Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.sm.Eagles Club Newbury Park.1991 MEMORANDUM TO: Bill Drueding FROM: Kim Johnson, Planning Office RE: Newbury Park PUD Insubstantial Amendment - Creating a Final Development Plan DATE: August 12, 1991 Summary: Planning Staff recommends approval for the addition of two picnic tables, two benches, and one horseshoe pit at Patsy Newbury Park and the establishment of a Final Development Plan for the park. Location: Patsy Newbury Park, 1.875 acres along the Roaring Fork River, part of the Creektree Subdivision Background: The city -owned parcel is zoned Park with a PUD overlay. It is undeveloped except for the trail along the river which connects Herron Park to the Rio Grande area. There has been no Final Development Plan adopted for this site. In June 1990, the Planning Director approved an exemption for stream margin review based on the limited nature of the proposal at that date. Prior to work commencing on the approved exemption, several neighbors expressed strong concern that there had been no public input to the park's planning process. They objected to the nature of the Eagles Club involvement, feeling that it privatized the public property. They also were concerned about activity levels the proposed development would generate. Over the last few months, the neighbors have met with the Eagles and Parks and Planning staff to allow public input and resolve any misconceptions. The proposal has been scaled back from the 1990 approval and now has support of the most concerned neighbors. Please see Attachment "A" for this site plan. Proposal: The park will contain one horseshoe pit, two picnic tables, and two benches. These items will be generally located in the area between the Eagle's building and the paved trail along the river. The park is meant to be used by people accessing from the trail as no parking is directly adjacent to the site. The Rio Grande Parking Plaza is approximately 800 feet from the park. Staff Comments: Planning Director Amy Margerum and Staff discussed how proposals such as this fall within the bounds of Section 7 -907 C. of the Land Use Regulations: Absence of approved Final Development Plan. This section reads: "In the absence of an approved Final Development Plan for a site designated Planned Unit Development , (PUD), an accurate improvements survey of existing conditions may be substituted to permit evaluation of whether the proposal is an insubstantial or other amendment." The Staff feels that the revised proposal is consistent with the open space nature of the site and the goals to develop City owned parks for enjoyment of the citizens and guests of Aspen. An objective of the Planning Office is to insure the character of the PUD area and provide consistency of process. A Director's approval of the current proposal and recordation of the Final PUD plan with the County Clerk will establish a Final Development Plan and will be the basis for evaluating future proposals. Recommendation: Staff recommends Planning Director approval of the Newbury Park Development Plan with the following condition: 1. A Final PUD plan shall be filed with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder within 180 days of approval. 2. Any revisions to the recorded development plan shall be processed through the Planning Office. I hereby approve with conditions the PUD Final Development Plan for Patsy Newbury Park. is. b1 — /7/ y rger 4 r , Planning Director Date AI Attachment "A" - site plan jtkvj /Eagles.pud.dirmemo 2 GROSS INVESTMENTS > 9 JENARDM. GROSS July 24, 1991 Ms. Kim Johnson Aspen /Pitkin Regional Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Ms. Johnson: I am writing you with regard to the proposed city park on the city property and Eagles property directly across from our new home in Oklahoma Flats. When we purchased our lot and started to develop our home, it was our understanding that this area directly across from us would remain open space with the pedestrian trail through it, and no other development. We have oriented our home toward the river and toward the south for views of Aspen Mountain. We are strongly opposed to any use of the property