a visual point of view fencing would not be appropriate around
the pond. Another area for the pond would be across the service road. If we
don't do the pond we can do a fluid cooler. The benefits for the pond are
that it eliminates the large piece of equipment and provides cooling in the
summer and also provides supplemental heating in the winter. The fluid
cooler only supplements the cooling system for the summer. The projected
savings for gas and electric in the Doer Hosier are 40%.
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008
Michael Shoring went over the power point presentation. The two additions
on either side of the auditorium have been revised and there has not been.
any change in the administrative wing. The floor plan indicates where the
trees will be removed. On the entry areas we are still looking at removing
the projection booth from the lobby and pushing that into the auditorium.
The most significant thing that we are looking at are the use of the shifting
walls and slot windows. In the profile of the building it shows how the
original walls step down sharply to echo the mountains surrounding the
building.
There is a small revision to the patio on the south side. On the northern side
there is a stepped connection into the patio so that you can come out of the
exit doors and out the side doors to the patio. With the revised patio we are
able to have ADA access from the Paepcke and Koch buildings.
There are new walls and we want to take the existing slot windows and use
those in a new way, re-centering of the new opening to the north and south.
The large door and glazing above would echo the slot windows and the
mullions would align with the existing windows and joint lines as they do
now.
There was discussion about mechanical duct work. Through studies it
would be better to move the duct work outside and onto the roof. In doing
so it would allow us to replace the existing ceiling and get the duct work out
of the auditorium so we present ourselves with a better acoustical situation.
The mechanicals will be enclosed on the roof in the shape of the existing
roof and less visible from the ground. The building has very poor air quality
so we need to install new duct work. If the duct work where inside the
auditorium we would have to drop the ceiling 24 inches which would affect
our acoustics.
Michael Shoring went over additional changes for the auditorium and
answered clarifications.
Jim discussed the proposed doors, windows and materials.
Michael Shoring said they are preserving the existing masonry surfaces.
The roofing will be changed and the windows on the auditorium will be
changed. The slot windows will be custom built to look exactly like the
existing ones. The windows are a big problem. The front doors are not
going to be replaced.
2
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008
August Hasz said the existing windows have an R value of less than 1. If we
where to increase the windows to today's standards we would get a 20%
reduction in the heating and cooling energy load which translates to about a
20% reduction in the carbon footprint. The windows are a key item for
certification of the building. The auditorium is not insulated. In the
administrative wing there is fiberglass insulation. We can use spray foam to
get some portions of the roof up to code. With the auditorium we don't
intend to change the auditorium walls because the masonry on both sides is a
key part to the experience of the building. In the administrative wing the
glass system is the vast majority of the walls.
Amy asked if there was anything else that could be done with the windows
instead of replacing them to increase the R value.
August said the windows are not that leaky and the seals could be better but
that is about all you can do. The actual performance of the glass is single
pane glass and there is nothing that you can do to make that glass better.
Also the frames are a conducting nightmare and they would have to be
replaced. One of the great things about double glazing is that it is applied to
the interior surface of the glass. The low E coating and the air gap are the
two things that make insulation. August also said one of the issues is that
the windows are operable.
Amy pointed out that this is not a noticed public hearing.
Chairperson, Michael Hoffman asked if anyone in the public wanted to
make comments on the project. There where no public comments.
Michael identified the issues:
1. Restudy the new walls (exterior) of the addition to be more sympathetic to
the existing portion of the building.
Ann said the plan presented is very successful in terms of the use of space.
The soft windows work very nicely as they repeat what is going on with the
rest of the building as does the overhead door.
Jay said he would like to see the garage door bigger. Ann said with the eight
foot door the end walls can match and if it was wider that couldn't occur.
The board concurred with Ann's comments.
3
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008
2. Work on a landscape plan that is congruent to Herbert Bayer's designs.
The plan has to be acceptable to the HPC.
Jim Curtis said the only landscape is that there will be several trees removed
around the building. Other than that we are not proposing to do anything
other than to re-grass any disturbed areas and make the connection into the
patio.
Sarah said the success is connecting the courtyard to the building. The path
that goes from the Institute and around the building seems disconnected and
opening up the building will tie the path together to the building.
Brian said the concept sketches address all the connections which are
necessary to tie to the patio.
Jim Curtis said their objective is to create ADA access from Paepcke to the
Koch building and from Paepcke to the patio.
3. Existing trees to be retained as much as possible and if some need to be
removed that we are informed and are part of that process. Trees to be
removed should be indicated on a site plan.
Michael said the board has already discussed trees and some elements of the
landscape plan.
Ann inquired about the pond. Jim Curtis said they need to accommodate
about 300,000 gallons of water between depth and surface in the pond. The
pond shown on the diagram is the appropriate scale. The existing pond
would be integrated into the crescent pond. Ann said having the large body
of water where currently there is a small pond would not be the right
approach. An option would be having grasses and then integrate the pond as
an art element.
Sarah inquired about geothermal and ground source. August said they are
the same thing. August said ground exchange is called geoexchange. Sarah
said you could do ground heat without a pond. August said the only way to
do the geo exchange without a pond or water` element is to lay pipe in the
ground. The vertical bore holes that we would need would be 25,000 feet of
pipe. That would be five plus miles of pipe drilled vertically. You are
talking $400,000 to $500,000 dollars worth of drilling and we would have to
4
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008
rip up the entire parking lot and re-asphalt it. To redo the pond would be
about $90,000.
Brian asked if the landscape around the pond is the original historic
landscape. Amy Margerum said no, only Anderson Park is historic.
Jim Curtis said the Institute has to look at the existing pond area and the
second alternative to determine which one they like and then come back to
the HPC.
Amy. Margerum said the SPA includes a landscape submittal.
Brian said he would not out rule the expansion of the existing ponds if they
are not the original historic configuration.
Jay also agreed with Brian. Jay asked how the pond is kept from freezing in
the winter. August explained that the thickest you will ever get built up is 8
to 10 inches. Once that happens you won't have evaporative loss. The pond
will stay around 38 degree and the system can function with degrees as cold
as 25 degree.
Ann said she would encourage the Institute to keep exploring the geo
exchange as opposed to mechanical heating and cooling.
4. That the cooler is not put in the proposed location.
Michael said the applicant said the cooler is not going to be in the proposed
location but they haven't decided where it will go.
S. No wall to be built on the walkway.
Michael said the applicant has stated they will not install the walkway.
6. A model to be presented at final for us to really understand the
mechanical implications. Michael said the model has been provided.
7. The new overhead door to the deck be looked at more closely and do a
design that is more sensitive to the existing architecture.
Michael said the applicant has succeeded in changing the architecture.
8. Restudy all existing materials and preserve them. Michael asked the
board how they felt about the existing materials being preserved.
5
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008
Brian said if gaining certification requires changing out the windows that is
something I can support as long as it is done within the character of the
building.
Sarah agreed. We are lucky that these windows can be replicated.
Jay said in order to support changing out the windows he would like
information on how the applicant came to that conclusion. Replacing
original materials goes against our guidelines. Replacing the windows with
a better material could be supported if the applicant provides documentation
as to why they can't be saved.
August said a single pane window can never get the performance of a double
pane window. The existing frames are conductive nightmares. There are
three things that go into calculating performance; center glass U value, the U
value of the frame and the infiltration which is the air moving through the
glass. You can't ad another layer and the only thing that can be done is a
storm window.
Amy said with Victorian houses we require the windows to be preserved
because they are examples of craftsmanship. Storm windows on the. exterior
have been used in the past.
Sarah said the HPC has a responsibility to make buildings no rely on
mechanized systems for heating and cooling. We have the opportunity to
replicate these windows so the building can be used for another 50 years.
9. Do not remove any other exterior walls over those indicated on the plan
tonight. Jim Curtis said no other walls have been removed.
Brian addressed the air duct system on the roof. As seen from the front and
back the systems fit in the symmetry of the building. The concern is seeing
it above the facade of the building.
Greenwald Pavilion
Amy said the HPC did a site visit and the Institute has researched tents. We
need to address the landscape and hear the neighbors concerns. The
applicant has found a company called Tent technology in which the tent has
6
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008
a lot more peaked forms. The entry canopies proposed have been withdrawn
from the application. We had previous discussions about the sides of the
tent possibly being mesh which gives it a more open character. We also had
discussions on the color to see if there are any other options other than
white. Staff supports white for at least the roof because that is consistent
with the white roofs across the campus. Maybe the rear elevation which
faces the neighborhoods could be treated in another way. There has been
discussion of landscaping the rear but staff is concerned because we do not
want to create rows of trees that aren't typically used on the campus. The
institute rents their chairs but they would like to purchase chairs and store
them somewhere, possibly under the tent. What is proposed now is a
separate tent structure and staff would like to discuss storing them under the
tent. Staff is recommending approval with conditions.
Jim Curtis represents the Aspen Institute
Jim said the existing tent is 60 x 120 and is not very attractive. We
completely agree that the white canvas is too reflective and cold white. We
also agree that the plastic walls are ugly and reflective and we would like
those changed. We would like feedback on the general shape of the tent and
the color. We are proposing a mosquito netting for the sides. The back
sidewall could be a different color. The tent company out of British
Columbia, Canada does tents on an international basis. They have off the
shelf tents and can do custom tents. ° The discussion with the HPC should be
how can we get a nicer tent and what constitutes a nicer tent. We also need
to discuss how often the tent goes up and down and how long it stays up. In
summation the tent proposed with the peaks and metal structure can come in
any color. The tent is available in the same size as the existing tent.
Sarah said the height is 23.2 feet to the peak. How does that relate to the
existing tent? The existing height is 23 feet.
Jay asked if the slab would increase the height. Jim said no.
Michael asked if the. applicant had alternative locations. Amy clarified that
possibly the tent could be oriented differently at the same location.
Jim said from a zoning point of view we could use the Marble garden or
Anderson Park but both are historic and would have substantial impacts.
There really aren't any other appropriate locations.
7
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008
Michael asked if the applicant considered other orientations. Amy
Margerum said there is the concern with the sage and we wanted to protect
it. We want to use the pad that we have already created.
Chairperson Michael Hoffman opened the public hearing.
Nancy Bryant wanted to know how many people complained about the color
of the tent etc.
Amy Margerum said we have had 5 to 10 people who live across the river
that are concerned with the color.
Nancy said we love this institute and we need it and we benefit from it. I am
in complete favor of the tent.
Paul Taddune, attorney representing the homeowner association for Pitkin
Reserve. Exhibit I photograph of the tent. The tent presents a glaring sore
thumb from their view plane. If in fact the institute is attempting to be
responsive the tent is in people's back yard and hopefully something can be
done to mitigate. This is a big box with no architectural treatment right there
in the middle and the color is stark white and stands out. The Pitkin Reserve
residents look at this every day.
Michael said in the memo it was mentioned about taking the tent up and
down. Amy said it might be questioned in the SPA which would involve
Planning and Zoning and Council.
Jim said if we took the tent down the steel structure would be up and the
vinyl would come down. The institute at this point is not interested in taking
the tent up and down. We need more technical information with the new
design as to how complicated that would be. The tent will be in the range of
$250,000. It is a nicer design and that is an incentive to keep it up. Taking
it up and down has a lot more wear and tear on the tent.
Gretchen Greenwood suggested lowering the tent in the ground. Jim Curtis
said maybe we can look at lowering it a foot but the issue is as you bring it
down in height the drainage problem becomes an issue.
Fred Pierce, attorney representing one of the homeowners across the river,
Helen Stone. With regard to taking the tent up and down during the course
8
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008
of the summer the neighbors have been in communication with the Institute
for the past three years. When the Institute came recently and discussed
going with a permanent permit for the tent they offered and said they only
need the tent for 3 to 6 events per year. They said they where willing to take
it down. That will be addressed by P&Z. The concern is that the staff
recommends a white roof. How does that white roof fit in with anything in
the context of what the neighbors are looking at? It looks like a circus tent.
If a less white color is used there will be less impact.
Paul Taddune said this is a collaborative effort and the more you work at it
you achieve a better result. There is a lot to be done and we can all work
together to do something that benefits everyone.
Chairperson, Michael Hoffman closed the public hearing.
Michael said. the board should limit the discussion to mass and scale. Color
and reflectivity will be addressed at final. The issues are the height and
shape of the roof line, location and the design of the tent.
Amy pointed out that the applicant is proposing a temporary storage tent and
staff is recommending putting the storage in some other area possibly under
the floor of the tent.
Jim Curtis said the Institute would like to hear the feedback on color of the
tent from the board.
Mass and scale of the roof line.
Jay pointed out that the points of the tent are the same height of the current
ridge line and then the points dip down so in essence you are decreasing the
mass.
Brian said one of the things that make this a stark contrast with the people
living across the river is that it is very much a rectilinear structure and has
very straight lines and appears hard and cold. It doesn't respond to the
background in anyway. The proposed tent has more of an organic element
and undulations.
Sarah said her concern is that the height is 23.2 to the apex. Maybe there is
away so that it doesn't have to be so peaked. As a suggestion maybe the
tent company can work on the peaks so that they are somewhat blunted.
9
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008
Ann also agreed that the peaked roof works well. Once the landscaping is
done it will help screen the back side of the tent.
Michael said the length and width of the new tent is approximately the same
as the existing tent. HPC members had no problems with the dimensions.
Brian said possibly the width could be widened. Jay pointed out that there is
a path behind the tent and that needs to be taken into consideration.
Amy Margerum said they can look at the site and see if it can be tweaked.
We are concerned about the impacts on the existing trees. Amy said they
would be glad to restudy the rectilinear dimensions.
Michael said the next suggestion was from Gretchen Greenwood about
sinking the structure.
Sarah said there are issues such as ramps and drainage. Presently this is a
temporary structure and all of a sudden it becomes permanent. Brian agreed
sinking the tent would require a lot of challenges. Ann said with the design
presented and the additional spruce trees it is very acceptable without
investigating lowering the structure. Jay said with the approval of the tent
the cement pad will be poured and it might be worth studying to see if it is
feasible for the Institute to sink it. Sarah said there are a lot of other issues
such a footers etc. that would be involved with sinking a structure and then
all of a sudden we have a permanent structure.
Amy Margerum said the Institute would not be interested in sinking the tent.
Ann said if you sink it and the tent goes down then you are dealing with
negative space throughout the year. You will also have to have some kind of
ramps installed.
Michael said the consensus is that the HPC will not require the applicant to
sink the structure.
Michael said the next question is whether or not we are going to require
them to include storage as part of the foundation. The board agreed that no
additional structure is allowed for storage.
10
ASPEN HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
MINUTES OF JULY 23, 2008
Michael said another issue is the landscape plan. Jim Curtis said in the
application booklet we propose 14 additional spruce trees.
Discussion on color and reflectivity.
Jay pointed out that the concern is how this structure impacts the historic
resource. That is probably the reason why staff suggested white because
there is so much white at the Aspen Institute. Jay said he is open to the color
and is sympathetic to the neighbors. Ann said her concern is the reflectivity.
A range of whites could be acceptable.
MOTION: Jay made the motion to approve the tent, Greenwald Pavilion
and restudy the length and width of the tent and placement on the existing
location. The flat concrete pad is approved. The storage tent is not being
approved due to lack of information; motion second by Brian.
Discussion
Amy said one suggestion was to restudy the north side that is visible from
the Pitkin Green area. The other issue is the wires that come out from the
tent as they might interfere with the trail.
Amy Margerum pointed out that the decorative aspects of the tent change
with each event.
All in favor, motion carried.
1005 Waters Avenue, Ordinance #48 negotiation
Nancy Bryant, owner
Gretchen Greenwood, architect
Amy said this is our first discussion under Ordinance #48. Any property
that is listed can have a 90 day discussion to see what benefits can be offered
regarding designation. The property owner brought in a remodel and staff
reviewed it. HPC is to review the project to determine its preservation. The
property is on Waters Avenue and built in 1964. The building is an example
of a modern chalet. The building has a shallow roof form and extending
eaves. If the property where designated the benefits would be a reduction in
the impact fees; setback variances; a potential FAR bonus and the possibility
of transfer development rights. This property is zoned R-15 and the
minimum lot size is 15,000 square feet and this lot is 9,000 square feet. It is
11
,. •'t ~ ~ l
~X~($i~ ~
1;
ORDINANCE NO. 14
(Series 1991)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO,
GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF THE ASPEN MEADOWS SPECIALLY PLANNED
AREA (SPA) FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, SUBDIVISION APPROVAL, REZONING
AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS, RESIDENTIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT ALLOT-
MENT, EXCESS GROWTH MANAGEMENT ALLOTMENT, GROW'T'H MANAGEMENT
EXEMPTION FOR ESSENTIAL.PUBLIC~FACILITIES, CONDOMINIUMIZATION,
AND VESTING 'OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS.
WHEREAS, that real property commonly }mown and referred to
as the "Aspen Meadows" has previously been designated a specially
planned area (SPA) on the City of Aspen Official Zone District
Map; and
WHEREAS, a master plan for the Aspen Meadows was adopted as
a component of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan in September,
~° ~ 1990; and
r.
` ~ WHEREAG, "..he City has received a comprehensive development
plan for the Aspen Meadows known as the Aspen Meadows Final
Specially Planned Area (SPA) Development Plan Submission
(hereinafter the "Plan"); and
WHEREAS, on December 20, 1990, after review and. approval and
upon recommendation of the Planning Department and. the Aspen
Planning and Zoning Commission, the Plan received conceptual
approval, subject to conditions, by the City Council pursuant to
the procedure set forth at Section 24-6-205(A.)(8)(b) of the
Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, Savanah:Limited Partnership, in conjunction with
the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies (the "Institute"), the
~~ ~ Music Associates of Aspen ("MAA"), and the Aspen Center for
Physics ("Physics"),'hereinafter jointly known as the
"Developer", submitted an application for a residential Growth
Management Quota System allotment as a component of the Plan on
February 15, 1991; and
WHEREAS, on March 4, 1991, the Developer submitted to the
Planning Department a proposed final SPA development plan for the
Aspen Meadows incorporating requests for subdivision approval,,
text amendments to the municipal land use code, requests far
rezoning and zoning map amendments, growth management exemption
for essential pubiic~facilities, conditional use approvals for
attached affordable housing units, and special review approval
.~~~_ for parking in an academic (A) zone district; and
--~' WHEREAS, the Developer's proposed final SPA development plan
has been subjected to review and comments by the Engineering,
Water, Parks, and Environmental Health Departments for the City
of Aspen, as well as review and comments by the Fire Marshal,
Sanitation District and Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority;
and
wxExEAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has
reviewed the Developer's development plan in accordance with
those procedures set forth at Section 24-6-205(A)(8)(c of the
)
Municipal Code and did conduct public hearings thereon on April
2, 9 and 16, 1991; and
WHEREAS, upon review and consideration of the Plan, agency
and public comment thereon, the review undertaken and comments of
2
.,y .
''i
the Plan as provided by the Historic Preservation Committee
relevant to design, and those applicable standards as contained
in Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code, to wit, Division 8 of
Article 7 (Specially Planned Area), Division 10 of Article 'i
(Subdivision), Divisions 2,3 and 4 of Article 7 (Permitted,
Conditional and Special Review~Uses, respectively), Division 11
of Article 7 (Text Amendments and Zoning Map Amendments), and
Article 8 (Growth Management Quota System),, the Planning and
Zoning Commission has recommended final approval of the Plan,
subject to conditions, to the City Council; and
WF~REAS, pursuant to the Growth Management Quota System the
Plannirg and Zoning Commission evaluated and scored the~res3den-
~:.:._ ~
t • ,~
tial component of the Plan, consisting of fourteen (14) units, at
33.85 points, thus, meeting minimum development approval
.threshold and, additionally, awarded the Plan 1.93 bonus points
as allowed under Section 24-8-106(E)(6) of the Municipal Code,
thus, giving the Plan a total GMQS scare of 35.78 points; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission further granted
conditional use approvals for four affordable housing units
associated with the residential component of the Plan and special
review approval for parking in an academic (A) zone district; and
WHEREAS, on April 16, 1991, the Planning and Zoning Comhis -
sion, after public hearing, incorporated its approvals, condi-
tional approvals, and recommendations into Resolution No. 91.10
3
and forwarded same to City Council in accordance with Section 24-
6-205(A)(8)(c) of the Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the public interest
would not. be served by affording phased GMQS development allot-
ments under the Plan and that an excess GMQS development allot-
ment as permitted by Section 24-8-103(B) of the Municipal Code is
desirable"and warranted; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered the
Plan under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as
identified herein, has reviewed and considered those recommenda-
tions and approvals as granted by the Planning and Zoning Com-
-~,~<..: mission and the Historic Preservation Committee, and has taken
.:~' and considered public comment at public hearing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Plan meets or
exceeds all applicable development standards and that approval of
the Plan, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and
elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and the Aspen
Meadows Master Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furtbers~
and is necessary for public health, safety and welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE Bg IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows;
Section 1
Pursuant to Section 24-7-804B of the Municipal Code, and
subject to those conditions of approval as specified hereinafter,
4
the City Council finds as follows in regard to the Plan's spe-
cially planned area development component:
1. The Developer's final plan submission is complete and
sufficient to afford review and evaluation for approv-
al.
2. The Plan is compatible and enhances the mix of devel-
opment in the immediate vicinity of the Aspen Meadows
and the proposed land uses as approved hereinbelow are
deemed to be appropriate and allowable in their under-
lying zone districts as authorized by an SPA overlay.
3. The Plan incorporates and provides sufficient public
facilities and roads for the requested development, and
provides significant open space, trails and public
.amenities for the residents and users of the develop-
ment.
4. The Aspen Meadows is generally suitable for the
requested development in terms of topography and the
-_. Plan creatively employs land planning technictues to
!~" preserve view planes and avoid adverse- environmental
~,~ i.mpacts .
5. The Plan will not require the expenditure of excessive
public funds in order to provide public facilities for
the development or its surrounding neighborhoods.
6. The Plan is•consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehen-
sive Plan and the Aspen Meadows Master Plan.
7. The Plan demonstrates good and sufficient cause to
remove the SPA designation for that portion of the
Aspen Meadows property that is to be conveyed to the
City and to adjust .the current SPA boundary •accord-
ingly.
Section 2
Pursuant to the findings as set forth in Section 1 above,
the City Council grants final SPA development plan approval for
the Plan subject to the following conditions:
1. A detailed construction timeline incorporating a
specific construction schedule for the installation of
5
the new Meadows Road shall be submitted to and approved
by the Planning and Public Works Departments prior to
staff approval of the final plat. Upon completion of
the new Meadows Road, all construction traffic associ-
ated with the development shall use and be rerouted to
the new Meadows Road.
2. The applicant shall provide 97 parking spaces at the
West Meadows facilities pending construction of the
West Meadows parking structure.
3. The Developer shall conduct a review and provide a
written report. of the development's traffic mitigation
plan to the Planning Director on the anniversary date
of the final passage of this Ordinance in years 1992,
1994, 1996, 1998 and 2000, and shall continue to con-
. duct and provide such reviews and reports every two (2)
years thereafter unless deemed unnecessary by the City
Council. Such report shall include, but not be limited
to, traffic counts on Seventh Street, number of van
.trips pursuant to the development's traffic mitigation
plan, charter vehicle use, passenger counts and desti-
nations arising from the use of the Aspen Meadows
facilities. The review and report shall also incorpo-
=-~' rate data and information from the Roaring Fork Transit
Authority (BETA) illustrating its service to the Aspen
Meadows facilities. The City will review the report
and may require modification to the development's
traffic mitigation program, including the addition of
reasonable new mitigation measures. All modifications
of the traffic mitigation plan shall be approved by tree
. Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing.
4. ~ The shuttle van system as incorporated into-the devel -
opment's traffic mitigation plan shall be operated by
that company or entity operating the lodge facility.
5. Delivery vehicles and delivery routes serving the
restaurant facilities shall be limited to those hours
of delivery and routes as delineated in the develop-
ment s traffic mitigation plan, except when severe
weather or circumstances beyond the control of the
lodge/restaurant operator require a deviation there-
from. The restaurant/lodge operator shall insure and
enforce the delivery hours and routes by contractual
obligation with its goods and services providers.
6. The thirteen foot (13') service access/emergency loop
drive serving the chalets shall be constructed with an
J 6
all weather surface adequate to support fire-fighting
apparatus. Such access/emergency loop drive(s) shall
be plowed, cleared and maintained to 13' widths at all
times of the year and particularly during the winter '~
months.
7. A11 buildings to be served and accessed from the 13'
access/emergency loop drive shall have interior sprin-
kling fire protection/suppression systems as appro~aed ,~
by the Fire Marshal and such system(s) must be approved
prior to the issuance of a building permit.
8. Specific fire hydrant locations for the development
shall be established and approved in cooperation with ~,
the Fire Marshal prior to the issuance of a building
permit.
9. A detailed tree removal and replacement plan shall be
submitted to and approved by the City Parks Depar~aaent
prior to staff approval of the final plat. Such plan
shall indicate all trees to be moved or removed, their
size, location, species, and time of planting, trans - '~
planting, or removal. All tree replacement shall be on
h?;~ ~ a one-to-one caliper inch basis with minimum size at 1
~~ 1/2" caliper.
10. The final plat shall depict all trails dedicated or
conveyed to public use. and all easements linking off-
site trails to the development's trail system. The
final plat shall particularly note (1) an easement for
a trail link from the racetrack; and (2) the trail /
between the tennis townhouses and restaurant as depict-
ed on the Master Plan. Exact trail locations must be
approved by the Planning Director giving priority to
those alignments which minimize damage or disruption to
existing vegetation and landscape and which subordinate
grade considerations and, thus, minimize switchbacks,
to the, preservation of existing topography. As-built
easements shall be executed and conveyed after trail
construction.
11. There shall be no interconnection of non-treated water
systems to potable water systems.
12. Pursuant to Section 23-53 (g) of the Municipal Code, the
Developer shall convey all rights, titles, easements
and interests to the Si Johnson Ditch and water right,
water wells and appurtenant water rights on the Aspen
>~1~ Meadows property to the City. The City shall, in
1 ~
exchange, lease-.back to Developer, or its successor(s)
in interest, raw water from those sources for irriga-
tion use within the development in an amount equal to
that amount of water reasonably necessary for the
efficient irrigation of the lands historically irrigat-
ed, not to exceed the amount of water conveyed to the
City by the Developer. Developer shall pay to the City'
its pro rata share of operation,. maintenance and repair
costs, plus one Hundred Dollars ($100.00) per year.
The lease as noted above shall not subordinate the use
of the water right to the emergency needs of the City
for minimum stream flows, hydroelectric power, or
municipal purposes..
13. The Developer shall install at its own cost a water
distribution system for the development meeting no less
than the minimum design, engineering, materials and
construction standards of the City for domestic munici-
pal and fire protection purposes and shall convey same
to }..he City upon completion, inspection and acceptance
by the City. Developer shall also convey to the City a `'
perpetual twenty foot (20') as-built easement extending
ten feet (10~) from each side of the centerline of all
newly constructed water lines, and a construction
,, easement extending an additional five feet (5') on each
rte` side of the centerline, along with a similar twenty
foot (ZO') easement and construction easement for the
future installation of a connector main to the existing
City water main in Black Birch Drive.
14. Drainage design for the development shall not inten-
tionally direct run-off into irrigation ditches or~
ponds.
I5. All residential units shall comply with fireplace
regulations as contained in the Municipal Code and
enforced by the Environmental FIealth Depary~.ment. No v
building permits shall be issued for residential units
absent compliance with fireplace regulations. All
disputes concerning the application or interpretation
of fireplace regulations to the development shall be
subject to review and determination by the Clean Air
Board.
16. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for each
component of the project, a drainage mitigation plan
for that component for run-off during construction
activity shall be submitted and approved by the City
Engineer so as to insure against or minimize run-off
` into Castle Creek and the Roaring Fork River.
l
8
17, Prior to the issuance of a building permit for each
component of the project, a fugitive dust control plan
for that component must be submitted to and approved by
the Environmental Health Department and such State
agencies as having jurisdiction over same.
18. A fugitive dust plan must be~submitted and approved by
the Environmental Health Department for the MAA parking
lot prior to issuance of a building permit for the MAA
rehearsal facility. .
19. All energy conservation and efficiency measures as
represented by the Developer in its GMQS application
regarding. insulation, glazing, solar orientation, HVAC,
and plumbing fixtures shall be incorporated into all
residential units and the design(s) for same must be
approved by the. City prior to issuance of any building
permit for residential construction. These measures
shall be further incorporated into deed restrictions
and/or covenants for all single family homes and condo-
minium declarations.
._.~ 20. Non-residential construction and facilities shall'
utilize state-of-the-art energy conservation and effi-
`~`~. °~ ciency measures as represented by the Developer.
Accordingly, =detailed plans suf~mitted for .building
permits for the lodge structures and the MAA rehearsal
hall must be accompanied by the energy information ,,
provided to staff in the Appropriate Technologies
Associates' letter of May 3, 1991, and the MA.A/Rehears-
al Hall Energy Conservation Description document sub-
mitted to Planning staff on May 20, 1991. The engi-
neered thermal envelope calculation will be verified by
the Building Depar*,unent according to the Model Energy
Code.
21. The Developer shall pay to the City an affordable
housing mitigation impact fee for 16.69 low income v
employees associated with ten new residential units,
seven on Lot 6 and three on Lot 5,. in an amount to be
calculated pursuant to those fee guidelines in effect
at the time the fee is to be paid. The fee shall be
paid prior to the issuance of a building permit for any
residential construction and shall be paid in amounts
reflecting and corresponding to the number of residen-
tial units sought to be permitted at any given time
(1.66 per unit) .
J
22. Developer shall construct replacement and/or additional
fox dens in a manner and at.locations to be selected in
the .field by the City, in consultation with the Direc-
tor of the Aspen Center for Environmental Studies,
prior to the issuance of any building permits for
development under the Plan, or any other demolition or
construction within .the development area, to wit, the
Aspen Meadows.
23. Revegetation of all areas developed pursuant to the
Plan shall be implemented in accordance with those
guidelines as set forth by Design Workshop in its
letter of 3/21/91, which letter is' incorporated herein
as if fully set forth. All revegetation shall be
inspected and monitored by the City to ensure that
revegetation efforts and the protection of same are
successful.
24. New manicured lawn areas shall be minimized to the
maximum extent possible, except in those areas adjacent
to the Music Tent, and such areas must be depicted and
approved on the final plat.
25. Prior to excavation, temporary construction barricades
and or fencing shall be erected within five feat of the
building envelopes of the tennis townhomes and trustee
townhomes to prevent damage from falling debris to the
slope bordering same unless unstable soils dictate
alternative locations mutually agreed upon by the
owner, the Building Depaz-~,..ment and the Planning Office.
Prior to issuance of building permits for individual
buildings, the locations of all fencing and barricades
shall be submitted to and approved by the Building
Department and the Planning .Office. All fencing and
barricades shall remain in place throughout the con-
struction process.
26. Financial assurances in amounts and in forms acceptable
to Developer and City shall be provided by Developer to
ensure the satisfactory installation and completion of
the new Meadows Road, all utility infrastructure,
including water lines, the trail along old Meadows
Road, and the..parking facility. That portion of the
above-referenced financial assurances reasonably found
by the Public Works Director to be related to the work
for which a permit is sought must be in place prior to
issuance of that building permit.
~~
~_.~
10
27. The following language shall be included in the
SPA/Subdivision Agreement: "Any SPA or Master Plan
amendment or future development applications submitted
by any non-profit user of the Meadows property (Lots 1,
2, and 3) shall be applied for Lointly by, all non-
profit property owners. This shall supersede prior
requirements requiring SPA submittal approval by all
property owners. Similarly any SPA Amendment proposed
to be submitted by any residential owner or association
thereof shall require, in addition to the consent of
the association of owners of the residential component
involved, the approval of the resident non-profits of
the SPA."
28. Public pedestrian access, excluding access to build-
ings, will continue to be allowed at reasonable hours
throughout-the entire academic (A), open space (OS),
and wildlife preservation (WP)' zone district areas of
the Aspen Meadows development, subject to reasonable
regulations as established by the owners thereof in
order to protect their property, as well as the academ-
ic privacy and serenity of the campus, its programs and
the health and safety of other users and visitors.
=~ '~ .
`fir 29. The MAA parking lot shall be plowed and kept clear of
snow during all wintertime performances or functions at
MAA facilities.
30. Pursuant to Section 24-7-804(D)(4) of the Municipal
Code, the final plat, which. shall, at a minimum, con-
sist of final drawings depicting the site plan, land-
scape plan, utility plan and building elevations, and a
specially planned area (SPA) agreement, shall be re-
corded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and
Recorder and shall be binding upon the property owners
subject to the development plan, their successors and
assigns, and shall constitute the development regula-
tions for the grope ~ opmen o e grope y
shall be imi a uses, density, configuration,
and all other elements an~conditi ns set forth on the
final development plan, and in this ordinance and the
SPA agreement. Failure on the part of the Developer to
record the final development plan, plat, and SPA agree-
ment within a period of 180 days following the adopt3.on
date of this Ordinance shall render the development
plan and plat'ir. valid. If the 180 days lapse, recon-
sideration of the final development plan, plat and SPA
agreement by the Planning and Zoning Commission and
.~
-- 11
City Council will be required before its acceptance and
recording.
Section 3
Pursuant to and by reason of the findings and conditions of
approval as set forth above in Sections land 2, specially
planned area (SPA) designation for the portion of the Aspen
Meadows property to be conveyed to the City is hereby removed and
the City~s Official Zone District Map shall be amended to reflect
such removal.
Section 4
Pursuant to Section 24-7-1004C of the Municipal Code, and
subject to those conditions of approval as specified hereinafter,
,. .
~= the City Council finds as follows in regard to the Plans subdi-
~~
vision development component:
1• The proposed subdivision is consistent with both
the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan and Aspen Mead-
ows Master Plan and is, furthermore, consistent
with the character of existing land uses in the
adjoining areas.
2• The proposed subdivision will not adversely affect
the future development of surrounding areas and
will be in substantial compliance with all re-
quirements of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code.
3• The proposed subdivision is compatible and suit-
able with the topography of the area and will not
present or create a threat to the health, safety
or welfare of the residents or neighbors of the
subdivision.
4. The proposed subdivision does not create spatial
patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or
premature extension of public facilities or unnec-
essary public costs.
12
5. The proposed new Meadows Road has the primary function
. of providing access to abutting property and will not
carry through traffic, thus, warranting its designation
as "local street".
Section 5
Pursuant to the findings as set forth in Section 4 above,
the City Council grants final subdivision approval for the Plan
subject to the following conditions:
1. The new Meadows Road shall
lic street from its inters,
Street and North Street to
Lot 6. Right-of-way width,
design shall be subject to
by the City Engineer prior
the final plat.
be dedicated as a pub-
ection with Seventh
the south boundary of
grades and intersection
inspection and approval
to staff approval of
2. Irrevocable legal access to the new Meadows Road
~*'~'
must be provided where necessary to all-existing
_.= and future properties abutting that portion of the
old Meadows Road that may be vacated and all ease-
ments for. such access shall be depicted on the
final plat.
3. All property exchanges between the Savanah Limited
Partnership, the Institute, the MAA, and Physics
shall be effectuated simultaneously with the re-
cording of the final plat.
4. All sanitary sewer improvements as installed in
the development area shall be inspected and ap-
proved to the satisfaction of the Aspen Sanitation
District.
5. Complete and detailed utility plans, i.e., elec-
tric, gas, cable T.V., and telephone, shall be
provided to and approved by the Planning Director
and City Engineer at or prior to submission for
recording of the final plat. Additionally, all
utilities shall approve utility design and loca-
tion prior to staff approval of the subdivision
agreement and final plat.
13
6• The final plat shall accurately reflect all under-
ground utility installations, particularly those
along roadways, trailways and cultivated landscap-
ed areas.
7. IItility facility installations shall be restricted
to roadway, trailway and cultivated landscaped
corridors wherever possible. If utility facility
installations must occur outside of these areas,
such alternate utility corridors shall be fenced
or barricaded to the narrowest width possible so
as to minimize vegetation disturbance or destruc-
tion from construction activities and machinery.
All utility location corridors shall be inspected
and approved by the City Engineer and Planning
Director prior to the. issuance of any excavation
permit.
8. Vegetation replacement necessitated by utility
installation shall utilize the same plant species
as the species of vegetation disturbed or damaged.
9. All ditches, swales, intermediary ponds and. detention
areas shall be subject to appropriate easements for
access and maintenance purposes and be depicted on the
final plat.
10 .. The Developer shall provide a digitized copy of the
subdivision plat prior to recordation of the mylar
copies.
11. Trench box construction methods shall be utilized
for utility installations whenever possible so as
to minimize site disturbance.
12: The Castle Creek sanitary trunkline shall be lined
unless deemed otherwise by the Aspen Sanitation
District. If sections of the trunkline must be
replaced, such replacement locations shall be
identified to the City Engineer and Planning De-
partment and the least disruptive methods shall be
identified and employed.
13. Detailed design drawings for the new Meadows Road and
Seventh Street and Eighth Street intersections shall be
provided to and approved by the City Engineer prior to
staff approval of the final plat. All design drawings
.: ~ 14
shall be prepared by a professional engineer registered
in the State of Colorado.
14. The speed limit for the new Meadows Road shall be
reduced to a speed below thirty (30) miles per hour as
determined by the City Engineer.
15. The existing old Meadows Road shall be converted to a
pedestrian trial/bikeway with ownership thereto to
remain in the City.
16. Pursuant to Section 24-7-1005E of the Municipal Code,
the final subdivision plat and subdivision agreement
shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County
Clerk and Recorder within 180 days following the adop-
tion date of this Ordinance. Failure to record the
final plat and subdivision agreement within the 180 day
time period shall render the subdivision approvals
granted herein invalid. If the 180 days lapse, recon-
sideration of the subdivision and subdivision agreement
by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council
will be required before acceptance and recording.
~`~ .~: Section 6
-~
Pursuant to Section 24-8-106 of the Municipal Code, the City
Council finds as~follows in regard to the Plan's residential
Growth Management Quota System allotment component:
1. The Planning and Zoning Commission has forwarded
to City Council a residential development total
score of 35.78 for the residential component of
the Plan, such score exceeding the minimum scoring
threshold.
2. The residential development component of the Plan
was the only development project submitted to the
Planning and Zoning Commission far 1990 residen-
tial GMQS allotments.
3. The GMQS residential scoring considered and reflected
the waiver of the six-month minimum lease requirement
as set forth in the applicable condominiumization
regulations.
.~
J
15
4• A multi-year or phased development allotment would not
serve the best interests of the Plan or the general
public.
5• Section 24-8-103B of the Municipal Code permits
the awarding of development allotments in excess
of the maximum allotment level in any given year.
6• The Plan as presented by the Developer warrants an
excess development allotment and the Planning
Office has indicated excess development allotments
are available.
7- No challenges to the Planning and Zoning Commis-
sion's scoring or ranking of the Plan's residen-
tial development component have been submitted as
pe='Znitted by Section 24-8-1062 of the Municipal
Code.
Section ~
Pursuant to the findings as sat forth in Section 6 above and
I'•~s%V
in accordance with Section 24-8-106J of the Municipal Code, the
,~
City Council awards and grants the Developer six (6) residential
development allotments from the GMQS allotment pool for 1990, and
eight (8) excess residential development allotments to be off- set
in future years in accordance with Section 24-8-1038 of the
Municipal Code.
In accordance with Section 24-8-108 (A) (1) of the Municipal
Code, Developer, or its successor in interest, shall be el igibl e
for exemption from the expiration of the GMQS allotments for
residential Lots 7, 8, 9 and 10 herein awarded upon proper
demonstration that those conditions of final approval and the
public improvements associated with Lots 7, 8, 9 and 10 have been
satisfactorily completed.
"~
~~
16
Section 8
Pursuant to Section 24-8-104(C)(1)(b), as amended per
Ordinance No. 13, (Series of .1991), of the Municipal Code, the
City Council finds as follows in regard to the Developer's
request for Growth Management Quota System development exemption
for essential public facilities:
1. The Institute's proposed development of new lodge
units, expansion of the existing health club,
expansion of the restaurant, and expansion of the
tennis shop, including rest rooms, is essential
for the revitalization of the Aspen Meadows prop-
erty .
2. The M.~A's proposed expansion of the Music Tent,
the addition of a year-round. rehearsal/performance
hall, and expansion of the Music Tent gift shop,
;~.. is~essential for the revitalization of the Aspen
Meadows property.
~.
3. The programs and activities sponsored and or host-
ed by the Institute and the MAA at the Asuen
Meadows facilities have historically provided
intellectual and cultural enrichment to the citi-
zens of the City of Aspen without which the City
would not have attained its present character and
standing in the national and international commu-
nity. Furthermore, the Aspen Meadows facilities,
and those of the Institute and MAA in particular,
have served and continue to serve important commu-
nity needs and proposed expansions of same will
only enhance their value and accessibility to the
citizens of the City of Aspen and the general
public.
4. The Institute's and MAA's proposed development
involves essential public facilities, will enhance
existing essential public facilities, and is not-
for-profit in nature.
17
Section 9
Pursuant to Section 24-8-104(C)(1)(b), as amended per
Ordinance No. 13 (Series of 1991), of the Municipal Code, and the
findings as set forth in Section 8 above, the City Council awards
and grants Growth Management Quota System development exemptions
from competition and affordable housing impact mitigation for the
following Plan development on the basis that such development is
for essential public facilities:
1. Fifty (50) new lodge units of 42,410
(Aspen Institute). square feet,
2. Health club expansion of 1,800 square
Institute). feet, (Aspen
--:.. 3 .
~ -~ Restaurant expansion of 2, 000 square
- feet, ( Aspen
Institute) .
4. Tennis shop expansion, including rest rooms of
980 square feat, (Aspen Institute). ,
5. Music Tent backstage expansion of 1,500 square
feet, (MAA).
6. The new rehearsal/performance hall of 11,000
square feet, (MAA) ,
7. Music Tent gft-shop expansion of 100
(MAA) . square feet,
- Section ZO
Pursuant to Section 24-7-1102 of the Municipal Code, the
City Council finds as follows in regard to the zoning map amend-
ments component of the Plan:
1. The proposed zoning amendments as set forth in the
Plan are not in conflict with the provisions of
Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code, the Aspen Area
~.~ 18
Comprehensive Plan or the Aspen Meadows Master
Plan.
2. The proposed zoning amendments are compatible with
surrounding zone districts and land uses.
3. The proposed zoning amendments will not adversely
impact traffic generation or road safety when
taken into consideration with the other aspects of
the Plan.
4. The proposed zoning amendments will not adversely
impact demand for .public facilities or services
nor adversely affect the environment.
5. The proposed zoning amendments will promote the
public interest and character of. the City of As-
pen.
Section Il
Pursuant to Sections 24-7-1102 and 24-7-1103, and Division 2
of Article 5 of Chapter 24, as amended per Ordinance No. 13
(Series of 1991), of the Municipal Code, and the findings set
forth in Section 10 above, the City Council does grant the
following amendments to the Official Zone District Map and does
designate the following zone districts for the development
subject to the conditions as specified below:
1. R-MF (Residential Multi-Family) shall be applied
to Lots 5 and 6 (townhomes).
2. R-15 (Moderate-Density Residential) shall be ap-
plied to Lots 7, 8, 9 and 10 (single family lots).
3. WP (Wildlife Preservation) shall be applied to the
25 acres, more or less, of land conveyed to the
City of Aspen (Lot 4)and to the racetrack area of
the Aspen Meadows property as depicted in the
final SPA development plan submittal.
19
4. OS (Open Space) shall be applied to Anderson Park,
the Marble Garden, and the Tent Meadow as depicted
in the final SPA development plan submittal.
5• A (Academic) shall be applied to Lots 1, 2 and 3
within the Aspen Meadows owned by the Institute,'
MAA, and Physics, except where other zone dis-
tricts have been designated as hereinabove provid-
ed.
6. The zoning designations as specified in paragraphs
1 through 5 above are contingent upon the Develop-
er providing precise survey boundaries of the zone
districts prior to staff approval of the final
plat.
7. Pending such time as the boundaries for the zone
districts as described above are finalized and
accepted, or no longer than six (6) months, which-
ever period is shorter, no building permit shall
be issued by the Chief Building official for any
development in the Aspen Meadows which would be
F,~~=.~, prohibited by the zoning districts herein desig-
.~ Hated and authorized.
Section 12
Pursuant to Sections 24-7-804B and D(2) of the Municipal
Code, the City Council finds as follows in regard to the
Developer's requests for variations from subdivision and subdivi-
sion improvement requirements, easement and utility requirements,
design standards for streets and related improvements, and z one
district dimensional and minimum lease requirements:
l• The proposed variations are compatible with exist-
ing development and land uses in the area and
surrounding neighborhoods and are not in conflict
with the provisions or goals of the Aspen Meadows
Master Plan.
2• The proposed variations will not adversely impact
public facilities or public safety.
