The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.500 W Hopkins Ave.A041-00r- 5 DO @ \1 b ?WI /1 6.\ UQ 1-1- CP YI - uu FBommerang Lodge 500 W. Hopkins 1 Rezoning, Minor pUD, GMQS Exemp., t f > . Â»956+ 4 p 5... it e -61 1 4 â„¢ 29' C .' . 1 . 1 1 - I. 3 4.4â€¢e,(21 Chris Bendon Community Development Aspen, CO 816 ] 2 January 2, 2008 Re: Boomerang Lodge insubstantial amendment to the PUD RECEPTION#: 545869, 0 111 512 0 0 8 at 12:42:59 PM, 1 OF 6, R $31.00 Doc Code AMENDMENT Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County, CO Chris, This letter with exhibits A, B, C & D contains all of the issues and comments that Planning and Zoning had .regarding the building permit review for the Boomerang Lodge Redevelopment. The following items were discussed and agreed upon at a meeting held at City Hall on December 27, 2007 between Chris Bendon the Director of Community Development, Jennifer Phelan the Assistant Director of Community Development and Todd Grange Zoning official (Planning Staff) and Richard Spencer of Reno Smith Architects and the ownership representatives Tripp Adams and Steve Stunda. This letter makes up an insubstantial amendment to the PUD for the Boomerang Lodge. a. Zoning questioned that the height of the center of the building exceeds the allowable building height by 1'-8". Page 2 of the recorded PUD dated 3/21/07 indicates a maximum building height of 36'-6". As a result of insufficient information available regarding existing grades for the site, the system for measuring building height became ambiguous. At the meeting it was determined that the current survey would be used and it would be permissible to "connect the dots" from the North property line grades across the area where the demolished building existed. It was at this time that the center portion of the building was deemed to be 1'-8" too tall and it was required to lower the center section of the building by 1'- 11". (see exhibit A & B) This graphic clearly illustrates the complete roof line of the lodge below the 36'-6" datum line (shown dashed). This solution was agreed upon by the enfu•e Planning and Zoning staff present at the meeting. b. Zoning questioned the heights of the mechanical and elevator shafts at the roof. The Mechanical encroachments (elevator shafts, vent chases, chillers) aze allowed to exceed the height limit by a maximum of 5'-0". (exhibit A and B) The elevator vent shafts protrude past the 36'-6" height limit but are under the allowable 5'-0" as noted in the City of Aspen Zoning Checklist page 4, "Methods of Measurement of Roof Height" item e., it states: Antennas, chimneys, ,flues, vents or similar structures.....shall not exceed S'-0" above the specked maximum building height limit. (see exhibit A & B) the indicted elements encroach no more than 4'-0" above the allowable limit. The planning staff at the meeting agreed to this Municipal Code interpretation. c. Zoning questioned if the lazge stone wall on the South elevation meets the PUD intent and found that it was acceptable with the recorded PUD for two reasons; (1) as an architectural "element" to brake-up the horizontal mass of the building. (2) as a functional chase for required fireplace and mechanical venting. (exhibit A & B). The stone walls (South and North elevations) that project a Couple of feet above the Lodge's roof line are accepted under IBC 504.3 Roof Structures which states: Towers, spires, steeples, and other roof structures shall be constructed of materials consistent with the required type of construction......shall not exceed 20' above the allowable height if made of combustible materials. This is simply an azchitectural element to break-up the linear massing of the building. The planning staff agreed that these items are ..«. . _ a.l_ - RENO SMITH ARCHITECTS, LLC. 605 W MAiN ST. N° 002 ASPEN coLORAOo 61611 970.925.5966 FACSIMILE 970.925.5993 E-MAIL o/fice~renwmilRCan 0371 SOUTHSIDE DRIVE BASALT COLORADO 01821 970.9216834 tw~rldoi3n3a A~ilunwwoo N3dSb' ~~ lll~ . r, . uu:, V v , ~ , a3/113~3?~ RECEPTION#: 551274,07/22/2008 at 4- fit 10:30:37 AM, 1 OF 4, R $21.00 Doc Code NOTICE Janice K. Vos Caudill. Pitkin County, CO Richard Spencer ALA ~ Reno Smith Architects Basalt. CO 81621 July 3.2008 Chris P don Directu, . mmunity Development RENO SMIT H ARCsÂ·HTECTS : ..0 Ciry of Aspen 130 S. Galena. St 3, 4 ST Aspen. CO 816 It 4 &2 Re: Boomerang lodge Insubstantial Amendment 1, 1735124990031 AS~>EN COLORADO Dear Chris Bendon. 97Â¢ C.,25 5066 Per our previous discussion. We are submitting this request tor an insubstaimal Dinendment as R relate. to the height ofa section of the exterior wail. adjacent to an i ..ng. iNterIor concrete pool deck.this FACSIMILL roof area is part of and ad jacent to the rot) farea aiong the f ...it building elevation which was addret.ed. . 920 925 5339 and approved previously by the insubstantial amendment dated January 1 2008. In this area. it was atreed that the building height couid be meastired trom the top ot the ratio walls to the top et the root: E W:z - - t)fr,Ce>@'23'10:5 71- "Cy- c. 1 he Planning Staff underskinds and accepts ihal chle m the huitding comer being pushed down j -1 1 thut the p:tifios clone jile South side ofthe hu:filing would require remining wails around them as a re,%11/1 id Ihe required egreu requiremems for fhe living areas, The building heighz will not be calculated from die cutunerged patio, but 0371 4013-HSIDE DRIVE front the grade at hithes! poim of the retaining wall (Exhibit m. This determination was agreed i,pon an<i accepted bÂ¥ the Planning Staff BA<' 1% 0.3 A We are prei....:... .1.ilt the same root-in question (at the Southeaht comer) would comply with the before 970 927 6834 Illet):tioned crite: ,:, and not exceed the PU i.) dimensioilai requirementj. l'he + iswat height in this area may actuall> be perceived as less (then the South elevation) as the roof on the east side steps back further : t- 1 + r : from the street. While the overall roof height is not changing in this area. there is an existing -*historic*. pool deck along a portion of the East w:all of the hotel. which creates greater distance from the roof line to the pool deck hek>w. Ihis condition ts deccribed in more detail below. The roof hejghts in questic,n are located along the Houth elevation betw:een grid lines =10 m #12. It is understood thal the rea,on the height eiceed> the allowable is due to a number of unusual. but necessanÂ· factors. 20 117Â¢ interf.:Â·.1, .in ofthe existing bui [ding and new huilding come together.Lt 1!..Â· e-, ;.tint concrete pÂ·*. Â· ' .Â·. i.. The poot along with thee,141 99 building is 3 trof,Â·.uieurÂ· . -: .'Â·'~ \ B.'11 histor> and i. .,cing preserved accÂ· :,c Â· 7 to HPC .Â·.,delines. bj The gradeat the pooldeck abuts directh into the new and old huilding and drops do##ii train th:e ekisting grade that surrounds the new and old buildintz ereating a depression m the drotind only at the pool area. c) The existing buitding uas not regulated to height when H was binit in the early 1960'i and had been raised aboÂ·...... 7 ... , meet the grade at street le,el er:C.ttlng a split Sub-grade level o:n the PO(31 side. dj It is t heareaat the intersection of the old and new :u,i -9.,-- measured at the tcip of the concrete pooi deck where the roof height exceeds the allowable jic..41. Although standing on the property thiN will not be noticeable * ith the eristing privacy wall furrounding the propert) . when measuring the roof height to the exist ing grade the only source of grade to measure from is the existing concrete pool deck. Richard Spencer AIA Reno Smith Architects Basalt. CO 81621 Jul>: 3.2008 , Chris Hertdon Director Community IXÂ·, clopment RIN{3 91%}MAIN.HirECTS .LC Cir> ot Aspen 130 S. Gatena. St. 606 W MAIN ST Aspen. COS 1611 W 002 Re: Boomerang Lodge Insub.stantial Amendment ASPEN COL ORAL}O 8~511 a) This is an unusual situation in that the pool take~ over from the higher existing grade stirrounding the old and new buildings. 970 925 068 b j It has been determined that the building height between grid lines N 10 to # 12 on the south elevation from the lop ofthe concrete pool deck to the roof of the new building is 4 I *-7.5" and FACSIMILE this lieight wil] be accepted as necessan for the character ofthe com:bini.ng the old building to 970 926 6993 the new bul}ding and will constitute this insubstantial amendment to the plat. E- Â·Â·MAIL office@renesmith corn Sincerel>i 0371 SOUTHSIDE DRIVES Richard Spencer BASALT Project Architect /1 1 COLORADO 81621 1 r 970927.68'34 Approved By: <4.~~VY VV FACSIMILE Oll Li~01* 970 927 6840 Mr. Chris Bert.ton Community Development Director APPROVED JULI 5 2008 Sincerel>. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR CITY OF ASPEN Richard Spencer, AIA Proiect Architect /j 4 44 MAX 6Ull PING Pr Â»1*1' /2 *1 1 71 LE -2- *Ffe Â©sur; Ave......4 9 - t/Â·-'--/i . # <-4 -Â«.Â·- ..4. ..A':(62 i f 16333,1 ' 4 4 (12 1 1 1 - INâ€ž,4- ROOF ' ; *-7.. .. .~ ---- . .. .........~ M. 1 1 1 1 t ~--1 ' r~~Â·-1Â·Â· Â·Â·Â·-T VMEQ FBFAN/Â£L 1 1 - I ; 1 1.. . 9f*""'w=0~~~~*-li : â€¢P .. .Â· Â·~" . Â· ~ ~ _ ~ _ ~ .. 1 . -- -uÂ«22<244</43fZ%~~ Â· .U ./., 1 y3 ~ V -- - ' -1 ' 1 ti.i~t < 1 PX r r,ORROOR Â· t : e .'+11 r-> : 0.1 -~~7 ~ 1 ' ty 11 Â¢9 i I. -- - Â· t -1 1 1 -I --. -4 k , 4,4:*- ", 1. : t â€ž 1. '72 â€ž-i Â· 1-1 11 -:1 18: 1 - : U.... %%. - ....a i .... .-1........ 7.... i . 1 , ; 1 <~~ ~~ r . F r .7 0 <.344< F= Shâ‚¬5:* 1 -- MTL RAIL" ,, -VP .. ' ... 4-- 9-Fl 1 " 1.-â€ž--. 1 it ~-1 - , ,-Â·Â·Â· n+-Â·Â·Â·Â·: :- I j . E: 1 16 iÂ· ---- 5% f E 1 7 I -/ ' : i. . --'. l'J 1 -I . 1 I ' / 8 L_.. ..Â·i .......... 1 . - :. I j I. 1 i: &&. 111 1 , r k 4 1 twl , .i 1 /\ i ": , 19 11 13 9 6,1 'Â· r i 1 1 -- 1 L - Â·Â·Â· .......rzism. 23"r -2.1 " '1.11" _I 1 -1 ...I ---r -- __ CORNER KING<Dri r Â«rk,42 30Â¥25 KEâ€¢ ArÂ©k:EveNEER:D NE h f t NOE 4 E Xin *ATE BALOOLY RALL â€ž TYÂ¥' PER ,Â¢0 Â·Â·Â·Â· / ki,.,Â·-;.ItÂ·W k- it.K:'144Â·Â·Â·r~ Â·Â·~.t63'#i**PU-).0.Â·,2 ..:,- fi 1 ~4~''f' ~~~k~ 6.6 .4~:Il. . 'f , I .,Il , - \1 \ 1 11 lillr 1.24,1-u j A \.4 \..3; . 1 ro 11 1 1 . \ r \t 0-- l iÂ¥ S r, 11 0 0. 19 . - 3 ,-2==44.1,31 41*v:*,r L ;rf' Pr al,P".- li t 1 4 e - r Â· 4 4 9Â· 5} 01\Cal ** 2 733'-Pal/9 9 02* RECEPTION#: 545869. 01/15/2008 at Chris Bendon 12:42:59 PM, Community Development 1 OF 6, R $31.00 Doc Code AMENDMENT Aspen, CO 81612 Janice K. Vos Caudill, Pitkin County. CO January 2,2008 Re: Boomerang Lodge insubstantial amendment to the PUD A - Chris, -- This letter with exhibits A, B, C & D contains all of the issues and comments that Planning ----72%r - and Zoning had regarding the building permit review for the Boomerang Lodge Redevelopment. The following items were discussed and agreed upon at a meeting held at RENO SMITH ARCHITECTS, LLC. City Hall on December 27, 2007 between Chris Bendon the Director of Community Development, Jennifer Phelan the Assistant Director of Community Development and Todd 605 W. MAiN ST. NÂ° 002 Grange Zoning official (Planning Staff) and Richard Spencer of Reno Smith Architects and the ownership representatives Tripp Adams and Steve Stunda. This letter makes up an ASPEN insubstantial amendment to the PUD for the Boomerang Lodge. COLORADO 81611 a. Zoning questioned that the height ofthe center ofthe building exceeds the allowable 970.925.5968 building height by 1 '-8". Page 2 of the recorded PUD dated 3/21/07 indicates a maximum building height of 36'-6". As a result of insufficient information available FACSIMILE regarding existing grades for the site, the system for measuring building height 970 925.5993 became ambiguous. At the meeting it was determined that the current survey would E-MAIL be used and it would be permissible to "connect the dots" from the North property office@renosmith. com line grades across the area where the demolished building existed. It was at this time that the center portion of the building was deemed to be 1'-8" too tall and it was required to lower the center section of the building by 1 '- 11". (see exhibit A & B) This graphic clearly illustrates the complete roof line of the lodge below the 36'-6" datum line (shown dashed). This solution was agreed upon by the entire Planning and Zoning staff present at the meeting. 0371 SOUTHSIDE DRIVE b. Zoning questioned the heights of the mechanical and elevator shafts at the roof. The BASALT COLORADO Mechanical encroachments (elevator shafts, vent chases, chillers) are allowed to 81621 exceed the height limit by a maximum of 5'-0". (exhibit A and B) The elevator vent 970.927.6834 shafts protrude past the 36'-6" height limit but are under the allowable 5'-0" as noted in the City of Aspen Zoning Checklist page 4, "Methods of Measurement of Roof Height" item e., it states: Antennas, chimneys, .flues, vents or similar structures.....shall not exceed 5'-0" above the specified maximum building height limit. (see exhibit A & B) the indicted elements encroach no more than 4'-0" above the allowable limit. The planning staff at the meeting agreed to this Municipal Code interpretation. 1N3,Id013A30 Al.INAMMOO c. Zoning questioned if the large stone wall on the South elevation meets the PUD NadSÂ¥ 30 *110 intent and found that it was acceptable with the recorded PUD for two reasons; (1) as an architectural "element" to brake-up the horizontal mass of the building. (2) as a 8066 -P O NtÂ·f functional chase for required fireplace and mechanical venting. (exhibit A & B). The stone walls (South and North elevations) that project a couple of feet above the Lodge's 03AI3033 roof line are accepted under IBC 504.3 Roof Structures which states: Towers, spires, ' steeples, and other roof structures shall be constructed of materials consistent with the required type of construction......shall not exceed 20' above the allowable height if made of combustible materials. This is simply an architectural element to break-up the linear massing of the building. The planning staff agreed that these items are Page 2 consistent with the recorded PUD documents and should be accepted as such. (exhibit B). c. Zoning questioned minor changes in the window placement from the PUD and agreed that there have been a few changes to the placement of windows and that these minor revisions meet the intent of the PUD. The minor shifting of the windows are a result of chase and duet locations and to provide a reduction of glazing areas to make the building more energy efficient. (Exhibit C and D). The RENO SMITH ARCHITECTS, LLC, exterior window arrangements have been altered slightly since the PUD application was recorded. These minor changes were a result of making the building more 605 W. MAiN ST N Â° 002 energy efficient as well as a camouflaging technique to hide the required mechanical venting on the exterior of the lodge. Chris Bendon noted that "this had no substance ASPEN COLORADO on the architecture or effect. "Cexhibit CID) 81611 d. The Planning Staff understands and accepts that due to the building center being 970.925 5968 pushed down 1'-11" that the patios along the South side of the building would require retaining walls around them as a result of the required egress requirements FACSIMILE for the living areas. The building height will not be calculated from the submerged 970.925.5993 patio, but from the grade at highest point of the retaining wall. (Exhibit B). This E-MAIL determination was agreed upon and accepted by the Planning Staff office@renosmith.com Note attached exhibits and graphics correspond to each of these above listed items. These items constitute the Insubstantial Amendment according to section 26.445.100 City of Aspen Land Use Code to be included with Boomerang Lodge Subdivision/PUD Final PUD Redevelopment Plan 0371 SOUTHSIDE DRIVE recorded 3/21/2007 at 3:39pm. BASALT COLORADO 81621 Approved by: CLANk #AL 970.927.6834 r- Jâ‚¬Â« 1 -104 Chris Bendon Date Director Community Development RECEIVED JAM 0 4 1008 CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT THE BOOMERANG LODGE EXPANSION A LODGE PRESERVATION APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY VANN ASSOCIATES, LLC 230 EAST HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (970) 925-6958 and HAAS LAND PLANNING, LLC 201 NORTH MILL STREET, SUITE 108 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 (970) 925-7819 APRIL, 2000 AN APPLICATION FOR EXPANSION OF THE BOOMERANG LODGE Submitted by: , Charles & Fonda Paterson 1104 East Waters Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 Prepared by: VANN ASSOCIATES, LLC Planning Consultants 230 East Hopkins Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-6958 fax: (970) 920-9310 and HAAS -LAND PLANNING, LLC Planning Consultants 201 North Mill Street Suite 108 Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-7819 fax: (970) 925-7395 mhaas@gateway.net PROJECT CONSULTANTS PLANNERS 9 Sunny Vann, AICP Vann Associates, LLC 230 East Hopkins Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-6958 Mitch Haas, AICP Haas Land Planning, LLC 201 North Mill Street Suite 108 Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-7819 ARCHITECT Charles Paterson 1104 East Waters Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-2875 SURVEYOR j Aspen Survey Engineers, Inc. David McBride, L.S. 210 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 (970) 925-3816 L . BOOMERANG LODGE EXPANSION TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. PROJECT SHE & NEIGHBORHOOD (EXISTING CONDITIONS) ............. III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.. 5 â€¢ Table One: Dimensional Requirements Comparison.... ..................12 IV. REVIEW REQUIREMENTS ....15 A. Rezoning 16 B. GMQS Exemptions ?8 â€¢ Section 26.470.070(M), Lodge Preservation GMQS Exemption. ..............................28 â€¢ Section 26.470.070*, Affordable Housing GMQS Exemption.... ..........................37 C. Planned Unit Development (PUD) .......................................... .38 â€¢ Section 26.445.040, General Provisions.......... ......................... â€¢ Section 26.445.050, Review Standards: Minor PUD. ............. .39 D. Conditional Uve 61 E. Vested Property Rights.. 63 EXHIBITS Exhibit #1: Land Use Application Form Exhibit #2: Pre-Application Conference Summary 1 EXHIBITS CONTINUED Exhibit #3: Proof of Ownership/Title Commitment 4 Exhibit #4: Letter of Authorization for both Vann Associates, LLC, and Haas Land Planning, LLC, to Represent the Owner/Applicant Exhibit #5: List of Property Owners Within 300 Feet of the Subject Property Exhibit #6: Signed and Executed Fee Agreement Exhibit #7: Engineering Report Prepared by Mr. Jay Hammond, P.E., of Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. Exhibit #8: Article from United Airlines Magazine about The Boomerang Lodge and the Patersons . I. INTRODUCTION The following application requests rezoning, GMQS exemptions, conditional use, and minor planned unit development (PUD) approval for the expansion of the Boomerang - Lodge onto the property across West Hopkins Avenue (to the south), The existing Â¢ Boomerang Lodge is located at 500 West Hopkins Avenue on the south half (Lots K-S) of Block 31 in the City and Townsite of Aspen. The property that is the subject of this application is currently zoned R-15, Moderate-Density Residential, and this application involves a request to rezone it to include Lodge Preservation and PIfD overlays (R- 15/LP/PUD). GMQS exemptions will be required for the new lodge units as well as the project's proposed employee housing, It is also requested that vested property rights status be granted along with the project's various land use approvals. (See Land Use Application Form and Pre-Application Conference Summary, Exhibits 1 and 2.) The application is submitted pursuant to Sections 26.445, 26 470,070(M), 26.470.080(B)(3)(c), 26.710.320, 26.304.060(B), 26.310.040, 26.308.010, and 26.425.040 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations by Charles and Fonda Paterson (hereinafter "Applicant"), the owners of the property (see Title Insurance Commitment, Exhibit 3). Permission for Vann Associates, LLC, and Haas Land Planning, LLC, Planning Consultants, to represent the Applicant is attached as Exhibit 4. A list of property owners located within three-hundred feet of the property and an executed application fee agreement are attached as Exhibits 5 and 6, respectively The application is divided into four sections. Section I provides a brief introduction to the application, while Section II describes the project site and neighborhood. Section III of the application outlines the Applicant's proposed 1 development, and Section IV addresses the proposed development' s compliance with the applicable review criteria of the Land Use Regulations. For the reviewer' s convenience, all pertinent supporting documents relating to the project (e.g., proof of ownership, etc.) are provided in the various appendices to the application. Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 1 1 t While the Applicant has attempted to address all relevant provisions of the Regulations, and to provide sufficient information to enable a thorough evaluation of the application, questions may arise which require further information and/or clarification The applicant will provide such additional information as may be required in the course of the application's review. II. PROJECT SITE & NEIGHBORHOOD (EXISTING CONDITIONS) The existing Boomerang Lodge resides on the south half of Block 31 (Lots K-S), located on West Hopkins Avenue between South 4th and 5th Streets. Lots K-S have a total area of 27,000 square feet. The first three units of the lodge were built in 1956 and construction continued in several phases until the completion of the west building in 1970. According to the Pitkin County Assessor's records, the existing improvements total approximately 21,288 square feet, roughly 2,500 square feet of which includes finished and unfinished basement areas. The lodge now includes 34 guest rooms (98 pillows). Parking for the existing lodge is located primarily along the adjoining alley and 4th ' Street. Twenty-seven off-street parking spaces are available. In addition, with a parking permit from the City, there is on-street parking along West Hopkins Avenue all the way from town to South 7th Street. The existing lodge site is exceptionally landscaped with towering spruce trees, an abundance of mature aspen and cottonwood trees, sod, some fencing, and numerous flowers, plants, and bushes. There is an outdoor pool and separate spa, both surrounded by decking, planter areas, and a concrete block wall providing privacy. As mentioned in the Introduction, the property that is the subject of this application resides across West Hopkins Avenue (to the south) from the existing Boomerang Lodge and has an area of 19,287 square feet (0.442 acre). A yet to be i Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 2 LEGEND & NOTES Â»%'ST O FOL#â€¢D SURVEY MONtuENT RESAR WITH CAP â€¢9 NOTED ~ G SET SPIKE OA P-K MAIL 5URVEY CONTROL POINTS PITKIN COUNTY TITLE. iNC TITLE COMIUMENT PCT-:4386 DATED 07/01/1998 IAS USED IN THE PREPARATiON OF THIS SURVEY SURVEY LOCATION OF THOSE PORT IONS OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED 1959 OFFICIAL MAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN WAS USED FOR THE ~C) WITHIN THE CITY AND TomISITE OF ASPEN HOPKINS 1980 APPROVED ali SURVEY AND RESURVEY OF TO-SHIP 10 SOUTH, C PLAT WERE USED FOR THE SURVEY LOCATION OF THOSE PORTIONS OF RANGE 05 WEST ANO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED MARY B MDIVISION THE PROPERTY LOCATED IN PITKIN COUNTY SCALE BASIS OF BEARINGS IS Ni 4'50 49Â·E 321.24Â· BETWEEN THE w CORNER RED CAP OF LOT 1 MARY B SUBD IREBAR Â¥/ CAP 161291 1 INCH - 10 FEET LOT, WY 0 SUBD {REBAR V/ CAP 16129I AND THE U ITIESS CORNER 24303 ~ MANHOLE 0 5 10 15 20 CONTOUR INTERVAL 19 2 FEET " O SET CORNER NO 4 REBAR W/ RED CAP 16129 1 Â® *AUER VALVE ~ ELECTRIC CONTOURS SCALED FROM ASPEN AERIAL MAPS AND NOT F:LED SURVEYED i /4.1 1 â‚¬29 Of GRAVEL P. 1 LINE BEARING D;STANCE L I N ,â€¢Â·50 49Â·E 5 00 4 6 1575.09.#I-E ~ Lj N /POINÂ·* 6 â€¢0 L 2 5 /4-50 49-* 5.00 4 270 \ \ 40 7 Â·gon 18 1 11 / 1 RED Cke 1 i 24303 C 8 1 / /1/- i : 1 1 il 1 111 1 \ l / 7 I I BOOK 777 1 141 / YEL CAP 24301 4 RED CAP 9i84 1 + t./.. D CALC ~ ~ 1 .REA ./ 1. e.Oe'. l .287 sol-l \ l f / 1 j El Ill ' 1 /00 / 1 / 1 11 4 / c 'e / / 1< / 1 HYDRANTS F 0* >- /4 / r / / 12 3 0 / 1 / G - 20 1 - â€¢4 REBARS , il/ 1 1 BLOCK 3k 1 /,4/ 1 1 REBAR . 4. .i/ ~ BENT 0 1 0 / .... 2 4 'S.0 / '0. 4.. P\\ . - 00 RED CAP I /3. 0 00'~ 24303 - 2 - rEl CAP/ i ~ / ~ -* f 2376 \ . dsl \ JO 09 1/ Â·. YELLOW CA , .14 1 >a .00 20 0 4 2376 Â¢ / YEI. CAP /~1 f j.-\ 2/6 7-* --- LEGAL DESCR/PT/ON ~ REB --* '34 ~ BENT ~ f 0 0//.I THAT PART OF LOTS A. 8 AND C LINT NORTHERLY OF LINE 7-8 OF THE CITY AND TOWNITE OF ASPEN MCCORDING TO THE 1978 RESURVEY BY THE BUREAU OF LAYI WANAGEMENT). EXCEPT THE SIUTHERLY 20 FEET THEREOF. AND THE NORTH 80 FEET OF LOTS D. E AND H. THE HORTH 80 FEET OF LOT F THE NORTH 75 FEET OF LOT G. AND THE NORTH 50 FEET OF LOT I. BLOCK 32. CITY ANO TOWNSITE oF ASPEN , 1Â§7gAP \ 1 COUNTY OF PITKI \1\ \ STATE OF COLORADO ALLEY /1 \ COR 4 LOT 2 1 - =A 3. h \ MARY B \\ 3 PREPARED BY SUBD 9. 1 1 ASPEN SURVEY ENG;NEERS, INC. <O/ 210 3. GALINA STREET P.O. BOX 2508 PRIDE OF ASPEN ASPEN. COLO. 01611 PWONE/FA* 1970) 925-3816 MIN/NG CL A / U ~ ~ 1 ~646 2. 308 No 29197 JULY 16. 1999 FEB. 08. 2000 I;7 - 7918 133UIS H.LHOOd 'S 219 \B resolved property discrepancy may result in the subject site including an additional 450 square feet of land (see shaded areas on the proposed site plan). Although the existing Boomerang Lodge is zoned Medium-Density Residential with a Lodge Preservation > Overlay (R-6/LP), the subject site is currently zoned R-15, Moderate-Density Residential. The project site is currently vacant, with no existing development or improvements located thereon. As the improvement survey on the following page illustrates, the subject property consists of portions of Lots A-I, Block 32. The subject property is more precisely described as follows That part of Lots A, B, and C lying northerly of Line 7-8 of the City and Townsite of Aspen (according to the 1978 re-survey by the Bureau of Land Management), except the southerly 20 feet thereof and the north 80 feet of Lots D, E, and H, the north 80 feet of Lot F, the north 75 feet of Lot G, the north 50 feet of Lot I, Block 32, City and Townsite of Aspen. The site of the proposed development is located on the south side of West Hopkins Avenue between 4th and 5th Streets extended, and will be accessed directly from West Hopkins Avenue. It includes some 270 feet of frontage on West Hopkins Avenue, which will afford some twelve to fifteen parallel parking spaces. The site is just north of the City's Little Cloud Park, approximately six blocks west of Aspen's commercial core, and one block south of Main Street. Public transportation is readily available on Main $ Street, and provides access to all four ski areas and virtually any location in the Roaring Fork Valley. The subject property's topography is essentially flat with steep slopes beginning just south of its boundary but not within the project site. No slope-related lot area or density reductions are applicable, nor are any other lot area reductions. Existing , vegetation within the property consists mainly of wild grasses and sagebrush. There are no existing impervious surfaces, nor are there existing drainage facilities. Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 3 With regard to existing utilities, please refer to the attached letter from Jay Hammond, P.E,, of Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc., Consulting Engineers (see Exhibit 7). The project site is located adjacent to an existing eight inch water line in West Hopkins Avenue as well as a twenty inch transmission main in the same street An eight inch sanitary collection main is also located in West Hopkins Avenue to the north of the project site Provisions for fire protection are extensive in the area of Block 32 with existing fire hydrants located on the southwest corner of Block 31, the northeast corner of Block 32, and most directly on the northeast corner ofthe site itself (#572). Electric service to the project site is from a buried primary electric line located in West Hopkins Avenue. There is an existing electric transformer on the south edge of the West Hopkins Avenue right-of-way just west of 5th Street and an electric system manhole on West Hopkins about mid-block on the project frontage, Gas, telephone, and cable television lines are also currently buried in the West Hopkins right-of-way in the area between 4th and 5th Streets. There is a cable television pedestal on the south edge of Hopkins near the 6th Street intersection, Surrounding properties include the existing Boomerang Lodge to the north; the Little Cloud Park and various mine claims to the south; the undeveloped 4th Street right- of-way and the Midland Trail to the east; and, the undeveloped Lots 1 and 2 of the Mary B. Subdivision to the west. As indicated by the City's Parcel Maps, ownership of the surrounding lands is somewhat of a "hodge-podge," making it difficult to understand and decipher the various ownership interests. Other surrounding properties include a two- story residential duplex to the northeast (corner of 4th and Hopkins), and the two-story, multi-family residential, Madsen Apartments to the northwest (corner of 5th and Hopkins) In total, the surrounding land uses include a mix of lodges, offices (on Main Street), and duplex, single-, and multi-family residential. The architectural styles used on the surrounding buildings vary as much as their uses. More specifically, the eclectic mix of architectural styles associated with the surrounding properties can be described as Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 4 VICINITY MAP 1 V 2 V3V 4 V 5 V 6 g. ASPEN A A 4 5.0 C9It9BAD0/ 4 V- Dr 10 /J \ *4 'k.J To 01-ood SpÂ¥,s -/ r \ \4.2N. |Ind Alpen Upon 4 4 \4hst B *{ . <. 90 B 9 W....E 9 K Wiv j 82 04** 9 4. 1 SUi= 10*4 Dr ~ 2 9/"m 1 S CD .4 3 30,14 St s, 4 Conoâ€¢-1 Lo St 6 Oak La 3 Aw Ave C 3 ...C' 1 C 7 M.le Le 67 0 5 9 Miâ€ž/ailj 3 1/â€¢'-P.kM 4 6 10 S-Â«*101,Â»te i 044 12 kiva:ide Am < 11 Azzlric,CO 13 Dale Ave 9 0 14 6841-d Ave f BrE] M D ..Â«0140, ~ 4 8 13 Mayne-Ct ~2*'4 - 3 - St ROAD CLA=FICAnON 3 9 9 / = P-yl-- 4 0 1 1,2 ..4 4% 4 * - M 829 - E E . Kn-06â‚¬rER 1 0 112 6,0.24 3 Â© 199: Phine Dir~tories Co. Inc- / : ' ' 1 Â£ 2 A 3 A 4 A 5 A 6 follows: Frank Lloyd Wright Modern to the north (existing Boomerang Lodge); neo- Victorian to the west, motor court cabin (L'Auberge) and unadorned Adirondack to the northeast; and, "Traditional" and 5Os plywood modern (Madsen Apartments) to the northwest. Roof forms vary from flat and shed roofs (Boomerang, duplex at 4th and Hopkins, and multi-family at 5th and Hopkins) to steeply pitched roofs (L'Auberge and single-family residences) The surrounding structures range in height from one to two- and-one-half (1 - 2.5) stories above grade. III. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT: The Applicant proposes to extend the Boomerang Lodge operations onto their Block 32 property located directly across West Hopkins Avenue, The vacant lot will be developed with six freestanding structures, five of which will be used solely as additional, individual chalet lodging units. The sixth building will be located on the west end of the subject property (hereinafter "west end building"), and will include the following: two 1- bedroom affordable housing units; a common area for all guests ofthe project, including a bath house with whirlpool, bathrooms, and dressing rooms; and, two 1 -bedroom guest units. The five free-standing chalets will each have a building footprint of approximately 740 square feet with nearly 2,180 gross square feet of floor area (including subgrade space) and around 01,610 square feet of FAR floor area on three floors. Each of these units will have three bedrooms and three and one-half (3.5) baths, for a total of six pillows per chalet unit. Combined, the five free-standing chalets will cover roughly 3,700 square - feet of the site, have approximately 10,900 gross square feet of floor area (much of which will be subgrade and, thus, be exempt from FAR calculations), 8,060 square feet of FAR floor area, and thirty pillows amongst fifteen bedrooms. Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 5 WEST 1-1 C) ID 1< INS AVE. A , PANEMENT ENDS /-~ -PARALL EL PA K KING $# ---- â€žCA IKAVE- L 29/ i 4 4 - 5 71 1 L_-1 tr/L,re' Ar 71Â· .3 4 141 i:ton i $:1 1-3- 1-]f~Jl:Â·> (- 6-1 ~ U 0- /1 +201 PA~r H (SIDEWALK) | +24 922 :02 Â£-1 L ILJ 20.7 1 27:71-11 U<fID 4- -9 L-J I t-f-lift) 1-Â«0971Â» TRASH 1 ~ / ' N tÂ»~ 74.) r- 2 l,LIGHT-uPtl- A. S 9-E --1- -1 . 1 Â· A f- 1 1 .1 11 1,0 1 1 \ 1 - b'-O - E-ONEYSOCKLE A K ~\1 - 343iI-E':;--~- -Â·- Br~iq/--- -.-1 ---CZk#- A \ 42 -31 1 '17 1 \ 1 N r ("PJ C.1- 1 / 1 (51 )llc> 1< n /7/ 1 i i / 6-0 L 0 4 \ #f f 4 , 40 OD i 7 (4 - r~VEWS <~ I Ditor BEDROOM \ 4994\ A ~~ ~~~~ ~ rot_04 -/ 2 AFFORPABL-9 C-dNPD 5 G 46102 1 ~ 1 4>- \ \I ~'\ -140:~IZE:-4 --WEST--END--BLDG; / \ 6 \ -.I- |. FooTPRitiT- 2137 4 5 0 GDLe)4 b- 3 MOVE 31-64 ~7{- 13~_- CHA LETS ALL rri--Â· 4.+~15.5-0 cuâ‚¬*46& Â«7 1 n /1* 7 - ING#*S.-I:ZE,8!*8,'BATHS, / i \ \ ~ ' - LTO E-AST 2--to' t-7, -4, 1 , C Â© rEt WAft D -Â·~3> _ _ LLIWIEfa- 1.-eve:1.-4,(' 6 0.4 4 \23-3 i , .AP.M.*AE:*C..bÂ¢16#A<:C 7 4-- Â·. A 0- 7 STREET %. 1 . 2 : i \ -1- '444 *FÂ©URT-HE -f.- i-.-*--- ..pil.--.- 1 '1 t 8,4. 1 , / 1/ PAT-to \1 1 , .Â· \ .~0"7&(Dur, Â· > M \ \\ 1, 1 I \ '11 \ A 940" , 4, 4,99Â·40 l \ 4 \ CHALET ~ , FC)(,TPAINT- 141.0 ~ ~ 1 / r - 14'-00 \ TTL.FLOOR AREA Al-MAN )\ / 11\ PAR 1612.0// / j 239LD " l / j f & F- 321 - < \ 1 N / C , \ - --turl- .1- - --'.--- ---- .---- ] 7'cO" \ . 1 / 79/ / 1 14\4 n -m- 1 U - 45104 | ~ 041 otc PROPERTY /60 EDGE OV PROPI R<ry ~ tolD. LE- > 1_ - F - 1 1 --\Â« .li j i / / / ~ )l. ~ i i If MA L 1 Â£9~2Â£6~ght*3~,Efts(VE,~%,eviyn,4 510. 1 - . j fhill l i i 1 1 ! 1Â£l L I . _Lj '; /-1 f j / LL.-L- Revl SED MARO-1 2000 B L (j C K 3 2 L c)T.5 A -I 1 JAN. 2000 5-CALE A~ =11.-cy FA R-*CHALET-5.16 124*5- - 8 06.2 *1~ 0 3/17/00 Â· 44-2.. ACKE 5.- 19,2 8 -1 Ff .6-43110) -TOTAL FoOTPRI NT cF CHALETS (53. 83 66* 3, 98+85-01 WER-M GNO BLDG - 3-718.5-0~ 11'779Â·F Â· FOOTPRINT OF WEST END BLDQ %,M:;145Â¥L) 1- 021'S. FOOTPRINT OF -TRASH Ellelâ‚¬>SoRES 80 0 J SITE + LANDSCAFE PLAN j k ' i \ 0- -f L_ - ==72- 53272/ -I 22'-(M ,-ruM +As'-c>â€¢ _~~ ~__ 1 -- ~ .. - '- --11 4, 1 ila 7- , - Vt . 1 1,4 4 0 7 1, - 1 T 1 . 1.: 11 9. 3 $4 3: . .-i 9.-Dll 1 it I Ill l). /-1.- 1 1.1 : L ./7 / I :Â». w ' , 1 - -~I.Ill-Ill. ~*pjB--~.)-&--9-.---i--*I-# 1 / ===r--I 1 1 H 9 F 6 c 8 1 -t'-0. 1 WEST- ELEVATION Â· N DAT ELEVATION ~ 4 740" - 771-1-111 328LDâ€ž -.' ~- FLI,OR. -152-1 - I -11 - 161-04 : 4 1 41 - j Z RLD" . h- 0 i - M - - r i. i 4 1 : . :I- 110. PATU M OLD - CEILING - 1 111 11 44 !111! 1 I It 41-DÂ·Â· h I 1- 11 1 1 1 1 *it _ I - 1 - - -t - L.J 444 - A 3 4.-- D_C F G H 4LoÂ· EAST E LE VAT I CO N -2-1/'5Â©UTH 2 L EVATI O N CHALET ELEVATIONS(TYP) PRO j ECT 32- . CHARLES PAVE AS CD N . DESIGN E 14 -No v. 1 9 q q 54 ALE 04. 't - i- CD. 2]100 .REVISED Â· MARCH 2-(boo J 7,4 9 + #4 / i ~:25-LA" ~ 1 -24- f/ ~ f \ 1 / 4 1 ENTÂ©,1 >\ 1,1 \1 1/f , r------ A V 51-ctly- 1 1 / /Â»e<~413%1 2 J 41-6" '7-7 u )'_i--:4/ 3 -9>k~ 464 4 . 4-<~ Fl- RN,2.~ - -1.---=61/43 1 -d Â»Mmt Li--9 11 0 2t ~~ ~ ~~ - -7,9266$*h- . \7 t \-11 . h\.OIRÂ«- . A-~ - <4 _1 - - i =~ ---u-~-th/~ ~ Â«=~ C ~- I .1,~bL - CLOS/4-1 . T. , 1 fl~/ 1 air . N .1 - 6 ~IÂ»- 1 'O 7/4- ~.-- --+r- . i " uifi 1 -ir #-_14!1 --411. 10 1 11*4441 1%\1. li- \-'EpjrrulacE) Â»-1--75Â»1 1 - ... -r i 11 -'\.4 ./ '. -' .. 10 13.-4.-r, -Ii 1 37*9 plÂ« - 3 Lifimal\\ (34 0 tzi- 1 1 f Â»,41 \VA 1 -YM 2 f ~#~1%*Efh.tb .e LEv . 111 1 \\\43 1} ; 4.-\--1 , - 1 1 7+ 1 h. t f -lit t\. \ f.#il \ 1 10 .Â» - 31- 3 31\ -- 244.1 4>>r./ \8 ---23 It. .M T \ j .- ~t-1- 25EURCOM-T...-~x-- + 1 1 \3.Â«Li --~_. -_~J~-1Â£ 1 /1 .,---Le N , \ 1 N \7 il_i~ 1 7 . 116, 9 1 1 \' Â©131 =- MAsfrp- 1 - ' r<MEI S Â£22Â£>i>M - Cd . 2.2 1 0...4. 1 .$ LU F \ 6 101-4" 1 69 j & 1-1/VING ROOM\~ - -b/2.0 --h ,- 1 - Â·)\ . Â· COM,- Cs \*, BEDRADEA , ~ 6 -1 -1 \5- 1 3 5 1 1 / \\\\% Â£ ~4 ki<< 2 Vi (50 1 . Stbul< 49<Ep:x . 43Â·â‚¬4ipit<1Â·4<z~th (i~ \r , 1 <i::44 \ GLD. 4,6Â«x,->.4- - 1+ 13..4 ~ = ..AJ 1047 - 4 ' 1 , - / - 1% 1 I j r X 6 1- ~ b ' -I-*.. 4 .1 1 - a - 1 -.-. A E F G H Â· 0-3 1 â€¢\1\ 1=<f \<\ L.LER ELB::-2-6228. Â£97 P MLD- EFLE?-DA._ 1+10,' ' - -1.-t)91 12 Ki â‚¬Lbo A 7+1 0 1 Â£ 1 & L ki 1 4 2 1 L A 1 0 -1 H .1 I \\1 CHALET FLOOR PLANS CrYe) \t , p ROB ECT 31 B.y CHARLES PAT.EkSON FAR LOWER- Fil,0 A- N OV 99 /CALET 944 - C -04 3 FLOORS - 20143' FAR KeWEft FLBOA :.23Â·4 OF 14-11~ t +8*Q 771 WALL<= "2Â·1 FY- + 1610' - MID .-FLO,>R- , 7410 RP. WALL# 2+ FT, REVISED,MARCH 2000 FAA - -FT-u Eii-,35*. Tr L 71:791- LIP19*FL P (DOR. =-69-74 EXP.19 13Â·41 r _ __ 1 r /111\\ \ 4--k E-'-E-~----=- +3--A~---6---L'~.-.-* -571A -i __- ___-~=Â»=~aillk[__]k Il~Â»-69*221 ~ *.--1-tEl Â« i-- 24 11----- = -----.SOUTI-1 ELEVATK>N EAST ELEVATION MOUNTAIN VIEÂ»/ 11 1 --1- ..FIT 1 ---- ftÂ«- 44 C)" 1 ~-31 [Ilial 1711 1-2=1.==11 11 7==7~1 1. .V=7.--- 31. 111, 1.3 .... i 1 2 - 77 - 1 ~- 2,1-8. --- 21' C 1 4-lif-~ Â«_1__~ Z~*tff~771/111\1- --0 /11 Ill I /11 1\ 1 - ===1==LLUU]1121Â£12_l 11 1 --1! L_L_U__11__L - NORTH ELENATI ON WES 1- ELEVATI C>IN HOPK1145 AVE-' VIE\N 1 VEST END BUILDIN6 PÂ·AOL E CT 3 2- .- CHARLES PATEIKSON DES laN E-12. JANUAR.9 19,00 1\1.- 1\~ 1 / / A 1 / / DEDAL'C)11 1 ...1/ /i 1, 22'J Â« 1\\\ 1 1 t , 1<- 1=j T- BE-r);402~-".~fl / 21 -2 14- ~VI~G 120Â£}M //~\(~ u 1\ ciggloo 8 4/ / r' L-- 7 ,/ 1 BEDROOM Apr. 1 --121zrÂ·.-= 00 -1 f // 1\\\ 1 1 1 \\ \ 1 *.-1-9 A- / PLAN--5 E CON D F-L (>OR. \/\/ PLAN - Rc-5 L> F T-OTAL = 16(39LA 1 9 j E--- - -1-1 ; -2341'-0 1-_-17=El-==-CE- 17 iL L I 1.-*-41[ 1 --K LIV IN G KM 1 â‚¬= EE 29~--11Lj API- P 1 WORK5Hop * 1 - 3-_0-9-_1 FUL'~\\ ---- 1 . U y t _ ~r,Hitlt]~11111- _ - 82 4 10011 1 - r \ \ 4- -Lfij= OP-IH---[11114. -u ff---f - 22 4,NG ADOM ' \ 5 7 oRAG E 1 -CONDD A 46) 0 - 34LD. 1. /1,/Â« \.\ / /2-1 / ~ In- 1 E-Z= / Â·Â·A \ 14 48, 181-ly APALWISTRÂ· E;t<ROGE. MA+SAf ~ , i - 4 A' fc -O fÂ»Â£,â‚¬4 ; LIVING KM 1 O - ' -2 A Pr 2- =14Â»0 F= -4 1- LLÂ« 1, " \ -1 ~~Prn==Â·m===czz~ PATID ; 4 11 m . *1 -~:4 . r .,9 1, 34\ 7 .LEEZE=ZE=3 - 191-0Â·------- 4 \ up 1 29'-0,1.__.-4 -221-' ~ â€¢4 1> f / / PLAN - F-38.51- PLC)(>84. ~ 4 -.-6 / il PLAN- 8ASEMENT TOTAL = 213-1,5-0 DRE,GING, BAT-15 - 5-96 )' 1 7q-10 APM. VEN. MASSAGE c 2[En 0~ 0 /\5 FooTPAINTÂ· 247Â·5 0 _ WE 3 -1- END BUILDING Â· CHARLES PATER SO N S'CALE ;G, '= 1 L O" roTA LÂ·Two FWORSÂ·3658.0. ID ROJ ECT 32 Â· D ES I G NI E R. Fr E e, 2. c' c'c> BAS EM - USABL E 74-1 0 1-11 4-4-95Â·5 4 4 The two 1 -bedroom guest units in the building on the west end of the property will provide a total of four pillows, will be configured with one unit above the other (duplex style), and will have a combined gross floor area of approximately 1,920 square feet (roughly 960 square feet each). The guest unit on the first floor will be handicap accessible, as required. The common guest facilities (whirlpool, bathrooms, dressing rooms) will have a gross floor area of approximately 430 square feet configured as a one- story element (with dressing rooms and bathrooms downstairs) connected to the east end of the building. The two 1-bedroom employee residences will be split level units in a side- by-side configuration (townhouse style), and will have a combined fioor area of approximately 1,400 square feet (approximately 700 square feet each). Split-level, in this case, means the units will each contain two stories, with the bedrooms upstairs. The west end building will have a total of approximately 3,720 square feet ofFAR floor area. A total of thirty-four additional guest pillows (seven guest units), two employee units, and common guest facilities, encompassing approximately 15,350 gross square feet of ftoor area, are proposed. The amount of FAR proposed is substantially lower due to many subgrade spaces being included in the 15,350 square foot figure. Aside from the subgrade spaces of the guest chalets, basement and storage area in the west end building will include an additional 1,430 square feet (with potential to include a fitness room and sauna). The actual amount of total FAR floor area proposed is approximately 11,800 square feet. Vehicular access to the project site is and will continue to be gained via its West Hopkins Avenue frontage. Access for trash pick-up will be from the South 4th Street and South 5th Street rights-of-way adjacent to the property. Snow removal along West Hopkins Avenue is already handled by the City and will continue as such. A detached sidewalk will be installed along the street frontage, in the West Hopkins Avenue right-of- way, providing a link from the Midland Trail to the public right-of-way and vice versa. The Applicants will agree to financially participate if and when a neighborhood-wide project is undertaken to install curb and gutter along West Hopkins Avenue. Until then, Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 6 the Applicants would prefer to leave the street edge in its existing condition so as to match that ofthe north side ofWest Hopkins Avenue. No off-street parking is proposed as there exists ample parking both in the adjacent streets and across the street at the existing Boomerang Lodge site. Further alleviating the need for off-street parking, the Boomerang Lodge maintains a shuttle van service capable of transporting six passengers at a time. The shuttle service is available as needed (on call), and will be extended to those who use the expansion units. The service is available for airport pick-up and drop-off, as well as for transportation to various destinations throughout town. The Boomerang management has experienced little demand on their shuttle van service in the past, due largely to their proximity (half a block) to existing free bus service to/from the airport, town, and all four local ski areas in the form of public transportation and bus stops along Main Street. The commercial core and the music tent are also both within easy walking distance. In order to allow the lodge use, the vacant parcel will need to be rezoned from its current R-15 designation to include Lodge Preservation and PUD overlays. The resulting zoning will be R-15/LP/PUD. With this rezoning, the Minor PUD process will be used to define the dimensional requirements, including parking, for the proposed development. At staff' s suggestion (see Pre-Application Conference Summary, Exhibit 2), the otherwise required Special Review to establish the affordable housing parking requirements will be combined, pursuant to Section 26.304.060(B), with the PUD review, Compliance with the City' s Residential Design Standards is not required since the structures will be devoted either entirely or partially (west end building is mixed use) to lodge use and are not "residential," per se. No development involving the existing lodge structure or parcel is herein requested. Therefore, the PUD will define the dimensional requirements associated only with the project site. This application does, however, refer to the existing lodge inasmuch as it is tied to the operational, employment, and parking needs of the proposed expansion. Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 7 In other words, the dimensional requirements (e.g., setbacks, height, FAR, open space, etc.) to be established for the proposed development will stand alone, but the operational, employment, and parking needs are intricately intertwined with those associated with the existing lodge. The new units will be operated as part ofthe Boomerang Lodge, under the same management and using the existing front desk and other facilities. Accordingly, this application describes the existing operational, employment, and parking characteristics of the Boomerang Lodge for comparison with the expected conditions after development. Both logically and in accordance with the Lodge Preservation regulations, these characteristics should be reviewed on the basis of incremental change/impact. In addition to their own home, the Applicants own a roughly 4,240 square foot triplex at 1020 Waters Avenue. The triplex contains three apartments of three bedrooms each. One of the three apartments has traditionally been rented to Aspen employees or summer students of the Music School, but is currently rented to school teachers, The other two apartments are used by the Applicant as housing for Boomerang employees. The Applicants have found their two apartments to be more than adequate to house their employees who do not already own homes. The units in the triplex are not deed restricted, but function as de facto employee housing under the Applicant's ownership. These units will continue to be available to employees of the Boomerang Lodge, including any "generated" by its expansion. Irrespective of the triplex, the Applicants will be providing housing for more than 60% the incremental increase in employment that will result from the proposed expansion. Both of the new 1 -bedroom affordable units will be deed restricted in accordance with the Housing Guidelines, providing credit for housing 1.75 employees per unit. This means the F Applicant will be providing new housing for a total of 3.5 employees (1.75 x 2). In reality, very few employees will be generated by the expansion since the existing employees will help to service the new units; nevertheless, housing for 3.5 employees is proposed. Based on the employee generation factors described later in this application, Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 8 the two proposed 1-bedroom units are more than adequate to mitigate the incremental increase in employee generation. Since each of the two affordable 1 -bedroom units will contain approximately seven hundred square feet of net livable area, it is herein proposed that they be deed restricted to the so-called Category 3 level. Rental ofthe units will comply with the APCHA minimum lease requirements, and in accordance with the Affordable Housing Guidelines, Boomerang Lodge employees meeting the income, occupancy, and asset standards will be given first priority to rent the units. In the event there are no qualified persons directly employed by the owner or no Boomerang employees who want to rent the units, the units will then be offered to other qualified persons according to the procedures contained in the Housing Guidelines. The five chalets and the eastern wing of the west end building are oriented to match the orientation of the existing Boomerang Lodge at the corner of 4th Street and West Hopkins Avenue; incidentally, this orientation of the existing Boomerang structure was matched in the construction of the duplex located across the street at the southeast corner of W. Hopkins and S. 4th Street. While being oriented in a northwest-southeast manner, all of the proposed structures simultaneously maintain a street orientation by having the longest wall plane of their respective north elevations run parallel to the street. The buildings cover a total of approximately 5,920 square feet of the 19,287 square foot site, resulting in a site coverage ofjust over 30%. Should the above mentioned property discrepancy be resolved in the Applicants' favor, resulting an additional 450 square feet of lot area, the site coverage percentage will drop to just under 30%. With the exception of a few small areas behind the fourth chalet from the east and much of the area behind the west end building, almost all of the approximately 70% of the site not covered by structures will meet the City' s open space definition. Although precise open space-to-view calculations have not yet been carried out, it is safe to estimate that more than 55% of the site will comply with the City's open space definition and Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 9 measurement requirements after development. The reason so much of the area behind the chalets will continue to meet the open space requirements is the 4th Street right-of-way and trail corridor adjacent to the project site (to the east) allows for the south side of the site to remain visible from pedestrian level along West Hopkins Avenue. The low percentage of site coverage and high percentage of open space is the result of generous setbacks and separation distances between structures. No structure is closer than fourteen feet from an adjacent building, and the proposed side yard setbacks are ten feet on each side. The low percentage of site coverage, high percentage of open space, generous setbacks, and ample spacing between structures are only possible because the Applicants are proposing a lack of on-site area being developed for parking. The other factor making these features of the proposed development possible is the Applicants' willingness and desire to sacrifice maximized densities in favor of a suitable, appropriate site plan. Consistent with the Applicants' mindset, as described in the previous paragraph, it is the their intent to leave the site in its undeveloped state with the exception of the structures, the walkways to the front doors of the structures, and the modest, down- directional lampposts on each side of the intersection of every walkway and the West Hopkins Avenue right-of-way/sidewalk. The walkways will be of stone washed concrete. Exterior lighting will be held to a minimum and feature down-directional, shielded fixtures to preserve the natural character of the area surrounding the site, including Shadow Mountain, Little Cloud Park, and the Midland Trail. The desire, and indeed the landscape plan, is to preserve and use, as well as replant, the wild vegetation which currently exists on the property. As already mentioned, the existing vegetation consists mainly of sagebrush and wild grasses. The Applicants intend to add only six aspen trees on Lots D and G (in the crook of the respective walkways), and fourteen honeysuckle bushes along the street frontage in an effort to complement the mature honeysuckle bushes that are prevalent on the existing Boomerang Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 10 Lodge site. The existing honeysuckle bushes found on Block 3 1 were planted some forty to fifty years ago by the Applicant. Over their many years of owning the Boomerang, the Applicants have observed an abundance of wildlife and birds in the area, and they wish to preserve, to the extent possible, the rural character of the surroundings. As the site plan and schematic architectural drawings illustrate, the proposed structures will complement the existing Boomerang Lodge. The existing lodge was designed by its owner, Charles Paterson, who is an architect. Mr. Paterson has designed the proposed structures and laid out the site plan such that the structures and their orientation will be fully consistent with that of the existing lodge. This goal is appropriate given that the new development will be a functional part of the Boomerang Lodge and should appear as such. Mr. Paterson's style has been described in some architectural circles as "Frank Lloyd Wright Modern." Complementary architectural styles are found up and down the West Hopkins Avenue corridor and throughout the neighborhood. The proposed structures are of similar height and width to buildings located throughout the surrounding neighborhood. The chalet structures will have a peak height of approximately twenty-eight feet, but under the City' s formula, will have a measured height of approximately twenty-three feet. In recognition of its larger overall mass, the west end building is scaled down to have a peak height of approximately twenty-six feet and a measured height of under twenty-two feet, Along the street front, the chalets will measure approximately twenty-five feet in length; the west end building will run some forty-six feet in length, broken into modules of no more than eighteen feet each. For purposes of comparison, the dimensional requirements associated with the underlying R-15 zone district (as they would apply to the subject lot) and those proposed for the PUD are as depicted in Table One, below. All square footages are rounded to the nearest ten square feet Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 11 TABLE ONE: DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS COMPARISON 1. Minimum Lot Size: â€¢ 1n the R-15 Zone: 15,000 square feet. â€¢ Proposed for PUD: 15,000 square feet. 2. Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling Unit: â€¢ In the R-15 Zone: 15,000 square feet for a detached residential dwelling or duplex; no requirement for a bed and breakfast or a boardinghouse. â€¢ Proposed for PUD: no requirementl 3. Maximum Allowable Density: â€¢ In the R-15 Zone: regulated via minimum lot area per dwelling unit; otherwise, not specifically regulated. â€¢ Proposed for PUD: one lodge or residential bedroom per 1,000 square feet of lot areal 4. Minimum Lot Width: â€¢ In the R-15 Zone: 75 feet. â€¢ Proposed for PUD 75 feet. 5. Minimum Front Yard: â€¢ In the R-15 Zone: 25 feet for residential dwellings; 30 feet for accessory and all other buildings. â€¢ Proposed for PUD 10 feet. 6. Minimum Side Yard: â€¢ In the R-15 Zone: 10 feet. â€¢ Proposed for PUD: 10 feet. 7. Minimum Rear Yard: â€¢ In the R-15 Zone: 20 feet for all buildings except residential dwellings and accessory buildings; 10 feet for residential dwellings; and, 5 feet for accessory buildings. â€¢ Proposed for PUD per approved final PUD development plans. 8. Maximum Site Coverage: â€¢ In the R-15 Zone: not regulated. â€¢ Proposed for PUD 35%. Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 12 9. Maximum Height (including view planes): â€¢ In the R-,15 Zone: 25 feet. â€¢ Proposed for PUD 23 feet for the west end building, and 25 feet for the chalets2 10. Minimum Distance Between Buildings on a Lot: â€¢ In the R-15 Zone: 10 feet. â€¢ Proposed for PIJD: 14 feet (exclusive of overhangs), 11. Minimum Percent Open Space Required for the Site: â€¢ In the R-15 Zone: no requirement. â€¢ Proposed for PUD: 55% or per approved final PUD development plans (whichever is greater). 12. Trash Access Area: â€¢ In the R-15 Zone: not regulated. â€¢ Proposed for PUD per approved final PUD development plans. 13. Allowable Floor Area: â€¢ In the R-15 Zone: 4,757 square feet for a detached single family residence on the subject lot; 5,177 square feet for a duplex on the subject lot; and, no regulation provided for any use other than single family detached or duplex. â€¢ Proposed for PUD: 12,060 square feet (0.625 FARb for all structures combined, as measured under the April, 2000, Aspen Land Use Code. 14. Minimum Off-Street Parking Spaces: â€¢ In the R-15 Zone two (2) spaces per residential unit of two or more bedrooms and one (1) space per residential studio or one-bedroom unit; established via Special Review for all other uses. â€¢ Proposed for PUD: no requirement. 15. Other Dimensions Determined Necessary to Establish Through the PUD Process: â€¢ In the R-15 Zone: not applicable. â€¢ Proposed for PUD: per approved final PUD development plans. Table One Notes 1: The minimum lot area per dwelling unit provisions of the R-15 zone district cannot be directly applied to a property containing a mix of uses, especially when most of Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 13 the uses are not residential. The proposal instead addresses the effect of such a dimensional requirement through the maximum allowable density provision. 