directly across from us for a park. As has been pointed out by others, there are two parks in close proximity to this land which can be used by the public; whereas this land was extremely inaccessible to the public, and seems to benefit only those who happen to be members of the Eagles Club. Regardless of this, it seems to me that this would be an inappropriate, if not illegal use of the city land, and we do wish to record out opposition to it. Thanking you very much, I remain / You struly, / / G „/J J nard M. Gross JMG /mgs 2700 POST OAK BOULEVARD • SUITE 1 670 • HOUSTON, TEXAS 77056 • A/C 713- 627 -3330 MESSAGE DISPLAY TO Kim Johnson From: Bill Efting Postmark: Jul 15,91 4:08 PM Status: Previously read Subject: Patsy Newbury Park Message: Met with Tom Todd today, looks like we are going to come to an agreement, sounds like they are even going to donate some money for trees. Will keep you posted. X SE \T BY: -- 1 __ �s 7Bay St. Aspen, CO 81612 Fraternal Order of Eagles North Spring St. !✓ Aspen, CO 81611 `; ` JUL - 9 1991 Dear Eagles: Why not more notice time for the meeting regarding the proposed park on city property behind the Eagles Club? Because of the short notice, we will be unable to attend the meeting. It seems to us that a minimum of notice should have been two weeks. Our thoughts have been expressed in letter form to the Planning Commission and to the members of the City Council. The property involved is small and not appropriate for active sports usage. As you know, there is a large playing field specifically designed for and intended to be used for active games located only a short block West of the Eagles Club building. Herron Park is located less than one hundred yards East of the property and should satisfy any need for a picnic area(Herron Park has been designed for that type of activity). The city property involved is presently used as a trail and is getting heavy usage as such. Bikers, walkers, joggers, along with mothers and children are much in evidence on the trail, and this usage would be discouraged by active sports usage and/or large groups. It's inappropriate to use public property for the benefit of a club or other specific group; particularly when such usage may tend to encourage the unlawful use of alcoholic beverages on city property. The continued passive use of this property seems most appropriate. Y, ?La. ward L Hanson 2r Mitzi Hanson July 5, 1991 Dear Neighbor, On July 10, 1991, at 6:00 p.m., the Eagles Club of Aspen is sponsoring an informal get- together with our neighbors and City Officials to discuss the proposed Newbury Park. All interested parties are invited to attend and a picnic -type dinner will be served. The updated park plan will be available for review at the Club from 5:00 p.m. on. We feel that the new plan addresses concerns expressed by some of the adjoining landowners, in that certain permanent "structures" have been eliminated, leaving what is basically a general landscaping and clean -up program. Representatives from Parks, Planning and City Council will be on hand to listen to the public's input and answer questions concerning the approval process. Please take advantage of this opportunity to express your views and give us your input. Jim Scruggs, President, FOE 184 is ,' MEMORANDUM TO: Bill Efting, Assistant City Manager FROM: Kim Johnson DATE: June 28, 1991 RE: Newbury Park Development Process I have updated Amy and Diane on the recently submitted plan and letter from the Eagles. We checked the code and feel that the proposal can be approved by the Planning Director as an insubstantial amendment to a PUD rather than a two -step review before P &Z and Council. As with this case, if an approved PUD plan does not exist, the Director shall consider any amendments specific to current site conditions. As we agreed several weeks ago, and as a courtesy to the concerned neighbors, the Parks Department (as the applicant) should hold an informal meeting to describe the proposal and gather input prior to Planning's consideration of the amendment. Public input may generate some good ideas and options in addition to giving the neighbors an opportunity to see how the proposal might