,~
~~~
20
Section 13
Pursuant to the findings as set forth in Section 12 above
and in accordance with Section 24-7-804D(2), as amended per
Ordinance No. 13 (Series of 1991), of the Municipal Code, the
City Council grants the following variations from subdivision
development standards and zone district dimensional and minimum
lease requirements as set forth in the Plan:
1. Curbs, gutters. and sidewalks need not be provided
within the development.
2. Alleys, paved or unpaved, do not need to be pro-
vided.
3. Traffic control signs shall be installed at the
intersection of the new Meadows Road and Seventh
and Eighth Streets, but no traffic signals need be
provided. Speed zones shall be signed as deter-
~ mined by the City Engineer.
4. If determined to be necessary by the City Engi-
Weer, street lights need only be provided at the
intersections of the new Meadows Road and Seventh
• and Eighth Streets. Ornamental streetlights are
• desirable.
5. No street bridges need be provided. Culverts to
accommodate irrigation ditches and drainage shall
be installed.
6. Street right-of-way regarding new Meadows Road
shall only be dedicated at lengths and widths as
determined to be necessary by the City Engineer.
7. The minimum centerline curve radius for new
Meadows Road may be reduced to 65 feet at and or
near the intersection of ~ighth Street, and right-
of-way widths may be reduced to 40 feet. Maximum
grade may be increased not to exceed 8~. All di-
mensions shall be specified and confirmed on the
final plat.
8. No street-end dedications need be provided.
21
9. Cul-de-sac dimensions for Meadows Road may be
increased to a maximum length of 2,000 feet with a
turnaround diameter at the administration building
of approximately 50 feet.
~.._..-~
10. The new road alignment for Meadows Road shall
remain "Meadows Road" in name.
11. Street trees lining new Meadows Road shall
consist of cottonwoods of 2 inch caliper
spaced every 30 feet along the east boundary
beginning at the intersection of Eighth
Street and extending north to the tennis
courts .
12. Fire lane and emergency vehicle access ease-
ments may be reduced in width upon approval
of the Fire Marshal.
13. Utility easement dimensional and location
requirements on lots other than those associ-
ates with the single family Lots may be re-
duced or modified-upon the approval of the
City Engineer and easements need not be pro-
vided in the absence of actual utility in-
stallations. All proposed utility easements
should be reflected on the final plat.
14. Fire hydrants shall and need only be situated
within 350 feet of all structures.
15. The six (6) month minimum lease requirement
for condominium units as contained at Section
24-~-1007 (A) (1) (b) (1) of the Municipal Code
is :~aived as to the condominium units as
depicted in the Plan.
16. A dimensional height variation for the center
portion of the Tennis Townhomes is allowed
for up to 3 feet.
17. A dimensional height variation for the north-
ernmost Trustee House is allowed for up to 8
feet .
l8. Minimum R-15 zone district lot size per
dwelling is reduced to .12,000 square feet for
Lots 7, 8, 9 and 10.
22
19. Minimum R-15 zone district side yard setback
requirements are reduced to zero (0) feet for
the west side of Lot 7 and the east side of
Lot 10.
20. Minimum RMF zone district front yard setback require-
ments for accessary buildings may be reduced to zero
(0) feet for Lots 5 and 6.
21. Minimum RMF zone district open space requirements are
waived for Lots 5 and 6 in consideration of the open
space otherwise provided in the SPA development plan.
Section 14
Pursuant to Section 24-7-1007 B of the Municipal Code, the
City Council finds as follows in regard to the Plan's condo-
miniumization component:
1. The 8 existing and 3 proposed Trustee Houses
(Lot 5) and 7 proposed townhomes (Lot ~6) to
be condominiumized are not presently leased
r on a long term basis.
2. A variation in the six (6) month minimum
lease requirement is warranted and has been
authorized pursuant to Section 13 above.
3. The proposed condominiumization will not
adversely impact the availability of afford-
able housing.
Section 15
Pursuant to the findings set forth in Section 14 above, and
i.n accordance with Section 24-7-1007 of the Municipal Code, the
City Council grants and awards condominiumization approval for
the Plan as follows, subject to the conditions as specified
herein:
1. For eight (8) existing and three (3) proposed
Trustees Houses (Lot 5).
` `,`.
`..
23
2. For seven (7) proposed townhomes (Lot 6).
3. Condominiumization as awarded in this Section
is contingent upon the payment of an afford-
able housing impact fee of $64,240.00, which
fee shall be paid to the City Finance Direc-
tor prior to recordation of as-built condo-
minium plats and declarations.
Section I6 ~ :~•
All material representations and commitments made by the
Developer pursuant to the Plan approvals as herein awarded, .
whether in public hearing or'docua-entation presented before the
Planning and Zoning commission, Historic Preservation Committee
and or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan
development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if
'`~.~_~ fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific condi-
tions.
Section 17
• The Official Zone District Map for the City of Aspen,
Colorado, shall be and is hereby amended to reflect those zoning
and rezonings actions as set forth in Section 11 above and such
amendments shall be promptly entered on the Official Map in
accordance with Section 24-5-103B of the Municipal Code.
Section 18
Any development or proposed development in the Aspen Meadows
not vested in accordance with law prior to the effective date of
this Ordinance shall comply with the terms and provisions of the
.~+~*
24
zone districts and conditions of
this Ordinance.
Section l9
development adopted pursuant to
Pursuant~to Section 24-6-207 of the Municipal Code, City
Council does hereby grant Developer vested rights in the Plan as
follows:
1. The rights granted in the site specific de-
velopment plan approved by this Ordinance
shall remain vested for three (3) years from
the date of final adoption specified below.
However, any failure to abide by the terms
and conditions attendant to this approval
shall result in forfeiture of said vested
rights. Failure to timely and properly re-
cord all plats and agreements as specified
herein and or. in the Municipal Code shall
also result in the forfeiture of vested
rights.
2. The approvals as granted herein are subject
to all rights of referendum and judicial
review.
3. Nothing in the approvals provided in this
Ordinance shall exempt the site specific
development plan from subsequent reviews and
or approvals 'required by this Ordinance or
the general rules, regulations or ordinances
of the City provided that such reviews or ap-
provals are not inconsistent with the approv-
als granted and vested herein.
4. The establishment herein of a vested property
right shall not preclude the application of
ordinances or regulations which are general
in nature and~•are applicable to all property
subject to land use regulation by the City of
Aspen including, but not limited to, build-
ing, fire, plumbing, electrical and mechani-
cal codes. In this regard, as a condition of
this site development approval, the Developer
shall abide by any and all such building,
fire, plumbing, electrical and mechanical
2 5'
codes, unless an exemption therefrom is
granted in writing.
Section 20
The City Clerk shall cause notice of this Ordinance to be
published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City
of Aspen no later than •fourteen (14) days following final adop- '
tion hereof. Such notice shall be given in the following form:
Notice is hereby given to the general public of the
approval of a site specific development plan, and the
creation of a vested. property right pursuant to Title
24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining
to the following-described property:
The property shall be described in the notice and appended to
said notice shall be the ordinance
~~ granting such approval.
Section 21
The City Clerk is further directed to record a copy of this
• , ,.
Ordinance in a timely manner after its final adoption with the
Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder.
Section 22
This Ordinance shall not effect 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.
•
"'~~ ~ 2 6
Section 23
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 24
Public hearing(s) on the Ordinance shall be held on the ~3 ~~
day of _~i;•'C~.N , 1991, in the City Council Cham-
v
bets, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISh'ED as provided by law by
..~ ,
F the City Council of the City of Aspen on the ~ 9 day of
1991.
William L. Stirling, Mayor
.~T°I't:ST:~
~ ~ ~E~~-~
Kathryn S Kcch, City Clerk
FIt7ALLY ADOPTED; passed and approved this ,~'-''day of
1991.
William L. Stirling, Mayor
27
ATTEST:
~~~
Kathryn Koch, City Clerk
28
r.. ~. ..
#34t~937 _~1 /2Q/92 1~5: 13 Far ~4U~_ . ~?U BE: 667 F'G 731
Silvia. Davis, F'itb::in Cnty Cler•~::, Dos ~.~~~~ ._
"THE ASPEN MEADOWS"
SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA
DEVELOPMENT & SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT
#34c_~q.3; r_~i /^•_~?/4^ 16: 1:~ =c '`4c?c_,, ~~~a
~ilvia Davis, F'it~-in Cnty i , .::. ~f~'' 667 F'G 732
r E Doc ~, cic_~
THE ASPEN MEADOWS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
I.
GENERAL REPRESENTATIONS .............................. 5
A. Construction Schedules -General ........................... 5
B. Construction Schedules -Detailed .......................... 6
C. Traffic Mitigation Plan ................................. 6
1. West Meadows Component .......................... 7
2. MAA Facilities Component .......................... 7
D. Site Improvements to Property .... ' ........................ 8
1. Utility Plan .................................... 8
(a) Water ....................................9
~) Sanitary Sewer .............................. 10
(c) Electricity ................................. 11
(d) Gas ..................................... 12
(e) Other Underground Utilities ...................... 12
(~ Drainage .................................. 12
(g) Fire Protection .............................. 12
(h) Vacation and Grant of Easements .................. 13
2. Meadows Road ................................ 13
E. Additional Conditions of Site Improvements ................... 14
F. Financial Assurances ................................. 15
II. INDIVIDUAL PARCELS -THE ASPEN MEADOWS .................. 16
A. Lot 1 -The Aspen Institute ............................. 16
1. Dimensional Requirements ......................... 16
2. Off-Street Parking .............................. 16
3. Site Improvements .............................. 16
(a) Utilities .................................. 16
(b) Landscape Improvements ....................... 16
4. Trails ...................................... 17
5. Financial Assurances ............................. 17
6. Employee Housing ......................:....... 18
B. Lot 2 -Music Associates of Aspen ......................... 18
1. Dimensional Requirements ......................... 18
2. Off-Street Parking .............................. 19
3. Site Improvements .............................. 19
(a) Utilities .................................. 19
i
~.. :~~ -' ciilC4/92 16:1 F.ec ~~__~. Eck:: 667 F'G 733
Silvi_. Davis, F'itE::in Cnty Clerk:. ,roc ~.i~ia
PAGE
C.
D.
E
F.
G
H.
(b) Landscape Improvements ....................... 19
4. Financial Assurances ............................. 19
5. Employee Housing .............................. 20
Lot 3 -The Aspen Center for Physics ....................... 20
1. Site Improvements .............................. 21
(a) Utilities .................................. 21
2. Financial Assurances ............................. 21
3. Trails ...................................... 22
Lot 4 -Conservation Land .............................. 22
1. Site Improvements .............................. 22
(a) Utilities .................................. 22
Lot 5 -The Trustee Houses at the Aspen Meadows .............. 22
1. Dimensional Requirements and Variations Therefrom ......... 23
2. Condominiumization and Six Month Minimum
Lease Requirement .............................. 24
3. Site Improvements .............................. 24
(a) Utilities .................................. 24
(b) Landscape Improvements ....................... 24
4. Trails ...................................... 25
5. Financial Assurances ............................. 25
6. Employee Housing .............................. 26
Lot 6 -The Tennis Townhomes at the Aspen Meadows ............ 26
1. ~ Dimensional Requirements and Variations Therefrom ......... 27
2. Condominiumization and Six Month Minimum
Lease Requirement .............................. 28
3. Site Improvements .............................. 28
(a) Utilities .................................. 28
(b) Landscape Improvements ....................... 28
4. Trails ...................................... 29
5. Financial Assurances ............................. 29
6. Employee Housing .............................. 30
Lot 7, 8, 9 and 10 -The Residences at the. Aspen Meadows ......... 30
1. Dimensional Requirements ......................... 31
2. Site Improvements .............................. 32
(a) Utilities .................................. 32
3. Financial Assurances ............................. 32
4. Employee Housing ...................... ~ ........ 33
Addi tional Provisions and Agreements ...................... 33
1. Access/Emergency Loop .......................... 33
2. Fire Protection ................................ 33
3. Fireplace Regulations ............................ 34
4. Drainage Mitigation ............................. 34
ii
,rt.~4 37 t~1/~4/9~ lb: i3 Rec `~+4~~C •~~i Bk: 667 F'G 734
Silvia Davis, F'itk:in Cnty Cler•k:. Doc ~.~?~~
PAGE
5. Fugitive Dust Control ............................ 34
6. Energy Conservation - Savanah ...................... 34
7. Energy Conservation -Institute and MAA ................ 34
8 ...................................
Fox Dens 35
.
9. .
Re-Vegetation ................................. 35
10. Manicured Lawn Areas ........................... 35
11. Construction Barricading ................ ......... 35
12. Amendments .................................. 35
13. Public Access ................................. 35
14. MAA Pazldng Lot .............................. 36
III. MISCELLANEOUS ...................................... 36
A. Periodic Project Review ............................... 36
B. Non- Compliance and Request for Amendments or Extensions ........ 36
C. General Provisions .................................. 38
1 ...............................
Notice 38
.
2. .......
Binding Effect ................................. 39
3. Applicable Law ................................ 39
4. Vested Rights ................................. 39
5. Expiration of Development Allotment .................. 40
6. Severability .................................. 40
7. Incorporation of Recitals and Written Submittals ............ 41
8. Entire Agreement; Amendment ...................... 41
9. Acceptance of SPA Precise Plan; Ratification by Owner ....... 41
10. Reasonableness ................................ 41
APPENDIX .... ............................................ 44
savanahlagmbltablaeon
lll
y.;4i~q~~ cil/y4/9~. ib: 13 f~ r~cic_~, c_~ci ~k: 667 F'G 735
,ilvia Davis, F'itk:in Cnty i arE;, Doc ~.o~~
DEVELOPMENT & SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT
"T~ ASPEN MEADOWS"
SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA
This Agreement, made and entered into this day of 1991,
by and among the City of Aspen, Colorado, a municipal corporation and home rule city (the
"City"), and The Aspen Institute ("Institute"), the Music Associates of Aspen ("MAA"), the
Aspen Center for Physics ("Physics") and Savanah Limited Partnership, a District of Columbia
limited partnership ("Savanah"). Collectively the Institute, MAA, Physics and Savanah are
hereinafter referred to as the "Consortium".
RECITALS
1. The City of Aspen after numerous public hearings adopted a Master Plan
for the Aspen Meadows as a component of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan in September,
1990; and,
2. The Consortium has submitted to the City for approval, execution and
recordation, The Aspen Meadows Final S.P.A. Development Plan and Final Subdivision Plat
(the "Plat") pertaining to the development of a tract of land known as the Aspen Meadows
situate within the City of Aspen, Colorado, legally described on Exhibit "A" (the "Property")
to include the following development activities, among others (the "Project"):
a. Reconstruction of the existing sixty lodge units of 35,950 gross
interior square feet and in addition, renovation of the existing
Kresge Building conference space (lower level, Building 5)' -Insti-
tote.
b: Construction of fifty new lodge units of 42,410 gross interior
square feet and additional subgrade mechanical space in Lodge
Buildings 1, 2, 3 and 4 totalling 960 square feet of gross interior
space -Institute
c. Health club renovation and expansion of 1,800 gross interior
square feet -Institute.
For the purposes of this Agreement, the term "gross interior square feet" or "gross
interior floor area" shall mean that floor area contained within the surrounding exterior
walls (measured from their exterior surface) of a building, or portion thereof, exclusive
of covered or uncovered decks, balconies, stairways, terraces and similar features, when
such features are not surrounded by exterior walls or enclosed.
a '~, cici Es f; 667 F'G 736
.f- ~`_~9:~i ~?1/_•^_4/9.^•• 1b: 1.~ Fte~• ..~
Si_via Davis, F'itF::in Cnty Cle, ..:, Doc ~.~~~_~
d. Restaurant renovation and expansion of 2,000 gross interior square
feet -Institute.
e. Tennis shop renovation and expansion, including rest rooms, of
980 gross interior square feet -Institute.
f. Music tint backstage expansion of 1,500 gross interior square feet
- MAA.
g. New rehearsal/performance hall of 11,000 square feet of Floor
Area Ratio ("FAR") -MAA.
h. Music tent gift shop expansion of 100 gross interior square feet -
MAA.
i. Renovation of the existing eight trustee houses and their expansion
to 2,500 square feet of FAR each - Savanah.
j. Construction of ten new townhouse condominiums of 2,500 square
feet of FAR each - Savanah.
k. Creation of four single family homesites, each homesite to have a
single family home and an accessory employee unit totaling 4,540
square feet of FAR exclusive of exempt garage space of up to 500
square feet - Savanah.
3. Following extensive public hearings at which substantial evidence in
support of the Project components was produced and considered, the Consortium received all
requisite development approvals from the City for the Project. The development approvals that
the Consortium has received include the following:
a. Subdivision approval to create ten separate lots at the Aspen
Meadows.
b. Growth Management Quota System ("GMQS ") approval for
fourteen residential units.
c. GMQS exemption for essential public facilities from competition
and affordable housing impact mitigation for the Institute and
MAA development components.
d. Zoning map amendments to create two RMF lots, four R-15 lots,
Academic (A), Wildlife Preservation (WP) and Open Space (OS)
zones and lots, all as depicted on the Plat.
;4i~q.;~ ci1/24/9? 16:1• R~.
_.ilvia Davis, F'itF::in Cnty
'_cii~, i~c_~ Es F:: 667 F'G 737
G_ _r•~::, Doc ~.i~ci
e. Variations from subdivision and subdivision improvement
requirements, easement and utility requirements, design standards
for streets and related improvements and zone district dimensional
and minimum lease requirements.
f. Condominiumization approval for the eight existing trustee houses,
the three new trustee houses on Lot 5 and the seven new
townhomes on Lot 6.
g. Waiver of the six month minimum lease requirements for the
approved development activity in the RMF zone district.
h. Conditional use approvals for affordable housing units on lots 7,
8, 9 and 10, and '
i. Historical Preservation Commission ("HPC") conceptual and final
approval for all aspects of the Project which were subject to HPC
review.
4. The City has fully considered the Plat and this Agreement as well as the
anticipated benefits and burdens to other neighboring properties by reason of the proposed
development and improvement of the Property, all in accordance with Chapter 24 and other
related provisions of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado (the "Municipal
Code"); and,
5. The City has found that the Plat and this Agreement meet the standards
set forth in Section 24-7-801, et seq. of the Municipal Code and further fords that the
Consortium has met its burden and has demonstrated the reasonableness and suitability of the
Project, its conformity to the requirements of Article 7 of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code and
the Master Plan, that the adverse effects of the Project have been minimized to the extent
practicable, and that the Project complies with the City Council's intent in originally designating
the Property with an SPA overlay, including the reasonable conformance of the Plat and this
Agreement with the approval granted to the conceptual development plan; and,
6. The City is willing to approve, execute and accept this Agreement and the
Plat for recordation upon the agreement of the Consortium to the matters hereinafter described,
subject to all of the requirements, terms and conditions of Article 7 of Chapter 24 of the
Municipal Code as presently constituted and such other laws, rules and regulations as are or may
be applicable; and,
3
~34cio.,, cjli?4/9C 16: 13 ~• `4ci<~. i~ci EsF::: 667 PG 738
;ilvia Davis, F'itk:in Cnty er•6:, Doc w.i~ci
7. The City has imposed conditions and requirements in connection with its
approval, execution and acceptance of this Agreement and the Plat for recordation and such
matters are necessary to protect, promote and enhance the public health, safety and welfare; and,
8. Under the authority of Article 7 of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code, the
City is entitled to assurances that the matters hereinafter agreed to will be faithfully performed
by the Consortium and the Consortium's successors and assigns; and,
9. The Consortium is willing to enter into such agreements with, and to
provide assurances to, the City; and
10. The Consortium has submitted and the City has approved a detailed
construction time line incorporating a specific construction schedule for the installation of the
new Meadows Road; and
11. Specific fire hydrant locations for the development have been established
and approved in cooperation with the Fire Marshall; and
12. A detailed tree removal and replacement plan has been submitted and
approved by the City Parks Department indicating all trees to be moved or removed, their size,
location, species and time of planting, transplanting, or removal specifying that all tree replace-
ment shall be on a one-to-one caliper inch basis with minimum size at 1 1/2" caliper; and
13. Exact trail locations have been approved by the Planning Director giving
priority to those alignments which minimize damage or disruption to existing vegetation and
landscape and which subordinate grade considerations and, thus, minimize switchbacks, to the
preservation of existing topography. As built easements shall be executed and conveyed after
trail construction; and
14. All property exchanges between Savanah, the Institute, the MAA and
Physics are to be effectuated simultaneously with the recording of the final plat or as soon
thereafter as is practical in the circumstances; and
15. The Consortium has provided to the City a digitized copy of the
subdivision plat.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, the mutual covenants
herein contained, and the approval, execution and acceptance of the Plat for recordation by the
City it is agreed as follows:
4
#3~c~3 ~ c_> 1.~ ='4,'9~ 15: 1 ~ a~ ~4c is i, c.ic i Bk:: 667 F'G 739
Silvia Uavi~, F'itF::in Cnt~ .lerF::, Doc w.cii~
I. GENERAL REPRESENTATIONS
A. CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULES -GENERAL:
The Consortium and City mutually acknowledge that exact construction schedules for the
entire Project cannot be submitted or agreed to at this time, due primarily to two factors:
(a) construction scheduling depends on the success of fund raising efforts by the non-
profit members of the Consortium, and (b) construction will take longer than a normal
development because summer programming and activities on the Property will require
curtailment of construction activity during summer months.
The Project involves five separate areas of construction activity with the following
currently estimated sequencing:
1. It is anticipated that the Institute renovation and new construction; including the
seven lodge buildings, administration building, health club and pool, parking
structure and attendant site work will be undertaken in at least three distinct
phases with the major components of each phase beginning in the Fall and ending
the following Summer.
2. It is anticipated that the MAA tent improvements (seating expansion, back stage
addition and site work), rehearsaUperformance facility construction and site work
and the reconfiguration of the parking lots on Gillespie will be undertaken in at
least two phases, one being the tent related improvements and parking lot work
and the other being construction of the rehearsal facility.
3. It is anticipated that the residential component, consisting of site improvements
for the single family lots, tennis townhomes and trustee house remodels and
additions and all related site work will be undertaken in three phases: the site
work for the home sites, the tennis townhomes and the renovation and expansion
of the trustee houses.
4. The construction of the new Meadows Road is currently planned for the Spring
of 1992, and the conversion of the old Meadows Road to a trail with landscape
and the upgrades to the utility and irrigation systems throughout the Property is
planned for the Spring of 1992. The utility and irrigation system work will be
coordinated with the individual construction phases and with the Public Works
Director. '
5. The schedule for completion of the City trail and bridge installation from the old
Meadows Road to picnic point and across to the Rio Grande trail and from behind
the auditorium accessing the Roaring Fork Road side of the campus will be
established by the City but will be coordinated with the affected Consortium
5
#~4i~q., Q1/~4/92 iu~: i.? F;~ arc;~c;;~.c?r~ ~~::; 667 F'G 740
'~ilvia Davis, F'itk:in Cnt`~ ~" ~r•k:, Doc ~.iat~
members. Disruptive construction activity will be scheduled so as not to interfere
with campus programs or activities. The City shall be solely and completely
responsible for grading, constructing and paying for all trail, bridge and
appurtenant recreation features from the Meadows Road West and North to picnic
point and across the Roaring Fork River to the Rio Grande trail and from the Rio
Grande trail up the hill to the Roaring. Fork Road by the Institute parking lot.
B. CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULES -DETAILED:
At the time of application for a building permit for a particular development component
of the Project, and as a condition precedent to the issuance thereof, the individual owner
shall provide the City Engineering Department with a detailed construction schedule for
that component, satisfactory to the City Engineer and the Chief Building Official in
connection with the Planning Office in the exercise of their reasonable discretion keeping
in mind that disruptive activities shall be scheduled to minimize impacts on adjacent
properties and campus activities.
The Construction Schedule shall particularly address how construction phasing and other
techniques within each separate component will best accommodate the following if
appropriate under the circumstances: (a) any barricading and provision of pedestrian
protection, (b) excavation access and large truck traffic circulation and staging areas, (c)
disposal of demolition and excavation materials, (d) delivery and storage of major
construction materials, (e) construction equipment access and storage, (f) contractor
vehicle parking, (g) compliance with City noise regulations, and (h) scheduling and
design of utility relocations, replacements and undergrounding.
Each of such Construction Schedules shall be verified by the City Engineer and the Chief
Building Official in consultation with the Planning Office and (if the City so desires)
recorded as a supplementary exhibit hereto.
C. TRAFFIC MITIGATION PLAN:
As part of the SPA approval process the Consortium, in connection with the City and
West end neighbors, has developed a traffic mitigation plan dated February of 1991 and
attached hereto as Exhibit "B" .
The traffic mitigation plan is evolutionary in format. It shall address the needs of the
guests, employees and users of the lodge and the concert goers and students of the music
facilities as well as the neighbors. The plan requires action on the part of the Institute,
any lodge operator, MAA, the Roaring Fork Transit Authority ("BETA") and the City
of Aspen. To accommodate the separate needs of the two distinct facilities at the
Meadows, the traffic mitigation plan has the following two components:
6
#.;4i~q.;~ cif/~~/q2 16:1. .F.. ~4i~ci.i~i~ Bf~:: 667 F'G 741
Silvia Davis, F'itF::in Cnt; .:ler•E::, Doc ~.iii~
1. West Meadows Component. This component includes programs to discourage
private automobile use and to encoura;e, through incentives, alternate modes of
transportation. Elements include:
a. Airport van service for guests and residents.
b. Van service to and from town for guests and residents.
c. The shuttle van system as incorporated into the development's traffic
mitigation plan shall be operated by that company or entity operating the
lodge facility.
d. Chartered vehicles when appropriate for group activities originating at the
lodge.
e. Bicycle rental and storage facilities.
f. Promotional materials encouraging use of alternate modes of transportation
and discouraging private autos.
g. Guest parking in a garage to be constructed under the tennis facilities.
h. Trail Easements to connect the Property with the Rio Grande Trail.
i. Limited employee parking with programs for alternative transportation use
for employees.
j . Delivery vehicles and delivery routes serving the restaurant facilities shall
be limited to those hours of delivery and routes as delineated in the
development's traffic mitigation plan, except when severe weather or
circumstances beyond the control of the lodge/restaurant operator require
a deviation therefrom. The lodge/restaurant operator shall insure and
enforce the delivery hours and routes by contractual obligation with its
goods and services providers. The Institute (itself or through it's
lodge/restaurant operator) shall furnish to the City written evidence of this
contractual obligation.
2. MAA Facilities Component. Efforts to reduce auto use have been undertaken in
recent years by MAA in conjunction with West end residents. The elements of
this plan are a further expansion of these earlier efforts:
a. Promotional materials, including maps, encouraging use of transit,
bicycles and walkways have been initiated and will be continued.
7
!~~4i?g3r i?1/24i92 16: 1' Fie .-''?i?, cii? DF-:: bbl F'G 742
~ - -
' '.via Davis, F'itFin Cnty Cl k:, Doc ~.i?ci
b. Pedestrian/bicycle ways include continued designation of Lake Avenue as
auto free. Bicycle racks will be provided in the vicinity of the tent.
c. Fourth Street from Main Street to the tent will be closed to all motorized
vehicles before large events and will be used for pedestrian and bus egress
after large events.
d. Enhanced transit service by RFTA to the tent during the summer.
e. Truck routing restrictions for deliveries to the tent and the planned
rehearsal/performance facility.
Institute, MAA and any lodge operator shall conduct a review and provide a
written report on the traffic mitigation plan to the City of Aspen Planning
Director on June 10 in years 1993, 1995, 1997, 1999 and 2001 and shall continue
to conduct and provide such reviews and reports every two years.thereafter unless
deemed unnecessary by the City Council. Such reports shall include, but shall
not be limited to, traffic counts on Seventh Street, number of van trips pursuant
to the development's traffic mitigation plan, charter vehicle use, passenger counts
and destinations arising from the use of the Aspen Meadows facilities. The
review and report shall also incorporate data and information from RFTA
illustrating its service to the MAA facilities. The City will review the report and
may require modification to the development's traffic mitigation program,
including the addition of reasonable new mitigation measures. All modifications
of the traffic mitigation plan shall be approved by the Planning and Zoning
Commission at a public hearing.
D. SITE IMPROVEMENTS TO PROPERTY:
Consortium shall and hereby agrees to accomplish the following improvements on the
Property: -
1. Utilit~Plan
The Consortium shall, when necessary, upgrade and relocate existing
water, sanitary sewer, gas, electrical, telephone, and cable television lines
in accordance with the approved Utility Plan recorded in Book c2 $ at
Page _~ of the Pitkin County Colorado Real Property Records (the
"Records"). The currently estimated cost breakdown of all items are set
forth on Exhibit "C".
In accordance with the Utility Plan, the Consortium shall construct the
following improvements in the Project Area.
8
~ 4~?9~? !:?i/~4/9~ 16: 1.~ Rec = ~!j.i?i? Bt: 667 F'C 743
Silvia Da•.~is, F'itE:in i~nty Cler•F::, Doc ~.!.?i?
(a) Water
The Consortium shall upgrade or install where necessary a water
distribution system for the development meeting no less than the
minimum design, engineering, materials and construction standards
of the City for domestic municipal and fire protection purposes and
shall convey same to the City upon completion, inspection and
acceptance by the City. The Consortium shall also convey to the
City a perpetual twenty foot as-built easement extending ten feet
from each side of the centerline of all newly constructed water
lines, and a construction easement extending an additional five feet
on each side of the centerline, along with a similar twenty foot
easement and construction easement for the future installation of
a connector main to the existing City water main in Black Birch
Drive to be installed and maintained at City expense.
The Consortium shall install and construct two new 8" Ductile Iron
water Ines within the Project in accordance with the Utility Plan
which will replace and upgrade existing 6" cast iron and smaller
diameter water lines on the site.
Additionally, the Consortium shall:
(i) Install and construct an 8" Ductile Iron water line from the
City's existing dead-ended 8" water line in the current
Meadows Road, extending northerly and easterly through
the Project and connecting to the City's 16" Red Mountain
water transmission main. There will be a short section of
6" D.I.P, connecting portions of the 8" loop in front of
Chalet No. 1.
(ii) Install and construct an 8" Ductile Iron water line from the
existing 16" Red• Mountain transmission main, extending
easterly north of Paepcke Auditorium, southerly and then
easterly in the Institute parking lot and terminating with a
tie-in to the existing City of Aspen 6" water line in Roaring
Fork Road.
(iii) Relocate the 16" Red Mountain water transmission main
around Lot 7 as shown on the Utility Plan.
(iv) Where required, all existing service lines will be replaced
and up-sized to support the upgraded and proposed con-
struction.
9
~ t
~, =' 43~ t~1/C~/?C 1b: 1.~ nec ~ _7'' iici rf::: 667 F'G 744
~i ~a Davis, F'itF::in Cnty Cler-- Doc ;~.i~ci
(v) Existing on-site water lines no longer used will be aban-
doned in place.
Plans and specifications for all water system improvements shall
comply with at least minimum City water system specifications and
be subject to the approval of the City Water Superintendent in the
exercise of his discretion. Final acceptance of the water system
installation by the City is conditioned upon submission of final test
reports by a registered civil engineer verifying conformance with
approved plans and specifications.
(b) Sanitary Sewer
The Consortium shall install and construct 8" PVC sanitary sewer
lines within the Project in accordance with the Utility Plan, which
will replace, upgrade, and serve existing and proposed facilities on
the site.
Additionally, the Consortium shall:
(i) Install a new 8" PVC sewer line in the new Meadows Road
to serve the four Single Family Lots 7-10. The sewer main
extension will connect to the sewer main in the existing
Meadows Road.
(ii) Install a new 8" PVC sewer main extension along the west
side of the proposed Tennis Townhouses and connect to the
existing Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District ("ACSD")
Castle Creek Trunkline.
(iii) Relocate, as necessary, portions of the existing sewer line
serving the Trustee Townhouses and connect to the ACSD
Castle Creek Trunkline.
(iv) Install and construct where necessary a new sanitary sewer
collection system for the MAA and Institute property
beginning at the proposed MAA Rehearsal/Performance
facility, extending westerly, northerly, and then westerly
and north of Anderson Park, to the West Meadows portion
of the Institute property. The sewer main will collect
wastes from the meeting, lodging, restaurant, parking, and
health club facilities, extend westerly and north of the
Trustee Townhouses, and connect into the ACSD Castle
Creek Trunkline.
10
''"'-~~' U1/~4/92 16:1. Rec ~-;~'~ cjc~
Bf~~: 667 F'G 745
Si is Davis, F'itk:in Cnty Clem.., Doc ~.c_~i~ J
(v) Install and construct a sanitary sewer collection system on
the Physics Property, extending easterly connecting
Boettcher Building, across the MAA parking lot and
connect into the ACSD sewer main in Roaring Fork Road.
(vi) The Castle Creek sanitary trunkline shall be lined wherever
practical. If sections of the trunkline must be replaced,
such replacement locations shall be identified to the City
Engineer and Planning Department and the least disruptive
practical methods of construction shall be identified and
employed.
(vii) Where necessary, all existing service lines will be replaced
and up-sized to support the upgraded and proposed con-
struction.
(viii) All the existing unused or unnecessary on-site sewer system
will be abandoned in place according to district regulations.
Plans and specifications for all sanitary sewer system improve-
ments will comply with generally applied ACSD specifications and
be subject to the approval of the District manager. Recordation of
the Plat shall indicate acceptance of the proposed system sizing,
locations and easements. Final acceptance by the District Manager
shall be conditioned upon submission of final test reports by an
independent registered civil engineer verifying substantial confor-
mance with approved plans and specifications, substantial compli-
ance with all generally applied rules and regulations of the
District, and submittal of executed and recorded easements on the
standard District form.
(c) Electricity
The Consortium agrees to contract with Holy Cross Electric to
install and construct all necessary electrical system upgrades within
the Project. Underground facilities will be brought from three
points of connection: Meadows Road, the overhead substation on
the east side of Castle Creek and the overhead substation on the
south side of the Roaring Fork River. All existing unnecessary
on-site electrical lines will be abandoned in-place. Routing of new
electrical lines will be consistent with the utility corridor whenever
practicable.
11
( ~
' rt.- 93 r c?i /~4/?~ ? 6: 13 f ec ~4 . c_~C~ Bk:: 667 F'G 746
Ci~via Davis, F'itE::in Cnty Cler•k:, Dr~r_ ~.cici
(d) Gas
The Consortium agrees to contract with Rocky Mountain Natural
Gas to install and construct all necessary upgrades to the gas
system for the Project. Underground facilities will be brought in
from two points of connection: Meadows Road and Roaring Fork
Road. All existing unnecessary on-site gas lines will be abandoned
in-place. Routing of new gas lines will conform to the utility
corridor wherever practicable.
(e) Other Underground Utilities
The Consortium agrees to contract with U.S. West and Canyon
Cable Television to install and construct all necessary upgrades to
their individual facilities within the Projecti. Points of connection
will be from Meadows Road and Roaring Fork• Road. All
unnecessary existing underground lines will be abandoned in-place,
and new routing will conform to the utility corridor whenever
practicable.
(fJ Drainage
The Consortium shall install and maintain storm drainage facilities
for storm runoff from the site in accordance with Municipal Code
Section 24-7-1004.C.4.f. A detention area designed to detain the
on-site 100-year storm runoff as specified by the Urban Storm
Drainage Criteria Manual will be constructed north of Anderson
Park as shown on the Drainage Plan.
The design volume that will be detained is approximately 0.9 acre-
foot of storm runoff. A final plan will be submitted to the Public
Works Director for his review and approval prior to the com-
mencement.of drainage work within the Project.
(g) Fire Protection
The Consortium agrees to install fire hydrants within 350 feet of
all existing and proposed structures. Placement will be reviewed
and approved by the City of Aspen/Pitkin County Fire Marshall
prior to commencement of construction.
12
S. via Davis, F'itF::in Cnty C1
(h) Vacation and Grant of Easements
ti". c:?~? Sf`: 667 FG 747
e Doc ~ . i?<_?
The City agrees to vacate any water, sewer or other utility
reservations at such time as these utilities are either abandoned or
relocated in accordance with the Consortium's commitment set
forth herein. Consortium agrees to grant any new easements for
relocated utility facilities in accordance with the location of the
utilities as constructed and in-place as may be required by the
individual utility's rules and regulations governing service.
2. Meadows Road
There shall be created a new Meadows Road accessing the Institute lodge
facilities and the residential properties at the Meadows. Savanah shall
construct the new Meadows Road, Seventh Street/North Street intersec-
tions, and Meadows Road/Eighth Street intersection in accordance with
the Plat. The new Meadows Road shall be dedicated as a public street
from its intersection with Seventh Street and North Street to the south
boundary of Lot 6.
Legal access to and from the new Meadows Road shall be provided where
necessary for the benefit of existing and future properties abutting that
portion of the old (existing) Meadows Road. Such easements are shown
and depicted on the Plat.
The speed limit for the new Meadows Road shall be reduced to a speed
below thirty miles per hour as determined by the City Engineer.
The old (existing) Meadows Road shall be converted at the expense of
Savanah to a pedestrian traiUbikeway with ownership thereto to remain in
the City.
In connection with the laying out and construction of the new Meadows
Road approved variations from subdivision design and other standards and
elements of the Municipal Code include the following:
* Curbs, gutters and sidewalks need not be provided within the
development.
* Alleys, paved or unpaved, do not need to be provided.
* Traffic .control signs shall be installed at the intersection of the
new Meadows Road with Seventh and with Eighth Streets, but no
13
~~~-Jy•' ~ ~~1 /24/4C 16: 13 Rec\ .. '>, c:~c~
- 8f'= 667 F'G 748
via Davis, F'itF::in Cnty CIerF::, Dc; ~,i~c_~
traffic signals need be provided. Speed zones shall be signed as
determined by the City Engineer.
* If determined to be necessary by the City Engineer, street lights
need only be provided at the intersections of the new Meadows
Road with Seventh and Eighth Streets.
* No street bridges need be provided. Culverts to accommodate
irrigation ditches and drainage shall be installed.
* The minimum centerline curve radius for new Meadows Road shall
be reduced to 65 feet at and or near the intersection of Eighth
Street, and right-of--way widths shall be reduced to 40 feet.
Maximum grade shall not exceed 8%. All dimensions shall be
specified and confirmed on the Plat.
* No street-end dedications need be provided.
* Cul-de-sac length for Meadows Road has been increased to a
maximum of 2,000 feet with a centerline turnaround diameter at
the administration building of approximately 50 feet.
* The new road alignment shall be called "Meadows Road".
* Street trees lining new Meadows Road shall consist of cottonwoods
of 2 inch caliper spaced every 30 feet along the east boundary
beginning at the intersection with Eighth Street and extending
north to the tennis courts.
* The Meadows Road construction shall be a local street in accor-
dance with the Plat and SPA approvals.
E. ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OF SITE IMPROVEMENTS:
In connection with the installation of all site improvements to the Property:
1. There shall be no interconnection of non-treated water systems to potable water
systems.
2. Pursuant to Section 23-56(g) of the Municipal Code, the Consortium shall convey
by special warranty deed to the City any right, title, easement and interest it may
have in the Si Johnson Ditch along with any water wells or other water rights
appurtenant to the Property. The City shall lease back to the Consortium, or its
14
` ~:- 't93 i i ~ i /?4/q2 16: 13 Reci.. -4' ' - ~ ~i ~ BE:: 667 F'G 749
Silvia Davis, F'itk:in Cnty Cleo .., Doc ~.C~~~
successor(s) in interest, raw water for irrigation use within the Project in an
amount equal to that amount of water reasonably necessary for the efficient
irrigation of the lands historically irrigated. Consortium shall pay to the City its
pro rata share of operation, maintenance and repair costs, plus $100.00 per year.
The lease as noted above shall not subordinate the use of the water right to the
emergency needs of the City for minimum stream flows, hydroelectric power, or
municipal purposes.
3. Drainage design for the Project shall not intentionally direct runoff into irrigation
ditches or ponds.
4. Utility facility installations shall be restricted to roadway, trailway and cultivated
landscaped corridors wherever possible. If utility facility installations must occur
outside of these areas, such alternate utility comdors shall be fenced or
barricaded to the narrowest width possible so as to minimize vegetation
disturbance or destruction from construction activities and machinery. All utility
location corridors shall be inspected and approved by the City Engineer and
Planning Director prior to the issuance of any excavation permit.
5. Vegetation replacement necessitated by utility installation shall utilize the same
plant species as the species of vegetation disturbed or damaged.
6. All ditches, swales, intermediary ponds and detention areas shall be subject to
appropriate easements for access and maintenance purposes and be depicted on
the Plat.
7. Trench box construction methods shall be utilized for the utility installations
whenever possible so as to minimize site disturbance.
8. All trail easements shall consist of the trail width plus two feet on each side of
the trail plus required temporary construction easements all as shown on the Plat.
F. FINANCIAL ASSURANCES:
Financial assurances in amounts and in forms acceptable to the Consortium and City. shall
be provided by Consortium to ensure the satisfactory installation and completion of the
new Meadows Road, all utility infrastructure, including waterlines, the trail along old
Meadows Road, and the parking facility; provided that only that portion of the financial
assurances found by the Public Works Director to be related to the work for which a
given construction related permit is sought must be in place prior to issuance of that
permit. The Consortium shall have the right, at anytime and from time to time, to
substitute financial assurances theretofore given with another form of financial assurance;
15
. -• - ! ~ , i ~i ~ E+F~: 667 F'G 750
'` t i~?37 i?1/=~/`~~ ib:1.; Re C1. ~:, Doc ~.i~iy
,, 1.;i ~ Davis, F'itk:in Cnty
provided always that such substituted financial assurance is satisfactory to the City
Attorney.
II. INDIVIDUAL PARCELS - THE ASPEN MEADOWS
A. LOT 1 -THE ASPEN INSTITUTE:
Lot 1 is the Institute Property and is zoned Academic (A), Open Space (OS) and Wildlife
Preservation (WP), all according to and as shown on the Plat. New development on Lot
1 has been approved for 50 new lodge units totalling 78,360 gross interior square feet,
for 110 new and renovated lodge units, a health club renovation and expansion of 1,800
gross interior square feet, a restaurant renovation and expansion of 2,000 gross interior
square feet, a renovation and expansion of the tennis shop of 980 gross interior square
feet and the creation of an underground parking structure for 97 cars below the
reconfigured tennis courts.
1. Dimensional Requirements
The dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted and conditional
uses in the Academic (A) Zone District are shown on the Plat.
2. Off-Street Parking
The Institute shall maintain 97 off-street parking spaces on Lot 1 until completion
of the underground parking structure.
3. Site Improvements
(a) Utilities. All telephone, electric and cable lines on Lot 1 servicing the
improvements shall be undergrounded. All water and sanitary sewer lines
shall be designed and constructed in accordance with standards of the City
and of the ACSD and as built easements will be provided as required.
(b) Landsca..,pe Improvements. Institute shall abide by and substantially
conform to the tree removal and landscape plans recorded as part of the
Plat in Book ~ t$ at Page ~, ei seq. of the Records. The landscape
plans depict and describe the nature, extent and location of all plant
materials in appropriate relation to scale, species and size of existing plant
material, flower and shrub bed definition, a plant material schedule with
common and botanical names, sizes and quantities, proposed treatment of
all ground surfaces (e. g. , paving, turf, gravel, terracing, etc. ), decorative
water features, retaining walls, fencing, benches, and all other agreed-
16
3;•i~g3~ i?1;'24/9? 16:1 Rec~ ~i~ci.cici Hk:: 667 F'~ 751
F ~~~ia Davi=, F'itE::in Cnt}~ L.IF Doc ~.C?~?
upon landscape features. Such landscaping shall be completed in a logical
sequence commensurate with the staging of improvements as contemplated
in the Lot 1 Construction Schedule, but in no event later than one year
after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the final
phase of improvements. It is the mutual understanding of the parties that
Certificates of Occupancy may in fact issue for improvements even though
the landscaping improvements related thereto have not yet been complet-
ed, so long as that portion of the financial guaranty provided for in this
agreement, which covers the estimated cost of such unfinished landscap-
ing, remains available to the City pursuant to the terms of this agreement.
All tree replacement shall be on a one-to-one caliper inch basis throughout
the Project as a whole with minimum size at 1 1/2" caliper.
4. Trails
The Plat depicts all trails dedicated or conveyed to public use and .all easements
linking off-site trails to the development's trail system, including (a) an easement
for a trail link from Lot 3 (Physics), running behind Lots 7-10, to Meadows
Road, and (b) the trail easement between the tennis townhouses and restaurant.
Written easements shall be executed and conveyed after trail construction
confirming the as-built location of each easement. The Consortium and City
agree that the racetrack trails are not to be improved. While the Institute is
granting the Easements it shall have no financial obligation whatsoever for any
trail or related work on the trail around the track or the trail between the Tennis
Townhomes and the restaurant as shown on the Plat.