2: Actual proposed heights are lower, but the proposed limits allow for a small and reasonable margin of error. 3 The 0.625 FAR is based on a lot area of 19,287 square feet and is proposed as a means of accommodating up to 12,000 square feet of FAR floor area. Should resolution of the previously described property discrepancy result in an additional 450 square feet of lot area, the ratio shall be adjusted to continue allowing no more than 12,060 square feet ofFAR floor area. As indicated above, the Applicants propose to maintain the minimum lot size, minimum lot width, minimum side yard, and maximum height requirements of the R-15 zone district. The proposed method of calculating density is too different from that required under the R-15 zone district for fair comparison (an "apples to oranges" comparison); nevertheless, the proposed dimensional requirements of maximum site coverage, minimum distance between detached buildings, and minimum percentage of open space exceed those of the R-15 zone district, and these are typically considered indicators of density. The proposed front and rear yard setbacks are less than those required by the R-15 zone district, but given the proposed development and surrounding properties, are more appropriate Regarding the proposed front yard setback requirement of ten feet, there are no adjacent developments along the south side of West Hopkins Avenue, and the proposed setback allows for the creation and establishment of a street presence and appropriate streetscape for this area that resides just six blocks outside of the commercial core. Also, given the steep slopes to the north, a ten foot front yard setback along West Hopkins Avenue's south side represents an appropriate precedent to establish. The proposed minimum rear yard setbacks are necessary only to accommodate a small portion of the west end building (the portion in which one of the affordable housing units will be located) and the four foot high enclosures around three of the chalet patio Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 14 areas. The full one-hundred foot depth typical of Aspen Townsite lots is not available on the project site, resulting in a site specific constraint where relief from the front and rear yard setback requirements of the R-15 zone are necessary though the PUD process. Since the project site backs up to public lands, the proposed minimum rear yard setback will appear much more generous and will not adversely affect any future development to the south. The proposed rear setback is close to that allowed for accessory structures in the R-15 zone. With regard to allowable floor area, the R-15 zone does not provide any regulation (i.e., unlimited) for bed and breakfast or boardinghouse uses, or for any other non- residential uses allowed in the zone, for that matter. Since the uses proposed are not regulated with regard to allowable floor area under the provisions of the underlying R-15 zoning, the proposed 12,060 square foot (0.625 FAR) limitation is more restrictive than would otherwise be required. The proposed off-street parking is less than that which would otherwise be required in the R-15 zone district. The rationale behind the proposed lack of an off-street parking requirement is explained later in this application (see the response to standard (4) ofthe LP GMQS Exemption request). IV. REVIEW REQUIREMENTS: The proposed development requires the receipt of seven (7) LP tourist accommodation development allotments and two affordable housing allotments, all exempt from the Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) scoring and competition procedures pursuant to Sections 26.470.070(M), 26.470.080(B)(3)(c), and 26.470.070(J) of the Regulations As discussed previously in this application, the proposal also requires a rezoning from R-15 to R- 15/LP/PUD pursuant to Section 26.3 10,040, In turn, under the new zoning designation, the proposal will be subject to review under Sections Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 15 26.710.050, Moderate-Density Residential Zone District; 26.710.320, Lodge Preservation Overlay Zone District; and, Section 26.445.050, Review Standards: Conceptual, Final, Consolidated, and Minor PUD. Since the Applicants desire to maintain a degree of flexibility with regard to the rental of the affordable housing units, conditional use approval pursuant to Section 26.425.040 is needed. That is, as already provided for in the APCHA Housing Guidelines, the Applicants would like to maintain the first right of rental on the proposed units every time one or both of the units should become available so they may use the unit(s) to house qualified employees of their lodge, if needed. If the Applicants do not need the unit(s) when they become available, then the units will be available to qualified renters though the Housing Office. The rationale for this desire is based on the fact that, sometimes, newly hired employees already own a home or, for whatever reason, do not wish to rent from their employer. The LP zone lists "affordable housing for employees of the lodge" as a permitted use, but "affordable housing" is a conditional use. Lastly, vested property rights status is requested for allland use approvals granted pursuant to this application. This section of the application is organized by applicable review standards, with each set of standards (e.g., rezoning, GMQS exemptions, PUD, conditional use, etc.) provided as a sub-section hereto. Under each sub-section, every individual review criterion is presented in indented and italicized print and followed by a response demonstrating compliance with and/or satisfaction ofthe given standard. A. Rezoning The Applicant hereby requests that the project site, as legally described in the Section II. of this application, be rezoned to include Lodge Preservation and Planned Unit Development overlays, resulting in a designation of R-15/LP/PUD. The Lodge Preservation overlay is required to allow the lodge use and, in turn, requires that a PUD overlay be established as well. The existing Boomerang Lodge is zoned Medium-Density Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 16 Residential with a Lodge Preservation Overlay (R-6/LP). Since the newly adopted LP and PUD regulations require that the dimensional requirements associated with a project be established as part of the PUD review process, there is no need to request that the underlying zoning ofthe project site be amended to match that ofthe existing lodge. Chapter 26.310, Amendments To The Land Use Regulations And Official Zone District Map, ofthe Regulations provides, at Section 26.3 10.040, nine (A-I) standards for City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission's review of proposed amendments to the official zone district map, as follows. A. W-hether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. The proposed amendment is fully consistent with all portions of the Regulations. The intended use of the property is consistent with the Lodge Preservation (LP) zoning with regard to its purpose and allowed uses. The proposal is for the development of lodge units and affordable housing, both of which are allowed uses in the LP Overlay Zone District, According to Section 26.710.320, the purpose of the LP Overlay zone is "to provide for and protect small lodge uses to permit redevelopment of these properties to accommodate lodge and affordable housing uses to encourage development which is compatible with the neighborhood and respectful of the manner in which the property has historically operated, and to provide an incentive for upgrading existing lodges on- site or onto adjacent parce Is" By rezoning the subject parcel to include LP and PUD overlays, the expansion and upgrading of the Boomerang Lodge onto an adjacent parcel is enabled, thereby promoting and protecting the continued existence of the Boomerang Lodge and development of affordable housing for its employees, As demonstrated in the foregoing (see Section II.) Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 17 and in response to the PUD review standards (following), the proposed site plan and architecture have been designed to be compatible with the neighborhood. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan. The proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the AACP as it will allow for both the expansion and continued viability of one of Aspen' s few remaining locally owned and operated, long-time (over 40 years of operation) small lodges, and the development of affordable housing for employees. However, the proposed development is not possible given the existing R-15 zoning unless said zoning is supplemented with the addition ofLP and PUD overlays. The stated "Vision" of the Community Plan provides that, "It is balance between all sectors of the community that we are striving to retain and enhance." Thls " statement refers to a balance between the "Aspen the community and Aspen the resort. As described in detail in response to standard "H.," below, this balance has been eroded over time by significant losses in both the moderately-priced, small lodge bed base and attainable housing for local residents. By expanding upon this type of bed base, furthering the viability of such a small lodge, and providing affordable housing, the proposed development will make strides toward reestablishing the balance the community has been struggling to retain and enhance. Similarly, the "Growth Action Plan" is intended to "Encourage land lises, businesses and events which serve both the local community and the tourist base." In obvious ways, expansion of the Boomerang Lodge and the provision of affordable housing Will serve the local community and the tourist base, but this will only be possible if the proposed rezoning is approved. Therefore, the proposed rezoning is consistent with the "Intent" ofthe "Growth Action Plan." Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 18 The proposed development, which will be enabled only by approval of the requested rezoning, will further the "Intent," policies and goals of the AACP's 'i "Transportation Action Plan" as well. Said portion of the AACP includes the following statements. The community seeks to provide a balanced, integrated transportation system for residents, visitors, and commuters thal reduces congestion and pollution," " reducing dependency on the automobile requires offering alternatives both for amomobile use and storage and other means of transport," and, "Seek to balance public and private transportation by increasing the number of available transportation choices." The Boomerang Lodge maintains a private shuttle van service for its guests, and said services will be extended to those who use the expansion units. The service is available for airport pick-up and drop-off, as well as for transportation to various destinations throughout town. Public transportation and bus stops along Main Street are within easy walking distance and provide access to all four ski areas (free of charge) as well as virtually the entire Roaring Fork valley. The commercial core and the music tent are also both within easy walking distance. By limiting the amount of available off-street parking to those spaces currently existing, guests ofthe lodge will be encouraged to utilize these alternative means of transportation to the maximum extent practicable. The "Intent" of the "Housing Action Plan," which is to "Create a housing environment which is dispersed, appropriately scaled to the neighborhoods and affordable r will be promoted by approval of the requested rezoning inasmuch as the rezoning makes the proposed development possible. The proposed employee housing units will be deed restricted and registered with the APCHA to ensure their continued affordability. The design ofthe affordable housing units is appropriately scaled in terms of bulk, height, mass and volume to both the neighborhood and the adjacently proposed lodge expansion units. In this way, the proposal is also consistent with the AACP policy calling for the development of" . small scale resident housing which fits the character of " the community and is interspersed with free market housing. Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 19 The project site is within the original City and Townsite of Aspen. In accordance with the Lodge Preservation Overlay Zone District's encouragement of "affordable housing for employees of the lodge" (which is listed as a permitted use, as opposed to simply "affordable housing" being listed as a conditional use), the proposal promotes the following "Housing Action Plan" policies: "Encourage infill development within the existing urban area so as to allow more employees will be able to live close to where they work," and, " an employer that builds affordable housing units shall have the right to designate that their employees shall have first right to those affordable units, if they meet the qualifications." The "Intent" of the "Commercial/Retail Action Plan" is to #Provide incentives for managed strategic growth by small lodges" This portion of the AACP explains as part of its underlying philosophy that, "The community must find ways to maintain these small lodges and the experience they offer to our guests." In addition, the policies of the "Commercial/Retail Action Plan," call for the following: "Provide incentives to keep small lodge owners in operation," and, allow for minor expansion with less " mitigation required in order to maintain the small lodge inventory in the community. 5, The proposed seven unit expansion from thirty-four to forty-one units is consistent with the goal of managed strategic growth by small lodges. Approving the requested rezoning and development will allow for keeping the Boomerang Lodge in operation and thereby maintaining and the experience it offers our guests. The joint LP and PUD Overlay provisions allow for mitigation at the level of incremental increases in impacts due to an expansion, and the proposed employee housing exceeds 60% of the incremental increase in employment that will be caused by the seven-unit expansion. Finally, the "Design Quality and Historic Preservation" element of the AACP is intended to "Ensure the maintenance of character through design quality and compatibility with historic features." Construction of the original Boomerang Lodge commenced in 1956 and was completed in 1970. While not specifically designated as an Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 20 historic structure, the Historic Preservation Commission intends to begin studying the designation of structures from this era in the Spring of 2000. Regardless of their findings, the Boomerang Lodge has a history of more than forty years in the community and, as such, is an historic feature. The proposed layout of the new lodge units and their architecture have been specifically designed to be compatible with the existing Boomerang Lodge and maintain a consistency to make obvious their relation thereto The philosophy of the "Design Quality" section of the AACP explains that, "Modern buildings woven throughout the traditional townsite and along the hillsides create an eclectic design quality that contributes to the small-town uniqueness of our community." The architecture of the existing Boomerang Lodge has been described as "Frank Lloyd Wright Modern," and it is one of the structures that contributes to the eclectic design quality and small-town uniqueness of Aspen. The expansion site will carry this design quality in a logical fashion to a site across the street, along the base of a hillside (Shadow Mountain). The foregoing has amply demonstrated how the proposed amendment will promote and further the goals, objectives, and intent of the Aspen Area Community Plan and is consistent with all elements of the same. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts ~ and land uses, considering existing land uses and neighborhood characteristics. As one moves from Main Street toward Shadow Mountain between 4th and 5th Streets, the Christiania Lodge and the existing Boomerang Lodge are encountered. The Christiania is zoned Office with a Lodge Preservation Overlay (O/LP), and the existing portion of the Boomerang is zoned Medium-Density Residential with a Lodge Preservation Overlay (R-6/LP). While not currently zoned as such, any proposed expansions or changes to these properties will require use of the Planned Unit Development process associated with the Lodge Preservation overlay, resulting in the Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 21 addition of a PUD overlay. The underlying zoning of these two properties is consistent with that of the neighboring properties to their respective east and west sides. The request herein proposed will result in the project site being zoned Moderate- Density Residential with Lodge Preservation and Planned Unit Development overlays (R- 15/LP/PUD). The R-15 zoning will remain consistent with the neighboring, adjacent properties to the east and west. The proposed LP and PUD overlays will be consistent with the overlays associated with both lodge properties between the project site and Main Street. With regard to land uses, the Boomerang Lodge, the Christiania Lodge, and the L'Auberge Chalets are all within one block of the subject site. Other surrounding properties are developed with detached single-family structures, duplexes, and multi- family apartment buildings. As such, the proposed amendment is fully compatible with surrounding land uses, zone districts, and neighborhood characteristics. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safetv. The proposed code amendment will not, in and of itself, have any effect on traffic generation or road safety. With regard to the development proposal enabled by the amendment, only a slight increase of approximately fifty-three vehicle trip-ends per day is anticipated (see letter from Jay Hammond, P.E., attached as Exhibit 7). Mr. Hammond considers this estimate to be conservative (high) due to the location of the site within one block of the Main Street transit corridor and the fact that the Boomerang Lodge maintains a six-passenger, on-call shuttle van for guest use. The estimated increase of fifty-three vehicle trips over pre-existing conditions for the site is characterized by Mr. Hammond as a "negligible" impact on surrounding streets. There is no doubt that West Hopkins Avenue and the surrounding streets can adequately and safely handle the impacts of the proposed development, and no improvements to the adjacent streets are required as a direct result of the additional traffic volumes associated with the proposed expansion. Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 22 The traffic generation will be held to a minimum due to the provision of a van shuttle service for transport of guests to/from the airport, as well as for transportation to various destinations throughout town. Public transportation and bus stops along Main I j Street are within easy walking distance and provide access to all four ski areas (free of charge) as well as virtually the entire Roaring Fork valley. The commercial core and the music tent are also both within easy walking distance. By limiting the amount of available off-street parking to those spaces currently existing, guests of the lodge will be encouraged to utilize these alternative means of transportation to the maximum extent practicable. Further, road safety will be enhanced by removing pedestrians from the street and relocating them to the detached sidewalk that will be constructed with this development, and on-street parallel parking has been demonstrated in numerous studies to serve a traffic calming function. 1 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, Please refer to the report prepared by Jay Hammond, P.E., of Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc., Consulting Engineers, attached hereto as Exhibit 7. Again, the proposed amendment, in and of itself, will not in any way affect infrastructure or infrastructure capacities. With regard to future plans for the property under the proposed R- 15/LP/PUD zoning, adequate water supply and pressure is available to serve the proposed project without additional upgrades to the City's treatment and distribution systems. Fire protection provided by existing hydrants will be adequate and will not be affected or interrupted by development. Treatment capacity is available from the Sanitation District to serve the additional demand associated with the proposed project. Historic drainage patterns and rates will be maintained after development via roof drains, downspouts and dry wells. Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 23 Impacts on parks and schools will be minimal as most of the development is comprised of tourist accommodations. Only two affordable 1 -bedroom dwelling units are proposed, and these will have negligible affects on schools and parks; after all, they will contain only one bedroom each. Park lands are plentiful in the neighborhood, with Little Cloud adjacent to the south, Koch Park just a few blocks to the southeast, Paepke Park just four blocks to the east, and the Marolt Open Space just a few blocks to the west. These parks all maintain more than enough capacity to adequately serve the proposed development The roads serving the project site are already plowed and maintained by the City of Aspen. With regard to the impacts to the surrounding roads, please refer to the response to standard "D.," above. The site is located on a public street, making it easily accessible for emergency medical services and fire protection. The introduction of seven new lodging units and two affordable housing units will not result in demands exceeding the j capacity of any public facilities or services. F Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Again, the proposed amendment, in and of itself, will not in any way affect the natural environment With regard to the development plans for the property under the proposed R-15/LP/PUD zoning, the natural environment will not be adversely affected. The property will be served by public water and sanitary sewer systems, and historic drainage patterns will be maintained. The availability of a shuttle van service, public transportation, and the lack of on-site parking will all serve in combination to reduce dependency on individual automobile use by the guests and residents of the property, in turn, significantly reducing the project's PMio generation and affects on air quality. As mentioned above, it is the Applicant's intent to leave the site in its undeveloped state with the exception of the structures, the walkways to the front doors of the structures, the modest, down-directional lampposts on each side of the intersection of Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 24 every walkway and the West Hopkins Avenue right-of-way/sidewalk, and minimal i plantings. Exterior lighting will be held to a minimum and feature down-directional, shielded fixtures to preserve the natural character of the area surrounding the site, including Shadow Mountain, Little Cloud Park, and the Midland Trail r 1 The desire, and indeed the landscape plan, is to preserve and use, as well as replant, the wild vegetation which currently exists on the property Access to the Midland Trail will not be adversely affected by the development, but will be improved by the installation of detached sidewalks along the West Hopkins Avenue street frontage. Over their many years of owning the Boomerang, the Applicants have observed an abundance of wildlife and birds in the area, and they wish to preserve, to the extent possible, the rural character of the surroundings. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City ofAspen. Placing Lodge Preservation (LP) and planned unit development (PUD) overlays on the property's existing R-15, Moderate-Density Residential, zoning classification will have j no affect on Aspen's community character and is certainly not inconsistent or incompatible with the same. The rezoning enables application for the expansion of the Boomerang Lodge. As explained in the foregoing, the expansion of the Boomerang Lodge in and of itself and onto the subject property is consistent with the community character (see response to standard "C.," above). H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. While not specific to the subject parcel but still important from a surrounding neighborhood and community-wide perspective, there has been a considerable reduction in Aspen's small lodge bed base. For instance, since 1990 a total of 264 lodge rooms have been added/constructed (7 at L'Auberge and 257 at the Ritz/St. Regis) to Aspen's lodging Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 25 4 bed base while Community Development Department records indicate the following losses to the Aspen lodging bed base since the start ofthe 1990s: Alpine Lodge 11 units Copper Horse 13 units Cortina 16 units Little Red Ski Haus 20 units Fireside Lodge 20 units Northstar 22 units 1 Aspen Country Inn 84 units Aspen Manor 21 units Bell Mountain Lodge 22 units Brass Bed Inn 29 units Alpina Haus Lodge 40 units Buckhorn Lodge 9 units Carriage House 10 units TOTAL 317 units These numbers do not account for changes in: (1) the lodging bed base of the unincorporated Metro Area of Pitkin County (such as the Heatherbed Lodge - 40 units, / the Highlands 1nn - 46 units, or the Maroon Creek Lodge - 11 units), which is believed to represent a net loss, too; nor, (2) facilities such as the Bavarian Inn (15-20 units converted to residential use), the Red Roof Inn, al/a Truscott (50 units converted to residential use), the Ullr (27 units being converted to residential use), or the Christiania Lodge (34 units used for residential purposes) that have been included in other similar counts/analyses. Consequently, it is believed that the numbers provided in the above tabulation represent a very conservative estimate. Given the numbers above, there have } been 264 lodging units added in Aspen since 1990 while at least 317 units (and up to 540 units) have been lost, resulting in a net loss of at least 53 lodging units and as many as 276 lodging units. Perhaps more importantly, all of the hotel units lost (including the 150 units to be :%). demolished at the Grand Aspen) were in the economy-to-moderate categories while all of the Ritz/St. Regis rooms are in the deluxe/luxury category. Similarly, an "Aspen Area Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 26 Pillow Count Survey" was completed by the Aspen Chamber Resort Association (ACRA) and Aspen Central Reservations in March of 1999. Said survey included the following findings (quoted from a Diane Moore memorandum to the ACRA Board of Directors dated March 2, 1999): k " ..the number of pillows available for short term occupancy have decreased over the past few years by approximately 100-200 pillows. While [their information] reflects that 393 pillows (economy properties) have been lost, there have been some gains in the number of pillows via property management companies, specifically with the rental of single family homes. The loss of 393 pillows is significant because these rooms were probably more accessible and affordable than a single family home rental. ., p "Conversations with local property management companies indicate that the owners of condominiums are reducing the number of days that their condo' s are available for short term vacation rentals." 1 "All of the properties that have been converted from lodge use to another use were economy properties." p "There is increased pressure to convert older, 'economy properties' to affordable housing units due to the strong need for employee housing. ,. p "Only a few properties, such as the L'Auberge de Aspen and the Beaumont Inn, have added rooms to their properties (total of 16 additional pillows). Both of these properties are considered moderate lodging." The above-described analyses explain significant changes in conditions affecting the community and which support the proposed amendment Inasmuch as the proposed rezoning will (a) support the continued viability of the Boomerang Lodge as a small lodge serving the economy to moderate cost tourist market, and (b) prevent its conversion to another use, the proposed amendment is a necessary step toward counteracting the trend of the 1990s resulting in significant losses to Aspen' s small lodge and economy/ j f moderately-priced tourist bed base. Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 27 I Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. The narratives provided in response to the previous review standards for a rezoning have provided more than sufficient evidence as to why the proposed amendment is in harmony with the public interest as well as the purpose and intent of the Land Use Code. For instance, the "Purpose" of the Lodge Preservation Overlay zone includes providing "an incentive for upgrading existing lodges on-site or onto adjacent properties- Such "adjacent properties" are in no case already zoned to include an LP Overlay, yet furthering the purpose of the LP Overlay zone seemingly requires rezoning such sites accordingly. In this way, the proposed amendment is in perfect harmony with the purpose and intent of the Regulations, in general, and the Lodge Preservation zoning, specifically. In addition, it has been repeatedly recognized that the provision of housing for employees in Pitkin County and Aspen is in the public interest and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Regulations. The proposed amendment will foster the creation of additional, deed restricted housing for employees of the Lodge or otherwise. !\ B. GMQS Exemptions j Section 26.470.070(M), Lodge Preservation GMQS Exemption Section 26.470.070(M) defines, authorizes, and regulates the process for exempting certain types of development in the Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlay Zone District from the competition and scoring procedures of the Growth Management Quota 1 / System (GMQS). According to said Section, development of properties zoned with an LP overlay to increase the number of lodge units and the number of affordable housing units shall be exempted from the GMQS scoring and competition procedures, provided that the Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 28 Planning and Zoning Commission determines, at a public hearing, that the following criteria are met. 1 (1) The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Please refer to the response provided for the same standard under the Rezoning portion ofthis application, above. i (2) The proposed development is compatible with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area and with the purpose of the Lodge Preservation (LID Overlay Zone District. With regard to the proposed development's compatibility with the character of 4 existing land uses in the surrounding area, please refer to the response provided for standard "C." ofthe Rezoning portion ofthis application, above. j Surrounding properties include the existing Boomerang Lodge to the north; the Little Cloud Park and various mine claims to the south; the undeveloped 4th Street right- of-way and the Midland Trail to the east; and, the undeveloped Lots 1 and 2 of the Mary B. Subdivision to the west. Other surrounding properties include a two-story residential duplex to the northeast (corner of 4th and Hopkins), and the two-story, multi-family ' residential, Madsen Apartments to the northwest (corner of 5th and Hopkins). In total, the surrounding land uses include a mix of lodges, offices (on Main i Street), and duplex, single-, and multi-family residential. The architectural styles used on the surrounding buildings vary as much as their uses. More specifically, the eclectic mix :4 of architectural styles associated with the surrounding properties can be described as , follows Frank Lloyd Wright Modern to the north (existing Boomerang Lodge); neo- Victorian to the west; motor court cabin (L'Auberge) and unadorned Adirondack to the northeast; and, "Traditional" and 50s plywood modern (Madsen Apartments) to the northwest. Roof forms vary from flat and shed roofs (Boomerang, duplex at 4th and Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 29 Hopkins, and multi-family at 5th and Hopkins) to steeply pitched roofs (L'Auberge and single-family residences). The surrounding structures range in height from one to two- and-one-half (1 - 2.5) stories above grade. With respect to the proposed development, the five chalets and the eastern wing of the west end building are oriented to match the orientation of the existing Boomerang Lodge at the corner of 4th Street and West Hopkins Avenue, which incidentally matches the orientation of the duplex located on the northeast corner of 4th and Hopkins. Simultaneously, all of the proposed structures maintain a street orientation by having the longest wall plane of their respective north elevations run parallel to the street. The layout and architecture of the proposed development has been designed to continue and compliment that of the existing Boomerang Lodge in an effort to make obvious its functional connection as part of the Lodge. In total, the proposed development is compatible with its neighborhood in terms of both the proposed use and design. The "Purpose" of the LP Overlay Zone District is, in relevant part, to "provide for and protect small lodge uses to permit redevelopment of these properties to accommodate lodge and affordable housing uses, to provide uses accessory and normally associated with lodge and affordable housing development, to encourage development i which is compatible with the neighborhood and to provide an incentive for upgrading existing lodges on-site or onto adjacent properties. If not for knowing better, the language of this "Purpose" statement would seem to have been written with the Boomerang Lodge expansion proposal specifically in mind. CL That is, the proposed lodge expansion and affordable housing development is L j being undertaken specifically as a means of protecting the future of the Boomerang Lodge and, thus, its small lodge use. Accessory uses normally associated with lodge and affordable housing uses are proposed, including facilities for a bath house, storage, and maybe a fitness room and sauna, The proposed development's compatibility with the neighborhood has been addressed above, and the proposal involves the upgrading of an Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 30 existing lodge onto an adjacent property. Therefore, the proposed development is fully compatible with the purpose of the LP Overlay Zone District. (3) Employee housing or cash-in-lieu will be provided to mitigate .for additional employees generated by the development or to mitigate for the demolition of multi-family housing, as required by section 26.530 This shall include an analysis and credit for existing employee generation and the incremental impact between the existing development and the proposed development. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be considered for this standard. No multi-family housing units will be demolished. The new lodge units will be operated as part of the Boomerang Lodge, under the same management and using the existing front desk and other facilities. Accordingly, the following analysis describes the existing employment characteristics of the Boomerang Lodge for comparison with the expected conditions after development. In accordance with the above standard, employee generation impacts are to be reviewed on the basis of incremental change. /4 A total of seven additional guest units (thirty-four pillows), two employee units of 1-bedroom each, and common guest facilities, combining for approximately 15,350 gross square feet of floor area, are proposed (including areas exempt from the calculation of FAR floor area) The guest units will combine for approximately 9,980 square feet of FAR floor area, and an average net livable unit size of approximately 1,680 square feet. The existing Boomerang Lodge has thirty-four guest rooms ranging in size from 280 square feet to 1,890 square feet (interior measurements/net livable). The average net livable unit size is approximately 510 square feet. The total facility includes approximately 21,290 square feet of improvements, of which roughly 2,500 square feet is located below grade, and another 4,160 square feet are common areas, The thirty-four lodge rooms provide for some 98 pillows. The lodge' s staffing historically and currently includes eighteen full-time equivalents (FTEs), consisting of the following: one head housekeeper, eight Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 31 housekeepers, three concierges/housemen, three front desk workers, one general manager, and two "hands-on" owners. Of these eighteen FTEs, ten own their own homes, including _ the general manager, one of the front desk workers, both owners, one of the concierges, and five of the housekeepers. In addition to their own home, the Applicants own a roughly 4,240 square foot triplex at 1020 Waters Avenue. The triplex contains three apartments of three bedrooms each. One of the three apartments has traditionally been rented to Aspen employees or summer students of the Music School, but is currently rented to school teachers. The other two apartments are used by the Applicant as housing for Boomerang employees. The Applicants have found using two of the three apartments to be more than adequate to house their employees who do not already own homes. The units in the triplex are not deed restricted, but function as de facto employee housing under the Applicant's ownership. These units will continue to be available to employees of the Boomerang Lodge, including any "generated" by its expansion. Irrespective of the triplex, the Applicants will be providing housing for more than 60% the incremental increase in employment that will result from the proposed expansion. Both of the new 1 -bedroom affordable units will be deed restricted to the so-called Category 3 level in accordance with the Housing Guidelines, providing credit for housing 1.75 employees per unit. This means the Applicant will be providing new housing for a total of 3.5 employees (1.75 x 2) Staff of the Community Development Department conducted an anonymous survey of ten small lodge owners/operators to better understand their employment patterns. Tabulated in December of 1999, the results of the survey found the following average FTE generation factors 0.267 FTEs per unit, 0.098 FTEs per pillow, and 0.021 FTEs per square foot (square foot figures were based on average unit sizes). Using these factors to assess the potential employee generation of the proposed expansion, the following results are arrived at: 2 Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 32 . By Units: By Pillows By Square Feet 7 34 1,680 x .267 x .098 x .021 1.869 FTEs 3.332 FTEs 35.28 FTEs Given these results, the calculation using the square footage factor is obviously ridiculous as there is no possible way the proposed expansion would result in over 35 additional FTEs when the existing lodge has nowhere near this number of FTEs. Therefore, the expansion should be expected to generate between 1.869 and 3.332 FTEs While not specifically stated in the Regulations, the AACP suggests that mitigation be provided at the level of 60% of the FTEs generated. 1.869 times 60% equals 1.12, and 3,332 times 60% equals 1.999; therefore, housing must be provided for 1.12 to 2 employees. With housing for 3.5 FTEs being proposed, the mitigation provided will be at the level of 105-187%, depending upon whether the pillow or unit factor is used In reality, very few employees will be generated by the expansion since the existing employees will help to service the new units; nevertheless, housing for 3.5 employees is ,~ proposed. Since 3,5 is 60% of 5.83, the proposed housing mitigates an incremental increase of 5,83 FTEs generated by the expansion. Based on the employee generation factors described above, there is no way the expansion will really generate 5.83 additional FTEs. Therefore, the two proposed 1-bedroom units are more than adequate to mitigate the incremental increase in employee generation. To put this another way, the proposal involves a 21% increase over the number of existing lodge units (7 is 20.58% of 34), If 18 FTEs service the existing 34 units, then a 21% increase in the number of units could, at least theoretically, generate 3.78 additional FTEs (18 x 21% = 3.78). Since mitigation is supposed to occur at the level of 60%, housing would be required for 2,27 FTEs (3.78 x 60%). The proposal involves the provision of housing for 3.5 employees, which is 154% of the minimum housing required under this method of estimation (64% more than minimally required). 1 Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 33 Furthermore, if using the generation factors arrived at via the Community Development Department's survey, the proposal involves the provision of housing for p more than 100% of the FTEs generated. Regardless of which method of estimating employee generation is used, the calculation sets provided above are extremely 1 conservative since the existing employees of the lodge will undoubtedly help to service the new units, rendering the incremental increase in employment less than proportional to the increase in the ratio of existing FTEs to existing lodging units. (4) Adequate parking spaces and public facilities exist, will be provided for the development, or that adequate mitigation measures will be provided. An existing deficit Ofrequired parking may be maintained through redevelopment. The Land Use Code requires 0.7 parking spaces per lodge bedroom unless otherwise established via PUD review. In the subject case, the number of required parking spaces for the proposed lodge and affordable housing uses need to be established pursuant to Section 26.445, as part of the PUD review. No off-street parking is proposed on the project site as there exists ample parking both in the adjacent streets and at the existing Boomerang Lodge site The existing Boomerang Lodge provides twenty-seven off-street parking spaces for its thirty-four lodging units, resulting in an off-street parking to lodge units ratio of 0.77 spaces per unit. This ratio decreases only slightly to 0.66 spaces per unit with the proposed addition of seven new lodge units, and the Applicants believe the 0.66 spaces per unit will prove to be more than adequate, particularly in consideration of the following. The ratio of existing off-street parking spaces to existing bedrooms is based on 27 spaces for 41 bedrooms, or 0.658 spaces per bedroom. With the addition of seventeen new lodging bedrooms, the ratio decreases to 0.466 spaces per bedroom While this may at first appear low, it must be considered that the 0.7 spaces per bedroom requirement has always been understood to include the provision of parking for accessory uses including restaurants, bars, salons, convention facilities, etc., and represents a uniform requirement regardless of location. No such accessory uses either exist or are proposed in the 4 Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 34 Boomerang Lodge, and the subject site is conveniently located with respect to downtown, event forums (music concerts), and transit. To employ the same parking to bedroom ratio as would be used for hotels such as the St. Regis (with its restaurants, multiple bars, convention facilities, salons, etc.) or the Inn at Aspen (located at the base of Buttermilk) would be preposterous, It is also important to factor in the following additional considerations. Although precise open space-to-view calculations have not yet been carried out, it is safe to estimate that more than 55% of the site will comply with the City's open space definition and measurement requirements after development. The low percentage of site coverage and high percentage of open space is the result of generous setbacks and separation distances between structures. No structure is closer than approximately fourteen feet from an adjacent building, and the proposed side yard setbacks are ten feet on each side. The low percentage of site coverage, high percentage of open space, generous setbacks, and ample spacing between structures are only possible because the Applicants are proposing a lack of on-site area being developed for parking. Herein lies the trade-off for which the Applicant is seeking approval: less than maximum density, generous setbacks, and more open space in exchange for the ability to sacrifice on-site parking lots. The project site has some 270 linear feet of frontage on West Hopkins Avenue. This frontage will provide between thirteen and fifteen parallel parking spaces on the south side of West Hopkins Avenue. The existing Boomerang Lodge has the same length of frontage along the north side of West Hopkins Avenue. Thus, the total West Hopkins Avenue frontage of the Boomerang Lodge will be 540 linear feet, providing on-street , parallel parking for twenty-six to thirty vehicles. On-street parking for approximately four vehicles also exists along the existing Boomerang Lodge's 5th Street frontage. When the number of on-street parking spaces (30-34) adjacent to the Boomerang Lodge properties is combined with the twenty-seven off-street parking spaces available on Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 35 l the existing Boomerang Lodge site, more than sufficient parking (57-61 spaces) is available to the lodge employees and guests as well as the residents of the two affordable housing units. If deemed necessary, two of the existing off-street parking spaces can be dedicated for reserved "car storage" use by the residents of the affordable housing units, leaving twenty-five ofthe off-street spaces available to guests and employees of the lodge. In addition, residential parking permits are available through the City for employees of the lodge. Approval of the proposed plan will promote the AACP's "Transportation Action " Plan," which includes the following statements: ..reducing dependency on the automobile requires offering alternatives both for automobile use and storage and other means of transport," and. "Seek to balance public and private transportation by increasing the number of available transportation choices " The need/demand for parking is at least partially alleviated by both the availability of convenient public transportation and the Boomerang Lodge' s shuttle van service, which is capable of transporting six passengers at a time. The shuttle service is available as needed (on call). The Boomerang management has experienced little demand on their shuttle van service in the past, due largely to their proximity (half a block) to existing free bus service to/from the airport, downtown, and all four local ski areas. Proximate bus stops also provide a free connection to Rubey Park, from which the entire Roaring Fork valley can be accessed. In addition, the commercial core and the music tent are both within easy walking distance. By limiting the amount of available off-street parking to those spaces currently existing, guests of the lodge will be encouraged to utilize these alternative means o f transportation to the maximum extent practicable, thereby forwarding the community goals expressed in the AACP. (5) There exists stÂ®cient GMQS allotments to accommodate the proposed development and the allotments are deducted from the respective Annual # Development Allotment and Metro Area Development Ceilings established pursuant to Section 26.470.050. Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 36 . Based on a February 2,2000, conversation with Senior Long Range Planner, Chris Bendon, the Applicants understand that a total of thirty-six LP tourist accommodation allotments are currently available. The proposed development requires only seven LP tourist accommodation allocations. Therefore, there are more than enough allotments available to accommodate the proposed development. Pursuant to Section 26.470.070(J) ofthe Regulations, the two proposed affordable housing units are exempt from the GMQS scoring and competition procedures. Section 26.470.070(J), Affordable Housing GMQS Exemption Section 26.470.070(J) of the Regulations provides that, "All affordable housing deed restricted in accordance with the housing guidelines of the City Council and its housing designee shall be exempt [from the GMQS scoring and competition procedures]." Review is by City Council. The section goes on to state that, The review of any request for exemption of housing pursuant to this Section shall include a determination of the City's need for such housing, considering the proposed development's compliance with an adopted housing plan, the number of dwelling units proposed and their location, the type of dwelling units proposed, specifically regarding the number of bedrooms in each unit, the size of the dwelling unit, the rental/sale mix of the proposed development, and the proposed price categories to which the dwelling units are to be deed restricted. The City is certainly in need of affordable housing, not only to mitigate the proposed development, but to help meet the shortfall of affordable housing available throughout the community. The proposed development complies with the "Aspen/Pitkin County 1999 Affordable Housing Guidelines." Two units of one bedroom each are proposed on the project site described in the foregoing. Each unit will contain approximately 700 square feet of net livable area, and be deed restricted as Category 3 rental units. Category 3 represents a maximum monthly rent cap of $1,047.00 under the current Guidelines, which may be amended from time to time. Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 37 The Applicants desire to maintain the first right of rental on the proposed units every time one or both of the units should become available so they may use the unit(s) to house qualified employees of their lodge, if needed. If the Applicants do not need the unit(s) when they become available, then the units will be available to qualified renters though the Housing Office. This type of arrangement is allowed for under the Section 8, Table IV notes of the 1999 Affordable Housing Guidelines. C. Planned Unit Development (PUD) In accordance with Section 26.445.030(B)(3) of the Regulations, due to the limited extent of the issues involved, a development application requesting approval as a Planned Unit Development on a parcel of land located in the Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlay Zone District shall be processed pursuant to the terms and procedures of Minor Planned Unit Development review (Minor PUD). This two-step process does not require approval of a conceptual development plan, but only review and approval of a final development plan by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, with public hearings occurring at both. Section 26.445.040, General Provisions Section 26.445.040(A) holds that the land uses permitted in a PUD shall be limited to those uses allowed in the applicable zone district in which the property is located. With approval of the rezoning requested herein (LP Overlay), the proposed lodge and affordable housing uses will be permitted. No use variations are either requested or required to accommodate the proposed development. , Section 26.445.040(B) states that, "Unless otherwise established pursuant to a Final PUD Development Plan, the maximum aggregate density shall be no greater than that permitted in the underlying zone district, considering the inclusions and exclusions of Lot Area, as defined, and the mandatory density reductions for slopes. " The subject Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 38 site is essentially flat, with a total elevation gain of some six feet from east to west over a distance of approximately 165 feet. Thus, the slope of the site equates to approximately 3.6%. The steepest slope on the site runs only twelve linear feet and slopes approximately 16.67%. Since all of the site is within the 0-20% slope classification range, no lot area or density reductions are applicable. Section 26.445.040(C) explains that the dimensional requirements associated with a PUD are to be established with the adoption of a final PUD development plan, The underlying zone district is to be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimension for each provision. A description of the proposed dimensional requirements is provided below, in response to Section 26.445.050(B), Establishment of Dimensional Requirements. Section 26.445.050, Review Standards: Minor PUD Development applications for Minor PUD must comply with the following ' standards and requirements. A. General Requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Please refer to the response provided for the same standard under the Rezoning portion ofthis application, above. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. Please refer to the following: the responses provided for standard "C." of the Rezoning portion of this application; the responses provided for standard "2." of the GMQS Exemptions portion of this application; Section II, Project Site & Neighborhood; and, Section III., Proposed Development, Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 39 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. The proposed development will not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area in any way, If anything, positive affects on the potential for future re/development of the surrounding area might occur since any necessary utility upgrades or extensions completed by the applicant would serve to aid in and better facilitate the re/development ofthe surrounding neighborhood. The properties along the north side of West Hopkins Avenue are essentially built out, but the south side of West Hopkins remains mostly undeveloped in the immediate area of the project site The undeveloped 4th Street right-of-way resides immediately to the east of the project site, and east of that there are existing residential developments. The lands to the south of the project site are publicly owned and/or contain multiple piles of mine tailings, and are not considered truly developable sites. The properties to the immediate west are located mostly within unincorporated Pitkin County and, as such, their development potential is limited by Pitkin County Zoning which precludes development on slopes of greater than 30%; these sites are currently limited to single-family residential development (up to 15,000 square feet ofFAR) and are ' unaffected by the development proposed herein. With regard to the properties to the north, these are basically built out but could be affected by the proposed development - inasmuch as seven LP tourist accommodation allocations will be consumed and no longer available. However, the LP program is structured on a first come, first served basis. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. Based on a February 2,2000, conversation with Senior Long Range Planner, Chris Bendon, the Applicants understand that a total of thirty-six LP tourist accommodation Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 40 allotments are currently available. The proposed development requires only seven LP tourist accommodation allocations. Therefore, there are more than enough allotments available to accommodate the proposed development. Pursuant to Section 26.470.070(J) of the Land Use Code, the two proposed affordable housing units are exempt from the GMQS scoring and competition procedures. Whether or not to grant the seven requested LP tourist accommodation allocations will be decided upon by the Planning and Zoning Commission while they consider their recommendation to City Council with regard to the PUD application. The GMQS Exemptions for the two affordable housing units will be decided by City Council during its review of the Minor PUD. Therefore, in accord with the requirements of this standard, all GMQS allotments and exemptions needed to accommodate the proposed development will be considered in combination with final PUD development plan review. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD The dimensional requirements Of the underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. Please refer to pages 8-15 of Section lII., Proposed Development, for an explanation of the proposed dimensional requirements and the rationale behind them. Section III. Of this application also includes a description of the proposed dimensional requirement's compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns. 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property a) The character of and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b) Natural and man-made hazards. i Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 41 1 0 Existing natural characteristics Of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade. and significant vegetation and land/brms d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics Of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking and historical resources. The proposed site plan's compatibility with existing and expected (via zoning designation) land uses in the surrounding area has been demonstrated throughout this application as well as in response to specific, similar review standards associated with the rezoning and GMQS exemption requests. In addition, the proposed development's compatibility with existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and surrounding area with regard to traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources have also all been addressed throughout the preceding portions of this application, particularly in Section III., Proposed Development, and Section IV.A., Rezoning There are no known natural or man-made hazards affecting the project site. Natural and man-made hazards affect the properties to the south, but not the proposed development. The steep slopes to the south are not a hazard for the project site due to the existence of dense vegetation and mitigating benches (natural and man-made) on the public lands and the Pride of Aspen Mine Claim. There are no waterways affecting the project site or surrounding area. Given the location of the site along the northeasterly base of Shadow Mountain, only morning and late afternoon sun will shine on the property. The angle of this solar access will result in shadows cast almost exclusively on the property itself, with very little shadowing on the public right-of-way. This will help to installed. minimize the development's impacts relative to icing of the street and the sidewalk to be As explained earlier in this application, existing vegetation on the project site is sparse, consisting mainly of wild grasses and sagebrush. It is the Applicant's intention to leave the site in its undeveloped state with the exception of the structures and the Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 42 walkways to the front doors of the structures. The Applicants wish to preserve, to the extent possible, the rural character of the area surrounding the site, including Shadow Mountain, Little Cloud Park, and the Midland Trail. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. Satisfaction of and compliance with this standard has been more than adequately demonstrated in the foregoing. The highest open space requirement of any City zone district is twenty-five percent and a fifty-five percent requirement is proposed for this PUD. The R-6, Medium-Density Residential, zone district is the only district with a maximum site coverage requirement at all, but is meant to address single-family and duplex residential development. Therefore, it would be reasonable for the proposed maximum site coverage to state "no requirement," but thirty-five percent is proposed. Considering all City of Aspen Zone Districts, the largest "minimum separation distance between detached structures" is ten feet; fourteen feet is proposed. All residential zone districts permit a twenty-five foot maximum building height, and since the proposed development is located in proximity to residential developments, the proposed twenty-five foot maximum height limitation is appropriate. The massing and scale of the proposed development is consistent with that of the surrounding neighborhood. The chalet structures will include two stories above grade and pitched roofs with a peak/ridge height of approximately twenty-eight feet and a measured height of approximately twenty-three feet. Taller structures exists across the street. The detached structures have been somewhat uniformly spaced to provide a consistent rhythm of building-to-open area along the streetscape. The proposed FAR will accommodate the development, but will not permit buildings of a size that would be out of character with those structures found in the surrounding area. Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 43 3. The appropriate number of offrstreet parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those .for pedestrian access andior the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. The Land Use Code requires 0.7 parking spaces per lodge bedroom unless otherwise established via this standard. No (zero) off-street parking is proposed on the project site as there exists ample parking both in the adjacent streets and at the existing Boomerang Lodge site. The existing Boomerang Lodge provides twenty-seven off-street parking spaces for its thirty-four lodging units. The Applicants believe the existing spaces along with the on-street parking will prove to be more than adequate. For further explanation as to how and why these spaces are adequate, please refer to pages 34-36 of this document (response to standard 4., of Section IV.B., GMQS Exemptions). In addition, the commercial core (six blocks) and the music tent (seven blocks) are both within easy walking distance. Also, West Hopkins Avenue serves as a designated bicycle corridor providing connections to downtown and the Marolt Open Space. Limiting the amount of available off-street parking to those spaces currently existing will serve as a disincentive, encouraging guests of the lodge to utilize these alternative means of transportation to the maximum extent practicable, thereby forwarding the community goals expressed in the AACP. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insulficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if. a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to service the proposed development. b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance to the proposed development. Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 44 The project site benefits from sufficient infrastructure capabilities to serve the proposed development and, therefore, no density reductions are necessary. As explained in the engineering report prepared by Jay Hammond, P.E., (see Exhibit 7), all utilities are available to the site and the existing capacities are adequate to accommodate the proposed density. West Hopkins Avenue is a City of Aspen public right-of-way and, as such, is already plowed and maintained by the City of Aspen. The Aspen Fire District station is a mere seven blocks from the project site, which is served with ample existing hydrants and is already within the fire protection district. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural sitefeatures. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground instability or the possibility of mudflow, rockfalls or avalanche dangers, b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage. soil erosion, and consequent water pollution. c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City. d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. The project site is suitable for the proposed development. It is essentially flat, and all of its area is within the slope classification category of 0-20%. The area to the south contains piles of mine tailings and multiple benches. The benches result from roadway easements and naturally flat areas. Above the mine tailings, the grounds are significantly forested with dense stands of coniferous trees. These benches and trees help to minimize if not virtually eliminate the hazards of rock fall and avalanche for the subject site. The project will employ roof drains, downspouts, and dry wells to maintain the site' s historic runoff/drainage rates after development. The Applicants will sign an agreement committing their proportionate financial participation if and when the City Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 45 undertakes an area-wide curb and gutter installation project. The installed and future drainage implements will all discharge into the sewer system, ensuring treatment. Thus, the proposed development will not be detrimental to the natural watershed and will not result in water pollution. No wood burning devices will be installed. Further, as explained earlier in this application, the development will encourage the use of alternative means of transportation such as the Boomerang Lodge shuttle van, public transportation, and walking. This will help to limit the amount of PMio generation attributable to the development. Regardless, the applicant will be required to comply with all requirements of the Environmental Health Department in connection with the issuance of building permits, and this will ensure that affects on air quality are addressed. All proposed structures will be located on flat ground. No driveways, roads, or trails are proposed on the project site. There are no critical natural features on the site, and site disturbance will be kept to the minimum required for construction. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's physical constraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area plan to which the property is subject. b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in subparagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided, or those characteristics mitigated. c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with. and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern, land uses, and characteristics. It is not clear that the proposed dimensional requirements request an increase in maximum allowable density. The maximum allowable density in the underlying R-15 zone Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 46 district is regulated via minimum lot area per dwelling unit; otherwise, it is not specifically regulated at all for allowed uses such as bed and breakfasts or boardinghouses. The proposed dimensional requirements, by contrast, will allow one lodge or residential bedroom per 1,000 square feet of lot area. Since these address density through differing means of measurement, they cannot be truly compared. For this reason, it is not clear that the proposal represents an increase in allowable density. Nevertheless, the discussion regarding the proposal's consistency with the goals and objectives of the AACP clearly demonstrates that the project will serve to advance many goals of the community, not the least of which address small lodges and affordable housing (see response to second review criterion for Rezoning). Also, as demonstrated in response to the two previous criteria, the site is physically capable of supporting the proposed density. Finally, it has been demonstrated throughout this application that the proposed development will be compatible with and complimentary to the existing and expected surrounding development patterns, land uses, and characteristics For instance, the largest of the proposed structures is located on the west end of the property, adjacent to unincorporated County lands which allow for substantially higher amounts of floor area (larger structures) than do the adjacent properties that are in the City. C. Site Design: The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public 's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1 Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner The site does not presently contain any unique natural or man-made features that provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past. The site, in its existing state, does not in any way contribute to the identity of the town. As previously explained, it is the Applicant's intent to leave the undeveloped portions of the site as they currently exist in an effort to preserve, to the extent possible, the natural character of the area Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 47 surrounding the site, including Shadow Mountain, Little Cloud Park, and the Midland Trail. In fact, the essence of the landscape plan is to preserve and use, as well as replant, the wild vegetation which currently exists on the property. Over their many years of owning the Boomerang, the Applicants have observed an abundance of wildlife and birds in the area, and they wish to preserve, to the extent possible, the rural character of the surroundings 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve signdicant open spaces and visas. 1 Since there are no significant open spaces or vistas worthy of preservation, the structures have been appropriately spaced. The spacing of the structures allows for the maintenance of an open feeling on the site, complementing the designated and publicly owned open spaces to the south, including Shadow Mountain, Little Cloud Park, and the Midland Trail. One would assume that to the extent the piles of mine tailings to the south of the project site can be obscured, such would be desirable. The site plan will not obscure views of Shadow Mountain from surrounding properties. The proposed heights of the various structures will enable continued visibility of Shadow Mountain from the street and the existing Boomerang Lodge 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular andpedestrian movement The five chalets and the eastern wing of the west end building are oriented to match the orientation of the existing Boomerang Lodge at the corner of 4th Street and West Hopkins Avenue. Simultaneously, all of the proposed structures maintain a street , orientation by having the longest wall plane of their respective north elevations run parallel to the street. The orientation of the existing Boomerang Lodge and the proposed chalets is mirrored by the orientation of the duplex structure across 4th Street to the east, The detached structures have been somewhat uniformly spaced to provide a consistent rhythm Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 48 of building-to-open area along the streetscape, with a minimum front yard setback of just ten feet. Given the steep slopes to the north and the site's location along the southerly edge of the urbanized area, a ten foot front yard setback along West Hopkins Avenue' s south side is appropriate. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. The site is surrounded on three of its four sides by public rights-of-way. _ Emergency vehicle access will be primarily from West Hopkins Avenue, and secondarily from the 4th and 501 Street rights-of-way. At its deepest part, the site has a depth of eighty feet, making even the furthest set back structures accessible for fire protection. Service and delivery vehicles will, for the most part, work through the existing front desk/offices area of the Boomerang Lodge across the street. Otherwise, West Hopkins Avenue will provide adequate access for all needs. Fenced trash enclosures will be located at the front corners of the property, accessible from the 4th and 5th Street rights-of-way. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. A detached, four foot wide sidewalk will be installed along the length of the project's West Hopkins Avenue frontage. By Code, sidewalks are required to comply with ADA specifications. Each unit will have a concrete walkway leading from the sidewalk to its front door. The ground fioor lodge room in the west end building will be handicapped accessible in accord with UBC and ADA requirements. The walkway leading to the handicapped accessible unit will also meet ADA specifications. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. Again, the project will employ roof drains, downspouts, and dry wells to maintain the site's historic runoff/drainage rates after development. No drainage related impacts Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 49 will be felt on surrounding properties. According to Jay Hammond, P.E. (see letter attached as Exhibit 7), on-site drainage requirements to maintain historic conditions under Section 26.580.020(B)(6) of the Regulations can be accomplished utilizing on-site dry wells located in the open space areas of the site. Further, on-site dry wells should be feasible in the pen'ious soils and will prevent any net impacts due to runoff or soil erosion. The Applicants will sign an agreement committing to financially participate for their proportionate share if and when the City undertakes an area-wide curb and gutter improvement project. No curb or gutter currently exist on either side of West Hopkins Avenue. 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use, No outdoor "programmatic" functions are associated with the proposed development. Each chalet unit will have a patio at its rear for private use, All programatic uses will be enclosed within the east leg of the west end building. Otherwise, the existing amenities associated with the Boomerang Lodge will be available for use by the guests of the new development. D. Landscape Plan: The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city, ivith surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designed treatment of extenor spaces, preserving existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety ofornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. As explained above, the existing state of the site does not in any way contribute to the identity or visual character of the city. Also as previously explained, it is the Applicant's intention to leave the undeveloped portions of the site as they currently exist in an effort to preserve, to the extent possible, the natural character of the area surrounding the site, including Shadow Mountain, Little Cloud Park, and the Midland Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 50 Trail. In fact, the essence of the landscape plan is to preserve and use, as well as replant, the wild vegetation which currently exists on the property. The only new landscaping additions proposed include the planting of six aspen trees in the crooks of two walkways (see site plan), and fourteen honeysuckle bushes along the West Hopkins Avenue right-of-way frontage. The existing Boomerang Lodge property contains multiple honeysuckle bushes planted some forty years ago by the Applicant, and the proposed landscaping will complement that located across the street while providing consistency therewith. Over their many years of owning the Boomerang, the Applicants have observed an abundance of wildlife and birds in the area, and they wish to preserve, to the extent possible, the wild character ofthe surroundings. As such, the Applicants believe it would be inappropriate to landscape the site to result in a well kept, artificially created, manicured appearance as seems to be implicitly desired in the language of this standard. That is, by maintaining the existing landscape characteristics ofthe site and adding only the modest plantings described above, the stated purpose of this standard --- "to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features of the subject property" --- will be met. 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner, Please refer to the response provided for the previous standard. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. For any trees to be protected or otherwise requiring protection, the Applicants propose the following methods of ensuring their protection. Prior to construction, all Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 51 trees to be protected will have orange protective barrier fencing erected which, as a minimum, will be supported by 1' x l' or similar sturdy stock for shielding of protected trees no closer than six feet from the trunk or one-half ( 1/2) the distance of the drip line, whichever is greater. Within this protection zone, there will not be any movement of equipment or storage of equipment, materials, debris, fill, or cut unless approved by the City Forester. During the construction stage, the developer will prevent cleaning of materials or equipment, or the storage or disposal of waste materials such as paints, oils, solvents, asphalt, concrete, mortar, or any other material harmful to the life of a tree within the drip line of any protected tree or group of trees. If these methods are deemed by the City Forester as unsatisfactory or in need of supplementation, the Applicant is willing to work with him to arrive at an acceptable plan. As explained in response to standard J., below, the Applicant will be phasing construction of the project over two stages, The first phase will involve only the three easterly chalets, and the second phase will include development of the remainder. The fill material resulting from the excavation of the three foundations in the first phase will be stored on the location of the fourth chalet. In conjunction with the methodologies i described in the previous paragraph, small "bobcats" will be used for backfill in order to minimize disturbance of vegetation. E. Architectural Character: It is the purpose of this standard to encourage architectural interest, variety, character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the building's - proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of materials, and other attributes which may significantly represent the character of the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan and architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character Of the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development shall: 1. be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable.for, and indicative Of, the intended use. and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 52 A large part of the architectural compatibility between the proposed structures and those of the surrounding neighborhood is derived from orientation. The five chalets and the eastern wing of the west end building are oriented to match the orientation of the existing Boomerang Lodge at the corner of 4th Street and West Hopkins Avenue and the duplex structure located at the other corner of 4th Street and West Hopkins Avenue. Simultaneously, all of the proposed structures maintain a street orientation by having the longest wall plane of their respective north elevations run parallel to the street. The detached structures have been somewhat uniformly spaced to provide a consistent rhythm of building-to-open area along the streetscape, with a minimum front yard setback ofjust ten feet to provide a street-front presence. The surrounding land uses include a mix of lodges, offices (on Main Street), and duplex, single-, and multi-family residential. The architectural styles employed on the surrounding buildings vary as much as their uses. More specifically, the eclectic mix of architectural styles associated with the surrounding properties can be described as follows Frank Lloyd Wright Modern to the north (existing Boomerang Lodge); neo-Victorian to the west (Cissnero residence); motor court cabin (L'Auberge) and unadorned Adirondack to the northeast; and, "Traditional" and 50s plywood modern (Madsen Apartments) to the northwest. Roof forms vary from flat and shed roofs to steeply pitched roofs. The surrounding structures range in height from one to two and one-half (1-2.5) stories above grade. The "Design Quality and Historic Preservation" element of the AACP is intended to "Ensure the maintenance of character through design quality and compatibility with historic features. " This PUD review standard seems to have the same intention. Construction ofthe original Boomerang Lodge commenced in 1956 and was completed in 1970. While not specifically designated as an historic structure, the Historic Preservation Commission intends to begin studying the designation of structures from this era in the Spring of 2000. Regardless of their findings, the Boomerang Lodge has a history of more than forty years in the community and, as such, is an historic feature. The proposed layout Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 53 of the new lodge units and their architecture have been specifically designed to be compatible with the existing Boomerang Lodge and maintain a consistency to make obvious their relation thereto. This will ensure that the architecture represents a character suitable for and indicative ofthe intended use. The philosophy of the "Design Quality" section of the AACP explains that, "Modern buildings woven throughout the traditional townsite and along the hillsides 2 create an eclectic design quality that contributes to the small-town uniqueness of our " community. The architecture of the existing Boomerang Lodge can be described as "Frank Lloyd Wright Modern," and is one of such structures that contributes to the eclectic design quality and small-town uniqueness of Aspen. The expansion site will carry this design quality in a logical fashion to a site across the street, along the base of a hillside. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less-intensive mechanical systems. Given the location of the site along the northeasterly base of Shadow Mountain, only morning and late afternoon sun will shine on the property. The property's location makes natural heating difficult but almost guarantees a degree of natural cooling. The angle of solar access will result in shadows cast almost exclusively on the property itself, with very little shadowing on the public right-of-way, thereby helping to minimize the development's impacts relative to icing of the sidewalk and street. 3. Accommodate the storage and shielding of snow, ice, and water in a safe an , appropriate manner thal does not require significant maintenance. The distance between the property line and the edge of pavement on West Hopkins Avenue is approximately twenty feet. The four foot wide sidewalk to be installed will directly abut the property line, leaving sixteen feet between the sidewalk and the edge of Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 54 the street. Sixteen feet is more than enough buffer room to absorb the impacts of street plowing while still accommodating parallel parking. Snow removal from the site will occur only along the walkways leading from the sidewalks to the front door of each unit. This snow removal will be handled via shoveling or the similar, and there is ample room alongside these walks to store the shoveled snow without any need for removal, Roof overhangs will provide snow shielding for the entryway to each unit, and the angle of inclination for the pitch of these roofs will ensure that snow sheds to the sides (not onto the entryway) F Lighting. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic concerns. Thefollowing standards shall be accomplished: 1. Alllighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any king to adjoining streets or lands. Lighting of site features, structures, and access ways is proposed in an appropnate manner. The development will comply with Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting, of the Regulations, and specifically with Section 26.575.150(E), Non-Residential Lighting Standards (including mixed use projects). Compliance with said section will ensure consistency with this PUD review standard. Outdoor lighting in the proposed development will be limited to downcast fixtures at the intersection of each walkway and the sidewalk, and possibly entry lights affixed to the wall adjacent to the doorway. No lighting of site features or structures is proposed, and no lighting will cause direct glare on or hazardous interference of adjoining streets or lands. 2. AH exterior lighting shall be in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD documents. Up-lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements, and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. Please refer to the narrative provided in response to the previous standard. Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 55 G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area: If the proposed development includes a common park, open space, or recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD, the following criteria shall be met: 1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open space, or recreation area enhances the character Of the proposed development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural landscape features Of the property, provides visual relief to the property's built form, and is available to the mutual benelit of the various land uses and property users of the PUD. As already explained, the applicants intend to maintain the grounds of the development in their existing, natural state. The amount and location of undeveloped areas on the project site will provide visual relief from the built form inasmuch as more than 55% of the site will meet the City's "open space" definition, there will be at least fourteen feet between detached structures, and the setbacks are generous. Nevertheless, no designated parks, open spaces, or recreation areas are proposed as part of the PUD, arguably rendering this standard inapplicable. Recreation areas are provided on the grounds of the existing Boomerang Lodge property in the form of a swimming pool and spa. Open space is provided in Little Cloud Park just south of the project site and the Marolt Open Space just a few blocks to the west, and City parks are available for use within easy walking distance. The Boomerang Lodge anticipates managing all aspects of the proposed development through and after completion. 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar manner. No common park or recreation areas are proposed 3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through legal instrument for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 56 I Maintenance provisions will be addressed as part of the Final PUD Agreement. The requirement of a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or - industrial development" is not applicable since no common open spaces or recreation areas are proposed. H. Utilities and Public Facilities: The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose any undue burden on #le City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified .financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructurefacilities exist to accommodate the development. Please refer to the report prepared by Jay Hammond, P.E., of Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc., Consulting Engineers, attached hereto as Exhibit 7. Also, please refer to the responses provided for previous standards related to infrastructure, Connections to public water and sewer will be made and the respective capacity of these services will not be exceeded. Historic drainage patterns and rates will be maintained after development via roof drains, downspouts, and dry wells. The Applicants will sign an agreement committing to financially participate for their proportionate share if and when the City undertakes an area-wide curb and gutter improvement project. Impacts on parks and schools will be minimal as most of the development is comprised of tourist accommodations. Only two affordable 1 -bedroom dwelling units are proposed, and these will have negligible affects on schools and parks. Given the one bedroom size of these units, it is not at all likely that school age children will be living on site. Park lands are plentiful in the neighborhood, with Little Cloud adjacent to the south, Koch Park just a few blocks to the southeast, Paepke Park just four blocks to the east, and the Marolt Open Space just a few blocks to the west, These parks all maintain more than enough capacity to adequately serve the proposed development. The roads serving the project site are already plowed and maintained by the City of Aspen. The site is located on a public street, making it easily accessible for emergency Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 57 medical services and fire protection. The introduction of seven new lodging units and two affordable housing units will not result in demands exceeding the capacity of any public facilities or services. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. While no adverse impacts on public infrastructure are anticipated, the applicants will bear the costs of any necessary connections, upgrades, and line extensions. Pursuant to Section 26.610.020 ofthe Regulations, park development impact fees for the new lodge bedrooms (but not the affordable housing bedrooms) will be due at the time of building permit issuance. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. It is not believed that any over-sizing of utilities will be necessary, but if such should be required, the applicant will be glad to be reimbursed. In the event that utilities have been oversized in connection with other developments in the area and an agreement for reimbursement is in place, the applicants will pay their proportionate reimbursement fees for connection to such facilities. I. Access and Circulation (Only standards 1 & 2 apply to Minor PUD applications) The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and niinimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the.following criteria: 1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through and approved pnvate road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 58 . Each structure and unit of the proposed PUD will have direct access to the adjacent street of West Hopkins Avenue via a concrete walkway from the front door to the sidewalk. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development. or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. Discussions relative to vehicular access, parking, and traffic have been provided throughout the foregoing portions ofthis application, and said discussions have adequately demonstrated that the proposed development will not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the property. The property is surrounded by public rights-of-way on three of its four sides, but two of these rights-of-way function only as driveways. Only West Hopkins Avenue functions as a road. Given the seventy-five foot right-of-way associated with West Hopkins Avenue and the low existing traffic volumes, there is no doubt that it can accommodate the proposed development without any need for further improvement. J. Phasing of Development Plan. The purpose Of these criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts Of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shelli be defined in the adopted final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with thefollowing 1. All phases, including the initial phase, shelli be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. The Applicants propose two separate phases to complete the development of the PUD The first phase will consist of the three easterly chalets, and the second phase will include the remainder of the PUD (two more chalets and the west end building). The i division of construction into two separate phases are absolutely necessary for the Applicants' ability to finance the project. Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 59 The first phase will function as a complete development, independent of the second phase, since the existing Boomerang Lodge will provide all necessary facilities and staff. 2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. The separation distance between the first and second phases will be limited to fourteen feet. Potential occupants ofthe initial phase will be made aware of when Phase 2 construction will commence, and will have the choice of whether or not to use the affected unit(s). 3. Theproposedphasing plan ensures the necessaq orproportionate improvements to public jacilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. The proposed phasing plan will be described in detail and guaranteed via the PUD Agreement. The only applicable impact fees will be those associated with Parks, and said fees are required, and thusly guaranteed, at the time of building permit issuance. Building permit and PUD Agreement requirements will also guarantee any necessary improvements to public facilities. Joint use facilities of the PUD will occur in Phase 2, but the existing facilities of the Boomerang Lodge will be available before, during, and after the completion of Phase 2. While the proposed affordable housing units will be built in Phase 2, it can be argued that Phase 1, through its association with the existing Boomerang Lodge, will not generate the need for any employee housing. Still, the Waters Avenue triplex owned by ' the Applicants will continue to include rental units available to employees of the Lodge. Furthermore, if Phase 1 is not permitted to occur as requested, it is likely that none of the development will ever be constructed, including the affordable housing element Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 60 l D. Conditional Use The Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlay Zone District allows "affordable housing for employees of the lodge" as a permitted use, but requires conditional use review for "affordable housing." Since the owners of the Boomerang Lodge have found in their numerous years of operating the lodge that new employees frequently own their own j~ homes or are simply not interested in moving from their existing domiciles, they desire to maintain a degree of flexibility with regard to the available market for rental of the affordable housing units that will be constructed. That is, if it is found that none of the employees of the lodge either need or desire to rent the unit(s) on the project site, then the Applicants wish for the unit(s) to be available to other qualified renters. Section 26.425.040, Standards Applicable to All Conditional Uses, requires that the Planning and Zoning Commission consider whether the following standards are met, as ( applicable: A. The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and standards of the Aspen Area Community Plan, and with the intent of the zone district in which it is proposed to be located; and Development of deed restricted, affordable housing within the City limits is wholly consistent with the goals, objectives and standards of the AACP. Please refer to Section i IVA.(B) of this application for further elaboration on this point. With regard to consistency with the intent of the LP zone district, please refer to Section IV.A.(A) of this 41 application B The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and surrounding land r uses, or enhances the mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the j immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development, and Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 61 The consistency and compatibility of the entire proposed development, including the affordable housing, has been sufficiently demonstrated throughout the foregoing portions ofthis application. C. The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed conditional use minimizes adverse 47ects, including visual impacts, impacts on pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise, vibrations and odor on surrounding properties; and Avoidance and/or minimization of the potentially deleterious impacts mentioned in , this standard have been addressed in relation to the entire development, including the affordable housing, in response to the various criteria associated with PUD review. D. There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use including but not limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks, police, fire protection, emergency medical services, hospital and medical services, drainage systems, and schools: and Again, the concerns raised in this standard have been addressed in relation to the entire development, including the affordable housing, in response to the various criteria associated with the Rezoning and PUD reviews. E. The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental need for increased employees generated by the conditional use, and In the immediate case, affordable housing is the conditional use, and supplying affordable housing does not generate a need for more affordable housing. 17 The proposed condinonal use complies with aH addinonal standards imposed on it by the Aspen Area Community Plan and by all other applicable requirements of this Title. The affordable housing units will be deed restricted and rented in accordance with the requirements of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority and its Housing Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 62 4 - Guidelines. The units will comply with all other standards imposed by the AACP and the Land Use Code. 1 E. Vested Property Rights In order to preserve the land use approvals which may be obtained as a result of this application, the Applicants hereby request vested property rights status pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 26,308 of the Regulations. It is our understanding that final f approval of the proposed development must be granted by ordinance of the City Council - to establish such status. It is also our understanding that no specific submission requirements, or review criteria other than a public hearing, are required to confer such status. Boomerang Lodge Expansion Page 63 EXHIBITS Exhibit #1: Land Use Application Form Exhibit #2: Pre-Application Conference Summary Exhibit #3: Proof of Ownership/Title Commitment Exhibit #4: Letter of authorization for both Haas Land Planning, LLC, and ) Vann Associates, LLC, to represent the applicant/owner Exhibit #5: List of Property Owners Within 300 Feet of Subject Property Exhibit #6: Signed and Executed Fee Agreement Exhibit #7: Engineering Report Prepared by Mr. Jay Hammond, P.E., of Schmueser Gordon Meyer, Inc. Exhibit #8: Article from United Airlines Magazine about The Boomerang Lodge and the Patersons . EXHIBIT #1 LAND USE APPLICATION PROJECT: Name: 1@ SOMERA)14 1-0Qiâ‚¬ ED<Muls,0.1 Location: 6-re A-I.8wcc 32,8-rv 4-6.hsrrk oF AGRW (&. sageoF *jegrl~orK,â€¢6% 45445*) (Indicate street address. lot & block number, legal description where appropriate) APPLICANT: Name: 21]Aft.â‚¬6 Aire G,WATAÂ·rusal Address: |104 E WATE& A,66 A,ped, eD 8l6 ll Phone #: (990) 925- 2895 REPRESENTATIVE: 9 Name: VAN Aeomes, LLC n 11*As LA,wR.*,gl,14, LLC Address: 230Ellom*GAME:,As.db016!1 & 201 R. Miu e 1(8 ; Asm.l, CD 81611 Phone #: (9?0)925- 6956 (990)925-7819 TYPE OF APPLICATION: (please check all that apply): [2' Conditional Use El Conceptual PUD ~ Conceptual Historic Devt. m Special Review [2' Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) ~ Final Historic Development El Design Review Appeal E Conceptual SPA E Minor Historic Devt. ~ GMQS Allotment ~ Final SPA (& SPA Amendment) J Historic Demolition ~ GMQS Exemption j Subdivision ~1 Historic Designation ~ ESA - 8040 Greenline, Stream ~ Subdivision Exemption (includes [~ Small Lodge Conversion/ Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, condominiumization) Expansion Mountain View Plane /// Lot Split El Temporary Use 0 other. VEsrgo*;41'rS ~ Lot Line Adjustment [~ Text/Map Amendment EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses. previous approvals. etc.) VACAtiThh|DEVePED S rE I PROPOSAL: (description ofproposed buildings. uses. modifications. etc.) 54â‚¬e- STA,le# aBLers; AAD I Smocruge wrril 2 Loo* o* rr6, 28Aho~Â»a*um:reo D ACGâ‚¬5684 8% - Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: S 2,860:22 [0 Pre-Application Conference Summary [0 Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement 21 Response to Attachment #2, Dimensional Requirements Form 0%1*81Â£ 0,00 H. 12-14 of:APPUCK,BA ax)Â© 8r Response to Attachment #3, Minimum Submission Contents [2~ Response to Attachment #4, Specific Submission Contents [0 Response to Attachment #5, Review Standards for Your Application EXHIBIT #2 CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: C.hris Bendon. 920.5072 DATE: 12.16.99 PROJECT: Boomerang Expansion REPRESENTATIVE: Sunny Vann OWNER: Charles and Fonda Patterson TYPE OF APPLICATION: 2 step. Rezoning, Minor PUD, LP Expansion and AH GMQS exemption. DESCRIPTION: Applicant is seeking to expand the Boomerang Lodge to a vacant parcel across Hopkins Avenue from the existing lodge.. The proposal includes 6 new detached lodge units and an employee housing structure to include one or two units and parking. The property is currently zoned R-15 and would need to be rezoned with an LP Overlay to allow the lodge use. The Minor PUD process will be used to define the dimensional requirements for the , new development including parking. Planner suggests the Special Review for AH Parking be combined, pursuant to 26.304.060(B), with the PUD review. , No development is proposed on the existing lodge and the PUD will only define dimensions on the new parcel. The applicant should, however. include the existing lodge in the application to describe operational, employment, and parking characteristics ofthe existing situation compared to the expected conditions after development. The creation of Lodge units does not automatically constitute a Subdivision. The applicant is contemplating an interval ownership ofthe new lodge units. A pending code interpretation will determine the requirements for this style of ownership, if any, and any code amendments that are necessary. Land Use Code Section(s) 26.445 Planned Unit Development (see Ordinance 35 of 1999) 26.470.70 Growth Management Exemptions, Lodge Preservation Program (Ord. 39 of 1999) 26.310 Rezoning (for LP and PUD Overlays) 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures. Review by: Staff for completeness Development review committee (DRC) for technical considerations Housing Authority for AH and lodge employment recommendations. Com. Dev. Director for recommendations Planning and Zoning Commission for final LP and AH allotments and recommendations for rezoning and PUD. City Council for final PUD and rezoning. Vesting is automatic and initiates after final approval. , Public Hearing: Yes, Applicant must post property and mail notice at least 10 days prior to hearing, or at least 15 days prior to the public hearing if any federal agency, state. county, municipal government, school, service district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application . Applicant will need to provide proof of posting and mailing with an affidavit at the public hearing. Referral Agencies: Engineering, Housing, Parks, Fire Marshall. Water, ACSD, Streets Planning Fees: Planning Deposit, Major ($2.220) Referral Agency Fees: Engineering, Major ($320); Housing, Major ($320) Total Deposit: $2,860 (additional hours are billed at a rate of $185/hour) - To apply, submit the following information: 1. Proofofownership. 2. Signed fee agreement. J. Applicant's name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant which states the name. address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. 4. Street address and legal description of the parcel on which development is proposed to occur. consisting ofa current certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all owners of the property. and all mortgages, judgments, liens. easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Development Application. 4 5. Total deposit for review ofthe application. 6. 30 Copies of the complete application packet and maps. One to Planner prior to remaining sets. HPC = 12: PZ = 10: GMC = PZ+5; CC = 7: Referral Agencies = 1/ea.: Planning Staff= 1 ' 7. An 8 1/2" by 11" vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen. v 8. Site improvement survey including topography and vegetation showing the current status, including all easements and vacated rights of way, of the parcel certified by a registered land sun'eyor, licensed in the state of Colorado. 1 9 A written description of the proposal and an explanation in written, graphic, or model form of how the proposed development complies with the review standards relevant to the development application. Please include existing conditions as well as proposed. 10. List of adjacent property owners within 300' for public hearings. Contact Ann Stark in GIS Dept. 920.5453. 11. Copies of prior approvals. 12. Additional application material as required for specific review. (See attached application packet.) Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, an un-adopted Ordinance amending the PUD regulations that may or may not be approved. and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. t EXHIBIT #3 1 AUG,16,1999 5:03PM PITKIN COUNTY TITLE NO. 4586 P 2/6 FNT COMMITMENT FOR TITLE INSIIRANCE SCHEDULE A 1. Effective Date: 07/26/99 at 08:30 A.M. Case No. PCT14386C2 2. Policy or Policies to be issued: (a) ALTA Owner's Policy-Form 1992 Amount$ 2,500,000.00 Premium$ 2,335.00 Proposed Insured: Rate;RE-ISSUE CHARLES G. PATERSON (b) ALTA Loan Policy-Form 1992 Amount$ 2,000,000.00 PremiumS 100.00 Proposed Insured: Rate:COMPANION MARY HUGH SCOTT, ITS SUCCESSORS AND/OR ASSIGNS Tax Certificate: $10.00 3. Title to the FEE SIMPLE estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment is at the effective date hereof vested in: MARY HUGH SCOTT 4. The land referred to in this Commitment is situated in the County of PITKIN State of COLORADO and is described as follows: See Attached Exhibit "A" PITKIN COUNTY 'TITLE, INC. Schedule A-PG.1 601 E. HOPKINS This Commitment is invalid ASPEN. CO. 81611 unless the Insuring 970-925-1766 Provisions and Schedules 970.925-6527 FAX A and B are attached. AUTHORIZED AGENT AUG. H. 999 5.03?M PITKIN COUNTY TITLE NO. 4586 P 3/6 EXHIBIT A THAT PART OF LOTS A, B AND C LYING NORTHERLY OF LINE 7-8 OF THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN (ACCORDING TO THE 1978 RESURVEY BY THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT), EXCEPT THE SOUTHERLY 20 FEET THEREOF AND THE NORTH 80 FEET OF LOTS D, E, AND H, THE NORTH 80 FEET OF LOT F, THE NORTH 75 FEET OF LOT G, THE NORTH 50 FEET OF LOT I, BLOCK 32, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN. 2 ' A 110 16. 1999 C . AOD A.A In A RQC MUL, , VJ[ IY PiTKIN COUNTY TITLE Pliu. M/UU 3. 4/6 FNJ SCHEDULE B - SECTION 1 REQUIREMENTS The following are the requirements to be complied with: ITEM (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or interest to be insured. ITEM (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record to-wit: ~ 1. Release by the Public Trustee of the, Deed of Trust from : MARY HUGH SCOTT 1- to the Public Trustee of the County of PIT'KIN for the use cf : PITKIN COUNTY BANK & TRUST COMPANY original amount : $600,000.00 dated : March 30, 1995 recorded : March 30, 1995 in Book 777 at Page 474 reception no. : 380166 2. Deed from : MARY HUGH SCOTT TO : CHARLES G. PATERSON ~ 3. Deed of Trust from : CHARLES G. PATERSON to the Public Trustee of the County of PITKIN for =he use of : THE LENDER TO BE INSURED HEREUNDER to secure : $2,000,000.00 4. Evidence satisfactory to the Company that the Real Estate Transfer Tax as established by Ordinance No, 20 (Series of 1979) and Ordinance No. 13 (Series of 1990) has been paid or exempted. I K -0 Certificate of nonforeign status executed by the transferor(s). (This instrument is non required to be recorded) 6. Evidence satisfactory to the Company that the Declaration of Sale, Notice to County Assessor as required by H.B. 1288 has been complied with. (This instrument is not required to be recorded, but must be delivered to and retained by the Assessors Office in the County in which the property is situated) 1 7 Completion of Form DR 1079 regarding the witholding of Colorado Tax on the sale by certain persons, corporations and firms selling Real Property in che State of Colorado. (This instrument is not required to be recorded) 1 AUG. 16.1999 5 :04?M PITKIN COUNTY TITLE NC. 4586 2 5/6 ENT SCHEDULE B SECTION 2 EXCEPTIONS The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company: 1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. 2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records. 3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area', encroachments. any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose and which are not shown by the public records. 4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. 5, Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or ocher matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by Chis Commitment. 6. Taxes due and payable; and any tax, special assessment, charge or lien imposed for water or sewer service or for any other special taxing district. 