impact them. We feel that the abutting property owners including the folks across the river should be invited by letter. Perhaps a general public invitation should be included in the newspaper also. I understand that the Eagles were going to invite the neighbors to a picnic. This is a friendly gesture and could possibly occur in conjunction with Park's presentation of the proposal. Please contact me when a date has been set for this meeting so I may attend to hear comments. In order to correctly process the insubstantial PUD amendment, a representative from Parks needs to meet with me for a pre - application conference to go over the application packet which I have attached for your convenience. An insubstantial amendment application is not very complicated, but will take some effort to gather the appropriate information and graphics. A Planning fee deposit of $113.00 is due when the application is submitted. If a waiver is sought, the applicant (Parks) must make a refund request to Council during budget hearings. Once a neighborhood meeting takes place, Planning staff will make every effort to expedite the review process. cc: Frank Peters Amy Margerum Diane Moore MEMORANDUM TO: Bill Efting FROM: Kim Johnson DATE: June 27, 1991 RE: Newbury Park Development Process I have updated Amy and Diane on the recently submitted plan and letter from the Eagles. We checked the code and feel that the proposal can be approved by the Planning Director as an insubstantial amendment to a PUD rather than a two -step review before P &Z and Council. As with this case, if an approved PUD plan does not exist, the Director shall consider any amendments specific to current site conditions. As a courtesy to the concerned neighbors, the Parks Department (as the applicant) needs to hold an informal meeting to describe the proposal and gather input prior to Planning's consideration of the amendment. Public input may generate some good ideas and options in addition to giving the opportunity for the neighbors to see how the proposal might impact them. We feel that the abutting property owners including the folks across the river should be invited by letter. Perhaps a general public invitation should be included in the newspaper also. I understand that the Eagles were going to invite the neighbors to a picnic. This is a friendly gesture and could possibly occur in conjunction with Park's presentation of the proposal. Please contact me when a date has been set for this meeting so I may attend to hear comments. In order to correctly process the insubstantial PUD amendment, a representative from Parks needs to meet with me for a pre - application conference to go over the application packet which I have attached for your convenience. An insubstantial amendment application is not very complicated, but will take some effort to gather the appropriate information and graphics. A Planning fee deposit of $113.00 is due when the application is submitted. If a waiver is sought, the applicant (Parks) needs to make the request for a refund from Council during budget hearings. Once a neighborhood meeting takes place, Planning staff will make every effort to expedite the review process. cc: Frank Peters N`: \ c l e ui -( c - poj a \ icR y1/4A f f<) 737 — (— Do Jeivt Q (til s Q uit z . z (sv� ,:) lf�, Do Z R g , ,92. s 2 f i O — oo cf: Y _.heed S©— GO ! N ey. &Cat, Jt. 1 1 cp PAT) ( ooC 12, it 733 000 #73i n b F j 4 , tyko,i # 727 TG; Gr-ry - ?r4ZK5 FLA , u, c 4 zoiCtC 9 r t,tu ti? t 06, ivf .1 S Orr/ GOU.UG 'fit; N /ajc/ PO-0 St vCl ; U4 0 1 f � r"raiz S O& ca l 01 `-Ord sk,Jt+t I. r -I tr.1F TU 6,01t - 5 ri C 1 ii o0 Ot t 0 r nJr 091--v t .) rry 7. y-OtG.� --7 "a- -- t6(f !AD4S uk)ci&J hl t t t4 ort r s4A/r -ma cc"-' TO A"PLtStsec) TO 6—` 't -/ fie« rt— R-Ar3 it ±_. i 5(c14Ga(t y d4F� Vr „A/Mt- -RA ar -Pt tnc 1-c- ae A !` 3r-t & &4- . r de_ Y o Ca— Jc t L A Pc 6. , W <set i b J_42 Far Su rr d-1 jc t t esoJ - To /A tb ts3 i dt' S 2F I crfa. -•1. YC� - r r fa o--roki61 - Mt a 1%4 4Sl . 