5. Financial Assurances
In order to secure the construction of the site and landscape improvements in
Paragraphs 3(a) and (b) above and to guarantee 100% of the estimated cost of
such improvements, Institute shall guarantee by irrevocable bond, sight draft or
letter of commitment or credit from a financially responsible lender that funds in
the amount of such estimated costs are held by it for the account of City for the
construction and installation of the above-described improvements. As a
condition for issuance of a building permit for a portion or all of the renovation
and new construction anticipated herein, the Institute and City shall agree on that
portion of the work outlined in Paragraphs 3(a) and 3(b) above reasonably
necessary to complete the work for which a permit is being sought and the
mutually agreed upon financial assurances shall be delivered to •the City prior to
issuance of the building permit. All financial assurances given by Institute to
City, in all events, shall give the City the unconditional right, upon and following
default by the Institute, notice thereof by the City, and a forty day right thereafter
to cure, to withdraw funds as necessary and upon demand to partially or fully
complete and/or pay for any of such improvements or pay any uncontested
17
__ _ _~. _
ai ~i? , i?c i Ejf=: 667 F't~ 752
}.i~93i c_~1/2~/9C 1S: 1.; ~ G1 ~, Doc ~.i~i~
~,~lvi~ Davi=, F'itk:in Cnty
outstanding bills for work done thereon by any party, with any excess guaranty
amount to be applied first to additional administrative or legal costs associated
with any such default and the repair of any deterioration in improvements already
constructed before the unused remainder (if any) of such guaranty is released to
Institute. As portions of the required improvements aze completed, the Public
Works Director shall inspect them, and upon approval and written acceptance, he
shall authorize the release from the guaranty delivered by Institute of the agreed
estimated cost for that portion of the improvements except that 10 % of the actual
cost of the site or landscape improvements shall be retained until all proposed site
or landscape improvements are completed and approved by the Public Works
Director.
At anytime and from time to time, Institute shall have the right to substitute for
the form of financial assurance given, so long as such substituting form meets the
requirements for form and content above set forth. Any such substitution shall
be subject to the prior approval of the City Attorney in his determination.
6. Em~loyee Housing
Under the terms of this Agreement the City acknowledges it has granted the
Institute a GMQS development exemption for essential public facilities from
competition and affordable housing impact mitigation for the Institute's existing
and new facilities.
B. LOT 2 -MUSIC ASSOCIATES OF ASPEN:
Lot 2 is the MAA Property and is zoned Academic (A) and Open Space (OS) all
according to and as shown on the Plat. Current development on Lot 2 consists of the
performance tent, the back stage area, a gift shop, a refreshment stand, a box office and
a parking lot. Approved new development allows for a music tent back stage expansion
of 1,500 gross interior square feet, a new rehearsal/performance hall of 11,000 squaze
feet of floor area and an expansion of 100 gross interior squaze feet to the existing gift
shop. Additionally, approval has been granted for a re-configuring of the tent to increase
tent seating to a total of 2,050 seats. FARs and the definitions thereof for the reheazs-
al/performance hall shall remain as set forth and defined in the Aspen Land Use
Regulations in effect as of June 10, 1991, notwithstanding and shall survive, for not less
than the three year period next succeeding June 10, 1991, any subsequently adopted
reduction in or change to the definition or calculation of FARs. •
1. Dimensional RetJuirements
The dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted and conditional
uses in the Academic (A) Zone District aze established on the Plat.
18
~/ #~ '?937 cii/^••_4/92 1b: 1:~ Fi~. ~a _ -~. i~i~ BFI:: 667 F'r 753
S~~via Davis, F'itF;in Cnt~/ C1E •., Doc ~.U~~ -
2. Off-Street Parkine
The parking lots at the South end of Lot 2 shall be reconfigured to allow for off
street bus drop-off, a new pedestrian trail through the parking lot, the addition of
bike racks for concert goers and parking for approximately 274 automobiles, as
shown on the Plat.
3. Site Improvements
(a) Utilities. All telephone, electric and cable lines on the Property servicing
the improvements shall be undergrounded. All water and sanitary sewer
lines shall be designed and constructed in accordance with standards of the
City and of the ACSD and written easements confirming the as-built
location thereof will be provided if and as required.
(b) Landscape_Improvements. MAA shall abide by and substantially conform
to the tree removal and landscape plans as recorded as part of the Plat in
Book ~ at Page ~, et seq. of the Records. The landscape plans
depict and describe the nature, extent and location of all plant materials
in appropriate relation to scale, species and size of existing plant material,
flower and shrub bed definition, a plant material schedule with common
and botanical names, sizes and quantities, proposed treatment of all
ground surfaces (e. g. , paving, turf, gravel, terracing, etc. ), decorative
water features, retaining walls, fencing, benches, and all other agreed-
upon landscape features. Such landscaping shall be completed in a logical
sequence commensurate with the staging of improvements as contemplated
in the Lot 2 Construction Schedule, but in no event later than one year
after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the final
phase of improvements. It is the mutual understanding of the parties that
Certificates of Occupancy may in fact issue for improvements even though
the landscaping improvements related thereto have not yet been complet-
ed, so long as the portion of the financial guaranty provided for in this
agreement hereof which covers the estimated cost of such unfinished
landscaping remains available to the City pursuant to the terms of this
agreement. All tree replacement shall be on a one-to-one caliper inch
basis throughout the Project as a whole with minimum size at 1 1/2"
caliper.
4. Financial Assurances
In order to secure the construction of the site and landscape improvements in
Paragraphs 3(a) and (b) above and to guarantee 100% of the estimated cost of
such improvements, MAA shall guarantee by irrevocable bond, sight draft or
letter of commitment or credit from a financially responsible lender that funds in
19
~~~. .~.
##=,. ~i9- U1/C4/9~ 16:13 f;ec ~4~~~~.i?' ~F~~: 667 F'6 754
Silvia. Davis, F'itEcin Cnty Cler•F::, Lac $.i?c?
the amount of such estimated costs are held by it for the account of City for the
construction and installation of the above-described improvements. As a
condition for.issuance of a building permit for a portion or all of the renovation
and new construction anticipated herein, MAA and City shall agree on that
portion of the work outlined in Paragraphs 3(a) and 3(b), above reasonably
necessary to complete the work for which a permit is being sought and the
mutually agreed upon financial assurances shall be delivered to the City prior to
issuance of the building permit. All financial assurances given by MAA to City,
in all events, shall give the City the unconditional right, upon and following
default by the MAA, notice thereof by the City, and a forty day right thereafter
to cure, to withdraw funds as necessary and upon demand to partially or fully
complete and/or pay for any of such improvements or pay any uncontested
outstanding bills for work done thereon by any party, with any excess guaranty
amount to be applied first to additional administrative or legal costs associated
with any such default and the repair of any deterioration in improvements already
constructed before the unused remainder (if any) of such guaranty. is released to
MAA. As portions of the required improvements are completed, the Public
Works Director shall inspect them, and upon approval and written acceptance, he
shall authorize the release from the guaranty delivered by MAA of the agreed
estimated cost for that portion of the improvements except that 10 % of the actual
cost of the site or landscape improvements shall be retained until all proposed site
or landscape improvements are completed and approved by the Public Works
Director. •
At anytime and from time to time, MAA shall have the right to substitute for the
form of financial assurance given, so long as such substituting form meets the
requirements for form and content above set forth. Any such substitution shall
be subject to the prior approval of the City Attorney in his determination.
5. EmploXee Housing
Under the terms of this Agreement the City acknowledges it has granted MAA
a GMQS exemption for essential public facilities from competition and affordable
housing impact mitigation for MAA's existing and new facilities.
C. LOT 3 -THE ASPEN CENTER FOR PHYSICS:
Lot 3 is the Physics Property and is zoned Academic (A) and Wildlife Preservation
(WP), all according to and as shown on the Plat. Development on Lot 3 consists of
meeting facilities and library building for Physics. No new development is approved by
this plan; however, new development with appropriate review is not precluded.
20
#' ?937 cal/Ca/qC ib: 13 Rec ~~ , cii~
_ . EcF=: 667 F'6 755
Silvia Davis, F'itk:in Cnty Cler•k:, Dor ~,c_~c_~
1. Site Improvements
(a) Utilities. Physics shall install and hook up to a sanitary sewer service for
all buildings currently not served. Such improvements shall be inspected
and approved by the Aspen Sanitation District and shall be conveyed to
the District upon completion, inspection and acceptance by the District.
Physics shall, if necessary, convey to the District a perpetual twenty foot
as-built easement extending ten feet from each side of the centerline of all
newly constructed sanitary sewer lines, and a construction easement
extending an additional five feet on each side of the centerline.
Physics shall, within two years of the date of recordation of this Agreement and
the Plat, complete the sanitary sewer improvements or post a financial assurance
in an amount and form mutually acceptable to the City and Physics to guarantee
completion of the sanitary sewer installation no later than thirty months from the
date of recordation of this Agreement and the Plat. •
2. Financial Assurances
In order to secure the construction of the site improvements in Paragraph 1(a)
above and to guarantee 100 % of the estimated cost of such improvements and
related re-vegetation of disturbed areas of Lot 3, Physics shall guarantee by
irrevocable bond, sight draft or letter of commitment or credit from a financially
responsible lender that funds in the amount of such estimated costs are held by
it for the account of City for the construction and installation of the above-
described improvements. All financial assurances given by Physics to City, in
all events, shall give the City the unconditional right, upon and following default
by the Physics, notice thereof by the City, and a forty day right thereafter to
cure, to withdraw funds as necessary and upon demand to partially or fully
complete and/or pay for any of such improvements or pay any uncontested
outstanding bills for work done thereon by any party, with any excess guaranty
amount to be applied first to• additional administrative or legal costs associated
with any such default and the repair of any deterioration in improvements already
constructed before the unused remainder (if any) of such guaranty is released to
Physics. As portions of the required improvements are completed, the Public
Works Director shall inspect them, and upon approval and written acceptance, he
shall authorize the release from the guaranty delivered by Physics of the agreed
estimated cost for that portion of the improvements except that 10 % of the actual
cost of the site improvements shall be retained until all proposed site improve-
ments are completed and approved by the Public Works Director.
At anytime and from time to time, Physics shall have the right to substitute for
the form of financial assurance given, so long as such substituting form meets the
21
t ,'~i ~ , EsF~: 667 F'G 756
Silvia L'iavis, F`itk:in Cnt•y Clem:. l~oc ~-~-~~~
requirements for form and content above set forth. Any such substitution shall
be subject to the prior approval of the City Attorney in his determination.
3. Trails
The Final Plat depicts a trail easement across the Physics Property from Gillespie
Street to the race track trail on Lot 1. Physics and the City agree that this trail
easement is not to be paved. Physics is granting this easement but has no
financial obligation of any kind for the trail or any related work.
D. LOT 4 -CONSERVATION LAND:
Lot 4 is to be sold by Savanah to the City of Aspen for the purpose of open space. Lot
4 shall be zoned Wildlife Preservation (WP). It is the intention of this zone district that
this Property remain open with a trail system and appropriate bridge connections to the
Rio Grande Trail. Neither the Consortium nor any of its individual members thereof
shall have any responsibility whatsoever for the construction, installation or maintenance
of any trail or other recreational facilities to be incorporated into Lot 4. Exact trail
locations must be approved by the Planning Duector giving priority to those alignments
which minimize damage or disruption to existing vegetation and landscape and which
subordinate grade considerations and, thus, minimize switchbacks, to preservation of
existing topography.
1. Site Improvements
(a) tilities. The Final Plat shows utility line easements as existing and
proposed for electrical, gas, storm and sanitary sewer, and water.
E. LOT 5 -THE TRUSTEE HOUSES AT THE ASPEN MEADOWS:
Lot 5 is Savanah's Property and is zoned RMF according to and as shown on the Plat.
Existing development on Lot 5 consists of the eight trustee houses, each of approximately
1,70 square feet, consisting of three bedrooms and two baths. Development has been
approved for an expansion and renovation of the existing trustee houses to create eight
three-bedroom units of 2,500 square feet of FAR each. In addition three new trustee
houses shall be developed on Lot 5, one on the South end of the existing units and two
on the North end of the existing units. Each new unit will be 2,500 square feet of FAR
with three bedrooms. Total build-out on Lot 5 shall consist of eleven units with thirty-
three bedrooms and 27,500 square feet of FAR, excluding carports (up to 500 square feet
per dwelling unit). FARs and the definitions thereof for the existing and new trustee
houses shall remain as set forth and defined in the Aspen Land Use Regulations in effect
as of June 10, 1991, notwithstanding and shall survive for not less than the three year
22
4~=' 'r (j1/~4/9~ 15:1 Rec ~ :ici `~ Bk:: 667 F'G 757
~ilv~a Davis, F'itF::in Cnty Cler•F::, Doc ~.i~ci
period next succeeding ~unL ;.(), l~~yl, any subsequently adopted reduction in or change
to the definition or calculation of FARs. The three new residences have received an
allotment under the GMQS and have received variations for setbacks, height and open
space, as noted on the Plat and as described below.
1. Dimensional Requirements and Variations Therefrom
The following dimensional ,requirements are for the RMF Zone District;
variations in these requirements that have been granted for the development
activity contemplated for Lot 5 are noted:
a) Minimum lot size (sq. ft.): 6,000
b) Minimum lot area per dwelling unit:
i) 3 bedroom unit: • 3,630 sq. ft.
c) Minimum lot width: 60 feet
d) Minimum front yard:
i) Principal building: 10 feet
ii) Accessory building: 15 feet
ote. A variation from minimum RMF Zone District front yard
setbacks for accessory buildin gs has been granted by the City to
zero feet for Lot 5.)
e) Minimum side yard: 5 feet
f) Minimum rear yard:
i) Principal building: 10 feet
ii) Accessory building: 15 feet
g) Maximum height: 25 feet
ote. A dimensional height variation for the two northernmost trustee
houses has been granted by the City for up to eight feet.)
h) Percent of open space required for building site: 35
23
#,; q.( ;7 /~4/S~' 16:1•? Rec ~4i~c~ _~ F" 667 F'v 758
Silvia Dais, F'itk:in Cnty Cler•E;, Doc ~.~?~~
ote. Minimum RMF Zone District open space requirements have been
waived by the City for Lot 5 in consideration of the open space otherwise
provided in the SPA development plan.)
i) External FAR (maximum):
1:1
j) Internal FAR: no requirement
k) Off-street parking requirement: 1 space per bedroom
2. Condominiumization and Six Month Minimum Lease Requirement
Pursuant to findings made during the approval process and in accordance with
Section 24-7-1007 of the Municipal Code, the City has granted and awazded
Condominiumization approval for all eleven units contemplated for Lot ~.
Condominiumization of the eight existing units is subject to payment of an
affordable housing impact fee according to Section 24-7-1007A(1)(c). The fee
totals $64,240 and shall be paid at time of recordation of the condominium plat
and declaration for the units on Lot 5.
The six month minimum lease requirement for condominium units as contained
at Section 24-7-1007 (A)(1)(b)(1) of the Municipal Code has been and hereby is
waived as to all the condominium units on Lot 5 as approved by this SPA plan.
3. Site Improvements
(a) Utilities. All telephone, electric and cable lines on the Property servicing
the improvements shall be undergrounded. All water and sanitary sewer
lines shall be designed and constructed in accordance with standards of the
City and of the ACSD and written easements will be provided if and as
required confirming the as-built location of each easement.
(b) Landscape Improvements. Savanah shall abide by and substantially
conform to the tree removal and landscape plans recorded as part of the
Plat in Book o~ ~ at Page 5 , et seq. of the Records. The landscape
plans depict and describe the nature, extent and location of all plant
materials in appropriate relation to scale, species and size of existing plant
material, flower and shrub bed definition, a plant material schedule with
common and botanical names, sizes and quantities, proposed treatment of
all ground surfaces (e. g. ,paving, turf, gravel, terracing, etc. ), decorative
water features, retaining walls, fencing, benches, and all other ~ agreed-
upon landscape features. Such landscaping shall be completed in a logical
sequence commensurate with the staging of improvements as contemplated
in the Lot 5 Construction Schedule, but in no event later than one year
24
~i± cif IC4/9C 16: 1~ Fiec ~-Tc_ii~, Bk:: 667 F'G 759
Silvia. Davis, F'itk:in Cnty Cler•Fc, iloc ~.cjci •
after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the final
phase of improvements. It is the mutual understanding of the parties that
Certificates of Occupancy may in fact issue for improvements even though
the landscaping improvements related thereto have not yet been complet-
ed, so long as that portion of the financial guaranty provided for in this
Agreement, which covers the estimated cost of such unfinished landscap-
ing remains available to the City pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.
All tree replacement shall be on a one-to-one caliper inch basis throughout
the Project as a whole with minimum size at 1 1/2" caliper.
4.
5.
Trails
The Plat depicts all trails dedicated or conveyed to public use and all easements
linking off-site trails to the Project's trail system, including the trail easement
between the tennis townhouses and restaurant. Written easements shall be
executed and conveyed after trail construction confirming the as-built location of
each easement. A portion of the trail Easement for the trail from Meadows Road
to Lot 4 crosses Lot 5, as depicted on the Plat. Trail construction on this
Easement and any other appurtenant recreational facilities and amenities and
landscaping is the sole responsibility of the City of Aspen. Neither Savanah nor
the Consortium shall have any financial responsibility for any of this work or for
the maintenance of any easements.
Financial Assurances
In order to secure the construction of the site and landscape improvements in
Paragraphs 3(a) and (b) above and to guarantee 100% of the estimated cost of
such improvements, Savanah shall guarantee by irrevocable bond, sight draft or
letter of commitment or credit from a financially responsible lender that funds in
the amount of such estimated costs, are held by it for the account of Ciry for the
construction and installation of the above-described improvements. As a
condition for issuance of a building permit for a portion or all of the renovation
and new construction anticipated herein, Savanah and City shall agree on that
portion of the work outlined in Paragraphs 3(a) and 3(b) above reasonably
necessary to complete the work for which a permit is being sought and the
mutually agreed upon financial assurances shall be delivered to the City prior to
issuance of the building permit. All financial assurances given by Savanah to
City, in all events, shall give the City the unconditional right, upon and following
default by Savanah, notice thereof by the City, and a forty day right thereafter to
cure, to withdraw funds as necessary and upon demand to partially or fully
complete and/or pay for any of such improvements or pay any uncontested
outstanding bills for work done thereon by any party, with any excess guaranty
amount to be applied first to additional administrative or legal costs associated
with any such default and the repair of any deterioration in improvements already
25
~.. .~~ ~.3i cil/24/9~ 15:1 ReC~ s~4ci s_~i~ Es F:: bbl F'G 760
Sil .la Davis, F'itk:in Cnty Clerr:.. Doc ~.t~i~
constructed before the unused remainder (if any) of such guaranty is released to
Savanah. As portions of the required improvements are completed, the Public
Works Director shall inspect them, and upon approval and written acceptance, he
shall authorize the release from the guaranty delivered by Savanah of the agreed
estimated cost for that portion of the improvements except that 10 % of the actual
cost of the site or landscape improvements shall be retained until all proposed site
or landscape improvements are completed and approved by the Public Works
Director.
At anytime and from time to time, Savanah shall have the right to substitute for
the form of financial assurance given, so long as such substituting form meets the
requirements for form and content above set forth. Any such substitution shall
be subject to the prior approval of City Attorney in his determination.
6. Employee Housing
Savanah and the City acknowledge that the renovation and expansion of the eight
trustee houses do not create any employee impact because the bedroom count in
each unit remains at 3. Savanah shall pay to the City an affordable housing
mitigation impact fee for 1.66 low income employees per unit for each of the
three new residential units on Lot 5, in an amount to be calculated pursuant to
those fee guidelines in effect at the time the fee is to be paid. The fee shall be
paid prior to the issuance of the building permit for construction of any new
residential unit on Lot 5 and shall be paid in proportion to the number of units
sought to be permitted.
F. LOT 6 -THE TENNIS TOWNHOMES AT THE ASPEN MEADOWS:
Lot 6 is owned by Savanah and is zoned RMF according to and as shown on the Plat.
Currently there is no residential development on Lot 6. Approved under this plan is
development of seven townhome units of three bedrooms and 2,500 square feet of FAR
each. Total build out on Lot 6 shall consist of seven units with twenty-one bedrooms and
17,500 square feet of FAR, excluding carports (up to 500 square feet per dwelling unit).
FARs and the definitions thereof for the existing and new trustee houses shall remain as
set forth and defined in the Aspen Land Use Regulations in effect as, of June 10, 1991,
notwithstanding and shall survive for not less than the three year period next succeeding
Tune 19, 1991, any subsequently adopted reduction in or change to the definition or
calculation of FARs. The seven new townhomes have received an allotment under the
City GMQS and have received variations for height, open space and setbacks for
accessory buildings, all as noted on the Plat and described herein.
26
l
#~.. !9 ~?1/~4/9~ 16: 13 Rec ~4~_tc?. cis ~f:: 667 F'G 761
Silvia Davis, F'itF:in Cnty Cler•k:. Doc r.i~i~
1. Dimensional Requirements and Variations Therefrom
The following dimensional requirements are for the RMF Zone District;
variations in these requirements that have been granted for the development
activity contemplated for Lot 6 are noted.
a) Minimum lot size (sq. ft.): 6,000
b) Minimum lot area per dwelling unit:
i) 3 bedroom unit: 3,630 sq. ft.
c) Minimum lot width: 60 feet
d) Minimum front yard:
i) Principal building: 10 feet
ii) Accessory building: 15 feet
ote. A variation from minimum RMF Zone District front yard
setbacks for accessory buildings has been granted by the City to
zero feet for Lot 6.)
e) Minimum side yard: 5 feet
f) Minimum rear yard:
i) Principal building: 10 feet
ii) Accessory building: 15 feet
g) Maximum height: 25 feet
ote. A dimensional height variation for the center portion of the tennis
townhomes has been granted by the City for up to three feet as shown on
the Plat. )
h) Percent of open space required for building site: 35
(Note. Minimum RMF Zone District open space requirements have been
waived by the City for Lot 6 in consideration of the open space otherwise
provided in the SPA development plan.)
27
_. _ r,.~~
~,
~ .4' 3i i?1/~4/9~ ib:1~ F:ec ~40C c~ E~F~: 667 F'G 762
Sil~._a Davis, F'itk:in Cnt;f Cler•E:, Doc ~.ciia
i) External FAR (maximum): 1:1
2.
3
j) Internal FAR: no requirement
k) Off-street parking requirement: 1 space per bedroom
Condominiumization and Six Month Minimum Lease Requirement
Pursuant to findings made during the approval process and in accordance with
Section 24-7-1007 of the Municipal Code, the City grants and awards
condominiumization approval for the seven tennis townhome units on Lot 6 as
approved by this SPA plan.
The six month minimum lease requirement for condominium units as contained
at Section 24-7-1007 (A)(1)(b)(1) of the I~iunicipal Code has been and hereby is
waived as to the seven condominium units on Lot 6.
Site Improvements
(a) Utilities. All telephone, electric and cable lines on the Property servicing
the improvements shall be undergrounded. All water and sanitary sewer
lines shall be designed and constructed in accordance with standards of the
City and of the ACSD and written easements will be provided if and as
required confirming the as-built location of each easement.
(b) Landscape Improvements. Savanah shall abide by and substantially
conform to the tree removal and landscape plans recorded as part of the
Plat in Book ~ at Page S~ , et seq. of the Records. The landscape
plans depict and describe the nature, extent and location of all plant
materials in appropriate relation to scale, species and size of existing plant
material, flower and shrub bed definition, a plant material schedule with
common and botanical names, sizes and quantities, proposed treatment of
all ground surfaces (e. g. ,paving, turf, .gravel, terracing, etc. ), decorative
water features, retaining walls, fencing, benches, and all other agreed-
. upon landscape features. Such landscaping shall be completed in a logical
sequence commensurate with the staging of improvements as contemplated
in the Lot 6 Construction Schedule, but in no event later than one year
after the date of issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the final
phase of improvements. It is the mutual understanding of the parties that
Certificates of Occupancy may in fact issue for improvements even though
the landscaping improvements related thereto have not yet been complet-
ed, so long as the portion of the financial guaranty provided for in this
Agreement which covers the estimated cost of such unfinished landscaping
remains available to the City pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. All
28
~ #•'_ 937 c_~1 /C4/ . C 16: 13 Fer~ ~4t . c?i~ gf:. -
~ ~ 667 F'G 76.E
Giivia Davis, F'itk:in Cnty C1er•E::, Do•. ~.i,ci
tree replacement shall be on a one-to-one caliper inch basis throughout the
Project as a whole with minimum size at 1 1/2" caliper.
4. Trails
The Plat depicts all trails dedicated or conveyed to public use and all easements
linking off-site trails to the Project's trail system. Two trail easements are
associated with Lot 6. The first is a minimum three foot wide unpaved walking
path which parallels the Meadows Road on the Eastern edge of Lot 6 and the
second is the easement on the Western portion of Lot 6 to accommodate the
construction and maintenance of the trail from Meadows Road to Lot 4 and across
the Roaring Fork River to the Rio Grande Trail, all as depicted on the Plat. Lot
6 shall be burdened with easements for these trails as shown on the Final Plat.
Construction of the walking path shall be completed by Savanah in connection
with the construction of the improvements on Lot 6. Savanah and the City
acknowledge and agree that all responsibility for construction of and payment for
the trail to Lot 4 and any other appurtenant recreational amenities permitted in the
zone district and landscaping is the sole responsibility of the City, and Savanah
shall have no responsibility for the maintenance thereof.
5. Financial Assurances
In order to secure the construction of the site improvements in Paragraphs 3(a)
and (b) above and to guarantee 100 % of the estimated cost of such improvements,
Savanah shall guarantee by irrevocable bond, sight draft or letter of commitment
or credit from a financially responsible lender that funds in the amount of such
estimated costs, are held by it for the account of City for the construction and
installation of the above-described improvements. As a condition for issuance of
a building permit for a portion or all ~ of the construction anticipated herein,
Savanah and City shall agree on that portion of the work outlined in Paragraphs
3(a) and 3(b) above reasonably necessary to complete the work for which a
permit is being sought and the mutually agreed upon financial assurances shall be
delivered to the City prior to issuance of the building permit. All financial
assurances given by Savanah to City, in all events, shall give the City the
unconditional right, upon and following default by Savanah, after notice thereof
by the City, and a forty day right thereafter to cure, to withdraw funds as
necessary and upon demand to partially or fully complete and/or pay for any of
such improvements or pay any uncontested outstanding bills ,for work done
thereon by any party, with any excess guaranty amount to be applied first to
additional administrative or legal costs associated with any such default and the
repair of any deterioration in improvements already constructed before the unused
remainder (if any) of such guaranty is released to Savanah. As portions of the
required improvements are completed, the Public Works Director shall inspect
them, and upon approval and written acceptance, he shall authorize the release
29
~' i ~i ~ Eif~: 667 F'G 7b4
#- 93~ i~1/24/q? 16:1.; Re's ~4< c~c~
Silvia Davis, F'itkin Cnty Cler•._, Dom ~-
from the guaranty delivered by Savanah of the agreed estimated cost for that
portion of the improvements except that 10 % of the actual cost of the site or
landscape improvements shall be retained until all proposed site or landscape
improvements are completed and approved by the Public Works Director.
At anytime and from time to time, Savanah shall have the right to substitute for
the form of financial assurance given, so long as such substituting form meets the
requirements for form and content above set forth. Any such substitution shall
be subject to the prior approval of City Attorney in his determination.
6. Employee Housine
In connection with the construction of the seven tennis townhome townhouse
condominium units on Lot 6 Savanah shall pay to the City an affordable housing
mitigation impact fee for 1.66 low income employees per unit for each of the
seven new residential units on Lot 6, in an amount to be calculated pursuant to
those fee guidelines in effect at the time the fee is to be paid. The fee shall be
paid prior to the issuance of the building permit for construction of any new
residential unit on Lot 6 and shall be paid in proportion to the number of units
sought to be permitted.
G. LOTS 7 8 9 and 10 -THE RESIDENCES AT THE ASPEN MEADOWS:
Lots 7, 8, 9 and 10 are owned by Savanah and are zoned R-15 according to the Plat.
These lots currently are undeveloped. Under the SPA, Savanah has been granted
approval to develop, on each lot, a single family residence together with an accessory
dwelling unit. Each lot has a FAR of 4,540 square feet, excluding 500 square feet of
garage, but including the accessory dwelling unit of 500 square feet above grade. FARs
and the definitions thereof for the residences and the accessory dwelling units shall
remain as set forth and defined in the Aspen Land Use Regulations in effect as of June
10, 1991, notwithstanding and shall survive for not less than the three year period next
succeeding June 10, 1991, any subsequently adopted reduction in or change to the
definition or calculation of FARs. The four single family units have specific building
envelopes as shown on the Plat and will be subject to protective covenants that will be
placed of record prior to the sale of any of Lots 7, 8, 9 and 10, which covenants will,
at a minimum, provide for (a) the establishment and incorporation of an association of
homeowners with a Design Review Board, at least one member of which shall be
designated by the City of Aspen Historical Preservation Commission, which Board shall
have original jurisdiction in all matters involving any change to the then existing state or
condition of any lot; (b) the manner in which each accessory dwelling unit on~ any lot
shall be used, occupied and rented, including the incorporation of applicable standards
and guidelines of the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority; and (c) the obligation of
each of Lots 7, 8, 9 and 10 and each owner, at anytime, thereof to comport with and
30
C~ ~
#34~•>3< <=~1/~4/9~ ib:1~ Rec ~4i~c_ JU ELF: 6b7 F'G 765 -
5ilvia Davis. F'itF::in Cnty Cler•F::~ Doc ~.i~ii
abide by the applicable terms, provisions, and conditions of .Ordinance 14 and approved
Subdivision Plat for said lots. The four (4) residences have received an allotment under
the City of Aspen GMQS and have received variations for minimum R-15 zone district
lot size per dwelling and minimum side yard setback requirements, as noted on the Final
Plat and as described herein.
1. Dimensional Requirements
The following dimensional requirements are for the R-15 Zone District: variations
in these requirements that have been granted for the development activity
contemplated for Lots 7-10 aze noted:
a) Minimum lot size:
15,000 sq. ft.
ote. The minimum R-15 zone district lot size per principle dwelling
unit has been reduced to 12,000 square feet for Lots 7, 8, •9 and 10.)
b) Minimum lot area per dwelling unit:
c) Minimum lot width:
d) Minimum front yard:
i) Residential dwelling:
ii) Accessory building:
e) Minimum side yard:
12,000 sq. ft.
75 feet
25 feet
30 feet
10 feet
(Note. The minimum side yard setbacks have been reduced by the City
under the SPA to zero feet for the West side of Lot 7 and the East side of
Lot 10.)
f) Minimum rear yard:
i) Residential building:
ii) Accessory building:
10 feet
5 feet
(Note. Rear yard setbacks for Lots 7-10 are as shown on the
Plat.)
g) Maximum height:
25 feet
31
l 6
,4c_~' i?1/C4/9C ib: 1~ F:ec ..~c,. ~ ~ ~~~.. 667 FG 76
Silvi~+ Davis, F'itE;in Cnty Cler•k., ,cc ~-cii?
2.
3.
h) Minimum distance between detached
buildings on lot: 10 feet
i) Percent of open space: No Requirement
j) External FAR: 4,540 sq. ft.
ote. The square footage includes an accessory dwelling unit of 500 sq.
ft. and excludes a garage of up to 500 sq. ft.)
k) Internal FAR: no requirement
1) Off-street parking spaces: One space per bedroom, and one
space per accessory dwelling unit.
Site Improvements
a) Utilities. All telephone, electric and cable lines on the Property servicing
the improvements shall be undergrounded. All water and sanitary sewer
lines shall be designed and constructed in accordance with standards of the
City and of the ACSD and as built easements will be provided as
required. It shall be the requirement of Savanah to install all utilities to
the lot lines. The utilities shall be installed in connection with the
construction of the new Meadows Road.
Financial Assurances
In order to secure the construction of the site improvements in Paragraph 2 above
and to guarantee 100 % of the estimated cost of such improvements, Savanah shall
guarantee by irrevocable bond, sight draft or letter of commitment or credit from
a financially responsible lender that funds in the amount of such estimated costs,
are held by it for the account of City for the construction and installation of the
above-described improvements. As a condition for issuance of a building permit
for a portion or all of the utility installation, Savanah and City shall agree on that
portion of the work outlined in Paragraph 2 above reasonably necessary to
complete the work for which a permit is being sought and the mutually agreed
upon financial assurances shall be delivered to the City prior to issuance of the
building permit. All financial assurances given by Savanah to City, in all events,
shall give the City the unconditional right, upon and following default by
Savanah, notice thereof by the City, and a forty day right thereafter to cure, to
withdraw funds as necessary and upon demand to partially or fully complete
and/or pay for any of such improvements or pay any uncontested outstanding bills
for work done thereon by any party, with any excess guaranty amount to be
applied first to additional administrative or legal costs associated with any such
32
C 4C~ i 01 /24/9 16: 13 Rec ~•~c:u:~. ~ ELF':
667 F'6 767
Silvia Davis, F'itF•;in Cnty C1er•E::, Doc ~.i~i~
default and the repair of any deterioration in improvements already constructed
before the unused remainder (if any) of such guaranty is released to Savanah. As
portions of the required improvements are completed, the Public Works Director
shall inspect them, and upon approval and written acceptance, he shall authorize
the release from the guaranty delivered by Savanah of the agreed estimated cost
for that portion of the improvements except that 10 % of the actual cost of the site
improvements shall be retained until all proposed site improvements are
completed and approved by the Public Works Director.
At anytime and from time to time, Savanah shall have the right to substitute for
the form of financial assurance given, so long as such substituting form meets the
requirements for form and content above set forth. Any such substitution shall
be subject to the prior approval of the City Attorney in his determination.
4. Employee Housine
In connection with the construction of each single family residence there shall be
constructed an accessory dwelling unit of 500 square feet above grade. These one
bedroom units shall be deed restricted to the low income rental guidelines in
effect from time to time as determined by the Housing Authority. It shall be the
responsibility of the owners of each of the four single family sites to lease the
employee units to qualified tenants as determined by the Housing Authority. The
owners shall have the right to select the tenants. A copy of the deed restriction
form for these residential sites is attached hereto as Exhibit "D" and is incorporat-
ed herein by this reference.
At the time of application for a building permit for any residential lot the City
shall, if so requested by the lot owner, consider the appropriateness of accepting,
instead of the accessory dwelling unit on the lot, cash in lieu thereof or an off-site
employee unit. The decision shall be at the reasonable discretion of the City.
H. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS AND AGREEMENTS:
1) Access/Emer ency Loop. The thirteen foot service access/emergency loop drive
serving the lodge buildings on Lot 1 shall be constructed with an all weather
surface adequate to support fire-fighting apparatus. Such access/emergency loop
drive(s) shall be plowed, cleared and maintained to thirteen foot widths at all
times of the year and particularly during the winter months.
2) Fire Protection. All buildings to be served and accessed from the thirteen foot
access/emergency loop drive shall have interior sprinkling fire protection/
suppression systems as approved by the Fire Marshal and such system(s) must be
approved prior to the issuance of a building permit.
33
_ ~ _ _ __
~•.
~_~ 9~< <~i/?4/S~ ib:1~ Rec ~4~ iaci BF.: 667 F~G 768
Silvia Davis, F'itF::in Cnty Clerk:, Dec ~.cici
3) Fireplace Regulations. All residential units shall comply with fireplace
regulations as contained in the Municipal Code and enforced by the Environmen-
tal Health Department. No building permits shall be issued for residential units
absent compliance with fireplace regulations. Savanah shall replace the wood
burning fireplaces in the eight existing trustee house units on Lot 5 with gas log
fireplaces. Minor relocations of existing fireplaces shall be considered replace-
ment of existing and not the incorporation of new fireplaces. All disputes
concerning the application or interpretation of fireplace regulations to the Project
(and individual components thereof) shall be subject to review and determination
by the Clean Air Board.
4) Drainage Mitigation. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for each
component of the Project, a drainage mitigation plan for that component for run-
off during construction activity shall be submitted to and approved by the City
Engineer so as to insure against or minimize run=off into Castle Creek and the
Roaring Fork River.
5) Fugitive Dust Control. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for each
component of the Project, a fugitive dust control plan for that component must
be submitted to and approved by the Environmental Health Department and
applicable state agencies. Additionally, a fugitive dust control plan must be
submitted and approved by the Environmental Health Department for the MAA
parking lot prior to issuance of a building permit for the MAA rehearsaU
performance facility.
6) Energy Conservation - Savanah. All energy conservation and efficiency measures
as represented by Savanah in its GMQS application and set forth in Exhibit "E"
hereto regarding insulation, glazing, solar orientation, HVAC, and plumbing
fixtures shall be incorporated into all residential units and the design(s) thereof
must be approved by the City prior to issuance of any building permit for
residential construction. These measures shall be further incorporated into deed
restrictions and/or covenants for all single family homes and condominia.
'~ Energyy_. Conservation -Institute and MAA. Non-residential construction and
facilities shall utilize state-of--the-art energy conservation and efficiency measures
as represented by the Institute and MAA. Accordingly, detailed plans submitted
for building permits for the lodge structures and the MAA rehearsaUperformance
hall must be accompanied by the energy information provided to staff in the
Appropriate Technologies Associates' letter of May 3, 1991, Exhibit "F" and the
MAA Rehearsal/Performance Hall Energy Conservation Description document
submitted to Planning staff on May 20, 1991, a copy of which is attached hereto
as Exhibit "G". The engineered thermal envelope calculation will be verified by
the Building Department according to the Model Energy Code.
34
~~
##f' X93-' i~I/~4/9C 16 1•~ Rec ~4~_ _~.i~i~ ~,f~:: 667 Fr 769
Silvis avis, F'itk:in Cnty C1erE::, L ~.~?~~
8) Fox Dens. The Consortium has constructed replacement and additional fox dens
in a manner and at locations selected in the field by the City, in consultation with
the Director of the Aspen Center for Environmental Studies ("ACES").
9) Re-Ve etation. Re-vegetation of all areas developed pursuant to the Plan shall
be implemented in accordance with those guidelines as set forth by Design
Workshop in its letter of March 21, 1991, a copy of which is attached hereto as
Exhibit "H". All re-vegetation shall be inspected and monitored by the City to
ensure that re-vegetation efforts and the protection of the same are successful.
10) Manicured Lawn Areas. New manicured lawn areas shall be minimized to the
extent possible, except in those areas adjacent to the Music Tent, and a.s shown
on the Plat.
11) Construction Barricadin .Prior to excavation, temporary construction barricades
and/or fencing shall be erected within five feet of the building envelopes of the
tennis townhomes and trustee townhomes to prevent damage from falling debris
to the slope bordering the development activity unless unstable soils dictate
alternative locations mutually agreed upon by Savanah, the Building Department
and Planning Office. Prior to issuance of building permits for individual
components, the locations of all fencing and barricades shall be submitted to and
approved by the Building Department and the Planning Office. All fencing and
barricades shall remain in place throughout the construction process.
12) Amendments. Any SPA or Master Plan amendment or future development
applications submitted by any non-profit user of the Property (Lots 1, 2 and 3)
shall be applied for jointly by all non-profit property owners but need not receive
approval of the owners of Lots 5-10 inclusive. This provision shall supersede any
requirement herein or elsewhere in the Municipal Code or otherwise contained
requiring SPA submittal approval by all property owners within a Specially
Planned Area. Conversely, any SPA Amendment proposed to be submitted by
any residential owner or association thereof (Lots 5-10, inclusive) shall require,
in addition to the consent of the owners of the residential component involved,
the approval of the resident non-profits of the SPA, which approval shall,
however, not be unreasonably withheld.
13) Public Access. Public pedestrian access, excluding access to buildings, will
continue to be allowed at reasonable hours throughout the entire academic (A),
open space (OS), and wildlife preservation (WP) zone district azeas of the
35
__. _.
~~ +~~? ~7 i?1; ^4i5? 16: 13 Rec 1 ?U. DF:: 667 F'G 770
~~~1~ Dwis, F'itk:in Cnty Clerk:, roc ~.i~i~
Property, subject to reasonable regulations as may, from time to time, be
established by the owners thereof in order to protect their property, as well as the
academic privacy and serenity of the campus, its programs and the health and
safety of other users and visitors.
14) MAA Parldng_Lot. The MAA parking lot shall be plowed and kept clear of snow
during all wintertime performances or functions at MAA facilities.
III. MISCELLANEOUS
A. PERIODIC PROJECT REVIEWS
To the extent practical and necessary, every six months following the .date hereof until
the construction of all components of the Project is complete, the Consortium shall, if
requested thereby, meet with the City Planning Office for the purpose of informing the
Planning Office as to the progress in developing the Project pursuant to the terms hereof.
If the Planning Office deems it necessary, the Planning Office will report to the Aspen
Planning and Zoning Commission on the outcome of one or more of these meetings.
The Consortium and the City recognize that these meetings, when deemed necessary, are
for purposes of providing progress reports and developing mutually acceptable solutions
to any problems that may be encountered during construction.
B. NON COMPLIANCE AND REQUEST FOR AMENDMENTS OR EXTENSIONS
In the event that the City determines that an individual member of the Consortium is not
acting in substantial compliance with the terms of this Agreement and/or one or more of
the Construction Schedules submitted to the City Engineering Department in accordance
herewith (a "Non-Complying Member"), the City Council may issue and serve upon the
Non-Complying Member a written order specifying the alleged non-compliance and
requiring the Non-Complying Member to remedy the same within such reasonable time
as the City Council may determine. Within twenty days of the receipt of such order, the
Non-Complying Member may file with the City Council either a notice advising the City
Council that it is in compliance or a written petition requesting a hearing to determine
any one or both of the following matters: .
(a) Whether the alleged non-compliance exists or did exist, or
(b) .Whether a variance, extension of time or amendment to this Agreement should
be granted with respect to any such non-compliance which is determined to exist.
36
( .~4~ '37 iii/C4/9? ib: i3 Red. ~i;i; `aci i~h~:: 667 F'G 771
Sil~._a Davis, F'itk:in Cnty Cler•k:, Doc ~.i~i;
Upon the receipt of such petition, the City Council shall promptly schedule a hearing to
consider the matters set forth in the cease and desist order and in the petition. The
hearing shall be convened and conducted pursuant to the procedures normally established
by the City Council for other hearings or pursuant to such other procedures, formal or
informal, upon which the City and the Non-Complying Member shall agree. If the City
Council determines by the evidence that anon-compliance exists which has not been
remedied, it may issue such orders as may be appropriate; provided, however, no order
terminating any approval granted herein shall be issued without a finding of the City
Council that evidence warrants such action and affording the Non-Complying Member
a reasonable time, not less than thirty days, to remedy such non-compliance. A final
determination of non-compliance which has not been remedied or for which no variance
has been granted may, at the option of the City Council, and upon written notice to the
Non-Complying Member, terminate any of the approvals contained herein which are
reasonably related to the requirement(s) with which there has been such established non-
compliance; however, under no circumstances will a failure to comply on the part of the
Non-Complying Member in respect of any obligations that attend that component of the
Project for which it is responsible, as outlined above, affect the approvals for any of the
remaining components of the Project. The City Council may grant such variances,
extensions of time or amendments to this Agreement as it may deem appropriate under,
the circumstances as an alternative disposition of any finding of non-compliance.
In addition to the foregoing, the Consortium or its successors or assigns, or any member
thereof may, on its or their own initiative, petition the City Council for a variance, an
amendment to this Agreement, or an extension of one or more of the time periods
required for performance hereunder, or otherwise. The City Council may grant such
variances, amendments to this Agreement, or extensions of time as it may deem
appropriate under the circumstances; provided in all events that the City Council shall
not unreasonably refuse to extend the time periods for performance indicated in one or
more of the Construction Schedules if the 'affected member of the Consortium
demonstrates that the reasons for the delay(s) which necessitate such extension(s) are
beyond the control of such member, despite good faith efforts on its part to perform in
a timely manner. Notwithstanding anything in this Section B to the contrary, the
foregoing concerning non-compliance and requests for amendments or extensions shall
not apply in connection with any matter with respect to which the Aspen City Charter
or the Municipal Code has invested original jurisdiction in other boards, such as the
Board of Appeals and Examiners. With respect to such matters the rules of practice and
procedure established for andJor by such boards shall, in the first instance, apply.
Noncompliance with one or more of the Construction Schedules set forth above due to
difficulties with fund raising or other occurrences outside of the control of the non-profit
members of the Consortium shall be examined in any non-compliance hearing before the
City Council and can be a basis for granting a variance from an extension of any of such
schedules.
37
C.