7. Reservations and exceptions as set forth in the Deeds from the City of Aspen recorded in Book 59 at Page 476 and 586 and Book 79 at Page 43 providing as follows: "That no title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of gold, silver, cinnabar or copper or to any valid mining claim or possession held under existing laws". AUG. 16,1999 5:04?M PITKIN COUNTY TITLE NO. 4586 f 6/6 - FNT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND DISCLOSURES The Owner ' s Policy to be issued, if any shall contain the following inems in addition to the ones set forth above: (1) The Deed of Trust, if any, required under Schedule B-Section 1. (2) Water rights, claims or title to water. (NOTE: THIS EXCEPTION WILL APPEAR ON THE OWNER'S AND MORTGAGE POLICY TO BE ISSUED HEREUNDER) Pursuant to Insurance Regulation 89-2; NOE'E: Each title entity shall notify in writing every prospecnive insured in an owner's title insurance policy for a single family residence (including a condominim or townhouse unit) (i) of that title entity's general requirements for the deletion of an exception or exclusion to coverage relating to unfiled mechanics cr materialmens liens, except when said coverage or insurance is extended to the insured under the terms of the policy. A sanisfactory affidavit and agreement indemnifying the Company against unfiled mechanics' and/or Materialmen's Liens executed by the persons indicated in the attached copy of said affidavit must be furnished to the Company. Upon receipt of these items and any others requirements to be specified by the Company upon request, Pre-printed Item Number 4 may be deleted from the Owner's policy when issued. Please centact the Company for further information. Notwithstanding che foregoing, nothing I contained in this Paragraph shall be deemed to impose any requirement upon any title insurer to provide mechanics or materialmens lien coverage. NOTE: If the Company conducts the owners or loan closing under circumstances where it is responsible for the recording or l of legal documents from said transaction, the Company will be deemed to have provided "Gap Coverage". Pursuant to Senate Bill 91-14 (CRS 10-11-122); (a) The Subject Real Property may be located in a Special Taxing Discrict; (b) A Certificate of Taxes Due listing each taxing jurisdiction may be obtained form the County treasurer of the County Treasurer's Authorized Agent; (C) Information regarding Special Districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained frcm the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor. NOTE: A tax Certificate will be ordered from the County Treasurer by the Company and the costs thereof charged to the proposed insured unless written instruction to the contrary are received by the company prior to the issuance of the Title Policy anticipated by this Commitment. This commitment is invalid unless Schedule B-Section 2 the Insuring Provisions and Schedules Commitment No. PCT14386C2 A and B are antached. l EXHIBIT #4 1 1 1 April, 2000 Mr. Charles Paterson 1104 Waters Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611-1975 Re Boomerang Lodge Expansion Application To whom it may concern: I hereby authorize both Vann Associates, LLC, and Haas Land Planning, LLC, Planning Consultants, to act as our designated and authorized representatives with respect to the land use application being submitted to your office for our property located at 500 West Hopkins Avenue. Vann Associates, LLC, and Haas Land Planning, LLC, are authorized to submit an application for Rezoning, GMQS Exemptions, Minor Planned Unit Development, and Conditional Use on our property. They, or their assigns, are authorized to represent us in meetings with City staff, boards, commissions, and the City Council. Should you have any need to contact me during the course of your review, please do so through Vann Associates, LLC, or Haas Land Planning, LLC, whose respective i addresses and telephone numbers are provided in the application. Sincerely, Charles Paterson, Owner of the Boomerang Lodge EXHIBIT #5 ALH HOLDING COMPANY GUNNISON AOYAMA TETSUJI 501 WEST MAIN LLC A COLORADO CORPORATION AOYAMA AKIKO ~08 AABC #202 435 W MAIN ST 6105 NE KES\NICK DR ~SPEN CO 81611 SEATTLE WA 98105 ASPEN CO 81611 *OYAMA TETSUJI BERR LLC BARTON META PACKARD AOYAMA AKIKO 611 W MAIN ST 6507 MONTROSE AVE j105 NE KESWICK DR BALTIMORE MD 21212 ASPEN CO 81611 ~EATTLE WA 98105-2049 ~OOMERANG LTD CITY OF ASPEN CITY OF ASPEN 500 W HOPKINS AVE 130 S GALENA ST 130 S GALENA ST ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 DUNSDON S MICHAELE ~LEARY THOMAS P REV LIVING TRUST CUNNINGHAM INVESTMENT CO INC BORKENHAGEN DAVID A IO N STEVENS ST 2461 F lM RD 617 W MAIN ST RHINELANDER WI 54501 GRAND JUNCTION CO 81505-1203 ASPEN CO 81611-1619 HAISFIELD MICHAEL DOUGLAS & /QOLDENBERG STEPHEN R & CHERYL J GRAMIGER HANS R HAISFIELD LISA YERKE ~30 W HOPKINS AVE PO BOX 67 616 WEST HOPKINS ISPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81611 HUNTINGTON TRUST CO N A TRUSTEE IGLEHART JIM JOHNSON STANFORD .2/0 NATIONAL CITY BANK ATTN CE 610 W HALLAM ST PO BOX 416 ~VIGHTON ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81611 ~55 E BROAD ST 5TH FL COLUMBUS OH 43251 KLEIN DEBBIE JOHNSTON DANIEL R & MARGARET S KAPLAN BURTON B A COLORADO CORPORATION 2018 PHALAROPE 1997 LAKE AVE ~OSTA MESA CA 92626 HIGHLAND IL 60035 546 MCSKIMMING RD ASPEN CO 81611 ~OELLE ALICE MADSEN, MARTHA W. MARCUS RENEE A PO BOX 2871 608 W HOPKINS AVE; APT. 9 432 W HOPKINS ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 ~ACGILL LEGACY LTD OSULLIVAN MIKE & LISA PATERSON CHARLES G ~ 1800 OLD KATY RD PO BOX 4476 500 W HOPKINS HOUSTON TX 77079 ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81611 SCOTT MARY HUGH SHADOW MTN CORP -RUDOLPH RICHARD E C/O RUSSELL SCOTT 111 & CO LLC C/O OATES HUGHES & KNEZEVICH P C ~O BOX 3080 7000 E BELLVIEW AVE STE 120 533 E HOPKINS AVE IEAREFREE AZ 85377 ENGLEWOOD CO 80111 ASPEN CO 81611 SHERWIN KITTY P & WALTER J 8.2% STARFORD PROPERTIES NV STASPEN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP IT KEON WILLIAM- C/O C/O JOHN STATON )17 ARANDALE RD 550 BILTMORE WAY 9TH FL 191 PEACHTREE STREET SUITE 4900 ETHESDA MD 20817-4701 CORAL GABLES FL 33134 ATLANTA GA 30303-1763 HROM ROBERT & PHYLISS 1/2 INT VIEIRA LINDA 50% INTEREST VERLEGER MARGARET B & PHILIP K JR THROM DOUGLAS 1/2 INT HALL TERESA 50% INTEREST 15 TORREY PINES LN 17 W MAIN ST 605 W MAIN ST NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660-5139 SPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 'EST ALFRED P JR YOUNG PAUL 111 YOUNG DONALD L ..EST LORALEE S 13355 NOEL RD LB 28 617 W MAIN ST 12 GREENBRIAR LN DALLAS TX 75240 ASPEN CO 81611 \OLI PA 19301 EXHIBIT #6 f' , ASPEN/PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for Pavment of Citv of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and Mt. 2*Â£~ES'~~EOEbd (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: APPLICANI has submitted :o CITY an application for Es<PALBRCA oF -Ate WooMEÂ£.AAâ‚¬l l_/AlÂ£/r (hereinafter. THE PROJECT). . APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 49 (Series of ! 998) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment of all processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. APPLICANT and CITY agree that because of the size. nature or scope of the proposed project. it is not possible at this time to ascertain the full extent of the costs involved in processing the application. APPLICANT and CITY further agree that it is in the interest of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs to be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue following their hearings and/or approvals. APPLICANT agrees he will be benefited by retaining greater cash liquidity and will make additional payments upon notification by the CITY when they are necessary as costs are incurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty o f recovering its full costs to process APPLICANT'S application. 4. CITY and APPLICANT further agree that it is impracticable for CITY Staff to complete processing or present sufficient information to the Planning Commission and/or City' Council to enable the Planning Commission and/or City Council [o make legally required findings for project consideration, unless current billings are paid in full prior to decision. 5. Therefore. APPLICANT agrees that in consideration of the CITY's waiver of its right to collect full fees prior to a determination of apflication Lowpleteness. APPLICANT shall pay an initial deoosit in the amount of S 2,8 60. 92whichis for 7AkLI/6-021ours of Community Development staff time. Ad if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit. APPLICANT shall pay additional monihly billings to CITY to reimburse , the CITY for the processing of the application mentioned above. including post approval review. Such periodic payments shall be made within 30 days of the billing date. APPLICANT further agrees that failure to pay such accrued costs shall be grounds for suspension of processing, and in no case will building permits be issued until all i costs associated with case processing have been paid. CITY OF ASPEN APPLICANT By: a a6 ~J- By: *Mie Ann Woods plommunity Development Director Date: Mailing Address: EXHIBIT #7 ENGINEERS SURVEYORS br (970) 925-6727 Uvt - SCHMUESER P.O. Box 2155 4 FAX t 970) 925-4157 GORDON MEYER Asoen. CO 81612 March 17, 2000 Mitch Haas Haas Land Planning, LLC 201 N. Mill St., Ste. 108 Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Boomerang Lodge Expansion Proiect, GMQS Exemption Engineering Report Dear Mitch: This letter comprises an engineering report for the GMQS Exemption and Rezoning application for the Boomerang property lodge expansion project on West Hopkins Avenue and Fourth Street in Aspen, Colorado. I have spoken with representatives of the primary utilities regarding the project and have undertaken site visits to observe site conditions and various utility locations. My comments endeavor to provide appropriate responses to the engineering-related requirements of City of Aspen Municipal Code Chapter 26.304, COMMON DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES. Introduction The existing Boomerang Lodge property is located at 500 West Hopkins Avenue on the south half of Block 31 of the Original Aspen Townsite and comprises 34 guest rooms, parking and guest amenities. The proposed application is for a Lodge Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemption and Rezoning to R15/LP/PUD to construct six free-standing buildings on a portion of Block 32 to the south of West Hopkins Avenue, across the street from the existing lodge. The proposed buildings will provide for seven additional guest units (a combination of 3-bedroom and one-bedroom units), two one-bedroom employee units and common guest facilities. With regard to the requirements of the Aspen Code, I offer the following comments: Water Supplv The Boomerang Lodge property is located adjacent to an existing 8 inch diameter ductile iron water line in West Hopkins Avenue as well as a 20 inch diameter transmission main in the same street. Based on my recent conversations with Aspen Water Department Director Phil Overeynder, the lines are in good condition and new taps from the 8 inch line would be available to serve the Boomerang Lodge expansion project. 118 West 6th, Suite 200 â€¢ Glenwood Springs. Colorado â€¢ (970) 945-1004 March 17, 2000 Mr. Mitch Haas Page 2 Phil indicated that the most logical configuration for service would be to have individual service lines from the main with meters and shutoffs to each building. 1! all the units are to remain under one ownership as part of the lodge, it may also be feasible to provide one service line through a master meter for all six buildings. This option would offer less flexibility in the future in terms of condominiumization or sale of individual units but may be more economical in terms of the service tap, shutoff and metering requirements. Phil indicates that adequate water supply and pressure is available to serve the proposed project without additional upgrades to the City's treatment and distribution systems. As an existing site within the downtown Aspen area, service would be subject to normal tap fees and connection requirements. Fire Protection Fire protection is extensive in the area of Block 32 with existing fire hydrants located on the southwest corner of Block 31 and on the northeast corner of Block 32. Fire protection to the Boomerang expansion site is currently provided most directly by the existing fire hydrant on the northeast corner of the site itself (#572). Fire protection provided by the existing hydrants should be adequate and will not be affected or interrupted by construction within the property. Given the small size of each building and the extensive West Hopkins Avenue frontage, I would not expect that the individual buildings would require sprinkler protection. Sanitarv Sewer I spoke with Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD) Superintendent Tom Bracewell regarding service to the Boomerang Lodge expansion project. An existing 8 inch diameter PVC pipe sanitary collection main is located in West Hopkins Avenue to the north of the expansion site. The existing collection main was constructed in 1989 and appears to be in good shape, according to the records of the ACSD, and can provide adequate service to the property. The main appears to have an average depth in the range of 5 feet to the top of the line so any significant below-grade facilities may require a sump pump for wastewater to reach the main. Treatment capacity is available from the ACSD to serve the additional demand associated with the proposed project subject to compliance with ACSD Rules, Regulations and Specifications. Service will be subject to full tap fees for connection to the sewer system by all of the proposed I units. Tom indicates that construction on the Block 32 parcel will also require payment of two supplemental fees associated with the line. One supplemental fee, at $1,050 per EQR, is being collected to perform repairs on the First Street collector located downstream of this site. A second supplemental tap fee, at $5,000 per EQR, is required to reimburse the construction of the existing collection main in West Hopkins Avenue. Both of these fees are charged in addition to the standard tap fees for new construction. Based on the ACSD schedules for condo or hotel SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC , March 17, 2000 Mr. Mitch Haas Page 3 type units, I would estimate the potential EQR's for the Boomerang Expansion project at 7.00 EQR. As we have discussed, I am providing the program and site plan information to the ACSD staff for their review and estimation of the full tap fees. The most likely scenario for sewer taps will be one tap per building with a shared service agreement for buildings where more than one unit or use may ever be subject to sale. Electric Electric service to the Boomerang expansion property is from an undergrounded primary electric line located in West Hopkins Avenue (as opposed to in the adjacent alley, where most dry utilities are located). There is an existing transformer on the south edge of the West Hopkins right-of- way just west of 5~h Street and an electric system manhole on West Hopkins about mid-block on the project frontage. Service into the lodge expansion site at the Boomerang will probably require installation of an additional transformer in the area. Miscellaneous Utilities Gas, telephone and cable television lines are also currently buried in the West Hopkins right-of- way in this area between 4th and 5th Streets. Telephone and cable TV primary lines were buried in conjunction with the undergrounding of the electric lines in the area. There is a cable TV pedestal on the south edge of the West Hopkins right-of-way to the east of 4~h Street and a phone pedestal on the south edge of Hopkins near the 6~h Street intersection. Service is available to the site from all these secondary utilities. Areas should be designated within the site plan to accommodate electric, phone and cable TV pedestals. Roads and Public Transportation The Boomerang Lodge expansion property is located on West Hopkins Avenue between 4~h and 5~ Streets. Information contained in the existing conditions figures presented in the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: Transportation Element prepared in 1987 noted that West Hopkins in this area exhibited between 500 and 1,000 vehicles per day (vpd) at that time. I have not been able to locate more recent traffic count data for West Hopkins Avenue in this area. For the most part, West Hopkins does not function as a through street and serves only the immediate neighborhood properties (although some increased use occurs in conjunction with pm commuter congestion on Highway 82). Current traffic volumes remain low through most of the day based on my observations during various site visits. The adjacent street is paved along the property I frontage and is in good condition. Parking is permitted along the street at this time. To anticipate some basis for traffic generation from the additional lodge development on the SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC March 17, 2000 Mr. Mitch Haas Page 4 Boomerang parcel, I referenced Section IV, "Road Design Standards" of the Pitkin County Road Management and Maintenance Plan, as adopted in 1997. The Pitkin County document recommends using the trip generation figures from the publication Trip Generation by the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE). The ITE publication addresses traffic generation figures for various types of uses. In considering the configuration of the proposed units on the Boomerang expansion parcel I would be inclined to utilize a traffic generation figure from the ITE for condominium / townhome units at 5.86 trip ends per unit per day. Using these traffic generation figures for the proposed project results in a total potential traffic increase of up to 53 vehicle trip-ends per day. I consider this figure conservative (high) due to the location of the site within one block of the Main Street transit corridor and the fact that the Boomerang Lodge maintains a 6-passenger on-call shuttle van for guest use. The 53 additional vpd over pre-existing conditions for the site would be a negligible impact to surrounding streets as a result of the development of additional lodge units and related employee units on the Boomerang expansion site. No improvements to the adjacent streets are required as a direct result of the additional traffic volumes associated with the Boomerang property lodge expansion application. It is the applicants intention, however, to install sidewalk on the West Hopkins frontage of the expansion site. The applicants would agree to join any future improvement district for the construction of curb and gutter along West Hopkins when and if such a district were formed. Our recommendation would be that the applicant would not install curb and gutter on the West Hopkins Avenue frontage of the property at this time, in keeping with the general condition of the remainder of that street. Highway 82, a block from the proposed lodge expansion site, serves as a major transit corridor offering convenient access to transit service including most major routes within Aspen as well as most down-valley destinations. Transit service to all points served by the Roaring Fork Transit Agency (RFTA) is available from within a block of the site. Storm Drainage I have reviewed the proposed site plan and existing conditions topography for the Boomerang lodge expansion project in relation to the existing drainage conditions on the site and would offer several recommendations regarding drainage design in conformance with the Aspen Municipal Code. The existing site comprises no impervious surfaces or existing drainage facilities. Site design should incorporate drainage to on-site detention facilities to control site runoff to historic levels following development. Based on our general experience with the area, I am anticipating that on-site drainage requirements to maintain historic conditions under City of Aspen Municipal Code Section 26.580.020(B)(6) Storm Drainage, can be accomplished utilizing on-site drywells located in the open space areas of the site. On-site drywells should be feasible in the pervious soils and will prevent any net impacts due to runoff or soil erosion. SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC March 17, 2000 Mr. Mitch Haas Page 5 I hope these comments are helpful in your preparation of the Boomerang Lodge property GMQS Exemption application. Feel free to contact me if I may provide additional information or detail. Very Truly Yours, SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC. /1 fir (-T\} '1 ------- ---> -- Jay W. Hammond, P.E. U Principal, Aspen Office JH/jh BLEER SCHMUESER GORDON MEYER, INC EXHIBIT #8 " 1 t i.*R 4'Â·Â· r :*1#*i?j:d 'AL i I I 11 -IL' P. 1/, 1~~*~~ 4' ' , 4444:fÂ·Â·:Â· ~- 11,191 4, . LAI+R + , , Â¢A, 2 . %, ' f . 4#O:ZiNXZL~:TrY#:tpr3 4 ft{'f-Â·:~ F .d-Ippie:&411<r j?Â· tr 0<74 '%*Â·34:Wil :1:1.1 4..44 1- ..4:~.t*.:**%4?9 _ ~ /;44Â·6#-4- ~.":~'g~#f~ Â·~ - Â· '. -' ?~ 14 *4 - 7 1 +2.' r 4 4,93... I . . '. 1 70*4 The Aspe . .4 When Charlie Paterson A j Aspen Hall of Fame for posed for this 1949 photo i.._ two years. He also served 4.irt inside his original log cabin tÂ¥-644-kff:*b'.1 on the Aspen Board of lie could not have imagined ~ 1 Adiustment for 20 years. he'd becomea leading civic <~- ~~-~1 , And he has represented 1. 1 A r I figure in Aspen. Pate*son \: 0 , It . the area lodges on Aspen -Et =1= ~~;* 211Ite ~I1~2 3- 31% - 412'3,1, ' 1 Central Reservations, d. t i ' Board. Music Associates of Aspen. wi iIi 15-* 41 3= 22 - 44 He was clmirman of the 1 - Iffl- 8*1,3.-46 -g *A M Â£ 6: .,sae, p.k' 46'Â« ?'*: 1?{E,ty KOOMER#NG LULPipt 2~-h , t~*Â·.E Ne y '44 THE LODGE THAT CHARLIE BUILT, AND BUILT, AND BUILT By Scott Dial -Uee Stadium is known as All that Babe did was show up and play House that Ruth Built." -'The House that Ruth baseball. albeit he played with a relish For almost 40 years nou-. thousands Built." But Babe Ruth never and flair that has not been mai:hed of disceming travelers have mide 2 itav raised a hammer, or even since. And the fans came. They Jame in the Boomerang Lodge a trucitional looked seriously at a blueprint. and he by the tens of thousands to see the Babe part of thek :ummer or w inter Aspen certainly never put any of his own play and it was the money from their vacations. Many of these rep eat cus- money into the building of the stadium. tickets th:' actually paid for ~'The :omers forid 3 refer to the Boomerang i 0,1 Ji 1 - - -1 " . - '4. h' 4'ili .1 Ir' r '11. h- as"The Lodge Charlie Built." And it is. ~ g@,tt.LP' â€¢t-."-t, i 00,4f~ %. Charles Paterson not only physically " ,44. 4 + 1-1 11.tul i ~*ki'~ I!:01.l 1 j -!7414-9.15 60 x helped build the Boomerang, he T â‚¬1-1 1 designed it. served as its contractor. I. " It-1 11 -;74 1& and personally raised financing for it. â‚¬ #1-- * 1 Not even the passage of nearly four decades has diminished his commit- ment to making the Boomerang the best of lodges. He still works about 16 44 L -*~-, 1 hours a day as host, manager, and goodwill ambassador for the lodge. And with the assistance of his wife, .Â·d Fonda, Charlie has created an ambiance 1 - r':4. . 1 of hospitality at the lodge that's as pal- '.4 111 L --- pable as the pungent aroma of the pines that stand just outside the windows and balconies of the Boomerang, and cover Charlie relaxes beside his cabin in 1949,just a few days after completing the structure. the mountain slope beyond the resort. 713.1.r Â· py - One of the marvelous things about /JgieS/2*Fr?~491 the Boomerang is that it seems to be 94~3>.*4-1.44*WRâ‚¬*â€ž-44.4 9.46: -'ttzit~s:~ i~: ~Â·i 91#j*it:**9 ~ ?KÂ· w: lure makes it appear timeless, ageless. suspended in time - its unique architec- ' 4-4921.tifF.*~ ?to , .. ---,3 b!'*â‚¬9%jESÂ·41:61>24:-:14 Its alodge that exists on its own terrns. 66*161 73-~3/000'-v --e.4... a-,4-37,-01 f.,S Not onterms of human time that would put it in a slot that would date it like a car. The Boomerang's unique architee- >, ture insures that it will remain timeless. 1-1.-6-1--2~.2~fi?Â¥?Â·'-' Â· Charlie Paterson learned many of his . elÂ·--'......2-- . -.Â· 3 architectural techniques from the mas- ter of the concept, his mentor. the leg- * ~~*-4%234~,.:Â¥ rit *fr-,- 21,7.I.-filk.it >fi-,44,#74,;42*%~i iÂ·-fijÂ·-+~ endary Frank Lloyd Wright. Paterson illÂ·y: :.1~4.'1'4407:Â·Â·=Â·'n. Â·-4919*ti 4..H.#pk#M*gleMME,;~.. 1*T~~~3~ has taken what he learned from Wright, 0...4 4 -'ali i-:9'.T>3*.; .6- : 41.2.-: -i-,--tÂ»,94Â·-7-*=4-~'~~6,0-wt...,TI-'7'73 43.'723~0%,if* -~ '0:.4-2 -1.- .9-":... added his own creative innovations, . - ; - .-37 -' ' 41 :41%254.--CyÂ·04 Â·-77 -4.-,Â·,f 30' 'f= <Â· 2'iÂ¢.C;.,.... ru.Z :Â·- 4Â·Â·'Â·i~f't3Â·Â·;21#49 Â· t. reÂ· , .... - 43.:Â·-Â·'Â»-4, ..49Â¥tbr.Â»:Xt~-d*,Â¥19/1 Â·Â·Â·2Â·Â·ehz:.........:.-â€žÂ·.... Â»16..4.-Â·-ft'.~.'.3 tive and interesting lodges in Aspen or any other resort destination in the A photo from 1954 documents the second addition to Charlie's log cabin that would world. eventually grow into a world class resort. Today the Boomerang boasts of 34 -- Â· 7,71 1 U.&350 luxury units including a number of two and three bedroom suites. But numbers '- 1 ~Â· ' 3~Â·J,f~. dâ€¢,Â·-IM;1 of rooms and lists of amenities will not tell you the whole story of the , . . .@4 0 RE.. 1...,:.J:t.:!4.-.931 Boomerang. To fully understand what this lodge represents, and how it came 1 # .. 4Â·31 Â·uâ€¢.4110 to be, you must know more about - .le + 1** - - Charlie Paterson. So, gentle readers, 'r~44â„¢-Â· -;-5-_â€¢ Jlt- . r. .. 6, * 2 with your permission, and an apology O , to Paul Harvey, your writer would like (10 i to tell you, "The rest of the Boomerang 9% -4 e, _2 Fpeâ€¢fr. 1.1 - .1 E Story." Ironically the Boomerang Lodge, , ..36..0 1, which is today a symbol of comfort and ''1944' I I ~0~-* :3-' 1 leisure, traces its roots to the days of agony and chaos at the beginning of World War II. "In 1938 Hitler's army 26'4!:fu. ht-A. Â·C Â·Â· invaded Austria and my father, Steve The first snow of a new season blankets the Boomerang in 1992. Schanzer. got my sister and I out of the .5 r ,;:f the Boomerang complex. country Just ahead of the German k ;.2 ~ ~ In addition to his interest in land and .,Â«r i 4% U 49Â¢ 0 troops. My mother died in Vienna Â· 1 eventually the hospitality industry, 'cr-,t 1.-2, ES Charlie loved skiing. before we left," explains ~ Charlie a. he pours another , v.Â· 1 d His talent on skis was cup of coffee in the sun- :I B 1 ' such that he was per- ':i 1 filled second story lounge li Â·t ' it : suaded to become an -Â·4) 4 1 of the Boomerang. "We Â· ; instructor at the Aspen went to Czechoslovakia. to Ski School. He started my Grandparents and when 1 0. 1 teaching in 1952 and Laught for 17 years, the Germans invaded, we ,Â» ' moved on to France. We 2/1 I 'LI" 19+ eight years as Top lived there for a year. * Instructor. The only â‚¬ break in his skiing came '*My Dad wanted to get 160 !91 0 I us out of Europe, but the - 5 in the mid-5Os when only way he could do it E Charlie was called to > Was to get US adopted in ~ active duty as an Australia." continues A. .R instructor for the moun- Charlie. So in 1940 my o tain and cold weather sister and I were adopted 2 training command C- and we went to Australia which was the reninant to live with the Paterson family. My Abover In the Boomerang's breakfast of the famed 10th Mountain Division. father stayed in France. He joined the lounge, Paterson emulated the Then in 1956, after his separation French Army, then was captured by the Wrightian trait of large corner glass from the Army, Charlie really began to Germans. but managed to escape. He windows to open up the room to the focus on his dream of a lodge. eventually made his way to Portugal, panoramic view of the Rockies. Actually, Charlie's first experience in and finally to the U.S." Below: Alfresco dining is a favorite the hospitality industry was in 1952 After the war, Charlie and his sister summertime Boomerang activitv. when he and his father ran the "Holiday decided to join their father in the House", a Victorian lodging U.S., so they immigrated to this 1 . home that no longer exists. country. "1 stayed in New York .4. But the experience whetted two or three years, but after hav- Charlie's desire to have his ing lived in Australia I knew that 1.6 own lodge. New York wasn't really where I IC " I "So when I got out of the wanted to be," Charlie adds. "So .4- Mountain Troops in 1956, we I struck out in 1949 for the West. 1 2-- i... Â·lf--Â· ~ 116 , started to build three units on 1 When 1 got to Aspen I knew U ... . /:. ,Â·ij â€ž~Â·.Â· Â· liÂ·Â·'- the property, and we were off * '%'*IPÂ·Â· Â·W' 'J'- that's where 1 wanted to be. F r in the lodging business," "My old : 415 1. W ..Clele:4&7:1:, .. "When I first hit Aspen I laughs Charlie. sensed something interesting was cabin was sort of in the center going to happen here. You could Â· .r, t.' of the new buildings. At that , -1, feel il in the air. I wasn't here 34'*- time there was only the Hotel more than a month before 1 went Jerome, the Prospector, and out and bought some property. I three or four other places that wanted a place to settle and offered lodging. When I look Aspen was it," insists Charlie. "I back on the beginning of our bought the land where the Â· lodge. sometimes I feel like a Boomerang stands today. pioneer." Actually I bought three lots at the : 3 Building three lodge units time. then bought three more on h would have been enough for each side as the years went by." -g most guys just out of the Charlie also built a log cabin - M Army. But not for Charlie on the land he bought. That orig- a Paterson. "After we complet- inal cabin, renovated and now g ed the three units, I decided to enhanced with all the amenities of 2 go back to architectural â€ž "I a world class resort, is still part of 0- school, explains Charlie. was very fortunate to study with Frank , ry Units that We believe are comparable A; .Â· 4. Lloyd 1Wright. 1 <pent three years at /- ie Â·f With anything in Aspen. Taliesin Easl in Wisconsin. While f was 47 1 3Â« 4 Whenever Charlie talks about the there. I designed the room where we re 0% 2% *01, r %- ew * 84* M. Boomerang, he generally uses the word sitting. 11, ./. * AL 'we- .-0 meaning he and his wife. Fonda. 3%.y "As you can see this lounge room is t. 190 $ And Fonda's presence is as inseparable from very Wrightian ... walls of concrete bat- < that of the Boomerang's ambience as tered blocks and the fire place of battered Photo by David Marlow Chartie's, "l run the day-to-day operations.- blocks." says says Charlie as a Charlie. 'If + smile lights his you'll look face, "but Fonda closely at the - ; 11$2# is the genius behind selecting windows you'll E- -1 - 1 the art and furni- L.1 1 11' I -1 see the corners , Mt. 0 11 ture that makes 1, , 11; 1 1 sort of a Frank ' --- - - ~'I,- '' Â¥ ..3:?*tt- ,-~Â§;Â© _ g WI I the units lookso 1,1 Lloyd Wright . t p, V. comfortable, 4 -5 C. I D J 1 1. 0 '' 4. She loves to buy signature. We - ar-ranged the - 141- art for the suites she has windows so that , a, - 0 and when you sit M impeccable taste. "The Boom- down you have .,st ~~" 4, ' erang wouldn't a feeling of 2 be the Boom- being complete- ly in the open. erang without The glass reach- Fonda," he adds. es to the ceiling, The almost the corners are ' intuitive collab- glass. and oration of almost all man- Charlie and One of the Boomerang's newly rebuilt luxury rooms. made objects Fonda allows are obscured by everything to the low back work in concert. wall that serves as the seat backs. All you pool is so attention-grabbing that it Each phase of operation from architecture can see to the east and the south are the earned a feature in Life Magazine in to art and hospitality. complements and sky. the mountains and the trees that the early 60's. The lower lounge also enhances all the others. An example is cover them. To a degree,all our rooms prof'fers a sauna and library, plus a the name Boomerang. It has obvious ties ' are built to afford the maximum feeling hexagon-shaped fireplace. The hexa- with Charlie's heritage. But it also has a of open space. gon shape is repeated often within and very special meaning for the Lodge. The effect of open space, the lack of without the Boomerang. For example, "Back in the mid-50's everyone was right angles and other innovations pro- that configuration is repeated outside in putting the name Aspen on their lodge or vide Boomerang customers with accom- the design of the pool and whirlpool. hotel ... the Aspen Inn, the Aspen modations that are almost futuristic in Despite the Boomerang innovations Chateau, or Aspen something or another. design yet they provide a feeling of com- the lodge is a work of art that is never So l decided we'd better have an original fort that satisfies even the most traditional finished in the eyes of Charfie name. The Boomerang was a natural expectations of hospitality. Paterson. "In '65 we built another selection. 1 thought 'if we really do a Another popular draw of the addition and in '70 we built the west good job, really run a good place, people Boomerang is the -underwater" pool end and still the improvements contin- will return here like the Boomerang.' window in the lounge on the lower ue. We took the units we built in the And so far they have," he concludes with floor of the lodge. Guests usually pre- 50's and completely rebuilt them this a smile. fur the large-windowed lounge on the year," explains Charlie. What Charlie says is true. Customers upper floor in the morning. -We started labor day. We gutted have found in the Boomerang a place of Afternoons, guests enjoy tea and cook- them until all we had left were the walls hospitality that is as timeless as its ies ir. the lower lour.5-2. and also in the and roof. We put in new features in architecture. That's why the Boomerang evening 90 where the> sip cool beÂ·. er- every unit. These units now include a has become known to so many cus- ages and z, atch swimmers through the marble bathroom. a large fireplace and tomers who return year after year as pool window. The underwater-, tew ; et bar. So now *c ha; e aix rle,1 luxu- "The Lodge That Charlie Built." + ISSUED FOR: CONSTRUCTION REVISION: A A A PROJECT NO: 2514 CHECKED BY: AR ISSUE DATE: JUNE 26,2007 COPYRIGHTâ‚¬)RSA 2007 9% 0 yff 11 99 9 + e *rt# T f ?2 (9 SKY LIGHT FrIMBER BEAMS-1 1 I I r--36'-6" HEIGHT UMIT *ER P.U.D. i ~ t=h==1 - - -v- - -E*30=E-7FY.-MEM:J-131 &~EEN~N.-rt-1 AM,M NU-TTEâ€¢1~rT]=11 , r--FLAT ROOF ~ S. lar-u- *Alf=dsi ta WooomoNG-liE~~~~'~'-a#lip- 7 ROOF OF EXT.LOBBY 0 1 1 1 - - STONE VENE@RED 2 9 2 Â® BALCONY WA~- 0 2 1YP. , L 104 1 9 1 01 1 = 1 -- @1 0 . GUARDRAILS - MTL. BARS & UGUARDRAILS- MTL. BARS & EXISTING GRADE -FINISH GRAD~ ~ 1 ' POSTS W/ TIMBER HANDRAILS POSTS W/ TIMBER HAND~\ICS 1 1 1 -TYP 1 1 11 1 :1 2-------,--------------L---------------- -ir=111=11111=11-111-111-=11-111-11--1,1-1111111-111-11--1.112=1111-11=111-11--1111=11111-11111=111111illt NORTH ELEVATION ELEVATOR VENT ELEVATOR VENT -38'-6" HEIGHT LIMIT PER P.U.D. 1-I-- -------- ---- M-----n 1/I///Ul//43/2*.Belist---I/,-IIL--Ligm/Exi RENO SMITH m.-Â·-r-==--M~--==n=,=-=,1 86/112 [Â·-â€¢=14+IM.I.==ik[*ti~ 1~ rl-~ ARCHITECTS 1 1- IN LLC ~ 01 1 603 WIST MAIN SIREET ZÂ» . Z. 2. SUITB 002 t. ASPEN, COLORADO ~ 81611 0 0 0,1 0 1 9 . 1 . 1 FAX (970 923-5993 1 371 SOUnISIDE AVE I ' N 101 1 BASALT, COLORADO i I 81621 (970) 927-6834 2-------,--------------L---------------- -4~1111=1=1111=11-=111-1-1-11-1-11--111-11=1111I11--111-1-11=1--11111=111111-111-_111111-_11-111111--L-t-_-3 FAX (970)927-6840 MODIFIED NORTH ELEVATION w,==11 EMA[LADDRESS ./ RECEI OVERALL ELEVATION JAM 0 4 7,1 m..8,1- EXHIBIT A CITY OF ASPEN [TwiFERE---1 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT | AO 201 I 19(101 DNIVZE[WOOH IBNG[AY SWIN,OH 3 009 OCIVHOT[OD 'NLISÂ¥ 1.-, ISSUED FOR: CONSTRUCTION CUENrAPPROVAL L REVISION: ~ ~ CD Set 1 1-9 9 9 9 9 9 99 9 9 9 @ @ ~ PROJECT NO: 25]4 ~ ~ rL~__~' 1-4 DRAWN BY: DS 1 1 1 1 CHECKED BY: AR/RS ISSUE DATE: Thur,deÂ·. December 27. 2007 COPYRIGHTÂ©RSA 2007 0.ecle,k, O-Â·ef 0. tr~-~ ~ra -1 .-1, .eal.Â¥,-!,0.-*.--f-.. -u~, ...... 6,1,11, Ic-ch L L C U,r- IhI ~,r~, 8 -c.,- p......car.....L./.12 - -- - ----------1 -- - I - - .1 -- --EL--1----------r--1--------------------- 1 â€¢ -r---- 1 -~--------------------------~---------- 1 111 , 1 lilli i It 6-1 r----- -* 1 C- lilli 1 1 1 1 1 1 L--7 ----1 1 1 --------------------------------------------------tz-tz-5 ' ~ZI~-ZEZZE===2~ZIEt=ZE-ZIZZIEZZIZE b=ZIZZE_______--___-__----_-__--_____-______-______-_-___ - - SOUTH ELEVATION 6-=,-1-- RECEIVED 11'1 0 4 :111 J, â€¢â€¢ i ELEVATORVENT CITY OF ASPEN ~lip~ ELEVATOR VENT STONE WALL a 4OMMUNITY D-' 'Lu.MCTP-Â«E&~Fg:~==Ck C 1 1 (3 (El a (3 Â® 81 8 9~ ~ !RENO Â·SMITH It ! 1 c=====mi 1 4 c.z: 1 1 ARCHITECTS 1 1 | LLC I.I.-I.- - ---* *.Ill'.0 -.Il.Ii--1- 1 ~~ ly 1 11 -==4 1 1 IE=41===*1 1 ---F/7/rl......-- 605 WEST MAIN STREET SUITE 002 ASPEN, COLORADO 1.~. 81611 (970)923.5968 - FAX - -- (970)925-5993 ---- _WEBS! 371 SOLTHSIDE AVE N 101 BASALT, COLORADO 81621 (970) 927-6834 4 1 , 1 | 6 + SUBGRADE PATIOS I i www.osmicon, 522221=r=J==r=rd- -------------~----~~ i r- i ; I k -7 r------- I , EMAILADDRESS 1 1 11 L--1 1 I officopÂ®nosmith com 111 1 ~:=1:EZZ:ZE:ZE~Z:ZW=ZZ:=:r:ZIZZ:ZIj It A- 1 ~-------------------------------------------------------A--4--4 I BUILDING 1 --------- ----- Il ...1 ---- I--- .-*-*---- ..lig .-/-0---- ---- -- ...----I-- ..I-* --------- J ELEVATION S.height Ch.nge MODIFIED SOUTH ELEVATIOp EXHIBIT B d~) 30*LE 1 . '0 ~TEEmr-------~ A 205 60/6 BOOMERA L DGE OCVHO100'NiadSV ISSUED FOR: SCHEMATIC DESIGN CLIENT APPROVAL ILEZZLIZEZZ...ZIZZIZEZZE-______________._L_~ - - 3- .1 -1 19 Ull lillil - t:a~==ir-llr--~ Itil Or--Il[-11~~ i ~ 1 - -r-1~-- I I REVISION: 12/10' -- ~ . 9 0 118-6 --- f PROJECT NO: er DRAWN BY: b --- -- ) CHECKED BY: AR 101-0 -I -- I ---- -- o ISSUE DATE: 0 : 1/2/2008 12:08 PM COPYRIGHTÂ©RSA 2005 1 0 C-) SOUTH ELEVATION i 1 r~ 1" . 10'-O WI 0 7 7 7 0 0 9 9 9 9 9 90 9 9 9 4 al 1 U 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 17tl 1 . 1 1 1 Emfillitimfit=====)/=====/==T==rrr==)=====/ Aillitrtitul,rE:*/1/1=:=L____N~ 1 - b - W - - FE 0 3- 0 --- 0Â© T- I --- -E- -7 - - --- - --* -r-- 7-- - --- - --- ---- --- - --- -- L___-3 L__-_IL - L-_.- 3--- 1 11 1 1 - 1 1 1 ---- I i k.-7 F --- 7 --J 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 It ' L 1 1 Ill --7 CZZIZ - MODIFIED SOUTH ELEVATION , M-~14 RENO Â· SMITH Â·ARCHITECTSÂ· RECEIVED ~--1----~ 605 WEST MAIN STREET SUITE 002 1 A N A A oral 81611 ASPEN. COLORADO JA. 1 V 1 (970) 9255968 EM_fIEMMELIUM EL-[11 CITY OF ASPEN (970) 925-5993 FAX tz=~ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 371 SOL-THSIDE AVE. BASALL COLORADO 81621 (970) 927-6834 , Â¥AX 118-0 - %- - (970) 927-6840 N 101 1 1 WEB SITE www.renosmith.com EMAILADDRESS office@ren-mith.com GENERAL: ELEVAT[ONS - - A.112. ~*rce.Â·* L ~n EAST ELEVATION ' ~ SHEET NO: - MODIFIED EAST ELEVATION 9-1 1 OGVHO1O2)'WHdSV 1-0- 9-0 ISSLED FOR: SCHEMATIC DESIGN CLIENT APPROVAL 157 REVISION: 12 -O - | LJ A 7- 1 1 61=8 1- 1 1/Le PROJECT IO DRAWN BY: ~CHECKED BY: AR 7-- , o<-~ 1- io.-0Â· ISSUE DATE: -11 4 1/2/2008 12:02 PM -r- â€žDo COPYRIGHTÂ©RSA 2005 9 100-0 - NORTH ELEVATION [ 1 }--'-----------------, --0 w U 0 r-- tI=L --- 1 1 Eli 1' 3 I I I 1# .1111 -- - - -- - -- ----- - -- - LJ ~A I ~ - MODIFIED NORTH ELEVALON â€¢19Lt# V~|211Â¥NO Â· SMITH Ilt 4# Â·ARCHITECTS ' I 605 WEST MAIN STREET I SUITE 002 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 _ _-- (970) 925-5968 Â¥-*~ET3Em ZEZZE---ZEZZIZE Z~~I_Z_Z_2_2_2_2-2~- --= CE-----~~~~~I / put,t. FAX 191/9/ (970) 925-5993 21 -- - -- iliz 371 SOLTHSIDE AVE. N 101 1-- 128-07 - _ ~ __~~~~~~~ _~_~~;-- _~__ ~~~~__~_~~~_ ~~:~~~~_ - BASALT. COLORADO In-Fin-0-1--1 MI I al--11 *Tr-3*m-- - - -- - - -- --- ~ --- (970) 927-6834 4 - - - FAX -_ .%,w......mith.com - - _ (970)927-6840 WEB SITE EMAILADDRESS 5.2--799:'-I.4/-1~---i--2------ office@renoimlth.com 39-- IEN-=Tr][-0-PETTE-1[~ -- F GENERAL: :91.1 11 11 ELEVATIONS - REST ELEVATION SHEET-96 C 2 )--------------~~---,010-0 , - -1- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - ~ MODIFIED REST ELEVATION ~ 10 6,1-1 D 14 -'- OCVHO1OD 'NI34SV DAIVNG[WOOH ISSUED FOR CONSTRUCTION 0.2.2.23.AL X REVKSION A Pnclog .1 A A A FROJECTNO: 1514 DRAWN BY: DS CH"ED BY: AR 156 UK DATE: JUNE:6,2/T COPYRIGHTÂ©RSA 3007 9 9 + 9 **9 + 092 2 + 1 FLAT ROOF-t-11 1 1 , , r-36Â·2'HEIGHTLIMITI|EMP.UD -6'R_~~ _12=_ 4-4.--3f~Me-=tt,J - - - - --- W,XBUILDINGMEIGWT -- 1 -- - -V -- 1 ~CO~~ ~~~e~ |~~~~~~~~~g~ ~ ~~~0~-|~,~~ ~~~_~ ~-FLATROOF I...IA= 0 ./.WI'll'imill'llilimi...14. I/- 7 E-1 .$,MBERBEU,4 '#mi# Ci ~â€¢LVWL,wâ€ž..:. ELL' ~ /-I~IOF OF EXT LOBBY ~-R00FDECKA~5=IR~~gs':~:al ./i 0â€ž,1 9//NJE/WAR*AN/6*/WLED*- ==EGRAW=,TRIZE~ O 4 uâ€¢ 1-Â·-+-4.1a _Bx8 TIMBER 11.1- 4 1- ~~11 1 MOON'=111 41-I l l EM~~~ 1, Uâ€¢ 1~-1 1 F' STONE VENEERED ~ MVIT-YM7+J I )11 . *~P r-|+ |Â®'111â€¢11-1.1[-3~ 1 t21.-BALcoN'rvmt-- , 4 W I i AF, . _ 4. -__â€¢L r. -~ 11 - i tâ‚¬858 49*F~4'*C@&3'*4~81=04,*-EEL + v ~ 51 aut.* I. ~_GUARDRAiLS - MTL. BARS & L GUARDRAILS. Mn- BARS & EXISTING Q~DE ~ FINISH GRAD~ ~ ~ POSTS W/ nMBER HANDRAILS pOSTS w/ TIMBERHANDrWLS I 7 I i .TY'P . TYP. NORTH ELEVATION ELEVATOR VENT ELEVATOR VENT ~-36'-/ HEIGHT LIMF PER P UD .-I 'h \ -Il Il----...I - -- --- f--4 1 11 ./--- u....I-- m Ella 6-A I- 1.- RENO Â· SMITH ARI'll'CTS 110 U.C 11 i n -146-x. ---â€¢-:-m ---I.-i ./.P. -r------1 / ~--Â·UU~-i 6,+ -L, -%=IN--]= F* ~ W wwi~u w 7-157 - MAE 605 WEST MAIN 81'REEr ...../21...mal" 1 11~ AS=fg=All '1611 Â®W,#ailhÂ£,/01/*85 ' ~ | (970)925Â·5961 PAX (970)925-5993 1- 2 8 Sotme/E 'VE - ~ I I I N 101 BAS,Ur, COLORADO 8162! I } (970)9276834 FAX (ro) 927-68Â¢o MODIFIED NORTH ELEVATION --,B.m= EMAILADDKESS D SCALE 1~ - 10' M (4- Â·-Â· ?11 l )11-- OVERALL ELEVATION . North 6 Soath r 4 ,-m-4,1 EXHIBIT A rITY OF ASPEN SFIEETNO: Â¢(MMON(TY DEVELOPMENT AO 201 HaNaÂ¥ SAID[JIOH 7,1 DOS 0103'NIJSV ISSUED FOR: CONSTRUCTION CU[WrAPFROYAL REVISION: A Pricing Set & CD lei a 1 6 4 9 9 CP 9 7 9 7 999 9 9 9 , PROJECT NOÂ· 2514 1 1 1 DRAWN BY: DS I : t-- _ -33*11]_~t]% #I [~ bjECTZ M~jiffÂ»~**i~ -- L 11 CHECKED SY: AR/RS 36'-6 61. Â»...Ill- -I.--- ISSUE DATE: IM- Thar.d,>+De~,mli~27.ZI07 CO.'RIGHTÂ©'SA 2007 *tÂ»-.-ILC a~-r=IN . El~ le==14 -1 *11/1 1 4 1114 1 * - 1 - 1 A 1 0 - 4/ 1 / / 0 - 4 2 - 4 -Cuar~ll,Teroll. 411-Dri~Â·11.!-lie:al ~~'0*,0 A-.JIWI~U 'Ct, -::=I,AR-:st--15*2Irfiâ€žf_NE""IF-<-TTIB~'CE'iI -T-liE*lllillili Ii.~00.,Â»N*/~*g...tle r.=****m_*9997 -"Â·"E uâ€¢ rrapant on ,r.n .Mr.-,0 _!+LL-Â»~-.-l '*0 ' M I khNÂ¢l l tjNI~122*Etl,=2~=~ 1*~~~~uiii@iia*Â»~i i aig=:Â° : .CL'... 1 - 1 1 . 1 11 11 1-1.-Ir!.-- 1 111, 1 11 1 11.- ' ' , , 1.-7 i CZE==r~~~.~.~z.z-Â·Â·~------1-zzÂ·:i ..1------ =------1 SOUTH ELEVATION BOAL. 1 -10 R k c:bv 'c D 1 :' 1 1-\ A - 1 C#TY OF K.- S'I EN A . ELEVATOR VENT ELEVATOR VENT _~ ~ ~ ! . 'p - STONE WALL a 41 401;MUN 11 a Â® Â® 0 Â® m 9 99 1 1 RENO Â· SMITH i ARCHITECTS 1 0. [ 3~1il#I~~=i~~A lit 1% 114 1 â€¢ 1 SUNE 002 1 -ill-3 'll.- LLC i i 04=7#71 T-mitMr-1-Bea - - - - 605 WEST MAIN STREEI : [al,LA+Vibic/41*11 4 [Al 'J# 1 -- -4 --9864Â®_114*1Â»bdk.. I,MFUBM/~ A. /~M/ 11- ASPEN. COLORADO 816/ (970)925-5968 , (970)923.5993 FAX ~ 5/14.--tj I ,~t -1~ I * - .. ' ~ . +1=.Ltr 1 Â¤E'--4 ~' ']~InGIiiiÂ©}i~~ 1 1 11 ,- 11 1 . 101 ]N SCUTHSIDE AVE 142-7 - --- BASALT. COLORADO RI62] .EL,/4 (970927-6540 1.. (970)927-6834 'AX L...........1 L.....1 L.....1 L........ , ~__ , Â·+,râ€ž ----- ..... 1 wEB SrrE f j SUBGRADE PATIOS 1 1 1 11 r---Â·r---1 ~ ; r--M4;ij EMAILADDRESS 1 11 1 111 L.-7 , 1 , 1 afncer==mith corn 1 1 1 11#1 r------- ELEVATION BUILDING S.height -/ MODIFIED SOUTH ELEVATIO 4 EXHIBIT B (~ 50-LE V.,0 SHEET NO: A 205 ~Â·Or6 319(IOT[ DAIVHGIWOOH 39<1AV SNLINdOH -* 005 OaÂ¥Â£0100'NadSV ISSUED FOR: SCHEMATIC DES]Gl I ILLE./APPROVAL 9 gw==zI==*=====aza~=___=c~~ -- 44#iN a 11 111.111 1 I EMM I #19 IllÂ° 1 ELL-L-~a Fll I t Mi#- REVISION: 4 Â¤-71[]-Eff~E'--I-/ <PROJECT NO: ~ CHECKED BY: AR 4 1 1 1 . 1/2/2008 12:08 PM ISSUE DATE: COPYRIGHTÂ©RS' 20. 100- 1-RRYIHELEATION WI U C 4 B 9 T A T -42 e 9 6 g 'LI' 9 0 9 9 9 4 3 if 2==a Â·41 I ' 1 1 1 ! 1 1 Â© 11=~ - L.1~~ IT---- iiE=~ 0 1 1 --1 - C c_-r r- - -- 1 11 ! 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r- 1 1 1 ~~ ~ 1-1 1 1 422,ZIZIEZZIEJEEZ~EZILIZZLEIJ-LIZZj__ , i L i SE ' 222-4222224 AI<i/AP A -~_22=232-1--2-3 -------6------ ---------1------- . ZE=RE=b,~ RENO Â· SMITH Â·ARCH"ECTSÂ· SS,M=#12* FCbL'-9 FFâ‚¬BÂ· m L.LC. 5 r 6468 b Urv 605 WEST MAIN STREET - k----------Â·.4 . .SPEN. COLORADO SUITE .2 --1 , 0 4 --7 81611 ttiTh'~ 03%Â·iSE:Evj - iggljEEEIEHA lim-1-MrlE*Ele 111 FAX (970)925Â·5968 (970}925Â·5993 COMMUNITY OF\/ELOPMENT 371 sor,liS.EAVE. N ]01 BASALT. COLORADO -4 8]631 (~70)927-6834 FAX 1 1 1 1, (9..#840 Â»/Â«---7.~â‚¬226] 7 -,Msm'Ih.com WEB SITE -1 ... ..... ... E --. i EMAILADDRESS f Â·.1 1Gfill//IMIT/"Ofie#E....Ell'I '.I...-,4.-,i ./ 1 1- --__J----_f-L---_-,___~___ _ ___p 9 1. GENERAL: - -lu'l . _ & 6 . ~ ~ _ ELEVAT[DNS -, EAST ELEVATION . FERLEETEr---1 Lt-----~ L_----1---_-__-_--_--5--- - -------------------- 64,69 C n MODIFIED EAST ELEVATION ~ OaÂ¥2101OD 'NV/â‚¬V ISSUED FOR. SCHEMATIC DESIGN CUE%TAP,ROVAL 191-U ~~ ~~~~~ 1~~11#f~" 3 t~ b REVISION: 71 EAR 8 : 6 - , 1 b -07 rt-IL. 1 -i-~1 lai#Â»i Elf m ME~ 114 -rg i i ji mill 1 F*41~!:~U-zir~~ 1 _ _ _ _ CHECKED BY: AR **Wis=191-% PROJECT NO: DRAWA BY: r : 2.1--------J----1------------------- 1,- 1 1 2129*"li"~-TE~. F 3 ISSUE DATE: 1/2/20" 12:02 PM 1 1 ~ 14==L-===125:' COPYRIGHTÂ©RSA 2005 - NORTH ELEVATION r . 10. D 5 3 r--- M 1 52- =229==EÂ«Purkmu~,1~Z/#~,=n-,me* E - 'r r i # -2.i ==S [ *-An=th Â¤1 I E~ 21@N I~INÂ» r---;kaD=FrrÂ¥-rE 01[1 MTTTWNT-1-M BID@ Ilikdmi 17.-M-TI~**:-----7--Up&4====A Q 1-L--~11--leam ==11--lamel -1-911-4664 11,74 2 11 3//*#Imm-.%1%011 --4 1 2.713t~~-- 15221-'' -Â· J .1 T ...... 1 ... 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 ... n --- - ~ MODIFIED NORTH ELEVâ‚¬le #i,46 :L 09-RENO Â· SMITH i Â·. Â·ARCHITECTS 111 LLC+ j..1 ; .3 <) 4 + T. S - 615 WEST MAIN STREET SUITE 00: ASPEN. COLORADO ITY OF ASP#r.' .611 4 1 -7 . 1-%Â« TR~ 0(~MUN?it DiE '?LOF"*,~4.~ (970> 92/54/ Â¥AX 9 (9?. 02.-5993 | | 01-n _ -;- meÂ·Â· 1..40/*lf"/."Il kel. -I-- P~~/ : '01 m SOUTHSIDE AVE BASALT COLORADO 7 7.-0. S - E Ill El 71-1 0 ]IEli ral-41 Ca SI62! I /701 927#34 Â¥,1 4 ,18-8' - ~70) 927*10 Â»=======*2 - '4 --- ~90I-1 2 '-tliNELLE [HP l-_ tod . ' 1 w,4-1-- 1 +--04 1 4 4 i te770%3& m.re,o,mith.co. WEBSITE EMALLADDRESS 4... onk,@renesmith.com GENERAL: ~. ul El-L*-1-1 0 - 5 1 1_NJEÂ»LEft 7-T-* - =1# ~--E-g-'r-~rET-"EMEN 10 g *ts~======Â«- ELEVATiONS -- -'-I...Illi~ ~<# I.lili....1 --- 11 1 SHEETNO: * FNEST ELEVATION 1 .10.0 6,1-1 D ~ MODIFTED MEST-ELEVAT~ON-L 10 DAIVHS[WOOH \ 74Â© i. tÂ®W\St-ti ~Irb -60Â¥pa ~ilÂ» I 13 1 4 rÂ® ~i ~l/1 vh.l Gle lauL Â» lac af P1Â»tb Ook/Ek< o.d< 8- 444 A. A-hf / 1 G H &14 1 -Clibmt 11.- u . C 301 -b I Â»mult, 01: L<& fluvc % 11-4 0 6 7 (15 p [â€ž4 , gy Lsa 6 f C,t-~ 9â‚¬.rU (is .- ~ â‚¬1*Â£4 trYi- m 14- 13/*-/1- C-Da'\AU l~~ - v~Aa.l râ‚¬t U li<Â£ i #cakill:Â· 64 ov'4, f y#fcâ€ž tlluvi#& Slrid ely. AoED. Wes Trio, 4 42 ' - 775 ~ 4- Â·Â·6Â« 11,1 D C:6 hol MA Ge<U AL fr wiN- . 448â‚¬r <goder- 2- 1>UTÂ« Â· 49 430.4 -AteD 47 loca teÂ£ 6--â‚¬ Cterâ‚¬Â¥,01*â‚¬, Fleed 14> wlat iN-, 9(lce, 01)(kt/16 UÂ» 4 /uldLd -1-m'i i Â·k,1~U , ddzÂ«LA *iullj 5 ' C vt,34 Stkk.1-Vee#-, , Se,A VA\Â¥k)Â» 45> 04)4 TEAÂ¢8446. 2 6 \081 Ika - 0 6 . *i 19 fft) *{9 + 15 f. y 2 1#: l , 4/ i , 1& I 1 11 - . - .1 - I 4 - 1- --------- hy, / 1, f N f---1 2 -4. 1 I /4 < < - .#47 - S......I-1 4. ' I. 1. '- - 4 - I - 1 --11 1. . I .-- 4 , I 1 1 9 8 11.1--- 4 1 - f- 1 --.__ ~ #.I=/ / ' ---.-1--*I.. ' m - - I=.- _-nÂ·Â·~*~-r---rÂ»---- -4 -I r 1--L - S - - --Li-z-Tr-7 -3..Tu.c.I 1 I., - ----- ---/r | --r]â‚¬.21:IL- III:----6 -1 f . 1 fieff5--Trim - -C. --- . -M --i 1 i - , 22'-03" J J 1 - 1 4 . lilli i , â€¢ 1 - 7 , 1 - A , 1 - .-TOM. + 2.01-0. . 1 J- - i -1 41- 1,1 11 1 .., f=7 1 h ' 91:'. 1 4 C It - 2 1 i I . 1,1 1 1-1/1 ' p,/.:j ./ 14 1 I * , . i .p r.1 , 1 - 1 lili $ 3 1 .1 1 dll, 4- : t . 11 - 1 1 2 +31 1 1 ilÂ·, i.-I 4 111 61 i 1 Â· 1 1,1,1 i El ,/1 1 MIl i. ... 1 1- 1 114, Â·,1 .. - -./ ~f l - 1 1 /1/,9 4 li :t 11 1. 1 -1 -- L- 0335/, 1; \\14 1 ., , et - 1 ... l . 1 1. 1 . - 4.- i . t. , 1 1 9 LO:' - 1 - t ' 12LD' . 1. - ,. -W--1-1----- ----- , t - 1 13Â«41 1 6 / I. * I L r" 1.9 -, - ,- 1 32\\303\ c I , 1 I 1 _if-f ~ d '1 j 1 1 11.0 ! ) 1 C 1,-07 1 4 1 - 1 1 WE 5 7 - E LE VAT.-10-N N O Al- H E'LEVA-EION t - 1 %- -4 25Lot, f- - -FlooA 1 - - 332----f*--- Clat~.PAÂ£(E --1 4 . I -643 21~_a lr.2 - i h -1 Er.--lf.7-71- \ 1 2 , 11 i Ill 11 1 1 1.- Ill 01. LE U , 1 Go I =LO" i 1 I ! 1, &11 1 1-1 1 3 111 1 FtÂ©11 4 1,1 . 1 1 | 1%11 } 1 r.,1 1 + - i #1 2,0 / 1 -1 61 E [111 ' I L'* -'.'I-j j 1 1 . 99 (3' ' ij --.%.- - i i .0 1 1 11 1 . . . P : I I -- . . ' It. 1 1 1 IS i .:-~4 - - . A W . - ... - . 16. 1 - 1 - f - .1 1 11.-+ 4 1-]19 -L 1 1 --FLDON j PATOM OLE'' *=f~~-Ilili , ' CE#LING, 1 221 , 1, r ~ --11 - 111 lilli 11 1 11. 1 1, 1111 Â«47-7- ....a-- =.--e.1.----l --- -- Xe k i I illiv i ,AÂ·A-,,-AÂ·,4,-4,-Â·GÂ·-0.n*A,0...-&*6,=*Â·0Â·*pg:4.'&&AML*WAc*MN,I-.." 7.i,1. 7. 7 1 ji %*ff 9, IC)'t 1 - 11--3-*|1 L , -1 , # . _ r '.1 1, 1 r Ir . 1 I I 1 f 1, 7 4-D ' 9. 4 201 11*1 I r-]L,__1 ~ k 1 1-1 6 715% 1 1 1. 1 -d 1 . 1 - Iii I lot. O. ; !! i =Ul] i : 1 h i ~ 1111.1 ! 1 r HT # _ 1 1 _ 6 , f------- .........-4....1 1 . L *4.-4 2 --1.--3 :114 tphil ;817/ , 1 -, .....1 1 , - 1 , .1 11 i 111 11 i,! i ; Cill- - -- 1 - - 4- - 1 - 4- - : -_ _ - 1 :1 1 1 1 1 I ' ' -- , 4 7 - -. 1 - - - ) I .CLEAâ‚¬T Fr i P- \/AI 1.43 Pti - . - 5~~-UT" H E L 59-ATED N -~ -- - U CHALET-ELEVATIONS (TYP) 2 14- CD j ECT- 32- CHABLES PAN-9 45 0 N . U E 9 1.43 (4 EE' 12.. 2 _..... 2,1-10 0 iKEV1-5-E D , MA-Rk-H--~ 2_DOCi - f r\ \ / 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 40\ 1 1 l 34-1- 1- - 1 1 RECORD P l 444 8 *91 / I 1 1 \ \ l 1 1 1 1 i li i 1 1 / ). 4 / -1 673 -5 -2745"A- 11 l / A 5 P, A / 4 + A.4 L 1- n 111111 1 lilli r 0 5 10 20 30 40 50 FT - b XZF DCALE )"= 10 ' // 2 , \4 04Â©15 OF BEARING ~ 2 0 tu 75 - -- 4- 1 1 SURVEÂ¥OR' 5 CERTI FICATE : I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THID HAF ACCURATELY DEF'ICTS f ' O - Rk h ~- # , - 10\1 LEGAL DEeCRIFTION A BUIKVEY FERFORMIED UNDER kiÂ¥ BUFERVISION ON / 0 j 1 . 93 Z J--- CEEMBER, 9, 111 OF THE FROFERTY Â»loWN AND UP Cl h -- A PARCEL OF LAND LOCATED IN SECTION Z TOY/hiSH I F 10 DEÂ©CRI FED HEREON. THE TWO STORY BUILDING WAS 449 L GB Â¥>0 SOUTH, RANGE 24 WEST OF THE GTH F. H., BA I D PARCEL FOUND TD DiE LOCATED ENTIRELY WITHIN THE 44 9 -2- O.4 EEING 140â‚¬E F>\feT-ICUL-ARY DESCifIDED AS FOLLOWS BOUNDARY UNEÂ© OF THE ABOVE DESCRI BED FROPEKTÂ¥ 6 1 BEGI'KIHING AT A POINT ON THE EASTERLYRIGHT-OF-WAY THE LOCATION AND DIMENDIONS OF ALL MUILDINES, 1 ' 4 -- - LINE OF kiILL BTREET IN THE TOWNÂ©ITE OF AEFEN, IMPROVEHENTS, EAE>EMENTÂ©, RIGHTS -OF-WAY N 0 \140<2<~ V 4 -COUNTÂ« OF FITKN, STATE OF COLOKAI30, WHENCE Tide EVIDENCE OR KNOWN ID NIE~ AND ENCROACHHENTS BY L ~ m 0 41 4 HORTHWEST CORMIER OF- LOT A, BLOCK & OF SAID ORON THEDE Â·PK.EMISEÂ© ARE ACCUf*\TELY" OHOV/hi AÂ»<r 1/Â» LA Ton/INDITE OF ASPEN BEARÂ© 6 4'50' 49 " 0/ 16,3 6,5 FEED / 'LDi96-- ~ ~ ~ 1-HIE -TRUE POINT OF- DEa [ NN ING, TH ENCE N 14Â° 50' 41 " E E 9 02 ALONG â‚¬AID EASTEKLY RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AT 1411-1- ' 1 . t ~5- SY-RET 71 -50 F:EET ; THENCE 5 73Â° 3148~E -7-7 6\ FEET > ALFINE BURVENS INC -,F_*53@syik ..0 1 1 F' 0.3 A - THENCE 45.82 FEET- ALONG THE ARC OF A CURVE -ID DATE ---3--3 0 Â· d#Z) f.i g , . 0 .9 8 N '1 45 THE LEFI HAVINGA KADIUD <DE- 50.00 FEET-S CENT-KAL P Al --h )Â«ff///-/7//-44 0 38 4 ANGLE OF 51Â°56 ' 15" AND A CHORD WHICH BEARD BYcs.~14#0$18-4.- -4--*------ - T Â· , 4 549Â°Il '02" E 43.79 FEET, THENCE 5 75Â°0971" E /Allm* F REDEEM g po. 1 " .0 NE- 7- #fA,be 44of,4, A/N/NG M K 0 0 13.04 FEET; THENCE 6 14Â° 50'49,1 W 50 26 FEET TO A L. 9% ePAA- 2,0/<D /0 A 6 0 TO A POINT ON THE eOLTH UNE OFA FARCEL OF MND <~*/A."suRvE'~2~1 WALLS 6 - Up 11 DEÂ©CRIBED IN BOK -31(0 AT FAGE 122 OF THE RECORDÂ© / 5 --0.66 441. / 4 n OF THE CLERK AINID RECORDER, RTKIN COUNTY, INOTED : .\? L -\_ COLORADO; THENCE N 75Â°01'11" W ALONG 54(D SOUTH ODADIS OF IDEAKI1\9 DI4Â°34'25"r ill.49 rT: -- w/ 0 LINE (30.11 FEET TO THE TRUE F:DINT OF BEGINNING DETWEEN THE t4O194â‚¬AOT- COF>Â·Ing Or BL-CLK A KA r 04) i / l r 79, A NAIL AND SHINER, AND TKIE NOIKTE-IEANT- 0 1 (OffNEL#.OF A â‚¬5[KIF OF LANID 0.5 FT wl[DE AhÂ·IP P 4 m : d/ J e |10 70 Fr LONG, ADJAINT TO L.or Â©, Â©Lazi< 79, Â°09'//"W 3 10; NG 4/ Alâ‚¬30 A WAI L AND Sk-In-~151<. . /30 N At 39 1 TK.11-4 Ca_t,ITY- TI Tl- E, It-46, OFIDE-Â« k|O, FEI- 9 k 1 G 2 - w Â©08% WAO US)ED IN TRIE FEE FAMATION OF -1 -64%01/ i f - = Th-11â‚¬2 9Â©2RMEr. _.Lt'Ent--0 F t-Â»1 TRUE C.Of. J 40&.00 NOTICE According to Colorado law you must commence any legal action based upon any defect in thus survey within three years after you first discover such defect / Alpine Surveys, Inc. Title IMPROVEHENT Â©URVEÂ¥ Job No 17 - 31 In no event may any action based upon any defect in this survey be commenced Surveyed 0.1.11 Revisions 3.30.00 Client DAVID Drafted 92.11 EKIK more than ten years from the date of the certification shown hereon Post Office Box 1730 2.20,COJEID Aspen, Colorado 81612 970 925 2688 - STREET MILL NORTH r $Â·40 . 7 - 0 1./' I g . l ) WE- El- A--4 CD i 1 84. 1/y 7 5 1- 0 " Ir + HAR.p-re p '*#-2--.tRAL.A t>AM\ BENDS HE.aE /"y:/ ' â€ž I ~*HK.P IE-19.1-LABLEAU_10_F_**P.0-FA .PeR tz CAR.s ~ -0-riPER--s-ROOT417- -- 24'..6 " V--7[47~--)A ENTRy ~ -~t-~----'--' JÂ·~...... ,-â€ž ..~.-,~-~.: ,. ~.~..~,~. ~,~..~~.~~ ~~~~ ~.~~~ ~ ~~k~,1'...". ., -, PROPP'A.Ty rED GARA GE. 440 ~ CON C. FAT.P' A k C F \\\<9 1 \IlkyÂ¥ 0,4 O --2 L 1 1 1 / .' 3 9%6.1 \\%'.11\\\ \ L. \\ . / 0/ 7\ Â·, p.Â·ji 1 3 K#MJ 0 0 FRGE' RYPRANT L - 1--. :31-94 4 2- WoutraucKLI ./2 1 1 -4 EÂ°OF LINf= 1\\\11\\\\ O.0- 11 1 Ap< / h \\\ 54\71\3 /. \\\ t\\\\ , r \\\\ \ 1 0 %\ - 4 4 0 / 4-\-4 0> .r945â„¢At \ 1-kEES 4., Â· Â·- 24 SHRUm e i / 4 / PROÂ¢[510-WA LL-- , , ,Â¢04+0#411-\6-90\\' \\ \ ~ IPA RK.1 N 4 ./ 16.- 1?K k:%Â¥Pit */ t , b 1 / < 1 0. FORPHAS E 1- \ ~ --. 19HAGEI . 58-04 4, . (p- cHALETS,~ i \\\ 1 >\ ! ,\\ \*rrÂ·â‚¬$*RkÂ¢4Â·Â·-4{>#.,ffit// \~~<AkÂ».a,(9600 - , \ 9/ i \ \ \ 1 4 94. ~ 00Lly - ~ IJ...K.~6.J.*r_CAVP Â·>iNeS r 4 .... / F. Al .. / / 9 \ 1 2 srogy r 1 5, w - f \ , .flij i y - __ _ _ _ BATHOUSâ‚¬ ' 1. - - I. 4.-- ~... ... -/ 7 1 1 CorrA G E- \- +12> 0 \ / f A . \1 CHAWEI ~*f' .â‚¬LANTEEP WALL OF / ,/ I -IN '\N.â‚¬. 11.%,16\\\6\1\\..1. '' i./ ... '' .FooT-Pe.UNT -14.1 0 ~ % _LARGE BOOLDERM $ 1 4-111. STREET~ A b Ll>.Verâ‚¬' Ill , , - 4. t. -FAli 1.- k.~% 5 f Dcst E DP Â·PRâ€žt.) PE R.Ty <SOo RTÂ»AD Folk 1 11 C --* \ ytFBRAE.2~4 2 DOWNÂ¢rAR'S 13>EDE.(>0949 N E P A E-- Â» F P 1409 E R'ry . : - 1 TERRAces \, , 1 - 1 \ ./.1 1 I. 47'- 7 / & D / 30'- ly -4 s L 0 â€ž Ci H = 1 F Re,f 1.-St-{5:.11-i I.Uny --2.2-00 3/ 4 CHAKLES PATER,56?N: DES-IGNER< :SCALE /32- 9= ILL)" 1-5 L CDC t<% 32_ LOTS A- A7310 _ _-r_ Tr> rAL. FAR. ' 11,778,5 r - F D A. 237 C> - CD M 8* ra- A N 4 L O D 6 M 30% Foorpetâ€¢,rs 51842.!24 -+ op,r,3 SPAc E â€¢ 13,894Â¢;=76% t. -./ 1 al i. v I l ili li I I lillillillilli.i 482688 Page: 1 of 20 05/14/2003 11:39A SILVIA CA.S FITKIN -v UL -Y CO R 101.00 D 0.00 PUD AGREEMENT FOR THE BOOMERANG LODGE EXPANSION PROJECT THIS AGREEMENT is made this / 3 day of /171 a-t,~ , 2002, between CHARLES G. PATERSON (the "Owner") whose legal address is 500 West Hopkins Avenue, Aspen CO, 81611, and THE CITY OF ASPEN, a municipal corporation (the "City"). RECITALS: WHEREAS, the Owner owns that certain real property (the "Property") located on the south side o f West Hopkins Avenue between South Fourth Street and South Fifth Street (Parcel Identification Number 2735-124-49-002) in the City of Aspen, County of Pitkin, State of Colorado, described as: That part of Lots A, B, and C lying northerly of Line 7-8 of the City and Townsite of Aspen (According to the 1978 Resurvey by the Bureau of Land Management), except the southerly 20 feet thereof and the north 80 feet of Lots D, E, and H the north 80 feet of Lot F, the north 75 feet o f Lot G, the north 50 feet o f Lot I, Block 32, City and Townsite of Aspen, and as modified by the addition of the north 85 feet of Lots D and E, and the north 80 feet of Lot G, Block 32, City and Townsite ofAspen through quit claim deed executed on August 14, 2000, and recorded with the o ffice o f the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder as Reception Number 446337; and, WHEREAS, the Property is being developed by the Owners as follows, where said development is hereinafter referred to as the "Project": <* The Property will be developed with six (6) detached structures, including four (4) freestanding chalets with three bedrooms each, one (1) freestanding cottage with one- bedroom, and a freestanding b uilding ( the " west endb uilding") to i nclude two (2) two-bedroom lodge units, two (2) studio affordable housing units, guest storage, common space, lockers, bathrooms, and spa facilities. In total, there will be seventeen (17) lodging bedrooms amongst seven (7) units, and two (2) affordable housing bedrooms amongst two (2) units. All seven (7) lodging units will be sold in a fractional share/interval ownership arrangement as further discussed herein. An outdoor swimming pool will be developed between the westernmost chalet, the cottage and the west end building. In addition, a total of seven (7) parking spaces will be located on-site. WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 1 of Ordinance No. 20, Series o f 2000 ("the Original Ordinance"), the City granted Rezoning from Moderate-Density Residential (R-15) to Moderate- Density Residential with Planned Unit Development and Lodge Preservation Overlays (R- 15/PUD/LP); and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 2 of the Original Ordinance, the City granted Minor Planned Unit Development approval with conditions; and, 111111 Page: 2 of 20 SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COU,TY C) R 101.00 D 0.00 WHEREAS, pursuant to Ordinance No. 41, Series of 2001 ("the Ordinance"), the City granted approval of a Substantial Amendment to the Planned Unit Development approval o f the Original Ordinance, as well as Conditional Use and Subdivision for Timeshare, subject to certain conditions that supercede those o f the Original Ordinance; and, WHEREAS, the City and the Owner wish to enter into a PUD Agreement for the Proj ect; and, WHEREAS, Owner has submitted to the City for approval, execution and recordation, a final plat for the Project (the "Plat") and the City agrees to approve, execute and record the Plat at Owner's expense on the agreement of the Owner to the matters described herein, subject to the provisions ofthe Municipal Code of the City of Aspen (the "Code"), the Ordinance, and other applicable rules and regulations; and, WHEREAS, the Owners are willing to enter into such agreement with the City and to provide assurances to the City. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration o f the mutual covenants contained herein, and the approval, execution and acceptance of the Plat for recordation by the City, it is agreed as follows: 1. Description o f Proiect. Re fer to the second "Whereas" statement, above. 2. PUD Dimensional Requirements. As set forth in Condition 13, Section 2 of the Ordinance, the following dimensional requirements were approved by the City as part of the Project, are shown on the Final PUD Development Plans, and shall be printed on all final building permit plan sets: a. Minimum Lot Size: 15,000 square feet. b. Minimum Lot Area per Dwelling Unit: No requirement. c. Maximum Allowable Density: One lodge or residential bedroom per 1,000 square feet o f lot area. d. Minimum Lot Width: 75 feet. e. Minimum Front Yard: 10 foot. f. Minimum Side Yard: 8 feet, except a 5 foot setback shall be permitted for the easternmost courtyard. g. Minimum Rear Yard: 1 foot. h. Maximum Site Coverage: 35 percent. i. Maximum Height: 25 feet. j. Minimum Distance Between Buildings: 6 feet. k. Minimum Percent Open Space: 40 percent. 1. Trash Access Area: to be located at the northeast corner of the property, on Fourth Street and Hopkins Avenue. m. Allowable Floor Area Ratio (FAR): 0.75:1. n. Minimum Off-Street Parking Spaces: 7 on-site spaces. 3. Acceptance of Plat. Upon execution of this Agreement by the parties hereto, the City agrees , 482688 Boomerang Lodge Expansi ID Agreement 1 Ill I Ill i Ililll lilli ml lil Illilll ill lilli 11 11 Page: 3 of 20 Page 3 of 10 05/14/2003 11:39A S.LVIA DAVIS PI-KIN COUN-Y CO 2 10..00 D 0.00 to approve and execute the Final Plat for the Project i - which conforms to the plat requirements o f the Code and the Ordinance. The City agrees to accept such Plat for recording in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder upon Owner's payment of the recordation fee. The City has further required the submission and recording of PUD Development Plans which are attached hereto at a reduced size as Exhibit "8" If the approved PUD Development Plans change subsequent to this approval, a complete set of revised plans shall be provided to the Engineering and Community Development Departments for review, evaluation, and recordation. 4. Development Requirements. The following development requirements will be satisfied by the Owner pursuant to Ordinance No. 41, Series of 2001. a. Affordable Housing. The Project shall include two (2) studio apartments for affordable housing and employee generation mitigation purposes, where each studio unit provides credit for housing 1.25 full-time equivalent employees. The entire development requires housing of 1.911 full-time equivalent employees. Both units will be of the rental variety (i.e., not for sale) and available first to employees of the Project. If not rented to employees of the Project, Owner retains the right to rent the unit(s) to a qualified renter under the terms of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) Guidelines (the "Guidelines"). In either event, the unit(s) must be rented to a qualified renter. Construction of the two(2) affordable housing units shall begin no later than 36 months after the completion of the three (3) easternmost chalets. If construction does not begin on the two (2) affordable housing units within said timeframe, Owner shall be required to mitigate the incremental employee generation attributable to whatever is built in the initial phase by temporarily deed restricting a two-bedroom unit at their 1020 Waters Avenue property or other acceptable property. Temporary deed restriction of a two- bedroom unit would provide housing for 2.25 full-time equivalent employees and would, therefore, be more than adequate to mitigate any incremental employee generation impacts attributable to a partial build-out of the Project. If a temporary deed restriction is necessitated, the temporary deed restriction shall be permanently dissolved and rendered null and void upon issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the two (2) affordable housing units provided for in the Project. If, after 36 months, a second phase of development to include construction of the on-site affordable housing is not initiated, Owner shall have the option of either converting the temporary deed restriction to a permanent deed restriction, or paying to the APCHA cash- in-lieu of housing at the then current rate for 0.88 of a full-time equivalent employee generated by construction of the three (3) chalets. With regard to either permanent or temporary mitigation, i f an affordable housing unit is to be rented by an employee ofthe Project itself, APCHA income and asset restrictions shall be waived. However, if a deed restricted unit is to be rented to a qualified renter who is not employed by the Project, standard terms and restrictions ofthe APCHA Guidelines shall apply. Boomerang Lodge Expan 'UD Agreement 111 li 111 lillillilli il ill'1111 il 05/14/2003 11:39A 482688 Page 4 0 f 10 Page: 4 of 20 S.LVIA DAL,S FITKIN COUN,Y CO R 101.00 D 0.00 In an effort to be consistent with Section 38-12-301, C.R.S., and the Colorado Supreme Court decision on the Town of Telluride v. Lot Thirty-Four Venture L.L.C. (Case No. 98- 5C-547, decided June 5,2000), Owner desires to grant to the APCHA an undivided one- hundredth of one percent (0.01%) ownership interest in the above-described employee housing units of the Project. With the APCHA consent to accepting an interest in the property, Owner agrees to indemnify and hold harmless for any claims, liability, fees, or similar charges related to ownership of an interest in the affordable housing units. Conveyance of the undivided one-hundredth of one percent (0.01%) ownership interest from O wner tothe A PCHA s hall t ake p lace p rior to orc oncurrent w ith i ssuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the units and after said units have been rendered capable of separate conveyance by way of condominium map or the similar (as described in paragraph 5, below). The APCHA shall not be entitled to the payment of monies upon sale or rental at any time of any residential units in the Project, nor shall the APCHA be entitled to derive any economic benefit whatsoever by virtue of its undivided interest in the Proj ect. Owner reserves the right to submit an alternative option, subject to review and acceptance by the City Attorney, to satisfy the rent control issue. b. Wastewater and Surface Drainage. The site development will meet the runoff design standards of the Aspen Municipal Code at Section 26.580.020(B)(6). Full drainage plans, and erosion and sediment control plans for both during and after construction, will be submitted for review by the Engineering Department as part of the building permit application. The drainage and erosion control plan shall be prepared by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer, and said plan shall demonstrate maintenance of sediment and debris on-site during and after construction. If a ground recharge system is necessary, a soil percolation report will be required to correctly size the facility. A two-year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. Foundation drainage systems must be separate from site storm drainage systems. Rain and snow melt runoff must be detained and routed on-site. These facilities must be shown on the drainage plans and submitted for approval as part o f the application for building permit. Drainage may be conveyed to existing landscaped areas if the drainage report demonstrates that the percolation rates and detention volumes meet the design storm drain. The drainage and erosion control plans shall prevent mud from getting tracked into the streets and shall demonstrate that roof drainage will not be discharged onto the sidewalk or into drain chases through the sidewalk. There shall be no clear water connections such as roof drains, foundation drains, or storm water connections to the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District sewage lines. c. Utility Connections. Utility meters and service connection points will be accessible to service personnel in the completed project and will not be obstructed by garbage or recycling containers, other structures or vegetation. Any necessary and new utility easements, required for surface utilities such as a pedestal or other above-ground equipment, shall be shown on the plan set submitted for building permits. Owner shall install and replace utility service lines and appurtenances, as required, to the standards of . Boomerang Lodge Expans JD Agreement 1 /11///11/// 11/1/1 /#/1,â€¢i d//11//11//illillilill lili 482688 Page: 5 of 20 Page 5 of 10 SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 101.00 D 0.00 05/14/2003 11:39A the utility provider. The costs of any necessary upgrades to existing utility lines, systems, and/or facilities attributable to the Project will be borne by the Owner. Owner will use good faith efforts to not disrupt utility service to adjacent properties during construction. Owner shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title 25, and with applicable standards o f Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City o f Aspen Water Department. The only exception to the provisions of this paragraph may include necessary changes to or easements for the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's (ACSD) sewer line that was erroneously installed by ACSD on the Property without an easement, when said line should have been installed in the public right-of-way; Owner will make good faith efforts to work with ACSD to coordinate a mutually acceptable arrangement with regard to avoidance of, easements for, and costs associated with the sewer line. d. Fire Protection. Owner shall install an approved fire sprinkler system and alarm system to the extent required by the Aspen Fire Marshal. e. Dust and Mud Control. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, Owner shall obtain from the City Environmental Health Department approval of a Fugitive Dust Control Plan. The Fugitive Dust Control Plan will include, as a minimum, plans for fencing, watering of dirt roads and disturbed areas, daily cleaning of adjacent paved roads to remove mud that has been carried out, speed limits, or other measures necessary to prevent windblown dust from crossing the property lines or causing a nuisance. A washed rock or other style mud rack shall be installed during construction as a requirement of the City of Aspen Streets Department. f. Construction Management Plans. There shall be no storage of construction materials in or on the public rights-of-way unless specifically approved by the Director o f the City Streets Department. A set o f construction management plans will be submitted by the Owner to the City as part of the building permit application and said management plan will include, noise, dust control, and construction traffic management plans. Construction is prohibited on Sundays and between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. on all other days. g. Heated Sidewalks. If Owner chooses to heat the new sidewalks for snow and ice melting purposes, there shall be no use of Glycol and the City shall not be required to replace or repair the heating system i f the City ever has to cause damage to said system en route to completion o f necessary work in the right-o f-way. h. Exterior Lighting and Streetlights. Any and all outdoor lighting shall comply with the applicable portions of Section 26.575.150, Outdoor Lighting, of the Aspen Land Use Code. i. Trees, Protection, Removal Permits, and Planting Plans. In the event required and prior to building permit application, a tree removal permit must be obtained from the Parks Department for any tree(s) that is/are to be removed or relocated. 482688 Boomerang Lodge Expai ?UD Agreement lilli 1111 lili 111 lilli lillilll 05/14/2003 11:39A Page 6 of 10 Page: 6 of 20 S.LVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 10-.00 D 0.00 j. Parking and Traffic Mitigation. Seven (7) parking spaces shall be provided on-site. Two (2) of the seven (7) spaces may be stacked one behind the other along the Property' s westerly boundary. The other five (5) spaces shall be located in a one-way, looped drive access from West Hopkins Avenue. No parking spaces in the Fourth Street right-of-way will be designated for use by the Proj ect. The following traffic mitigation measure will mitigate PM-10 emissions and vehicular trip generation: (1) limiting the number of available parking spaces; (2) providing secure bicycle storage; (3) providing a free bicycle fleet consisting of at least five bicycles available for use by guests and employees ofthe lodge; and, (4) providing a courtesy shuttle/van for guest trips to and from the airport and other local destinations. k. Building Permit Plan Requirements. In addition to such requirements enumerated above and otherwise required by the City o f Aspen Building Department, the following information shall be submitted as part ofthe building permit application: a construction dust and noise mitigation plan; a list o f all conditions o f approval associated with the Proj ect; a completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District; a site improvement survey prepared by a licensed professional surveyor where said survey includes, as a minimum, monuments, setback lines, utility lines, pedestals and poles, easements, existing features (irrigation ditches, sidewalks, driveways, buildings, trees, etc.), and the surveyor's seal dated within twelve (12) months of the submittal; and, plans for all improvements, snow storage, and utility pedestals. 1. Contractor Knowledge of Conditions. The building permit application shall include a signed letter from the primary contractor stating that the conditions o f the development order as specified in the Ordinance and construction management plan have been read and understood. m. Fees. Prior to issuance of a building permit, all applicable tap fees, impact fees and building permit fees shall be paid. Cash in lieu of school land dedication shall be paid at the time ofbuilding permit issuance at the then current rate, and said payments shall be made on a proportional basis to the net number of bedrooms being constructed under the particular building permit. Park development impact fees are due and payable to the City of Aspen at the time ofbuilding permit issuance at the then current rate, and said payments shall be made on a proportional basis to the net number of bedrooms being constructed under the particular building permit. If an alternative agreement to delay payment of the Water Tap and/or Parks Impact fee is finalized, those fees shall be payable according to the agreement. 5. Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (CCIOA). As soon as construction of the Project allows, Owner shall submit the Proj ect to a plan for condominiumization created pursuant to Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act (CCIOA) in order to facilitate the conveyance of an ownership interest in the employee housing units to the APCHA and the conveyance of fractional/interval ownership interests in the lodge units pursuant to the timeshare approval granted under the Ordinance. The City agrees to process for approval and for recordation a condominium map or similar prepared in accordance with the Code and CCIOA. As the Owners have provided employee housing pursuant to the Code, the Project is exempt from . I Boomerang Lodge Expansi D Agreement Page 7 of 10 Ill u ill Imt i I ilint ill nill Int i i 05/14/2003 11:39A 482688 Page: 7 of 20 paying the Affordable Housing Impact fe S.LVIA DAVIS PI-KIN COUN-Y CO R 10..00 D 0.00 Fractional/interval owners will be subj ect to a reservation schedule whereby all such owners are required to reserve use o f a unit on or before October 1 st for use in the winter season and on or before May 1 St for use in the summer season. If such share owner reservations have not been confirmed by these dates, any remaining unreserved times in the units shall be made available for rental to the general public on a short-term basis. 6. Timeshare. In addition to other representations made herein and in the application approved pursuant to the Ordinance, Owner shall provide the City with all documents and financial assurances required pursuant to Sections 26.590.010(C)(1) and 26.590.010(C)(20) of the 2001 Aspen Land Use Code. The $20,000.00 letter of credit required pursuant to Section 25.590.010(C)(1), Marketing and Sale of Timeshare, ofthe Code is to ensure that Owner conforms to the marketing plan contained in the disclosure statement required pursuant to 26.590.010(C)(20). The letter of credit shall be provided to the City as part of the building permit application for the first lodging unit(s), and the City shall release the letter of credit once all shares in all units have been sold for the first time. The requirements of this paragraph shall remain in full force and effect unless the cited Code Section(s) is/are repealed or replaced with more permissive requirements in which case the Project may benefit from such Land Use Code amendment(s). 7. Recordation. Pursuant to Section 27.480.070(E) of the Aspen Land Use Code, once fully executed, this Agreement and the Final Plat shall be recorded in the office o f the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Failure on the part o f the Owner to record the plat within one- hundred eighty (180) days following approval by City Council shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration and approval of the plat by the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council will be required before its acceptance and recording, unless an extension or waiver is granted by City Council for a showing o f good cause. The subdivision plat shall also be submitted in a digital format acceptable to the Community Development Department, for incorporation into the City/County GIS system. The one-hundred eighty (180) day recordation requirement contained herein shall not apply to the recording o f condominium or similar maps, or declarations or any other documents required to be recorded to accomplish a condominiumization or similar in the City of Aspen. 8. Financial Security for Public Improvements. In order to secure the performance of the construction and installation of improvements in the public R.O.W., the Owner shall provide a letter of credit, cash or other guarantees in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney prior to the issuance of any building permits for the project. As estimated in Exhibit "A", the amount of the financial security for public improvements in the R.O.W. is $23,565. The guarantee documents shall give the City the unconditional right, upon clear and unequivocal default by the Owners in its obligations to complete the public improvements, to withdraw funds against such security sufficient to complete and pay for installation for such public improvements, or to withdraw funds against such security sufficient to complete and pay for installation for such public improvements. If the improvements have not been completed to the satis faction o f the City within one year, the City may require the Owner to adjust the amount o f the financial security for inflation. Boomerang Lodge Expans -JI) Agreement Ill li lli lili lili lili Ill lilli lilli I ~ 482688 Page 8 of 10 Page: 8 of 20 05/14/2003 11:39A SILVIA DAL.S FI-KIN COUNTY CO R 101.00 D 0.00 As portions of the improvements are completed, the City shall inspect them, and upon approval and acceptance, shall authorize the release of the agreed estimated costs for that portion of the improvements, except that ten percent of the estimated costs of the improvements shall be withheld for the benefit of the City until (i) all of the improvements have been inspected and accepted by the City, (ii) a two-year maintenance bond has been provided by the Contractor, and (iii) as-builts provided (if required). -In the event that any existing municipal improvements are damaged during Project construction, on the request of the City Engineer, a bond or other suitable security for the repair of the improvements shall be provided by the Owner to the City. 9. Financial Security for Landscape Improvements in the R.O.W. In order to secure the performance of landscape improvements in the public R.O.W., the Owner shall provide a letter o f credit, cash or other guarantees in a form satisfactory to the City Attorney prior the issuance of any building permits for the proj ect. The amount of the required financial security shall be 125% of the estimated cost of the landscape improvements. As estimated in Exhibit "A", the amount of the financial security shall be $3,310. The guarantee documents shall give the City the unconditional right, upon clear and unequivocal default by the Owners in its obligations to complete the landscaping improvements, to withdraw funds against such security sufficient to complete and pay for installation for such improvements, or to withdraw funds against such security sufficient to complete and pay for installation for such improvements. If the landscaping improvements have not been completed to the satisfaction o f the City within one year, the City may require the Owner to adjust the amount o f the financial security for inflation. As portions ofthe landscaping improvements are completed, the City shall inspect them, and upon approval and acceptance, shall authorize the release of the agreed estimated costs for that portion of the improvements, except for thirty-five percent (35%) of the estimated costs of the improvements. Ofthis thirty-five percent, ten percent (10%) shall be released by the City after (i) all of the landscaping improvements have been inspected and accepted by the City, and (iii) as-builts provided (if required). The remaining twenty-five percent (25%) of the financial security shall be retained by the City until the landscaping improvements have been maintained in a satisfactory condition for two (2) years. 10. Notices. Notices to the parties shall be sent by United States certified mail to the addresses set forth below or to any other address which the parties may substitute in writing. To the Owner: Mr. Charles G. Paterson c/o The Boomerang Lodge 500 West Hopkins Avenue Aspen, CO 81611 To City of Aspen: City Manger 130 South Galena Street 1111111 lilli 111111111111 lili 11111111111111 lilli 111111 05/14/2003 11:39A 482688 Page: 9 of 20 SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO : 10..00 D 0.00 EXHIBIT A City of Aspen Financial Securities for Improvements in the R.O.W. Project: Boomerang PUD Page 1 of 1 Prepared by: John Niewoehner, City Com-Dev Engineer Date: 12/06/02 Note: Separate financial securities should be submitted for Public Improvements in the ROW and Landscaping Improvements in the ROW Public Improvements in ROW (excluding landscaping): Description of Work Unit Unit Price Quantity Cost Mobilization/De-mobilization LS 2000 1 2000 ' Clearing & Grubbing (ROW area SY 5 0 0 between street and property line) Site Cleanup and Restoration (5-6% LS 1500 1 1200 total cost) 4" Thick Concrete Sidewalks (237 LF) SY 70 132 9240 Curb and Gutter (305 LF) LF 25 305 7625 6" Thick Reinforced Drive Ramps (35 SY 100 35 3500 ' SY) TOTAL AMOUNT REQUIRED FOR 23565 i PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS FINANCIAL SECURITY LS= Lump Sum Landscaping Improvements in the ROW: Description of Work Unit Unit Price Quantity Cost 2" Caliper Cottonwoods each 280 5 1400 Seeding (not sod) LS 50 1 50 Irrigation LS 1200 1 1200I Sub-Total 2650 25% Contingency 660 TOTAL AMOUNT REQUIRED FOR 3310 LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS i FINANCIAL SECURITY /plat-review/boomerang#9 ' D Boomerang Lodge Expansi D Agreement Page 9 of 10 Aspen, CO 81611 With Copy To: City Attorney 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 11. Binding Effect. The provisions of this Agreement shall run with and constitute a burden on the land on which the Project is located and shall be binding on and inure to the benefit of the Owners' and the City's successors, personal representatives and assigns. 12. Amendment. The Agreement may be altered or amended only by written instrument executed by the parties. 13. Severability. If any ofthe provisions of this Agreement are determined to be invalid, it shall not affect the remaining provisions hereof. ATTEST: THE CITY OF ASPEN, a municipal corporation /UZAÂ¢00) /44- --4\1>9 1 1 --4 ,/ Kathryn S. ]~ch, City Clerk HOen Klfnderhd,diayor- APPROVED AS TO FORM: I Ill lilli ml lili lili jill illilll ill Illill 'll lili 05/14/2003 11:39A 482688 Page: 10 of 20 S.LV-A DAVIS PI-KIN COUNTY CO R 101.00 D 0.00 C-/AL# Tz,rk sht- 3 9Â¤Mli Worcester, City Attorney OWNER: CHARLES G. PATERSON By Â£50 â‚¬ - Charles G. Paterson Boomerang Lodge Expa PUD Agreement .00:Frizil . - 0. Page 10 of 10 /2 A â‚¬A STATE OF COLORADO ) )ss. ~ NOTARY PUBUC "1 STATE OF e// COUNTY OF PITKIN ) 4 eLORADO 41 The foregoing instrument was acknowledge *4Â¢Forek#01#2 day of G.Jp~ 200j, by Helen Klanderud, Mayor, and Kathryn S. KociÂ¢Ci!fflerk. Witness my hand and official seal. LetÂ· 6 Aode 9~flu-7(A - My commission expires Notary Public U C STATE OF COLORADO ) ..4 - h. t /.% - COUNTY OF PITKIN ) ~ The foregoing instrumelly*s acknowle,dged before me thisl R'Alay of (~~,6-Â£... 203 by Charles G. Paterson, a24*kâ€¢Loil:he, 44erty. Witness my hand and official dea.7~-- Mycommission expires: 4-11 - 3-0 0 1- ,< 447, A . 98,.2 O~Pt~E.U,*2 i. - ~otary Public c:\documents\city applications\Boomerang PUD A C.-'.4.-,aÂ¥,+ 111111-1111.11-1111111111111111 lili lili. 05/14/2003 11:39A 482688 Page: 11 of 20 S.LV - A DAVIS PITKIN COUN-Y CO 7 10..00 D 0.00 CASE NUMBER A041-00 PARCEL ID # 2735-124-49002 CASE NAME Boomerang LP Expansion PROJECT ADDRESS 500 W. Hopkins PLANNER Nick Lelack CASE TYPE Rezoning, GMQS Exemption, Conditional Use OWNER/APPLICANT Charles and Fonda Paterson REPRESENTATIVE Vann Associates LLC/ Hass Land Planning LLC DATE OF FINAL ACTION 7/24/00 CITY COUNCIL ACTION Ord. 20-2000 PZ ACTION ADMIN ACTION Approved BOA ACTION DATE CLOSED 10/20/00 BY J. Lindt -PAREEL ID: |2735-124-49002 'DATE RCVD: |3/27/00 - #COPIES:~ - CASE NO~A041-00 CASE NAME:~Boomerang LP Expansion PLNR:~ PROJ ADDR:~500 W. Hopkins CASE TYP:~Rezoninlg, GMQS Exemption, Conditi STEPS:| OWN/APP: Charles and Fonda ADR~ 1104 E. Waters Ave. C/S/Z: ~Aspen/CO/81611 PHN:~925-2875 REP:~Vann Associates LLC/ Hass ADR:1201 N. Mill St. #108 C/S/Z: ~Aspen/CO/81611 PHN:~925-7819 FEES DUE:~2970 FEES RCVD:~2310 D 330-E 330H STAT:F REFERRALS| REF:~ BY~ DUE: ~ MTG DATE REV BODY PH NOTICED 1 7 DATE OF FINAL ACT~#.~/~<* CITY COUNCIL: REMARKS| PZ: BOA: CLOSED: 1(0/400 BY: 13- l.-Ud 1- DRAC: PLAT SUBMITD: | PLAT (BK,PG):~ ADMIN: Nifgajd 7;Pa 12, H i& 4 <3 PRA 30 IMPEX: CÂ»,9:kÂ« N... - 4 --h. . 415& Ll,i~#41*7 /---I>9% M '~ . , r + '// 11 06<% 4, 47~U[V _ _ r "TÂ¢/1-9-3 9 f deff 1-:0 (11.0 IMFÂ»ROVEMCM-r sURVEY 1 III \ .20:rtilinaBLE k R=za.m~..3,= M..4.8.7~u,All,72a- .8..f--r:/<f~JI=r-- ...,=2'as&-4--m"ma#*64 24__ __ 11 U N MROJEC T SITE F'LAM I L-44] 1 - --1-1,4--- . ~4 111 AZ.1 CHALET #1 f'LAMS 4 ELEVATIOMS Al.1 CHALET *2 AMP #3 FLAMS 4 EL-EVATOMS 1 - r I 11.4. ' ' 6J#Lit 1. d '' 2 196' 13 .Â·1 - - U.3 CHALET *4 FLAMS 4 ELEVAT\OMS -- n.4 COTTAGE FLAMS 4 ELEVATIONS t,2.5 WEST e,UILPIrÂ·16 ALAM VIEWS *2.b WEST bull-PIMO ELEVATIOMS DOC)MEK AMEr F.U.P. DLOCK 32. CITYOF ASFEM. COLORAPO 1 11 li li lili i i ir ill Illill Hi li 05/14/2003 11:39A 482688 Page: 12 of 20 S.LVIA DAVIS FI-KIN COUN-Y CO R 10..00 D 0.00 OWMER/PESIOMER: ARCHITECT: LAMP USE FLAMMIMGD STRUCTURAL- EM<*IMEEK: SURVEYOR: CHARLES O. PATERSOM POUQ RAGER-ARCHITECTY.C. HAAS LAMP rÂ»LAMMIMO THOMAS QUESTERDERC AerVM SURVeÂ¥ CM<WIMEERS. IMC. c./0 1*HE hOOMERAMâ‚¬3 LOP(le 120 SMOWMA55 CREEK RP. 201 MILL STREET 9.-4 gO,ARIMO FORK PR. 210 5. GALEt-IA ST. 500 WEST HOPKIMS AVEMUE SMOWMASS. CO. 81654 ASf'tfri. CO. albll AirEM. CO. 81641 F.O. 50* 2506 Asreri. co. siblj (970 ) 917-4780 TEUrAX (970) 925-7819 TEL (970) 925-7999 TEL ASRM. CO. aibli (970) 925-3416 TEL (970) 925-3516 TEL/FAX LrOAL PESCRITTIOM OP PROrERTy. I.laT Or PIMEMS#OM.AL Ft:QUIKMMWMTS, CmKTIF"ICATIOM 4 *LerÂ·IUTUKE *OCKS: ,Â«EA CALCULATIOMS; I.-CE.-I--61 DIJ,Le,h<, %00......A - -UÂ» 0-u.- 0â€¢%-s th* -W - Ir,~-rtÂ¥ C*he â€¢'p*;.:,p~~Â¥â€¢9 10Â©8**4 e,D Â¢i- CLH/11, 1=7Â»1 -, -3 1O4iS I ~A. 20,~ â€¢ North 11<de O f W est Ho~ k,4, /Wonue beewl:,n 'cuuâ€¢ F ou. b lu,â€¢,ut a~d kk~â€¢ Uâ€¢ I ./ 61â€¢cot a'ureâ€¢I ..%/7 /07Â»,L.. y.6.7~ E~~Â»4*Ane.......=41-r ....124Â· 49 -002.- th- C.y ./ As./0. Ce.=4 -* P.... 3â€¢*- c. 46'AN .EVDEVVED AND 7,71 r CF,23,1-Â·ic,ATE CITÂ¥ F.Â»03*NEIR'S APPROVAL 1 het p-t " L." /'. A . 1-d â‚¬7 4,Â«N iothâ€¢-4 0/ UÂ»- 7-/ 4/the Lit, -nd Â·, 1.-.it- 0/ Irt i Ull/EI AileNED. ADULY AUTHORIZE I REEPm EGE NÂ·TA-1 iv,ir ,-,F~~~LI) TIÂ·+4.9 PLAT OF Â£*Dee <-A =.,ru te th, 1 97% m.â€¢...ve. by 'he Bure- a L-wl M =-U **â€¢ac~ W&. *t.'ll.IMI/â€¢ ..... -*v-- %6967:&re -L:1#1:.U[ 31;2:Al-:NÂ·[711;NC~nAL>C>. ~~~4Â«2Â¥VED tâ€¢ fiYEert'~~R9-weW-1['AE15-rÂ¥ d. A.epâ€¢EN. 1-HIS: ~~ . . u.v.Â· c- â€¢4 ,ounâ€¢-ly )0 A-4 0Â»-â€¢â€¢*47 4-4 0- â„¢*421 00 feet ar,F Lut# E. an,1 M U- r.,0,1 80 *eet of L..01 r. Ow -0,0 7, Neet <ar 1.02 4 Ga- north 30 /401 4 1.0 1. Blnek 32. Cit, 001 1,1OLDS FEEF .IMPI F TTLE TO T ./. REAL_Es.... Des.-1./0 ./AION ....7 AND CLEAA OF ALL 1 I. NS ANC> ./.C.MOF+ANCE. EXC-E PT F=O. T}Â·12 1 + N OF ,-go=.7 -r-0.9-i T-'ll :,, Al-. ..... m16*Nd ly th., 160.Â»Ul' 0~ U- .... I I Ieee * '..r- b .- O.79 E. Ind m. aorth /0 ..ret.4 Lot g. D.... Al. elyÂ· and ..wtud. 0/ Aspca -re..h ...t 1/il MCIF.'AGEL NAMED ./.EON AL' tiCM,{4,4 Mir r,1 1 IEVE l eÂ¢â‚¬ I AC' :1 331 A, LD _ . _.-_ - - 1-nâ€¢ 4-4 e.-aâ€¢te.i ./* ./."In.t l..2.00 -.Â£1 .=Ow...1 -/Th th. 0/.- ..'h/Pil,k/,1 ON THIS MAP AHL THUE THINS CZE.TI!-ICATE IS NOT TO DE- C.ONST.... A. A- <bly 1- retn,Â¥-r Câ‚¬â€¢t-ty Cleâ„¢ 4,14 A-.-ler B U,41./lon .wÂ»ber +40.17 ... Alls'i,A<: r i iF TI TLE -0,4 /1. c>Kâ€¢ir.,ic]. 0.7 i WA~A12**~ -iÂ·ir.e AND ,Â·r 18 i i.[Li...TOOD ANO ......co -AT NE,1 AL. AUUUME. .c-â€¢2 V,in, L 13[ C .AH,31Â£[) CCA r Â¥ COUNC L AP..OVAL rÂ£,774_ f.A e. L.GT. - .%. 1 M. 7. I I Ue#"a*Eusa,-ALIEco~,4 1*-ter te *hc le.... ' -/rel.'' 44*~r-It.ev/ LiAUS, LI rY 'i,An-IATUOEVr H ON Ah~Y St Al EMEN t CON i AINED ./.. 2 eta; U u..16*1/1.:K*auâ€¢ou,â€¢211~ As ...Gâ€¢Â·t.6 6, C-*U., 1 21. S.... 2 or 9- 0...U-nci 22*PLE,fo< Â®Â£8203 Tkny PLAI OÂ·- 1./ VVA.9 ..Vitil-.D AND Â·/O.Al ..00.4.- AL-OW... APFROve D *, Y vÂ·:Â·r. -6,9- fiÂ©541#Eff-by-Â¥-FLF-77FTÂ¥=73rXAFT N. T ,-1,8.-_. DAÂ¥ OFr Z.L a. th: reâ€žt .un, D.,â€¢*...enâ€¢ pl-,s..4 -:./1 bc *,aled-.all t~..1 -1.14.. IZECX>,lot f, AS *Zt er PTIC>14 Ne ~ OF 11-412 Ht:AL Eel ACÂ¥: RECOR,jb O,- 0.1...OW...... rL.OO~ /-'IA> -Â· 6-L.OCÂ»â‚¬ ,â€¢,Al. 2. )'__ A.....)--4,/. NO. SERIES OF AN[D Pt- ..O en Ki- cr-nip. 1-v. coi... 4,4.-~jo. MUâ€¢u-441 1-ot... 19,000*qu-- I-, i SIONED T .8 21... OF .*XL. b.Luu.nuuu. L.,~t *:r--g p.I, D-alluns Unlt Ne -lu*ren.â‚¬,at 7,1/W//RE,/4Ne* 111-/ CE+Qi/,le//reVFT9lk,IKIcgNI/.C,gite U/FORAT ME T--6 M......... All,-,~~â€¢I- n-,iâ€¢'.Â· .... 1.4~..........Inal b.'.Â»ea' pe:Â· 1.000 .0.- _ir- bAY oF \ ,"/,1. .,~~~ evf'11/8/,244/T#/1&.#.''-~ ~~- - ./. -11-El 1 Fret ..f b.* ..â€¢ ~ POSITI'llt/ 24 YVI Â·---Â· Marn C.. e.... DefunrÂ»nun ..E Will. 75 â‚¬-L /41,unwul 'row le*I 10 '61* MY COMMISION EXPIAF-. .8.._.-L~ ma Minutann, 84Â¢â€¢: Y-/ I ./d wrrNESS MÂ¥ wh,O AN n Oft,~1.4,~ 1 "0'fid' 1-Â· .,1-on & 1.-Y Pt411C ./.Am..1 ./.r /'S.I 1 foot Coewl....1 1Â¥ DEVEL</1 'MI NT D./.C .... APP.OVAL M-â„¢mun E.*te C.,ver/* â€¢ 3 p--- 5@1 E. Hup*,na -r-,1 IS Pt-Al C f -r,Â·1â‚¬ _ __ _. WAI R/VIC.,AT / AND Mak..,un. %-*t ./ f-4 - .Â¥72 A.P..CO 81611 APPROVEL) 'r.Â· THE toti'Erftbiâ‚¬ OP Ti#E â‚¬56*09//ArrY OEVELOPMENT ortri srhce 4 511-5 COVERASE C,LCULATIOMS u:=cs == *rgu"t==r" 11111.,Exh/ '. .ula'... DE I â€¢Ar< 1 ML f.,T 0, Tk iE CITY OF ASP EN. -T H,S I . OAV OF ._* ~11#- ,WI~ H.*UU *ew~c CE+44, Â»rICATE O. DEDICA/10. A.-Ill.NE=*/P KNO~/V AL 1. MLN BY TH,~Â¥E PRESâ‚¬. 18 -rHAT C|/ARI.~1, RV*J -. ah--La -~ thn, - ee 4-Â·uÂ· i ,-Â£ O.fectow ... CUVIE..... MOÂ¥*TAGEE OR .6,4.......O/ CE.TAI' LANDS IN T.E CITY V-- AWIN*â€¢M AND TCINN SITE OP /4/'FEN, 9,7,0/ COUN-7 V. COLORADO. /22,<2491"/':Â·i A/ .,/ t-â‚¬Z>LL-{~0/**t: raicÂ»' 724, M lemu.BED fi.r<SN .-.i U/-115 0/HE. PIA r Nâ‚¬>-res. EAL PROF,6... UNDEFÂ¢ T H. NAME AND STYLE OF Publ' RO// ./....4,a....... DOES; *AIZJIT"AI 9,,U,LA .,C> U ' &/119'/W%1gp A.â€¢11 CITY <231 AE,UnIN. PITâ€¢<IN COUN,Y 3 41., --0,<.r-â€¢-ot ...11 G.=-p. -h C.v ~30,Anâ‚¬-.1 â‚¬*,Awl.-,le- .4. 41 c.-1-. ei 2200.) . 7-.=tel Ep,â„¢.-un A...1 2002; Exteoss- A,4 2009 F-*-nuâ€¢ad t., t:her Bnooa--e 1-deâ€¢ E..C.T.- 1 -6 Â£6 0,19 oF ...,/.2./VI.. Or 2003.. .91.â€ž I N........ U, 22Â»e *./.WI /â€¢41 ././â€¢.aâ€¢-* 0- ...I....de- .~vp-â€¢, to d.# C7026 45) ' 1.Câ„¢=, = WI. anÂ¢1 -A* THEE FOR k 00, NO C C RTF,CAT C <,1/*~~~tâ€¢ AND CUMNER/14- ABAP %*S feFAM' ImRE Ma Affir VM i . 200.a. * ut.,PN ~ Â¥r... rad [OC' 'lle DAY COM MISION ...,a ES = ___'~2'. . 6- w,g-NESS ..v .AND AND c-Flrf VB4 ***6wfL:*1* : Â· r.,DI ER); E. 4- 11**e Notan. Publle , i - 44)'M' CoÂ· 81*11 , Â·. Vt>.1.41. 3*:- - **4* pr'/WV . ~ - L.n Hes... , -u.Â»,2 ~retal O,2.-n 2â€žpecl- / Te,~1 ,-04 CLERâ€ž AND ,~C CONDER'/ ACten#'TANCEL -%-nt-.- ef a,t- 0,---r-1- '.18 ...1 0/ THE _ r.....Lat.20~ WWKS ACCEFT-ED FON FILI~JO Tolâ‚¬.j F~u,I,D.n,Â·, 4ev~-r -.-/T<:â€¢te~ l.,Jâ€¢t IN TH E OF=F,<DE OF -TAiEELEA K ANC> AÂ¢'OOACT,ER OP 1,â€¢ L COU,Â·rrÂ¥ OF +Â·â€¢, 1 kiN, s i Art Or COLOMAUO, AT _ O'CLOCK. DAY OF ~94* n-A J~./1* AEEPT-75-80. 1/wJ w elibi . PAC,E -63--2._._-_._. AND Cu-r,tÂ¥ Clerk end A-crwrier PROJECT VICIMITYM/4rl P 49 -yÂ·'Attl.!.,1.,~1- :,ry-1.1.di':1;47.2?.-~CirÂ·A .%.'19..032'H. . Vef#26%4#3#Ah#-RiBNAR i ***4#~~W,Ar.~Mj,r: 1.9>WAL:Â·Â·3;ttlk/*em | 0)0/r~IAria ..9 1 r- ..... I ... H 111 482688 Page: 13 of 20 1111111 111111111111111 05/14/2003 11:39A SILVIA D=LIS FITKIN C.UATY CO R 101.00 D 0.00 M e . 1140. GEMERAL MOTES #i. ALL PRO/OMP SIVEWALKS. U criNTERUMI OR - CURBS. OUTTERS. 414*teICAP > go.w -0,0-0. 6-0. RAMPS To De coMSTRUCTED TO CUKKEMÂ¥ CITY MEW KebtiFZ~P PKNEWAY f--- -| EMOITICER,MO STRiPAAPS. /2. ME 'PROPERTY IrrROVEMEMT SURVE'/'PROVOEP OY'ASfert UbLe \ 1 SURVEY EMe MEEKS. IMC.' FOR rgortgrfrionurter,Ts. *%9 ' 5 DthRIM(35. PiSrAMCES 4 ArlY ORAeS-CuTE -- EXISTING OR rgorosep %=0 EASEMENTS AMP EMCROACHMEria. MIVEWAY . + MEW -KTW'351 WILL M SUBMITTEP AT TIME Or #3. A PETMLED LAMPSCAPIMO FL,M MÂ§H + Epee Or CIUÂ·rTER 9.- 4 ., 4 + rle./ eâ€ž:55 STRIP -k / ,% BUILPIrte PERMIT FOR .Af,ROVAL DY E ./ E \\\Â»1\742--4 THE r,Fa<.5 Der,RTMEMT. Ir KEO *2871*%7YNXWN#en . ---I- - -*,Ve/1UE' i BY THE PARKS PEPARTME,17. 'ri LAMPSM'IMe f'LArl \VILL IMCLUPE O 2 lf) 51-OCK 32 * + -1-- TREES OM â„¢E ADUTTIMe C U < 0 10 0 r,-iria PeateriATED 4 9 , NEW TREES FROFERTY TO Â·THE SOUTH or THE O toR uSe e>Y *PU npiCAL â€¢ OBASS -----*-1- 2,0<OMBTANG, F"KOFÂ·c:grr. STRIT -----Â· -+210 * ,)t ge#rfrogeep pmver J OCCUFNÂ·11'5 ANÂ·lrs TOM to PES,Orâ‚¬P NW . 4 1 CorsÂ·rgucnzg Art . b .0 N.--COKDAr.lO5 *ATH CITY Erte,MEERIMe -3... ' MONATY LIME ' ----*-*.- STAMP/,Aps 1 If.4 CONCRETE o - --4.- 44-0,- SIPâ‚¬W/'LK ; i i & SUâ€ž,;:4.21~.4~5 ----- ' I 620. 1 ' â€¢ ' 1 I x..4 r'rriCAL , -- r-72 20.-U,LO. :/ 'il -a,27434223 1~-/. 1*4-- 4 : 1 4 // 7 . LITILITYpECMSTALS LOCATiON MerÂ·IP,Me erÂ·nort (:) teog. / 47Â· OAO.O 9 Â· UnurIES NY=OVA. Mew CUIRD,410 *10. 4- 2-0Â· Pâ€žON) le \ -- 1 I --Il-1 , . I MTS. 61) w < aUTTER TO DE PES*tÂ·te) NYP 4 QUEST COM / ~ Aae ~ / M.CORPMÂ·(CE VATH ' Con<TRUCTEP IM 01-yerlaiMEERIrle / k \ \ STAMP+APS -7 1 1 1 4 1 , \ - .. fr - , - - - ,- 1 r --1n*- 47--% ' j _ N--7----*% cuge , pericep R.O.W. L .il CÂ¢MTEKLIME CDR 0 TR,AH 4 UTILITY' , , rap / / h /~A Loorep W.2-9,4.--0..100 / i Â¥ lk. PAVE worle- /7 1 - \ C :1--4 -Il. '/ -5 \. , 90 f-k WAYstert ..., -~~n~j,~'div <L I. \ \. ,~L,60 1.Fet.Tr 2 67*- 6'.15. A.* .72-1* Furult , FAVEMEMT WEST A , .t , - 301;44 . ) HA-r or 4111 st CHALET ' - 1 M / 4 Â» r *Mil- , 1. , 0 .3 1 1 41< fj \ \ 44 4 / U % % 6-44 / WATER MAM -- . De>PR \L 1 1 I Flge H~KAMT U \ A \ ' .1 \ 3.PM. L -- I --/ - . Or Or VaL L.. 79 ~~*Tfu j CHALET j *4 f . 1 E , TO, O% VAL-L \ ------ ,/ ~--~ '5,4:L 1 \ 0 -40 \ 1/ .1 /' F -7 â€¢ qor gy.-4 p~L . L.1 .... . Â¥, 1 0 4 % : 7.1- .0 . ' NOT / , - --- 04 rue x M ./ ~ ) 1 1 \ MEV H,ArIPIC,â€¢,~ 1 -P &- I / i C .1.=P'U , -/S- .793.2 7 /, Ar ; rPNEOP' UR.Am- RAMr TO DE *- t Pestorlep /44â€¢IP r \ "PR , COMSâ„¢UCTEP IM REVEGITATE . / j 0*KET ~ ACCORPRNCE WITH TE-ACE! r,MICAL / Tor or wÂ£ - =Al r n GLO, , OTYUMJIMEBRIMe ~ * ~ 1 7910' -0' STAMPARPS Un:-% tl W 2 --..\ J M 3 / ~ 6--,237. =t--- 1 - --2399,43- .raACK '% % 5# i . TOF Or VALL --1 -40 :... 701. -01 I 4 I Rq*- <EEÂ·:21:<31 )9' i. TorOAVAL # 0/ --8- . E I f .%4 - .2 k \ -.J 5.4 1' , , r j '- . - 11.1 4 tu - i \ . 4 \ Of"CRry LIME e .\ \ \ \ - - (0 0 \ li -/~ \ H - J -%- I i\Â» 0 1 - \. \â€ž 3 -1 . f \I . .9 -I 'â€¢â€¢ I\. 7 , a -. Ke TRAIL N \ \ %-. 1\ 51 TE f LAM Al.1 14 - to'-O 4 >42#Lpiria SETÂ» OPERTÂ¥ LIME W.1/2610+61 09Â£/-ZZG--026 - rgfle 02 ''sewmoug - pecy 3,00<3 -W Â·r :urno,~Â£~ 20-91-11 -6-' 1: 4 .2- 41Â¥T., 1 ..i â€ž.~. 1-1 i a~, v- I, rk:maly . Â¥ r:'CL<0.--Â·A- f.0 I Â· /-4 .-/$.'-R -4.<.I E ; i Me 1 - Vt:*40 E-- 7- Â·.:go BrtiMT:ThfuiT,t,~n ---- , .' 1, 1 | ' ~ 'F/-aff -11 1 ; 1 11 11 Mil 1 1 1- e -- 1 : Â¢ 0 )-2-zit= 4] i_-j E , ra r. .AO, ..40.reA 0 a %.4 - . â‚¬ %-- A 1,221 - 1 1,-I<y~ li "i 4# - r- - 4)>?aA - " {,4724~9 3- NG>111\~/211 ,-:npr Â» 4.r Fi,# cik f"- f il-imi\ E I 0 6-1*El,0.10Â» lip t i . : 8: KA'\x:5 - 4.1 Did . 0 -- 11 4 4,1 ,/ r. .--- .---4..------4 Z *-ri 1J' 1 & 2 - ra f' 1 1 ' 1, 1 .. .. ----------'.IL.--,-.'- - .,-'. 1 4 1 If. '.1 U..1 i ! 1, Il i : 4 ill,li 11' I 1 701111 1.â€¢ 1 ...,--- -- -I-.--1.--:-----=-I.-1 - - ------ Â· 6-6/ .,0,Â·iÂ¢ie'l~- sm,r- I t I Bli I ~ -N-44.2 1 4 -\% F 1 E i /...., 1 'ij.,lf' / 0 -\ 3 -â„¢ 70 C 2 14 7 1 1 1 rj 4., r rn i.â€ž9 , .... ff fit = 1 lii 11 A Â«4 1 TIFINZ. ~-" =-2-4 1 63 1 /04 09 /- - \-n--, 32 - & dits. -- M.4.1 lijili'Uf \ t*:1:Yul-,9, - r-----1 1 .... 1 ; 'FLA L-----I rk*54'/ M ~ < ----A /: 11 1 1 i. it 1 lili -- 0- 0 .- a< 11 1 -7/B 1 RE! il, 1 "Imy -7,1 inKÂ¥ 11 7{Titff. Â·Â· ' 1 B*â‚¬tÂ»je~ke ~i L I 11 !ilillill' 11, Â® c V 14->.-L 1 1 9 11 1 1! :lili 1 ".-jbt U ; 4 *-7 ------ --7,---- -- -- ra 14 11 1~\ 4 ra ./14 â€ž9 E- 1 -111 AW 2%_. -'991ttl; 11 trpiÂ·n. i, . ' .4 0,4 1 1-+1111]Ii,!}21 tÂ· 1 i i - - 1 -1 F*11Â·1Â·~ ---0-*--J.I.. â€ž- t--4 11 2-J-~ I 1 1 /1 1 '2.0 52 1 V Â® 0 00 1 1 1 Â® 1 B i L--ipi.,-,i --: - - 17,4 1. 11 N -1 1 .1 16-4.4.,1,/le 6. 4 - 4 _r 1 1- .1 *310*WN I.' - .AÂ·eÂ·Â·tÂ· 4â‚¬~ lAw# ,â‚¬-*/0,6'.. 4-/I.......... - 1 1 y ' Ulk,142/ 1 ! , r .4 E 1 t i v <7 m 2 1 / I ' ' <r 1.4 0 1 , ;1 â‚¬\\ m t~ /* --h Â» V 1 1 . 1 - ~ ' 1 /1 ! 1 , ,/ 'tr n I V/': 11' 1 ' 1 ./2 1 ~_bl12>33&,V- ' 1 e I . ! eba -------3 7.24*R litÂ·i , '72315'~ '.9 1- -4 4 1-, ' .11'I. ' 11 Â·- 7. 111 Fwd i .6 lili l;'181* â‚¬4* ...._._-_._._ltir-1/Zikz*MttiaA 01 T.*d Ittmw 16.... 1;-19-02 CHARLES PATERSOM PESIUMER DOOMERAMG CLUD Revision: e>LOCK 32. W. HOF'KIMS AVE. , poue KAGE:K. ,â€¢86#411.-ECT 1780 Sno/mass C.rack ioad - Sr,0/ma... CO. arb54 - 970-927-1760 rlÂ·+OME,/FAX ASfrM. COLORAPO Prawn:J. Plaulhard I# 3.31VJÂ·13 - WOI.LVAN-72 1# lillÂ¥+43 - WOUVAIU +UnDâ‚¬ l# 131Â¥HO - UOUVAN-12 19Va 1#11-Â¥#43 - AJOUVAN-G H.1-~ID!.1 . 01 - ,9/1 G . 011 -Re/1 LEVEL FLAM - CHALET ! I -KIN COUNTY CO 3 11:39A ~*10#6**1 03 ZV i-mimi-m miue"""I~mumu~ 5/14/2003 11 :39A 482688 S.LVIA DAVIS PI-KIN COUN-Y uu R 101.00 D 0.00 Page: 15 of 20 I J I i.-i -~ - 1 ' 4 -f ~--. 1 ' 1 1 It | i i 1 Â».t.,4.-- I ----93 1 4-- --'ll---l-LI/-1.F. r.- - ~~ li I Â· - ----4Â·- 122Vt,=44--- --. 6 2 8 -2 1 : 19-4/ 2,/0(144 -1 7. il Â» -1-< -151 =.4 El.JF* _.- 1 : 1 1 -'. 1 â€¢ ~ .fl, 1\ 1 -- A L,1 914, # - -/4 1 1 â€¢ , 4 / 1/1 1 = 47.21Â»23Â· ' I . 1 k 0 , . - --60,/1// 1 1 .0- ri-" .I El--4 72 44 ./11- /11 81 N%33%4 .-- + -- 4 -V-1 Ct -/ tr i 11 -*; I /1/1 1 K '7[% 11 66aL ! I !/' j! 90~9551, I i r 1-11 1 M SU 12#1- LAUg., 1 1 1, - L.V.,1224 1/ U./, 1 - - oter ..4.*. 21 . EWE bjudip i_ _-1 %.3>I~* 1, . 1 Â¥7â‚¬.0 7 1 2= /\ 1 i 029 -1 V f -/i 1- 1Â«.ff /4 A h ...1 : Â· 1 FK, 1 -0 Ngquii{19 ~:~ T : ,~Â· i 0541,5 -fic/ ..--I--+Ill. 0 M. 2 /-r~ 9 J---- . ; mia ---- --A 1 - LA_!1 -- rl k..Aâ€ž.......â€žM r - ----*-9. 10 i _ Metz 6 . , - 6 1 . 1/. 1,1- ) i ' 1 J r \.8-0 , /0 11/ i\ --) 4 1 7 00 - ---1 ' + ~;ij = u ti AN T ,-17 1,2*. | 1 - /1 , r Â· J . , f f , , 1./.4/. 4 1 1 ..1 /9 7 i *<\ 1 . : lk, 1 . . f /1 i i I--~[---"-it 'Â«* 4%~41:~ 4 L/42 . I I , ~ -I- I . 1 .12 7/ , ALIF . ' -1 1 :< 1 E., -- ,-r 2 </ 14 .1 . , Â· ' I nur 143 1 1; /- i =- =-~--- - *L/F-- vx,,-1 1 V*:r:r.'.2. 1 1. ....rÂ¥- -4.........9---- i ~h\/'4 4:t ' 1 1 1 . Â¢ 1 --I. 1 1 - -F- -rÂ· 11 4 1 11 4 1 .. I ... DELOU/ GRAPE PLAM - CHALET #2 4 #3 /0~\ QKOUMP LEVEL rLArl - CH,LE-r #2 4 #3 UrrER LEVEL PLAM - CH,ALET #2 4 #3 ~a - - coÂ· 96.- to. 1/8, 5 10* M 1,1 E Un 11 f-7-1 f71 , 0 E - M 10 L N S < M k-Liu.-44 k. - - I-+ 41 L 3 ...1 -Â· JEU'â€¢14 1 |EE 1 1~0~!M~ tti!Â¢277 9 4 u % t't-Mu,~42=,4-*A[=gl *:3 12~--4--r- r , .....-/*-*-1 .)=1~Hi#p~ glfEV 1 t. 4:,7 ;3:71Â£16Â«217*igmall* 4 U Â£ 1 11 -Â·---wk*+SU~ . ---j--ju~--4 1-4-4 =1.-2 - /2 , /3 10&' A....Â«d T 1-~96 ; -1----41 -- 1.4.- m- g p=a 7 9=i---MI- 11 CE'~ 311* ~ O #-=ra--1- -1 2 V. .. de - --1, ! El W W *=41Â· 1%1 u~' N -,-,re-v-Â· 7 F' Â·-% 1 - W#Ht!*11**t, 83 [...-,) *-,-.- -F--2:*..~ ...*iVJL .i+~-,9-,~~ .:5-,r~*.~~~i:.ItiL;1(fzâ€ž 16-4Â¥311- -*.......... .--4 11 / 1 . T 4 r--r-14 - . . 1 ~ I. 1 1 1 ! 1 1 lili 1 1 1---7 1 ! k - i -te.1~**birild.3' Â·0. ' 2_2_-:Zl 1 1 1 1 -3 1 .11 0... 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r i i i 7,-,1 ! ,-.: ! ! ~~ ~ L-_.3 ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ lilitd ' ii L,1-1 1 ' iii i I i i *l . f.- 1 1 1 ./.1.- 1 iii i! 1 1 11 0 , i i ii i ! i / 1 11 1 ----Â·' li ; i i i! ! i ! i i i 5 1,1 L...3 1 1 11 1 1 I i 111 1 1 1 1 i 1 I - f Â£71 i MORTH ELEVATIOM - CHALET #2 4 #3 ~ EAST ELEVATIOM - CHALET #2 4 #3 - SOUTH ELEVATIOM - CHALET #2 4 #3 1/8.- to' 1/8 4 - 1,0 y U/EST ELEVATION - CHALET #2 4 #3 1/64 - 1'04 8 .1 -- /4,2.2 0019 09ZI-ZZGÂ·Â·CLG - P#941 -03 ~9901unnoug < peol #,#13 Â®â€¢ewmoug P-'evine:-1 Â·r:umild 30-G lili 11'llili 1111111111'llilli 482688 Page: 16 of 05/14/2003 11._-A SILVIA CAL.S PI. ... C.UATY CD R 101.00 D 0.00 .N. ' 1 ' A----4, i < ift'-TÂ·2141-1 11 1 I I i 9 lf] 0 01 2 1 ; r dEP .Ful .2--- -'lizil-* 1 1 1 1 84*a , tq~f4 -___ ___ -1 ; 00 9 1 ~ 1 1'4 A A i 1 1 1 -w I ,*-1-11 12/44 -4 0 --- PJA ~ 1 , ; ra i ito .ra l'ritlnet./.% 1 ' 1- L la *:1 Uvel 2-41 uu=U 1 5 krd)M 09 <Kr y' 2 w2 . 1 M -6 U ' ~ 1--I ag=,1 LA'- .91 fl= i , 00- X174* d=wabj l E Di E 11 1 ' t,1 M.,f-Ar' . 79% 1 il illÂ·i i V(V- L, =* --3 2 - 1/.. 1 - 1 1 k . 1 I Â·Â· O ,0 2 . $ . 1 . D W. A i 1--~_ L~4 Mtr,> ;rn>Â·m-r.~i ~FrI~ .ILL.I- *---- ,-- %*r LAJL----12123 ~ 1 . 1 t 1,1 tr 8 1 - 4- rf :... Â¥Â·i i i 11 1 .--- 0 14 4 />. E-4 1'! ' /1 t:-~ OU< a." i ! .H 1 41 1 2 1 : 1 t/4.3 .Act i \1~~9 i / ' i Â£ 1 li .-, 1- -- : 441 <.%10, I - ...tah- # / 1 l. 931.4<7 W \,A 9,-1 1 .,-41t 1 4 %47 41 11 444~K~r 7 /0. .1 : LL I '1 .. ~tÂ«Â« tr.:fill l.. t-- -4 28& 7% 40,=In. e 1! 471 1 li , 1 ..h % 2. h.r :9.MA= 1 :1 Â» ... 1 il l, i /' 11 , 4 - 4 n $ I BELOW G,KN)15 FLAll - CH/,LET #4 /-1 GROUMP LEVEL PLAM - CHALET *4 Uff'ER LEVEL FLAM - CHALET #4 1/6. = to. 1/6.- to. 1/0 4 -110' r:n __ 32-95,4-4 E..SLL k...1 r=n / th/An.'Â· AS=.112.=12%>L ..- I F U 1 4-Â·RU -H U k 1 <M \- U w,+7/.-4 ' 74-45*Ad'ji 'mILI--------- --- I ./ 'FLABil ..0=29Nx - 0'11-2 1 U d 1,-81. W 11 4 1 .4-' 1 1 1 ,. i t==1 E- 032~EPB~~Â¥--1 ~A f(~j~ij Em~g &A Â» ' t.nuzÂ·.9#:.i*1~__~,9- â€žZ;+ 0 % '' -/IX -,7 4-â€¢t---7- _. sy~IZU 1.,L: 111 rÂ· -T Â·. -- Â·27+ , 15*Aff?;P : Fil 1 V ]Â·E 4-724 4% Ur--1 1:1 i if 1-1 1, 11;- 214 1 11 U & i 1-1 11-'Lliwitbi 1-*,:-*i*-Tz*11 u #~cata~--;.11W~ <-1 1 T--7-1-- *tZÂ®Â·FM.1~----- t U.ti.Â£[L.ALEEL -- . .t~.2~ -r~***'r+4'IM...94.14U+--4*,44*.4.-+4,liN--- 27+-=11.-'~ i !1 !! HEE 1 1 1 1 11 F Â·... i i L. ----- -- - -1 . 1 1 j -â€¢ 1 1 1._-- 11.mat..4 ._-.â€ž__- 4 . ,--$ p.,â€ž -~...., ---r-â€ž-w#.----â€ž....1---4 ---4-- ,Â·4.-Â·- M- A *513 1 i i' il 11 1 1 i::: i 1 11 - , i i i / lili i i 1 1 ' 1 - i 1 i :-4 :i i i i i:-/; i 11 1! ---Â· -iÂ·-- 1/0.- to. 1/8.- 10 ' MORTH ELEVATIOM- CHALET #4 rh EAST ELEVA-THOM - CHALET *4 ~'~~ SOUTH ELEVATION - CHALET #4 ~ U/EST ELEVATIOM - ClÂ·thLET #4 10 Al.3 92W1)1921 k./093 WVW)LJO#W 09Â£1-LZG-OLG - IG'719 '07 'e"Gowmoug - POON 110,2 06 Ouloloug Ogil pJ,Ntnew - riume,d I01Ia suile".3 20-Gl-11 :'0/61 482688 , 1 Illi lill I lill 1 1 illilli ill illill li li 05/14/2003 11:39A Page: 17 of 20 M S.LV-A DAVIS PI-KIN COUN-Y CO R 10..00 D 0.00 0 9 (r) 0 ~ i E--------7 1 J- ,! UYOL \11 21 8%9 1 1 LAaik .1 69 21 Y1 1 tO r lur,~ T Â¢1 I *- ti:Â¥UAil -2.1 23 VII MUU rgf<X ..4.*ar // T .-.AL I : 1 1 1 VAgy - 2 ZE 6 1 0 0-3[[~ET]jo. < j 02 , 11 ErÂ·â€¢eiJ,-L-- -41 1 1.-t---- OU i I 0..4 1 1 -1 --- -- 41 0*> 4,67 4..1,---.-- /2=36/Ed&/T,2/512$2522%3 1 J ...... ! 1 1 '1 1 : 11 2 1.-= i _ 1 4 2 2 e --..- -, ---- . - - .4.. -I--- -- -I -I.---I - ' 0 0 DELOW GRAPE PLAM - CO-TTAGE GROUMP LEVEL PLAM - COTTAGE lia. - 100. 1/a. = 10. Ple A m 4 :91#11 , Rh \ /11 //flhj -M:Yr I \ \ bitle. 5. ey e.(1.6.... I '.'04'. I'ly //li# i. ' 1 ,d4;5.1VE#/824//4/6,24& *8%\,5;~2222k..delf 1 Iâ€¢~1./.....---I/5eGUe"*I./.b.&<*/*/ 1- 2 1 /C .ry â‚¬ 1 ! 1 4------2.$1 0 . 114 Â«B *i,=,rell'*4/mireÂ·f- k. . - r. 10 --1--v- . ir--Liu 45*imk 977=T=-7. 44 It , n . 1 :f--2 4 _rr , Â·Â· 4 If .1. 1 11 44 1 1 1 --. ' Â£/---- -'I ' . ' 1 1 1 1 1 ... 1 1 1 1 , 1 1 1 1 1 1 , 1 1 ... $ = 0 X MC)R.TH ELEVATIOM - COTTAGE - EAST ELEVATIOM - COTTAGE SOUTH ELEVATIOM - COTTAGE 1/a' - 1,0. 1/8.-CO. WEST ELEVATIOM - COTTAGE C 1/a'. t'o. 2 Z i k AZ.4 JAV 33Weigd Woâ‚¬Vil.LVJ 991194+13 WwgwofÂ·w 09Â£1-Zts-oa - PG,9,9 -03 Â·â€¢sewrnaug - peoÂ¥ Mâ€¢ pjew~new ~r:unle,ld Â· 1 n â‚¬ 1 Â· '1 i 11 1 1 1 i 141 ; ,/21 .- I- - + I - r- rumily= ===:=~ - -----T 11 1/\ f / + f ~ /,1 , . 1 8 1 +0/74.W . 4 1 . 1 IL-*-a I - 1% Bl - 1.1~ 2-imEK =* 1 ; /., 5 ////1 4&_g-100Â· 1 17\ l-1 >211 6/ /1 6 0 >/ 1 44.6 -+ 3 0 Mil / J < L A<7 -r-rn er...U ';a G . ~ /*Ggp U Y OL w=, IEÂ· PILy - :lot A-=nvtn -[h, 059 1 1/1 /, 1.-/ / WOOW Wil,1001 #e f. /*.'049'. / Vi \L , 4/ \ Fro 0 0 ....2 Er--71 .49Â¥ - \ 11 -*'-Jo,0,0 1 \ Enifi 64IaL Â©wel ths**Wy l. AN+~wl USL . 4 Ktf 1 L 4./ 6- 2 j' ~2 .....W .,I. J k,WHO.LN , J 1 . 2 '~9~A,â€ž~f : . Â·Â» i .4 55511 1 0/9 V.dal A / 7 /19% , U. b ' ./.1 -~P-141 1-#7--13-,ri)~ ~- - ETi ,-I M 4- 4 /i I ' Fl-0 .unaL I.U f *Â·hAN* I ./ . wpâ‚¬:wrl ..v,go .~ /. C .\ 11 , u 1/6\\ % r -2 1 . 1-4 cl \317>Of' \ //l/ $. 1--- *-- p~ I. A 7-9< 2C \ ; -7 \ Ob\,1,00, \ .00.1 \ 1 t.<1.3. i -- / \6 441>21 O * - i #79'. 1~341 \ /41â‚¬141\ 31- // , - b-j ti./tiÂ¢h 134. Â» 4/ N .# ..a \ F Vuf~*2 %35/2 Je<47 % ./.1 \ - -B--46.:1 /Â« /51 DELOW GRAVE PLAM - WEST DU/Le/Me GROUMP LEVEL MLAM - WEST bUILPIMG 165.- to' 1. PJ 1 1 1 /, 1 0 1 482688 11 t e / U A E 05/14/2003 11:39A 0 1111111111111111111111 i Page: 18 of 20 1L._11 I lilli +uve il im 11! i ~ SILLIA [AVIS PITKIN COU.TY CD R 101.00 D 0.00 if] 0 1/ h.1 A 1 1 ,1 D=11 ki 9 \] 2 +RAY. ;C 6 ,' -ul -4~34-7 . 0' U --B-7 erÂ·,0--r+,Â»29 ... i L/ ic*' 1 i - t:*7 47X M J .R.",9 5 _* ;8 / 1% N / / NAr 7\ 7 :--~,I/-1/ / \\ 3 - 4 \ Â¥ 11.i:.9 1-,U.A 1 ;F'=13 - --art-1~. 2/ vul,\ \ ANAW@ - ~ -041 . k 4%67- 1, - u \ 1-5..1 .- ~ , th Â·i Z 5 L17 _, r -rG-! 13 1 -4--Wt*w t-1 , lao OR i no i 1. 1 10 1 ~.i '.1 4,1/ t.../ \ 171-ITTÂ· -0=. 7 #A:404 : 4 ##A % \ \ V. 2 Â« l.,@C, 1 \ : , '.- 4 i 4-' -1 ----= -* b*f 14 1/ Â»\\ 3%<100 + .F '\ - - I UPPER LEVEL PLAM - WEST BUILDING AZ.5 1/84 - 1'0' ~JAV GUI 3019 xvjaWO}Â·61 0921-ZZG-OZE - rggle Â·03 Â·,get.umoug - pecow 10-g egotumoug 0921 3 1Â¥J â‚¬71*IV p/eLlineL-1 -r:urne-d 30-61-11 1 111111 lilli 111111111111 lili lill 1111111 111111111111 lili 05/14/2003 11:39A , SILVIA DAVIS PITKIN COUNTY CO R 101.00 D 0.00 482688 Page: 19 of 20 M -M 3&2 \ /:;FFIf, h . U 3. 0, -__ -I -- I- L:3GIEE,L/,WIA#A ek-9 r-~~,W ' .FRE,--_1 - Ygmi-Emilas *CE'~â‚¬-_ ...3-'342 -liES>IC=- _ --- a 62 E Â·r Â· rquist@1'51; 4..--1..--*4:Â·~---Â·44EEEiZZLEEZ - Â· .4 0%2 E. *.t.==-2 -6##42:,1 0 - -446.=wi~f-11 -1 2 M !2 u !, , liaÂ·4â‚¬i 1.11 - Â· Â· i rr--r 4 1 1, i , ~~1'72 J 1 -1 t. -1-1 ; J 1 1 1,1 1,1 1 1 11 11 1 ---4- . i i , i 11 . 1, 1 MORTH ELEVATION - WEST DUILPING <7 EAST ELEVATIOM - WEST DUILPIME c I ~-I.-I---I----.------I.----I..---=.-Ill-------'. C Z ~-I'.-I---'----I-.I-~------I---I-'---I-~ 1/8.-10' h 2 2 t 0 0 2 - AtÂ¥/iIA ---- - . f.m.1.,flk.. 1 1 1 k /21 / 0Â» N 54 L 36 4/ L ,Â¥b Â»Â« < 023 4 Ef to %2 1 . . ... . % Ef Fy:1-----------------. -=* + 4131~44*,4,1.,1 r=:-- Tf-,~~~I- 224=Z|:.4~~fl--TÂ·f 1-7-~--?il - - 1 -11 -:=-1-it-:ti. r,r'0'-'fÂ¥----1-,1.-..49~ Z go EEK.101/101EM~-==3-mb/*~-- -:' 1... 2 --- ~ --~.. ~-~i- -. r.-~-~EIÂ©IZLEEjbf:~.~J_.~Ugt=3-e~''f~ r ' ' IL~ T,1 Tl~ ~~'Ii,1 1 I,1 4 1 '1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 , 4 + Fl- Â¥r Â· 1 ' : I -1- / -.J 1 1 1 0 1 m - SOUTH ELEVATION - WEST DUILPIM<3 f-*\ WEST ELEVATIOM - WEST BUILPIrl(9 ~ l.3 AZ.6 PAV 3019 22#619241 WC)93 luole .1 pj,Ninew r:um..id /bles\OVEHEAJ-F ..Sumity OWNER CERTIFICATE ~~ BY THESE PRESENTS THAT CHARLES G PATERSQI BEING THE RECORD BOOML-ANG LODGE MINOR PLANNED UNIT DEVE.JPMENT THAT PART OF LOTS A B AND C LYING WORTHEaLY OF LINE 7-8 OF THE CITY IND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN lACCORDi NG TO THE 1978 RESURVEY BY THE BUREAU OF LAND WAWAGEMENT }. EXCEPT THE SOUTHERLY 20 REZONING TO R-15, MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, FEET THEREOF. AND THE NORTH 85 FEET OF LOTS D. AND E THE NORTH 80 FEET OF LOTS F. G AND H. AND THENORTH 50 FEET OF LOT l. BLOCK 32. CITY AND TOINSITE OF ASPEN. P ITI IN COUNTY. COLORADO WITH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND LODGE PRESERVATION BLOCK 25 BLOCK 31 3,8 ~0; ~~~5 'U,J[ 0 TRUE 1~4\S CER,[\F~~r~~~ ~S Â¥1041.10 ~E co,~S-[RUED '5 NA ..1.*Cl COLORADO DOES HEREBY REPLAT THIS REAL PROPERTY UNDEM THE NAME AND STYLE OF THE 4 1 4, ~ OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICTS. BOOAIERANG LODGE INOR PLANNED UANT DEVELOPMENT. CITY oF ASPEN. PITKI COUNTY COLORADO AND DOES HEREBY DEDICATE TO THE CITY OF ASPEN THE ELECTR)CAL AND CO~UNICAT ION EASEMENT AS SHOWN HEREON. EXECUTED THIS_ DAY OF -. 2002. â€¢5 R@ CHARLES G PATERSON. AS OVIâ‚¬R 1-9 Of (3 482688 STATE OF COLORADO I f Il 1 1 Illl111Illl lilli Ill1Ill Ill 05/14/2003 11:39A COUNTY 0% PITKIN ) Page: 20 of 20 THE FOREGOING OIER Â· S CERT i F ICATE WAS ACKNOILEDGED BEFORE VE THI S - DAY OF 2002 BY CHARLES G PITERSON AS OWNER. S.LV-A DAL I S PI-KIN COUN-Y Co R 10..00 D 0.00 MY COMMISSION ExPIRES WITNESS WY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL 2 NOTARY PUBLIC ~ MORTGAGEE S CERTIFICATE KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS THAT IESTSTAR BANK ASPEN COLORADO IS THE f.2 MORTGAGEE OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY AS EVIDENCED BY THAT DEED ~,f OF TRUST RECORDED AS RECEPTION NO. OF THE REAL ESTATE RECORDS e OF P I TK I N COUNTY. COLORADO HEREBY CONSENTS 10 THE RECORDING OF THJ 9 MAP EXECUTED TH!5 - DAY OF . 2002. j -4 JEFF TUHLI N.. /~NVERT 6 75 Â«52 f - - A 4~ STATE OF COLORADO) 2002 BY JEFF THULMAN OF WESTSTAR BANK ASPEN COLORADO AS MORTGAGEEI COUNTY OF P I TK 1 4 1 I ~ ~j,~ SCALE WY CO,NISSION EXPIRESÂ· THE FOREGOING MORTGAGEE' CERTIFICATE WAS ACKNOWLEDGED *EFORE VE THIS - DAY OF WITNESS WY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL \ INVEAT 7 0 --- ~ 4*Â«/4/19 \ Ck - v 1 INCH Â· 20 FEET NOTARY PUBLIC TITLE CERTIFICATE 2 1*,Drl 0 10 20 30 40 THE UNDERSIGNED. A DULY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTAT.VE OF P,TKIN COUNTY TITLE INC. ~| CONTOUR INTERVAL 152 FEET THE PERSONS ISTED AS OVIERS ON THIS PLAT DO HOLD FEE SIMPLE TITLE TO TIE WITHIN -= BLOCLAÂ» REGISTERED TO DO BUSINESS IN BITKIN COUNTY. COLORADO DOES HEREBY CENUY THAT RED CAP .-/ .-/ DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY FREE AND CLEAR OF ALL Li ENS AND ENCRUIBRANCES EXCEPT 24303 9 ' P B THOSE LISTED ON THE OWNER'S CERTIFICATE. ALTHOUGH ME BEL ]EVE THE FACTS STATED AVENUE OF TITLE NOR AN OPINION OF TITLE NOR A GUARANTEE OF TITLE IND / IS UNDERSÂ¥000 -+ 4 AND AGREED THAT LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY. NEITHER ASSUIES NOR WILL BE CHARGED I O RECâ„¢C r.,SA WITH ANY FINANCIAL 05.-IGATION OR LIABILITY WHATSOEVER ON ANY SIATEMENT 04 4 1 -+-- S 0 - 1 CONTAINED HEREIN. a harrn .2002. -12'.<--fÂ«er/4 30Â« 02 - 4 (30 - ; - Â· 4440 1 1 VINCE HIGENS. PRESIDENT PITKIN COUNTY TITLE. INC. 601 E. HOPKINS AVE BLOCK 39 8- 1 ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 8 STATE OF COLORADOJ GO Â¢ il - RED CAP i COUNTY OF PIKTIN 1 L-'41. 4. 1 1 2â€¢303 C / - DAY oF .2002 BY VINCE HIGEMS AS PRESIDENT OF PITKIN 1. Â· IHE FOREGOING TITLE CERTIFICATE WAS ACKNOWLEDGED BEFORE WE THIS - 0 / COUNTY TITLE. INC OG. \Â¥'TNES5 MY HAND AND OFFiCIAL SEAL 1 6 1.00. 1 4 / / MY CO- 1 351 ON EXPIRESÂ· U 8 93'.,. 1 1 "246:1:. '44 2 \\ 1 < NOTARY PUBLIC 8 19,737 2â€¢303 * ./Gul I i. DAVID â€¢. IcIRIDE. MERESY CERTIFY THAT IN JULI 199,9 A SURVEY WAS PERFORIED [35) _ 1.U~ [x') e YEL CAP 472 SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE NO. 446337 918. 3.41 658Â¤ 393 Ki> b . ) 1 CALC. AREA . UNDER W DIRECTION AND SUPERVISION OF THE HEREON DESCRIBED REAL PROPERTY. THE 0, f . 