1 6 cot-4 Ii4 c t 3 P foR 6t' '' /44- S 4Ot1 Nirior Lo ✓ p SimGF1cact --iesc, vc.lowt-t. 3l& A r(71 tb Of= d) r 0)3Jr -S'r w41 - pot4 _ FAi 5y 1-45 - / at t es/ c ar_D -c i CSe Ai &E t-4 t1O At- P 4-5( rr >`.c ^cat A at e a-Cw t71z0F - t(..a o� tt r o siaazi - cre-r r=&yt o±. "GPs Scv( AS Tbtt s 3/ir-1 taJcaci lcTuizas' � t -r tut cyr m 4 tew- WciTH t_ V-4r iA tk i ase Iris, .. e rrtvA-i t ��4 `-/- t os4i t�r_ Fl -1k 1TY i 6t.t l3at? .. ,. vciG j 'AtK is Ga 1..r);Go-r t r -t 41 * Aktiaci at A 41 Sri OF - , T A Y- ToW Fa)1Z >!Ot -tom Wti1151 A � tcC i 777( PAST aZESlrd`0._71' F" 184 HOLLAND & HART i ir 2 MN ATTORNEYS AT LAW DENVER 600 EAST MAIN STREET TELE' ! .L. DENVER TECH CENTER ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEC •' ER(303)925 -9367 COLORADO SPRINGS ASPEN BILLINGS BOISE CHEYENNE WASHINGTON, D.C. THOMAS J. TODD May 23, 1991 VIA HAND DELIVERY Ms. Kim Johnson Aspen /Pitkin Regional Planning Office 130 South Galena Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Creektree Subdivision Dear Kim: After our May 21, 1991 telephone conversation, I wanted to write and confirm your position concerning the Eagles Club. You said that the Eagles Club does not have authority to proceed on any sort of park improvement plan for the park located in the Creektree Subdivision until such time as the Planning Office has thoroughly reviewed the Eagles Club's proposals and developed a "park master plan" in cooperation with the City Parks Department. You indicated that the Planning Office and the Parks Department may possibly develop this park master plan without holding a public meeting. I discussed with our client, Creektree Condominium Association, Inc., the fact that decisions relating to the park may be made on a staff level without formal public input. The Association wants me to express its concern about two issues: 1) the Planning Office has not responded in writing to my letter addressed to you of September 28, 1990; and, 2) proceeding on a park master plan without public input is contrary to the stated goals of the Aspen City Council as expressed in the Declaration of August, 1989 (copy enclosed). The Declaration is very specific in regard to protecting open space and encouraging public input. See, for example, goals numbered 5, 10, 11, 14, 15 and 16. Genuine and significant issues affect this project and they require serious consideration by not only the Planning Office and the Parks Department, but all neighbors in the vicinity. There are open space issues, building envelope concerns, access issues and the impact that a development of this nature would have on the surrounding neighborhood and general Rio Grande trial use. HOLLAND & HART ATTORNEYS AT LAW Ms. Kim Johnson May 23, 1991 Page 2 As I discussed with you, it is in everyone's best interest to resolve this problem through mutual discussions and group decision making, and I appreciate your keeping me abreast of all developments on these matters. Very truly yours, gjere42r) Thomas J V Todd for HOLLAND & HART TJT /sm cc: John L. Lancaster, III, Esq. Howard Hanson 3 $ DECLARATION OF THE CITY COUNCIL , ASPEN, COLORADO , (� i . ' A 1989 _BY --- We believe that Aspen's natural setllng is extraordinary and irreplaceable. We believe that throughout Aspen's 100 year history of boom, bust, and boom it has been blessed with a special character. It wasn't a typical mining camp and It isn't a typical resort. We believe that Aspen's residents and visitors embody a rare mix of friendliness, irreverence, fairness, enthusiasm and humor. We enjoy the rich variety of people who live and visit and cherish the tolerance that allows us to live here in harmony. We believe that Aspen has always been willing to march to its own tune; from building opera houses in the wilderness to sawing down signs. We believe that from the renaissance of Aspen forty years ago we have inherited a unique blend of music. art, sports, intellect and spirit. Ie believe that the community of Aspen has a sense of wholeness, coherence and scale that makes it a joy to live in and to visit. We believe we are lucky to be the stewards of this combination of town, natural environment and philosophy that has _,. cavided a sanctuary for many of us. We respect the sacrifices we have made to continue to participate in this shared vision. .9e believe that just as a unique combination of people, nature and ideas came together to create Aspen, they could just as well break apart and destroy it. We believe Aspen is fragile and finite and needs our protection and our love. Therefore: We ask you to help us to reaffirm these values. We have developed the following goals to carry out this mission. • 1. In order to ensure that an adequate amount of affordable 8. - To support the role of the human services in light of housing is available, create a 10% vacancy rate in the increased stress and pressure in the community. affordable housing in two years (1991). 