~~.~ . ~~ _ .. .,......~.r..K
#34i~9.;; ~i1!.^_4/5C 16: 13 Re( 4i~~-,, cic_~ Df::: 667 F'6 772
of is Devis, F'itk:in Cnty~ i.:lei , Doc ~.~~~~
GENERAL PROVISIONS
1. Notice. Notices to be given to the parties to this Agreement shall be deemed
given if personally delivered or if deposited in the United States Mail to the
parties by registered or certified mail at the addresses indicated below, or at such
other addresses as may be sustained upon written notice by the parties or their
successors or assigns:
City of Aspen: City Planning Director cc: City Manager
130 South Galena City Attorney
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Lot 1: Aspen Institute
1000 North 3rd Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
With a Copy To: Gideon Kaufman
Wheeler Square Law Offices
315 East Hyman Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Lot 2: Music Associates of Aspen
2 Music School Road
Aspen, Colorado 81611
With a Copy To: Alan Schwartz
106 South Mill Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Lot 3: Aspen Center for Physics
700 West Gillespie
Aspen, Colorado 81611
With a Copy To: Nick McGrath
600 East Hopkins Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Lot 4: City of Aspen/City Planning Director
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
38
l #' '~q37 U1/2~/92 i6: 1.; S~ s-"~i,r,, cif Bf: 667 F'G 773
Si .via Davis, F'itk:in Cnt, Cle Doc ~.~?U
Lots S, 6, 7,
8, 9 and 10 Savanah Limited Partnership
600 East Cooper, Suite #200
Aspen, Colorado 81611
With a Copy To: Robert W. Hughes
Oates, Hughes & Knezevich, P.C.
533 East Hopkins Avenue
Aspen, Colorado 81611
2. Binding Effect. The provisions hereof shall run with and constitute a burden
upon the title to the Property with the exception of Lot 4, thereof, which is not
a part of the Aspen Meadows Specially Planned Area, and shall be binding upon
and shall inure to the benefit of the Owner, each member of the Consortium and
the City and their respective heirs, personal representatives, successors and
assigns.
3. Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be subject to and construed in accordance
with the laws of the State of Colorado and the Municipal Code of the City of
Aspen.
4. Vested Riehts. Pursuant to Section 24-6-207 of the Municipal Code, a Vested
Property Right is hereby established for all development activities (including the
siting and massing of building improvements) approved by this Agreement and,
accordingly, for the three year period next succeeding June 10, 1991 no zoning
or land use action by the City, legislative or otherwise, and no citizen initiated
zoning or land use action shall in any manner alter, impair, prevent, diminish or
otherwise delay any development activities or use of the Property approved by
this Agreement, except: '
a. with the consent of the owner of the property affected by such action; or
b. upon the discovery of natural or man-made hazards on or in the immediate
vicinity of the property affected by such action, which hazards could not
reasonably have been heretofore discovered, and which hazards, if
uncorrected, would pose a serious threat to the public health, safety and
welfare; or
c. to the extent that compensation is paid as provided in Title 24, Article 68,
C.R.S.
Nothing by the establishment of this Vested Property Right shall exempt the
development activities or use of the Property contemplated in or by this
Agreement from subsequent reviews and approvals which may be required by
39
~, ~ci r ill/?4 /?2 16:13 Fec ~~.,i~, ~ Ecf': 667 F'G 774
Silvia D~~~is, F'itk:in Cnty Clerk:, iloc ~.~?~?
other provisions of this Agreement or the general rules, regulations and
ordinances of the City provided that such reviews and approvals are not
inconsistent with the development activities or use of the Property contemplated
in or by this Agreement. Moreover, the establishment of this Vested Property
Right shall not preclude the application of ordinances or regulations which are
general in nature and are applicable to all property subject to land use regulation
by the City including, but not limited to, building, fire, plumbing, electrical and
mechanical codes and in connection with any such development activities or use
of the Property, the owner(s) of the property involved shall abide by any and all
such building, fire, plumbing, electrical and mechanical codes, unless such
owner(s) shall have been granted an exemption therefrom in writing. Nothing by
the establishment of this Vested Property Right shall preclude judicial determina-
tion, based on common law principles, that a vested property right exists with
respect to any development activity or use of the Property approved by this
Agreement, or that any subsequently enacted or citizen initiated zoning or land
use action has resulted in a compensable taking of all or some portion of the
Property. In the event of a final determination by the Aspen City Council of a
noncompliance with the terms of this Agreement by any Consortium Member,
then so much of the Vested Property Right hereby established as relates to that
component of the Project for which the Non-Complying Member is responsible,
as set forth above, shall from then and thereafter no longer exist; provided that
if such determination is ever judicially invalidated then the Vested Property Right
formerly extinguished shall, ipso facto, thereupon be revived nuns pro tune to the
time of the City Council's determination of non-compliance.
5. Expiration of Development Allotment. The development activity contemplated
in Subsection G of Section II of this Agreement shall be eligible for exemption
from expiration under the provisions of Section 24-8-108 of the Municipal Code,
notwithstanding that a building permit is not sooner obtained in respect .of such
development activity, if on or before three years next succeeding the effective
date hereof application for such exemption is made by the owner(s) of any of Lots
7, 8, 9 or 10 and by the time of such application for exemption any conditions
set forth in this Agreement relative to the development activities contemplated in
Subsection G of Section II, which were to have been met by the time of such
application have, in fact, been met, and all contemplated utilities have been
installed to the lot lines of Lots 7, 8, 9, and 10 and the work and activities
contemplated by Subsection D2 of Section I of this Agreement have been
completed.
6. Severability. If any of the provisions of this Agreement or any paragraph,
sentence, clause, phrase, word or section or the application thereof in any
circumstances is validated, such provision, paragraph, sentence, clause, phrase,
word or section shall be severed from the Agreement and the remainder shall
remain in full force and effect.
40
#•~ ~•= -' ~~ 1 /~4/S.^_ 16: 1. ~ F:ec ~4( c it:• jF~:: 667 F'G 775
Silvia avis, F'itk:in Cnty Cler•k:, L ~.i~~~
7. Incorporation of Recitals and Written Submittals. The City and the Owner hereby
stipulate and agree that the recitals preceding this Agreement, and all of the
written submittals (as amended and presently effective) made by Owner to City
throughout the course of the Aspen Meadows SPA approval process, shall be
deemed to be part of this Agreement and to be incorporated herein by this
reference. The City will, upon request from interested parties, including
prospective purchasers and lenders, and within a reasonable period of time
following such request, issue appropriate written certification as to the compli-
ance, or lack thereof, of any component of the Project with such recitals and
written •submittals.
8. Entire Agreement: Amendment. This Agreement contains the entire understand-
ing and agreement between the parties herein with respect ~to the transactions
contemplated hereunder and may be altered or amended from time to time only
by written instrument executed by each of the parties hereto.
9. Acceptance of SPA Final Development Plan: Ratification by Owner. Upon
execution of this Agreement by all parties hereto, the City agrees to approve and
execute the SPA Final Development Plan and Subdivision Plat for the Aspen
Meadows, and to accept the same for recordation in the Recording Office of
Pitkin County, Colorado, upon payment of the recordation fee and costs to the
City by Owner. For its part, Owner hereby ratifies and confirms each and every
representation set forth in the Plan, and made in the course of submittals and
hearings (as amended and presently effective), upon which approvals granted may
have been based.
10. Reasonableness. In all dealings with one another under, and in connection with
all determinations or interpretations that are to be made pursuant to this
Agreement, the parties hereto, their agents, employees, designees and affiliates,
and any third parties called upon to make any determination pursuant to the
provisions of this Agreement, shall conduct themselves reasonably, fairly and in
good faith.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have hereunto set their hands and seals
the day and. year first above-written.
• .,
.. ~ ~~
• THE CITY OF ASPEN COLORADO
ATTEST:
• S ... +
Kat~ryi~ - ch:;'City Clerk
,a
municipal corporation
By: S• c~
Jo Bennett, Mayor
(Signatures Continued on Page Following)
41
l ~4` '3i ~?1/:4/92 1S: 1~ Rec~•. ;cic; ~i~ Et f:; 667 F'6 ?76
5i1 . _a Davis, F'itF::in Cnty Cler•E::, Doc ~.ciiy
SAVANAH LIlVIITED PARTNERSHIP, a
ric~ f C` lumbi~limited partnership
THE ;N INSTITUTE
By: ' ~~-
MUSIC ASSOCIATES OF ASPEN
By: ~~ ~ ~ ~• ~~ ~
~.
,.
ASPEN CENTER FOR PHYSICS
sC
\~
V
STATE OF
COLORADO
COTJNTY OF PITKIN
SS.
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~_ day of
N ~ 199 by a •` N~q M i ~~ as
• ~ F ~T for SAVAN LIlVIITED PARTNERSHIP, a District
of Columbia mited partnership.
_. ;,
~,
,.
;•:~ ~it~: ..
.~
;. ~ -. • -
_ .~
s„x~O~t M _
v L ` ~
C^
VVITNFSS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires: ~~
~[`104f1E1 ~8LL1C3
42
i, ( .
#•~ •~3~ U1/24/S~ 1E,:13 Fiec ~4~_ ~~O Est.: 667 F'G 777
Silvia Davis, F'it~::in Cn±Y C1r?r•E::, Doc ~.C~~~
STATE OF COLORADO )
ss.
COUNTY OF PITKIN )
~ The foregoing instrument ~s ac~owle~da foe me is day of
`~ /~' 1..1 , 199~,~by V / t ,~(`, _ f~L as
f PEN IN
,~~'~~~ ~~'• '~ ~ _ WITNESS my hand and officia' °°~'
~~_t,' ' 0 T `~My commission expires: ~; _~
-~S~AL)~'`~ ~ -
~~
ss.
COUNTY OF PITKIN )
U The foregoi19 insb ment w~s^aclrnowlP.da~~me this ~ day of
--~-Y~r-.~. ~- Y r~-c1 ~ ~' ~ IZT~-f as
_ j~-~~-S ~r?~-ter- for MIDI ~SSOCI~T~ ASPEN.
_ ~ _ WITNESS my hand and office
',-~ ..
• •'' ~ •' -• My commission expires: '~,
1_ : ~tir
~. , : ,1
,~ 4 -
- ' ~::
:S'Y~3~ jk.flr;,~zOLORADO )
•~r7 it fl. Uf~Si ~~ )
.SS'
COUNTY OF PIT'KIN )
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged befo~~ me 's ~ day of
_~~ ~'. 199„ by ~~ i2 T l2 IY H- as
~ , : ~ . ~ {,, fc~` A P FOR PHYSICS.
.:. ; .,;:
(,SEAL)
WITNESS my hand and official ~Pa~
My commission expires: 7
` ~,'
. -J.
- `` ~.~ L • n c • •.
„4_
~'sa7,~oihlagmfs~iq'meado.agt
43
_ _
(. r
#r..~4~~`. .'' C~1/C4/9~ 1b:1-~ Rec ~`4~~~~.. ! bF: 667 F'G 778
Silvia Da~~is, F'itF::in Cnty Cler•E::, Doc S.~~ia
APPENDIX
PAGE NO. EXHIBIT
1 A
6 B
8 C
33 D
34 E
34
34
"LIST OF EXHIBITS"
DESCRIPTION
Legal Description of Property
Traffic Mitigation
Utility Cost Estimates
Deed Restrictions for Single-Family Sites
Energy Conservation and Efficiency Measures
F Appropriate Technology Associates Letter
G MAA RehearsaUPerformance Hall Energy Conservation
Description
35 H
~~,~n~x~~au.ot
Design Workshop March 21, 1991, Re-Vegetation Letter
44
__ ___
n.=4iio,ji cil/.^4/9^ 16:
lvia Davis, F'itE::in
EXHIBIT "A"
The Aspen Pdeadows
I, I;G ~ t. 1) T'SC R I i'Ti () N
1~r ~4rii~, ciir F,f::: 667 F'G 779
Cry..: C' ~•k, Doc ~.irir
A tract of land located within portions of the North 1/2 of Section 12, and tlu Soutli 1/Z Section
1, 'fcr~vnship 10 South, Rance RS Wit of the C,th Principle Meridian, Pitkin County, State of
Colnrado being more particularly described as follows:
Beginning at the center north 1/16 airner of said Section 12, d~criixd as such on the "Plat of
Ilre Aspen 1~leaclnws Subdivision Exception" and being a found in place 3B x 1 incfi steel bar.
'flrrnce N R4" 14' 00" W, along the north line of Ben Deane Lot Split Subdivision and Gti~tle
Creek Suhciivisinn, 797.G2 feet to the eaeterly line of Red Butte Cemetery; 'Dunce along the
easterly boundary of said Red Butte Cemetery, the following nine (9) courses:
1) N 17" 40' 15" E, 84.75 Poet;
2) Thence N 13° O1' 35" W, 65.00 feet;
3) Thence N 11° 33' 10" E, 96.62 feet;
4) Thence N 1° 50' 20" E, 114.04 feet;
5) Thence N 14° 30' 25" W, 64.31 feet;
t'-) 'Ilrence N 4° 08' 3U" W, 286.13 feet;
7) Thence N 21° 28' S0" W, 171.56 Ceet;
H) Thence N 16° 21' 15" E, 305.82 feet;
~)) Thence N 1" 02' 20" W, 33.38 feet;
'1•hrnce N RR° 35' 15" r, 392.52 feet; Thence N S° 30' 0U" r, 38.99 feet;
'tlu•nce N 7" 06' 1R" W, 14.77 feet to the southeast corner of Lot l0, Black Birch Estates.
'flu•nce along the e<~sterly boundary of said Black Birch Estates, the following four (4) courses:
1) N 2c)" S4' U0" W, 199.72 feet;
2) Tlrcnce N 14° 17' 00" W, 119.61 feel;
3) Thence N 15° 03' 00" E, 84.24 feet;
4) Thence N 52° 19' 00" E, 57.18 feet to the center line intersection of the Rearing Fork
River and Castle Creek;
Tlrrnce southeasterly approximately 3000 feet along the centerline of the Roaring Fork River,
being described by the following seventeen (17) courses for the purpose of acreage ~lcttiations
only, and is not intended for the e,Stablislrment of boundary lines:
1) Thence S 4U° 10' 12" C, 12G.35 feet;
2) Thence S 64° ] R' 32" E, 131.86 feet;
3) Thence S R2" 09' S2" E, 384.76 feet;
4) Thence S 50° 54' S9" E, 92.62 Ccel;
5) ?lance S 1?° 3(l' 46" E, 203.fi5 feet;
6) Thence S 19° 45' OR" W, 250.14 feet;
7) Thence S lU' 22' OU" W, 192.51 feei~
R) Thence S 44° 55' O1" E, 119.52 feet;
9) 'i'hence S R2° 30' 4t'i" E, Zti9.67 feet;
11)) Thence N 76" 4G OR" E, 141.4(1 feet;
i 1) Thence S 84° OR' 11" E, 120.42 Ceet;
12) Tl~cnce S 5t° 11' IZ" E, 217.42 feet;
13) Thence S 70" 55' 07" E, 239.71 feet;
14) Thence S 35" 54' 3R" E, 162.80 feet;
15) Thence S 9" U6' 17" W, 129.26 feet;
1 C~) 'Ilrence S 41" 2ti' 27" E, ] 15.37 feet;
17) Thence S 7G" 13' 42" E, 1(12.93 feet t~ a Paint on the westerly boundary line of Lot lA
Second Aspen Compa ny Subdivision;
~~' -?~- '~1/C4/9~ 16:13 Rec
Silvia Louie, F'itk:in Casty
~40ii, cjci
C1 erF:: , Doc
:~~: 667 F'G 780
~,i~i~
Thence along the westerly boundary of said Secancl Aspen Company Subdivision, the fallowing
hvo (2) courses:
1) S 0" 27' 00" E, 470.0() feel;
2) 'T'hence S 1G" 35' 00" >w 723.90 feet la a point along the north right-of--way of Gillespie
Avenue;
Tl~ct~ce N R9" 58' 15" W along the north rigi~t-of--way of said Gillespie Avenue, 869.13 feet to
tl~e weft right-of--way of Sixth Street; Ttrence along the west right-oC way of said Sixth Street
S p" 12' OU" E, 199.71 feet to a paint along the north right-of--way of North Slreet; Tluacx along
tl~r nartli right-of--way of said North Stree! N 75" 12' 00" W, 269.67 feet; Treace S 14.47' 30"
W, c).G6 feet to a paint an the Aspen Township line 5-(; Tlirnre N 65" 3O' O0" W along said
Asl~cn Township Line, 488.80 feet to a paint Mang flu east risf~t-af--way of ilu original Meadows
Road; Thence along said east right-af--way of said Meadows Raad the fallowing five (~ courses:
1) N O" 54' UO" W, 400.71 feet;
2) Tlunce N 65' Z1' 00" W, C.7Z feet;
3) Tiunce N 0° 54' 0(1" W, 19.12 feel;
4) Tlicnce along the arc of a curve to file right, havicig a radius of 1403.09 feet, a central
angle of A° 33' 12" for an arc length of 209.40 feet, and wiu~se chard bears
N 3" 22' 36" E, 209.26 feet;
5) Thence N T 39' 12" E, 296.47 feet;
l'licrice N R4" 14' ()0" W, 84.21 feet to flu Tnu Paint of T3eginning and rnntaining R4S36
awes more ~r less.
f
-_
^ ib• 1.; ~ _ ~4Ui?.iii) E+F;. 6i~i~
tiaS3i i~1/~~/9~ E;, Doc $• - -
SLlvia Davis, F'it4~:in Cnty C1
EXHIBIT "B"
THE ASPEN MEADOWS
TRNFFIC M1T1GAT10N PLAN
February, 1991
..
l
#3• !~7 i? 1 /?4/9~ i b : 1.~ Rec ~4C~
Silvia Da:pis, F'itF;in Cnty Clerk:.
THE ASPEN MEADOWS
TRAFFIC MITIGATION PLAN
~c_~ Esf'. 667 F'G 7732
Doc ~.i~i~
This plan has been prepared by the following individuals:
Committee Members:
King Woodward, The Aspen Institute
Kim Johnson, Aspen/Pitkin County Planning Office
Dan Blankenship, Roaring Fork Transit Agency
George Vicenza, tiVest End Resident
Robert Harth, Ed Sweeney, Music Associates of Aspen
Don Swales, West End Resident
Roger Hunt, Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission and West End Resident
Perry Harvey, R.J. Gallagher, Hadid Aspen Holdings, Inc.
Bob FeIsburg, Felsburg Holt & Ullevig
Other ParilclC)antS:
John Goodwin, Aspen Police Chief
Chuck Roth, Aspen Public Works Department
Jan Collins, West End Resident
Amy Margerum, Aspen/Pitkin County Planning Office
i'
#~4 ~i c_~1/24/9~ 16:1. Rec X40;_ ?~~ E~l~:: 667 F'6 783
Silvia Bavis, F'itl;in Cnty Clerk, D~cc ~~.00
I. Introduction
During the late summer of 1989 the City of Aspen began the preparation of a Master Plan
for the Aspen Meadows property. This plan, completed in January 1990, was formulated
within the framework of four goals. Two of the goals, which are directly related to the
traffic and transportation aspects of the plan, were stated as follows:
Goal 3: Mitigate, to the maximum extent feasible, the effects of the devel-
opment on neighboring properties.
Goal 4: Mitigate, to the maximum extent feasible, the project's impacts on
the overall community.
From a transportation standpoint, the Master Plan included a number of physical elements
in the site plan which were directed at achieving these goals. These included creating a
new primary access point to the West Meadows via Seventh Street, constructing a new trail
system linking both the East Meadows and the West Meadows to the City's trail system,
and improving the MAA parking lots to better serve automobiles and transit interface.
However, the Master Plan went even further and identified a number of mitigation
measures, many of which are operational in nature, which should be explored. These
included such measures as controls on delivery vehicles; plans for smaller, non-diesel
transit vehicles; shuttle service to/from the Meadows; parking controls; and emphasis on
pedestrian and bicycle access.
To respond to this concern, in October 1990 the Consortium formed a committee to
further evaluate mitigation measures and to develop a traffic mitigation plan for the Aspen
Meadows project. This committee was comprised of representatives of the owners and
users of the property, West End residents, the manager of the Roaring Fork Transit
Agency (RFTA), representatives of the Aspen/Pitkin County Planning Office, a member
of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, and a professional transportation consul-
tant. The committee held seven meetings between October 30, 1990 and February ~, 1991
to discuss mitigation measures and to prepare this plan. In addition to committee mem-
bers, other residents and City employees participated in these meetings.
Early in the process, the committee formulated the following goal statement which
directed the committee's efforts:
"To develop mitigation measures for the Aspen Meadows facilities to reduce
automobile use and it's impact on the West End neighborhood and the community
at large, and to make the Meadows facilities more accessible to residents and guests
in environmentally sound ways."
The resulting plan has been developed in two components. Because the characteristics
associated with the lodge, restaurant, and health club facilities on the western portion of
the property differ significantly from those of the MAA facilities on the eastern portion,
the mitigation measures appropriate to each portion also differ. Therefore, the following
sections provide a series of mitigation measures for each of the areas of the property.
With each measure are provided a brief description of the action, the suggested phasing
for implementation of the measure, and identification of the responsible party.
C #34i~9.~i ci1/^4/9~ ib: i~._, Rey >4cicj.cjci E~f.: 667 F•G 784
Silvia Davis, F'itE:.in Cnty Ller•k:, Dor ~,c?c~
In developing and implementing this or any mitigation plan, it is important to understand
that the plan must be evolutionary. While the goal of the plan must remain steadfast, the
mitigation measures and the details of their implementation must be flexible, requiring
monitoring and fine tuning over the years. It is recommended that the City undertake a
program to review the effectiveness of the mitigation measures on a regular basis and to
work with the Consortium to modify the details of the measures to ensure effective, yet
efficient, implementation.
(• t'~'4U9:3i
i cii/C4/ 9C i6: 13 hoc ~ c_~,i~p Bl: :_ 667 F'G 785
v
a Davis, F~itk.in Cnt;~ Cle,•E:, Doc ~.~~~~
11. Mitigation Plan for West Meadows Facilities
A. Background
Currently, the residential units on the western portion of the Aspen Meadows
property include 60 lodge units and eight townhouses. The conceptual SPA
approval included the addition of four single family residences, ten new three-
bedroom townhomes, and 50 lodge units. The purpose of these additional facilities
is primarily to better serve the group activities sponsored by the members of the
Consortium. During the summer months, use will be almost exclusively by these
groups. During the winter season, it is anticipated that the lodge may be operated
for public use. Furthermore, the restaurant will be renovated, but will not be
expanded. Finally, the health club, used primarily by guests of the West Meadows,
will be enlarged slightly.
In developing the mitigation plan, the committee considered measures that ad-
dressed each of the primary user groups of the West Meadows facilities: guests,
employees, and users of the restaurant or health club who are not. staying on the
grounds.
Furthermore, a mitigation plan usually includes auto disincentives and incentives
to use other modes of transportation. Auto disincentives are restrictive measures
that discourage individuals from using their automobiles. The second element is
comprised of measures that make it attractive and convenient to use alternatives to
the automobile. As will be highlighted by the list of measures described in the
following section, this mitigation plan includes a wide range of both auto
disincentives and alternative mode incentives.
How effective will this plan be? tiVhile it is very difficult to project exactly how
much trip reduction will occur as a result of this plan, the committee believes that
it has the potential to significantly mitigate the effects of additional traffic due to
the new development. The following table presents a summary of trip generation
which might be expected from the West Meadows based on trip rates typical of the
Aspen area if no specific mitigation program is implemented. As shown, the
existing residential and restaurant facilities could generate about 750 vehicle trips
per. day. The proposed additional residential units could generate another 340 trips
per day, bringing the total trip estimate to nearly 1,100 vehicles per day. Thus, a
30 percent trip reduction would result in total traffic generation with the expanded
facilities equal to that which could be generated by the existing facilities without a
mitigation plan. Because of the nature of the users of the West Meadows and the
broad-based character of the mitigation. plan, it is believed that, when properly
implemented, the proposed plan will achieve these results.
3
#34ci93i cii/^4/9? 16: 13 ( _ 3^~ici, cic~
lvia Davis, F'itF.:in Cnt C1 Bf'• 667 PG 786
Y k: ~ Doc ~ , r"~ c_~
m
c
•
L
fQ
O
/
~~
4.6
C
CQ
V
tr
~ ~ Q
Q~ O
~p 'CT'
f*1 ~ N'1 QI ~ [)
Q ~ ~ C O
C
C
- as
O LL a"
~ O
O C
O
_
C
~ O
=
-
~
c
v~
r~i n
Q O
U
_ ~
Y
G
C
h Q
C' _
• L
O
~
O
.._.
Q
O
E"' N N .D r'1 _I c I Q
61
'II E
Q ~
L"i w
~ C
H
O to O
-C O
0
y
c
m
,-.
.~
F-
c
_
O N ~
• 0.
~ E'- ~O O O O
I ~ QI ~ O
_ N c~1 QI (~ ~
.~
:: C
L C
. ~
_ ~ ~ ~
O ' X C/1
w ~, O E
"'
r O O
O
~
~
~
O
O
CI
~ ~
Q
~
cS
~ _, y
`
C
O
•y
C t~
~ y ~
H
0
• ~ E
~ ~ .-. .~. U
~
C
u ~ E ~ .~ Lt, ~„
`„ c
i
~.
d
~ o
O
.-.
~~ Ca ...
H
~ ca
Q
~ ~ ~ ~ ~'
E,., Q C R O L H
C^ .~
i
O >
i
>, i ~~
H ~
~ ~ N
~
H ~
~ ~
O y V
~.
es ~
~
R a
R' o ~ v
c a~
~ ~ `'' C Y
CV
L ct
0 d
~ ~
•~ O
~ ~
~ ..,
L
["' a
i
'O
y ~
0 ~
•C
` y
~ fO
CJ V N ~ CO H •C N'+ O ~ y
O
~ ~ ~ a ~ E^ VI Q ~ , v
4
_. ___
*3<" "`~~r ~_~1/24/9.^•_ 16: 13 Re~ ~4ci' pig 81-; 667 F'G 7B7
Si< ~~ Davis, F'itF::in Cnty Cler•.•., Doc ~.i~i~
B. Elements of Mitigation Plan
The following elements of a traffic mitigation plan directed at West Meadows
related traffic have been identified.
1. Airport Van Service
Description: A free van service to and from the airport will be provided
for guests and residents of the West Meadows. Because it is antici-
pated that most of the guest visits will be prearranged, the lodge
will dispatch the van (a vehicle with an approximate capacity of
12 -16 passengers) to pick up guests based on their flight schedule.
Similarly, departures will also be able to be prearranged. All guests
will be encouraged to use this convenient, yet efficient, service.
Phasing: This service will be initiated upon opening of the renovated
lodge.
Responsible Partv: Lodge operator through agreement with Aspen
Institute.
Z. Van Service to/from Town
Description: A free van service will be operated between the West
Meadows and downtown Aspen. This service will be available to all
guests, residents, and employees of the West Meadows, including
users of the restaurant, tennis couru, and health center. The ser-
vice will utilize a relatively small vehicle, seating approximately 12-
16 passengers. The service will be a regularly scheduled service
with frequent headways. During the high season, this route will run
from early morning to late evening on one-half hour headways.
The schedule will be adjusted for applicability to each season, and
may be provided on an "on demand" basis during certain seasons.
Phasing: The basic service described above will be initiated with the
opening of the renovated lodge. Its usage will be monitored, and
the service will be adjusted as necessary to meet the demand of the
patrons.
Responsible Partv: Lodge operator through agreement with Aspen
Institute.
3. Chartered Vehicles for Group Activities
Description: When appropriate, group activities either leaving or coming to
the West Meadows will be served by chartered vehicles arranged by
the management of the West Meadows. By providing this service,
management will be better able to control the number and/or size of
vehicles serving the participants in such activities. Furthermore,
encouragement of the use of this service will discourage the use of
private automobiles by participants.
34C'` ? ~ C~ i /~4/S~ 16 : 13 Rec~ ..4c_ic i ~ ~ i Eel.:: 667 F'G 788
Sil~_a Davis, F'itk:in Cnty C1erE::, Doc ~.cici
Phasing: This service will be provided with the first organized groups
using the West Meadows.
Responsible Party: Lodge operator.
4. Cuest Parking
Description: No parking for the lodge units will be provided adjacent to the
units. Instead, parking for these units will be located in a parking
structure under the tennis courts. Thus, even if guests bring vehi-
cles to the campus, their vehicles will not be immediately available
to them. Furthermore, guests wilt need to walk past the van service
in order to get to their vehicles. It is hoped that this concept will
encourage guests to use the van service rather than their private
automobiles.
Phasing: See construction schedule.
Responsible Party: Aspen Institute
S. Trail System
Description: Site planning has provided for on-campus trails that connect
to the extensive city-wide pedestrian and bike trait system adjacent
to the Meadows property. Thus, the Meadows trail system has been
designed to complement the City's efforts in developing pedestrian
and bicycle trails, thus encouraging guests of the Meadows to use
these modes of transportation.
Phasing: The on-site trail systems will be phased through the City's trail
construction program.
Responsible Party: City and the Consortium.
Bicycle Facilities
Description: _ bicycles will be made available for use by guests of the lodge
at a minima! fee designed to cover maintenance, replacement, and
administrative costs. Furthermore, bicycle racks will be provided at
those facilities which may be used by persons not lodged at the West
Meadows (for example, at the health center and at the tennis
couru).
Phasing: It is expected that this program will begin with 25-30 bicycles
available. The program will be monitored and the supply of bicy-
cles will be increased accordingly.
Responsible Party: Lodge operator.
1,
#k~4 3i U1/?4/9? 16:13 Rec ~4<_~ iii 1Fc: 6b7 F'G 789
Silvia Davis, F'itE::in Cnty Cler•F::, Doc ~.i?~?
7. Promotional Materials
Description: All promotional materials for the West Meadows lodge will
emphasize the availability of the van service, will encourage walk-
ing and bicycle use, and will discourage the need for personal
automobiles. The focus of this mitigation measure is to precondi-
tion the guest so that he or she chooses not to even rent a car upon
arrival in Aspen.
Phasing: This message will be included in all promotional materials
published for the renovated lodge.
Resaonsible Party: Lodge operator and Aspen Institute.
8. Employee Parking
Description: Limited employee parking will be provided on-site. This
parking will be available only for employees for whom vehicles are
essential for the execution of their jobs and for employee carpools
of 3 or more persons. A ride matching service will be available
through management to encourage the formation of carpools.
Furthermore, employees will be provided with their choice of
subsidized transit passes or subsidized parking at the Rio Grande
parking garage. A shuttle service will be provided for employees
from the Rio Grande garage either in conjunction with the regular-
ly scheduled van service to Town or as a separate operation.
Phasing: This measure will be implemented with the opening of the
renovated lodge.
Resaonsible Party: Lodge operator and Aspen Institute.
9. Coordination with Potential Rail Service
Description: If passenger-rail service does materialize on the Rio Grande
right-of-way, a transit stop will be encouraged in a location which
would allow access to the Meadows via the pedestrian bridge on the
Roaring Fork River.
Phasing: To be implemented with the initiation of rail service.
Resaonsible Party: Applicant and Rail Service Operator
.•34 37 i~l/~4/9~ 16:13 Rec`..~i~c. ~ci E~fc: 667 F'G 790
Silvia Davis, Fitk:in Cnty Clerk:, Doc ~.cjc_~
10. Delivery Truck Restrictions
Description: Because of the expected infrequency of large vehicle deliveries
to the West Meadows property (approximately 4 to 5 per day), it is
recommended that truck restrictions be focused on time of day and
route restrictions. It is recommended that deliveries will be limited
to the hours of 9:00 - 11:00 A.M. and 2:00 - 4:00 P.M. Thus, the
noise impacts of delivery vehicles will not occur during the most
sensitive time periods. Furthermore, all deliveries to the West
Meadows will be restricted to use of Seventh Street only between
the Meadows and SH 82. These restrictions will be implemented
through operator agreements.
Phasine: The time of day and route restrictions will be implemented upon
opening of the renovated lodge.
Responsible Partv: Lodge operator and Aspen Institute.
8
.. _ _~
~.
#34~?93< <~1!~4/9~ 1b: i.~ Rec ~4~?~~.~~~- {f; 667 F'G 791
Silvia Davis, F'itl::in Cnty C1erF::, Doc ~.~?~~
III. Mitigation Ptan for MAA Facilities
A. Background
The MAA facilities, located on the eastern portion of the property, will include
rearranged seating in the tent and a new rehearsal facility to accommodate rehears-
als and small performances. It is important to note that the modifications to the
performance tent will not increase the size of the audiences; they will simply
improve the seating conditions for the audiences.
Although there are students and faculty associated with traffic related to the MAA
facilities, the majority of concerns expressed by neighbors are related to the
impacts created by concert-goers. Therefore, most of the mitigation measures
included in this plan are focused on these users. Principally, these measures are
directed at encouraging concert-goers to walk, bike, or ride the transit system
rather than driving their automobiles to the concert.
This part of the plan particularly will be evolutionary in nature. Efforts to reduce
auto use have already been undertaken in recent years by the MAA in conjunction
with West End residents. The elements discussed in the following section are a
further expansion of these earlier efforts. As the program is implemented and
evaluated, it is expected that even further refinements will be appropriate.
B. Elements of Mitigation Plan
In developing a mitigation plan to address MAA traffic, the program focuses on
several measures.
1. Promotional Materials
Description: Promotional materials (including maps distributed by MAA
will encourage use of transit, bicycles, or walkways to access the
concert site.
Phasine: These efforts have already been initiated and will be continued.
Responsible Party: MAA
Z. Pedestrian/Bicycle Ways
Description: An enhanced system of routes exclusively designated for use
by pedestrians and bicyclisu to access the concert area will be
implemented. This system wiI1 include:
Continued designation of the Lake Avenue
pedestrian/bicycle way.
#' "~4~ i 01 /^4/92 16: i:~ R~ ~4' '`, Oi ~ Bk:: 667 F'G 792
Si~via Davis, F'itl::in Cnty Cle, .•., Doc ~.c.~cj
o Fourth Street will be closed to automobile traffic from
Gillespie Street to Main Street for approximately one hour
before and one hour after major concerts. Prior to concerts,
the street will be for pedestrian/bicycle use only. After the
concerts, it will used for pedestrian/bicycle traffic and for
buses leaving the MAA grounds. Allowing buses to use this
route after concerts will separate the buses from automobile
traffic, thereby decreasing the delay experienced by the
buses and thus providing an incentive for using the transit
service. This closure wilt include barricades and appropriate
signing at both ends of Fourth Street and will require tem-
porary warning signs at each cross street to ensure the safety
of pedestrians and bicyclists. Furthermore, the proposed
design of the MAA parking lot provides for a continuation
of the pedestrianway from Fourth Street to the music tent.
o Facilities for bicycle storage during, concerts will be pro-
vided in the vicinity of the tent.
implementation: It is anticipated that the Fourth Street closure wilt be
implemented during the next concert season. The bicycle storage
facilities will be provided with the improvements to the MAA
parking lot.
Responsible Partv: MAA and City.
3. Enhanced Transit Service
Description: Transit service to the MAA grounds will continue to be improved and
emphasized. This includes elements affecting the city-wide system,
circulation through the neighborhood, and on-site operation:
All city-wide RFTA bus routes serving the West End, as well as the
special MAA bus runs, will continue to provide service. Enhanced
signing and bus service information wilt be provided at the Rio
Grande parking garage to direct patrons to the bus stop on Main
Street.
Prior to a scheduled concert, large buses (unless carrying a greater
number of phssengers than can be accommodated by the circulating
shuttle or during inclement weather) will unload all passengers at
the intersection of Fourth/Main. Concert goers will then be en-
couraged to walk on Fourth Street to the tent or to use the smaller
vehicle shuttle which will be circulating on Main, Fifth, Gillespie,
and Third Streets. This vehicle will be a compressed natural gas
powered vehicle and will operate for approximately one-half to one
hour before the concert.
Following concerts, buses will stand by on Fourth Street or at the
transit stop in the parking lot to transport concert goers back to the
center of town.
10
:}c )c.
Si 1 vi
~?1/4/92 16:13 Fiec
_a V .
Esk:: 667 F'G 793
Davis, F'itk:in Cnty Cler•l, Uoc ~.~~i~
The MAA parking lot has been designed to provide a location for
buses to load and unload passengers while removed from Gillespie
Street. This location is on the south end of the parking lot and
would allow good clockwise circulation of the buses from Fifth
Street into the parking lot and back out onto the street system at
Fourth and Gillespie.
4.
S.
Phasing: It is anticipated that this improved transit service will be provided during
the next concert season. The program will be monitored and the service
will be adjusted accordingly.
Responsible Party: The transit service will be the responsibility of RFTA. The
transit improvements in the parking lot will be the responsibility of the
MAA.
Truck Restrictions
Description: Although the number of large vehicle deliveries to the MAA facilities
is very limited, it is recommended that all such vehicles will be restricted to
using Third Street only between the MAA grounds and Main Street. MAA
will enforce this limitation with their vehicle drivers.
Phasing: These restrictions will be implemented during the next concert season.
Responsible Party: MAA
Residential Parking Permit Program
Description: A residential parking permit program is still under consideration.
This program would prohibit all parking on streets from Mill Street to
Eighth Street and from Main Street to the Roaring Fork River other than
for residents or their guests during the concert season. The MAA would
institute paid parking in their lou in connection with this plan. Permit
parking may require issuance of vehicle stickers for a fee, installation of
appropriate signage, and City enforcement.
Phasing: It is recommended that the residential parking permit program be
instituted after the effectiveness of the remainder of the mitigation plan
has been evaluated. Because of the significant impacts of such a program
on the residents of the West End, furiher input from the residents should
be incorporated into an implementation plan for this program.
Responsible Party: MAA, City and West End residents.
11
#34c i~3 r ~ ~ i /?4/9~ 16: 1.~ Rec 3;4~ ~~? . ~ ~~ ~ DF:: 667 F'G 794
Silvia Davis, F'itF::in Cnty Cler•F•:, Doc ~.c~c=~
E701161T C
ASPEN MEADOWS S1801VlSIONB.P.A.
ESTI~G,TE OF PROBABLE COMSTRUCTION COSTS
Oecembsr 5, 1991
This sstleate of probable construction costs la based on prellminary design and
represents Leonard Rlce Consulting hater Engineers best professional }udgeaent.
It does not. however, oonstltuta a warranty or representation that acttal bids
WIII not vary from this estimate na matter how carefully prepared.
1 1 t 1
1 1 1 I ~
1 1 { {
( watar ; Sanitary S Gas ; Electrla (Telephone ;Cable N ;
( ~lalns ; Sewer ( Lines Lines { Lines ; ;
'------ 1 1 1
1 :1 -1 1 ;---- i -- I- ---- I
(LOT 1 -PHI • (5133,000 { S168,000 (
, 1 1 1 540,000 i 595,000 (
~ _ 510,000 {
' 510,000 (
{
, 1 1 1
{LOT 1 - PH ll ' ( 587.000 (5131,000 ( 1
S17,000 ( S35,000 ( 1
510,000 (
510,000 I
1 I I s
{ l0T 2 { PH II { PH II ( PH II { PH II ( PH II { PH II {
i { { 1
( (
I
I
LOT 3 ; N/A I S123,000 ; N/A ; WA 1 WA ; N/A {
{- { --
I lOT 4 N/A WA { N/A WA N/A { N/A ;
{ LOT 5 { PHI 530,000 ; PHI ; PHI ; PHI I PHI {
( {'-'--{- -i- ( { - { {
{ LOT 6 ; PHI ; 538,000 ; PHI ; PHI ; PHI ; PH f ;
1 1 1
I ----- I---- 1'---1-----1 - 1 -(
----
1
( LOT 7 - 10 I S43,000 ( S40,000 ( 56.000 i 512,000 ( S5,000 { 55,000 {
i ( { i { ( { {
;CASTLE CR. LINE ; N/A ; S230,000 ; N/A ; N/A N/A ; WA
Lus...ea..au ~ u.oxx.:. l.usasa. ~ a.ra..s. l uvo.. ~ ar-as. I.a..a~~ (
I 1 1 1 I sal - ssl
{ TOTAL (5243,000 ; S780,000 { 563,000 { 5142,000 ; 525,000 { 525,000 (
PHI -Infrastructure Installation generally defined as west of the existing
18' water I lne.
PH II -Infrastructure Installation generally defined as east of the extsting
18' water Ilse.
_ ~ :.
rt.l:..t l`J.l. ~:..` 1/i:Y/7:.. 1Ci. l._r r _~ ~'T
'lvia Davis, F'itF::in C~r C7 ^rF::, Dec ~.~?~?
EXHIBIT "D"~
EMPLOYEE HOUSING DEDICATION
THIS DEDICATION, is made and entered into as of the
199_, by
("Owner"), with reference to the following:
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Owner is the record owner of the following described real
property (the "Property"), to wit:
Lot ,The Aspen Meadows Subdivision, according to the
Aspen Meadows Final S.P.A. Development Plan and Final
Subdivision Plat recorded in Book at Page of the
Pitkin County, Colorado real property records
QA7tS HUGt4.5 & 1WEgviCH P.G
7fiud floor. Aspen Plus Building
533 Fia Hopldm
Aspen, Colorado 81611
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Development and Subdivision
Agreement "The Aspen Meadows" Specially Planned Area recorded in Book at Pages
et seq. of the Pitkin County, Colorado real property records, ("Development
Agreement") Owner is required at this time to dedicate the Property to specific employee
housing restrictions and guidelines; and
WHEREAS, Owner desires by this instrument to effect such dedication
upon and with respect to the Property.
NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to and as required by the terms of the
Development Agreement, Owner hereby declares, covenants and agrees that:
1. The accessory dwelling unit ("Unit") that is situate on the Property
shall be and hereby is restricted in terms of use, occupancy, and
rental exclusively to low income employee housing use, occupancy,
and rental guidelines and qualifications that may, from time to time,
be in effect, duly adopted, and regularly and uniformly applied by
the City of Aspen or its duly constituted employee housing designee
("Housing Authority"). The Unit shall not be condominiumized,
day of
,~34 ~ r c_~ 1 /C4/9C i b : 13 Rec ` ~+4Ci is i Bfc: 667 F'G 796
Silvia Davi=, F'itE::in Cnt;~ Cler•E;, Doc ~.c_?c_~
2. The Owner of the Property shall be responsible for leasing the Unit
to qualified residents of Pitkin County as determined by the City or,
': i
as the case may be, the Housing Authority. Verification of
employment and income levels for the individual(s) who occupy the
'' unit shall be completed and filed with the City or the Housing
Authority prior to the inception of any tenancy or occupancy. The
Owner of the Property shall have the right to select tenants for the
Unit provided that, in all cases, such tenants shall be qualified in
terms of employment and income level as set forth above. Except
for normal hiatuses arising in the ordinary course from the
termination of one tenancy and the inception of a new tenancy, the
Unit shall at all times be used and occupied for employee housing
purposes, as set forth above. Should the Owner of the Property fail
to maintain the Unit so occupied, the City or the Housing Authority
shall have the right to propose to the Owner of the Property a list
of eligible tenants therefor, from which list the Owner shall be
obligated to select a tenant(s) for the Unit within thirty (30) days.
All leases or occupancy agreements for the Unit shall, at a
minimum, be in writing, shall be approved in advance by the City
or Housing Authority, shall be for a term no less than six (6)
months, and shall adhere to and abide by the employment, income
levels and employee housing guidelines set forth above.
3. The dedication and covenants contained herein shall be deemed a
burden upon and to run with the title to the Property, shall be ~
binding upon the Owner and its successors and assigns, and upon all
other persons or entities having any right, title or interest in or to
the Property, or any part thereof, and shall inure to the benefit of
and be specifically enforceable by the City of Aspen or the Housing
Authority by any appropriate legal action, including injunction,
abatement or eviction of non-complying tenancies.
4. Neither this dedication nor any of the covenants contained herein
shall be modified, released or waived in any respect except by
written instrument executed by both the Owner, at any time, of the
Property and the City of Aspen, Colorado, and duly recorded in the
Pitldn County, Colorado real property records.
2
( ~.
4~t93i ~?1/~4/9~ ib: 13 Rec ~. _~~~. c_~i~ bF:: 667 F'6 797
Silvia Davis, F'itk:in Cnty Cler•k:, Doc ~.0~~
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Owner has made this Dedication as of the day
and year first above-written.
OWNER:
.STATE OF )
ss.
COUNTY OF )
The foregoing instrument was aclrnowledged before me this
199_, by
i l WITNESS my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
ii
:~
(SEAL)
~'
Notary Public
.:
Approved as to form and content:
ii
,~
THE ASPEN PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY
~' B •
~ y.
..vaaah\docsldedieate.02
i;
3
day of
~. _ ~.
} -•4~~93i C~1/~4/9~ 16: 13 Rec ~~~ici, c_~i> FsFr; b67 F'G 798
Cilvia Davis, F'itEcin Cnty Cler•E;, Doc ~.c_~ci
EXHIBIT "E"•
Energy Conservation and Efficiency Measures
The applicant is committed to energy-efficient building design and construction standards beyond
those required by the Building Code. The applicant's commitments for the residential projects
are as follows:
(1) Insulation:
Thermal resistance values of the building envelopes will exceed criteria mandatcd
by the Energy Code Amendment to the Uniform Building Code. Exterior surfaces of all heatcd
spaces will conform to the following minimum specifications:
• Walls: R-26
• Roof: R-38
• Floors (over unheated spaces): R-19
The greatest opportunity for energy conservation occurs in the types of materials
specif ed in the construction of the building envelope. An infiltration barrier wrap such as
"Tyvek" will be installed around the entire building exterior which will significantly reduce
infiltration. All penetrations of the wrap will be carefully caulked and sealed to further enhancc
the effectiveness of the barrier. High quality windows and doors with state-of--the-art closures
and gasketing methods will be specified throughout.