1,4.1.1 1 INVEAT 4 8 PRECISIONIS GREATER .THAN_ 6 to.000 WITH AN ACCURACY TO 000!OF AN ACRE AND Â£ 1 4,1 /3- 7 LOCATION AND DIVENSIONS OF rHE BOUNDARY LINES UTILITIES IIPROVEVENTS AND EASEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PITKIN COUNTY TITLE. INC. TITLE (04/ITMENT NO PCT-/386 , LI-'Af 30' 1 1 1 1 r / 34 1 1 \14 HÂ¥DNANTS i DATED #ILY 01 Iggl ARE ACCURATELY SHOWN ON THIS MAP THE CONTROL SURVEY THAT THE SURVEY Â¥14*'DONE INÂ·*COROANCE ITH CRS I 973 T. TLE 38 ARI ICLE 5 I AS Ahâ‚¬NDED FROM TI)* TO HIE. ' S IONED THIS 24 DAY $ _11CC--Â· 200 W I,AUA~ 31 G / ~ / 4,;. 35.;0 2,1 Â»23.1 j -/4 RE-' 5 Â»LOCK * Ni e . 1 [t<]8 ,-0 0 ie NI] '960% gig. O b -- /:t:?R \ fl~Z DAVIb W â€¢CURIDE 45 1.,20 - : el : 000 U D F~ =b . ,& gri] 090 u * 3 6 \C / //4 ASPEN SURVEY EN{}l NEERS. INC. 210 S GALENK #. Â· . . 73.1 ASPEN. CO. 816]f Â·Â·2 7,10 0$; 1 i.. I bul,A, RED CAP , 52FWe. .0 9 0. Â£7120.9 0. 0 Â£313.2 ME - 24303 -\ 0 â€¢ FLJOCI:1[~ 0 0 .,lnld, [13 PlIp.. [JUyt~ f[*Dell .5,02-/ 4- a. ' n\\1 . , 4 $ 2 .' I I. - â€¢aliet *M . A. 2 YELLOW tap e \; ~ i* f C I TY CO 6% C [1. AP PROVAL 2376 1, .AIN W YEL CAL.1 AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL Of THE CITY ASPEN ON TH 5 24,h DAY OF JULY * THIS PLAT OF THE BOOERANG LODGE MINOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT IAS REV IEVED cCEE,300300=99 ..[1~7' A.'#1[J t~0 2000 *10*DINANCE NO 20 SERIES oF 2000 AND RECORDED I RECEPTION No, 2376 -,Â»1 * 73.09 0 I 1-,mo m (ndE 3 2-174*om al? e --- ENT ' *00 ~~ ~ ~~t / REBAR / 11Â·. OF THE REAL ESTATE RECORDS OF P TK IN COUNTY. COLORADO SIGIED THIS - DAY OF -. 2002 ~\ Ytil>- ---- / '13 op 6.~,1...T~~ 0 0.0 9221 -Q[ilop \\ 7- - i HELEN KLANDEAUD. 11â€¢YOR KATHRYN S KOCH CITY CLERK : ATTEST .,21713:,0 409 Cit** PLLEY \ C Al,JTH 39 90 2 00 COR 4 ~4 &&... LOT 2 /k - \4~GO. j ~ CITY ENGINEER' S AP PROVAL .P ~ MARY B ~ LfNE BEARING DISTANCE VICINITY MAP * L / N 14'50Â·49-E 3 00Â· -HIS PLAT OF TME Bookâ‚¬RING LODGE INOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPIENT WAS REVIEWED L 2 S 14'50 49 I 5 00 AND APPROVED BY THE CITY ENGINEER OF THE CITY OF ASPEN THIS - DAY OF /- 7 . 2002 144 l 3 N 75'09Â·/1-â€¢ 6 40 ~\ SUBD ~ - '9 i CITY ENGINEER. NICK ADEH LEGEND & NOTES 'PC sEWER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL 237 N i MANHOLE 1 if - O FOUND SURVEY MONUIENT REIAR WITH CAP AS NOTED 121 62' ~4~24..t THIS PLAT OF THE IOOWERING LODGE WINOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WAS REVIEWED AND Â· APPROVED BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENâ€¢ OF rHE CITY OF INDEX ASPEN ON THIS - DAY OF . 2002. PITKIN COUNTY TITLE INC TITLE CO-ITIENT PCT-14386 & 1652/F DATED 07/01/1998 WAS USED IN THE PREPARATION OF TH15 PRIDE OF ASPEN SURVEY 1959 OFFICIAL WAP OF THE CITY OF ASPEN WAS USED FON THE MJNING CLAIM SHEET , CERTIFICATES. SURVEY. VICINITY MAP DIRECÂ¥OA. JULIE ANN WOODS SURVEY LOCATION OF THOSE PORTIONS OF THE PROPERTY LOCATED WITHIN THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN MET I PLOT PLAN BLDGS 1-6 5â€¢â€¢EEr 2A ELEIATIONS CHALETS 1-4 CLERK AND RECORDER'S ACCEPTANCE 180 APPROVED BLI SURVEY AND RESURVEY OF SECTION 12 TOWNSHIP 10 SOUTH. I RANGE 85 IEST ON FILE IN THE BLâ€¢ OFFICE AT GLENWOOD SPRINGS COLORADO I SHEET 3â€¢ COTTAGE 5 PLAN & ELE,ATIONS AND THE AUENDED INO RESTATED PLAT OF WARY B SUBDIVISION PLAT BOOK 30 AT 1 ACCEPTED FOR RECORDING IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK AND RECORDER OF PITK;N COUNTY. PAGE 6 â€¢ERE USED FOR THE 5UR VEY LOCATION OF THOSE PORTIONS OF SHEE1 4 FLOOR PLANS CHALETS 1-4 COLORADO AT - 0 CLOCK _.W ON THIS - DAY OF . 2002 1â€¢1 FLAT BOOK _ AT PAGE - AS RECEPTION NUMBER THE PROPERTY LOCATED / DITKIN COUNTY. ~~ SHEET 18 .OIER FLOOR PLAN BLDG 0 BASIS OF BEARINGS 11 klâ€¢'50 49-8 321 24Â· BET*EEN THE q CORNER SHEET 28 GROUND FLOOR P LAN B L DG 6 LOT I MARY I SUSD *REBAR W/ CAP 16129) AND THE SW W,TNESS CORNER OF LOT 1 WARY 8 SUID. IREIAR */ CAP 161291 j SHEET 30 SECOND FLOOR PLAN ILOG 8 CLERK AND RECORDER SILVIA DAVIS ~ AINHOLE ~ SHEET 48 ELEVATIONS NORTH & SOUTH BLDG 6 SHEET 5* ELEÂ¥ATIONS EAST & WEST BLDS. 6 PREPARED BY O SET CORNER NO 4 REBAR W/ RED CAP 16129 SHEET SA ROOF PLAN BLDG. 6 ASPEN SURVEY ENGINEERS. INC. Â® WATE, VALVE : 2 IO S. GALENA STREET P.0 BOX 2506 ACCOWINe To Cole'ADO La Â¥011 â€¢IUST Co,IKE ANY LEGAL ACTION Â· ASPEN. COLO. 8l6tl -SED .ON â€¢MY DEFICT 14 .,1 ... THIN THIE' YEAR, ..â€¢ VOU PHONE/FAX (970) 925-3810 F I.ST DISCOVE'ED WO4 DiVECT IN NO EVENT. -I ./ ACTION -Sco .0* ANÂ¥ *PECT IN -1$ PLAT . COD...D WORE ... TEN YEARS F.. THE DATE . 'WE CERTIFICATI.. ./. ME.ON JO@ NO 291970 DEC. 10. 2000 SHEET I OF 11 REVISED JAN 0 2002 FI FTH 2 1 62 - - ~ 4 1-1 I G i T Et> Â« 927 ' DEVELOPMENT ORDER ofthe City of Aspen Community Development Department This Development Order, hereinafter "Order", is hereby issued pursuant to Section 26.304.070, "Development Orders", and Section 26.308.010, "Vested Property Rights", of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. This Order allows development of a site specific development plan pursuant to the provisions of the land use approvals, described herein. The effective date of this Order shall also be the initiation date of a three-year vested property right. The vested property right shall expire on the day after the third anniversary of the effective date of this Order, unless a building permit is approved pursuant to Section 26.304.075, or unless an exemption, extension, reinstatement, or a revocation is issued by City Council pursuant to Section 26.308.010. After Expiration of vested property rights, this Order shall remain in full force and effect, excluding any growth management allotments granted pursuant to Section 26.470, but shall be subject to any amendments to the Land Use Code adopted since the effective date of this Order. This Development Order is associated with the property noted below for the site specific development plan as described below. Charlie and Fonda Patterson, 1104 E. Waters Ave., Aspen, CO 81611 Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address and telephone number Lots A- 1, Block 32, City and Townsite of Aspen Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property Planned Unit Development Approval Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan City Council Ordinance #20-2000 Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) August 5,2000 Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) August 6,2003 Expiration Date of Development Order (The extension, reinstatement, exemption from expiration and revocation may be pursued in accordance with Section 26.308.010 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code.) Issued this 5th day of August, 2000, by the City of Aspen Community Deyflopment DirectorÂ· C 41- Â»00-Gb-- Ju~ Ann Woods, Community Development Director - PUBLIC NOTICE Of DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL 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 the Land Use Code of the City of Aspen and Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following described property: Lots A-I, Block 32, of the City and Townsite of Aspen, by ordinance of the City Council numbered 20, series of 2000. For further information contact Julie Ann Woods, at the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Dept. 130 S. Galena St, Aspen, Colorado (970) 920-5090. s/City of Aspen Publish in The Aspen Times on August 5,2000 ORDINANCE N0. 20 (SERIES OF 2000) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE BOOMERANG LODGE MINOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, REZONING TO R-15, MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, WITH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND LODGE PRESERVATION OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICTS, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No. 2735-124-66-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Charles and Fonda Patterson, owners, represented by Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, LLC, and Haas Land Planning, LLC, for Conditional Use approval for affordable housing. Growth Management Quota System (GMCÂ¤) Exemptions for lodge preservation and affordable housing, a Minor Planned Unit Development (PUD), Rezoning to Moderate Density Residential, R-15, with Planned Unit Development and Lodge Preservation Overlay Zone Districts for a property consisting of portions of Lots A-I, Block 32, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is approximately 19,287 square feet, and is located in the R-15 Zone District; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.310 0 f the Land Use Code, the City Council may approve Amendments to the Official Zone District Map, during a duly noticed public hearing after taking and considering comments from the general public, and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission, Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445, the City Council may approve a Planned Unit Development, during a duly noticed public hearing after taking and considering comments from the general public. and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission, Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommended approval of the Minor PUD, finding that the site design better addresses on-site parking and neighborhood compatibility; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 6,2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 29, Series of 2000. by a five to zero (5-0) vote, approving a conditional use for affordable housing and GMQS Exemptions for lodge preservation and affordable housing, and recommending City Council approve the Boomerang Lodge Minor PUD and Rezoning to R-15/PUD/LP; and. WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.100.104 - Definitions, the definition of a lodge is the following: "Same as hotel, except that lodges in the Lodge Preservation Overlay 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 446356 08/24/2000 09:57A ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 1 of 8 R 40.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO District must be available for overnight lodging by the general public on a short-term basis for at least six months of each calendar year, and may have kitchens within individual lodge rooms"; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen/Pitkin County Community Development Department issued a Land Use Code Interpretation ofthe term ;'general public" as used in the definition of lodge, which states that the term does not allow for an owner of a lodge unit to perpetually occupy the unit; and that the requirements for a lodge apply uniformly to alllodge units within a lodge and each lodge must conform to the lodge provisions, unless the use of that specific unit has been appropriately approved for another land use; and. WHEREAS, on February 14,2000, at a duly noticed public hearing, City Council upheld this Land Use Code Interpretation; and, WHEREAS, the applicant voluntarily desires to deed restrict the two (2) affordable housing units to restrict the amount of rent that can be charged consistent with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Housing Guidelines ; and, WHEREAS, the Colorado Supreme Court in the case entitled Town of Telluride v. Lot Thirtv-Four Venture L.L.C. (case No. 98-5C-547, decided June 5,2000) held that Section 38-12-301, C.R.S., prohibits the enactment of an ordinance that imposes rent controls; and, WHEREAS, Section 38-12-301, C.R.S., states that the rent control statute is not intended to impair the right of a municipality to manage and control any property in which it has an interest through a housing authority; and, WHEREAS, the applicant desires to grant to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority an interest in the property subject to the terms and conditions contained herein; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority has consented to accepting an interest in the property on conditions that it be indemnified and held harmless from any claims, liability, fees or similar charges related to ownership of an interest in the property; 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 Planning and Zoning Commission, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Board, the Community Development Director, 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, 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 446356 08/24/2000 09:57A ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 2 of 8 R 40.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 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 TIIE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code. the Boomerang Lodge property, Parcel Number 2735-124-66-001, shall be rezoned from R-15 to R-15 with Planned Unit Development and Lodge Preservation Overlay Zone Districts. Section 2 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Boomerang Lodge Minor PUD is approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. A PUD Agreement shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval by City Council and shall include the following: a. The information required to be included in a PUD Agreement, pursuant to Section 26.445.070(C). 2. A Final PUD PIan shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval granted by City Council and shall include: a. A final plat meeting the requirements o f the City Engineer and showing easements, encroachment agreements and licenses with reception numbers for physical improvements, and location o f utility pedestals. b. An illustrative site plan of the project showing the proposed improvements, landscaping. parking, and the dimensional requirements as approved. c. A drawing representing the project' s architectural character. d. A drawing showing the phase 2 under ground parking garage location, and a plan showing a temporary on-site parking area for three (3) automobiles screened on all sides except the access by landscaping approved by the Community Development Department. The Applicant shall eliminate the three (3) on-site parking spaces proposed to be accessed from West Hopkins Avenue. Because the below grade parking garage extends to the lot lines beyond the building footprints, the plan shalI show landscaping in the space between the buildings and the lot lines. 3. Within 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for a building permit, the applicant shall record a PUD Agreement and the Final PUD Plans with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder binding this property to this development approval. a. A completed curb, gutter, and sidewalk agreement, if necessary. 111111111111111111 lilli 111111 lilli lilli 111 lilli 1111 lili 446356 08/24/2000 09:57A ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 3 of 8 R 40.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 3 b. A completed agreement to join any future improvement districts formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in adjacent public rights-of-way. 4. The following dimensional requirements of the PUD are approved and shall be printed on the Final Illustrative Plan: a. Minimum Lot Size. 15,000 square feet. b. Minimum Lot Area per dwelling. No requirement c. Maximum Allowable Density. 1 lodge or dwelling bedroom per 1,000 square feet of lot area. d. Minimum Lot Width. 75 feet. e. Minimum Front Yard. 10 feet. f. Minimum Side Yard. 10 feet. g. Minimum Rear Yard. As shown on Final PUD Plans. h. Maximum Site Coverage. 35 percent. i. Maximum Height. 25 feet. j. Minimum Distance Between Buildings. 14 feet. k. Minimum Percent Open Space. 55 percent. 1. Trash Access Area. As shown on Final PUD Plans. m. Allowable Floor Area Ratio. The Applicant shall provide an accurate floor area ratio for the purposes of recordation. n. Minimum Off-Street Parking. As shown on Final PUD Plans (not less than 10 spaces). 5. The building permit application shall include: a. A copy o f the final Ordinance and recorded P&Z Resolution. b. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. c. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. d. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval from the Parks Department Director for off-site replacement or mitigation of removed trees. e. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado 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 2-year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 446356 08/24/2000 09:57A ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 4 of 8 R 40.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 6. The building permit plans shall demonstrate an adequate fire sprinkler system and alarm system for the new buildings, in the event required by the Aspen Fire Marshal. 7. Prior to issuance o f a building permit: a. The primary contractor shall submit a letter to the Community Development Director stating that the conditions o f approval have been read and understood. b. All tap fees, impacts fees, and building permit fees shall be paid. I f an alternative agreement to delay payment of the Water Tap and/or Parks Impact fee is finalized. those fees shall be payable according to the agreement. c. The applicant shall submit a detailed landscape plan to the Community Development Department showing the size, species, quantity, and location of all existing and planned native vegetation on the site. The landscape plan shall show: 1) The size, species, quantity and location of planned vegetation surrounding the temporary parking area. 2) The size, species, quantity and location of vegetation between the affordable housing and lodge condominium building and the lot line above the sub-grade parking garage. 3) A green strip to include street trees, and a separated sidewalk/concrete path along the front of the Applicant' s property which shall be constructed at such time deemed appropriate by the City Engineer. The final landscape plan shall be approved by the Community Development Director after considering a recommendation by the Parks Department and City Engineer. The Applicant shall contact the City Forester regarding the correct seed mix for replanting disturbed areas with native species. 8. No excavation or storage of dirt or material shall occur within tree driplines or outside of the approved building envelope and access envelope. 9. AlI construction vehicles, materials, and debris shall be maintained on-site and not within public rights-o f-way unless specifically approved by the Director of the Streets Department. 10. The applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. 11. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction. 12. All uses and construction shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code as they pertain to utilities. 13. The Applicant or owner shall mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 446356 08/24/2000 09:57A ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 5 of 8 R 40.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 14. A fugitive dust control permit will be required during construction. 15. Slope stabilization, erosion control, and sediment control measures need to be implemented before, during, and after construction. 16. The Parks Department shall approve the location ofthe proposed sidewalk to ensure that it does not conflict with future trail plans in the area. 17. Construction of the affordable housing units shall begin no later than 36 months after the completion of the three (3) chalets on the eastern portion of the lot. Pursuant to Section 26.445.050(J) Planned Unit Development - Phasing o f Development Plan, prior to the issuance of building permits for the first phase, the Applicant shall provide a promissory note secured by a Deed of Trust in the property in a form acceptable to the City Attorney to the City for .88 of an employee generated by the first phase at the Category 3 level at the then current Aspen/Pitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines, subject to termination upon complete provision of on-site mitigation for phase 2. The Deed o f Trust shall be subordinated to the existing debt and any construction loan(s). All conditions in this ordinance shall be memorialized in the Final Plat and Planned Unit Development Agreement. 18. The Applicant shall convey an undivided fractional interest in the ownership of the property to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority for the purposes of complying with the recent Colorado Supreme Court Decision regarding rent control legislation. The Applicant may submit an alternative option to satisfy the rent control , issue acceptable to the City Attorney. 19. The Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority and City o f Aspen from any claims, liability, fees or similar charges related to ownership of an interest in the property. 20. Prior to phase 2 and prior to the building permit being issued, the Applicant shall record a deed restriction for the affordable housing units, and grant the undivided fractional interest in the ownership of the affordable housing units to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. 21. Each Boomerang lodge unit shall conform to the provisions of Section 26.100.104- Definitions. Lodge, and any change in the lodge' s operations must be reviewed, approved, and mitigated for (employee generation) pursuant to the then current Land Use Code and Aspen/Pitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines. 22. Signs shall be posted inside the parking garage warning drivers to watch for pedestrian and bicycle traffic upon exiting the garage, and directing drivers to use Main Street instead of West Hopkins Avenue. 23. There shall be no sale of the property in whole without a concurrent sale o f the Boomerang Lodge to a single purchaser. Nothing herein shall preclude the Applicant 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 446356 08/24/2000 09:57A ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 6 of 8 R 40.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO from applying for condominiumization or the sale of fractional interests in the property. Notwithstanding any other provision o f this Ordinance, the bulk sale of the property for estate planning purposes shall be permitted. Section 3: 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 4: 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. Section 5: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution 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. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council ofthe City ofAspen on the 12th day of June, 2000. Attest: *1 Of 4, U â€¢. 4 + Â« 1 464 41"16 0 t. . -- Kathryn S#och, efity Clerk Rachel Richards, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 24th day of July, 2000. Attest: 4 04 4 f 44 9.Â«f~ #0037Â£4Â£0- i Sca@hutnb.*ch, Ci# Clerk - ~achel Richards, Mayor\ 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 446356 08/24/2000 09:57A ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 7 of 8 R 40.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO cri .A / Approved as to form: j h ,â€¢ , k'42- 1422L22.-24 John *vorcestor, City Attorney C:Viome\nick!\Active Cases\Boomerang\Ordinance.doc 1111111111111111111111111111111111mill'111111111111111 446356 08/24/2000 09:579 ORDINANC DAVIS SILVI 8 of 8 R 40.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO MEMORANDUM 4\\ a. TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager John Worcester, City Attorney GillÂ« . Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director 'Â· ~r K Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director FROM: Nick Lelack, Planner 1~~0/ RE: Boomerang Lodge Expansion - Rezoning & Minor Planned Unit Development - 2nd Reading/Public Hearing DATE: July 24,2000 *F . - .M. Main St. . 00. . t. Â« Al# -- 4 . . f # 4/.i. I Â· Christiania Boomerang -Ull 4 ,: 2, f di.*-DU Lodge Lodge A.(**& 27-."/A â€¢* 4- - 'i ~. -it- 1- 1.9- 8*xx .. ,/9/4-- '-41-" 14Â£611.4,/8/&2"6/.--/ ' 4 ni r 4/F",4,""' D I . ' 2, Â«41 .....: --...... Proposed ,-â€ž-'.L.1.35 â€¢~A 4- W.Hopkins 4. Boomerang ... p :5 A#Illfilr1111*d ~ 4 Lodge ymi 2 A *: ; .&7747*7/71/ELE r .1. 1 .Â«M:ym~Al-, i.- APPLICANT: SUMMARY: Charles & Fonda Patterson The purpose ofthis application is to expand the Boomerang Lodge across W. Hopkins to a vacant lot. Specifically, the REPRESENTATIVE: Applicant proposes to add five (5) chalets, two 1-bedroom lodge rooms, two 1-bedroom affordable housing units, and a Sunny Vann bathhouse. On June 6, the Planning and Zoning Commission Mitch Haas voted 5-0 to approve the project with conditions. CURRENT ZONING: LOT SIZE: CURRENT LAND USE: R-15 19,287 sq. ft. Vacant PROPOSED ZONING: PROPOSED FAR: PROPOSED LAND USE: R-15 with PUD & Lodge 12,060 sq. ft. Lodge & AH Preservation Overlay Zone Districts 1 REVIEW PROCEDURE, REQUEST, & Acl'ION â€¢ Rezoning & Minor Planned Unit Development Reviews: The Planning and Zoning Commission shall by resolution recommend City Council approve, approve with conditions, or deny the rezoning and Minor Planned Unit Development requests. Requests: (1) Rezoning from Moderate Density Residential, R-15, to R-15 with Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlays. (2) Minor Planned Unit Development to establish dimensional and parking requirements for the site. Action: City Council unanimously approved the rezoning and PUD requests on First Reading with the recommendation that the Applicant provide on-site parking spaces. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend City Council approve the rezoning and PUD requests with the recommendation that five (5) on-site parking spaces be provided, and that two (2) of the 5 spaces be designated for the ALI units. â€¢ GMOS Exemptions - Lodge Preservation & Affordable Housing: The Plandng and Zoning Commission shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application for GMQS Exemptions for a lodge preservation application and/or an affordable housing application after considering a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority on lodge preservation applications. Request: Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) exemptions from scoring and competition for two (2) affordable housing allotments, and seven (7) Lodge Preservation - Tourist Accommodations allotments. Action: On April 19, the Housing Authority recommended the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the exemptions. On June 6, the Commission approved GMQS exemptions for lodge preservation and AH by a vote of 5-0. Council should be aware that the Housing Authority recommended, and the Planning and Zoning Commission approved in its resolution, a condition that the construction of the affordable housing units shall begin no later than 36 months after the completion of the three (3) chalets on the eastern portion of the lot. Council can review the project's proposed phasing under the PUD criteria, if they have concerns over this issue. â€¢ Conditional Use: The Planning and Zoning Commission shall by resolution approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for a conditional use. Request: The Lodge Preservation Overlay District allows affordable housing for employees of the lodge; conditional use is required to allow non-lodge workers to live in the affordable housing units. Action: The Commission voted 5-0 to approve the Conditional Use. 2 STAFF COMMENTS: Charles and Fonda Patterson (Applicant), represented by Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, LLC, and Mitch Haas of Haas Land Planning, LLC, have submitted an application to expand the Boomerang Lodge across West Hopkins Avenue to a vacant parcel. Specifically, the Applicant is requesting approval to construct six structures on the lot to include: 1. Five (5) chalets. Each chalet would consist of 3 bedrooms 3.5 bathrooms, and approximately 2,180 .. . i square feet of total area . 60 .......1 ;.Â¥. (1,610 square feet of floor ./ *.1 1. Â¥ ..,4.7. 1 . 4 .1 '.....J-4 ... lut... â‚¬'. ..,f area). & :1 i :AÂ· I , I. 5 0 Â£~ 1Â¥ . Miiae,<RA/.fira .1,1, .â‚¬ i -4 Â£ 72 : 2. Two (2) 1-bedroom lodge units. Each unit would be .*C. #t.=.' . I .... ..i--1 about 960 square feet. 3. Two (2) affordable 1 ' 4 - ... I ....': housing units. Each unit would consist of about 700 - square feet. 4. A bathhouse for guest use. - This photo shows the stub of 4th St. with the subject - property located to the right at the bottom of the mountain. The 4th St. stub serves as a trail head for The 1 -bedroom lodge units, the trail behind the property and up the mountain. affordable housing units, and bathhouse would be constructed in one building. In total, the project would add 17 lodge bedrooms in seven (7) lodge units, and two (2) affordable housing units. Community Development Staff believes the spirit and intent of the proposed project meets the goals of the lodge preservation and affordable housing programs. The Aspen Area Community Plan calls for increasing the lodge accommodations and affordable housing units in town. Staff also appreciates the proposal to maintain the site in its natural condition to the greatest extent possible, to connect each chalet to a new sidewalk with a pedestrian path, as well as to limit the measured height to 23 feet for the chalets, and 25 feet for the lodge/bathhouse/AH building. In addition, Staff supports the proposed PUD dimensions, including density, floor area ratio, setbacks, open space, height, etc. Staff believes the proposed lodge expansion and affordable housing units are appropriate for this lot in this neighborhood. Since the First Reading, the Applicant has revised his site plan again to address the parking issue. In his latest proposal, the Applicant proposes to provide a 10-12-car underground parking garage beneath the second phase affordable housing and 1 -bedroom lodge units building. In addition, he is suggesting that the proposed parking along 4th Street be eliminated, but continues to provide three (3) head-in parking spaces along West Hopkins. Staff agrees that the parking garage will address all of the lodge's parking needs into the future. However, this proposal is part of phase 2. Staff is pleased to see 3 the elimination of the 4th Street parking, which could have impaired access to the trailhead. We continue to be concerned about parking along West Hopkins Avenue. Staff recommends as an alternative, and the Applicant agrees, a temporary, on-site surface parking area be located where the affordable housing units will be located in the future. This would eliminate the need for all except one curb cut along West Hopkins. Staff recommends and the Applicant agrees that this temporary parking area will be screened by landscaping. When phase 2 begins, parking could temporarily be shifted across the street or provided on-street until the garage is completed. The following discussion addresses issues related to the streetscape, GMQS Exemptions, the phasing of development and covenants placed on the property by the previous owner. 1) Streetscape Staff recommends the streetscape along the front of the subject property be developed similar to the traditional Aspen street improvement pattern. Specifically, this includes a curb and gutter next to the edge of the existing pavement, a green strip to include street trees approved by the Parks Department (which would also serve as snow storage), and a separated sidewalk/concrete path along the front of the Applicant' s property. Staff recommends that this development occur in phase 1. 2) Building Placement Staff continues to recommend that the chalet units have a consistent building line and that they should parallel West Hopkins Avenue. It should be noted that the Planning and Zoning Commission did not indicate any concerns over the proposed building orientation o f the chalets. 3) GMQS Exemptions Applications to increase the number of lodge units and the number of affordable housing units are subject to employee housing mitigation requirements pursuant to Section 26.470 of the Land Use Code pertaining to lodge preservation and affordable housing exemptions. The Planning and Zoning Commission is charged with determining whether an applicant is proposing to provide adequate employee housing to mitigate for the increased number of workers generated by a lodge preservation development - in this case an expansion - after considering a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The Commission approved the provision of two (2) 1-bedroom affordable housing units, which would provide affordable housing mitigation for 3.5 employees (1.75 per unit). On April 19, the Housing Authority recommended the Planning and Zoning Commission approve this level of mitigation for the lodge expansion. Detailed Housing Authority and Staff referral comments are included in Exhibit B. Due to the recent Colorado Supreme Court decision on the Telluride case, Staff is concerned that the rental caps proposed may be unenforceable, thus not ensuring perpetual affordable units. This issue was not discussed during the Planning and Zoning 4 Commission public hearing as Staff was not fully aware of the Court decision at that time. However, Staff and the Applicant have agreed, subject to City Council's approval, that the Applicant shall grant to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority a fractional interest in the property on the condition that the Authority be indemnified and held harmless from any claims, liability, fees or similar charges related to ownership of an interest in the property. This provision is included in the Ordinance as Conditions 17- 18. 3) Phasing of Development Two phases of the development are proposed. Phase one is proposed to consist of 1 building the three chalets at the easterly portion of the lot - next to the 4tll Street stub. Phase two is proposed to consist of the other two chalets and lodge/bathhouse/AH building. The reason for the separate phases is critical for the Applicant to finance the project. The Housing Authority recommended a condition of approval that the affordable housing units must be started no later than 36 months after the completion of Phase 1. Staff is concerned that there is no financial security guaranteeing the two affordable housing units will ever be built. Staff proposes Condition 16 to address this issue. which states: Construction of the affordable housing units shall begin no later than 36 months after the completion of the three (3) chalets on the eastern portion of the lot. Pursuant to Section 26.445.050(J) Planned Unit Development - Phasing of Development Plan, prior to the issuance of building permits for the first phase, the Applicant shall provide a cash-in-lieu payment to the City for the fractional employee generated by the first phase at the Category 3 level at the then current Aspen/Pitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines, subject to refund upon complete provision of on-site mitigation for phase 2. All conditions in this ordinance shall be memorialized in the Final Plat and Planned Unit Development Agreement. 4) Covenants During the First Reading on the proposed development, John Batty, representing Mary Hugh Scott, the previous owner of the subject property, argued that the project does not comply with covenants she placed on the property as part of the contract to sell the lot to the Applicant. Staff requested a copy of the covenants from the Applicant to help City Council better understand the history of the property. The Applicant declined to provide the covenants to Staff, stating that the Applicant will be prepared to answer any questions from Council on this matter during the public hearing. The Applicant does not want the private real estate contract to become part of the public record. RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes the Applicant has made an effort to better address the parking concerns. Although Staff continues to believe the buildings should be sited parallel 5 to West Hopkins Avenue, the proposed layout without head-in parking can work, provided a temporary parking area is provided on-site. Staff recommends approval of the project with conditions. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No. ~ Series of 2000." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B -- Referral Agency Comments (thl, C LTY 6-LEI24<b d>ppicat Exhibit C -- Letters Exhibit D -- Code Interpretation - Definitions for the term "general public" as it relates to lodges Exhibit E -- Revised Site Plan C:\home\nicki\Active Cases\Boomerang\Boomerang CC public hearing.doc 6 ORDINANCE N0. ~ (SERIES OF 2000) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE BOOMERANG LODGE MINOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, REZONING TO R-15, MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, WITH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND LODGE PRESERVATION OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICTS, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No. 2735-124-66-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Charles and Fonda Patterson, owners, represented by Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, LLC, and LIaas Land Planning, LLC, for Conditional Use approval for affordable housing, Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemptions for lodge preservation and affordable housing, a Minor Planned Unit Development (PUD), Rezoning to Moderate Density Residential, R-15, with Planned Unit Development and Lodge Preservation Overlay Zone Districts for a property consisting of portions of Lots A-I, Block 32, City and Townsite ofAspen; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is approximately 19,287 square feet, and is located in the R-15 Zone District; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.310 of the Land Use Code, the City Council may approve Amendments to the Official Zone District Map, during a duly noticed public hearing after taking and considering comments from the general public, and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission, Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445, the City Council may approve a Planned Unit Development, during a duly noticed public hearing after taking and considering comments from the general public, and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission, Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommended approval of the Minor PUD, finding that the site design better addresses on-site parking and neighborhood compatibility; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 6,2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 29, Series of 2000, by a five to zero (5-0) vote, approving a conditional use for affordable housing and GMQS Exemptions for lodge preservation and affordable housing, and recommending City Council approve the Boomerang Lodge Minor PUD and Rezoning to R-15/PUD/LP; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.100.104 - Definitions, the definition of a lodge is the following: "Same as hotel, except that lodges in the Lodge Preservation Overlay District must be available for overnight lodging by the general public on a short-term basis for at least six months of each calendar year, and may have kitchens within individual lodge rooms"; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen/Pitkin County Community Development Department issued a Land Use Code Interpretation of the term "general public" as used in the definition of lodge, which states that the term does not allow for an owner of a lodge unit to perpetually occupy the unit; and that the requirements for a lodge apply uniformly to all lodge units within a lodge and each lodge must conform to the lodge provisions, unless the use of that specific unit has been appropriately approved for another land use; and, WHEREAS, on February 14,2000, at a duly noticed public hearing, City Council upheld this Land Use Code Interpretation; and, WHEREAS, the applicant voluntarily desires to deed restrict the two (2) affordable housing units to restrict the amount of rent that can be charged consistent with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Housing Guidelines ; and, WHEREAS, the Colorado Supreme Court in the case entitled Town of Telluride v. Lot Thirty-Four Venture L.L.C. (case No. 98-5C-547, decided June 5,2000) held that Section 38-12-301, C.R.S., prohibits the enactment of an ordinance that imposes rent controls; and, WHEREAS, Section 38-12-301, C.R.S., states that the rent control statute is not intended to impair the right of a municipality to manage and control any property in which it has an interest through a housing authority; and, WHEREAS, the applicant desires to grant to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority an interest in the property; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority has consented to accepting an interest in the property on conditions that it be indemnified and held harmless from any claims, liability, fees or similar charges related to ownership of an interest in the property; 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 Planning and Zoning Commission, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Board, the Community Development Director, 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: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Boomerang Lodge property, Parcel Number 2735-124-66-001, shall be rezoned from R-15 to R-15 with Planned Unit Development and Lodge Preservation Overlay Zone Districts. 4 Section 2 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Boomerang Lodge Minor PUD is approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. A PUD Agreement shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval by City Council and shall include the following: a. The information required to be included in a PUD Agreement, pursuant to Section 26.445.070(C). 2. A Final PUD Plan shall be recorded within 180 days ofthe final approval granted by City Council and shall include: a. A final plat meeting the requirements of the City Engineer and showing easements, encroachment agreements and licenses with reception numbers for physical improvements, and location of utility pedestals. b. An illustrative site plan of the project showing the proposed improvements, landscaping, parking, and the dimensional requirements as approved. c. A drawing representing the project's architectural character. d. A drawing showing the phase 2 under ground parking garage location, and a plan showing a temporary on-site parking area for three (3) automobiles screened on all sides except the access by landscaping approved by the Parks Department and eliminate all other on-site parking. Because the below grade parking garage extends to the lot lines beyond the building footprints, the plan shall show landscaping in the space between the buildings and the lot lines. 3. Within 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for a building permit, the applicant shall record a PUD Agreement and the Final PUD Plans with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder binding this property to this development approval. This agreement shall reference the applicant's desire to convey to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority interest in the property and that such conveyance shall take place on or before the application for building permits. Failure to affirm the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority interest in the property shall render the approval null and void. The agreement shall indemnify and hold harmless the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority from any claims, liability, fees or similar charges related to ownership of an interest in the property. 4. The following dimensional requirements of the PUD are approved and shall be printed on the Final Illustrative Plan: a. Minimum Lot Size. 15,000 square feet. b. Minimum Lot Area per dwelling. No requirement c. Maximum Allowable Density. 1 lodge or dwelling bedroom per 1,000 square feet of lot area. d. Minimum Lot Width. 75 feet. e. Minimum Front Yard. 10 feet. f. Minimum Side Yard. 10 feet. g. Minimum Rear Yard. As shown on Final PUD Plans. h. Maximum Site Coverage. 35 percent. i. Maximum Height. 23 feet for the west end building, and 25 feet for the chalets. j. Minimum Distance Between Buildings. 14 feet. k. Minimum Percent Open Space. 55 percent. 1. Trash Access Area. As shown on Final PUD Plans. m. Allowable Floor Area Ratio. 12,060 square feet. n. Minimum Off-Street Parking. 5 spaces, 2 of which shall be designated for the affordable housing units. 5. The building permit application shall include: a. A copy of the final Ordinance and recorded P&Z Resolution. b. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. c. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. d. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval from the Parks Department Director for off-site replacement or mitigation of removed trees. e. A completed curb, gutter, and sidewalk agreement, if necessary. f. A completed agreement to join any future improvement districts formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in adjacent public rights-of-way. e. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado 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 2-year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. 5. The building permit plans shall demonstrate an adequate fire sprinkler system and alarm system for the new buildings. 6. Prior to issuance of a building permit: a. The primary contractor shall submit a letter to the Community Development Director stating that the conditions of approval have been read and understood. b. All tap fees, impacts fees, and building permit fees shall be paid. If an alternative agreement to delay payment of the Water Tap and/or Parks Impact fee is finalized, those fees shall be payable according to the agreement. c. The applicant shall submit a detailed landscape plan to the Community Development Department showing the size, species, quantity, and location of all existing and planned native vegetation on the site. The landscape plan shall show: 1) The size, species, quantity and location of planned vegetation surrounding the temporary parking area. 2) The size, species, quantity and location of vegetation between the affordable housing and lodge condominium building and the lot line above the sub-grade parking garage. 3) The curb and gutter next to the edge of the existing pavement on West Hopkins Avenue, a green strip to include street trees, and a separated sidewalk/concrete path along the front of the Applicant' s property. The final landscape plan shall be approved by the Community Development Director after considering a recommendation by the Parks Department and City Engineer. The Applicant shall contact the City Forester regarding the correct seed mix for replanting disturbed areas with native species. 7. No excavation or storage of dirt or material shall occur within tree driplines or outside of the approved building envelope and access envelope. 8. All construction vehicles, materials, and debris shall be maintained on-site and not within public rights-of-way unless specifically approved by the Director of the Streets Department. 9. The applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. 10. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction. 11. All uses and construction shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code as they pertain to utilities. 12. The Applicant or owner shall mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. 13. A fugitive dust control permit will be required during construction. 14. Slope stabilization, erosion control, and sediment control measures need to be implemented before, during, and after construction. 15. The Parks Department shall approve the location of the proposed sidewalk to ensure that it does not conflict with future trail plans in the area. 16. Construction of the affordable housing units shall begin no later than 36 months after the completion of the three (3) chalets on the eastern portion of the lot. Pursuant to Section 26.445.050(J) Planned Unit Development - Phasing of Development Plan, prior to the issuance of building permits for the first phase, the Applicant shall provide a cash-in-lieu payment to the City for the fractional employee generated by the first phase at the Category 3 level at the then current Aspen/Pitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines, subject to refund upon complete provision of on-site mitigation for phase 2. All conditions in this ordinance shall be memorialized in the Final PIat and Planned Unit Development Agreement. 17. The Applicant shall convey an undivided fractional interest in the ownership of the two affordable housing units to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority for the purposes of complying with the recent Colorado Supreme Court Decision regarding rent control legislation. The Applicant may submit an alternative option to satisfy the rent control issue acceptable to the City Attorney. 18. The Applicant shall indemnify and hold harmless the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority and City of Aspen from any claims, liability, fees or similar charges related to ownership of an interest in the property. 19. Prior to phase 2 and prior to the building permit being issued, the Applicant shall record a deed restriction for the affordable housing units, and grant the undivided fractional interest in the ownership of the affordable housing units to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. 20. Each Boomerang lodge unit shall conform to the provisions of Section 26.100.104 - Definitions, Lodge, and any change in the lodge's operations must be reviewed, approved, and mitigated for (employee generation) pursuant to the then current Land Use Code and Aspen/Pitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines. Section 3: 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 4: 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. Section 5: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution 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 o f the remaining portions thereo f. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 12th day of June, 2000. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Rachel Richards, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 24th day of July, 2000. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Rachel Richards, Mayor Approved as to form: John Worcestor, City Attorney C:\home\nicki\Active Cases\Boomerang\Ordinance.doc EXHIBIT A BOOMERANG LODGE EXPANSION REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS Section 26.310.020, Standards Applicable to Amendments to the Official Zone District Map In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. Staff Finding: This application requests to rezone from R-15, Moderate Density Residential, to R-15 with Planned Unit Development and Lodge Preservation Overlays. Rezoning is required to allow the lodge use on the site and the PUD allows the Applicant to establish dimensional requirements for the new lodge and affordable housing units on the site. Staff does not believe rezoning this parcel would be in conflict with any portions of this title. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with ali elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding: Staff believes rezoning the parcel will not conflict with the AACP. The AACP encourages maintaining the community' s lodging base, increasing the number of affordable housing units, and locating development within the Aspen Community Growth Boundary and close to transit. Rezoning this parcel to include PUD and LP Overlays will allow the Boomerang Lodge to expand its operations and provide affordable housing to its employees or qualified local workers, thereby fulfilling several AACP goals and objectives. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Finding: Staff believes the proposed rezoning is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses. The site is located across the street from the existing Boomerang Lodge, and near the Christiania Lodge, L'Auberge (lodge), detached single family homes, duplexes and multi-family residential buildings, recreation areas, and Main Street. Zone districts within about a three-block radius include R-6, R-15, Park, LP Overlay, PUD Overlay, and Office. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Staff Finding: Rezoning the property would increase the intensity of the uses allowed from one single family residence to multiple lodge and affordable housing units. If developed as proposed under the R-15/LP/PUD, traffic generation will increase in the neighborhood as well as road safety issues. A single family residence in Aspen generates between 5 and 10 automobile trips per day. According to the application, Jay Hammond, P.E. evaluated potential traffic generation caused by the Boomerang expansion. Mr. Hammond believes that the developed site under the proposed zoning could generate up to fifty-three (53) automobile trips per day. However, the lodge's location and shuttle service should help reduce traffic generation from the site. Staff believes that road safety would be improved if parking were provided on-site, thereby removing parked cars from the street and out of pedestrian and bicyclists way. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such facilities, including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Staff Finding: All appropriate utility agencies and the City Engineer were referenced on this application and reported the ability to serve this project. A condition of approval shall be that the owner(s) mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. School, park, water, sanitation, and other impact fees will be due prior to the issuance of building permits. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Finding: Rezoning the property will not itself create adverse impacts on the natural environment. Rezoning the property would increase the potential use of the property from residential to lodge and affordable housing. Combining the rezoning with a PUD will increase the intensity of uses on the site which could adversely impact the natural environment to a greater extent than the development of one single family home. However, the Applicant has represented that as much of the natural vegetation and terrain will be maintained as possible, and Staff has every reason to believe this to be the case because the Applicant has a vested interest in the neighborhood. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff Finding: Staff believes rezoning the property is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen, particularly because rezoning the parcel will allow for lodging and affordable housing uses - both of which are important to maintaining the community character. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff Finding: The community has lost more than 300 lodge units over the past decade due to redevelopments, and the increasing service demands by Aspen' s visitors, residents, and second homeowners continues to create a need for workers and affordable housing in town. In addition, two consecutive slow ski seasons has hurt the local economy. Increasing the lodging base and number of affordable housing units in town are convincing reasons for supporting the rezoning. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. Staff Finding: Staff does not believe the proposed rezoning would be in conflict with the public interest and believes it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Land Use Code. Again, rezoning the property would benefit the City from gaining lodging and affordable housing. 