9. To maintain, renovate, reconstruct and manage the 2. To limit speculative growth. To encourage growth that capital assets of the City. will reinforce our sense of community and re- enfranchise those who now are forced to move away. 10. To preserve the traditional character of the town including historic structures, open space, small 3. To make public transit more convenient, affordable, lodges and local services. frequent, attractive and fun, and to have it go where the car does not. To reduce the number of cars on Castle 11. To work together with all people and organizations in Creek Bridge by 25% by June. 1991. • the Roaring Fork Valley. To work with all local. State and Federal agencies to assure that we are 4. To reduce the use of and dependency on the automobile responsive to each others needs. by expanding and maintaining bicycle and pedestrian paths. To encourage, facilitate, research and Implement 12. To evaluate existing financial resources and develop alternate methods of transportation for the residents and funding mechanisms to accomplish our goals. visitors of Aspen. • 13. To continue the annexation of the metropolitan area 3. To improve air quality, increase recycling, improve water and reach agreements on revenue sharing with the conservation, increase tree planting, reduce noise County to insure that adequate services are pollution and in general be more sensitive to nature, performed. animals, and each other. 14. To develop a consistent and fair government so that . 6. To encourage innovation, creativity, and participation by citizens know what to expect from elected officials, the City Staff, and to listen and respond to staff employees, and government processes. inventiveness. 15. To protect and serve our residents and visitors in an 7. To increase public access to all the arts and humanities open, fair and sensitive manner. To preserve and to facilitate the increased cooperation of all artistic individual freedom and respect for human dignity. endeavors in Aspen. To continue to nourish the tradi- tional Aspen blend of arts, intellect, sports and recrea- 16. To seek the full cooperation and aid of all citizens to lion. accomplish these goals. HO D &HART PHONE (303) 'HOLLA L TT AT LAW TEIEPE� 925 -9367 TELECOPIER 303) bop EAST MAIN STREET 81611 O DENVER CENTER ASPEN ,COLORAD DENVER TECH P THOMAS J. TODD COLORADO RINGS ASPEN 199 BILLINGS $eptember 2 POISE CHEYENNETON D C_ WASHING ,p, 1 f 1 J HAND pELIvERED K i m Johnson Tonal planning Office 1 30 eSout kGalena 58161 Aspen, Colorado Creektree Subdivision Re: with Y°u� Amy Dear to my conVerstrie Ea91es volleyball court, Kim: a follow concerning i e Ea a s o f to Eagles This is Lamont portions th a barbec rum andt eons our an °3 of ee north hOeaslLot the located of e application an d four d space loca a barbecue ty legally dedicated open P Club pr on th owner ium Association, the 1 of Subdivi and Building the Eagles' ag es Subdeo Club l opposed to t ent Eagles ag ante ktree Subdivision, is o most recent During our our all Lot 4 of the CreekV of refs t that man? °nterp issues retati a thee tied to legal order to interpretations io us application for discuss we ati °with this background a facts. I with a summ the ary of conveys of associate variety l am providi ? issues, Association's concerns. and well as Associa with Amy met focus on these ndomini When I lastsubdivi$ -t Plat Creektr cations• eeI last Development Agreement• O S ace p coP °f the Cre eSubdi subdivider stated that 1. I dropped off and Planne t lat map, the ding plann of Building Leslie Subdivis dedications on the plat Cl n In ma p and th