In addition to the exterior barrier wrap and internal bat~rigid insulation, an interior
vapor barrier will be provided. This vinyl vapor barrier will not only further decrease infiltration
___
~.;-' c_~1/~4/9~ ib• 13 Re~• ~4~? i~c_~ Est: 667 F'G 799
~~, ~
Silvia Davis, F'itk:in Cnty Clet~r•., Doc ~.~?~~
but will tend to hold interior humidity levels at least 10 to 15 percent higher than exterior levels
resulting in a greater degree of occupant comfort at lower room temperatures. All penetrations
of the vinyl-vapor barrier at windows, doors, wall switches and outlets will be sealed. With the
individual units sealed and insulated, an air-to-air heat exchanger, will be used to control the
indoor air environment while significantly reducing energy losses. Expandable foam insulation
will be utilized at all exterior door and window frames to cut down on air infiltration in these
locations.
(2) Glazing:
Skylighting will be encouraged to assist heating by passive solar gain. All of the
blazing in this project will be selected with the highest "R" value practical. Glazing located
within six feet of the floor will be low "E" type to enhance the warmth radiating between
occupant and glazing. The use of low "E" glass will permit a significant improvement in the
occupant's sense of comfort because of its effectiveness in reradiating interior warmth.
(3) Passive Solar Shading Devices:
• Herbert Bayer installed sun screen trellises on the trustee units to protect the
South and West exposures from excessive overheating. These same devices will
be used on the new Trustee Houses and townhomes to m;mmize heat gain in the
occupied spaces. These will occur on all South and West elevations of both
buildings which are not protected by roofs.
• Deciduous trees used as shading devices have also been planned for Trustee
Houses.
(4) Mechanical:
All space heating and domestic water heating equipment will be rated with AFUE
efficiencies of 90% or greater. All heating distribution ductwork and piping in unheated spaces
#' '~~937 i~i/~4/92 ib: 13 R~_ • ~~ `_~. ~~i~ E~f: 667 F'G 800
Silvia Davis, F'itE:in Cnty C1 E. k:, Doc ~.c_~c_~
will be insulated to a minimum of:
R-8 Duct insulation;
R-3.7 Pipe Insulation;
R-6 Insulation on recirculation hot water pipes
Programmable set-back thermostats will be used for each heating zone. Outdoor
swimming pools and hot tubs, if any, will be provided with insulated covers.
(5) Lighting:
Both interior and exterior lighting will be specified utilizing the latest in energy
efficient bulbs. Whether incandescent or fluorescent, high lumen output/Iow wattage bulbs will
be specified. In addition to using high efficiency bulbs, multiple switching within each space
will be designed to closely approximate task lighting based on probable furniture layouts while
maintaining sufficient flexibility to focus on task lighting arrangements as the house is occupied.
After these efficiencies have been maximized, daylighting will be considered for additional
efficiencies. Careful selection and location of glazing materials will permit minimum energy
inputs during daylight hours while avoiding the use of shading devices to minimize glare. Any
skylights to be utilized will employ high "R" value glazing and will be strategically located to
permit maximum natural light penetration into the unit interiors with minimum total glazing area..
(~ Building Orientation and Solar Utilization
The majority of building units have major view and glass orientation to the South.
Special glazing will min,m;ze heat loss during the colder months. Operable windows will
provide ample cooling and through-ventilation during the warmer months.
(b) Water and Wastewater. (Maximum Z points).
Considering the extent to which the proposed development will use water conservation
techniques such as water conserving plumbing fixtures or wastewater reuse systems or will
"34i~9.~~ U1/~4/9~ 16: i~ P._c 'c_~i~, c'~i~ EcF::: 667 F'G 801
.ilvia Davis, F'itE;in Cnty C~erk, Doc ~.~~~~
conserve surface water resources through irrigation, sprinkling, ponding and similar site
enhancements, and considering whether the applicant dedicates water rights to the City of
Aspen.
Efficiency in domestic water use will be achieved by utilizing water-efficient shower heads,
faucet aerators and flush toilets.. Maximum flow criteria for water-using appliances are as
follows:
Shower heads ?.5 Gpm
Faucet aerators 2.5 Gpm
Toilets 2.5 Gallons per flush
Over the years, the existing irrigation ditches have been used to water a portion of the
lawns and gardens at the Meadows. At other times domestic water has been used because of
inadequate maintenance of the ditch system. For instance, domestic water has been used
exclusively on the Institute grounds in recent years. The non-profit organizations have agreed
that in the future, the lawn and garden areas within their parcels will be maintained with
irrigation water. This will assure that treated water is conserved and these water rights are
protected. The limited lawn areas of the residential projects will also be irrigated in this fashion
if adequate water is available and the water can be efficiently delivered to these sites.
(c) Air. (Maximum 2 points).
Considering the effect of the proposed development on the City's air quality, including but
not Limited to whether fewer or cleaner wood-burning devices than allowed by Iaw will be
installed; whether existing. dirty burning devices wdl be. removed or replaced by cleaner
burning devices; whether dust prevention measures are employed on the unpaved areas;
and whether any special emission control devices are used.
In keeping with Aspen's clean air standards, the 8wood-burning fireplaces in the existing
Trustee Houses will be converted to gas-log fireplaces. It is also anticipated that gas-log
fireplaces will be provided in the 14 new residential units, if ties can be done in compliance with
C ~ '#34ir9:~i Crl/C4/9C ib: i•~`..ac '4i~ci.c_ici Bfc; 667 F'G B02
Silvia Davis, Fitk:in Cnty ~_er•k:. Doc ~.Cri~
conserve surface water resources through irrigation, sprinkling, ponding and similar site
enhancements, and considering whether the applicant dedicates water rights to the City of
Aspen.
Efficiency in domestic water use will be achieved by utilizing water-efficient shower heads,
faucet aerators and flush toilets.. Maximum flow criteria for water-using appliances are as
follows:
Shower heads 2.5 Gpm
Faucet aerators 2.5 Gpm
Toilets 2.5 Gallons per flush
Over the years, the existing irrigation ditches have been used to water a portion of the
lawns and gardens at the Meadows. At other times domestic water has been used because of
inadequate maintenance of the ditch system. For instance, domestic water has been used
exclusively on the Institute grounds in recent years. The non-profit organizations have agreed
.. .,
that in the future, the lawn and garden areas within their parcels will be maintained with
irrigation water. This will assure that treated water is conserved and these water rights are
protected. The limited lawn areas of the residential projects will also be irrigated in this fashion
if adequate water is available and the water can be efficiently delivered to these sites.
~, ~.c_ ' i _
c? 1 /^•_4/9? 16: 13 Rec _
~ . _,i ~ r.
'? Bf~ ,~ .,..,.,~ ,.... ~...,
667 F'6 803
Sily_ i Davis, F'itEiin Cnty ClerFc. Doc ~-~?~?
EXHIBIT "F"
jj ~ ~ ~~~~~~~~
~~1~~~ ~~~~~~
pP~~ _
,Svlu,• Energg fvr Susfuin~hlr ?~euelopment .
~ yj~~ 10 91
Idr. Fred bmith~ Vor,~t at- idant
l~rpan. Bkiinq Carp
P. d. Box iZ4~9
~r~pan, Co s16~
Darr btr. bmith, ~ Arrigo~ni. ~
Can.aultant, I ha.Ve been rsquvsted by sacker,
~ 8nez'~{Y,~,t4ato to state 'design 4oals is regard to energy
Raga, Jlx' ro sCt.
~tiieisncy in the Aspen M~adaws p ~
~ergy ettiaianoy will be a high priority in the das35n ai ~
mho erf oz~aAtsoa
ladr~o titYits. 11a r-ilx end~+avor to axaa~n ~ Q Ztuia nee givou ~.n
asitaria as W811 dg the syst~~ ~ ttb4 Model Srtssrr~~yy soda, 1989
ChaDt~ra { and 5 raapect3,voly lords flt •~~icifnoY. we a-ra
Edition. xri ordaY' t c~ Qn~rgY o~i~~baianey atratagies tar the da~sign,
evalustirtQ a nwabor '
3naludirwt
1. $iQh psttar~4anao glasinq pradvcts euah as Low-~ and/or Kaat~
Mirror to uin3mixe beat loss and eP'~~iz• °°ntxoL 41: solar heat
gain truti glasad area~• .
Z, super insulation +tisahniqqut~es l~Liire~tent~. ~O and tlvor.~ tc
~ininit~Q the buildup s h~~ntinq ra4 .
_. 71ir lnaiea~a reduct:ioa atrategier ~ the ~ lditt~usti a Q~iad
~filx.rationlaxfiltz'atipn o't sir thZ'o1lQ ..
~. Heat xeaavaty vantilet~.o otivn has is~all astbo Pr°viaia~raq+iii'sd
aasoaistld with tight aonstru t loss.
fresh sir xac~,; Yamants ~tithaut the et~soeisted h~ .
s. High a~ficiaaoy hastin~t apstams aAd aQntro~.s to ma~t~miae aasxgy
a~ZiaienoX~ e~o~ort azLd indoor air gaalitY~ ~ t li ht
4. High gt£},aienay Lighti~ ~ifa~ ld coatida high quasi y 4
at the loMast o$aratit~q ~~ Y ~'
ide deotnasrtation at my ~n~2'4Y ~nnlyai~ ~d
2 Mill p~`r B ~, aecerdaiiCe with the provisiot~a
raC~p~atians for tho dasi n,
4~ tar fLodsi snargy gads.
3iAaerelyr ~~,,
KGnnath R. alaots '
tn~gy Carsultant
.~
(, _
~4i~q~; cj1/~4/92 16:13~F,ec }i~t~,cici E~F•; 6b7 F'G
Silyi~ Dsyis, F'itk:in Cnty C1erE;. Doc ~,i~i~ 8J4
1
JJ
Salai Energy fc~r 5ustatnable Drvelop»tent
pro: Hr. grad smith, Vice Presidat~t
Aopen skiing Company
1~. Kan Axc~uletta
8adkan Ariguni & Roars,IriC.
Hr. BtQVS Ranipn
City ;o! ~Aap~n, 8utlaing Wept.
lAO~L~ Ks~n .Olson, AgprQpriata 7~chna2.o~y As3oviataa
Rn r l~BPIDN SNBTZTUT$ ~ btEAbOt4K LQDQE
D~1?Bt ~ August 1991
Ate Enrsrgy ~orisultant, T bav~ providoe~ ongoing analysis and
rscvmaendntions for the •Aapeui Hsadowe pro~act. I have evalaated the
final daeigri sp.cifioationa with regard to ttia builfling envelope
and its cvmpliancs with th~• ModQI, ~trgy coda..
The buildipQ aavslvpe !or •atob o! tha sovoa build u3~~~r are ~
C~tplianao r-itts th~r ltod~i ssssrgy Code, 1040 bdiiti~oa. Cods
compliance is satisrisd ad r~dtxuitsd by 8aation St3~. icy s»olysis by
COae 6actiori 1s ae tol].owe: '
• 4a4.t aaargy Analgsi8
Ths buildings~in thi^ project aatis~'y the raquireaent~r of chapter
Fi~w and are tttarlar4 nsceapted tree thB ' rsQuiremant~s of Section
' ;02. The rec~uireatants or chapter six are ' applicable only tc
bnil4inga under aoo0 Square teat in Moos area anti tberfcre do n+~
app3.y to this pro~eat. •
542.! 4ritaria !ot firoup R buiiQings
Per tht~ pu~poss c! this CQd~, th~4os buildiaga, being .rogi4arntial in
nature rlfld thrs• or less storieac in height aza alasSlZl~td Gx'aup R,
l~rpe a-z .
50~.,Z.l.t xslSst!
Tha ~~~ of the ~1Alla was det'sn~2tefl ,by ~urstiotl• i and do »ot exceed
the value Of' O.ap Btu/h--ft , given n Tabltc 502.2.1 and as
dAt4rntinad by Figure #1 oP Chapter SeV+e-ri using 10,000 Annual
Haatfnq Degree-gays. Uti V83LlQS se deter tined ter tech of th!
buildings are given in Tab].e i of th#g zsport.•
~.
~C~9~ i cJ1/~419~ 16: 1~ Rec S C~, i>c=~ EiF 667 F'G 805
' Silvia Davis, F'itk:in Cnty CIerE:. Doc ~.i~ci
lio1.Z:1.2 AOOIi ,
The U O! tha RAV! was date+tmf~cd }~- Equation 2 and daaA not axvnad
the V~-ltte of 0.023 Dtu/h-! z given in Table ' SOZ. ~ • i and Aa
eeter=ained by ~iqurd #Z a! Chaptar Bsvsri using l0,oao Annual
~eatting DegT$ a Ivan +in Tab]-call of thia~x z zt.~ ~~ ~~ oP tha
puilninge q
aoa.a.i.s 8iaor over uah~at.~.~rpaa.a:
'~.iJo of tha Floors over unheated crawl spacea.do nat sxaaed tha
value a~ 4. fly Stu/h-=t~ givEsn in Tabio 502.3. i and as d~tscrsmai~a ~
g~,gure- I~6 Af Chapter Qeven using 10 ~ doe Dual Keating i~~gr ]'e
Ua values •aa determined far each o= tha buildings Ara given in
Tplale••1 0! this report..
sQZ, S. ~.. ~ als?~-oa-q~ca~ds l7.aQra•:
'1'hfa 8action daee not app:ty as thara ar4 rya slabs-~an~rade for
h6ated epBCQa. ~ .
ap=.y~. ~,. s Crsri span` xslis~
This ~ Qscta.vit doss nat apply as there are crawl 'spa;aaa balos~t
unineu3.ntsd i:lopre.
sQa.~.l.lf naa~taAt Xalist
Tha axteriar balellent walls belot~ uninsulntad !leers in bui=ding ~~
~e ,~raulated to R-~~ (tJ- . Q.~05~ aThiCh more than satig#.cfSChgptar
valtto of fl . fls roquirad bar Table SQa ..3.1 and Fiaura
~a~~ upir-g 10, o0Q Attiruul Heating begree-daYa•
8o2.S.Z Coa2luq C~itsriat •
The required stw2~8arde of thin aaation havQ been ~-ore thnt~
aatisi'i~dd by aompiia~ae with pravioua saCtions.
as:.~ ]tir Leaksget
MarVisY windawe and docre are spsai~ied an8 haw air i~iltz'ati°n
rates which are lass than the 0.34 0~+ {per toot o~ operable each
cragC~ Zor windo+re and o.0 afa {psr aquar4 foot c! araay !cr• dears.
.. ....__
~ - -Fc-~93 r
' Silvia _ _ ___ _
U 1 /~4/9~ 16: 1 ~ Rec
Davis
Fit
~4~ ~i ~ , c~<~ Esf;;
667 F'G BOb
,
k:in Cnty C1erF;. Doc $,c_~cj
TABLE i
ACT~IL Vo
as deteaxmitied for aaatt build~Q
• conB ~ BUY?~DTNG
REgUTAE~l~T ~1 f 2 #3 ~#~ ~3 ~6 ~T
WALLS U 0.30 .iti~ ~.14 .1$ .I3 ~ .14 .2$ .14
• R 5.0 7.1 ?.i 5.6 7.7 ~ 7.1 5.3 7.1
ROOF II O.OZb~ .023 •.033 .OZ7 .OZZ .024 .020 .021
R
40.0
43.5
46.b.
45.8
4a.a
41.7
!~0.0 .
47.6
~'I.6gR V . 0. G6 .0:33 .033 .033 .433 .033 .033 .011
R a0.0 30.0 30.0 30•.0 30.0 30.0 :30.0 30.0
9L119 H/A K JH N/!s N jA N/A N/A H JA K!A
HASEKEIQT ~ 0.46 !Q/!~ N/A H/A N/.~ NJA 0.06 NjA
_ _ -- _ _ _ _
. I #.;4i~q.;i i~i/24/9~ 16:1~....ac '`4iui.i~i~ BK: 667 F'G 807
,ilvia Davis, F'itE:in Cnty ~ ~r•k:, Doc ~.i~t~
• 80p~+1,l~RY I~I~'OAK7-TIQlt •
~ypiati ~psqu~ lfali ~aation .
$xternel Air FS]~.m 0•~•~ _
s 8T0 ~ ~4aryl is 8ladter
1" pharioli~ Foam Rigid Ineu]:atia -
n ~o.ss
ala~~ gyp ~d. ~ .
b* ~ Fi.barglama watt rnssulatian • 19 ~ ~ •
ll~~~ OYA Bd.
Interior Air F3,lm ~
0.58
• TOTAL R-value Z8. $6.
0.033 27.57 ~
0.036+
v=valua
+- Overall II-value. *d~tuttr+d for ~X frdmj.~Q 5 16" a. c.
~ypia~l Soo!•Naation •
Exterior Air Sflta 0 _ s.?
pypal~tt Hsmbrwne ~
' ~~
o
SjB p2 ad 8heathiag
i5R Fi~laea bait ~sula-tivr .
4 •
~ rs« ~~ ~' 0-56
o
6~
Inter~.or Air Film .
.
• Tpfru Rwalua ~ 49.51
0 z d
0 45.74 ~
0'. Oa 1 ~-
U=valus .
+~ overall II-value nd;~ust®d for ZX lramiaq @ 16~ n.a..
sypi+aal alssi.aq Onft
SpocSPications withAOVSrazzeta-valu~ot~a.as~r~~-3 ~~Arf~ .8gsai..~.ad
to ba auppl.lad
~ypiowl styxigx-t
spscifiec{ ~ ~ supplied with nutximum overall V-vales
Skvlia~#~ ~n~
4! 0.30 tW o~C value)
epaedrel 8gationa
~pipQ~, ~naul,eeted 8p4ndrel Sectivna~ ~sz'a apaesitiad tt~ hwv4 a oSnimum.
R--value oP Z0.
`+~~`r•~r' cil/.?4/5~ 1d:.1~~ t;ec ( ~c~,pci E~h:: 667 F'G 808
1v= Davis, F'itE in Cnty C1~~~rE,, 'roc ~,cici
EXHIBIT "G"
MAA/REHEARSAL PERFORMANCE HATS,
ENERGY CONSERVATION DESCRIPTION
The new Music Hall will incorporate many energy conserving
features. These features should combine to make it one of the most
efficient structures of its type. The energy strategies for the
building involve both design features and high technology
solutions.
A. Design
1. Approximately 80-85g of the building's volume will be
below grade, a significant and well-proven feature
that will lessen the heat load in the winter and
cooling in the summer.
2. For acoustic reasons the main hall will be essentially
a double wall structure. This will have the effect of
creating an unusually effective thermal as well as
acoustic barrier.
3. Incorporated will be more standard design features
such as air lock entries, reflective roof materials
and low emissivity glass.
B. Technological
1. We will be using a mechanical engineer as a consultant
who is well known for innovative and effective
solution to HVAC problems. They will include the
latest high efficiency equipment and techniques, such
as warm air recovery systems, ultra high efficiency
boiler systems, etc.
2. We will design lighting using the latest techniques in
high efficiency illumination where ever possible. It
is possible that more traditional lighting sources may
be required in the main hall to eliminate ballast
noise.
3. We will specify low water usage fixtures in the new
restrooms.
CONCLUSION
The new MAA Music Hall will be a state-of-the-art facility in
every respect. In addition, we will give high priority to
reducing overall operating costs through the incorporation of
every appropriate energy conservation technique.
May 10, 1991
I~,~.~~,~~~„~~ka„q,\~. '`34ti9.ii i~1/~4/9~ 16:13`._.~c ~4t~t7.i_~i~ BF:: 667 F'G 809
+ ilvia Davis, F'itE;in Cnty C :r E:, Doc ~.i?U
EXHIBIT "H"
March 21, 1991
Ms. Amy Margerum
Planning Director
Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Aspen Meadows Final SPA: Impact of Construction and
Development to Native Vegetation
Dear Ms. Margerum:
This letter is intended as clarification to Item 26, page
92, in the Aspen Meadows Final Submission Document, in so
far as this section addresses the impacts of construction
and development on native vegetation on the Aspen Meadows
property.
The landscape design is illustrated in the Conceptual
Planting Plans, L-9 through L-12. They indicate a minimal
area of manicured landscape immediately adjacent to, or
contained among the buildings. In public areas, new tree
planting will be limited to Aspen, Spruce, Pine and
Cottonwood trees, which presently exist on the property.
Existing trees that will be affected by new development will
be relocated on the property to the maximum extent possible.
These trees are identified on the Existing Conditions Plans,
L-1 through L-4.
The intent is to limit the impact on native vegetation by
intensely maintaining only the manicured areas and by
carefully monitoring construction activities to limit the
extent of disturbance.
Revegetation of all disturbed areas of native vegetation
will occur based on the following guidelines:
1. An appropriate mix for native grasses will be
determined by.a turf expert who will identify
• existing native grasses. Disturbed grass areas
will be re-seeded with this mix.
Si.lv].elrDcly/~4/9.^• 10: i3 •r
Uc•a~n 1~„~~L,h„1,.1~„~. i s ~ F'i tEri n
Cnty
Ms. Amy Margerum
March 21, 1991
Page Two
~4i~t~, cir~ BE' bb? PG 61IfJ
l erE: ~ Doc ~. r_~ci
2. Native plant materials will be obtained from a
nursery such as Native Plants, Inc. in Utah. This
nursery has a wide range of native plants
including Sagebrush, Willows and Gambel's Oak, all
of which are common on the property. The plants
are container grown, they come in many sizes 'and
are dependable growers. With proper watering,
Sage and Willows grow rapidly.
3. In conditions where slopes exceed 3:1, erosion
control materials will be applied, and where
necessary slopes will be stabilized through
terracing and planting techniques. In all cases,
sufficient topsoil will be applied.
4. The first year is the most critical in the
establishment of native shrubs and grasses. A
temporary irrigation system will be installed to
ensure that the ground is kept moist during the
first growing season.
By following these guidelines which have led to successful
revegetation with native materials in previous projects, we
feel that the Aspen Meadows property can be maintained as an
attractive manmade environment along with a healthy, natural
landscape.
Sincerely,
DESIGN WORKSHOP, INC.
:~~'Y ~ ~ ,
Don Ensign
Principal
DE/la
Page 1 of 1
Jason Lasser
From: elyseelliott@aol.com
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 10:25 AM
To: Jason Lasser
Subject: Paepcke Auditorium Expansion -PARKING
Dear Jason
Thank you for taking your time to explain to me this proposal.
I am very supportive of the Aspen Institute, however, I do not think that this proposal addresses the parking
situation.
Parking is a big problem in the West End neighborhood and is exacerbated by the programs from the Music Tent,
Paepcke Auditorium, Physics Institute and most recently, the expansion of the Christ Episcopal Church.
I strongly urge the Aspen Institute to add more parking spaces on site to accommodate this expansion of 63 seats
to the Paepcke Auditorium.
Although public transportation is available, I believe that most people do not use it and choose to drive to the
events. It is impossible to find a parking space in front of our house during the lectures, concerts and services.
I would appreciate it if you were to convey my concerns for parking to the Planning & Zoning Commission.
Sincerely,
Elyse Elliott
610 W. North St.
Get the MapQuest Toolbar. Directions, Traffic, Gas Prices & More!
9/5/2008
Page 1 of 1
Trisha Nelson
From: Lynn Rumbaugh
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 4:58 PM
To: Trisha Nelson
Subject: neighborhood request
Hi Trisha:
Steve Fallender, a West End resident, is requesting that some streets in the west end be blocked, signed, etc to
reduce speeding associated with Music Festival events. Can you (or whoever is appropriate) give him a call? His
# is 920-1816.
Thanks,
Lynn Rumbaugh
Transportation Programs Manager
City of Aspen
130 South Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
voice: 970-920-5038
fax: 970-544-9447
web: www.aspenpitkin.com
hGre.~tr~ u1 ~,,-r~,w~ e~-_
6/27/2008
Trisha Nelson
From: Tricia Aragon
Sent: Monday, August 18, 2008 9:56 AM
To: Trisha Nelson
Subject: Red Brick Traffic Calming Complaint
Trisha,
Page 1 of 1
I received a call from Ron Demain (407) 312 6683, he would like to see a some traffic calming measures around
Garmisch, Hallam ,and Francis. He believes people come around Fancis to fast and makes it difficult to cross
Garmisch.
Trish Aragon, P.E.
City Engineer
City of Aspen
130 S. Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Phone: (970) 429-2785
Fax: (970) 920-5081
~~~-p-
8/20/2008
Page 1 of 2
Trisha Nelson
From: Patty Raab
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2008 10:53 AM
To: Trisha Nelson
Subject: RE: Traffic Accidents
Trisha,
I searched the database and found the following:
(1) accident at the intersection of Fifth and Gillespie. The single car accident occurred in January of 2002
and involved a car vs a tree.
(1) accident at the intersection of Fourth and Smuggler. The accident occurred in June of 2005 and involved
2 dogs vs. a motorcycle.
Please note, this data represents the cases where an officer responded and filed a case report. There may be
rare situations where an officer responded and a report was not filed, however I do not have record of those. The
records date back to 1997. Let me know if you need anything further.
Patty Raab
Combined Records Department
Aspen Police/Pitkin County Sheriff
506 E. Main St. Ste 102
Aspen, CO 81611
Phone (970) 920-5320
Fax (970) 920-5751
From: Trisha Nelson
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 3:44 PM
To: Patty Raab
Subject: RE: Traffic Accidents
We are looking to see if:
There is a crash problem at each intersection, which is defined by 5 or more crashes in a 12 month period. Such
crashes include right- and left-turn collisions as well as right-angle collisions.
Probably atime-frame of the last 2-3 years?
Thanks!
Trisha L. Nelson, CFM, P.E.
Senior Project Manager ~ Engineering Dept.
City of Aspen ~ 130 South Galena Street
Aspen CO 81611 ~ F 970.920.5081
P 970.429.2784 ~ C 970.309.5604
From: Patty Raab
Sent: Tuesday, June 24, 2008 3:39 PM
To: Trisha Nelson
Subject: RE: Traffic Accidents
Trishia,
Tt~ Cm of Asr~
City of Aspen Community Development
Citizen Complaint Form
The Colorado Open Records Act stats that public records such as this complaint form may be open to
public inspection. Therefore, you ma not wish to provide any information you consider confidential.
In order to file a formal complaint, you will need provide a name, address and telephone number.
Name Information: ~~ ~~ ~`•'
Phone:
Address:
Email Address:
Caller Requests Contact After Follow Up?
Complaint Information:
Address:
Owner Name:
When did offense occur?
Nature of the Complaint:
Follow Up and Resolution:
Compla' t a~ n y
Name: ~ Date:
Time: Referred to:
Action Taken by:
Name: ~ tR ~ Date:
YES
!:•\Rminnnrinn F..nnc\(`nnctmntinn APl otnA Fnrn+c\!'iti~on !'mm~laint Fnrm rlnr
Additional Comments:
TO: Jason Lasser
FROM: Jim Curtis,
DATE: October 21, 2008
MEMORANDUM
Aspen Community Deve. Office
Owner Representative
The Aspen Institute
RE: Paepcke Auditorium Renovation & Additions
. ~ ~ M e+ a.: ..,:~
r
L
City Council Supplement ~ ~„~ < ~ ~ .~~s . ~ 4~~-
SPA Amendment Application, Dated Apri12, 2008 ~`"``""`"~~~" ~ `'`~'"~~`°`=,lT
The Aspen Institute is pleased and excited to propose a comprehensive renovation
of the Paepcke Auditorium building vs. continuing with the band-aid repairs which have
occurred in the past. The goal of the renovation is to preserve the character of the
building, while bringing the building into the 215 century regarding mechanical, audio-
visual and communication systems, energy conservation, ADA accessibility and
openness to the community. The Aspen Institute is excited about preserving and
upgrading the building for another 50 years of wonderful use for the Institute and the
community.
A. CURRENT SCHEMATIC DESIGN DRAWINGS
Enclosed are the most current Schematic Design drawings for the above. Positive
refinements have been made to the plans since the April 2, 2008 application to reflect
comments from 2 meetings with the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC), a site
inspection with the Parks Dept. and comments from the City of Aspen staff. On July 23,
the plans received unanimous "Conceptual" approval from the HPC and the applicant is
scheduled to return to HPC for ``Final" review of the plans on November 12t~'
The Institute does wish to address one question raised by Councilman Johnson at
the October 14 City Council lst Reading meeting. Approximately 64 linear feet of the
exterior wall is proposed to be demolished for the renovation and additions. The 64 linear
feet equal 8.2 % of the total 784 linear feet of the exterior walls of the building. Also, as
referenced in Amy Guthrie's May 28 HPC memo the 64 linear feet of exterior wall
proposed for demolition does equal approximately 35.9% (not 45%) of the 178 linear feet
of the exterior slotted walls of the building. However, as shown on the enclosed
drawings, FMG Architects have designed the new addition walls to be similar to the
demolished walls and sympathetic to the overall character of the building. The proposed
additions were actively discussed at the May 28 and July 23 HPC meetings and HPC
unanimously voted "Conceptual" approval of the plan at their July 23 meeting
LasserPlepckeAudRenMemo 1 Of 2
Also, at the two HPC meetings there was active discussion on why the two
additions to the building are being proposed. The additions are proposed for the
following:
To make the existing auditorium and stage ADA compliant, approximately
45 of the existing 346 seats would be lost. The Aspen Institute felt it would
be extremely difficult to fundraise the estimated $ I 0-$ I2 million dollars for
the renovation and lose 45 seats as part of the renovation. In fact, many
Institute Trustees suggested expanding the seating significantly more than
what is being proposed.
2. Equally important, the Aspen Institute is very excited about "opening-up"
the building on both sides and especially the Mayer Patio connection. This
connection is seen as an exciting link among the Paepcke Auditorium,
Mayer Patio and Koch Seminar Building. It is seen as a similar "opening-
up" of the building as the over head doors used at the Harris Concert Hall.
B. GEOTHERMAL POND
The Aspen Institute is proposing to heat and cool the renovated Paepcke Building
using a Ground Source Heat Pump (GSHP) Pond, i.e. a Geothermal Pond as shown on
the enclosed Site Plan. The recently constructed Doerr-Hosier Building at the Aspen
Institute is heated and cooled by a GSHP System which is projected to reduce the gas and
electric use of heating and cooling the building by approximately 40%. The Doerr-Hosier
Building has been awarded a LEED "Gold" Certification which is believed to be the lsc
Gold Certified building in the valley. It is hoped the renovated Paepcke Building would
achieve approximately the same 40% savings. Moreover, the pond has been sized to
hopefully tie-in the Koch Seminar Building at a future date. The proposed pond location
was field inspected and conceptually agreed to by Brian Flynn of the Parks Department
on September 10`x'. The Aspen Institute will continue to work with the Parks Department
to refine the design and construction management plan for the pond.
If the GSHP Pond proves technically infeasible or too costly, the Aspen Institute
will cool the building using a fluid cooler mechanical system and heat the building with
high efficiency boilers. The proposed location for the fluid cooler equipment is shown on
the enclosed Site Plan, and this location has also been conceptually agreed to by the Parks
Department based on submittal of a construction management plan to protect the cluster
of aspen and cottonwood trees hiding the equipment.
LasserPaepckeAudRenMemo 2 Of ~
O ~<'
~o
\~ p a
Q` J ~
~~
V~
o Z U
~ (~ J
o N (!) ~
o O ~ ~
Uw
H ~
~ U
W ~
2 Q
U=
~ U
Z
O~ ° a
~ / a c~
O~
Z J
~ ~
J
J
W
W
Q
LL
Ii
II
~~
~I
i
I
z
Q
J
~..
W
~_
Cn
Z
C~
~ w
p ~c~o
_zo
U ~o~
Q zm~
~ ~Y°
2 Qav.w
~ ~~Q
N O
N
o
o
Q o
~ ~
~ o
o
m o
o ~
a
W
=
W
W W
0 ~
z
~_
W
U
Q
W
2
U
oZU
J
N ~ J
~~U
UW
~ ~_
~ _
WU
2 ~
Ua
cn _
Z U
O I~-
Q
QO
O~
Z J
~ ~
J
J
W
W
Q
LL
W
I-
~' _Z ~
~ ~
J
Z m OJ
aY0
Q~w
wwa
~~a
_~
_~
_~
L__
i ~
i
i,
~~j
o ~ U
_~
o N (n J
~ O 0 ~
o Uw
~~_
~_
WV
2 ~
UQ
cn _
Z V
O~
Qp
O~
Z J
~ ~
J
J
W
W
Q
LL
Z
Q
J
O
O
J
LL
I-
Z
W
W
Q
m
Z
C~
~ w
p ~c~o
_zo
U_ ~o~
E- ?~O
Q zm0
~ ~wc~
= Qaw
~ ~~Q
~~
mz
~~
;9
3~
~~
~NZS
W U
p~~
~~o
°
~~~
U V
~~~
s~
,fl w
I I ...u
°~~~
i
~°
~
¢
_°a ~/
~~
,J
_ - \/
r
~~
- -,~ \J
-~
_ _ \/
__-_ ~- 3
U
~
°; - ~ l 0
G
8
A~
K ;;
Z
;
O~~
~ ~
~~
-
rrLi
Zgz
III_ 1
I
I.
~ o _~
Q
0
Q
m
F
h m
I Q
J
Q
Z
I o
U
I W
r~
~~ __
I
~~~
°Sa
~~~
•I I
3 /
i
°
z
_______ a IJ I
II
I ~ II
II
VIII
II
II
I o
s'~~
°a II
II
I ~ II
°III
II
z II
II
~ --I i --- -I 1 I
II
LJ
--ll
II
II
II
II
II
II
--~1
II
II
II
II
II
II
__ll
II
II
II ~~
II
I I ~~
--{; ~~~
II G
I I ~~~
II
II
II
~~ I I
III I
III I
„ LJ
II
I I
II
II
II
II
~I I ~ o
II
II
-~i
II
II
II {,
`I+r I II
II
II
¢ tl II
~~~ I I
~~~ I I
II
II
I I
II
~ ~ I I I
II
II
II
-'---- II
II
_____ ~al
tJ
II
III
II
II
II
II Z
II
II
II Q
II
Iii J
I I ll.l
II =
II
Z
------ ~ °
:~'ol,
ICI
3
z
0
o
~' °
~ ~.
i
II
II
II
11
II
II
II
II
II
H
~~
II
I la
IIW
II~
II
G
I! !~~ ~~~
I I ~
~7
II
II
II
II
II
JJ n
IIII
IIII
YJI I
I I ~y
II
I I b,
II
a$
I I~~
IT~IJ
II
II
__JI
Y1
II
II
II of
II
II 5
II °
--1J H
II
1
II
`° oZU
~(~J
p ~ J
w ~ 0
o UW
HH_
~_
wV
_~
UQ
cn _
ZU
O~
Q ~
O~
Z J
LL
J
J
W
W
Z
O
H
U
W
Z
~J
Z G
O
Q
w
J
w Q
O
J
W
Z
C~
~ W
p ~c~o
_zo
U ~o~
~- ??o
~ zmp
aWU
= a~w
~ ~aQ
W
Z
Y
O
O
m
m
O
J
2
c~
0
Z
U
w
~o
~~4
R
---Is,
ill
II
Il
II
Ill
---~,
II
II
II
II
III
II
II
II
ll
Il
Ill
II
-+,
~~ Z
~„ ~
----~~
II
II
II W
II
-----hJ w
w
---~,
II
II
II
II
II
---tea
I
II
II
II
II
II
_ _ i
.___ J
.___ ~
II
II
II
II
II
II
II I
I
II
II
II
II I
J11IF I
___1y1Fi
I
'_-- I
II
II
II
II
II
II I
____~~
I
II
II
II I
II
II
II
I
l
II
II
II
II
II
II I
I
II
II
II
II
II I
II
I
II
II
II I
II
II
II
I
II
~I I
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II I
II
I
II
11
II
~I I
II
II
II
---->~
i
Z
0
a
W
J
W
I---
w
oZU
J
p ~ J
~ ~ 0
o Uw
~H
~_
wU
_~
Ua
c~ _
Z U
0 1~-
Q C7
z~
~~
J
J
W
W
Q
LL
Z
O
H
U
W
Z
/~^,
~/ /
Z
O
I
J
W
Z
C~
~ w
0 ~ ~ 0
- Z D
U_ ~o~
~-- ? ~ O
~ zmp
~wU
= Qaw
~ H ~ Q
~~~
z
0
H
Q
Q
0
H
0
a
x
w
0
x
w
w
O
O
A
Aa
O
a
c7
H
w
0
x
w
O
a~
w
O
3
w
0
N
0
0
z
Q
J
J
L.L
~_
LL
V
_z
X
W
~ Z
O
~ (~
N ~
~ W
0 0
U_
H
Q
W
U
Z
O
Q
O
Z
W
z
W
Q
W
C~
J_
W
U
W
Q
J
J
H
U
W
~_
2
U
Q
2
U
J
J_
J
J
W
W
Q
O
0
J
w
Q
=;r
5~ LJ~
]~; ~~ ~~c
5~~ ~ ~~
1~,
,,
,,
,,
,,
11
11
II
II
II
II
II
11
11
/1
i~
~~~
~_ _
~
`` `\~C_ i
~
=J~
II
II
jl II
J I ~ ~ I I~
C, I VI1 I rC
II
Ij 11
II 11
II II
II Ij
I I
C; i ~ ~ I ~]
II
II ~ II
I~ II
I I I I I I I I
___ ~ II
II II II
J I j1 ~ I I L
C,I Ir__________________________1 IrC
I I I I 11 1 1
I ~ I I I I I I
1 1 I I I I 1 1
I I I I I I
II II II I
II
I I I I I I
Cil IL _______JI ILC
_________________________ I
I I 1 j I ~ I
I I I1 I I
I I I I 1 1 1 1
11 I I 1 1 I
1 1 I I 11 I
I I II
I I 11 11
~ ~ IL JI ~'
`i.~ . Ir--- --------- - -----,I i
II II ^J
II I
11
ii 11
`JI IL
I 1
I I
`~1 I~/
11 II
II j1
I
II 11
IL_________________________JI
L___________________________J
0
oZU
o N ~ J
~ O 0 ~
o U W
H H
~ _
WU
2 ~
UQ
c~ _
Z U
O~
Q~
O~
Z J
~ ~
J
J
W
W
Q
LL
Z
J
O
O
J
H
Z
W
~ w
W F-
Q ~zo
m ~~
?~O
Z izm0
aWU
~ QUZ
~ W
W I=-~Q
of
III
ill
II
ii
11
ill
II
III
ill
II
II
'll
II
II
II
11
III
II
III
II
II
II
II
Il
'Il
III
II
III
______ III
II
II
ill Z
--~~ O
II Q
11
Tj W
it J
II W
Fa ~
II W
Z
~_
W
J
W
•i •i
+ +
---------I-fl
---------til
I
II
II
_ F~___
Z I I 11 1
III
II
II
4J
ll
II
II
II
II
II
II rl
rr--- 11
zJ 'Il
II
II
II
II
III
II
II
II
II
II
III
Li
______fl
II
III
ti II
II
by I I
ti II
ti III
II
----y I I
ti II
_ II
III
II
II
II
II
----- II
III
-___ ~ll
- l!
I
II
III
II
II
II
II Z
II Q
III
II W
II J
II W
II
II
II ~
II
II O
-----iii Z
I
oZU
J
0o N ~ J
~ O ~ ~
UU
- W
H H
~ _
WU
_ ~
UQ
cn _
ZU
O~
QO
O~
Z J
~ ~
J
J
W
W
I
--- l
II I
II
II
II
II
---i~
II
II
II
II
II I
~~
I
--- l
fl
II I
II
II
II
II
II
~I I
II
II
II
II
II I
I- I
-__ii l
- ~~~111 I
__-~l
II
II
II
II
II I
I
- ry
II
II
I
it I
II
II
II
II
II I
II I
II
II
II
II I
II
I
II
II
II I
II
II
I
II
II I
II
II
II
I
II
~I I
II
II
II
II
II I
II
II
I
II
II I
II
II
II
I
II
~I I
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
___ I I
Z
Q
W 7
J L
W O
Q
W
1Q LW
r
_W.I f=Z~
w ~o~
U ?~O
zmp
Z WaYU
~_ Q~w
X
W ~~Q
VlllG
MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Ireland and Aspen City Council
FROM: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~ '
RE: Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan COWOP Final Review
Second Reading of Ordinance No. 34 Series 2008 -Public hearing
DATE: November 10, 2008
SUMMARY:
City Council initiated the Lift One
Neighborhood Master Plan COWOP review
through the adoption of Resolutions No. 13
and 80, Series of 2008. The 27-member
Master Plan Task Force met every Thursday
from April lOt" through October 2°d and made
their final recommendation by a 19 to 1 vote
(with one abstention). The Plan has been
reviewed by the Historic Preservation
Commission and the Planning and Zoning
Commission. Both boards supported the
project by unanimous votes.
The proposed ordinance implements the
recommendation of the Task Force and
provides final approvals for the proposed
redevelopment.
Tonight's meeting will provide a general
overview of the entire master plan. Staff will
start with the current conditions of the area,
the historic importance of this area to the
success of Aspen as a ski area, and the
impetus for a master plan.
The purpose of a COWOP review, the Current view down South Aspen Street
process the group went through, the goals and
challenges the group experienced, and the
significant milestones that helped shape the final plan will be presented. The pursuit of
an aerial lift through the site and the frustrations the group experienced in that discussion
as well as the idea of re-using the original lift 1 corridor will be discussed. A few of the
Current view up South Aspen Street
task force members will participate in this portion of the presentation. The property
owners will address their lodging and commercial programs as well as common facilities.
The master plan accomplishes a rebirth of this
side of the mountain. This is the original base
of Aspen Mountain that currently
accommodates an average of 3% of the
Mountain's skier traffic.
The plan is organized around open space and
gathering places and allows for a balance of
breathing room and function. The Master Plan
incorporates a new high-speed quad lift
replacing the current lift 1 A, a new surface lift
along the historic lift one corridor, pedestrian
pathways, a ski museum, public parking, all
new street and drainage infrastructure, two new
lodging facilities with associated commercial
space, affordable housing both on-site and off-
site, and rehabilitation and re-use of historic
resources all within an existing neighborhood
context.
A "decision packet" is attached to this memo
that will be augmented as the project review
moves forward. The purpose of the decision
packet is to capture the proposal and
representations of the master plan. There will
also be Power Point presentations at each
meeting along with a physical copy of each
presentation.
x.
a
~-
J
I
r_ ~~
t,`
°~ ~~`,~ .,.A,..
REVIEW SCHEDULE:
Tonight -November 10th -Second Reading dr Public Hearing. This will be an
overview presentation of the Master Plan, the background, the COWOP process, project
goals, the final site plan, lodging program, and a summary of the Task Force
recommendation.
November 24th -Continued Second Reading & Public Hearing. This will be a more
detailed presentation of the project including architecture, massing, energy efficiency
measures, and a review of the proposed ordinance.
December Ist -Continued Second Reading & Public Hearing. This will be a chance for
the project team to respond to questions from the first two public hearings. The COWOP
process included several experts on mountain planning, project financing, energy
2
Proposed Master Plan
efficiency, etc., and those experts will be on-hand for this meeting. Amore detailed
review of the proposed ordinance is also expected.
December 8t~' -Continued Second Reading & Public Hearing. This is expected to be
the final meeting where the project team will respond to any remaining questions and a
final review of the proposed ordinance occurs.
APPLICANTS:
1. Aspen Land Fund II, LLC (Centurion Partners). Represented by John Sarpa.
2. Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge -Aspen, LLC. Represented by Robert Daniel.
3. Aspen Skiing Company. Represented by David Bellack
4. The City of Aspen.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends City Council receive the presentation, conduct a public hearing,
and continue the review of Ordinance No. 34 to November 24tH.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to continue the public hearing for Ordinance No. 34, Series of 2008, The Lift
One Neighborhood Master Plan, to November 24, 2008."
ATTACHMENTS:
Proposed Ordinance 34, Series of 2008
A - Decision Packet, November 10th meeting
B - Project Binder attached by this reference. The project binder contains the entire
history of the COWOP process and is located in the Community Development
Department. Please contact City staff to review this document
travisc cr,ci.aspen.co.us or 429.2751.
C - Project website, http://www.aspenpitkin.com/depts/41/liftoneMP.cfm, attached by
this reference. A copy of the website on the day of each hearing will be maintained
in the project file.
D - November 10th Power Point Presentation attached by this reference. A copy of the
presentation will be maintained in the project file.