26.445.050 Review Standards: Minor PUD A development application for Conceptual, Final, Consolidated Conceptual and Final, or Minor PUD shall comply with the following standards and requirements. Due to the limited issues associated with Conceptual Reviews and properties eligible for Minor PUD Review, certain standards shall not be applied as noted. The burden shall rest upon an applicant to show the reasonableness of the development application, and its conformity to the standards and procedures of this Chapter and this title. A. General requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding Staff believes the proposed PUD is consistent with the AACP. The AACP encourages maintaining the community's lodging base, increasing the number of affordable housing units, and locating development within the Aspen Community Growth Boundary and close to transit. Rezoning this parcel to include PUD and LP Overlays will allow the Boomerang Lodge to expand its operations and provide affordable housing to its employees or qualified local workers, thereby fulfilling several AACP goals and objectives. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. Staff Finding The proposed development would be consistent with the character of existing land use in the surrounding area, which include lodge; residential - detached single family, duplex, and multi-family; park; offices; and trails. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Staff Finding Staff does not believe the proposed development would adversely affect future development of the surrounding area. The surrounding area, with the exception of a large vacant lot immediately to the west, is mostly built out, consists of trails, or is in the county and would be subject to county land use code regulations which severely restrict development on steep slopes and in wildfire areas. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. Staff Finding The Applicant is requesting seven (7) LP tourist accommodations allotments and two (2) affordable housing unit allotments for this development. The lodge and affordable housing units are exempt from the GMQS scoring and competition requirements. The LP tourist accommodations allotments are available, and the affordable housing units ceiling level of allotments are also available. The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to approve the GMQS allotments. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD as described in General Provisions, Section 26.445.040, above. The dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. The proposed dimensional requirements shall comply with the following: 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property: a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b) Natural or man-made hazards. c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and landforms. d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. Staff Finding Staff believes the proposed dimensional requirements are appropriate and compatible for the proposed lodge and affordable housing units proposed for the site. There are no natural or man-made hazards or existing natural characteristics of the property that would make the proposed development unsuitable for the parcel. The site is relatively flat and avoids natural hazard areas. The dimensions appear to be compatible with existing and potential developments in the neighborhood. The lodge and affordable housing units would impact the neighborhood more intensely than would a single family residence or duplex under current zoning. However, Staff does not believe the increased impacts would be significant considering the multi-family dwellings and other lodges in the immediate area. Staff believes a temporary parking area shielded from view by landscaping and the proposed sub-grade parking garage adequately addresses the lodge's current and future parking needs. The garage and temporary parking area reduces the impact of traffic, noise, and parking on the surrounding area. Removing head-in parking off of West Ilopkins Avenue and the 4th Street stub also minimizes any impacts on pedestrian circulation in the area. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. Staff Finding The proposed scale and massing appear compatible with the surrounding area. Site coverage is proposed to be 35% and open space is proposed to be 55%. The measured height of the chalets is proposed to be 23 feet, which is 2 feet below the R-15 height limit. The sixth building - AH and lodge units, and bathhouse - is proposed to be 25 feet. Overall, the dimensional requirements appear appropriate for the property given its location at the base of Shadow Mountain. 3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. Staff Finding The Applicant is proposing 10-12 on-site parking spaces off of West Hopkins Avenue in a sub-grade parking garage. Staff believes this is an adequate number of parking spaces for current and future lodge needs. A temporary parking area on-site for three (3) automobiles for phase 1 is also an appropriate number of off-street parking spaces. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to service the proposed development. b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance to the proposed development. Staff Finding There are no infrastructure capacity issues that would prohibit the amount of development being considered. Staff does not recommend any reductions in the development being proposed. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced ifi a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground instability or the possibility of mud flow, rock falls or avalanche dangers. b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and consequent water pollution. c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City. d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. Staff Finding Staff does not recommend reducing the allowable density within the PUD because no natural hazards or critical natural site features exist on the parcel. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's physical constraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if: a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area plan to which the property is subject. b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in subparagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided, or those characteristics mitigated. c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern, land uses, and characteristics. Staff Finding The applicant is not requesting an increase in density beyond what is allowed within the PUD. C. Site Design. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. Staff Finding The proposed development complies with the natural features of the site to the greatest extent possible. The notable natural site feature is the dense vegetation. No historic structures or other unique features exist on the property, though the site does abut the Midland Railroad right-of-way which is currently used for trail purposes. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. Staff Finding The structures are spread out across the lot, which is the length of one city block. The only open space remaining on the lot will be the 14-16 feet between the structures, the spaces within the setbacks, and small pockets in front of or behind four (4) of the proposed chalets. Vistas would be preserved by limiting height to 25 feet, which is allowed in the R-15 Zone District. 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. Staff Finding Although Staff does not believe the chalets are appropriately oriented toward W. Hopkins Avenue, the Planning and Zoning Commission did not did not indicate any issues regarding building orientation. The structures are oriented toward the mountain in a th manner similar to one section of the existing lodge and the duplex across 4 Street to the east. Even though these units are not subject to the Residential Design Standards, Staff believes it is important that the chalets address the street in a manner that creates a consistent facade line. Structures in this area are primarily parallel and square to the street, and located close to the street in front of any parked automobiles. If the chalets were located along the front of this property in a manner that created a consistent fa~ade line, Staff believes the units would significantly contribute to the context of the neighborhood and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. Staff Finding th Access to the property is from West Hopkins Avenue and 4 Street by pedestrians, cyclists, and automobiles; pedestrians and cyclists may also access the property from the rear through dense vegetation. The Aspen Fire Marshall has reserved comment on the access until the City has received a building permit application. A condition of approval is that the Aspen Fire Marshall shall approve emergency access to the property prior to the issuance of a building permit. A second, related condition of approval is that the buildings be sprinkled. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. Staff Finding Pedestrian and handicapped access will be provided via a proposed new sidewalk along W. Hopkins Avenue. The ground floor lodge room in the building near the corner of W. Hopkins and 5th Street is proposed to be handicapped accessible and in compliance with the UBC and ADA. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. Staff Finding A condition of approval is that a drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer which maintains sediment and debris on- site during and after construction, be approved by the City's Engineering Department prior to the issuance of building permits. If a ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 2-year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. The City drainage criteria needs to be implemented. The Applicant is proposing to accommodate drainage on site through the use of roof drains, downspouts, and dry wells to maintain the site's historic runoff and drainage patterns. I f a parking structure in phase 2, then an oil/sand separator will likely be required by the Aspen Consolidated Sand District. 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. Staff Finding Although the primary use of the property would be lodging, no programmatic functions are proposed. D. Landscape Plan. The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. Staff Finding Staff supports the Applicant' s proposal to preserve and use as much of the native vegetation on site as possible for landscaping. The Parks Department recommends that the Applicant contact the City Forester regarding correct seed mix for replanting disturbed areas with native species. Another recommendation is that the planting of cottonwoods in the buffer zone between the road and the Applicant's structure would be the most beneficial. E. Architectural Character. It is the purpose of this standard is to encourage architectural interest, variety, character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the building's proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of materials, and other attributes which may significantly represent the character of the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development shall: 1. Be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the intended use, and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less-intensive mechanical systems. 3. Accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice, and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. Staff Finding Staff believes the architectural character of the proposed buildings will enhance the visual character of the City, appropriately relate to the existing architecture of the Boomerang Lodge, and represent a character suitable for the location at the base of the mountain. It is difficult for the property to incorporate any natural heating because of its location at the base of Shadow Mountain; similarly, natural cooling is accomplished by the shade provided by the mountain. Roof overhangs to the entry of each unit would accommodate the storage and shedding of snow and ice; the roof pitches will also shed snow away from the entrance and walkways. Storage of snow from the proposed sidewalk along W. Hopkins Avenue can be accommodated through shoveling snow into the 10-foot setbacks. F. Lighting. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic concerns. The following standards shall be accomplished: 1. All lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. Lighting of site features, structures, and access ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. 2. All exterior lighting shall be in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD documents. Up-lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements, and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. Staff Finding All new lighting for the proposed residence must be in compliance with the City's lighting code adopted in November 1999 and Uniform Building Code for safety. The new lighting shall be designed to minimize glare onto adjacent properties. G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area. If the proposed development includes a common park, open space, or recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD, the following criteria shall be met: 1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses and property users of the PUD. 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar manner. 3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through a legal instrument for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Staff Finding No common park or dedicated open space is included in this application for this lot. However, the Applicant proposes that 55 % of the site will serve as required open space. In addition, Applicant plans to maintain the native vegetation and to replant disturbed areas with native species. Common areas are located in front of or behind four of the chalets in the center of the property. H. Utilities and Public facilities. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. Staff Finding All appropriate utility agencies and the City Engineer were referenced on this application and reported the ability to serve this project. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. Staff Finding Staff recommends a condition of approval be that the owner(s) mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. Staff Finding No oversized utility stubs were requested to be installed with this development. I. Access and Circulation. (Only standards 1 &2 apply to Minor PUD applications) The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: 1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. Staff Finding Access to the lodge and affordable housing units would be provided via a proposed new sidewalk along W. Hopkins Avenue. Specifically, each chalet, lodge unit, and affordable housing unit would have access to the public street via a paved path from the front door to the street. Vehicular access to the property would from West Hopkins Avenue to a temporary parking area during phase 1 and a sub-grade parking area after phase 2. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. Staff Finding Staff believes the temporary parking area and permanent sub-grade parking garage would minimize impacts on traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development. J. Phasing of Development Plan. (does not apply to Conceptual PUD applications) The purpose of this criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with the following: 1. All phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. Staff Finding Two phases of the development are proposed. Phase one is proposed to consist of building the three chalets at the easterly portion of the lot - next to the 4th Street stub. Phase two is proposed to consist of the other two chalets and lodge/bathhouse/ALI building with a parking garage underneath. The reason for the separate phases is critical for the Applicant to finance the project. The Housing Authority recommended a condition of approval that the affordable housing units must be started no later than 36 months after the completion of Phase 1. Staff is concerned that there is no financial security guaranteeing the two affordable housing units will ever be built. Staffproposes Condition 16 to address this issue, which states: Construction of the affordable housing units shall begin no later than 36 months after the completion of the three (3) chalets on the eastern portion of the lot. If the project is built in phases, prior to the issuance o f building permits for the first phase, the Applicant shall provide a financial guarantee acceptable to the City for the employees generated by the total project at the Category 3 level at the then current Aspen/Pitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines. In the event that a building permit is not issued for the affordable housing units within 36 months of the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the first phase buildings, the City shall have the right to obtain complete payment for the fractional employee generated by the first phase at the then current Aspen/Pitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines. The Applicant would be relieved of the financial obligation for the affordable housing mitigation for the employees generated by phase 2. All conditions in this ordinance shall be memorialized in the Final Plat and Planned Unit Development Agreement. 2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. Staff Finding The physical distances between the two phases will be fourteen (14) feet, which is the distance between the two chalets in the middle of the property. The Applicant will notify owners of the eastern chalets prior to the start of construction of Phase two. Alternative parking will be provided for phase 1 users while phase 2 construction begins. 3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in- lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. Staff Finding Please see number 1 above in this section. Joyce Ohlson Tom Bracewell Becea Schickling Memorandum TO: Nick Lelack, Community Development FROM: Rebecca Schickling, Assistant Parks Director DATE: May 25,2000 RE: Boomerang Lodge Expansion John Krueger, Patrick Duffield and myself did a site visit to the lot and have the following concerns and comments. The proposed on street parking for the project presents a few complications for future trail plans for the Shadow Mountain Trail. One alternative for the Shadow Mountain trail is to extend the trail at its terminus at 4th Street and bring it down on to the South side of Hopkins Street in the right-of-way (ROW). An eight to ten foot trail along LIopkins would be in conflict with the proposed parking for the Lodge and Condominiums. This may also present a problem along 4th Street as well. If the trail were to stay behind the Boomerang lot, then access to the property would need to be from Hopkins or 4n1 Street. The trail may continue along the alley and old Midland ROW and then extend up the mountain. The Parks Department could support their request to adjust the lot line along Lot G, however, an adjustment to include in their property boundary the southerly portions of Lots D&E would severely encroach upon the trail. 28 'Exw 6:+ B REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS MEMORANDUM To: Chris Bendon, Planner From: Ben Ludlow, Project Engineer Reference DRC Caseload Coordinator Date: April 11,2000 Re: Boomerang Lodge Expansion The Development Review Committee has reviewed the Boomerang Lodge Expansion application at their April 5,2000 meeting, and has compiled the following comments: General 1. Sufficiency of Submittal: DRC comments are based on the fact that we believe that the submitted site plan is accurate, that it shows all site features, and that it is feasible. The wording must be carried forward exactly as written unless prior consent is received from the Engineering Department. This is to alleviate problems related to approvals tied to "issuance of building permit." 2. R.O.W. Impacts: Ifthere are any encroachments into the public rights-of-way, the encroachment must either be removed or be subject to current encroachment license requirements. Site Review 1. Site Drainage - Requirement - A drainage report was not submitted with the application. The site development approvals must include the requirement meeting runoff design standards of the Land Use Code at Sec. 26.580.020.A.6.a and a requirement that, prior to the building permit application, a drainage mitigation plan (24"x36" size plan sheet or on the lot grading plan) must meet the requirements of the Engineering Department Interim Design Standards and must be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Department. The mitigation plan must also address the temporary sediment control and containment plan for the construction phase. If drywells are an acceptable solution for site drainage, a soils report must be provided with a percolation test to verify the feasibility of this type of system. Drywells have depths well below depth of frost (10' minimum) to function in cold weather. The drainage plan must contain a statement specifying the routine maintenance required by property owner(s) to ensure continued and proper performance. Drywells may not be placed within public right of way or utility easements. The foundation 22 drainage system should be separate from storm drainage, must be detained and routed on site, and must be shown on drainage plans prior to application for building permit. The drainage may be conveyed to existing landscaped areas if the drainage report demonstrates that the percolation rate and the detention volume meet the design storm. Information - The City drainage criteria needs to be implemented. This includes but is not limited to erosion control, soil stabilization, and vegetation disturbance. Also, there needs to be an analysis of where the drainage will flow and what adverse affects may arise from potential mud and debris flow. 2. Community Development - Information - The following request was provided by the Planning Department: NO INFORMATION AT THIS TIME 3. Fire Protection District - Information - The following information has been provided by the Aspen Fire Protection District: NO INFORMATION AT THIS TIME 4. Streets Department - Requirement - As of the request of the Streets Department revisions need to be made as follows: a. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction. 5. Parks - Information - The following information has been provided by the Parks Department: a. Since the applicant wants to have the natural look for the landscaping, then Steve Ellsperman, the City Forester, should be contacted for the correct seed mix to use in the disturbed areas. b. The Midland Trail would be most effective if it is extended behind the property location. This may require a trail easement. c. The planting of cottonwoods in the buffer zone between the potential Trail and the applicant's structures would be most beneficial. 6. Engineering - Requirement - The following requirements have been provided by the Engineering Department: a. ROW permits and Encroachment licenses will be required during construction if applicable. b. A Fugitive dust control permit will be required during construction. 23 c. Drainage and soils problems in the project location may require the installation of curb and gutter. If not during the construction, then a curb, gutter, and sidewalk agreement will be made. d. A full soils report and drainage report are needed before the issuance of the building permit. Presenting it in a timely manner is beneficial to the applicant as well as the reviewer. e. The south elevation of the building has a few open doors and windows that can be subject to mud and debris flow. It is not a requirement of the City of Aspen Engineering Department to control design for this at this point. But, one must be prepared for the possibility of structural and aesthetic damage if a debris flow would occur. Engineering - Information - The following information has been provided by the Engineering Department: a. The parking design for the project is somewhat inadequate. One suggestion is to do a geometric design to the west half of 4th St. to allow for parking along that area. b. Another parking consideration is to allow parking in the front of each building via the planned sidewalk locations. c. A final parking consideration would be to allow parking access from the south end ofthe property. 7. Utilities: A utility plan needs to be submitted before any real comments and conclusions can be drawn by the utility companies. - Water: City Water Department - Requirement - The following information was given by the City of Aspen Water Department: a. All uses and construction will comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal code as they pertain to utilities. b. A distinction during the design phase will need to be made as to whether there will be separate or shared service lines - Wastewater: Aspen Consolidated Waste District - Information - As a request of the Consolidated Waste District, revisions need to be made as follows: a. A set of drainage plans needs to be provided to Peg at ACSD so that an estimate of fees can be processed. 24 b. Each proposed building will need a separate tap or they will be subject to a shared service agreement. c. An 8 inch PVC sewer line runs through the middle of the property and needs to have an easement. In worse case it may need to be moved. - Electric: a. Currently the City wants to extend the electrical service to that property and other property in the neighborhood. b. There needs to be a lighting agreement similar to the sidewalk, curb, and gutter agreement to insure that the lighting will be the same for the neighborhood. - Construction: Work in the Public Right of Way - Requirement - Given the continuous problems of unapproved work and development in public rights-of-way adjacent to private property, we advise the applicant as follows: Approvals 1. Engineering: The applicant receives approval from the City Engineering Department (920-5080) for design of improvements, including grading, drainage, transportation/streets, landscaping, and encroachments within public right of way. 2. Parks: The applicant receives approval from the Parks Department (920- 5120) for vegetation species and for public trail disturbance. 3. Streets: The applicant receives approval from the Streets department (920- 5130) for mailboxes, finished pavement, surface materials on streets, and alleyways. 4. Permits: Obtain R.O.W. permits for any work or development, involving street cuts and landscaping from the Engineering Department. DRC Attendees Staff: Phil Overynder Applicant's Representative: Sunny Vanh Chris Bendon Mitch Haas Ben Ludlow Nick Adeh 25 APR.25.2000 2:21PM ASPEN HOUSING OFC NO.598 P.1 MEMORANDUM TO: Chris Bendon or Nick Lelack FROM: Cindy Christensen DATE: April 19, 2000 RE: REQUEST FOR BOOMERANG LODGE EXPANSION /SSUE: The applicant is requesting rezoning, GMQS exemptions, conditional use, and a minor planned unit development (PUD) approval for the expansion of the Boomerang Lodge. BACKGROUND: The applicant is proposing to construct on a vacant lot six freestanding structures, five of which will be used solely as additional, individual chalet lodging units. The sixth building is proposed to include two one-bedroom affordable housing units, a common area for all guests of the project, including a bathhouse with whivlpool, bathrooms and dressing rooms, and two one-bedroom guest units. The five chalet units will consist of three bedrooms and three and one-half baths, With the two additional guest units, the proposed project will add a total of 17 bedrooms. There are three major issues that the Housing Board has to discuss and make a recommendation to the Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission. The first revolves around mitigation requirements of the additional employees generated by the expansion. The second revolves around the phasing of the project and when the affordable housing units are to be completed. The third relates to the 8ize, livabllity and management of the proposed affordable housing units. The mitigation requirements will be discussed first. Miticiation: There 18 no set policy on how to mitigate for employees for Lodges. In calculating the mitigation requirements for this expansion, the applicant used a study that was provided by Chris Bendon in the Community Development Department, attached as Exhibit 'A". The study was only a study and was not former[y adopted to use to calculate employees. The study calculated employees by units, by pillows and by square footage, and shows a wide variety of employee generation. By using the study, the mitigation requirements would be as follows: APR.25.2000 2:22PM ASPEN HOUSING OFC NO.598 P.2 Bv Units: Bv Pillows: *Bv Sauare Feet: 7 34 1,880 x.267 x.098 x.021 1.869 3.332 35.28 *This is by lodge unit only and relates to only one lodge unit. The study provides a very broad framework for mitigation requirements: anywhere from 1.869 FTE's to over 35.28 FTE's. The 1993 Aspen Area Community Plan recommended housing 60% of the workforce from Aspen Village upvalley. The updated Aspen Area Community Plan does not stipulate any percentage, Just a number. If the 60% figure was used, this would relate to an FTE amount of 1.12 to 21.17. The applicant proposes using a different methodology, noting that the 21.17 mitigation number is unreasonable, since they believe that existing employees will service the expansion, thus generating few new employees. The applicant states that the proposal involves a 21% increase over the number of existing lodge units (7 is 20.58% of 34), and that 18 FTE's service the existing 34 units, The application concluded that if 18 FTE's service the existing 34 units, then a 21% increase could generate 3.78 additional FTE's (18x21%-3.78). At the 60% rate, the mitigation rate would be 3.78 x 60% = 2.268 FTE's. Another method would be to use the employee base for the existing units. Previously, the Housing Office has been using an average of .1 to .4 employees per lodge room. The survey concluded that on the average, each lodge unit creates approximately 0.245 employees, which was used in calculating the additional lodge units proposed for the St. Moritz. However, the seven chalet units are not your typical lodge-type unit. Most lodge units range in size from 600 square feet to 800 square feet. The chalet units being proposed are 1,680 square feet, tWice the size of an average lodge unit. Due to the size of the units being proposed at the Boomerang, which five of them average to be at least twice the size of regular lodge units, staff is recommending mitigation as follows: 5 units X 2 for size = 10 X .245 - 2,45 new employees 2 units X .24 = .49 new employees Total mitigation requirement would be 2.45 + .49 = 2.94. The 2.94 figure is not taking into consideration 60% of new employees, but 100% of new employees. Due to the nature of the lodging business in the Aspen area, the higher level of service that i8 being required by the clientele, the addition of a bathhouse and common area, and the size of each lodge unit, in order to maintain at least the same level of employee support, the mitigation for this project would be 2.94 employees as calculated above, 2 APR.25.2000 2:22PM EN HOUSING OFC NO.598 P.3 4 The Lodge is currently 17,400 square feet and is adding 15,350 square feet (11,800 square feet is actually counted by Code definition). The applicant is proposing to provide two one-bedroom units, which is 2 X 1.75 employees = 3.5 employees. The applicant does stipulate that they own a 4,240 square foot triplex at 1020 Waters Avenue. The triplex contains three apartments of three bedrooms each. One of the three apartments has traditionally been rented to Aspen employees or summer students of the Music School, but is currently rented to schoolteachers. The other two apartments am used by the applicant for housing for Boomerang employees. The units in the triplex are not deed restricted, but function as de facto employee housing under the applicant's ownership. Although the applicant should be commended for providing this housing, this is not a guarantee that these will always be affordable rentals for employees, so should not be considered in reviewing this application. Phasing: The applicant is proposing two separate phases to complete the development of the PUD. The first phase will consist of the three easterly chalets, and the second phase will include the remainder of the PUD (two more chalets and the west end building, which includes the affordable housing portion). By phasing the affordable housing units last, there is a possibility that they will not be completed. If the calculation of .245 FTE's per unit is used, then the three chalet units (8ix regular type lodge units) created in the lirst phase would generate: .245 X 6 = 1.47 FTE's required for mitigation. Proposed AH Units: There are some issues concerning the affordable housing units that must be addressed: 1. The applicant is proposing to include in one of the chalet buildings two one- bedroom, Category 3, units. The unit sizes are approximately 700 square feet each, with 350 square feet per floor. The floor plans do not show a kitchen, which is required for an employee-housing unit. 2. There is no on-site parking for the affordable housing units. This is an in.town site with a private shuttle van service. Currently, the application does not stipulate whether any employees would have access to the private shuttle van. The lack of on.site parking would not create a problem as long as the employees would have access to this private shuttle van service. 3 APR.25.2000 2:22PM ASPEN HOUSING OFC NO.598 P.4 3. The affordable housing units would have to be fully deed restricted under the Category 3 guidelines, which require a minimum six-month lease. RECOMMENDATION: The Housing Board met on this issue April 19, 2000, Since there is not an established methodology for calculating FTE's for lodge units, staff used the required mitigation of 2.94 FTE's. However, these lodge units are not your typical lodge- type units, since they are stand-alone and not connected to the main structure. The Housing Board, however, did recommend approval of the application under the following conditions: 1. Using the formula stated above, the applicant needs to provide mitigation for 2.94 FTE's, which Is under what is being proposed for mitigation. 2. Due to the phasing of the proJect, the affordable housing unit is not scheduled to be constructed until Phase 2 of the project, therefore, the Board recommended that the affordable housing unit must be started no later than 36 months after completion of Phase 1. 3. The afÂ£rdable housing units should include kitchens and an interior design plan should be provided to the Housing Office that shows how the living space will functionally work with furnishings. 4. The tenants of the affordable housing units be permitted to use the shuttle service at any time, and that the tenants be issued a City of Aspen parking permit and guest permit for on-street parking. 5. The deed restriction for the unit shall be recorded PRIOR to approval of the building permit for Phase 1. AwordreferramoomerangahmR,doe 4 JUN. 7.2000 12:09PM ASPEN HOUSING OFC NO.342 P.2 MINUTES OF THE APRIL 19, 2000 REGULAR MEETING OF THE ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY 1. EXECUTIVE SESSION: Tom made a motion to go Into an executive session to obtain legal advice on a potential litigation matter regarding a citizen's comphint; Tim seconded the motion. All were in favor. Mick made a motion to move out of Executive Session; Torn ~ seconded the motion. All were in favor. The Board came out of the Executive Session at 7:00 p.m, 11. Jackie Kasabach, Chairperson, called the regular meeting to order at 7:05 p.m. The April 19, 2000 meeting was held in the Plazal Meeting Room, Courthouse Plaza. Board members in attendance were Jackie Kasabach, Cari Britton, Tim Semrau, Mick Ireland, and Tom McCabe. Staff members present were May Roberts, Executive Director; Bill Vitany, Assistant Director; Lee Novak, Project Manager, and Cindy Christensen, Operations Manager. 111. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Tim made a motion to approve the Apr115, 2000 meeting as submitted; Tom seconded the motion All were in favor. Motion passed. IV. PUBUC COMMENT: There was no public comment. V. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMENTS: Roberts distributed a letter from Mary Ellen Shembri regarding a possible discrepancy with the lottery system where there seems to be groupings of last names. Kasabach suggested reverting to the ping pong ball system until the software handling the lottery can be analyzed and/or a new one Instigated. Ireland stated that a new lottery software program still may not guarantee a perfect pÂ¤gram. VI. BOARD OF DIRECTORS' COMMENTS: Ireland updated the Board on the failure of House BIll 101, which could have created affordable housing In the valley. Ireland advised the Board as to why the County Is readdressing the growth management and mitigdion issue. McCabe stated that he had a discussion with Ben Nighthorse Campbell regarding the Forest Service parcel, and asked if he could look into moving this exchange along. VII. DISCUSSION ITEMS: A. 7*; and Main Update: Novak updated the Board on the progress of this project. B. Truscott Expansion Update: Novak updated the Board on the progress of this project, 'Conceptual approval was received from the Planning & Zoning Commission. Council has already had 1 * reading and 2nd readin@ ris Monday night. It will be about six to eight weeks for final application, If @11 goe& according to plan, staff will be going back to Coundl In early October for final approbal. Aspen/Plidn County Houâ€¢Ing Authority Minutes April 19, 2000 Page 1 JUN. 7.2000 12:09PM ASPEN HOUSING OFC . NO.342 P.3 - Roberts stated that a Request for Proposal has been completed to possibly combine construction management with other projects that the City Is doing, This could save money In the long run. VI11. ACTION ITEMS: A. Draco Affordable Housing Project: Stoney Davis was present as the applicant and Mick Haas was present representing Mr. Davis. Roberts stated that the Board met in the fall of 1999 at Mr. Davis' request on this project, The Planning & Zoning Commission approved the project and now Mr. Davis is requesting formal approval by the Housing Board. The proposal Is to build three one-bedroom units and three two-bedroom units, for a total of nine bedrooms. Mr. Davis Is recommending that the units be deed restricted under the Category 3 guidelines. Staff believes that this Is an excellent infill-type project and would recommend approval. This project is not being proposed for mitigation and will not be used for any type of mitigation in'the future. Ireland made a motion to recommend to City Council approval of this project as submitted; McCabe seconded the motion. Roll Call Vote: Ireland, Elritton, Somrau, Kasabach, and McCabe voted yes. Motion passed. B. Boomerang Lodge Expansion: Charles and Fonda Patterson were present as the applicants and Mitch Haas was present representing the Â· applicants, Christensen stated that the applicants are proposing to construct six additional chalet type units to be located on the vacant lot adjacent to the Boomerang Lodge. Christensen stated that there are three issues that need to be discussed. The first revolves around the calculation of the required mitigation; the second revolves around the construction phasing of the affordable housing units; and the third issue revolves around the affordable housing units themselves. Christensen stated that there has not been any specific way to calculate the required mitigation for lodge units. Chris Bendon, City Planner in the Community Development Department, had developed a concept using information provided by other lodges in the community. After reviewing the different scenarios for calculating the required mitigation, staff recommended that 2.94 employees need to be mitigated. The applicant is proposing to mitigate for 3.5 employees by providing two one-bedroom units. Christensen had a concern with the units since they are not your typical lodge-type units. The plans for the affordable housing units also do not show If kitchens are Included. Haas stated that the units will have kitchens and that the shuttle van service will be available to the tenants of these units. Haas stated that the phasing of the program Is proposed, with the affordable housing units being built last, due to the financial aspects of the project. Christensen stated that staff had recommended deed restricting one of their existing units until the affordable houisidg units are completed. The Patterson's felt that this was unnecessary, Fondai Patterson stated that the bank sees the existing units as free market and allowÂ£ them to borrow for the construction of the proposed project. Aspen/PlgIn County Hou:Ing Authority Minutes April 10, 2000 Page 2 JUN. 7.2000 12:10PM ASPEN HOUSING OFC NO.342 P.4 Britton asked how large the lodge units are proposed. Haas stated that they are proposed to be 3-bedroom, 3-1/2 bath units, with each containing about 1,680 square feet. Haas stated that the current staff Is under worked and the additional units will allow the existing staff to work a 40-hour work week. Ireland suggested a time limit to provide the affordable housing units, say within a 36-month period. Ireland made a motion to recommend approval to City Council to accept the requirement for 2.94 FTE's, which will be mitlgated by the two one-bedroom units, and that the one-bedroom employee units shall be built within 36 months after completion of the first phase; Britton secended the motion. McCabe stated that the FTE requirement probably would not be approved by City Council. McCabe stated that these five units are not your typical lodge unit. These are five standalone units. ROLL CALL VOTE: Ireland, Britton, Semrau, Kasabach and McCabe voted yes. Motion passed. IX. WORK SESSION: The Board moved the Guldeline discussion to a special worksession to be scheduled for April 26, 2000,4:30 p.m. There was a motion to adjoum and It was seconded. The Board adjourned Its regular meeting at 8:10 p.m. THE ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY HOUSING AUTHORITY /h,-14 A.gur#AL 44Â« 4,4 .64 12*lu'lyn A. Kasabach, Chairpermon Mary Robe,[s, Executive Director .. Aspervfltkln County Housing Authority Minutes April 19, 2000 Page 3 /57401@C-K C MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council, Nick Lelack, Charlie Paterson FROM: Stephen Goldenberg SUBJECT: Boomerang Lodge Rezoning & Expansion DATE: June 19.2000 1. Inapplicability of"Lodge Preservation/CMOS Exception" for New "Time Share" Construction The applicant has stated that he intends to sell seven "time shares" in each of the five "chalets" for from $300,00-$400,000 per share. That works out to 10-14 million dollars, plus the sales price ofthe 2 employee units and the value of the 2 lodging units. If this is still his intention, the Lodge Preservation Regulations ("for moderately priced adjacent lodging") do not apply and the application should be withdrawn or denied. If the applicant has changed his mind and there is no longer such intention, the property should be contractually deed restricted so that it cannot be sold off or separated from the existing Boomerang Lodge in case he changes his mind again after the project is completed. The intention to time share the project was stated to me twice, and on different occasions to Cheryl, Renee Marcus, Tom Cleary, Martha Madsen and others and appears in a written memo in exhibit #2 ofthe "Lodge Preservation" application, a copy of which is attached. P&Z was not aware of the applicants intention to "time share" the chalets when they approved the application. They would reconsider the application if it were put back on their agenda by city staff. 2. Rezoning from 1 Private Home to 5 "Private Homes" plus 2 Employee Units and 2 Lodging Units There is little or no public benefit derived from up zoning this property. Each of the five "chalets" will contain 2,100 square feet of living space with 3 bedrooms, 3.5 baths, a full kitchen, dining room and study. Ifnot time shared, they will rent for more than $2,000 per night. Even without the 2 lodge and 2 employee units, this represents 3 or 4 times the density allowed in the underlying R-15 zone. That is why the site plan looks so packed and why there is no room for the required off street parking. The requested FAR is more than 12,000 sq. ft. instead ofthe zoned 5,000 sq. ft., the requested number ofbedrooms is 19 as opposed to 5 and the buildings will be set back only 10ft. instead o f the required 25 ft. 3. Ignoring the Onsite Parking Requirements on New Construction Nineteen bedrooms require approximately 14 offstreet parking spaces. The Boomerang van does not generally pick up or drop offat the airport. People paying $300,000+ for a 1/7th timeshare or $2,000+ per night are likely to rent a car even ifthey don't use it every day. That's actually worse because the unused cars will sit on Hopkins Ave. all day and all night. All the more reason to keep them offthe street and out of sight. There should be at least 10 on site garages or parking spaces. There should be no street parking for the "new residences" or the old Boomerang. The present neighbors park in their required garages to keep Hopkins Avenue uncluttered for pedestrian use in the summer, to assist with snow removal in the winter and for esthetic reason all year round. There was no parking in the proposal because there are too many buildings proposed for that site. 4. Impact on Natural Environment The six proposed buildings will certainly have a more adverse environmental impact than one single house with one ADU or even a duplex. The building footprints are several times greater than the allowed single family or duplex and the resulting open space is considerably less. They are also asking that the front yard setback be reduced from 25 ft. to 10 ft. That will put the buildings much closer to the street and the winter shadows right on the street further aggravating street icing conditions. 5. Phasing ofConstruction The project as proposed is very"rich" financially and could easily be financed and built in one shot. The application is phased so that the profits from the sale of the Phase I "times shares" can pay for the construction of Phase II. The public benefit of the two affordable units should come earlier rather than later. 6. Traffic, Road Safety. Service and Emergency Vehicle Access A residential unit generates 5-10 auto trips per day. For a pedestrian street, that's a lot more traffic. The neighbors and the present Boomerang guests exit and enter from the alley, to 4th and then on to Main. Guests of the new Boomerang residences will have no choice but to use Hopkins coming and going. Adults and children using the old Boomerang pool will have to run across Hopkins and back, as will the cleaning, maintainance and other staff all year round. An unobstructed street and a striped pedestrian cross walk will be necessary to minimize accidents and provide somewhat better access for service and emergency vehicles. No lettered parking permits should be issued to any Boomerang guests. 7. Employee Mitigation The employee mitigation calculations appear to be understated. 17 additional bedrooms in 6 additional buildings would likely require 5-7 additional employees. Only 2 additional affordable units are provided. 8. Summary The very high density ofthe project, as proposed, causes all ofthe above problems. Reducing the number of"chalets" to 2 or 3 would reduce the density, traffic, environmental impact, and safety problems, leaving room for open space and garages to keep the autos off the street and out o f sight, and allow the entire project to be built profitably in one phase. Less density would also permitthe buildings to be setback further from the street as required in an R- 15 zone. (~9 -1 ,-l34.--- )J l CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Chris Bendon, 920.5072 DATE: 12.16.99 ~ PROJECT: Boomerang Expansion REPRESENTATIVE: Sunny Vann 1 OWNER: Charles and Fonda Patterson TYPE OF APPLICATION: 2 step. Rezoning, Minor PUD, LP Expansion and AH GMQS exemption. DESCRIPTION: Applicant is seeking to expand the Boomerang Lodge to a vacant parcel across Hopkins Avenue from the existing lodge.,The proposal includes 6 new detached lodge units and an employee housing structure to include one or two units and parking. The property is currently zoned R-15 and would need to be rezoned with an LP Overlay to allow the lodge use. The Minor PUD process will be used to define the dimensional requirements for the new development including parking. Planner suggests the Special Review for AH Parking be combined, pursuant to 26.304.060(B), with the PUD review. No development is proposed on the existing lodge and the PUD will only define dimensions on the new parcel. The applicant should, however, include the existing lodge in-the application to describe operational, employment, and parking characteristics of the existing situation compared to the expected conditions after development. 1 -)4 <unuon of Lodge units does ~tautomatically constitute a Subdivision. Ihe app'4- is contemplating an interval ownership ofthenew-lodge units. A-Ending code interpretation will determine the requirements for this style ofownership, if any, and agy~ - code_gmendments that are necessary. Renee Marcus 432 W. Hopkins Aspen, CO 81611 TO: Aspen City Council RE: Boomerang Lodge Expansion My family and I came to Aspen 32 years ago; and we have lived opposite the Boomerang Lodge for the past 22 years. I realized that the property across the street from us would not reinain vacant forever, but hoped that future development would preserve the character of West Hopkins Avenue. West Hopkins Avenue is a beautiful pedestrian / bicycle street with an eclectic mix of Victorian homes, duplexes, employee housing, lodging and open space. I am not opposed to additional lodging. The Boomerang was here long before I arrived; and has provided much needed and appreciated moderate priced rooms with the old charm we all cherish. The "Boomerang Lodge Expansion" proposed, however is NOT an expansion o f the Boomerang Lodge as we know it, but a new and separate development of 5 3 bedroom, 3 1/2 bath single family homes and 2 additional lodge rooms. This proposed project with 19 additional bedrooms and no off street parking would be on a building lot more appropriate for a single family home or duplex with a garage. The duplex where I live has a two car garage plus additional o ff street parking for each unit which are the same size as the proposed "chalets". Mr. Paterson told ine that he intends to sell 7 fractional ownerships for each "chalet" at approxirnately $300,000.00 ... ($10,500,000.00). AT LEAST 9 0 ff street parking spaces are absolutely necessary to control a potentially ugly and congested situation! By reducing the number of"chalets" to 3 and including garages for these homes and off street parking for the employee units, the Patersons would still be inaking a huge profit on their investment, while helping to preserve the character of the neighborhood. West Hopkins Avenue is the only remaining street in the city that is a reminder ofwhywe originally moved to Aspen. Please preserve the charm and beauty o f this street for the enjoyment of its residents and visitors. R---- ..2 .11-- *enee A. Marcus j Cheryl Goldenberg 430 West Hopkins Ave. Aspen, CO 81611 June 17, 2000 Dear Mayor and Aspen City Council: I've lived across the street from the Boomerang Lodge for the past 13 years. I'm writing because I'm concerned that the new project being proposed as an extension ofthe Boomerang will cause an inappropriate and excessive number of cars to be parked on West Hopkins Avenue - the pedestrian/ bike way. The five individual chalets which will probably be sold as time shares or as individual homes to be managed by the Boomerang are alllarger than my home. We live in a duplex on a 9,000 sq ft. lot (less than halfthe size ofthe property to be developed) and by zoning law each half ofthe duplex is required to have a two car garage and an individual space off the street. The parking space and garage are in the back in the alley and out of sight ofthe pedestrian/bike way. We think that the developer ofour property also fought for fewer spaces but we're thankful now that the city prevailed and the street looks more beautiful because the cars are put away out ofsight. I don't believe that the Lodge Preservation rezoning is appropriate as the Boomerang is not adding moderately priced small lodging - this is very expensive high priced housing or lodging. Charlie Paterson says that time shares would probably sell for $300,000 - $400,000 for 1/7 ofa chalet. It's logical that the people who stay in these chalets will find the price ofa car rental inconsequential. If the chalets are used by owners they may be eligible for resident passes and leave their cars on the street all the time - even when they're not here. Smaller sized and much less expensive units like The Gant (largest unit is 1600 sq. ft. and rents for $300 to $1,000 per night) and Aspen Meadows provide a lot of on site parking for their guests and they are both hidden away and not on the ped/bike way. Even Aspen Square, North of Nell, The Little Nell and The St. Regis, which are all right in town and where guests could easily walk and take buses, have underground garage parking for their guests. Also tourists who are paying these high prices are likely to demand more services than the Boomerang currently provides and that will create more traffic on W. Hopkins. The question is "Is this expansion really providing the smalltodge experience that the zoning is trying to protect?". Ifthe project was less dense there would be room for parking and still plenty ofroom for profit as each chalet could eventually sell for close to $3 mil each. Less density and a garage is necessary here not only for the chalets but also for the employee units, and not just for the people using this property but for those of us who walk, bike, jog, roller blade, etc. into town and want to continue enjoying the relatively quiet beauty of Shadow Mountain and West Hopkins Avenue. Thanks for your time and attention. Sincerely, Cheryl Gol#nberg Thomas Cleary 217 So. Third, Box 2701 Aspen, CO. 81612 June 19,2000 Aspen City Council & Mayor City Hall Aspen, CO. 81611 Subject: Boomerang Expansion Dear Members and Mayor: I own a duplex in Block 39 with two off street parking spaces pe i unit. My property is one block East ofthe Boomerang Project, which I ot ject to, because it is much too dense and should offer off street parking. The ariel view or plan view shows six buildings tightly spread a: ross the property, however a north elevation would show a solid row of buildings with no space to see through to the base of Shadow Mountain. Therefore I wouli[ suggest that three buildings be allowed with proper spacing and necessary off stre, :.parking. - The developers have advised me that each unit will be fully self iufficient with kitchen, dining room, living room, bedroom and bathrooms which will be sold on a time-share bases. The two lodge units are really insignificant an 1 the employee housing is a very low trade off for the project. -5--I.