of the located north the .ark s Club , the City In Paragrap to be the park loca :ad •ublic Agreemen was t Bh 1l tthi up rce11w uld be used as open space for sl alse that e MuniciP n ark purposes. tions of th �, as public t 3_101 of the Land Use Regulations gterm "o en s . ro u u to the u a e of Aspen defines cted fr the Section open spac „ Code of The City unt e definiti of term "structure „ •,land••Among is r things t e• Among other of an g.151_,_,221 excludes structures expressly MESSAGE DISPLAY TO Kim Johnson From: Bill Efting Postmark: Sep 27,90 8:03 AM Subject: Reply to: Forwarded: Reply to: Eagles Club - Efting Reply text: From Bill Efting: tanks Preceding message: From Kim Johnson: Bill, regarding Amy's comments, it seems like some sort of review is appropriate on the part of the Parks Dept. Can you talk to George Robinson or someone to establish some process? If I can provide assistance in setting up a process, let me know. The land use code is FULL of processes which may be applicable. Previous comments: From Amy Margerum: I believe I mentioned before that I felt Parks needed to prepare a Development Plan for the property...this may me an administrative review given the comparision with "existing conditions" but I want something in the files as to what the plans are for the property. From Kim Johnson: Bill called to let Planning know that he has a call in to the Club President to discuss the access issue w/ the adjacent condos. He asked what process Parks should be going through for park development. The park at Koch lumber evidently didn't have any formal public input. I don't know what would be the best route, but I told him it would be a good idea to discus this with Jed to see what he'd suggest. Do you have any ideas? It isn't readily apparent on the Zoning Map if the park area is PUD overlay. X Howard L. Hanson P.O. BOX 1690 725 BAY STREET ASPEN, COLORADO 81612 30 August 29, 1990 Amy Margerum, Planning Director City of Aspen City Hall 130 Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Ms. Margerum: It is my understanding that you are in the process of approving plans for a barbecue area and recreational area located partly on city property and partly on property of the Eagles Club. Since the plans appear to rather substantially change the open space use for which the property was dedicated, it would seem appropriate to invite the adjacent and other affected landowners to comment on the proposals. The trail running through the above mentioned property is used by bicyclists, runners, walkers, and children. The proposed changes may discourage continued use by some of the present users. Only a block from the Eagles Club is a large playing field (Rio Grande Park) more than adequate for both volleyball and horseshoes. Just East of the Eagles Club is Herron Park. It also would, I think, be improper to encourage drinking on city property. May we discuss this further? Sincerely, Howard L. Hanson Aspen /Pitkin Planning Office 130 south galena street aspen; cJor,,a 1 0""81611 August 30, 1990 Howard L. Hanson PO Box 1690 Aspen Colorado 81612 Dear Mr. Hanson: Thank you for your letter addressing your concerns about the Eagles Club improvements to the adjacent city owned property which is zoned "park." I have discussed the matter with Kim Johnson, the planner assigned to this project. We agree that the Eagles will need to submit an application for an amendment to their existing Development Plan if they choose to make any changes to the previously existing improvements and to obtain building permits for any structures. If these changes qualify as "insubstantial," given the criteria in the Land Use Code, there will not be a public hearing on the changes. The improvements to the 'park' are allowed uses on that land and are consistent with the deed restrictions for the property and the zone district requirements. The City, as property owner, will also need to apply for an amendment to the Development Plan which is likely to be an administrative item again not requiring a public hearing. I understand your concerns and the concerns of many of the adjacent landowners and will speak to the Parks Department about holding a public meeting in order to inform the neighbors of the changes that will be allowed to take place. In the interim, please feel free to contact Kim Johnson at 920 - 5090. She will be able to explain the plans for the property. Thank you for your interest. If I can be of further assistance please let me know. Si erel , my . Margeru4 Pla ing Dire•i or cc: Kim Johnson Bill Efting — a ■••• - 4 V . • ' • • , 414.;.