Liit ne Neighborhood
Master Plan
THE CITY OF ASPEN
City Council Decision Packet
November 10, 2008
DECISION PACKET
Lilt ne Neighborhood
Master Plan
THE CITY OF ASPEN
DECISION PACKET CONTENTS
• Opening letter from Chris Bendon, Chairman
• Resolution 13
• Resolution 80
• Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan -Site Plan
• Task Force Goals
• Architectural Character -Lodge at Aspen Mountain
• Heights -Lodge at Aspen Mountain & Lift One Lodge
• Architectural Character -Lift One Lodge
• Uses
• Zoning
• Maintenance of Neighborhood
• Security
• Vacations and Dedications
• Roads and Sidewalks
• Construction Management Planning
• Future Amendment Process
• Affordable Housing
• Historic and Non-Historic Assets
• Willoughby Park -Site Plan
• Community Benefits
• Financial Representations Related to Community Benefits
DECISION PACKET
Litt ne Neighborhood
Master Plan
TxE Gn of Asa~ty
Dear Aspen City Council Members and Mayor,
DECISION PACKET
November 3, 2008
The purpose of this Decision Packet is to quantify the representations that will be made during the
Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan application. This packet will include supplemental materials
and representations made by the applicant during the process. This packet is comprised of, but not
limited to, all of the information outlined in the Table of Contents. At each meeting new materials
will be added and a final, updated Decision Packet will be adopted in conjunction with the City
Council's adoption of ordinance 34.
Thank you for creating the opportunity to Master Plan the Lift One Neighborhood. The Ciry
Council ordered for a comprehensive master plan for the base of Lift One that was developed based
on community goals. I believe that the COWOP Task Force has delivered to you a plan that is
unique to Aspen and this particular neighborhood, balances resort and community needs, and is
responsive Council policies. The Ciry Planning and Zoning Commission and Historic Preservation
Commission have recommended approval of the plan,
The citizens involved in this effort have taken the task that you assigned them very seriously,
devoting more than 100 hours each to the task. They have my respect and appreciation. I would also
like to thank the Aspen Skiing Company, Centurion Partners, and Roaring Fork Lodging for
entering into an alternative planning process and following it through to the end. They are taking
the economic risk associated with a major development at the base of Aspen Mountain and were
flexible in working to address community desires.
I look forward to presenting the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan at your November 10``'
meeting.
Cheers,
Chris Bendon
Chairman
Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan
RESOLUTION N0. 13
(SERIES OF 2008)
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL DETERMINING THE "LIFT
ONE NEIGHBORHOOD MASTER PLAN" ELIGIBLE AS A PROJECT
REASONABLY NECESSARY FOR THE CONVENIENCE AND WELFARE OF
THE PUBLIC {COWOP) ON PROPERTY LOCATED ON BOTH SIDES OF
SOUTH ASPEN STREET SOUTH OF DEAN STREET OWNED BY THE CITY
OF ASPEN, THE ASPEN SKIING COMPANY, ASPEN LAND FUND II {AKA
CENTURION PARTNERS), AND ROARING FORK MOUNTAIN LODGE
ASPEN ALL WITHIN THE CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO.
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received a completed
application from Aspen Land Fund II, also known as Centurion Partners, LLC; Roaring
Fork Mountain Lodge -Aspen; the Aspen Skiing Company; and, the Aspen City
Manager, for a determination of eligibility for a project, known as the Lift One
Neighborhood Master Plan, reasonably necessary for the convenience and welfare of the
public (COWOP) for a redevelopment of lands, owned by the above mentioned parties,
for the purpose of providing or improving the provision of lift-served skiing access to
Aspen Mountain, pedestrian, vehiculaz and emergency vehicle access to properties along
South Aspen Street, non-traditional energy sources such as ground source energy system,
recreational facilities, a museum focused on the evolution of skiing in Aspen, public
parking, and commercial, lodging,, free-market residential, and affordable residential land
uses; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen manages public right-of--way in the planning area
including Hill Street, Summit Street, Gilbert Street, the alley within Block 10 of the
Eames Addition, South Aspen Street, Juan Street, and Dean Street and owns certain
public land known locally as Willoughby Park and Lift One Park; and,
WHEREAS, the legal descriptions of the lands subject to this review are attached
as Exhibit ~A and are .generally described as lands on bath sides of South Aspen Street
south of Dean Street, excluding the Shadow Mountain Townhomes; and,
WHEREAS, changing the disposition of certain city-owned lands within the
project area may require a public vote; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.500.050 of the Land Use Code, the City
Council may make a determination whether a proposed development is reasonably
necessary for the convenience and welfare of the public by applying the standazds of
Section 26.500.040 during a duly noticed public hearing after taking and considering
comments from the general public, and a recommendation from ~ the Community
Development Director; and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director determined that the Lift One
Aspen City Council Resolution No. 13, Series of 200$
COWOP Eligibility for Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan -Page 1
Neighborhood Master Plan may be eligible for consideration as a project reasonably
necessary for the convenience or welfare of the public, and notified in writing the `.
Planning and Zoning Commission, the Historic Preservation Commission, and the
Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority the date of the public hearing before the City
Council at •which time a determination is to be made concerning eligibility of the
proposed development; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the Lift One
Neighborhood Master .Plan eligibility proposal under the applicable provisions of the
Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of
the Community Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at
a public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or
exceeds the Standards for Determination, Section 2b.500.040, for the following reasons:
1. The Master Plan could provide enhanced access to lift-served skiing on Aspen
Mountain, lodging facilities that -meet the needs of the of the community,
affordable housing units that serve the needs of the community, improved
vehicular, pedestrian and emergency vehicle access, the development of public
parking, the preservation of important local and national historic resources, the
development of non-traditional energy sources such as ground source energy
system, recreational facilities, a museum focused on the evolution of skiing in
Aspen, and a unif ed approach to managing construction impacts and ongoing
maintenance and operations of the area's infrastructure. \
2. Preserving and enhancing short-term lodging facilities, providing adequate
emergency services and access, the provision of effective access to lift-served
skiing, housing the workforce, and energy efficiency are stated community goals
that could be addressed through master planning of this area. •
3. Portions of the subject area are owned by the City of Aspen and a Master Plan
could permit an advantageous disposition of those properties;
4. Portions of the subject area are managed by the City of Aspen as rights-of--way
and a Master Plan- could permit an advantageous disposition of those properties;
5. The bifurcated ownership of the subject area and independent projects in various
stages of entitlement may result in an ad-hoc development pattern while a master
planning process using an interactive and multidisciplinary approach with a
diverse COWOP task team, including neighbors of the project and persons with
special interest in the property and its development will lend itself to the type of
open dialogue needed to determine a cohesive future vision for the neighborhood;
and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary
for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare.
C
Aspen City Council Resolution No. 13, Series of 2008
COWOP Eligibility for Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan -Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE iT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT:
Section 1- Eligibility
Pursuant to Section 26.500.040 of the Land Use Code, the Lift One Neighborhood Master
Plan, as described herein, is determined to be eligible development necessary for the
Convenience and Welfare of the Public.
Section 2 -Procedure and Standards
pursuant to Section 26.SOO.OSO(B)(b), the procedure and standards for review of the
project shall be:
Process:
1. Task Force Team convenes and establishes its role, meeting schedule, meeting
procedural protocol and meeting rules for the conduct of business of the Lift One
Neighborhood Master Plan COWOP Task Force Team.
2. Task Force Team Chair and Staff shall be the City's Director of Community
Development who may designate a meeting facilitator or other personnel or
contractors as needed.
3. Property owners shall represent themselves or designate a representative.
4. Task Force Team shall develop the Master Plan (quantitative elements and broad
urban design elements, including the contextual relationship of the project to
surrounding properties).
S. Community Development and Interdepartmental Technical Staff Review.
6. Task Force Team and Staff provide recommendations to City Council.
7. Formal final approval decision shall be the responsibility of City Council and shall
require adoption of an Ordinance. City Council may, by resolution, determine the
project no longer qualifies for the COWOP process, at any time, and discontinue the
COWOP Task Force Team.
Standards:
1. Section 26.44S.OS0, Review Standards: Planned Unit Development.
2. Section 26.310, Amendments to the Land Use Code and Official Zane District Map.
3. Section 26.41 S, Development Involving Historic Resources. Any development
affecting a historic resource shall be required to comply with this section, beyond` any
decision reached in the COWOP review.
4. Section 26.470, Growth Management, to the extent determined necessary during
project review. It is expected that commercial, lodging, affordable housing, and free-
market housing allotments will not require an additional review beyond the COWOP
review.
5. Section 26.480, Subdivision, if determined to be necessary during project
development and review.
6. Technical design standards of utility providers shall be considered and the COWOP
decision shall not supersede any non-city utility provider.
7. The Aspen Area Community Plan shall be considered a policy guide and the final
recommendation shall include an analysis of conformance with this adopted plan.
Aspen City Council Resolution No. 13, Series of 2008
COWOP Eligibility for Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan -Page 3
Section 3 - COWOP Task Force Team Members
Pursuant to Section 26.500.050(B)(c), the Task Force Team to review the development
proposal shall include representatives from the following:
• Task Force Team Chair -Chris Bendon, Community Development Director (non-
voting)
• Planning Staff - as assigned by the Community Development Director (non-
voting)
• City Council Members {2) - to be determined
• Flapping and Zoning Commission member - to be determined
• Historic Preservation Commission member - to be determined
• Centurion Partners, LLC -John Sazpa
• Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge -Aspen, LLC -Bob Daniel
• Aspen Skiing Company -Dave Bellack
• Five to seven neighbors to include atleast:
o One neighbor to the South -- to be determined
o One neighbor to the North - to be determined
o One neighbor to the West - to be determined
o Two neighbors to the East - to be determined
• Aspen Historic Society -Georgia Hansen
• Aspen Valley Ski Club -Jeff Kai
• Five to seven Citizens at-large - to be determined
It is acknowledged through this resolution that it will be beneficial for many interested
parties beyond those identified in the above noted list to be involved in the COWOP
process and that the opportunity for involvement is created through this process.
Additional interested parties will be able to attend all meeting of the COWOP Task Force
Team and may be provided with email notice of meeting schedules at their request. All
meetings of the Task Farce Team will be conducted in public hearings.
It is also acknowledged through this resolution that numerous City Departments, other
governmental or district agencies and eansultants will provide technical assistance and
analysis as determined to be necessary and/or as required.
Section 4 -Proposed Timeframe
Pursuant to Section 26.500.050(B)(d), the proposed timeframe for the procedures to be
used to review the pxoposed development are anticipated to be completed within
approximately eight (8) months from the date of this resolution. The following schedule
is an estimated timeline and is subject to change:
Aspen City Council Resolution No. 13, Series of 2008
COWOP Eligibility for Lift One Neighborhood Master flan -Page 4
March Finalize COWOP Task Force Membership
April -May Task Force Meetings. Introductions, site visit, process overview, project
overview, goals and objectives. Check-ins as needed with HPC and P&Z.
Check-in or hearing with Council to review goals.
May -June Task Force Meetings. Identification of physical, regulatory and economic
constraints with input from technical advisors an nature of constraints. A
third party briefing of financial assumptions and assertions will be needed.
Identification o d Check-instas needed witheHPC and P&Z.nCheck-in or
must be observe
hearing with Council to review constraints.
June -Aug. Multiple Task Force Meetings to consider balance of goals and
constraints, project program, and potential site plans (uses, access,
intensities, and massing}. Design charrettes (longer sessions) may be
used. Check-ins as needed with HPC and P&Z. A third party analysis of
financial assumptibalance of s oalsnand constraintsdand preferred site plan
Counexl to review g
and program.
Aug. -Sept. Multiple Task Force Meetings ~to consider conceptual architecture and
more-refined site planning issues. Review proposed development
agreement and construction management plan. Check-ins as needed with
HPC, P&Z, and City Council.
September Finalize Task Force recommendation.
Sept. -Oct. Public Hearings for Master Plan adoption with HPC, P&Z, and City
Council.
Section 5 Comuonents of the Master Plan and Adoption
At a minimum, the Master Plan adopted pursuant to this process shall include:
1. A description and depiction of allowable development on each property, including
allowable height, area, bulk, density, uses, operating characteristics, and unit
ownership structure.
2. A description and depiction o~~ sh ~~ 1 describet the spec fic'ty upon~whi h
fenestration. The Master P
conceptual architecture may be amended and the process of amendment.
3. A description and depiction of the rights-of way to be vacated, upgraded, or
otherwise affected including encroachments therein.
Aspen City Council Resolution No. 13, Series of 2008
COWOP Biigibility far Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan -Page 5
4. A description of the amount and- method(s) of affordable housing and other
development impact mitigation requirements that must be provided.
5. A description and allocation of responsibility for the development. and
maintenance of neighborhood and shared infrastructure and community benefits
(e.g., the Town Lift and new ski terrain, road improvements, and public parking).
6. A description of the timing, phasing, and management of construction activity.
As necessary, the construction management plan shall contemplate the individual
property owners proceeding separately, provided that such development is
consistent with the Master Plan and that the shared obligations and construction
management requirements are satisfied.
The Community Development Director shall present the findings and recommendations
of the Task Force to City Council during a public hearing and shall provide an analysis
for the proposal and the standards of review identified herein along with a proposed
Ordinances} that implements and entitles the Master Plan. The proposed Ordinances}
shall provide final approval of the necessary land use reviews and shall cause issuance of
a Development Order(s), subject to any detailed design, engineering, documentation and
platting recordation requirements applicable to each development site and any final
reviews that may be required in connection therewith, with the understanding that all
such final reviews shall be ministerial in nature excepting any required final review by
the Historic Preservation Commission. The Ordinance adopting the Master Plan shall
describe and implement the necessary reductions in Growth Management Allocations to
accommodate the build-out of the Master Plan. ~.
Section 6 -City's Timely Processins and Review
The City Council shall allocate meeting times and resources of the City and necessary
and reasonable for the timely processing, review, and guidance of the master planning
COWOP process.
Section 7 -Historic Preservation Commission Review
This Resolution does not exempt the subject properties from the procedures and
requirements of Section 26.415, Development Involving Historic Resources. Both
Conceptual and Final Review approval shall be necessary for properties designated
Historic Landmarks regardless of the direction or disposition of the Mater Plan. Roaring
Fork Mountain Lodge -Aspen, LLC, shall process such applications to the Historic
Preservation Commission as may be required for its project concurrent with the Master
Planning COWOP Process.
Section 8 - Cost Sharing
There shall be established a cost sharing agreement that shall identify and proportionately
allocate joint costs of the master planning process to the parties involved. Costs
associated with individual employees andlor consultants of the parties shall be the
responsibility of the particular party. The City shall not assess land use review fees for ~.
Aspen City Council Resolution No. 13, Series of 2008
COWOP Eligibility for Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan -Page 6
this master planning process.
Section 9 -Economic Analysis
There shall be retained a financial consultant with expertise in the economic viability of
ski area or resort real estate development. The consultant shall be independent and shall
be subject to approval of both the City Council and land owners. The City of Aspen,
Centurion Partners, Aspen Skiing Company and Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge -Aspen,
LLC, shall provide information relating to the financial viability of the Master Plan and
their respective components to the satisfaction of the economic consultant.
Such information shall be provided to the independent financial advisor only, in strict
confidence, and shall not be shared with other participants, the Task Farce, the public, the
City Council, staff of the City or anyone else without the express written consent of tlae
party providing such information. The financial advisor shall be entitled to provide
participants and the City .Council with his/her conclusions and opinions regarding
financial viability based upon the information provided as Long as the information itself
remains confidential.
Section 10 -Master Planning Process may be Terminated
The master planning COWOP process may be terminated by the City Council, Centurion
Partners, the Aspen Skiing Company, or the Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge -Aspen,
LLC. Termination shall be preceded by a meeting between the City Manager, the
Community Development Director, and representatives of the three private property
owners. Potential reasons to terminate the planning process include failure to keep to a
reasonable schedule, an inability to agree on physical, regulatory or economic constraints,
or a fundamental disagreement regarding the direction of the plan. The process may be
terminated for any reason, including no reason. .
Section 11- Townhomes Proiect on hold
City Council Ordinance No. 32, Series of 2003, granted approval for a development on
the Centurion properties known as the "townhomes project" on land owned by Centurion
Partners, LLC, City Council Resolution No. 9, Series of 2008, extended the statutory
- vested rights for the townhomes project through July 28, 2409. If Centurion requests, the
Chief Building Official shall discontinue review of the building permit and consider the
permit dormant with respect to Section 105.3.2., Time limitation of application, of the
2003 International Building Code. Centurion shall have the right to reactivate the
building permit application at any time prior to July 28, 2009.
The townhome approvals embodied in Ordinance No. 32, Series of 2003, and all building
permits and applications and vested rights associated therewith, shall be exempt from
Section 26.304.030(F) ("No Multiple Applications") of the Land Use Code, and shall not
be otherwise adversely affected or impaired in any way by the involvement of the
Centurion Partners property in this master planning COWOP process. Finally, Centurion
Aspen Csty Council Resolution No. i 3, Series of 2008
COWOP Eligibility for Lift One Neighborhood Master Pian -Page 7
Partners' participation in the COWOP Process shall be exempt from Section ~~
26.304.060(F) (Resubmittal of a Previously Denied Application) of the Land Use Code.
Section 12 -Lift One Lodge Application on hold
The proceedings for the pending Application for Lift One Lodge, which includes land
owned by the Aspen Skiing Company, the City of Aspen, and Roaring Fork Mountain
Lodge -- Aspen, LLC shall be suspended far all intents and purposes during the time of
the master planning COWOP process. For the purposes Section 26.304.070(F} of the
Land Use Code, the application shall continue to be considered "active" and any and all
deadlines or expiration dates associated with the Lift One Lodge Application will be
tolled until processing is resumed. All previously obtained consents and all previously
obtained approvals or recommendations of approval, in particular the approvals of the
Planning and Zoning Commission and Historic Preservation Commission, shall remain in
effect. Upon reactivation ~of the Lift One Lodge Application, the application will
continue to be processed and considered pursuant to the City's Land Use Regulations in
place on the date that the .Application to the Historic Preservation Commission was
deemed complete in March of 2006.
Section 13 -Holland House Redevelopment Credits
The time period for utilization of replacement credits for employees, lodging, and any
other pertinent matter related to the Holland House Lodge, following its demolition, /
ursuant to the pending application for a demolition. permit, is hereby extended to the \..
P
later of:
1. 24 months after final approval, denial or withdrawal of the current application for
Lift One Lodge, or
2. 24 months after final approval, denial or withdrawal of a new application for all
or some of the properties described in the current Lift One Lodge application; or,
3. 24 months after approval of a final application for development of the Lift One
Lodge site pursuant to the Master Planning COWOP Process, whichever is later.
Section 14 -Historic Designations
The City shall not initiate a process to designate the Skiers Chalet Lodge or any other
structure located within the Master Planning Area as historic resources as long as the
Master Planning COWOP Process is active. The Master Planning process may
recommend designation of historic resources.
Section 15 Temporarv Affordable Housing Use of Existing Buildin
The Skiers Chalet Lodge and Skiers Chalet Steakhouse may be utilized as housing for
working residents during the pendency of the Master Planning COWOP Process. A
temporary deed restriction or agreement regazding the affordability of the units and
compliance with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be approved by the
City Attorney prior to such buildings being occupied as affordable housing. A Building
Permit and improvements may be necessary prior to occupancy. The temporary use as
Aspen City Council Resolution No. 13, Series of 2008
COWOP Eligibility for Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan -Page 8
affordable housing shall not effect achange-in-use and the properties shall not be subject
to the City's Housing Replacement Program. In addition, lodging and employee credits
associated with the Skier Chalet Lodge will remain in effect while it is used for
affordable housing.
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 25th day of February, 2008.
Attest:
,rf ~.~
'~~~ '~~
athryn S. Kq~h; Gity Clerk
Michael . Ir and, Mayot.
Approved as to form:
_ ~ ~
Jo orce ter, City Attorney
Exhibit A -Legal descriptions of land subject to Master Planning Review.
Aspen City Council Resolution Na. 13, Series of 2008
COWOP Eligibility for Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan -Page 9
Exhibit A to City Council Resolution
No. 13, Series of 2008.
A. Property of Aspen Land Fund II, LLC
PARCEL 1:
Block 6,
EAMES ADDITION 70 THE CITY AND TOWNSiTE OF ASPEN.
more pariicularty described as foibws:
Beginning at a point wtttch is fhe intersection of the Easterly right of way Une of Garmisch Street and the Southerly right of
way line of Dean Avenue, from whence the. Northeast Comer of Section 13, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th
P.M„ bears N 53'20'28" East 614.56 feet;
thence along the Southerly right of way tine of Dean Avenue S 75'09'11" E 330 feet to the Westerly right of way I'tne of
Aspen Street;
thence along said right of way line of Aspen Street S 14°50'49" W 130 feel to the Northerly right of way sine of Juan Street;
thence atortg said right of way Gne of Juan Street N 75'09'11" W 330 feet to the Eastery right of way Une of GarmisGt
Street;
thence along said right of way Une of Garmisch Str®et N 14°50'49" E 130 feet to the paint of begtnning.
EXCEPTING therefrom: The por4on described in Book 232 at Page 362.
The above parcel is also described as follows:
Beginning at a post whtch is the intersection of the Easterly right•of-way line of Garmisch Street and the Southerly
right of-way line of Dean Avenue, from where the. Northeast comer of Section 13, Township 10 South, Range 85 West of
the Sltdh Principal Meridian bears N 53°20'28" E 814.56 feet, more or less;
thence along the Southerly right-of-way line of Oean Avenue S 75°49'11" E 330 fee, more or less, to the Westerly
right-of-way line of Aspen Street;
thence along said right-of-way Une of Aspen Street S 14°50'49" W 134 teat, more or tens to the Northerly right-of-way Cute
of Juan Street;
thence along said right-ofway line of Juan Street N 75°09'11" W 296.20 feet, to the Southeasterly comer of that parcel of
land described in Book 232 at Page 3fi2;
thence N 44°21'11" W alang fhe Northeasterly line o! said parcel, a distance of 38.73 feet to the Northeasterly right of way
line of Garmisch Street;
thence aiong said right-ot way Une of Garrnisch Street N t4°50'49" E 147.90 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning.
SAID PARCEL OF LAND ALSO BEING DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
Block 6.
EAMES ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,
more particularly described as toUows:
Beginning at a point which is the intersection of the Easterly right of way Une of Garmisch Street and the Soutterly right of
way tine of Dean Avenue, from whence the Northeast Comer of Section 13, Totnrttship 14 Sotttft, Range 85 West of the 6th
Principal Meridian., beam N 53'20'28" East 814.56 feet more or less;
thence along the Southerly right of way tine of Dean Avenue S 75'09'11" E 334 feet, more or less to the Westerly right of
way tine of Aspen Street,
thence along said right of way tine of Aspen Street S 14°50'49" W 130 feet, more or less to the Not~terly tight of way line
of Juan Street;
thence along said right o! way Une of Juan SUee! N 75°09't t" W 330 feet, more or less to the Easterty right of way line of
Garmtsch Street;
thence along said right of way Une of Gamzisch Street N 14`50'49" E 130 feet, more or less to the point of beginning.
EXCEPTING therefrom: That parcel of tend described in book 232 at Page 362 in the records of the Clerk and Recorder
of Pitkin County, Colorado.
Said Parcet 1 is also described as follows:
Beginning at a point which is the intersection of the Easteriy right-of-way Gne of Qarmisch Stl'@ef af'td fhe SD1Jl11C11~
r~ht-of-way tine of Oean Avenue, from whence the Northeast comer of Section 13, Township 30 South, Range 85 West of
the Sixth Principal Meridian bests N 53°20'28" E 814.56 feet, more or less;
thence along the Southerly right-of-way line of Dean Avenue S 75°09'11" E 330 fee, more or less, to the Westerly
right-ot-way Eine of Aspen Street;
thence along said right-ol-way line of Aspen Street 5 14°50'49" W 130 feet, more ar less to the Nartfierly right-of~xay line
of Juan Street:
thence along, said right-0f~way tine of loan Street N 75°09'11" W 298.2D feet, to the Southeasterly corner of that parcel of
land described in Book 232 at Page 362;
thence N 40'21'11• W along the Northeasterly fine of Bald parcel, a distsnce of 36.73 feel to the Northeasterly right-of-way
Iine of Gamifsch Street;
thence along said rightaf-way line of Garmisch Street N 14'50'49" E 107.90 feel, nwre or less, !o the point of beginning.
PARCct 2;
That portion of the Northeast one-quarter of the Northeast one-quarter (Lot 1y of Seclitxt 13, Township 10 South, Range
85 West of the 6th P,M„ desulbed es fopovrs:
Beginning at the Northeast Comer of Lot 13, Block 11, Eames Addition;
thence N 75°09'11° W 181.25 feet;
!hence S 14°50'49" W 78.00 feet;
thence S 03'55'43" W 164.99 teat;
thence S 75°09'11" E 150.00 feet;
thence N 14°50'49" E 240.00 feet to the point of beginning.
ALSO KNOWN A5
Lots 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20,
Block 11,
£AtWES ADD1710N TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,
and a tract of land being part of Lot 1 of Section 13, Township 10 South, Range BS West of the 6th P.M., described as
follows:
Beginning at the Northwesterly corner of Lot 13, Block 1 t, Eames Addition;
thence S 14°50'49" W 240.00 feet along the Westerly Iine of said 131ock 11 to the Southwesterly corner of Lot 2D, Stock 11,
Eames Addhion;
thence N 03°55'43" E 164.99 feet;
thence N 14'50'49" E 78.00 feat;
thence S 75°D9'11" E 31.25 feel to the point of beginning.
AND
Lots 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12,
Block 11,
£AMES ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, more fuNy described as follows:
Beginning at the Northwesterly corner of said Loi 7;
thence S 75"09'11" E t6o.00 feet along the Natttterty boundary Gne of said Block 71;
ttrence S 14°50'49" W 100.00 feet along the Easterly boundary Iine.ot said Block 11;
thence N 75°09'1 t" W 180.00 feet along the Southerly boundary Sine of said Lots 7-12 to the Southwesterly comer of said
Lo17;
thence N 1a° 50'49" E 100.00 Eeet along the Westerly boundary Iine of said Lot 7 to the point of beginning.
SAID PARCEL OF LAND ALSO BEING DESCRit3ED AS FOLLOWS:
Beginning at the Southwest comer of sold Lat 7, a rebar and cap PLS # 29030, from which a rebar and cap PLS # 25a7
bears N 55° E a distance o! 0.7 feet;
thence N 14°50'49" E abng the westerly line of said Lat 7, a distance of 100.00 feat to the Nortfiwest comer of said Lot 7,
also being at the Southerly right-of~way of Juan Street in the Cily of Aspen, a rebar and cap PLS # 2547;
thence S 75°09'11" E along the Northerly line of said Block 11, also being the Southerly right-of-way fine of said Juan
Street a distance of 160.00 feet to the Northeast corner of said Block 11, a rebar and tip PLS #29030;
thence S 14'50'49" W along the Easterly line of said Stock 11, also being the Westerly right-of--way of Aspen Street in the
Gity of Aspen a distance of 100.00 feet to the Southeast comer of said Lot 12, a rebar and cap PLS # 29030;
thence N 75°09' f t" W along the Southery fine of said Lots 7,8,9, 10,11 and 12 a distance of 180.00 leer to ~11E point of
beginning.
AND
The vacated alley situated in Stock 11, EAMES ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN.
B. Property of Aspen Skiing Company {
1. Land Under Contact with Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge -Aspen, LLC which is
included in the Lift One Lodge Application:
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14,
Block 10, and Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 12,
FAMES ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,
TOGETHER WITH an easement and right of way for the construction,
erection, operation and maintenance of a cable ski chair lift, as created, defined
and established by Easement Agreement between the Board of County
Commissioners of the County of Pitkin and Friedl Pfeifer recorded October 24,
1962, in Book 199 at Page 489, and,
TOGETHER WITH an easement and right of way for skiing purposes, as
created, defined and established by Easement Agreement by and between the
City of Aspen and Aspen Skiing Corporation recorded October 17, 1969, in
Book 244 at Page 31.
2. Land Area to the South of the Lift One Lodge Site:
That property owned by the Aspen Skiing Company extending south from
Block 12, Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, a distance of
900 feet.
C. Property of Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge - Snowmass, LLC
Lots 1, 2, 3, 12, 13, and 14, Block 8, Eames Addition, City and Townsite of Aspen,
and Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10, Block 9, and Lots 4 and 11, less the west 22 feet
thereof, Block 9, Eames Addition to the City and Township of Aspen, together with
that portion of th alley in Block 9, Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of
Aspen, abutting on all of Lots 5 and 10 and on Lots 4 and 11, except the west 22 feet
thereof.
c
D. Property owned or maintained by the City of Aspen.
Willoughby Park:
Lots 1-14, Block 7 and Lots 1-3, Block 8 Eames Addition, City and Townsite of Aspen.
Lift One Park:
Lots 3 and 12 Black 9 and the western 22 feet of Lots 4 and 11, Block 9 Eames Addition,
City and Townsite of Aspen.
Public rights-of--way:
• South Aspen Street south of Durant Avenue.
• All unvacated portions of Dean Street west of Monarch Street.
• Juan Street between South Aspen Street and Garmisch Street.
• Garmisch Street from Juan Street to Durant Avenue.
• Gilbert Street west of Monarch Street.
• Hill Street west of Monarch Street (unopened).
• Summit Street west of Monarch Street (unopened).
• A one-block section of alleyway between Hill Street and Summit Street east of
South Aspen Street (unopened).
• A one-block section of alleyway south of Summit Street east of South Aspen
Street {unopened).
RESOLUTION N0.80
{SERIES OF 2008}
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL CONFIRMING THE "LIFT
ONE NEIGHBORHOOD MASTER PLAN" ELIGIBLE AS A PROJECT
REASONABLY NECESSARY FOR THE CONVENIENCE AND WELFARE OF
THE PUBLIC (COWOP) AND UPDATING THE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF
ELIGIBLE PROPERTY WITHIN THE MASTER PLAN.
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received a completed
application from Aspen Land Fund II, also known as Centurion Partners, LLC; Roaring
Fork Mountain Lodge -Aspen; the Aspen Skiing Company; and, the Aspen City
Manager, for a determination of eligibility for a project, known as the Lift One
Neighborhood Master Plan, reasonably necessary for the convenience and welfare of the
public (COWOP) for a redevelopment of lands, owned by the above mentioned parties,
for the purpose of providing or improving the provision of lift-served skiing access to
Aspen Mountain, pedestrian, vehicular and emergency vehicle access to properties along
South Aspen Street, non-traditional energy sources such as ground source energy system,
recreational facilities, a museum focused on the evolution of skiing in Aspen, public
parking, and commercial, lodging, free-market residential, and affordable residential land
uses; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen City Council adopted Resolution No. 13, Series
of 2008, determining the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan reasonably necessary for
the convenience and welfare of the public (COWOP} review process; and,
WHEREAS, the legal descriptions of the lands subject to this review have been
updated and are attached as Exhibit A and are generally described as lands on both sides
of South Aspen Street south of Dean Street, excluding the Shadow Mountain
Townhomes; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chapter 26.500 of the Land Use Code, the City Council
may make updates or adjustments to a proposed development determined reasonably
necessary for the convenience and welfare of the public during a duly noticed public
hearing after taking and considering comments from the genera] public, and a
recommendation from the Community Development Director; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Counci4 has reviewed and considered the Lift One
Neighborhood Master Plan eligibility confirmation and updated descriptions of the land
within the master plan under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as
identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community
Development Director, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing;
and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the findings of Resolution No. i 3, Series
of 2008, are unchanged with the updated legal descriptions and the project shall continue
to be reviewed as a project reasonably necessary for the convenience and welfare of the
public (COWOP); and,
Aspen City Council Resolution No. 80, Series of 2008
Confirming COWOP Eligibility and Updating Legal Descriptions
for Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan -Page 1
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary
for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT:
Section 1- Eligibility Confirmation
Pursuant to Section 2b.500.040 of the Land Use Code, the Lift One Neighborhood Master
Plan, as described in Resolution No. 13 Series of 2008 and with updated property
descriptions, continues to be reasonably necessary for the Convenience and Welfare of
the Public and eligible for the COWOP review process.
Section 2 -Undated Legal Descriptions
The updated legal descriptions of the lands subject to the COWOP review process aze
attached as Exhibit A.
Section 3 -Progress of Master Plan Task Force
The progress of the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan Task Force Team, as
documented by the project binder on file with the Community Development Department
and the project web site located at http•//www aspenpitkin com/depts/4l/liftoneMP.cfm,
shall be incorporated into the continuing work of the task force.
Section 4 -Resolution No. 13. Series of 2008
Together with the updated legal descriptions attached hereto, all aspects of Resolution
No. 13, Series of 2008, shall remain in fu41 force and effect.
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this ZS cn day of ~_f,(..d-'~-- , 2008.
Attest:
Kathryn S. K ,City Clerk Michael .Ireland, Mayor.
Approved as to form:
~``~ ~°~
o rcester, City Attorney
Exhibit A -Updated legal descriptions of lands within the Lift One Neighborhood
Master Plan review process.
Aspen City Council Resolution No. 80, Series of 2008
Confirming COWOP Eligibility and Updating Legal Descriptions
for Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan -Page 2
Resolution No. 80, Series of 2008
ExkibitA - Legul Descriptions
A. Property of Aspen Land Fund II, LLC
South Aspen Street Subdivision/Planned Unit Development Lots 1, 2, and 3, as described
on the plat thereof recorded Apri127, 2007 with the Pitkin County Clerk and recorder as
reception number 537080 in Book 83, Page 50.
B. Property of Aspen Skiing Company
1. Land Under Contract with Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge -Aspen, LLC which is
included in the Lift One Lodge Application:
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14,
Block 10, and Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 12,
EAMES ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,
TOGETHER WITH an easement and right of way for the construction, erection,
operation and maintenance of a cable ski chair lift, as created, defined and established by
Easement Agreement between the Board of County Commissioners of the County of
Pitkin and Friedl Pfeifer recorded October 24, 1962, in Book 199 at Page 489, and,
TOGETHER WITH an easement and right of way for skiing purposes, as created,
defined and established by Easement Agreement by and between the City of Aspen and
Aspen Skiing Corporation recorded October 17, 1969, in Book 244 at Page 31, and
TOGETHER WITH that portion of the alleyway for Block 10 vacated in Book 259 at
Page 83.
2. Land Area to the South of the Lift One Lodge Site:
That property owned by the Aspen Skiing Company extending south from Block 12,
Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, to the Aspen City limits.
C. Property of Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge -Aspen, LLC
Lots 12, 13 and 14, Block 8, together with that portion of the alley in Block 8 abutting
said lots, Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, Eames Addition, City and
Townsite of Aspen (Skiers Chalet Steakhouse); Lots 5, b, 7, 8, 9 and 10, Block 9,
together with Lots 4 and 11, Block 9, less the west 22 feet thereof, Eames Addition to the
City and Townsite of Aspen, and that portion of the alley in said Block 9 vacated by the
City of Aspen in Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2006, recorded April 11, 2006 under
Reception No. 522845 (Skiers Chalet Lodge); and Lots 1, 2, 13 and 14, Block 9, Eames
Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, together with that portion of the vacated
alley between Lots 1 and 14 and the west 20 feet of the vacated alley between Lots 2 and
13, Block 9, Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen (Holland House).
Aspen City Council Resolution No. 80, Series of 2008
Confirming COWOP Eligibility and Updating Legal Descriptions
for Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan -Page 3
D. Property owned or maintained by the City of Aspen.
Wilkoughby Pazk:
Lots 1-14, Block 7 and Lots 1-3, Block 8 Eames Addition, City and Townsite of Aspen,
and that portion of Juan Street east of South Aspen Street between Blocks 7 and 8, Eames
Addition, City and Townsite of Aspen and that portion of the alley in Block 8 adjacent to
Lots 1, 2, and 3 Block 8, Eames Addition, City and Townsite of Aspen.
Lift One Park:
Lots 3 and 12 Block 9 and the western 22 feet of Lots 4 and 11, Block 9 Eames Addition,
City and Townsite of Aspen.
Public rights-of--way:
• South Aspen Street south of Durant Avenue.
• All unvacated portions of Dean Street west of Monarch Street.
• 3uan Street between South Aspen Street and Garmisch Street.
• The alleyway between Lots 1, 2 and 3 and Lots 12, 13, and 14, Block 8, Eames
Addition, City and Townsite of Aspen (unopened).
• Garmisch Street from Juan Street to Durant Avenue.
• Gilbert Street west of Monarch Street.
• Hill Street west of Monarch Street (unopened}.
• Summit Street west of Monarch Street (unopened).
• A one-block section of alleyway between Hill Street and Summit Street east of
South Aspen Street (unopened).
• A one-block section of alleyway south of Summit Street east of South Aspen
Street (unopened).
Aspen City Council Resolution No. 80, Series of 2008
Confirming COWOP Eligibility and Updating Legal Descriptions
for Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan -Page 4
Litt ne Neighborhood
Master Plan
Ttte Cm of Asp
GOALS
Master Plan Goals Adopted Unanimously on May 22. 2008
DECISION PACKET
Respect Aspen's history: integrate the balance of architecture and design through the relationships,
mass and scale of historic and proposed structures.
Showcase and promote Aspen's ski history and traditions.
Provide easy and welcoming access to all users that integrates the Lift One neighborhood and town
while minimizing traffic and pavement.
Develop improved lift access and infrastructure that includes the World Cup venue and year-round
activities.
Create a "lights on" mix of lodging, services, amenities and on-site affordable housing to attract
visitors and locals while respecting the nature of the neighborhood.
Develop an economically viable and flexible project without imposing burdens on the community.
Create an environmental showcase that exploits on-site energy generation and responsibly uses
energy and other resources.
Lilt ne Neighborhood
Master Plan
T~ Cm of Asp
GOALS ACHIEVED BY THE TASK FORCE
DECISION PACKET
Below are the "Goal Buckets" we used to begin our Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan process and
the Master Plan Goals associated with each bucket. Underneath the Master Plan Goals are the many
ways in which the Task Force addressed the Master Plan Goals.
History
1. Respect Aspen's history: integrate the balance of architecture and design through the
relationships, mass and scale of historic and proposed structures.
2. Showcase and promote Aspen's ski history and traditions.
• Lift 1 Corridor -Reestablished as ski corridor with new lift apparatus.
• Creating an interactive space revolving around Lift 1 and the onsite historic assets.
• Skiers Chalet Steak House -Proposed conversion to local's bar/restaurant, affordable
housing, and affordable commercial.
• Skiers Chalet Lodge -Converted to a museum for the Aspen Historical Society.
• Ticket Office -Returned to its 1950's size with the possibility of reuse.
• Out Buildings -Restored onsite as part of park character.
• Deep Powder Cabins -Relocated and rehabilitated, possibly on Aspen Mountain for SkiCo
use.
• Re-vegetation of Willoughby Park and the development site to historic levels.
• Boat Tow Apparatus -Relocated into the Historical Society Museum.
Accessibility
1. Provide easy and welcoming access to all users that integrates the Lift One neighborhood and
town while minimizing traffic and pavement.
2. Develop improved lift access and infrastructure that includes the World Cup venue and year-
round activities.
• New Platter Lift beginning in Willoughby Park and terminating at the base of a new high
speed Quad Lift.
• New high speed lA Quad Lift.
• Public restaurant bar at Lift One Lodge for apres ski and during Winternational.
• Onsite communications infrastructure for easy World Cup set-up and tear-down.
• Infrastructure designed to minimize pavement and desire for drivers to use Aspen St.
i. 22 foot width on South Aspen south of Dean Street.
Liit ne Neighborhood
Master Plan
Txs Gn of As~ty
DECISION PACKET
ii. New curved street alignment minimizes views of pavement.
iii. Platter lift begins skiing at Willoughby Park.
iv. Underground delivery route.
v. Public lockers allow easy pedestrian access.
vi. Below grade service corridor for deliveries
vii. Enhanced pedestrian access along Aspen Street, Dean Avenue, Juan Street, and Gilbert
Street.
• More pedestrian-friendly Dean Street between Monarch and South Aspen.
• Improved South Aspen Street
i. Snowmelt South Aspen.
ii. Improved right-of--way including new sidewalks.
Vitali
1. Create a "lights on" mix of lodging, services, amenities and on-site affordable housing to attract
visitors and locals while respecting the nature of the neighborhood.
2. Develop an economically viable and flexible project without imposing burdens on the
community.
• Return of apres ski to Lift 1 side of Aspen Mountain.
• New hotel rooms at the base of Lift 1.
• On-Site Affordable Housing.
• Revitalizing the Skiers Chalet Steak House to encourage local's presence.
• Underground public parking.
• New Historical Society Museum.
• New on-site affordable ski lockers.
• All membership or fractional beds available for nightly rental.
• Replacement of volleyball courts to an appropriate destination to be determined in
conjunction with the Parks Department.
• Maintain or improve ski access to most adjacent properties.
Sustainability
• Create an environmental showcase that exploits on-site energy generation and responsibly uses
energy and other resources.
Liit ne Neighborhood
Master Plan
T~ Crr~ of Asr~v
1. Design
• 50% building less fossil fuel consumption compared to Ashrae 90.1 baseline
• Identify and compare with measured data from peers
• LEED Silver-Gold
2. Verify
• Commissioning
• Measurement & Verification
3. True-Up
DECISION PACKET
• Post-occupancy "true-up" through off-sets, operating improvements, or capital improvements
Liit ne Neighborhood
Master Plan
T~ Cm of Aster
USES
DECISION PACKET
Lot 1, Lift One Lode. The Lift One Lodge Project is approved as a mixed use membership lodge/whole
ownership project consisting of 35 lodge units, 5 free market residential units, the affordable housing
components described in Section 16.1 below, a maximum of 9,000 square feet of net leasable commercial
space and a total of 250 subgrade parking spaces.
The Project's lodge component will consist of one-bedroom, two-bedroom, three-bedroom and four-
bedroom suites. Each bedroom within the lodge component will be separately keyed as a "lock-off' unit.
For Growth Management Quota System purposes, the Project's lodge component will contain a total of
101 bedrooms equaling 101 keys or separately rentable divisions.
The Project's commercial component shall consist of a public restaurant, kitchen and bar; and various
facilities for the Aspen Skiing Company, including, but not limited to, a ticket sales area, public/employee
locker rooms, other skier servicing facilities, etc. The public restaurant, bar and kitchen will contain a
maximum of 4,000 square feet of net leasable commercial area. The Aspen Skiing Company's facilities
will contain a maximum of 5,000 square feet of net leasable commercial area. The lodge will also include
other guest service areas, facilities and ancillary spaces and uses which are not considered net leasable area
for Growth Management Quota System purposes.
The Historic Preservation Commission previously granted Conceptual Approval for the relocation of the
Skiers Chalet Lodge and the Skiers Chalet Steak House. The Lift One Lodge Project shall require final
approval from the Historic Preservation Commission for both relocations, which shall be processed
separately from the Master Plan in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 26.415 of the City of Aspen
Land Use Code.
Lot 5, Lode at Aspen Mountain. The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project is approved as a mixed use
hotel/fractional/whole ownership project consisting of 75 lodge units, 26 fractional ownership units, 5
free market residential units, the affordable housing components described in Section 16.2 below, a
maximum of 18,000 square feet of net leasable commercial space, and a minimum of 238 subgrade
parking spaces.
The Project's hotel component will consist of 72 standard/executive and one-bedroom lodge rooms; 2
two-bedroom lodge suites; and one two-bedroom presidential suite for a total of 78 bedrooms. The
Project's fractional ownership component will consist of 8three-bedroom units and 18 four-bedroom
units containing a total of 96 bedrooms. For Growth Management Quota System purposes, the Project's
hotel and fractional ownership components will contain a total of 174 bedrooms and 101 keys or
separately rentable divisions. No "lock-off' bedrooms are proposed. The whole ownership component
will consist of one three-bedroom free market residential unit and 4four-bedroom free. market residential
units.
Liit ne Neighborhood
Master Plan
THE GTY OF ASPEN
DECISION PACKET
The Project's 18,000 square feet of net leasable commercial area will consist of a spa; the hotel's restaurant
and kitchen, rooftop bar, lobby lounge, sundries shop, meeting rooms and ballroom; and a small sales
center for the fractional ownership units. The hotel will also include other guest service areas, facilities
and ancillary spaces and uses which are not considered net leasable area for Growth Management Quota
System purposes.
The Project will be condominiumized in two or more condominium regimes (one covering the Deane
Street Condominium affordable housing project on Lot 6), and the fractional ownership units will be sold
pursuant to a timeshare use plan.
Lot 3, Skiers Chalet Steak House. The Skiers Chalet Steak House is approved as a mixed use
commercial/affordable housing building which will contain approximately 1,052 square feet of net
leasable commercial space on its ground floor and a total of 5 dormitory affordable housing rooms on its
second and third floors. An outdoor seating area will be provided adjacent to the building. The
commercial space's net leasable area shall be identified in the Lift One Lodge Final PUD Development
Plan and individual Subdivision/PUD Agreement.
The Lift One Lodge Subdivision/PUD Agreement shall also include a list of permitted uses for the
commercial space, which list shall be derived from those uses permitted within the (NC), Neighborhood
Commercial, zone district.