• • tans,: •• L • • . c. . Our , . • • ' • 1 • , ..11 • • •,z I T S • • ar• the pr develop • the , .:u.:uv hurd ne b, renuat -0 tor, f land includoki in the totatr . ; • • • ci Lv is ttillirvg to appros _ +hat Plat upon agreement ar •• and t ub�J.V - in t cn• r descr . r -. • )00 a_.. i..9rr 01...f tl,n :..tt. . ■•r0.•ti to mi ll be • • • • • • • — ---? - jt -- -- , r s ('her prow • onanE • • • a ,y - I. SI.!)/11 . ..Idni - ri wret r euv and agree that t' i l 1 J joxi in . - _ • formz tl , n of any o: treat improvement dia v. • Z.11 zr. pttrt Of tho StO_.! . al.... mac. ha orouor...4 or fomowd gor alas . _ - 11 00000*U • 1-Mait , ..acettic - 4 .. • troaluding the lands wit 1/ 1.po , deruondier ' . or Li t ' properly r - 1,nts or , Lot 4. abutting t.av , . . - - ,!" - yr 't0 4 • • 1 . it.. '• ) 1.. I, .•0' ,••• c,f ht• . :t 1■• •ntois on ot 2. sh iho And o1 qati c•r ourth r exoec.1 t he; r • Are, of he Lulea CVO Q ow) , d,0.1.14441 by the etetemery amp* . - . . . . • _ • - ••■ s • 4 • • • • • — „ • • • ,, r i • . to • • , • .• • • • • - • • • • f - • 1 1 „azz. 4§ - , Le ocaptete4.- 01 1. • . • . • - , . • _ • • ' _ • _ _ - t. — — • • • • nel t t the City •• 1 . 1. . ; »is sat Jeri th4 • • • • • • - • • t uk jet t to a t - • • • • Hunitl : 'i_ . t • h.r • _ - - By it • r:■rk t0 • t 1% 13 0.440, PX-4. - ° • .;- r • • • • j Y , • -_.. �. ... - ' .. -r~�. ...�r,�... ... -.. - __... �,+..� ®- rte..+.,- �.++ss+«as- .. �.i 1 ...... ._ 1 r __...._._ il .., . sit ,,v y ii611.. not be twat as ass by 4 H• „. ---...--,..-.— -.......... -- .. Easermatitz in mint...mann* or ronstrucaton t ent Y. GP.' n Hotrnpolitan tosatation 1k on tho Plat. OC-Atilk -- • . .. . • ,..-, ., ' . _ ---4 ' ,, ........ —...... .1.—...................... _ . ...:e . . ".... . _ . ---- --I ... -.--.... ..4, ... _. . - . .. . • ..„ • ..„ . .od _ - a . , . . .. - t .., . • . • . ' . .. . . ..• • „ ' ',if . .. _ , .... . - % • , ' . ; # .. . .............–...,. ; Sh. _ .. . • _ 16. • • • • • - �► Str • r B sue.: 4 Closing memo to file Eagles Club / Newbury Park Stream Margin Exemption Date: July 2, 1990 From: Kim Johnson, Planner On June 25, 1990, Planning Director Any Margerum approved a Stream Margin Exemption for the Eagles Club proposals for improvements at Newbury Park. These additions include one at- grade volleyball court, 4 clay horseshoe pits, a barbecue pit and concrete slab with picnic tables, and railroad tie steps from the club building down to the park area. Two conditions of approval have been placed on this project: 1. The Eagles Club must obtain any Building Permits which may be required for construction of the stairs, BBQ pit and slab, or any of the other approved additions. 2. If the situation arises whereby any tree 6" diameter or over must be removed, moved, or damaged by construction, the Eagles Club must contact the Parks Department for appropriate consultation or permits. MEMORANDUM TO: Bill Dreuding FROM: Kim Johnson, Planning Office RE: Eagles Club / Newbury Park Exemption from Stream Margin Review DATE: June 24, 1990 Summary: Planning Staff recommends approval of an Exemption from Stream Margin Review for site improvements to be done by 'the Eagles Club at Newbury Park. Background: The Eagles Club wanted to undertake a community service project by improving Newbury Park and adding some recreational 'features such as a volley ball area and horseshoe pits. Representatives Stan Mathis and Danny Bliss spoke with me, Bill Efting, Jim Gibbard, and Tom Baker. We concluded that the extent of the work would not impair the park or the river, and should not require Stream Margin Review. Proposal: Using volunteer labor, the Eagles plan to lay out one at -grade sand volleyball court on the flat area below and slightly east of the Club Building. To the west of this they propose 4 clay horseshoe pits. Directly below the building, at the base of the hill, they will construct a stone or brick BBQ pit on a 10'x26' concrete slab. Two picnic tables will be added to the cooking area. In order to improve access up and down the slope, a series of at -grade R.R. tie steps and handrails are proposed between the building and the park. Donated trees and park benches will be added at locations recommended by the Parks Department. See Attachment "A ". Staff Comments: Stream Margin Review exemptions are described in Section 7 -504 B. of the Aspen Land Use Regulations, revision date August 14, 1989. This proposal qualifies for exemption based on the following facts: 1. No floor area is being added. 2. No trees which require a removal permit will be affected. If it becomes apparent that a tree 6" diameter or greater is in the way of construction, the Eagles will work with Parks in any permit process required. 3. The Rio Grande Trail bisects Newbury Park between the river and the proposed volleyball and horseshoe areas. No proposed development will be closer to the river than the trail. 4. An existing approved building envelope has not been designated for the Eagles Building, therefore these proposals do not violate or contradict an approved plan. 5. The volleyball and horseshoe areas are within 100' of the high water line of the Roaring Fork. However, these "developments" are at grade and will be comprised of sand, clay and R.R. tie borders. Not unlike other amenities in similar riverside City parks, Parks, Engineering, and Planning Staff considers these at -grade additions to have no impact on the river corridor. Exemptions from Stream Margin Review are approved by the Planning Director. Recommendation: Planning Staff recommends approval of an Exemption from Steam Margin Review for the Eagle Club / Newbury Park improvements with the following conditions: 1. The Eagles Club must obtain any Building Permits which may be required for construction of the stairs, BBQ pit and slab, or any of the other approved additions. 2. If the situation arises whereby any tree 6" diameter or over must be removed, moved, or damaged by construction, the Eagles Club must contact the Parks Department for appropriate consultation or permits. I approve an Exemption for Stream Margin Review for the Eagles Club / Newbury Park improvements with conditions. (24,9 L Amy r gerum, P Director ate 7 Attachment "A" - Site Plan jtkvj /eagles.dirmem 2 • 0 �����������U����� ��� �������-U������������~�����K���°�" U�D�� � ^ FRATERNAL o�� ORDER OF EAGLES �� K � � � ��������o ������ Ea E. The Fighting Fraternity, with More than a Mi/lion Members AERIE HOME: roosoLccxcn STREET, BOX /o6-ASPEN, COLORADO ^1o1x- PHONE 000-ms-9912 June 19, 1990 Kim Johnson Planning Department � � �� City of Aspen `', YV/`^� • �� Dear Kim Johnson ' The following letter is to inform you of our Aerie's plan for Newberry Park. This is a passive park and would be used twice a summer for both the Elks and our picnic. This park will include the following: i. Clay horseshoe pits framed in railroad ties. 2. An area reserved for a volleyball court (sand optional) 3. Steps leading from Spring st, down to the park made with railroad ties & concrete at grade level with handrails. 4. Steps leading from Northwest corner of the building heading East along the building and under the patio then turning North to the park. These concrete steps will be framed with railroad ties at grade with handrails. 5. BBQ pit at the base of hill adjacent to the NW corner of the building. This grill will be 13 ft long and 3 1/2 ft wide and set on a concrete slab 26 ft long and 10 ft wide to facilitate a food serving area for the above mentioned picnics. This pit will be made of either brick or stone depending on material donatirns. There will be tables on both ends of slab for service and picnicer's. The grill will have removeable steel grates. 6. Small park benches set on wood posts and donated trees placed around the park based on the Parks Department's recommendations. Re tf Sub itted, ,Af AP Mike Kelly, Chairm '~~1 Newberry Park Committee - Fraternal Order of Eagles Aerie #184