Lot 4, Willou~hby Park. Approval is granted for the relocation of the Skiers Chalet Lodge to Willoughby
Park as depicted in the Decision Packet, and the use of the building for community purposes including,
but not limited to, a historical museum, affordable housing, and/or affordable commercial space. The
building's use shall be addressed in the Lift One Lodge Subdivision/PUD Agreement to be recorded
concurrently with the Lift One Lodge Final PUD Development Plan.
Lot 6, Deane Street Condominiums. Lot 6 is approved for the development of a 15 unit affordable
housing project. The Deane Street Condominiums Affordable Housing Project will consist of 7 studio
units, 4one-bedroom units, 2two-bedroom units, and 2three-bedroom units.
Lift lA Base Area Development Envelope. The Lift lA Base Area Development Envelope is approved
for the uses, activities and improvements necessary, ancillary and incidental to the development, function,
operation and maintenance of winter and summer recreation and a ski area base, including, but not
limited to the following:
• Skiing, snowboarding, and other winter and summer recreational sports and activities;
• Ski and snow sports racing, competitions, demonstrations, other special events, including
supporting activities, facilities, improvements and infrastructure;
• Ski lifts and mechanized uphill transportation, including all related improvements and
equipment, such as lift terminals, towers, platforms, supporting or retaining walls and
foundations, stairs, elevators, plaza spaces, lift mazing, housings, roofs, and similar structures,
operator houses or lift shacks and storage;
Lift ne Neighborhood
Master Plan
THE CITY OF ASPEN
DECISION PACKET
• Ticketing sales and all necessary and incidental commercial skier services functions, facilities
and equipment, including, but not limited to ski and equipment rental, lockers, public
restrooms, offices, ski school facilities, emergency medical care, and related activities and uses;
• Making, clearing, removing, sculpting, grooming and maintaining snow and snow surfaces,
together with all the infrastructure, deep and shallow utilities, and equipment and machinery
necessary for performing the same, whether fixed or mobile;
• Motorized vehicle access and use, including snow grooming equipment as described above, as
well as snowmobiles, emergency vehicles, wheeled vehicles, service and support trucks and
other vehicles routinely used in the conduct and performance of mountain recreation,
operations, services, construction, supply, events and the permitted uses described herein;
~ Operational, commercial, interpretive, and informational signage reasonably necessary and/or
incidental to the performance of other activities and functions described herein;
• Any and all customary activities, equipment, housings, structures, and functions which maybe
necessary, appropriate, ancillary and/or incidental to the full use, practice and enjoyment of
skiing and other recreational sports and activities, mechanized uphill transportation, and
related business purposes and activities; and
• Installation, staging, construction, maintenance, alteration, repair, operation, servicing, and
replacement of all of improvements, structures, materials, landscaping and/or equipment
described or contemplated herein.
List ne Neighborhood
Masser Plan
DECISION PACKET
T~ Cm of Asr~v
ZONING
Upon the approval of this Ordinance by the Aspen City Council, Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 are hereby rezoned
as depicted on the Proposed Zoning Map attached hereto as Exhibit 2. The rezoning shall become
effective upon the recordation of the Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat, and the Official Zone
District Map of the Ciry of Aspen shall be amended by the Community Development Director as follows.
• Lot 1, Lift One Lodge, shall be depicted as included within the L, Lodge, zone district with a
Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay. A portion of Lot 1 shall include H, Historic Overlay,
to reflect the portion of Lot 1 containing a tower of the original Lift 1 system and the relocation of
the Skier's Chalet Steak House building off of this Lot. The Lodge Zone District permits the
development, operations, and maintenance of ski area structures, facilities, equipment,
management and operations.
• Lot 2, Lift One Park, shall be depicted as included within the PUB, Public, zone district with H,
Historic Overlay and a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay. The PUB Zone District
permits the development, operations, and maintenance of ski area structures, facilities, equipment,
management and operations.
• Lot 3, Skiers Chalet Steak House, shall be depicted as included within the NC, Neighborhood
Commercial, zone district with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay. Lot 3 shall also
include H, Historic Overlay, to reflect the prior Historic Designation of the Skiers Chalet Steak
House building and its relocation thereto.
• Lot 4, Willoughby Park, shall be depicted as included within the PUB, Public, zone district with a
Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay. The PUB Zone District permits the development,
operations, and maintenance of ski area structures, facilities, equipment, management and
operations.
• Lot 6, Deane Street Condominiums, shall be depicted as included within the AH, Affordable
Housing, zone district with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay.
Liit ne Neighborhood
Master Plan
DECISION PACKET
THE GTY OF ASPEN
VACATIONS
The following public right-of--way vacations within the Lift One Neighborhood shall be and hereby
are approved, and the fee simple ownership of the lands underlying such vacated rights-of--way shall
be combined with and incorporated into the respective adjacent parcels. Such vacations and
resulting ownerships are shown on the Proposed Street and Alley Vacation Map attached hereto as
Exhibit 3, shall be depicted and described on the Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat, and shall
become effective upon the recording of the Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat and the Master
Development Agreement.
• That portion of Deane Street located east of Garmisch Street along the northern boundary
of the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project;
• That portion of Juan Street depicted on Exhibit 3, the Proposed Street and Alley Vacation
Map;
• That portion of South Aspen Street located south of Juan Street and north of the northern
boundary of the Shadow Mountain Condominiums;
• Those portions of Gilbert Street depicted on Exhibit 3, the Proposed Street and Alley
Vacation Map;
• Hill Street east of South Aspen Street through the Lift One Lodge Project;
• Summit Street east of South Aspen Street through the Lift One Lodge Project; and
• The portion of the remaining alley in Block 9, Eames Addition to the City of Aspen, within
the Lift One Lodge Project.
Lilt ne Neighborhood
Master Plan
DECISION PACKET
Tt-~ CrrY of Asae~v
DEDICATIONS AND EASEMENTS
The Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat shall accomplish the following public right-of--way
dedications and shall grant the following perpetual easements and encroachment licenses as
depicted on the Proposed Subdivision Map attached hereto as Exhibit 4, to wit:
• A public right-of--way for relocated South Aspen Street;
• A public pedestrian easement along the vacated portion of Juan Street;
• A public ski and pedestrian easement within Lot 1, Lift One Lodge Project, within Lot 2, Lift
One Park, and within Lot 4, Willoughby Park;
• An easement granted to the Aspen Skiing Company and/or assigns within Lots 1, 2 and 4
for purposes of constructing, operating and maintaining the surface lift and other associated
skiing improvements and operations;
• A perpetual subsurface easement beneath Lot 2, Lift One Park, and Lot 4, Willoughby Park,
for the use and benefit of the Lift One Lodge Project and the Lodge at Aspen Mountain
Project for purposes of constructing, operating, using, maintaining and accessing parking
garages;
• A perpetual subsurface easement beneath a portion of relocated South Aspen Street for the
use and benefit of the Lift One Lodge Project and the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project for
purposes of constructing, operating, using, maintaining and accessing a parking garage; and
• A perpetual access easement across Lot 1 for the benefit of the Aspen Skiing Company.
In addition to the foregoing, the City of Aspen public right-of-way known as Dean Street, a/k/a
Deane Street, is hereby officially named and designated Deane Street (with an "e"), and this spelling
shall be reflected in the various Plats and Agreements recorded pursuant to this Ordinance.
ORDINANCE N0.34
(SERIES OF 2008)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN
AMENDING AND CONFIRMING THE BOUNDARIES AND APPROVING THE
LIFT ONE NEIGHBORHOOD MASTER PLAN AND GRANTING FINAL LAND
USE APPROVALS AND A DEVELOPMENT ORDER FOR ALL PROPOSED
DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE MASTER PLAN INCLUDING PROPERTY
LOCATED ON BOTH SIDES OF SOUTH ASPEN STREET SOUTH OF DEAN
STREET OWNED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN, THE ASPEN SKIING COMPANY,
ASPEN LAND FUND II LLC (AKA CENTURION PARTNERS LLC), AND
ROARING FORK MOUNTAIN LODGE-ASPEN LLC, ALL WITHIN THE CITY
OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received a completed
application from Aspen Land Fund II, LLC also known as Centurion Partners, LLC;
Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge -Aspen LLC; the Aspen Skiing Company; and, the
Aspen City Manager, for a determination of eligibility for a project, known as the Lift
One Neighborhood Master Plan, reasonably necessary for the convenience and welfare of
the public (COWOP) for a redevelopment of lands, owned by the above mentioned
parties, for the purpose of providing or improving the provision of lift-served skiing
access to Aspen Mountain, pedestrian, vehicular and emergency vehicle access to
properties along South Aspen Street, non-traditional energy sources such as ground
source energy system, recreational facilities, a museum focused on the evolution of skiing
in Aspen, public parking, and commercial, lodging, free-market residential, and
affordable residential land uses; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen manages public rights-of--way in the planning
area including Hill Street, Summit Street, Gilbert Street, the alley within Block 10 of the
Eames Addition, South Aspen Street, Juan Street, and Dean Street and owns certain
public land known locally as Willoughby Park and Lift One Park; and,
WHEREAS, the legal descriptions of the lands subject to this review are attached
as Exhibit 5 and are generally described as lands on both sides of South Aspen Street
south of Dean Street, excluding the Shadow Mountain Townhomes; and,
WHEREAS, the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan's public and private
property landowners were represented by their respective property owners and/or
representatives including Robert Daniel of Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge -Aspen LLC,
John Sarpa of Centurion Partners LLC, David Bellack of the Aspen Skiing Company, and
Chris Bendon of the City of Aspen, all of whom were authorized to represent their
individual public or private property interests; and,
WHEREAS, the COWOP land use review process, Chapter 26.500 of the City of
Aspen Land Use Code, was created and adopted by the City of Aspen to allow the
planning of projects of significant community interest, when determined necessary by the
City Council according to said Chapter, to evolve an iterative process considering input
from neighbors, property owners, public officials, members of the public, and other
parties of interest assembled as a formal reviewing authority of the City of Aspen
providing recommendations directly to City Council; and,
WHEREAS, via adoption of Resolution No. 13, Series of 2008 and No. 80 Series
of 2008, the City Council found that the proposal for review as a project reasonably
necessary for the convenience and welfare of the public met the Standards for
Determination, Section 26.500.040 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, for the
following reasons:
(a) The Master Plan could provide enhanced access to lift-served skiing on
Aspen Mountain, lodging facilities that meet the needs of the of the community,
affordable housing units that serve the needs of the community, improved vehicular,
pedestrian and emergency vehicle access, the development of public parking, the
preservation of important local and national historic resources, the development of non-
traditional energy sources such as ground source energy system, recreational facilities, a
museum focused on the evolution of skiing in Aspen, and a unified approach to managing
construction impacts and ongoing maintenance and operations of the area's
infrastructure;
(b) Preserving and enhancing short-term lodging facilities, providing adequate
emergency services and access, the provision of effective access to lift-served skiing,
housing the workforce, and energy efficiency are stated community goals that could be
addressed through master planning of this area;
(c) Portions of the subject area are owned by the City of Aspen and a Master
Plan could permit an advantageous disposition of those properties;
(d) Portions of the subject area are managed by the City of Aspen as rights-of-
way and a Master Plan could permit an advantageous disposition of those properties;
(e) The bifurcated ownership of the subject area and independent projects in
various stages of entitlement may result in an ad-hoc development pattern while a master
planning process using an interactive and multidisciplinary approach with a diverse
COWOP task team, including neighbors of the project and persons with special interest in
the property and its development will lend itself to the type of open dialogue needed to
determine a cohesive future vision for the neighborhood; and,
WHEREAS, via adoption of Resolution No. 13, Series of 2008 and No. 80 Series
of 2008, the City Council established a COWOP Task Force Team to develop a Master
Plan for the Lift One Neighborhood including the quantitative elements of the plan, broad
urban design elements of the plan, and the contextual relationship of the plan to
surrounding properties; and
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 2
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
WHEREAS, the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan COWOP Task Force Team
is comprised of citizens with a broad range of perspectives, expertise, and awareness of
community issues. Following are the members of the task force and their affiliation:
City of Aspen City Council Mick Ireland
Dwayne Romero
P & Z Cliff Weiss
HPC Alison Agley
Com. Dev. Chris Bendon, (non-voting)
Landowners Lodge at Aspen Mtn. John Sarpa
Lift One Lodge Bob Daniel
Aspen Skiing Dave Bellack
Com any
Neighbors South -Shadow Chrissy McNamara
Mountain
West -Juan St., Derek Johnson
Trainors Landing Denis Murray
North -South Point, Galen Bright
Timber Ridge Tami Solondz
East - Sissy Erikson
Mountain Queen Zachary Matthews
Gilbert Street
Other Affected or Aspen Hist. Society Georgia Hanson
Interested Parties AVSC Mark Cole
ACRA Debbie Braun
Community At Large Yasmine dePagter
Allyn Harvey
Mark Hughes
Mary Janss
Andrew Kole
Ruth Kruger
Mary Anne Meyer
Bernard Phillips ,
*Brian Schaefer (*removed for non-
attendance)
Bill Wiener, Jr.
and,
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 3
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Community Development Director was a non-
voting member and served as the chair of the Task Force Team, in compliance with the
requirements of Section 26.500 of the Aspen Land Use Code; and,
WHEREAS, the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan COWOP Task Force Team
has met every Thursday for a minimum of three hours and up to seven hours from
April 10, 2008 to October 2, 2008, for a total of 26 meetings to consider the project goals,
constraints, concepts, and possible development scenarios; and,
WHEREAS, the COWOP review process enabled the planning and design of the
master plan to reflect community values, taking into consideration various opinions and
expressed points-of--view from neighbors, land owners, citizens, and technical expertise
from professionals assisting the planning effort; and,
WHEREAS, the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan COWOP Task Force Team
adopted the following master plan goals which were subsequently acknowledged by the
Aspen City Council via adoption of City Council Resolution No. 59, Series of 2008:
• Respect Aspen's history: integrate the balance of architecture and design
through the relationships, mass and scale of historic and proposed structures.
• Showcase and promote Aspen's ski history and traditions.
• Provide easy and welcoming access to all users that integrates the Lift One
neighborhood and town while minimizing traffic and pavement.
• Develop improved lift access and infrastructure that includes the World Cup
venue and year-round activities.
• Create a "lights on" mix of lodging, services, amenities and on-site affordable
housing to attract visitors and locals while respecting the nature of the
neighborhood.
• Develop an economically viable and flexible project without imposing
burdens on the community.
• Create an environmental showcase that exploits on-site energy generation and
responsibly uses energy and other resources.
and,
WHEREAS, the COWOP land use review procedure does not and has not
lessened any public hearing, public noticing, or any critical analysis or scrutiny of the
project as would otherwise be required; and,
WHEREAS, the Task Force meetings were run in a public hearing type format
with the ability for members of the public and concerned citizens to comment on the
progress of the master plan; and,
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008. Page 4
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
WHEREAS, the project received approximately 59 pages of emails and letters
which can be viewed on the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan website accessed from
www.aspenpitkin.com; and
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Internet website had approximately 340 page
views per month; and
WHEREAS, the progress of the task force and all materials, meeting summaries,
diagrams, and maps related to the planning effort were maintained in 2 project binders
available for public inspection at the City of Aspen Community Development
Department and on the City of Aspen Internet web site, www.aspenpitkin.com/; and,
WHEREAS, during the planning process for the Master Plan updates on the
progress of the planning effort were considered as agenda items at public meetings by the
Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Board, the City Planning and Zoning
Commission, and the Historic Preservation Commission; and,
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission was updated regarding the
progress of the Task Force throughout the project by their Task Force Representative
Alison Agley; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission were updated regularly
regarding the progress of the Task Force by their Task Force Representative, Cliff Weiss;
and,
WHEREAS, on August 12th, approximately 60 citizens attended an "open-
house" style public meeting, notice of which was published in the Aspen Times,
conducted to provide information and discuss planning issues with neighbors and
interested citizens; and
WHEREAS, approximately 18 articles in the Aspen Times appeared over the
course of the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan Task Force review process detailing
ongoing planning issues and the evolution of the plan, including 5 articles that were
published prior to the formation of the Task Force and an additional 10 letters to the
editor; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen Daily News published 13 articles regarding the Lift One
Project including 5 that were published prior to the formation of the Task Force; and,
WHEREAS, staff and members of the Task Force presented the progress of the
Task Force to the Board of Directors of the Aspen Chamber Resort Association on July
29, 2008; and,
WHEREAS, On August 21, 2008, an update was provided at the annual ACRA
Luncheon by Task Force member and ACRA President Debbie Braun to approximately
250 attendees; and,
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 5
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
WHEREAS, staff presented the progress of the Task Force to the Aspen/Pitkin
County Housing Authority on August 6, 2008; and,
WHEREAS, staff presented the progress of the Task Force to the Aspen Board of
Realtors on August 13, 2008; and,
WHEREAS, City of Aspen Project Assistant Travis Coggin and City of Aspen
Community Relations Officer Sally Spaulding spoke about the project and where/how to
access information related to the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan on the KSNO radio
station on August 19, 2008; and,
WHEREAS, City of Aspen Community Development Director Chris Bendon and
Project Assistant Travis Coggin spoke about the project and where/how to access
information related to the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan on the KSNO radio station
on October 17, 2008; and
WHEREAS, staff presented the progress of the Task Force to the Commercial
Core and Lodging Commission on August 20, 2008; and,
WHEREAS, staff presented the progress of the Task Force to the City of Aspen
Community Development and Engineering Departments on August 20, 2008; and,
WHEREAS, staff presented the progress of the Task Force to the Pitkin County
Community Development Department on September 8, 2008; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen devoted one episode of City Matters to the Lift
One Neighborhood Master Plan and filmed an on-site program with members of the Task
Force; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen filmed a special edition of City Matters on
October 15, 2008 with members of the Task Force; and
WHEREAS, the City Matters program covering the Lift One Neighborhood
Master Plan has aired approximately 11 times on CGTV; and,
WHEREAS, there have been informational slides running continually on CGTV
displaying the time and date of upcoming Lift One Task Force Meetings as well as the
Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan website; and,
WHEREAS, City Council reviewed the progress of the Master Plan during two
(2) publicly noticed work sessions on June 9 and July 21, 2008, considered progress of
the effort and provided direction as to the proper planning and design objectives and
issues to be fully considered; and,
WHEREAS, the COWOP Task Force determined that the Lift One
Neighborhood Master Plan provides the following community benefits associated with
the Goals created by the COWOP Task Force.
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 6
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
History
1. Respect Aspen's history: integrate the balance of architecture and design through the
relationships, mass and scale of historic and proposed structures.
2. Showcase and promote Aspen's ski history and traditions.
Community Benefits under History -View plane corridor maintained. Revitalized
sense of history. Museum integrated providing historical connection. Recycles
historical buildings as historical assets.
Accessibility
1. Provide easy and welcoming access to all users that integrates the Lift One
neighborhood and town while minimizing traffic and pavement.
2. Develop improved lift access and infrastructure that includes the World Cup venue
and year-round activities.
Community Benefits under Acessibility -Creative and uniquely Aspen solution for
people mover. Infrastructure updates -sidewalks on Aspen Street. Year-round
access to top of hill, surface lift from Dean Street. Proven technology/appropriate to
area. Improved skiing to Dean Street. Neighborhood -more inviting and more
inclusive. Removes "load" from other lifts. Corner of Aspen and Durant will be
safer.
Vitali
1. Create a "lights on" mix of lodging, services, amenities and on-site affordable
housing to attract visitors and locals while respecting the nature of the neighborhood.
2. Develop an economically viable and flexible project without imposing burdens on the
community.
Community Benefits under Vitality -Lockers at starting point of skiing. Affordable
commercial is a possibility. Local's friendly steak house for beer, etc. Revitalized
and beautified a huge section of town at base of mountain. Lights-on neighborhood
from addition of affordable housing. Added hot beds and hotel. Better World Cup
venue.
Sustainability
1. Create an environmental showcase that exploits on-site energy generation and
responsibly uses energy and other resources.
Community Benefits under Sustainability -Increased tax base--50% less fossil fuel
consumption than similar uses, sets new standard for lodges--LEED Silver or Gold.
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 7
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
and,
WHEREAS, the Master Plan is of higher quality as a result of the COWOP Task
Force Team review process and the thoughtful and interactive discussions that allowed
multiple iterations and development scenarios to be discussed would not have otherwise
occurred if the Master Plan had not been reviewed as a COWOP application; and,
WHEREAS, the Master Plan is consistent with the Goals and Objectives of the
2000 Aspen Area Community Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the project meets the goals created by the COWOP Task Force; and,
WHEREAS, the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan received a vote of 19 in
favor, one opposed and one neutral at the final Task Force Meeting on October 2, 2008;
and,
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission formally reviewed the Lift
One Neighborhood Master Plan during a series of public hearings beginning August 27,
2008 and concluding October 8, 2008, resulting in a vote of 4-0 in favor of the Master
Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Historic Preservation Commission formally reviewed the
Conceptual Application for relocation of structures, development of Lift One Park, and
development of Willoughby Park beginning August 27, 2008 and concluding October 8,
2008 and voted unanimously to grant Conceptual Approval for Major Development and
Relocation for the properties located at Willoughby Park, Lift One Park, 233 Gilbert
Street and 710 South Aspen Street, as evidenced by Resolution No. 23, Series of 2008;
and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission formally reviewed the Lift
One Neighborhood Master Plan during a series of public hearings beginning August 26,
2008 and concluding on October 7, 2008, resulting in a vote of 6-0 in favor of the Master
Plan; and,
WHEREAS, Hill Street, Summit Street and their associated alleys, a portion of
Gilbert Street, a portion of Juan Street and a portion of Dean Street west of South Aspen
Street rights-of--way, as currently platted, do not provide for efficient or practicable
vehicular movement and the City of Aspen believes it is in the best interests of the City,
and its residents, to vacate the rights-of--way, concurrent with the approval of the
development proposal and effective upon recordation of the Master Subdivision/Street
Vacation Plat, such that the lands may be used for development purposes; and,
WHEREAS, the lands subject to this right-of--way vacation are depicted on
attached Exhibit 3 and shall be depicted and described on the Master Subdivision/Street
Vacation Plat; and,
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 8
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
WHEREAS, the vacation action, considering the Master Plan entire land
assemblage, will not leave any land without a means of adequate access to a public right-
of-way; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen has reviewed, verifies, and hereby accepts the
vacation of the Hill Street, Summit Street, a portion of Gilbert Street, a portion of Juan
Street and a portion of Dean Street west of South Aspen Street rights-of--way and the
reversion of associated lands to adjacent parcels, as depicted and described on the
proposed Street and Alley Vacation Map, attached hereto as Exhibit 3, the Master
Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat, as consistent with the requirements of C.R.S. Section
43-2-301 et. seq.; and,
WHEREAS, the vacation of these portions of the Hill Street, Summit Street, a
portion of Gilbert Street, a portion of Juan Street and a portion of Dean Street west of
South Aspen Street rights-of--way meets or exceeds the review criteria for effecting such
changes as adopted by the City of Aspen; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.304 and 26.500 of the Land Use Code, City
Council may approve, approve with conditions, or deny all requisite land use approvals
necessary to grant a development order for a proposed development determined eligible
for COWOP land use review upon a recommendation from the Community Development
Director and consideration of comments offered by the general public at a duly noticed
public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Aspen Community Development Director has reviewed
the proposed development in consideration of the recommendations of the COWOP Task
Force Team, the requirements of the Land Use Code, and comments from the City
Engineer and applicable referral agencies and has recommended approval of all necessary
land use approvals for granting a development order for the proposed Project including
Final approval of a COWOP Land Use Review including: Subdivision, Final PUD
Development Plan approval, Rezoning of portions of the lands within the Lift One
Neighborhood to L, Lodge (PUD), Planned Unit Development Overlay; NC,
Neighborhood Commercial (H)(PUD), Historic, Planned Unit Development Overlay; and
PUB, Public ;(H)(PUD), Historic, Planned Unit Development Overlay, Vacation of
certain public rights-of--way, Dedication of certain public rights-of--way and easements,
Growth Management Quota System ("GMQS") allotments for lodging, free market
residential and affordable housing units, commercial net leasable space, and essential
public facilities, Condominiumization, removing and re-establishing historic landmark
designation of a parcel, Final Timeshare approval, Mountain View Plane review
approval, 8040 Greenline approval, Conditional Use approval, and Commercial Design
Review approval; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the
development proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as
identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Lift One
Neighborhood Master Plan COWOP Task Force Team, the Community Development
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 9
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Director, P&Z, HPC, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered
public comment at a public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or
exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development
proposal, with conditions, 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 the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT the City Council hereby amends the
boundary of the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan (the "Master Plan") as set forth in
Section 1 below; hereby approves the Master Plan as described and depicted in the
Decision Packet; and hereby declares that such approved Master Plan and all land use
approvals necessary or appropriate thereto, as herein set forth, shall constitute a site
specific development plan as defined in Section 24-68-102(4)(a) of the Colorado Revised
Statutes, subject to the conditions described herein.
Section 1: Eligibility Confirmation and Amendment to Master Plan Boundaries
The lands included in the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan are hereby amended to
include land owned by the Aspen Skiing Company extending generally to the south from
the southwesterly boundary of the Mountain Queen Condominiums, the southerly
boundary of Block 12 of the Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, the
south end of the South Aspen Street right-of--way and the southerly boundary of the
Shadow Mountain Condominiums to the southerly boundary of the City of Aspen, as
depicted on the Master Plan Boundary Map attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
The purpose of including these additional lands is to accommodate the uphill terminal of
the new "surface lift" and the lower terminal of the new high speed Lift lA, and to
accommodate certain pedestrian access improvements south of the South Aspen Street
right-of--way.
Pursuant to Section 26.500.040 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code, the Lift One
Neighborhood Master Plan, as described in Resolution No. 13, Series of 2008, and in
Resolution No. 80, Series of 2008, and with the inclusion of the additional Aspen Skiing
Company lands as described above, is and continues to be reasonably necessary for the
Convenience and Welfare of the Public and eligible for the COWOP review process.
Section 2: Legal Descriptions
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 10
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
The legal descriptions of the lands within the Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan
boundary are attached hereto as Exhibit 5.
Section 3. Master Plan Approvals; Vested Rights; Development Order
(a) The Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan is hereby approved, and the respective
owners of lands within the Master Plan boundary (the "Lift One Neighborhood"), as such
lands are described in Section 2 above, are hereby granted all land use approvals
necessary or appropriate to the implementation of the Master Plan, including without
limitation the following:
(i) Final PUD Development Plan approval for the developments described in
Section 11 below;
(ii) Subdivision approval as described in Section 4 below;
(iii) Rezoning of portions of the lands within the Lift One Neighborhood to L,
Lodge (PUD), Planned Unit Development Overlay; NC, Neighborhood
Commercial (H)(PUD), Historic, Planned Unit Development Overlay; and
PUB, Public (H)(PUD), Historic, Planned Unit Development Overlay as
described in Section 8 below;
(iv) Vacation of certain public rights-of--way as described in Section 9 below;
(v) Dedication of certain public rights-of--way and easements as described in
Section 10 below;
(vi) Growth Management Quota System ("GMQS") allotments for lodging, free
market residential and affordable housing units, and commercial net leasable
space as described in Section 14 below;
(vii) Condominiumization as described in Section 28 below;
(viii) Final Timeshare approval for the developments described in Section 11
below;
(ix) Mountain View Plane, 8040 Greenline, Conditional Use and Commercial
Design Review approval for the developments described in Section 11 below;
and
(x) Removing historic landmark designation from 710 South Aspen Street a/k/a
the Skiers Chalet Steak House and designating Lot 3 as a Historic Landmark.
(b) Pursuant to HPC Resolution No. 23, Series of 2008, unanimously adopted on October
8, 2008, Conceptual HPC Approval has been obtained for the relocation of the Skiers
Chalet Steak House building to a portion of the South Aspen Street right-of--way being
vacated pursuant to this Ordinance, and for the relocation of the Skiers Chalet Lodge to
Willoughby Park and its conversion to a Ski Museum. Final HPC approval for these
actions must be obtained before a Building Permit or Permits are applied for in
connection therewith.
(c) The right to undertake and complete the development and use of the Lift One
Neighborhood pursuant to the site specific development plan hereby approved shall be
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 11
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
vested for a period of fifteen (15) years from the date of final adoption of this Ordinance,
all as shall be more specifically set forth in a Vested Rights Development Agreement to
be approved contemporaneously with this Ordinance.
(d) No later than fourteen (14) days following final adoption of this Ordinance, the Aspen
City Clerk shall cause to be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the
City of Aspen a notice advising the general public of the approval of a site specific
development plan and the creation of a vested property right for the Lift One
Neighborhood pursuant to Section 26.304.070(A) of the City of Aspen Land Use Code.
Following the publication of said notice, the Community Development Director shall
issue a written Development Order containing the information required by Section
26.304.070(B) of the Land Use Code, which Development Order shall have an effective
date as of the date of publication of the notice of approval of the site specific
development plan.
Section 4: Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat
Within two (2) years following the date of final adoption of this Ordinance by the City
Council, the record owners of the underlying lands shall prepare, execute and record a
Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat of the Lift One Neighborhood which subdivides
the area into the following parcels, as depicted on the Proposed Subdivision Map attached
hereto as Exhibit 4.
Lot 1: Lift One Lodge
Lot 2: Lift One Park
Lot 3: Skiers Chalet Steak House
Lot 4: Willoughby Park
Lot 5: Lodge at Aspen Mountain
Lot 6: Deane Street Condominiums
For purposes of this Ordinance, Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 together shall hereinafter be referred to
as the "Lift One Project" and Lots 5 and 6 together shall hereinafter be referred to as the
"Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project".
The Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat shall also depict and describe a development
envelope for the relocation of the Lift 1 A base area as more specifically addressed and
described in Section 11.6 below, shall vacate the public rights-of--way described in
Section 9 below, shall dedicate the public rights-of--way described in Section 10 below,
and shall grant certain perpetual easements beneath, within or above public rights-of--way
and beneath Lot 2, Lift One Park, and Lot 4, Willoughby Park, as described in Section 10
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 12
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
below. A Master Utility and Drainage Plan for the Lift One Neighborhood shall be
recorded concurrently with the Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat.
The City acknowledges that the boundaries of Lots 3 and 6, respectively, may need to be
adjusted, and the Community Development Director shall have the authority to approve
such adjustment(s) as an Insubstantial Amendment to this Ordinance. The final
boundaries of such Lots (and of any adjoining Lots affected by the approvals granted by
such adjustments) shall be depicted and established on the individual Subdivision Plats to
be executed and recorded pursuant to Section 7 below.
The City further acknowledges that lot line adjustments may be required to accomplish
the conveyance of portions of vacated Deane Street and of vacated South Aspen Street
into the ownership of adjacent property owners. The Community Development Director
shall have the authority to approve and execute any related Lot Line Adjustment Plats via
administrative review.
Section 5: Master Development Agreement
Contemporaneously with the recording of the Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat,
the owners of the lands within the Lift One Neighborhood (excluding the City of Aspen)
shall prepare, execute and record a Master Development Agreement which sets forth a
description of the subdivision improvements and other amenities required by the Master
Plan, including the following:
(a) The relocation of South Aspen Street and associated sidewalks as depicted on the
Proposed Subdivision Map attached as Exhibit 4;
(b) The installation and/or relocation of all utilities and drainage facilities depicted and
described on the Master Utility and Drainage Plan;
(c) Deane Street right-of--way improvements, including sidewalks;*
*The design of the Deane Street right-of--way improvements for that section of Deane
Street between the South Aspen Street and Monarch Street rights-of--way shall be
coordinated with the City of Aspen Community Development, Parks, and
Engineering Departments. All, or a portion, of the $250,000 allocated to Deane
Street improvements by Ordinance No. 32, Series of 2005 (the Chart House
contribution) may be used for the design and implementation of these improvements.
(d) The landscaping of South Aspen Street and other public rights-of--way;
(e) The new Lift lA high speed lift and other improvements to facilitate access to the lift
from South Aspen Street;
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 13
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
(f) The surface lift from Willoughby Park to the Lift lA Base Area Development
Envelope;
(g) 80 subgrade public parking spaces beneath areas to be depicted on the Master
Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat;
(h) Public locker facilities;
(i) A Ski Museum located in Willoughby Park;
(j) The relocation of the volleyball courts currently located in Willoughby Park; and
(k) Improvements to Willoughby Park.
(1) An allocation amongst the owners (excluding the City) of the responsibilities for the
ongoing maintenance of said improvements and amenities.
5.1 Sequencing: If Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project Proceeds First. In the
event the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project elects to proceed with the permitting and
construction of its development ahead of the Lift One Lodge Project, the Lodge at
Aspen Mountain Project shall be obligated to provide financial assurances for and to
construct the improvements and amenities described in Section 5 above, excepting
utilities and drainage facilities that fall entirely within the other Project site and which
are not required for the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project, and excepting the surface
lift and the improvements described in subparagraphs (i), (j) and (k) above, all of
which will occur within the Lift One Lodge Project area.
In lieu of the surface lift, the Lodge at Aspen Mountain shall establish and operate a
regular public van service along South Aspen Street to the Lift lA base area until
such time as the surface lift is operational. The Lift One Lodge Project shall
construct these excluded improvements during the course of the development of its
own Project.
The Lift One Lodge Project shall be obligated to reimburse the Lodge at Aspen
Mountain Project, within ten (10) days following the date of issuance of the initial
building permit for the Lift One Lodge Project, for all costs and expenses incurred to
date by the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project that would otherwise have been the
responsibility/share of the Lift One Lodge Project under the terms of the Master
Development Agreement. If the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project chooses to
implement a Special District to provide the required improvements or some of them,
then the Lift One Lodge Project's reimbursement obligation shall be to the Special
District to the extent the Special District has incurred such costs and expenses.
5.2 Sequencing: If Lift One Lodge Project Proceeds First. In the event the Lift
One Lodge Project elects to proceed with the permitting and construction of its
development ahead of the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Lodge Project, the Lift One
Lodge Project shall be obligated to provide financial assurances for and to construct
the improvements and amenities described in Section 5 above, excepting utilities and
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 14
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
drainage facilities that fall entirely within the other Project site and which are not
required for the Lift One Lodge Project.
The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project shall be obligated to reimburse the Lift One
Lodge Project, within ten (10) days following the date of issuance of the initial
building permit for the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project, for all costs and expenses
incurred to date by the Lift One Lodge Project that would otherwise have been the
responsibility/share of the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project under the terms of the
Master Development Agreement. If the Lift One Lodge Project chooses to
implement a Special District to provide for the required improvements or some of
them, then the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project's reimbursement obligation shall be
to the Special District to the extent the Special District has incurred such costs and
expenses.
Section 6: Special District
To the extent the owners of the Lift One Lodge Project area and of the Lodge at Aspen
Mountain Project area elect to form a Special District to fund, construct, operate and/or
maintain certain of these subdivision improvements and amenities, the details thereof
shall be set forth in the Master Development Agreement. The Agreement shall provide
that in the event either the Lift One Lodge Project or the Lodge at Aspen Mountain
Project is ready to proceed with its development ahead of the other Project, then that
Project shall have the right to proceed on its own to form the Special District with the
requirement that the other Project will join the Special District when it is ready to do so.
If the Special District chooses to issue bonds for purposes of constructing improvements,
and if the Special District has sold bonds sufficient in amount to cover the approved
estimated cost of accomplishing the improvements undertaken by the Special District, the
City agrees that such Special District funding shall be deemed adequate financial
assurance from the Project owners for such subdivision improvements. In establishing
the boundaries of and the real property interest to be included within the Special District,
Lots 1, 3 and 5 shall be included and all publicly-owned property and facilities, including
underground public parking, and owner occupied affordable housing units, shall be
excluded.
Section 7: Individual Subdivision/PUD Agreements
No later than two (2) years following the date of recording of the Master
Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat and the Master Development Agreement, individual
Subdivision Plats and individual Subdivision/PUD Agreements shall be prepared,
executed and recorded covering the Lift One Lodge Project and the Lodge at Aspen
Mountain Project, respectively. Said individual Subdivision Plats and Subdivision/PUD
Agreements may be recorded at the same time or at different times, as the respective
developers may determine to be appropriate. Contemporaneously with the recording of
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 15
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
each individual Subdivision Plat and Subdivision/PUD Agreement, a Final PUD
Development Plan shall be recorded for that property and shall include the following
information:
(a) An illustrative site plan of the Project depicting the proposed improvements, the
approved dimensional requirements, and adequate snow storage areas;
(b) A drawing(s) representing the Project's architectural character, which demonstrates
the general architectural character of each building and depicts materials, fenestration,
projections, and dimensions and locations of elevator shaft heads, skylights,
mechanical equipment, etc.. Mechanical equipment shall be screened from pedestrian
view;
(c) A landscape plan depicting the location, amount, and species of landscape
improvements with an irrigation plan, containing a signature line for the City Parks
Department; this plan should also include any movable planters/pots within
pedestrian areas;
(d) A grading and drainage plan, with any off-site improvements specified;
(e) A utility and public infrastructure plan meeting the standards of the City Engineer and
City utility agencies; and
(f) An exterior lighting plan meeting the requirements of Section 26.575.150 of the Land
Use Code.
(g) Cost estimates for the improvements and requirements described in the
Subdivision/PUD Agreements; and
(h) A description of the financial assurances to be provided.
Section 8: Rezonings
Upon the approval of this Ordinance by the Aspen City Council, Lots 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 are
hereby rezoned as depicted on the Proposed Zoning Map attached hereto as Exhibit 2.
The rezoning shall become effective upon the recordation of the Master
Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat, and the Official Zone District Map of the City of Aspen
shall be amended by the Community Development Director as follows.
(a) Lot 1, Lift One Lodge, shall be depicted as included within the L, Lodge, zone district
with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay. A portion of Lot 1 shall include
H, Historic Overlay, to reflect the portion of Lot 1 containing a tower of the original
Lift 1 system and the relocation of the Skier's Chalet Steak House building off of this
Lot. The Lodge Zone District permits the development, operations, and maintenance
of ski area structures, facilities, equipment, management and operations.
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 16
Lib One Neighborhood M aster Plan
(b) Lot 2, Lift One Park, shall be depicted as included within the PUB, Public, zone
district with H, Historic Overlay and a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay.
The PUB Zone District permits the development, operations, and maintenance of ski
area structures, facilities, equipment, management and operations.
(c) Lot 3, Skiers Chalet Steak House, shall be depicted as included within the NC,
Neighborhood Commercial, zone district with a Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Overlay. Lot 3 shall also include H, Historic Overlay, to reflect the prior Historic
Designation of the Skiers Chalet Steak House building and its relocation thereto.
(d) Lot 4, Willoughby Park, shall be depicted as included within the PUB, Public, zone
district with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay. The PUB Zone District
permits the development, operations, and maintenance of ski area structures,
facilities, equipment, management and operations.
(e) Lot 6, Deane Street Condominiums, shall be depicted as included within the AH,
Affordable Housing, zone district with a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Overlay.
Section 9: Public Right-of--Way Vacations
The following public right-of--way vacations within the Lift One Neighborhood shall be
and hereby are approved, and the fee simple ownership of the lands underlying such
vacated rights-of--way shall be combined with and incorporated into the respective
adjacent parcels. Such vacations and resulting ownerships are shown on the Proposed
Street and Alley Vacation Map attached hereto as Exhibit 3, shall be depicted and
described on the Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat, and shall become effective
upon the recording of the Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat and the Master
Development Agreement.
(a) That portion of Deane Street located east of Garmisch Street along the northern
boundary of the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project;
(b) That portion of Juan Street depicted on Exhibit 3, the Proposed Street and Alley
Vacation Map;
(c) That portion of South Aspen Street located south of Juan Street and north of the
northern boundary of the Shadow Mountain Condominiums;
(d) Those portions of Gilbert Street depicted on Exhibit 3, the Proposed Street and Alley
Vacation Map;
(e) Hill Street east of South Aspen Street through the Lift One Lodge Project;
(f) Summit Street east of South Aspen Street through the Lift One Lodge Project; and
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 17
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
(g) The portion of the remaining alley in Block 9, Eames Addition to the City of Aspen,
within the Lift One Lodge Project.
Section 10: Public Right-of-Way Dedications and Perpetual Easements
The Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat shall accomplish the following public right-
of-way dedications and shall grant the following perpetual easements and encroachment
licenses as depicted on the Proposed Subdivision Map attached hereto as Exhibit 4, to
wit:
(a) A public right-of--way for relocated South Aspen Street;
(b) A public pedestrian easement along the vacated portion of Juan Street;
(c) A public ski and pedestrian easement within Lot 1, Lift One Lodge Project, within
Lot 2, Lift One Park, and within Lot 4, Willoughby Park;
(d) An easement granted to the Aspen Skiing Company and/or assigns within Lots 1, 2
and 4 for purposes of constructing, operating and maintaining the surface lift and
other associated skiing improvements and operations;
(e) A perpetual subsurface easement beneath Lot 2, Lift One Park, and Lot 4,
Willoughby Park, for the use and benefit of the Lift One Lodge Project and the Lodge
at Aspen Mountain Project for purposes of constructing, operating, using, maintaining
and accessing parking garages;
(f) A perpetual subsurface easement beneath a portion of relocated South Aspen Street
for the use and benefit of the Lift One Lodge Project and the Lodge at Aspen
Mountain Project for purposes of constructing, operating, using, maintaining and
accessing a parking garage; and
(g) A perpetual access easement across Lot 1 for the benefit of the Aspen Skiing
Company.
In addition to the foregoing, the City of Aspen public right-of--way known as Dean Street,
a/k/a Deane Street, is hereby officially named and designated Deane Street (with an "e"),
and this spelling shall be reflected in the various Plats and Agreements recorded pursuant
to this Ordinance.
Section 11: Approved Uses and Development Programs
11.1 Lot 1, Lift One Lode. The Lift One Lodge Project is approved as a mixed
use membership lodge/whole ownership project consisting of 35 lodge units, 5 free
market residential units, the affordable housing components described in Section 16.1
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 18
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
below, a maximum of 9,000 square feet of net leasable commercial space and a total
of 250 subgrade parking spaces.
The Project's lodge component will consist of one-bedroom, two-bedroom, three-
bedroom and four-bedroom suites. Each bedroom within the lodge component will
be separately keyed as a "lock-off' unit. For Growth Management Quota System
purposes, the Project's lodge component will contain a total of 101 bedrooms
equaling 101 keys or separately rentable divisions.
The Project's commercial component shall consist of a public restaurant, kitchen and
bar; and. various facilities for the Aspen Skiing Company, including, but not limited
to, a ticket sales area, public/employee locker rooms, other skier servicing facilities,
etc. The public restaurant, bar and kitchen will contain a maximum of 4,000 square
feet of net leasable commercial area. The Aspen Skiing Company's facilities will
contain a maximum of 5,000 square feet of net leasable commercial area. The lodge
will also include other guest service areas, facilities and ancillary spaces and uses
which are not considered net leasable area for Growth Management Quota System
purposes.
The Historic Preservation Commission previously granted Conceptual Approval for
the relocation of the Skiers Chalet Lodge and the Skiers Chalet Steak House. The
Lift One Lodge Project shall require final approval from the Historic Preservation
Commission for both relocations, which shall be processed separately from the
Master Plan in accordance with the provisions of Chapter 26.415 of the City of Aspen
Land Use Code.
11.2 Lot 5, Lodge at Aspen Mountain. The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project is
approved as a mixed use hotel/fractional/whole ownership project consisting of 75
lodge units, 26 fractional ownership units, 5 free market residential units, the
affordable housing components described in Section 16.2 below, a maximum of
18,000 square feet of net leasable commercial space, and a minimum of 238
subgrade parking spaces.
The Project's hotel component will consist of 72 standard/executive and one-bedroom
lodge rooms; 2two-bedroom lodge suites; and one two-bedroom presidential suite for
a total of 78 bedrooms. The Project's fractional ownership component will consist of
8three-bedroom units and 18 four-bedroom units containing a total of 96 bedrooms.
For Growth Management Quota System purposes, the Project's hotel and fractional
ownership components will contain a total of 174 bedrooms and 101 keys or
separately rentable divisions. No "lock-off' bedrooms are proposed. The whole
ownership component will consist of one three-bedroom free market residential unit
and 4four-bedroom free market residential units.
The Project's 18,000 square feet of net leasable commercial area will consist of a spa;
the hotel's restaurant and kitchen, rooftop bar, lobby lounge, sundries shop, meeting
rooms and ballroom; and a small sales center for the fractional ownership units. The
hotel will also include other guest service areas, facilities and ancillary spaces and
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 19
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
uses which are not considered net leasable area for Growth Management Quota
System purposes.
The Project will be condominiumized in two or more condominium regimes (one
covering the Deane Street Condominium affordable housing project on Lot 6), and
the fractional ownership units will be sold pursuant to a timeshare use plan.
11.3 Lot 3, Skiers Chalet Steak House. The Skiers Chalet Steak House is
approved as a mixed use commercial/affordable housing building which will contain
approximately 1,052 square feet of net leasable commercial space on its ground floor
and a total of 5 dormitory affordable housing rooms on its second and third floors.
An outdoor seating area will be provided adjacent to the building. The commercial
space's net leasable area shall be identified in the Lift One Lodge Final PUD
Development Plan and individual Subdivision/PUD Agreement.
The Lift One Lodge Subdivision/PUD Agreement shall also include a list of
permitted uses for the commercial space, which list shall be derived from those uses
permitted within the (NC), Neighborhood Commercial, zone district.
11.4 Lot 4, Willoughby Park. Approval is granted for the relocation of the Skiers
Chalet Lodge to Willoughby Park as depicted in the Decision Packet, and the use of
the building for community purposes including, but not limited to, a historical
museum, affordable housing, and/or affordable commercial space. The building's use
shall be addressed in the Lift One Lodge Subdivision/PUD Agreement to be recorded
concurrently with the Lift One Lodge Final PUD Development Plan.
11.5 Lot 6, Deane Street Condominiums. Lot 6 is approved for the development
of a 15 unit affordable housing project. The Deane Street Condominiums Affordable
Housing Project will consist of 7 studio units, 4one-bedroom units, 2two-bedroom
units, and 2three-bedroom units.
11.6 Lift lA Base Area Development Envelope. The Lift lA Base Area
Development Envelope is approved for the uses, activities and improvements
necessary, ancillary and incidental to the development, function, operation and
maintenance of winter and summer recreation and a ski area base, including, but not
limited to the following:
(a) Skiing, snowboarding, and other winter and summer recreational sports and
activities;
(b) Ski and snow sports racing, competitions, demonstrations, other special events,
including supporting activities, facilities, improvements and infrastructure;
(c) Ski lifts and mechanized uphill transportation, including all related improvements
and equipment, such as lift terminals, towers, platforms, supporting or retaining
walls and foundations, stairs, elevators, plaza spaces, lift mazing, housings, roofs,
and similar structures, operator houses or lift shacks and storage;
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 20
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
(d) Ticketing sales and all necessary and incidental commercial skier services
functions, facilities and equipment, including, but not limited to ski and
equipment rental, lockers, public restrooms, offices, ski school facilities,
emergency medical care, and related activities and uses;
(e) Making, clearing, removing, sculpting, grooming and maintaining snow and snow
surfaces, together with all the infrastructure, deep and shallow utilities, and
equipment and machinery necessary for performing the same, whether fixed or
mobile;
(f) Motorized vehicle access and use, including snow grooming equipment as
described above, as well as snowmobiles, emergency vehicles, wheeled vehicles,
service and support trucks and other vehicles routinely used in the conduct and
performance of mountain recreation, operations, services, construction, supply,
events and the permitted uses described herein;
(g) Operational, commercial, interpretive, and informational signage reasonably
necessary and/or incidental to the performance of other activities and functions
described herein;
(h) Any and all customary activities, equipment, housings, structures, and functions
which may be necessary, appropriate, ancillary and/or incidental to the full use,
practice and enjoyment of skiing and other recreational sports and activities,
mechanized uphill transportation, and related business purposes and activities;
and
(i) Installation, staging, construction, maintenance, alteration, repair, operation,
servicing, and replacement of all of improvements, structures, materials,
landscaping and/or equipment described or contemplated herein.
Section 12: Approved Dimensional Requirements
12.1 Lot 1, Lift One Lodge. The following dimensional requirements are
approved for Lot 1 and shall be reflected in the Final PUD Development Plan for the
Lift One Lodge Project.
(a) Minimum Lot Size
(b) Minimum Lot Width
(c) Minimum Front Yard Setback
(d) Minimum Side Yard Setback
(e) Minimum Rear Yard Setback
(f) Maximum Building Height
(g) Minimum Distance Between Buildings
Per Final PUD Development Plan
Per Final PUD Development Plan
5'
0'
5'
Varies, 55.5 ft. at highest point
Per Final PUD Development Plan
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Page 21
(h) Maximum Allowable Floor Area
(i) Minimum Off-Street Parking Spaces
135,000 sq. ft.
250
12.2 Lot 5, Lodge at Aspen Mountain. The following dimensional requirements
are approved for Lot 5 and shall be reflected in the Final PUD Development Plan
for the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project.
(a) Minimum Lot Size
(b) Minimum Lot Width
(c) Minimum Front Yard Setback
(d) Minimum Side Yard Setback
(e) Minimum Rear Yard Setback
(f) Maximum Building Height
(g) Minimum Distance Between Buildings
(h) Maximum Allowable Floor Area
(i) Minimum Off-Street Parking Spaces
Per Final PUD Development Plan
Per Final PUD Development Plan
5'
5'
5'
Varies, 59.5 ft. at highest point
Per Final PUD Development Plan
191,000 sq. ft.
238
12.3 Lot 3, Skiers Chalet Steak House. The following dimensional requirements
are approved for Lot 3 and shall be reflected in the Final PUD Development Plan for
the Lift One Lodge Project.
(a) Minimum Lot Size
(b) Minimum Lot Width
(c) Minimum Front Yard Setback
(d) Minimum Side Yard Setback
(e) Minimum Rear Yard Setback
(f) Maximum Building Height
(g) Minimum Distance Between Buildings
(h) Maximum Allowable Floor Area
(i) Minimum Off-Street Parking Spaces
Per Final PUD Development Plan
Per Final PUD Development Plan
5'
5'
0'
34'
Per Final PUD Development Plan
4,000
0
12.4 Lot 4, Willoughby Park. The following dimensional requirements are
approved for Lot 4 and shall be reflected in the Final PUD Development Plan for the
Lift One Lodge Project.
(a) Minimum Lot Size
(b) Minimum Lot Width
(c) Minimum Front Yard Setback
Per Final PUD Development Plan
Per Final PUD Development Plan
40'
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Page 22
(d) Minimum Side Yard Setback
(e) Minimum Rear Yard Setback
(f) Maximum Building Height
(g) Minimum Distance Between Buildings
(h) Maximum Allowable Floor Area
(i) Minimum Off-Street Parking Spaces
10'
10'
32'
Per Final PUD Development Plan
6,000 sq. ft.
0
12.5 Lot 6. Deane Street Condominiums. The following dimensional
requirements are approved for Lot 6 and shall be reflected in the Final PUD
Development Plan for the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project.
(a) Minimum Lot Size
(b) Minimum Lot Width
(c) Minimum Front Yard Setback
(d) Minimum Side Yard Setback
(e) Minimum Rear Yard Setback
(f J Maximum Building Height
(g) Minimum Distance Between Buildings
(h) Maximum Allowable Floor Area
(i) Minimum Off-Street Parking Spaces
Per Final PUD Development Plan
Per Final PUD Development Plan
0' '
5'
5'
3 5'
Per Final PUD Development Plan
13,000 sq. ft.
0
12.6 Height and Floor Area Measurements.
(a) Height, building. For the purposes of calculating the maximum height for
development within this master plan area, the height of a building shall be the
maximum distance possible measured vertically from interpolated natural grade,
to be recorded in the Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat, to the highest point
or structure within a vertical plane. Architectural and mechanical appurtenances
including but not limited to antennas, chimneys, flues, vents, trellises, flag poles
or similar structures shall not extend over ten (10) feet above the specified
maximum height limit.
(b) Floor area. For the purposes of calculating the maximum allowable floor area for
development within this master plan area, there shall be included that floor area
within the surrounding exterior walls as measured from the outside face of
structural sheathing. The calculation of the floor area of a building or a portion
thereof shall not include decks, balconies, exterior stairways, gazebos, porches,
landscape terraces and similar features. For any story that is partially above and
partially below interpolated natural grade, as recorded in the Master
Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat, only the floor area above the point at which
interpolated natural grade crosses the subfloor elevation of that story shall be
counted towards floor area.
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 23
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Section 13: Reconstruction Credits
The following reconstruction credits have been verified by the City of Aspen and shall be
credited against the Growth Management Quota System allotment requirements of the
Lift One Lodge Project and the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project.
13.1 Lift One Lodge Project
(a) A total of 38 lodging reconstruction credits consisting of 20 lodge units in the
former Holland House Lodge; 10 lodge units in the former Skiers Chalet Lodge;
and 8 lodge units in the former Skiers Chalet Steak House shall be credited
against the Lift One Lodge Project's lodging GMQS allotment requirement. The
38 reconstruction credits shall equate to 76 lodging pillow for allotment purposes.
(b) One free market residential reconstruction credit located in the former Holland
House Lodge shall be credited against the Lift One Lodge Project's free market
residential GMQS allotment requirement.
(c) A commercial reconstruction credit of 3,374 square feet of net leasable area
consisting of 2,429 square feet in the Skiers Chalet Steak House and 945 square
feet in the Lift 1 A base structure shall be credited against the Lift One Lodge
Project's commercial GMQS allotment requirement.
13.2 Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project
A total of 19 free market residential reconstruction credits consisting of one single-
family dwelling unit, and two duplex units and 16multi-family dwelling units located
in the former Mine Dumps Apartments, shall be credited against the Lodge at Aspen
Mountain Project's and the Lift One Lodge Project's free market residential GMQS
allotment requirements.
Section 14: Growth Management Quota System Allotments
The following Growth Management Quota System allotments are hereby granted to the
Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project and the Lift One Lodge Project.
Develo ment T e Allotment or Lod e at As en Mountain
Residential-Free Market 0 Units (5 Reconstruction Credits)
Commercial 18,000 Net Leasable Square Feet
Residential-Affordable Housing 15 Dormitory Rooms
Lodging 348 Pillows
Develo ment Tye Allotment for Lift One Lod e
Residential-Free Market 0 Units (5 Reconstruction Credits)
Commercial 6,680 Net Leasable Square Feet
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 24
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Residential-Affordable Housing 16 Units
Lodging 126 Pillows
Develo ment Tye Allotment for Skiers Chalet Steakhouse
Residential-Affordable Housing 5 Dormitory Rooms
Develo ment T e Allotment or Ski Museum
Essential Public Facility Exempt (9,000 Gross Square Feet)
Development Type Allotment for Deane Street Affordable
Housing
Residential-Affordable Housing 15 Units
The above growth allotments are in addition to reconstruction credits associated witht he
properties but which do not require new growth allotment. The Growth Management
Quota System allotments granted pursuant to this Ordinance shall expire on the day after
the fifteenth anniversary of the effective date of the Development Order issued by the
Community Development Director described in Section 3(d) above.
Section 15: Growth Management Quota System Accounting
The Lodging and Commercial Growth Management Quota System allotments granted in
Section 14 above constitute multi-year development allotments as provided for in Section
26.470.090.1. of the Land Use Code. Pursuant to Section 26.470.090.1.c, the Community
Development Director is hereby directed to reduce the Annual Allotment, as provided in
Section 26.470.030.D, in future years to accommodate the Lift One Neighborhood
Master Plan as follows.
Development Typical Lift One 2009 2010 2011
Type Annual Neighborhood GMQS GMQS GMQS
Allotment Master Plan Year Yeaz Yeaz
Lodging 112 pillows 474 pillows
Section 16: Affordable Housing Requirements
16.1 Lot 1, Lift One Lodge. The Lift One Lodge Project will generate 53.5
employees. The Project has committed to provide affordable housing mitigation for
40 employees or 75 percent of the employees generated. The Project's employee
generation and mitigation commitments are as follows.
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 25
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
(a) Lodge Bedrooms. The development of lodge units within the L, Lodge, zone
district generates 0.5 employees per bedroom. The Lift One Lodge Project
contains 101 lodge bedrooms and has a lodge GMQS reconstruction credit of 38
bedrooms. The Project's 63 net new lodge bedrooms, therefore, will generate
31.5 employees.
(b) Main-Level Commercial Space. Commercial space on the main level of a
building in the L, Lodge, zone district generates 4.1 employees per 1,000 square
feet of net leasable space. The Lift One Lodge Project contains approximately
3,600 square feet of net leasable area on the main level and has a commercial
GMQS reconstruction credit of 3,374 square feet. The Project's main-level net
new commercial space, therefore, will generate approximately 1.0 employees.
(c) Basement/Upper Level Commercial Space. Commercial space on the basement
and upper levels of a building in the L, Lodge, zone district generates 3.075
employees per 1,000 square feet of net leasable space. The Lift One Lodge
Project contains approximately 5,400 square feet of net leasable area on the
basement and upper levels. The Project's commercial component on these levels,
therefore, will generate approximately 16.5 employees.
(d) Lot 3, Skiers Chalet Steak House Commercial Space. The Skiers Chalet Steak
House will contain approximately 1,052 of commercial net leasable space on its
main level. Commercial space on the main level of a building in the NC,
Neighborhood Commercial, zone district generates 4.1 employees per 1,000
square feet of net leasable space. The Skiers Chalet Steak House's commercial
space, therefore, will generate approximately 4.5 employees.
(e) Total Employees Generated/Mitigation Requirement:
(i) Lodge Bedrooms 31.5 Employees
(ii) Main-Level Commercial Space 1.0 Employees
(iii) Basement & Upper Level Commercial Space 16.5 Employees
(iv) Skiers Chalet Steak House Commercial Space 4.5 Employees
(v) Total Employees Generated 53.5 Employees
(vi) Required Mitigation @ 75 Percent 40 Employees
(f) Affordable Housing Mitigation. The Lift One Lodge Project's affordable housing
mitigation shall be met as follows.
(i) On-Site Rental Units. The Lift One Lodge Project shall provide housing for
no less than 21 employees in a configuration of studio units and two-bedroom
units on Lot 1 within Lift One Lodge and dormitory rooms on Lot 3 within
Skiers Chalet Steak House building. The configuration of the dormitory shall
be set forth in the Final PUD Development Plan for the Project. The units will
be deed restricted to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority ("APCHA")
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 26
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Category 3 income and occupancy guidelines for rental units in effect at the
time of recording of a Condominium Map for the Project. The deed restriction
will provide that whenever an affordable housing unit becomes available for
rental, the unit owner shall have a period of thirty (30) days from the date of
termination of the prior tenancy to rent the unit to a person employed within
the Project, provided that such person is otherwise qualified under the current
APCHA Guidelines. If no such qualified Project employee has signed a lease
agreement on the unit within said thirty (30) day period, APCHA shall have
the right to select a qualified tenant for the unit. No Final Certificate of
Occupancy shall be issued for the Project until the deed restriction for the
affordable housing units has been executed and recorded.
Unless a different arrangement is worked out with the City Attorney, and only
to the extent necessary to comply with applicable Colorado law, at the time of
recording of the deed restriction the owner of the affordable housing units will
convey aone-tenth of one percent interest in the affordable housing units to
APCHA, subject to such terms and conditions as the owner and the City may
mutually agree upon.
(ii) Lift One Lodge/City of Aspen Partnership. The Lift One Lodge shall
financially contribute to a City of Aspen affordable housing project in an
amount necessary to house the balance of the 75% required mitigation not
housed on Lot 1 and Lot 3 as delineated in (f)(i) above. It is anticipated that
this will be the Burlingame Ranch affordable housing project, but a different
City affordable housing project may be substituted in whole or in part, by
mutual agreement of the parties. The Lift One Lodge Project and the City of
Aspen shall enter into a Housing Agreement whereby the Project agrees to
contribute to the City the dollar amount calculated to be required to build the
number of units needed to house the number of employees calculated herein.
Based on a cooperative analysis performed by the City and the developer, the
Burlingame Ranch subsidy shall be $130,000.00 per employee. The Housing
Agreement shall be attached as an Exhibit to the Lift One Lodge Project
individual Subdivision/PUD Agreement. The affordable housing units
developed with this financial contribution shall be sold or rented, at the City's
election, at a sale or rental rate determined by the City in accordance with
applicable APCHA Guidelines, and shall not be owned or controlled in any
manner by the Lift One Lodge Project.
(g) Total Employees Housed/Lift One Lodge.
(i) Lots 1 and 3, On-Site Rental Units 21 Employees
(ii) Partnership Units 19 Employees
(iii) Total Employees Housed 40 Employees
16.2 Lot 5, Lode at Aspen Mountain. The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project
will generate 168.5 employees. The Project has committed to provide affordable
housing mitigation for 126.5 employees or 75 percent of the employees generated.
The Project's employee generation and mitigation commitments are as follows:
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 27
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
(a) Demolition of the Mine Dumps Apartments. The pre-existing, prior to demolition,
Mine Dumps Apartments consisted of 16 multi-family units, 23 bedrooms, and
7,722 square feet of net livable area. Demolition of these units resulted in a
replacement requirement of 8 units, 12 bedrooms and 3,861 square feet of net
livable area. These units, bedrooms and net livable area must be provided on Lot
5 to satisfy the replacement requirement. The replacement requirement equates to
housing for 15 employees.
(b) Lodge/Fractional Ownership Bedrooms. The development of lodge and fractional
ownership units in the L, Lodge, zone district generates 0.5 employees per
bedroom. The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project contains 174 lodge/fractional
bedrooms. The lodge and fractional ownership components of the Project,
therefore, generate 87 employees.
(c) Main-Level Commercial Space. Commercial space on the main level of a building
in the L, Lodge, zone district generates 4.1 employees per 1,000 square feet of net
leasable area. The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project contains approximately
10,800 net leasable square feet on the main level generating approximately 44.5
employees.
(d) Basement-Level Commercial Space. Commercial space on the basement level of a
building in the L, Lodge, zone district generates 3.075 employees per 1,000
square feet of net leasable area. The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project contains
approximately 7,200 net leasable square feet on the basement level generating
approximately 22 employees.
(e) Total Employees Generated/Mitigation Requirement:
(i) Mine Dumps Replacement 15 Employees
(ii) Lodge/Fractional Ownership Bedrooms 87 Employees
(iii) Main-Level Commercial Space 44.5 Employees
(iv) Basement-Level Commercial Space 22 Employees
(v) Total Employees Generated 168.5 Employees
(vi) Required Mitigation @ 75 Percent 126.5 Employees
(f) Affordable Housing Mitigation: The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project's
affordable housing mitigation requirement shall be met as follows.
(i) On-Site Rental Units. The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project shall contain 15
dormitory affordable housing units on Lot 5. Each dorm unit will house two
employees for a total of 30 employees housed. The configuration of the
dormitory shall be set forth in the Final PUD Development Plan for the
Project. These affordable housing units will satisfy the Project's replacement
affordable housing requirement described in Section 16.2(a) above. The units
will be deed restricted to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 28
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
("APCHA") Category 3 income and occupancy guidelines for rental units in
effect at the time of recording of a Condominium Map for the Project. The
deed restriction will provide that whenever an affordable housing unit
becomes available for rental, the unit owner shall have a period of thirty (30)
days from the date of termination of the prior tenancy to rent the unit to a
person employed within the Project, provided that such person is otherwise
qualified under the current APCHA Guidelines. If no such qualified Project
employee has signed a lease agreement on the unit within said thirty (30) day
period, APCHA shall have the right to select a qualified tenant for the unit. No
Final Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued for the Project until the deed
restriction for the affordable housing units has been executed and recorded.
Unless a different arrangement is worked out with the City Attorney, and only
to the extent necessary to comply with applicable Colorado law, at the time of
recording of the deed restriction the owner of the affordable housing units will
convey aone-tenth of one percent interest in the affordable housing units to
APCHA, subject to such terms and conditions as the owner and the City may
mutually agree upon.
(ii) On-Site Sale Units. The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project shall provide 7
studio, 4one-bedroom, 2two-bedroom and 2three-bedroom affordable
housing units on Lot 6, to be known as the Deane Street Condominiums.
These units will house a total of 26.25 employees. The unit mix and
minimum sizes shall be set forth in the Final PUD Development Plan for the
Project. These affordable housing units will be deed restricted to the APCHA
Category 3 income and occupancy guidelines for sale units in effect at the
time of recording of a Condominium Map for the Deane Street
Condominiums. No Final Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued for the
Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project until the deed restriction for these
affordable housing units has been executed and recorded.
(iii)Off--Site Sale Units. It is anticipated that 27 employees will be housed in Units
I-Q of the Pacific Avenue Condominiums, which are to be constructed at the
Aspen Airport Business Center pursuant to BOCC Resolution No. 135-2004
recorded October 29, 2004 as Reception No. 503623. The Lodge at Aspen
Mountain shall retain the right to select the first purchaser of each of these
affordable housing units, provided only that such purchaser is qualified by the
APCHA to be a purchaser under the applicable APCHA Guidelines. No Final
Certificate of Occupancy shall be issued for the Lodge at Aspen Mountain
Project until the deed restriction for these affordable housing units has been
executed and recorded.
(iv)Lodge at Aspen Mountain/City of Aspen Partnership. The Lodge at Aspen
Mountain Project shall financially contribute to a City of Aspen affordable
housing project in an amount necessary to house the balance of the 75%
required mitigation not housed pursuant to (i), (ii) and (iii) above. It is
anticipated that this will be the Burlingame Ranch affordable housing project,
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 29
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
but a different City affordable housing project may be substituted in whole or
in part, by mutual agreement of the parties. The Lodge at Aspen Mountain
Project and the City of Aspen shall enter into a Housing Agreement whereby
the Project agrees to contribute to the City the dollar amount calculated to be
required to build the number of units needed to house the number of
employees calculated herein. Based on a cooperative analysis performed by
the City and the developer, the Burlingame Ranch subsidy shall be
$130,000.00 per employee. The Housing Agreement shall be attached as an
Exhibit to the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project individual Subdivision/PUD
Agreement. The affordable housing units developed with this financial
contribution shall be sold or rented, at the City's election, at a sale or rental
rate determined by the City in accordance with applicable APCHA
Guidelines, and shall not be owned or controlled in any manner by the Lodge
at Aspen Mountain Project.
(v) Mine Dumps Tenants. The tenants in the Mine Dumps Apartments at the time
of demolition thereof shall be provided a right of first refusal to purchase an
affordable housing unit in the Deane Street Condominiums. Such buyers shall
meet the qualification requirements of the APCHA.
(g) Total Employees Housed/Lodge at Aspen Mountain:
(i) On-Site Rental Units 30 Employees
(ii) On-Site Sale Units 26.25 Employees
(iii)Off--Site Sale Units 27 Employees
(iv)Partnership Units 43.25 Employees
(v) Total Employees Housed 126.5 Employees
Section 17: Parking Spaces and Parking Garage
The Lift One Lodge Project and Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project parking garage shall
be considered an approved commercial parking facility. Minimum parking spaces to
serve each Project are identified in Section 12 above. Allocated spaces shall be identified
on the individual Subdivision/PUD Agreements (or the Final PUD Development Plans
attached thereto) required under Section 7 above. Allocated spaces shall not be sold or
leased separate from the portion of a Proj ect to which they are allocated. Unallocated
spaces may be leased by the owners thereof on a daily or longer-term basis, or may be
sold to third parties.
The parking spaces in the parking garage shall be used for parking vehicles and accessory
storage (such as ski storage at the head of a parking space), and shall not be principally
used for storage, trash containers, mechanical equipment, or other non-automobile related
purposes.
Section 18: Building Permit Application
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 30
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
The building permit application for each of the Lift One Lodge Project, the Lodge at
Aspen Mountain Project, and the Lift lA Base Area Project, respectively, shall include
the following:
(a) A copy of this final City Council Ordinance, as recorded, and a letter from the
primary contractor stating that the Ordinance has been read and understood.
(b) The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set.
(c) A completed tap permit for service from the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District.
(d) Evidence that a tree removal permit has been attained pursuant to the requirements of
the City Parks Department. The tree removal permit shall be accompanied by a
detailed landscape plan indicating which trees are to be removed and new plantings
proposed on the site.
(e) A drainage plan including an erosion control plan and snow storage runoff plan
prepared by aColorado-licensed Civil Engineer which maintains sediment and debris
on-site during and after construction. If a ground recharge system is required a soil
percolation report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 5-year storm
frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements.
(f) A final construction site management plan and parking plan pursuant to the
requirements set forth in Section 19 below.
(g) An excavation/stabilization plan prepared by a licensed Engineer.
(h) A fugitive dust control plan approved by the Environmental Health Department
which addresses watering of disturbed areas including haul roads, perimeter silt
fencing, as-needed cleaning of adjacent rights-of--way, speed limits within and
accessing the site, and the ability to request additional measures to prevent a nuisance
during construction. The Project developer shall wash tracked mud and debris from
the street as necessary, and as requested by the City, during construction.
Section 19: Construction Management Plan
At the time that each of the Lift One Lodge Project and the Lodge at Aspen Mountain
Project submits a proposed individual Subdivision/PUD Agreement to the City for
review, and at the time the Lift lA Base Area Project submits a building permit
application to the Building Department for review, the Project developer shall also
prepare and submit a Construction Site Management Plan and Parking Plan (the "CMP")
to the City for consideration. The CMP shall be reviewed by the City's Construction
Management Officer and the City Engineer, and shall be consistent with the City's
revised CMP Requirements Manual of June, 2007, as it may be amended from time to
time. The final CMP shall be attached as an Exhibit to the Project's Final PUD
Development Plan, or in the case of the Lift lA Base Area Project, to its Building Permit.
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 31
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Any further regulations regarding construction management that may be adopted by the
City of Aspen prior to application for a building permit for a Project shall be applicable.
A temporary encroachment license is required for use of City right of way for
construction purposes. A Project developer shall not be allowed to close South Aspen
Street during construction except for relocation and reconstruction of the street and the
construction of subgrade improvements beneath the street. Street closure of South Aspen
Street concurrent with significant public events like World Cup shall be avoided.
Throughout the construction process, access will be maintained to Lift lA and Shadow
Mountain Condos.
A Project developer shall provide phone contact information for the on-site project
management to neighboring properties, and shall post such information on a sign at the
construction site in full public view so that concerns about the development may be made
directly to construction management personnel.
Section 20: Soil Stabilization
The Applicant shall install inclinometers and conduct bi-monthly monitoring for a minimum
of one spring thaw cycle before the issuance of an excavation permit. The number and
location of the inclinometers shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to
installation. If any slope movement is identified by the bi-monthly monitoring, the project
will not be allowed to exacerbate the historic rate of slope movement during or after
construction. If the historic rate of movement is exacerbated during the construction
process, the City shall stop work on the project and require the Applicant to make such
improvements that are necessary to reduce the slope movement back to historic rates. If the
inclinometers determine that there is a historic rate of slope movement, the design shall
exhibit a global stability meeting the AASHTO requirements, which implies a minimum
factor of safety of 1.5.
In preparing soil stability reports for the property, a soil bearing grid with no more than 100
feet between test locations shall be used under the building's footprint. In areas outside of
the building's footprint, test locations shall not exceed 500 feet apart. The depth of soil
borings must exceed the elevation of the lowest footer by twenty (20) feet. Prior to the
recordation of the Subdivision/PUD plans and documents, the Applicant shall develop a
mutually acceptable agreement with the Shadow Mountain Homeowner's Association re.
slope "stability provisions.
Section 21: Hazardous Soils: This site has not been previously identified as containing
hazardous soils. However, detailed soils reports shall be submitted with the Building
Permit application and if any hazardous materials are reported the applicant shall provide
the City with a mine waste testing and handling plan provided by a registered engineer or
other entity with experience in soils and hazardous waste disposal. The plan must comply
with the following conditions of approval regarding development and handling of any
hazardous or toxic soils encountered on the property unless adequate information is
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 32
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
provided to the Environmental Health Department indicating that certain requirements
should be waived:
a. Any disturbed soil or material containing more than 1000 ppm lead that is to be
stored above ground shall be securely contained on and covered with anon-
permeable tarp or other protective barrier approved by the Environmental Health
Department so as to prevent leaching of contaminated material onto or into the
surface soil. Disturbed soil or material may be stored onsite if the Environmental
Health Department determines that there exists a satisfactory method of disposal
at the excavation site. Disturbed soil and solid waste may be disposed of outside
of the site upon acceptance of the material at a duly licensed and authorized
receiving facility.
b. Non-removal of contaminated material. No contaminated soil or solid waste shall
be removed, placed, stored, transported or disposed of outside the boundaries of
the site without having first obtained any and all necessary disposal permits.
c. Dust suppression. All activity or development shall be accompanied by dust
suppression measures such as the application of water or other soil surfactant to
minimize the creation and release of dust and other particulates into the air and to
prevent such dust and particulates from traveling off the site.
d. Any contaminated soil or mine waste rock that is disturbed or exposed shall be
contained on the property such that runoff does not exit the property or
contaminate clean soils existing on or off the property.
Any contaminated soil or mine waste rock to be left on-site shall be placed under
structures, pavement or covered by a minimum of 1 foot of clean soil that
contains less than 1,000 ppm lead.
Section 22: Approval for Temporary Use of Willoughby Park and Lift One Park
The City Council hereby approves the temporary use of Willoughby Park and Lift One
Park for construction-related purposes in connection with both the Lift One Lodge
Project and the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project, respectively, provided that the details
and conditions of any such uses shall be described in the CMP for each Project pursuant
to Section 19 above and shall be coordinated with the City Parks Department.
Section 23: Pre-Submittal Meeting
A Project developer shall arrange with the Community Development case planner to
conduct apre-submission meeting with the City Community Development Staff prior to
submittal of a building permit application. This meeting shall include the developer, the
general contractor, the architect of the construction drawings, the project planner, the
Community Development Engineer, a representative of the City Building Department,
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 33
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
the City Construction Management Officer, and the Community Development
Department's case planner.
Section 24: Juan Street Pedestrian and Emergency Vehicle Easement
The Juan Street Pedestrian and Emergency Vehicle Easement, as depicted on the
Proposed Subdivision Map attached hereto as Exhibit 4, shall be established as a
perpetual easement on the Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat pursuant to Section 4
above. The bridge over Juan Street connecting components of the Lodge at Aspen
Mountain Project shall be at least sixteen and a half feet above Juan Street to allow for
the passage of emergency vehicles under the structure.
Section 25: Impact and Other Proiect Fees
The Lift One Lodge Project, the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project, and the Lift lA Base
Area Project respectively, shall be responsible for payment of impact, permit, timeshare
mitigation and other project fees to be defined in the Master Development Agreement.
Section 26: Funding of Replacement of Lift lA
26.1 Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project. Pursuant to an agreement with the
Aspen Skiing Company, in the -event the developer proceeds with the construction
of the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project, the developer shall provide Four Million
Dollars ($4,000,000) to the Aspen Skiing Company towards the cost of replacing
Lift lA with a new high-speed lift. Such commitment is hereby incorporated into
this Ordinance as a condition to City Council approval. If the new lift is not yet
operational when the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project is ready for occupancy, in
order to be granted a right of occupancy by the City the developer shall provide to
the City and to the Aspen Skiing Company, as co-beneficiaries, a Letter of Credit
or Performance Bond in the amount of $4,000,000 (less any portion thereof
already advanced by the developer to the Aspen Skiing Company), in a form
satisfactory to the City Attorney, as collateral security for developer's
performance of this condition.
26.2 Lift One Lodge Project. In the event the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project
does not proceed, the Lift One Lodge Project and the Aspen
Skiing Company have agreed to share the cost of replacing Lift lA with a new
high speed lift. If the new lift is not operational when the Lift One Lodge Project
is ready for occupancy, in order to be granted a right of occupancy by the City the
developer of the Lift One Lodge Project and the Aspen Skiing Company shall
together provide to the City a Letter of Credit or Performance Bond in the amount
required to complete the installation of the new lift, as calculated by the Aspen
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 34
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Skiing Company and reviewed and approved by the City, in a form satisfactory to
the City Attorney, as collateral security for the completion of the new lift.
Section 27: Environmental Initiatives
The Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project and the Lift One Lodge Project have each committed
to the following energy goals for their respective Projects. Such goals are hereby
included as conditions of approval.
(a) Fifty percent (50%) less fossil fuel consumption in the Project's buildings
compared to the Ashrae 90.1 baseline;
(b) LEED Silver or Gold Certification when the Project becomes operational; and,
(c) Post-occupancy "true-up" through off-sets, operating improvements, or capital
improvements.
The details of the energy conservation program shall be set forth in the individual
Subdivision/PUD Agreement for each Project.
Section 28: condominiumization
condominiumization of (a) the Lift One Lodge Project; (b) the Lodge at Aspen
Mountain Project, and (c) the Deane Street Condominium Project, respectively, are
hereby approved by the City of Aspen. Upon substantial completion of construction of
each Project, the developer shall submit a Condominium Map of the Project to the
Community Development Director for review and approval. During the period of vested
rights described in Section 3(c) above, the Condominium Maps shall be reviewed under
the applicable provisions of the City's Land Use Regulations in effect on the date of final
adoption of this Ordinance. Following expiration of said vesting period, the
Condominium Maps shall be reviewed under the then-current condominiumization
requirements of the Land Use Regulations. The condominiumization of each Project shall
be accomplished prior to the closing of the sale of any unit or fractional interest in the
Project.
With regard to the Deane Street Condominiums, the Condominium Declaration and the
HOA Articles and Bylaws shall be reviewed and approved by the Aspen/Pitkin County
Housing Authority before the affordable housing deed restriction is recorded on the
property. The Condominium Declaration and HOA documents shall be consistent with
the provisions of the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act.
Section 29: Vacation of Townhome Approvals; Further Vested Rights Extension.
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 35
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
The developer of the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project has represented to the City that
the approvals previously granted by Ordinance No. 32 (Series of 2003) for the
development of 14 free market townhomes and 17 affordable housing units on the Project
site, together with all vested rights extensions associated therewith (the "townhome
approvals"), shall be deemed fully and forever vacated, terminated and of no further force
or effect upon the execution and recording of the Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat
described in Section 4 above. The Project developer and the City shall cooperate in the
execution and recording of such instruments as may be necessary or appropriate to
accomplish the vacation and/or termination of said townhome approvals. The foregoing
commitments by developer are incorporated herein as a condition to the City Council's
approval of this Ordinance.
The vested rights period associated with the townhome approvals presently expires on
July 28, 2009. In light of the complexity of the several developments approved by this
Ordinance and the two (2) year time period established in the Ordinance for the recording
of the Master Subdivision/Street Vacation Plat, said vested rights period is hereby further
extended by the City Council for a period of two (2) additional years, to expire on July
28, 2011.
Section 30: Master Plan Amendments
The entire Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan shall remain active as a COWOP land use
review subject to the provisions of Land Use Code Section 26.500, Development
Reasonably Necessary for the Convenience and Welfare of the Public, and the procedures
therein and as established pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 13 (Series of 2008)
and Resolution No. 80 (Series of 2008), for the entire vested rights period set forth in
Section 3(c) above or as otherwise extended by the Aspen City Council. The purpose of
the COWOP land use review remaining open is to allow for the consideration and
enactment of potential amendments to the Master Plan, some of which could be
substantive and require City Council approval.
Amendments may be processed at any time and from time to time by any one or more of
the developers of the Lift One Lodge Project, the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Project, and
the Lift lA Base Area Project.
Amendments which are not materially inconsistent with a representation or condition of
approval and which are substantially consistent with the goals of the Lift One
Neighborhood Master Plan and the use, character, intensity, traffic generation, employee
generation, circulation patterns, and public amenities of the Master Plan development as
approved in this Ordinance by the City Council, may be approved by the Community
Development Director. By way of example and not of limitation, the types of
amendments to the Master Plan approval which may be approved by the Community
Development Director may include insubstantial changes to the site plan, architectural
materials, fenestration, character, projections, floor area, gross floor area, net leasable
commercial area, unit counts and configuration, interior partitioning and circulation,
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 36
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
parking ratios and layout, insubstantial height modifications, location and vertical
projections for mechanical equipment or elevator overruns, the location and design of
pedestrian amenity space, and the conversion of free market residential units to fractional
ownership units and the conversion of fractional ownership units to lodge units. The
Community Development Director may choose to refer all or part of an amendment
request to the City Council. The Director's decision shall be considered the final
administrative action on the matter. An amendment not considered insubstantial by the
Community Development Director shall be reviewed as a substantive amendment. An
applicant may appeal a decision by the Community Development Director to the City
Council, which appeal shall be processed as a substantive amendment, as outlined below.
Substantive amendments shall be reviewed and approved by the City Council.
Substantive amendments shall be those which represent a fundamental change to the use,
character, intensity, traffic generation, employee generation, circulation patterns, or
public amenities of the Master Plan development. Amendments to the plan as a result of
denial by the Colorado State Tramway Board of the requested variation to lift setback
requirements for the surface lift shall be reviewed as a substantive amendment. The
review shall be at a public hearing and shall require adoption of an Ordinance. The City
Council shall use the same Land Use Code criteria as used for the initial City Council
approval of this within Ordinance, unless certain criteria have no bearing on the specific
amendment request. At the discretion of the City Council, a COWOP Task Force Team
may be convened or reconvened to consider substantive amendments and to provide
advice and guidance to City Council pursuant to Section 26.SOO.OSO.D of the Land Use
Code.
Amendments to the Master Plan after the expiration of the vested rights period and any
extensions thereof that may be enacted shall be reviewed in accordance with the
standards and procedures set forth in the City of Aspen Land Use Code then in effect that
govern amendments to a Planned Unit Development.
Section 31: Material Representations Preserved
All material representations and commitments made by the Lift One Project, the Lodge at
Aspen Mountain Project, and/or the Lift lA Base Area Project, respectively, in
connection with the Master Plan development approvals as herein awarded, whether in
public hearing or documentation presented before the Lift One Neighborhood Task Force
or the Aspen City Council, are hereby incorporated in such development approvals and
the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an
authorized entity.
Section 32: Existing Litigation
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 any ordinances
repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded
under such prior ordinances.
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 37
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Section 33: Separability
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 34: Public Hearing
A public hearing on this Ordinance was held on 2008, in the City Council
Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a
public notice of the same was 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 , 2008.
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this day of , 2008.
Michael C. Ireland, Mayor
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
John P. Worcester, City Attorney
Attachments:
1 -Adjusted Master Plan Boundary
2 -Proposed Zoning Map
3 -Public Rights-of--Way Vacations & Dedications
4 -Proposed Subdivision Map
5 -Legal Descriptions
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 38
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Exhibit 1-Adjusted Master Plan Boundary
Monarch Street /.,~ 1
~E ,~ .,• ~ ,` ~
,a I , -
-(' ~ s ~ ~ M ster Ian
~ ~ ~ . ~ ~L .. - . i ioundiry i ~ i
~ _ ~ ~~ y~ _ ~ soao
IN _
.
e ~ . ~. ~ creenr~e
South Aspen Street ~ I
_~ ~____._ .~ ,r.~
~^,7~, ~ ° ~ -mot
~'~P ~ ~ ~ F~~_ J ~ Ascen City
11 ~ / Limits
tt i
1
i ~- , I
~=arm=sob Street ~ ~ / I
Lift One Neighborhood Master Plan
Os+ OJII!!11`.. Ia.xl.a )
Exhibit 2 -Proposed Zoning Map
r
~.~ ~. i
PUB (H) (PUD) ~
~ ~ PuWie, Historic Overlay, . / / • ` I
I Planned Unlt -
e WrrapmentOwrlay
r- • ~ ' a~
e ~e~%. ~ C
PUB (PUD) e ~ ~ ~~ ~ Cenavrrtion a
Public, Planned UnR ~ r e ~"~' ~ ' ~ 1 ~
Development OreAay 8 - T ~ _ _ _ _ J ' ~a~
. ;
.~ ~
a a ~ .M..~a,.
-~ ~.
NC (H) (PUD) L (PUD) ~
n.ieneornood Canmemir. Lodge, P4nned unit
HMgic DYeriN. Plsnned e ~ OweloPment OverhY I . aaJ
uni! DaralapmarR UMay I f e
AH (PUD) e ~ ' ~ ' _ •
AlloNabb MWaine, ~
Planned Une - ~,
DerelopmeM Overlay e ~ /
- I e 1
f
~w
lift One Neighborhood Master Plsn
poSS O . ~. "°°"'°'°'""A 2
m comes..
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 39
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Exhibit 3 -Public Right-of-Way vacations and Dedications Map
~~ ,/
I
I ~ Hill Street ~, •/ /
~ . ~~ ~,,,..,~ ""'~' ~ ~ f1 ~immit Stnjet ` '
~ Gilbert S r i i r i i i I
~' err ~ ~ ~' ~
~ r r r ~~
South-Aspen ~ e e r r
e Street r r r r r r
r r ____ r /
e ...,.,.,. ~- -~ j ~
r
r- ~------------- --i ~ - - ~
Juan Street ~ ~ Remaining Alley • •
r rj a Block 9, Eames I ~~ 1
~ Addition r
I r r J ~ w,4~1
e r -
Daen Street
^
r •~ / ~ I
~ .~/ 1
._:
r
Lift Oiro Neight~orhood Maebr Plan
.,.,e...
pons ns;~,iit,:r~~ir, _~-~rmr,wa ~ . "°'° o~eii~ "'° 3
Exhibit 4 -Proposed Subdivision Map
~~ ~~ ~
r ee j.•
I 1 Lot 4 `. ' Lot 8~ :~'~~•••I
~_ _ ~ Public Ski snd r J I
r Pedestrian ~ Lot 3 i flan /
Ease ~erd ~ ~--.L Easement ~ =~ ~ I
Lot 5 r /
~ ~ ~ ~.4~
.J ~
~ r
Ir Lot 6 ' ~ . ~ ~ I
~.J ~1_ /
.~.~.~ /
r
LiR Ons NeighYOrhood Nlarter Plen
+...~
pOSS ~+n~%Intcr~„kt ~ w~nNrm~r' ~ . ~ , o~~ "~ 4
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 40
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
Exhibit S -Legal Descriptions
A. Property of Aspen Land Fund II, LLC
South Aspen Street Subdivision/Planned Unit Development Lots 1, 2, and 3, as described
on the plat thereof recorded Apri127, 2007 with the Pitkin County Clerk and recorder as
reception number 537080 in Book 83, Page 50.
B. Property of Aspen Skiing Company
1. Land Under Contract with Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge -Aspen, LLC which is
included in the Lift One Lodge Application:
Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14,
Block 10, and Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, Block 12,
EAMES ADDITION TO THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN,
TOGETHER WITH an easement and right of way for the construction, erection,
operation and maintenance of a cable ski chair lift, as created, defined and established by
Easement Agreement between the Board of County Commissioners of the County of
Pitkin and Friedl Pfeifer recorded October 24, 1962, in Book 199 at Page 489, and,
TOGETHER WITH an easement and right of way for skiing purposes, as created,
defined and established by Easement Agreement by and between the City of Aspen and
Aspen Skiing Corporation recorded October 17, 1969, in Book 244 at Page 31, and
TOGETHER WITH that portion of the alleyway for Block 10 vacated in Book 259 at
Page 83.
2. Land Area generally adjacent to and south of the Lift One Lodge Site:
That property owned by the Aspen Skiing Company extending generally to the south
from the
southwesterly boundary of the Mountain Queen Condominiums, the southerly boundary
of Block
12, Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, the south end of the South Aspen
Street
Right-of--way and the southerly boundary of the Shadow Mountain Condominiums to the
southerly boundary of the City of Aspen.
C. Property of Roaring Fork Mountain Lodge -Aspen, LLC
Lots 12, 13 and 14, Block 8, together with that portion of the alley in Block 8 abutting
said lots, Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, Eames Addition, City and
Townsite of Aspen (Skiers Chalet Steakhouse); Lots 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10, Block 9,
together with Lots 4 and 11, Block 9, less the west 22 feet thereof, Eames Addition to the
City and Townsite of Aspen, and that portion of the alley in said Block 9 vacated by the
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 41
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan
City of Aspen in Ordinance No. 4, Series of 2006, recorded April 11, 2006 under
Reception No. 522845 (Skiers Chalet Lodge); and Lots 1, 2, 13 and 14, Block 9, Eames
Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, together with that portion of the vacated
alley between Lots 1 and 14 and the west 20 feet of the vacated alley between Lots 2 and
13, Block 9, Eames Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen (Holland House).
D. Property owned or maintained by the City of Aspen.
Willoughby Park:
Lots 1-14, Block 7 and Lots 1-3, Block 8 Eames Addition, City and Townsite of Aspen,
and that portion of Juan Street east of South Aspen Street between Blocks 7 and 8, Eames
Addition, City and Townsite of Aspen and that portion of the alley in Block 8 adjacent to
Lots 1, 2, and 3 Block 8, Eames Addition, City and Townsite of Aspen.
Lift One Park:
Lots 3 and 12 Block 9 and the western 22 feet of Lots 4 and 11, Block 9 Eames Addition,
City and Townsite of Aspen.
Public rights-of--way:
• South Aspen Street south of Durant Avenue.
• All unvacated portions of Dean Street west of Monarch Street.
• Juan Street between South Aspen Street and Garmisch Street.
• The alleyway between Lots 1, 2 and 3 and Lots 12, 13, and 14, Block 8, Eames
Addition, City and Townsite of Aspen (unopened).
• Garmisch Street from Juan Street to Durant Avenue.
• Gilbert Street west of Monarch Street.
• Hill Street west of Monarch Street (unopened).
• Summit Street west of Monarch Street (unopened).
• A one-block section of alleyway between Hill Street and Summit Street east of
South Aspen Street (unopened).
• A one-block section of alleyway south of Summit Street east of South Aspen
Street (unopened).
Ordinance No 34, Series 2008 Page 42
Lift One Neighborhood M aster Plan