---- The time-share basis for the project establishes a very good retun on investment with three buildings instead of the six buildings. This project is located on the city - county line and not in the cit S core where density is more acceptable. I hope the council and planners will review the project with as ni.tch scrutiny as they did with the Draco project in the City Center. Respegtfully subM~e~1 WM A .h. 1 57 Lrhainassp 43 1 West Hopkins Aspen, Colorado 81612 June 16,2000 Mr, Nick Lelack Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Boomer,ng Lodge Expansion - Rezoning & Minor Plan Unit Development Dear Mr. Lelack: I am writing to share some comments and concerns that I have regarding the proposed Boomerang Lodge Expansion. I own a residence at 431 West Hopkins which is diagonally across the street from the Boomerang Lodge, and I am personally acquainted with Mr. Charles Patterson, the owner ofthe Lodge. First let me say that I endorse all of the comments made by the various agencies that have reviewed the project. In particular, I think that it is critical for the maintenance of the West Hopkins bike and walkway that there be no on street parking for this proposed project. Also, I think it is important that the record be clarified as to the type of project which is being proposed. It is my understanding that this is not an expansion of the Boomerang Lodge but is instead a time sharing arrangement whereby the multiple owners of the chalets would have access to the Boomerang Lodge facilities and services which lie across West Hopkins from the site in question. I question whether or not the proposed use complies with the letter or the intent of the Lodge Preservation Rules and Regulations. Thank you very much for this opportunity to share some ofmy thoughts about this project with you, 47' Aft /1 1 2 t'itaton, Jr. 41#*est Hopkins Street jh Aspen Lonsolidated Sanitation -District Sy Kelly * Chairman John Keleller Paul Smith * Treas Fran]2 Loushin , Michael Kelly * Secy Bruce Matherly, Mgr April 18, 2000 RECEIVED Chris Bendon APR 2 0 2000 Community Development 130 S. Galena OOMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Aspen, CO 81611 ASPEN / PITKIN Re Boomerang Lodge Expansion Dear Chris The Boomerang lodge is currently served by the public system. The District currently has sufficient capacity to serve the additional development proposed. There are downstream constraints that will be eliminated through a system of additional proportionate fees. Additional fees will be involved for the Kaplin line extension and 1 st street impact fees. The proposed location of buildings 1, 3. and 5 may be a problem due to their proposed proximity to the public line. The location shown appears to encroach into the District' s sewer line easement. I'd encourage the applicant's engineer to contact our line superintendent for more information. No clear water connections (surface run-off, roof drains, foundation drains, etc) are allowed to the public system. Dry-wells are proposed for the project The comments made by the applicant's engineer in exhibit 7 regarding sanitary sewer are accurate. We have not however received a site plan or the detailed information needed to complete a tap permit and estimate fees. The total connection fees must be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit. As usual, service is contingent upon compliance with the District's rules, regulations, and specifications which are on file at the District office. Sincerely, ~4- D- *~Li A~~-L..L--3~// Bruce Matherly District Manager 565 N. Mill St.,Aspen, CO 81611 / (970)925-3601 / FAX (970) 925-2537 steve, 07:55 AM 7/14/00 -0600, Points to consider with the Boomera- - Application Page 1 of 2 r , ./ .1 131*' Dll- 6 Reply-To: <steve@goldenberg.com> From: "steve" <steve@aspeninfo.com> To: "Nick Lelack" <nicki@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Points to consider with the Boomerang Application Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2000 07:55:47 -0600 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Importance: Normal Reasons To Disapprove the Boomerang Application "Expansion", "Rezoning", "Lodge Preservation", "GMQS Exemption", "PUD" %*tting a Precedent for Inappropriate Application of Lodge Preservation Rules I Historic use of the vacant property has not been for lodging as required. (sec. ) h This is not an upgrade of an existing lodge as required. (sec. ) * It is not "onsite or adjacent" as required. (sec. ) * A "Time Share" is not the same as a "lodge" and runs contrary to intent of L.P. (sec. ) It will draw millions out of the project up front and leave the Boomerang Lodge with the financial responsibility of servicing the future time share users. h The new buildings are not intimately related to the old. (sec. ) h The "expansion" should be part of the "original" lodge and not separately saleable. 1â€¢ L. P. expansion is for "economy and moderate lodging", not $2,000+/night "chalets".(sec. ) â€¢ P&Z did not know about the timesharing when they conditionally approved the application. â€¢ The City probably wouldn't let a different owner put up a lodge or "chalets" on this site. â€¢ Inadequate employee mitigation. (Addition will require more new employees than stated) h Adults and children will have to cross Hopkins Ave. and back when using Boomerang pool. â€¢ Application not consistent with the underlying Residential-15 zoning. Inappropriate Rezoning from Residential R-15 Allowed or Required Proposed â€¢ Number of buildings 1 7 * Number of bedrooms 5 19 * Required setback 25 feet 10 feet * FAR 5,000+/- sq.ft. 12000+/- sq.ft. I Principle use Residential Timeshare * Added traffic on pedestrian/bikeway 5 trips/day 35 trips/day â€¢ Off street parking spaces 14 0 or 5 h Building footprint less than 3,000 sq.ft. 12,000 sq.ft. Excessive Density h Site plan too crowded to allow required off street parking. b* Can't see through from street to base of Shadow Mountain. )Â· Not 70% open space as stated by applicant. i Street side areas cannot be counted as open space. (sec. ) ~ Decks and walkways cannot be counted as open space. (sec. ) b Parking areas cannot be counted as open space. (see.) Printed for Nick Lelack <nickl@ci.aspen.co.us> 7/17/00 steve, 07:55 AM 7/14/00 -0600, Points to consider with the Boomera .,rÂ¥ Application Page 2 of 2 ???? cannot be counted as open space. (sec. ) Setting a Precedent for Inadequate Off Street Parking Present Boomerang guests bring cars. (see Boomerang photos) Guests from Denver/Boulder, CO, UT, WY etc. usually drive to Aspen. $400,000 1/7th timeshare owners will most likely have cars. $2,000+/night 2,200 sq.ft. luxury 3-bedroom "chalet" renters will have cars. Non-lodge employees will most likely have cars. Regulations require 14 off street parking spaces. (see Scott photos) Numerous curb cuts are not desirable. Printed for Nick Lelack <nickl@ci.aspen.co.us> 7/17/00 VVVVVVVV THE BOOMERANG Mrs. Mary Hugh Scott c/o John Beatty, Attorney at Law 520 E. Cooper Aspen, Co 81611 July 12, 2000 Dear Mary Hugh: We have always valued our friendship with you, which goes back over 30 years when you first came to Aspen and stayed with Russell and the children as guests at the Boomerang Lodge. The recent proposal ofour expansion ofthe Lodge to the adjacent parcel, known as block 32 took the possible concerns of the neighborhood, and also your concern very seriously. We also took into consideration our concern as the neighbor most seriously impacted by any changes. We have always felt very strongly that the transition of Shadow Mountain to the town lay at the base, specifically on Block 32, and we were happy that Mrs. Paepcke did not wish to sell her land during her lifetime so it would remain as wild grass and sagebrush with wildllowers sprinkled throughout. Unfortunately this was not to be forever. When we acquired the land from you, our intention was to be sensitive to the land and neighborhood. In our planning we feel we have accomplished this. One remark that I recall from you was that you did not wish to see a solid wall ofbuildings, or a solid planting ofpine trees, fronting the street. When I thought ofthe design of our project, I had some serious constraints in mind:Any building should have the mass broken up and recede into the landscape.There should be open space to allow the natural vegetation to continue behind and between the buildings. The buildings should be oriented to the view and the sun, be low in scale and as unobtrusive as possible. We feel this has been accomplished. In fact, we carefully followed the official guidelines published by the City of Aspen for the Shadow Mountain neighborhood. Furthermore, the buildings total footprint occupy only 30% ofthe land. The remaining 70% will be open space. In addition, the roof height is actually lower than what is allowed by code. At our meeting with Planning and Zoning, we had a 5 to 0 approval with high marks for a sensitive design. 500 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE 1 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 970-925-3416 â€¢ 800-992-8852 FACSIMILE 970-925-3314 THE BOOMERANG We were deeply disturbed and hurt by the caustic and negative comments made by your representative at the City Council hearing on June 26th. We deserved better than that ! I called your secretary this spring to discuss our plans. We were told that you were unavailable. In the end, I thought you would be in touch with us at your convenience. This void in communicating directly with you, even now, has contributed to the present misunderstanding and bitterness. My hope is that when this letter reaches you it will alleviate some of your concerns. Fonda joins me in wishing you kind regards. Sincerely, Charles Paterson c.c. Russell Scott 111 & Co LLC Michael Hoffman, Attorney at Law Mayor Rachel Richards and City Council Sunny Vann and Mitch Haas, Landplanners Nick Lelack and Julie Anne Woods, City Development Dept. 500 WEST HOPKINS AVENUE ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 970-925-3416 â€¢ 800-992-8852 FACSIMILE 970-925-3314 . INF,MEY REALTORSÂ® June 26,2000 Honorable Mayor & City Council Hand Delivered 130 South Galena St. Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Lady and Gentleman: It has come to our attention that there has been some objection expressed, recently, regarding the proposal ofthe Boomerang Lodge's modest expansion. We would like to submit to you that the Boomerang Lodge is, perhaps, the finest remaining example of a true lodge experience in Aspen - something which we all have been sorry to see slowly disappearing. Charlie and Fonda Paterson have worked exceedingly hard, over more years than most of us have been here to make it a fine hostelry of which this community can be proud. We have looked at their plans and believe their low-density (with 70% open space) addition to the lodge is a perfect use of the space and, furthermore, respects the environment. Finally, as we have stated above, small lodges are struggling today and Aspen is in danger of loosing this once strong segment ofaccommodations. The Patersons are simply responding by expanding the bed base, allowing them to keep their lodge a viable operation. C ~7 Doremus and Pamela Toon 1 822 West Smuggler St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 Telephone: 970/925-6866 Facsimile: 970/925-5843 E,kilÂ©/T<C- MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council, Nick Lelack, Charlie Paterson FROM: Stephen Goldenberg SUBJECT: Boomerang Lodge Rezoning & Expansion DATE: June 19.2000 1. Inapolicability of"Lodge Preservation/GMOS Exception" for New "Time Share" Construction The applicant has stated that he intends to sell seven "time shares" in each o f the five chalets" for from $300,00-$400,000 per share. That works out to 10-14 million dollars, plus the sales price ofthe 2 employee units and the value ofthe 2 lodging units. Ifthis is still his intention. the Lodge Preservation Regulations ("for moderately priced adjacent lodging") do not apply and the application should be withdrawn or denied. If the applicant has changed his mind and there is no longer such intention, the property should be contractually deed restricted so that it cannot be sold off or separated from the existing Boomerang Lodge in case he changes his mind again after the project is completed. The intention to time share the project was stated to me twice, and on different occasions to Cheryl. Renee Marcus, Tom Cleary, Martha Madsen and others and appears in a written memo in exhibit #2 of the "Lodge Preservation" application, a copy of which is attached. P&Z was not aware of the applicants intention to "time share" the chalets when they approved the application. They would reconsider the application if it were put back on their agenda by city staff. 2. Rezoning from 1 Private Home to 5 "Private Homes" plus 2 Employee Units and 2 Lodging Units There is little or no public benefit derived from up zoning this property. Each of the five "chalets" will contain 2,100 square feet of living space with 3 bedrooms, 3.5 baths, a full kitchen, dining room and study. Ifnot time shared, they will rent for more than $2,000 per night. Even without the 2 lodge and 2 employee units, this represents 3 or 4 times the density allowed in the underlying R-15 zone. That is why the site plan looks so packed and why there is no room for the required off street parking. The requested FAR is more than 12,000 sq. ft. instead ofthe zoned 5,000 sq. ft., the requested number ofbedrooms is 19 as opposed to 5 and the buildings will be set back only 10ft. instead ofthe required 25 ft. 3. Ignoring the Onsite Parking Requirements on New Construction Nineteen bedrooms require approximately 14 off street parking spaces. The Boomerang van does not generally pick up or drop offat the airport. People paying $300,000+ for a 1/7th timeshare or $2.000+ per night are likely to rent a car even ifthey don't use it every day. That's actually worse because the unused cars will sit on Hopkins Ave. all day and all night. All the more reason to keep them offthe street and out of sight. There should be at least 10 on site garages or parking spaces. There should be no street parking for the "new residences" or the old Boomerang. The present neighbors park in their required garages to keep Hopkins Avenue uncluttered for pedestrian use in the summer, to assist with snow removal in the winter and for esthetic reason all year round. There was no parking in the proposal because there are too many buildings proposed for that site. 4. Impact on Natural Environment The six proposed buildings will certainly have a more adverse environmental impact than one single house with one ADU or even a duplex. The building footprints are several times greater than the allowed single family or duplex and the resulting open space is considerably less. They are also asking that the front yard setback be reduced from 25 ft. to 10 ft. That will put the buildings much closer to the street and the winter shadows right on the street funher aggravating street icing conditions. 5. Phasing ofConstruction The project as proposed is very "rich" financially and could easily be financed and built in one shot. The application is phased so that the profits from the sale ofthe Phase I "times shares" can pay for the construction of Phase II. The public benefit of the two affordable units should come earlier rather than later. 6. Traffic, Road Safety, Service and Emergency Vehicle Access A residential unit generates 5-10 auto trips per day. For a pedestrian street, that's a lot more traffic. The neighbors and the present Boomerang guests exit and enter from the alley, to 4th and then on to Main. Guests of the new Boomerang residences will have no choice but to use Hopkins coming and going. Adults and children using the old Boomerang pool will have to run across Hopkins and back, as will the cleaning, maintainance and other staff all year round. An unobstructed street and a striped pedestrian cross walk will be necessary to minimize accidents and provide somewhat better access for service and emergency vehicles. No lettered parking permits should be issued to any Boomerang guests. 7. Employee Mitigation The employee mitigation calculations appear to be understated. 17 additional bedrooms in 6 additional buildings would likely require 5-7 additional employees. Only 2 additional affordable units are provided. 8. Summary The very high density ofthe project, as proposed, causes all of the above problems. Reducing the number of"chalets" to 2 or 3 would reduce the density, traffic, environmental impact, and safety problems, leaving room for open space and garages to keep the autos off the street and out o f sight, and allow the entire project to be built profitably in one phase. Less density would also permit the buildings to be setback further from the street as required in an R-15 zone. 1/ / \-llut Lâ‚¬>IL.- 1.-3. CITY OF ASPEN - PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Chris Bendon, 920.5072 DATE: 12.16.99 ~ PROJECT: Boomerang Expansion REPRESENTATIVE: Sunny Vann * OWNER: Charles and Fonda Patterson TYPE OF APPLICATION: 2 step. Rezoning, Minor PUD, LP Expansion and AH GMQS exemption. DESCRIPTION: Applicant is seeking to expand the Boomerang Lodge to a vacant parce] across Hopkins Avenue from the existing lodge.,Ihe proposal includes 6 new detached lodge units and an employee housing structure to include one or two units and parking. The properry is currently zoned R-15 and would need to be rezoned with an LP Overlay to allow the lodge use. The Minor PUD process will be used to define the dimensional requirements for the new development including parking. Planner suggests the Special Review for AH Parking be combined, pursuant to 26.304.060(B), with the PUD review. No development is proposed on the existing lodge and the PUD will only define dimensions on the new parcel. The applicant should, however, include the existing lodge in-the application to describe operational, employment, and parking characteristics of the eXisting situation compared to the expected conditions after development. Is contemplating an interval ownership Ethenewlodge units. 42endino- cdRe -) The creation of Lodge units does not automatically constitute a Subdivision. The applicant 1 .<~nterpretationwill determine the requirements for this style ofownership. ifany. and ap.v- . --I---- ~ ------ eamendmentsrhatare necessary. Renee Niarcus 432 W. Hopkins Aspen, CO 81611 TO: Aspen City Council RE: Boomerang Lodge Expansion My family and I came to Aspen 32 years ago; and we have lived opposite the Boomerang Lodge for the past 22 years. I realized that the property across the street from us would not remain vacant forever, but hoped that future development would preserve the character of West Hopkins Avenue. West Hopkins Avenue is a beauâ‚¬ful pedestrian / bicycle street with an eclectic mix of Victorian homes, duplexes, employee housing, lodging and open space. I am not opposed to additional lodging. The Boomerang was here long before I arrived; and has provided much needed and appreciated moderate priced rooms with the old charm we all cherish. The "Boomerang Lodge Expansion" proposed, however is NOT an expansion of the Boomerang Lodge as we know it, but a new and separate development of 5 3 bedroom, 3 1/2 bath single family homes and 2 additional lodge rooms. This proposed project with 19 addilional bedrooms and no off street parking would be on a building lot more appropriate for a single family home or duplex with a garage. The duplex where I live has a two car garage plus additional off street parking for each unit which are the same size as the proposed "chalets". Mr. Paterson told me that he intends to sell 7 fractional ownerships for each "chalet" at approximately $300,000.00 ... ($10,500,000.00). AT LEAST 9 0 ff street parking spaces are absolutely necessary to control a potentially ugly and congested situation! By reducing the number of"chalets" to 3 and including garages for these homes and o ff street parking for the employee units, the Patersons would still be making a huge profit on their investment, while helping to preserve the character of t:he neighborhood. West Hopkins Avenue is the only remaining street in the city that is a reminder o f why we originally moved to Aspen. Please preserve the charm and beauty of this street for the enjoyment of its residents and visitors. n __- - -i 2-111V 90/UP Renee A. Marcus I Cheryl Goldenberg 430 West Hopkins Ave. Aspen, CO 81611 June 17, 2000 Dear Mayor and Aspen City Council: I've lived across the street from the Boomerang Lodge for the past 13 years. I'm writing because I'm concerned that the new project being proposed as an extension ofthe Boomerang will cause an inappropriate and excessive number of cars to be parked on West Hopking Avenue - the pedestrian/ bike way. The five individual chalets which will probably be sold as time shares or as individual homes to be managed by the Boomerang are aillarger than my home. We live in a duplex on a 9,000 sq ft. lot (less than half the size ofthe property to be developed) and by zoning law each halfof the duplex is required to have a two car garage and an individual space off the street. The parking space and garage are in the back in the alley and out of sight ofthe pedestrian/bike way. We think that the developer ofour property also fought for fewer spaces but we're thankful now that the city prevailed and the street looks more beautiful because the cars are put away out of sight. I don't believe that the Lodge Preservation rezoning is appropriate as the Boomerang is not adding moderately priced smalllodging - this is verv expensive high priced housing or lodging. Charlie Paterson says that time shares would probably sell for $300,000 - $400,000 for 1/7 of a chalet. It's logical that the people who stay in these chalets will find the price ofa car rental inconsequential. If the chalets are used by owners they may be eligible for resident passes and leave their cars on the street all the time - even when they're not here. Smaller sized and much less expensive units like The Gant (largest unit is 1600 sq. ft. and rents for $300 to $1,000 per night) and Aspen Meadows provide a lot of on site parking for their guests and they are both hidden away and not on the ped/bike way. Even Aspen Square, North ofNell, The Little Nell and The St. Regis, which are all right in town and where guests could easily walk and take buses, have underground garage parking for their guests. Also tourists who are paying these high prices are likely to demand more services than the Boomerang currently provides and that will create more traffic on W. Hopkins. The question is "Is this expansion really providing the smalllodge experience that the zoning is trying to protect?". Ifthe project was less dense there would be room for parking and still plenty ofroom for profit as each chalet could eventually sell for close to $3 mil each. Less density and a garage is necessary here not only for the chalets but also for the employee units, and not just for the people using this property but for those of us who walk, bike, jog, roller blade, etc. into town and want to continue enjoying the relatively quiet beauty of Shadow Mountain and West Hopkins Avenue. Thanks fbr your time and attention. Sincer*, _92.14 33 6-(d'~ Mic it Cheryl Gol#nberg Thomas Cleary 217 So. Third, Box 2701 Aspen, CO. 81612 June 19, 2000 Aspen City Council & Mayor City Hall Aspen, CO. 81611 Subject: Boomerang Expansion Dear Members and Mayor: I own a duplex in Block 39 with two off street parking spaces pa unit. My property is one block East ofthe Boomerang Project, which I ot j.ct to, because it is much too dense and should offer off street parking. The ariel view or plan view shows six buildings tightly spread a: ross the property, however a north elevation would show a solid row of buildings 'rith no space to see through to the base of Shadow Mountain. Therefore I would suggest that three buildings be allowed with proper spacing and necessary off strec: parking. / C-The developers have advised me that each unit will ie fully self i ufficient with 9 < kitchen, dining room, living room, bedroom and bathrooms which will be sold on a ) 71 < time-share bases. The two lodge units are really insignificant ani the employee .1.) \~housing is a very low trade off for the project. The time-share basis for the project establishes a very good retu - 2 on investment with three buildings instead of the six buildings. This project is located on the city - county line and not in the cit 5 core where density is more acceptable. I hope the council and planners will review the projecr with as nuch scrutiny as they did with the Draco project in the City Center. ResÂ£~tfully su*f~e~ BMIntis . 431 West Hopkins Aspen, Colorado 81612 June 16,2000 Mr. Nick Lelack Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Boomenne LodEC Expansion - Rezoning & Minor Plan Unit Development Dear Mr. Lclack: I am writing to share some comments and concerns that I have regarding the proposed Boomerang Lodge Expansion. I or,n a residence at 431 West Hopkins which is diagonally across the steer from the Boomerang Lodge, and I am personally acquainted with Mr. Charles Patterson, the owner of the Lodge. First let me say that I endorse all of the comments made by the various agencies that have reviewed the project, In particular, I think that it is cntical for the maintenance of the West Hopkins bike and walkway that there be no on street parking for this proposed project. Also, I think it is important that the record be clarified as to the type of project which is being proposed. It is my understanding that this is not an expansion of the Boomerang Lodge but is instead a time sharing arrangement whereby the multiple owners of the chalers would have access to the Boomerang Lodge facilities and services which lie across West Hopkins from the site in question. I question whether or not the proposed use complies with the letter or the intent of the Lodge Preservation Rules and Regulations. Thank you very much for this opportunity to share some of my thcughts abcut this project with you. Staton, Jr. 4~/west Hopkins Street jh -- Noe n cl>N/p o ...15 Scit (1 4-6 85 - O*Â¢ S+AE.et 2-0, - Alle.Y '04 445 1 I 2 0891 71 12454-02 0853 4671 4 t -0 Noâ€¢â€¢ Glvt/00 ~ I yi 4' 2 4. r 4.9.- % Sc~.tt- Con A. 5 90*t - Uork'bs /ke- - NE-913-6 08917112454-02 0853 4672 1 1. 9. + r ,-.1 41#le D h . - f- , - T--- m 8Â©Â°0"445 Al(e~ p.-r's ~ FULL 1.i.-. * Â·ubyir licÂ·tug-UL Ub:03 46. 4 i C h- 6 -0-~ 4 Â¢1, : ime-raw, 4% 26.2- # e*, efe.7 9 ce -1 i :1:101 : 1 1 Â·:Â·â‚¬CÂ·f :Â·'Â· Â·1Â·1CÂ·.Â· .4.-~C % WO.,1 ,- i Â£24Â·.14-UZ Lit:Â·3Â·3 46, u .4 p LAT:227. i /,l C 14 0 â‚¬- D dA N,JEOh t *ul-ji~- 83(te 1 0 le @60 t' 9< ElygfT-= 6 ASPEN/PITKIN COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CODE INTERPRETATION JURISDICTION: City of Aspen APPLICABLE CODE SECTION: Section 26.100.104 - Definitions EFFECTIVE DATE: January 12,2000 WRITTEN BY: Chris Bendon, Senior Planner APPROVED BY: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director SUMMARY: This interpretation of the Land Use Code determines that the term "general public" (as used in the provision that lodges remain available for use by the general public) does not allow for an owner of a lodge unit to perpetually occupy the unit. The requirements for a lodge apply uniformly to aillodge units within a lodge and each lodge unit must conform to the lodge provisions, unless the use of that specific unit has been appropriately approved for another land use. And, the manner in which land is owned does not grant the land owner(s) the ability to circumvent any other provisions of the land use code, including zone district regulations, definitions, the change-in-use provision, or the timeshare regulations. BACKGROUND: Sunny Vann requested an interpretation of the Land Use Code to determine if the term "general public," as used in the definition of Hotel and Lodge, allows for units to be perpetually occupied by owners in an interval ownership arrangement. DISCUSSION: Lodge units within an LP lodge may be individually owned through a condominium form of ownership. This is practiced in several ofthe lodges and hotels in town and is specifically stated in Ordinance No. 39, Series of 1999. The purpose for this "whereas" clause was to ensure lodge owners understood they were not losing their right to condominiumize their lodges as this term was removed as a land use in the LP Zone District. The six-month provision came about as an incentive to LP lodge operators who, on occasion, provided lodging to groups staying for longer periods of time. The example of Music Festival students was used throughout this discussion as many of the smalllodge operators master leased their lodge to the Festival for the entire summer season. This traditional style of operation was not in keeping with the Hotel definition, in which the Lodge definition was based, hence the amendment. It was resolved, however, that lodges must remain available to the general public for at least half of the year on a short-term basis to ensure the use of the land remains lodging, not residential. In other words, the form of ownership does not allow a lodge owner to circumvent the zoning of the property or to convert to another land use. There may be some confusion in the terminology being discussed. The act of condominiumizing property describes ownership of space for the purpose of sale. This is typically done in multi-family structures to allow individual units to be conveyed separately. Interval ownership, however, describes the manner in which many owners o f one property have agreed to divide their interest. This has been most common in sales of planes and yachts, where several owners agree on the manner in which the right to use the interest is divided. The application ofthis form of ownership in real estate has been described as a Timeshare. The acts are mutually exclusive. This is consistent with the manner in which the Land Use Code currently treats Condominiumization and Timesharing - one act dividing an interest spatially and the other act dividing the interest time-wise. Neither of these acts grant a land owner the ability to change the nature of his land use, especially when the use is not allowed in the zoning. The term "general public," as used in the definitions of Hotel and Lodge, refers to people with no proprietary interest. Although, as proposed, the units could be sold on an open market, an exclusive right to perpetually occupy a unit excludes everyone except the owner. In principal, what differentiates a lodge from a residence is the fact that a lodge is open to the general public, whereas a house is not. In fact, inquiring about the availability of a room in a hotel is different than if a stranger walked up to one's house and inquired about an overnight stay. Examples of this difference can also be found in comparing a restaurant to one's personal dining room, or a taxi to one's personal automobile. The Land Use Code regulations regarding land use and change-in-use apply equally to all parcels, structures, buildings and divisions thereof. For example, an owner of a multi-family building does not have the right to convert one unit to a commercial use unless the use is allowed in the zone district and the appropriate change-in-use approvals are achieved, regardless of the relatively small percentage of the building the commercial use may represent. This philosophy also applies to lodges. Each lodge unit within an LP lodge must be available to the general public at least six months of each year. To not make a lodge unit available in this manner would effect a change-in-use and would require the appropriate , approvals for that specific unit. The majority of Mr. Vann's letter seems to concentrate on the relative merits of changing the land use code to allow perpetual owner occupancy as a means of financing LP development. While the points are understood, it is not the purpose of the Interpretation section to amend the Land Use Code, regardless of one's desire for the Director to think "outside the box." It is the responsibility of the Planning Director to make interpretations of the Land Use Code where ambiguity may exist. The Land Use Code provides a process in which land use regulations may be amended. Staff suggests Mr. Vann direct his energy in this manner. Appeal of Decision As with any interpretation of the land use code by the Community Development Director, you have the ability to appeal the decision to the Aspen City Council. This can be done in conjunction with a land use request before City Council or as a separate agenda item. CC: John Worcester, City Attorney Chris Bendon, Senior Planner -Z- i UBLIC NOTICE DATE JUL, 24 ZoO + 1 . * 4 TIME 5--: DI) PM . ~ ~ . C tTy COONIC I L LACE c ITy HALL ;t*238 i j ~,44 miA - 1- (117 (C,UNCIL 91Â·4 44Â¥ *Arts# URPOSE Te) CON.#PER. t: 'f~Al*18 - PpgOVAL FoR MINOR PLANA19> UNf EVELOPMENT(PUDD TO REZON 2- - 152 W IT-H LOU>(AE PRESERVAT/ON - A-:4'0- r- = LA#e 'SE vP OVERLAYS AND FOR A N FFORDABLE HOUSING- 4?VIOâ‚¬ XEMPTION FOR TWO GIST- UNI-ES 19 T-HE PROPOSED LOE>4-2 FANS t ON FOR;BOOMERANG LO~E ON BL K '32_ /01-S A-1\ ~ *rnâ‚¬n -OF,4ATKÂ»6 CONTACT *.74/AMâ„¢â€¢ PL~-4-*3 C.FRCE I 1309*OA04~A~e, 4%*~0 P JUN-30-2000 FRI Ul:43 Fri County of Pitkin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE PURSUANT } SS. TO ASPEN LAND USE REGULATION State of Colorado } SECTION 26304.060 (E) , beta or repceseating an 400[icir.[ to the Ciry of.Upen, personally cer:iff that I have compIidi with the public nctice requirements pursuant to Sec:ion 26.304.060 (E) of le .Asyen Land Use Re@ulations in the foilowing m ... .... 1. By mailing of notice, a copy o f wlichis acached hereto, b::0' first-class, porage prepaid U, S, Mlil to all owners c fprope:tv with three hundred (300) feer o f the subject 2000 prcreny, as indicated on the arached List, on the 2 117 of J UL>l , 1*t (which is _16 --. davs :rier to the publir kal,41 0 A... -: 7/*1/04 I 2. By posting a sign in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as k could be ses: from the nearest oublic way) and that the said sign was pcsted and visible ce=tinuct:.51:/ ZooS. from 4.e 6 *tday of 4 ULY , 2927 Bfust be posted for at lest ter. 00) full Amâ€¢.' 3 di>-s before the heanng 6.6 6-6 - I. . . photograph of 52 posted sign # 281:hed herÂ·:to. Signsurs (An.ch photograph here) Sig:r.ed befort me this i Â£23 dw 4 0 L,y . 381;51' 10Â©-O WITNESS D, [Y HAND AND,339.fEAL My commi-sica expires:-&12, 43~0 61,0 ~29*.1 Notija_P-ublig- A 0 ---Â«Â« i- Not~yfublt89 Signature L./ 2 JOHN A. FORSTER E E NOTARY PUBLIC m MY COMMISS! '3'6 1-"prt b 9,2/25/21)03 . WEST -- --1-4 O P !<IN 5 AVE. A f. PAVEMENT ENDS ~ /Â¥r 1 -76-8. ALL EL PA K K It>IG- -<4 L_- IG F.AVE L /1 1 j 4 / 1 H (5IDEWALK) 7 c-_k Fr uU 4*11[Ld . . 1-1 j <PL-1-1 fir- 41-11 u r: .3 I i Â©~-Ii ILL t | r7M/1 x -/*Y -T '-' 1==J = = 2- - t. LIGHT. PALAR 5 LL') (TYPO 7. 6 1 1. / Â·'l \ . . JOI-0 / 1 -TRA514 -- 1 1 ,Â· 7 -23 t.11Â· IHI;REysliCKLE- I J .1 - , Ij/-- h->4:,4 - ! 1/61/6/L J \1/1- - N j ~ \/\ .-. C=1 AffÂ£ws f 4 h 19- D. c i Â»006>/i / 3-9 ...2 L 1 ' M fe i ' ts ILT-TIJ *4 f T /-#1- j&Y5-) ~5gle/- Â® /<. \ i../7 // \ 91 / , .1.....Illi (3) / 2-roirr 5201KDOM I '. fÂ· 1 ~~(,.' 1. 11 <46\ 04 2 AFFORPABLE .C.0110053-4611 \ 1 1 I i L I &Â£Z,1~MUNT/-9 \ 0 440 & ' fOLON \ \\ /2\ inprET. 11 Â· 1 ---Pchor,Rt,rE,-2137'4 4-/ GOLD' 7 /1 1 - \2 \ 942 \ r -WE5T-ENCE'-p LE><a. 2-Â·. /..; ~;. ' ; #Â·~ P 11 , 13Â¥L--7.--C MA LETS ALL , /1 r.-- \ ~,/x.,.,) 3 "1 Movi 306" 0 I ~ I_5>_ ER,ST ' C,D / -1 .+ 1 \ *33299> _=IP Â»21' %1/40~H. f -' STIREEr 1 'AnG- k i .:\ \ L - 1.1 .1 f> 1 I (4) \ \ - EL__ _.~-~4 -i A. \ 62 499.5,0 , \\ I A 10'-O,4 7 1 I' - \ \ ~67., -li , - ,~ --CHALE T. ~ 1 1 ~.~ . , FOOTPAJN-1- 141,0 ~ ~ ..3 n '9'-O. 9 â€ž6.FLOOR AREA. 11740 \ ~ t< 391-0. VAi:- -1- -- -1 -7to'IX. ---1- -1 ~ 1 Xi _3 Â° 45/L 79" - .TEOCE- 23,= PROPERTY - ZE 56- ON EPGE OF p RUPE R<ry 3 +O- T 11 > Ill (2 + I lot 0. -1*/19&/dlfi [-H i 11 / I. Â»Â»'foÂ«Â»Â«9 510 I F , 7 -REy! 28> MARCH - 2(,00 B L G C K 32 Lul-5 A-I 2-JAN.-*50(5 - SCALE 92 + r-cy -FARTÂ·ECHAL.EC5--1612-0~9- m --8069-P~.,4~7 11,-172Â·5-0 3/17/oc, _Reg-r GNO BLDG- 37leÂ·5-0~ Â·442- ACRES-_ 19,2.8-1,0.41*19 - TOTAL FOOTPRINT o F CHALETS (5) 3,786-0 ~ ,5545-07 54**AREAÂ·56*9 Â· F(66-TPRINT 6* Wâ‚¬ST END BLDG, gk"5Â§11 ~ 5922.9 4 FOOTFKLAT CFF 1-RASH ENCLOSURES 80 0 - SITE + 43Â»NO<5 1,ON .%52 >L kl h.,8- 9-f ' LANDSCAPE PLAN tÂ« 479 7.. a A hirsÂ© A'N+ED> W E.S. T - 14 0 P WINS AVE. A , PAVEMENT EFpS vki /--Â¥. \ --PARALLEL PAR.KING k C.4 -G FAVE L 29/ 2 7 1 L_ +tor Â¥74 M (SIDEWALK) ~-â€¢'-/reclrÂ·-Ad//3---rMTefahtfiST,ir)5173/I- _3,â€žrhuitu /f .7 -----L#L~/IY -7=> -TR,SH 1=JI- -=*1:1.[!29RE~ % 1 -.r . - 11,7 oryp.) SH - ~- rEm*ADOU-E- 1 ).- * (11,0 -1. / 1 0 1 ... ,/ '22 , \AS.*ts Â·4 -0' 1 i . I U,IXÂ·*1 ASPENS r 1*011-0 I _ 0 I .1 . .4 . 9:11-9'12 ~ Â· 7* 7 m .7 1, t. : f z-remr -6.GRC>PIt \ h i . ' b t\% .... ...i-~-~~~*~ C .\ \ 1 - 50.-OIl .C.0/005&MAIR \\ t,. ~ ~ f + Â·~ AFFORPABLW * de#L, 1 \. \\\ , i ". -5 PIEZZ i â€ž A PARTMENT-5 -WENT-ENII-BLDG, \F.litw. 5\ . '\ 1 ....0 & ...1 . 1 i. Move 32-64 - Fc,oTPR'Er-213'7'/2 - -/Lt'di '2 , ' Got . 7414,1 .400Â·u; I 6*ki hi \ I.'- -1.2 4 . 1 1 f WA LETS ALL i- - Â·r f rr- 1--l . 44Â·4â‚¬Â· r 0 4,7 64. Crk Y : \ ~ / . A.-6 - A '42,2691 \ 1/ :1, Â· 2 - 3.-0 ./NCk-=RE-55:*31.IBATH st- I f./,\\ 1 \ Nr .. . ID - E-AST -- ..1- 4 r . - )el,l,F.te>< ..-E n WARD .ufÂ»*aul#re=21.-.Ci>.2 - 1, . 2- , .:=321=177, /, l- . N.NX ~ ~.73Â· Â· Â·*Â·~ 74197. -'Â· Â· Â· ~L \ 1, F~URT-192> STREET- CHALE~9 - ~~ am 498.5,0 / - fl * 0 / IÂ·>fi:, h ' ./ .'.3 + ~ , i FOOTPANT- 141.0 ~ \va / .. ..PAJ -2â‚¬1 / / 1 -. 16. . i 4 1 'Â»=2*Wagm#.*pdj#/4*641".Vi'laur 77*/5#9,Â·4~â€¢ai~ r.....:.. 1-Â·,le J.Ti..- -1~ .k . - 1 . 5 k. .-3 1 -- â€¢ 1 * ...-I".*' I ..9,1 + \ 1 ,~ 1.-0. 1 -1 . ..... ell-- ,. . 1 4 ~-EDGE OF: PROPERTY -- -A B. 0 11 L c>, -4Â·r'- . - EDGE OF PRUPâ€¢2 KTy . -3 Â£ mtoâ€¢, - IJ*Li-2/#p/ t- H -444*09~lo f : Y 1149Â«229479 .jr 5-09 1 . ' .REVI SED) MARCH -:1('oc<) B L O C Y< 3 Z LciTS A -I L-JAN.- *2506 5-CALE N 6 11.-Cy _LEJA-EKE*-C_HAI--ET-5- 7612-91~5- r 8 06991~~ 11,772Â· F JA 3~)7/00 _REE-M END BLDS- 37)8.5-9 442- ACRES- 19,281 9~-633,29 TOTAL FOOTP IKI NT OF CHALETS (S)Â· 3,7860 ~ ~ 54*9ED AREAs(49 Â· .PkiDJ-PAINT t)# Â·WEST END BLDG, 2, k'37~59 58er ~ 5922.54 FOOTPRINT OF URASH ENCIDSORES 80 0 J SITE + LANDSCAFE PLAN /-6 *59 57 - dor %>w *ED WES. T -" 14 0 P !<IN 5 AVE. '4__ -- PA*EMENT EN DS -1 -Â¥r ---h -PARALLEL PARKING_.< ~---2 -G-FAVE L 2 - li L ' -\ 4,-.e Â·p,AT H MIDEWALK) - 1 1 I . 1 -%79 -rl : '* FT)Ll~ C# Fl 77 5 3 Uqu p'X '4.61_J ~'4U 49 rl h:Pr'U1,~ 1 1/Â· LL r, 21- -Â·r *SH I | ~-1-- -2=Â»/ 4- L 10Â» 4â‚¬I-1-1, ir-T#/tprK'kp. 1 - ~...99. -3 - LUGH+Jau44 r. 7- â€¢) | <LY-' MAL 1 .Al./.0 Â·.) C-TYR) #- - ~ .-EXTNEYSUOK L E ~ I .\13- .-. toi-O TRASH ..1 --2 .1 - -+1-n: \ - fl'SH E S , f ...1 HAINâ€¢4- 0 511/' '# APENS O -3/1-9 ~ / 4,4 \/7 1 46 0 1 - 04 OF..' l'. f> ' (5) . \ . I , .0 E â€¢ 3 .1~ Ila 00 / 0 t #A 1 (/, l'%, . -i \ 3'lle \- / â‚¬ 6-0'-0. r 14' 1--ONÂ¥ 5601K0OM 1 Â· " i -- -I 10?1100 5 Cl' Ila IR .1 .- , f 1 '40 4< \ \ h --/ \ 1,1 2.MFOR#*04 j 1. 43- ~ \>:0--APIE=- A PAR:TMENT-5 -*5-r-ENUI-BL04 ' /\ , \ * .,4 2 4 - F /*-13Â¥L-7 / GOLD' / 1,2 0 -CHA LEILS ALL â‚¬ i 'Ly MOVE 3,-64 r . Â· .1Â©6-LLEÂ£849.-Barâ„¢- ./1 k . .7 /1 1 1-9_ E-Px *ST /L.10.--7, ~ Â·7 ~' . L'Z_ 28U1.*aE*66Mhi*A~:~~ i /, -- Le\14,-9- 6-*viu / /1 , /5 ~' To WARD- ~~ _"FOURT-H>-~ I= I.-- - 1.-Il \ STREET 11 -lkÂ« PATI O . I.0 V \ -708'g~AUST 4 , $ 14/MA \ V . .==- -*A 1-rcl. .4 -., f . \Â£ CM *18.5,0 4 , ., i -, 2 A 01.0., t f ' 2 C HAL Â£ T. 4 / ~ . i &ATPA.INT 141,/ ~ ~ ./ 1 IqL 0. 44 Â¥'rL./CUOR AREâ€¢. 1:T40 1 2 1,/ \ ;39'_O. 1 PAR. - - 1,12.0~ / - ' 12- , \ . .// 1 ~ EDGE OF PROPER<ry 1../ 9 -D- t'' - 9-â‚¬04-E OF= PROPER:ry 4 - 10,-0.1 --FI- -CE A C), t . 1 -- 1. ~ -Â».114 lill I .Ili- l Ill i l.lll + 1 1 Jbh.,"-1 lij1 9 1 Ul ;/ r 7-9 . -h 4------- --Be- cf " *y! 56-9 MARCH--*cioÂ© B L O C K 32. LOTS A-I .JAN.-Aboes -SCALE N==ill-O" -FrAR-Â·;1-O~F~#'A~-21:-M t- -: 7*}] i, 772, FIA Vjvoc> *14.2. ACRES-_ 19,2.8-1,~..&151.15 .TOTAL FOOT.P RINT- CF CHALETS (93 3,786-Fd ~1 ,5845-07 684.*Â·>25.%51/4 Â· 1@:~c~)TPR.INT CL# WEIST END BLDa. 2,8-7,59 ~ 5922.50 FOOTPRINT OF -TRASH ENCLDSOFES 80 0 J SITE + LANDSCAPE PLAN Joyce Ohlson Tom Bracewell Becea Schickling Memorandum TO: Nick Lelack, Community Development FROM: Rebecca Schickling, Assistant Parks Director DATE: May 25,2000 RE: Boomerang Lodge Expansion John Krueger, Patrick Duffield and myself did a site visit to the lot and have the following concerns and comments. The proposed on street parking for the project presents a few complications for future trail plans for the Shadow Mountain Trail. One alternative for the Shadow Mountain trail is to extend the trail at its terminus at 4th Street and bring it down on to the South side of Hopkins Street in the right-of-way (ROW). An eight to ten foot trail along Hopkins would be in conflict with the proposed parking for the Lodge and Condominiums. This may also present a problem along 4tli Street as well. If the trail were to stay behind the Boomerang lot, then access to the property would need to be from Hopkins or 4m Street. The trail may continue along the alley and old Midland ROW and then extend up the mountain. The Parks Department could support their request to adjust the lot line along Lot G, however, an adjustment to include in their property boundary the southerly portions of Lots D&E would severely encroach upon the trail. 26 315 South 7* Slmet Aspen, CO 81611 July 24,2000 TO: Charlie Patterson, City Council FROM Ed Zdacky, neighbor in Shadow Mountain neighborhood RE: Current development application for land across Hopkins from Boomerang Lodge T ain happy to write a letter in support of a development application, having opposed many others. 1 support the PatÂ©ersons because: I like the scale efthe small buildings proposed 27 I am concerned that we arc losing tourilt accommodations at a rapid rate, and need replacement rooms in complexes like The Gant and the Aspen Alps, there art substantial numbers of units that the owners won't rent. Al real estate price& Increase, so does this Irend Given that this land will be developed, I think this type of development will serve the town best. Thank you for your timc. Ed Za,acky /1\7 A EZ/jt 6/1 J 7.1 v .200 :,n,I Â·,/,iÂ·in, IT-,v=n: rvi 70Ta o,R n,I 1,Â¥41 O, :nT unm nnoz.,1 z.Â·, n 315 South 7th Street Aspen, CO 81611 July 24,2000 TO: Charlie Patterson, City Council FROM: Ed Zasacky, neighbor in Shadow Mountain neighborhood RE: Current development application for land across Hopkins from Boomerang Lodge I am happy to write a letter in support of a development application, having opposed many others. I support the Pattersons because: 1) I like the scale 0fthe small buildings proposed 2) I am concerned that we are losing tourist accommodations at a rapid rate, and need replacement rooms In complexes like The Gant and the Aspen Alps, there are substantial numbers of units that the owners won't rent. As real estate prices increase, so does this trend. Given that this land will be developed, I think this type of development will scrve the town best. Thank you for your time. Ed Zasacky EZ/jt 1, 1 q , Pajo 499 TOO/I00% AL-IVEN FVO gRI6 936 046 XVi 9(:CT NOM 0008/rE/LO 0 -'23 , = .3 ", 7 6 4 "2 27 6 6,.j 2 f 1 233 81 4 6-2 i .2.3 -E E 2 7 %5 -922 & 2 2% 2 1.2 2 7 -2 = Boomerang . L g.et:I: E >4 2 9 11- AN i continued from page 3-A Club, to be built at the base of E# 5 5' ~~ ~ low-profile chalets," he said. Aspen Highlands, and at The 0 -- 2 M 9 4. 22 8 U U gs -g | 9 )% I- 8 While fractional ownership is Timbers project in Snowmass ,Eu 16 4 -= M 8 -9-? H f Bilitimi an option Paterson is simply con- Village. k =fo -2 4 templating as a means of financ- At the Snowmass Residence 424=1 Mag ing the expansion, the concept Club, two-bedroom units are sell- N 20= 2 g M 2 :p 8Â·â‚¬ E (020 25#2-0.3 had as manx kiupporters as detrac- ing at $229,000 and three-bed- =~ 83 917Â»â‚¬ ~~= -2 tors at the hearing. room units are going for E -e L -0 d -3 U 8 >Cl - With the loss of 18 percent of $329,000. Those prices are one- En -= 12 83 A @g . u 4 9)5. 3, g - S bom . t.:ECENE & - 5 1222*Â§ 1 %715 A epen's "pillows" in the last five . seventh of the total price, as there 2 *3200 3 EE -6=2 60- -5 m -years, mostly through the are seven buyers per unit, said destruction or conversion of Dave Hanna, director of sales. 5 #24 4.2 3 42*43 8 1% E small lodgeN, the Boomerang The first 12 of the 30 units will 62% 39'E.5 th 1Â¤ s E expansion was embraced by the open in December and Hanna ElÂ° t Â£ 2 8 d u & g Â¢ E M P U bilsiliess comilitinity expects all of the units to be fully E. 992 3 Aspen Skiing Co. Vice Presi- sold by the end of the upcoming 2-07 w 02. ER 31â‚¬f 1~044 ~aNEENts# 2%Â®4 dent John Norton lauded the pro- winter season. -==2 0:%?dttE' 32â‚¬E jed and predicted 11-actional own- At the Boomerang, though, the ership of the chalets would keep lodge preservation zoning -will 1 E e & 4 E- 1 *2 4 2 4 2% A M 2 e -2 t them filled with yisitors. require the new chalets to be >.5 3% "These should be hot beds for open to the general public at least 1 -* 2 --8 -2 -3 :4 -2- -m -3, -4 2 3. 2 :-2 -9â€ž --2 4 2 the community, which is what we six months of the year, even if ~ 4~ ~0 ~4 4 E EL+~ pi - E R need." he said. Paterson obtains city approval to 8 -1 4111) -2 -0 1 bo , 22= , o 2 3 -Â¤ .2 8 42 m :i O 0. , The Skico looked at fractional sell a fractional ownership inter- Â©@- u *9.4, 8 M. 3 1 2 . d h P 2 ownership arrangements at est in them. E M E 44 4 0. < Et- and Vail before moving forward function as family lodge units, for lodges in Telluride, Deer Valley That means the chalets will Â£ < 0 1 P CU -3, E K 8 92 B 2 - ..O 'C B with its own such project at the which there is a high demand, new Snowmass Residence Club, during part of the year, Paterson b Â£ DE E c 6 E Norton said. said. CE M 2 1 - it produces higher occupancy ilies will help the Boomerang "There's no question about it And accommodations for fam- g & 2,0 2 2 C = .2 1 on a year-round basis," said Bill thrive in a changing marketplace 2 ok<OE)50= Tomcich, president of Aspen in which traditional lodge rooms Â¢ A-cjuoo,SO . bo -4.5 0 7 Q Central Reservations. He also fill tip on weekends but may sit -0 9 0-=bom 00 9 2 04%-0/E 3 spoke out in favor of the project. empty during the Â·week. Units 32 9 f O 2 71 0 - Fractional ownership allows with multiple bedrooms and a u ge' 3 Â·0 2 2 0 9 7 the sale of a unit to several buy- kitchen will be filled for a week, 0 0 b 2 % 4.2.2 2 M ers. Instead of buying blocks of Paterson predicted. ..40 u 2 9 2 % 1 9 2 4 29 time - the traditional time-share "We need a new product in g, 21 01 -2 -M :N -5-1 -5 1 -2 1 arrangement - buyers own a marketability - just to give us a fraction of the unit itsel f. shot in the arm," said Paterson. 21~23 glm,#fl The concept is also being "We need something for fami- embraced at the Ritz-Carlton lies." m .C. 2 2 -O 0 U >u aa .0- S Wednesday, July 26,2000 â€¢ The Aspen Times 3.A Lodge gets 'shot in arm â€¢ City approves house for guest use will be built across Intended by a zoning aimed at protect she so ion of the mendations everal of h e the existing ing Boomerang expansion proposal add 7 bedr m s ts one ff Writer expansions sub ownership watches its old ski lodge pre rv the mainstay of its 1 rN acco odations - disappear affordable h sing parking and ath- one by n,a least one lodge MEMORANDUM Â¥ttl a. TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager John Worcester, City Attorney Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Directo rd.o FROM: Nick Lelack, Planner *// RE: Boomerang Lodge Expansion - Rezoning & Minor Planned Unit Development - First Reading - Continued DATE: June 26,2000 On June 12, 2000, City Council continued the First Reading for the application submitted by Charlie and Fonda Paterson (Applicant) to rezone and create a Planned Unit Development for the property located across the street from the existing Boomerang Lodge to June 26,2000. Please find attached a revised site plan for the Boomerang Lodge Expansion proposed by the Applicant, and letters from neighbors concerned about the project. The revised site plan includes five (5) on-site parking spaces. Designated parking spaces for the two (2) affordable housing units would be located at the existing lodge, along the 5th Street side ofthe structure. Each proposed on-site parking space would require a curb-cut. It is highly unlikely that the City Engineer will issue more than one (1) curb cut to this property. The proposed on-site parking would be inconsistent with the W. Hopkins Avenue streetscape, except for the four (4) head-in parking spaces across the street near the 4'11 Street intersection. Parking along W. Hopkins Avenue is primarily either parallel or on- site via alley access from the back of the properties. Staff believes that the Applicant can provide on-site parking behind the chalets and lodge/bathhouse/affordable housing building in a manner that preserves the native vegetation in the back of the property. Locating parking behind the structures would maintain the streetscape and reduce the presence of automobiles on W. Hopkins Avenue. Far more people - pedestrians, bicyclists, and automobile traffic - would be exposed to the head-in parking along W. Hopkins Avenue than would pedestrians and bicyclists using the trail behind the property, especially since much of the mature vegetation is not on-site, but rather on City property along the trail. Community Development Staff continues to believe that the Applicant should consider developing a new site plan with buildings oriented toward the street and adequate on-site parking (depending on the number of units, bedrooms, and square footage). 1 RECOMMENDATION: Staff continues to recommend that the Applicant revise the site plan to include at least 5-7 on-site parking spaces appropriately located, with the buildings oriented to the street. Staff further recommends that City Council table this request until such a plan is submitted to staff for further analysis. RECOMMENDED MOTION : "I move to table Ordinance No.~ Series of 2000, until to allow the Applicant to revise their site plan." ALTERNATIVE MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No. 20, Series of 2000, approving the rezoning to R- 15/Planned Unit Development/Lodge Preservation and minor PUD, with the conditions in the ordinance." (Council will need to decide on an option related to Condition 16 regarding surety for the affordable housing units proposed in the second phase.) CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Original Staff Report Exhibit B -- Revised Site Plan Exhibit C -- Letters Exhibit D -- Code Interpretation of the term "Lodge" C:\home\nicki\Active Cases\Boomerang\CC 1st Reading CONTD.doc 2 -vilib MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager John Worcester, City Attorney Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director 410 r 1 FROM: Nick Lelack, Planner~~2 RE: Boomerang Lodge Expansion - Rezoning & Minor Planned Unit Development - First Reading DATE: June 12,2000 Main St. .,-1.- Â« r- . --7/ -=Nam& f / 4 4Â¢162 k- Christiania Boomerang ao/3/-21 Tr . //,m:KE~~i "441- e JÂ£ 7/: ' 4 Lodge Lodge 11 41'f.-*rt I 7"4//Mf M~17 i#Flk-(trA "*4~ lf,71 I 1*2-1 k -9 7 .rt :.2 Es?' -71#jiBM. p- Proposed , -' 22 /VU , frÂ»* I>b Expansion of ~ , g ~~..*1~1, # '..T.-' / 12'. k W. Hopkins Boomerang EU~ Lodge â€žHAX; 1 1 \ k .L, 41:A ./ /7-155 .., , 1,1 APPLICANT: SUMMARY: Charles & Fonda Patterson The purpose of this application is to expand the Boomerang Lodge across W. Hopkins to a vacant lot. Specifically, the REPRESENTATIVE: Applicant proposes to add five (5) chalets, two 1-bedroom lodge rooms, two 1 -bedroom affordable housing units, and a Sunny Vann bathhouse. On June 6, the Planning and Zoning Commission Mitch Haas voted 5-0 to approve the project with conditions. CURRENT ZONING: LOT SIZE: CURRENT LAND USE: R-15 19,287 sq. ft. Vacant PROPOSED ZONING: PROPOSED FAR: PROPOSED LAND USE: R-15 with PUD & Lodge 12,060 sq. ft. Lodge & AH Preservation Overlay Zone Districts 1 di#Vv 01Â·110 lr- A REVIEW PROCEDURE, REQUEST, & ACTION â€¢ Rezoning & Minor Planned Unit Development Reviews: The Planning and Zoning Commission shall by resolution recommend City Council approve, approve with conditions, or deny the rezoning and Minor Planned Unit Development requests. Requests: (1) Rezoning from Moderate Density Residential, R-15, to R-15 with Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlays. (2) Minor Planned Unit Development to establish dimensional and parking requirements for the site. Action: The Planning and Zoning Commission voted 5-0 to recommend City Council approve the rezoning and PUD requests with the recommendation that five (5) on-site parking spaces be provided, and that two (2) of the 5 spaces be designated for the AH units. â€¢ GMOS Exemptions - Lodge Preservation & Affordable Housing: The Planning and Zoning Commission shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application for GMQS Exemptions for a lodge preservation application and/or an affordable housing application after considering a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority on lodge preservation applications. Request: Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) exemptions from scoring and competition for two (2) affordable housing allotments, and seven (7) Lodge Preservation - Tourist Accommodations allotments. Action: On April 19, the Housing Authority recommended the Planning and Zoning Commission approve the exemptions. On June 6, the Commission approved GMQS exemptions for lodge preservation and AH by a vote of 5-0. Council should be aware that the Housing Authority recommended, and the Planning and Zoning Commission approved in its resolution, a condition that the construction of the affordable housing units shall begin no later than 36 months after the completion of the three (3) chalets on the eastern portion of the lot. Council can review the project's proposed phasing under the PUD criteria, if they have concerns over this issue. â€¢ Conditional Use: The Planning and Zoning Commission shall by resolution approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for a conditional use. Request: The Lodge Preservation Overlay District allows affordable housing for employees of the lodge; conditional use is required to allow non-lodge workers to live in the affordable housing units. Action: The Commission voted 5-0 to approve the Conditional Use. 2 STAFF COMMENTS: Charles and Fonda Patterson (Applicant), represented by Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, LLC, and Mitch Haas of Haas Land Planning, LLC, have submitted an application to expand the Boomerang Lodge across the street on a vacant parcel at 500 West Hopkins Avenue. Specifically, the Applicant is requesting approval to construct six structures on the lot to include: 1. Five (5) chalets. Each chalet would consist of 3 Â· bedrooms 3.5 bathrooms, and approximately 2,180 - I .. square feet of total area . . 1. - ,. I. 4 ..4. (1,610 square feet offloor - Â·* :' '1 .0 .... .+i,~+.0'.1.: *014? : >4 4 . 'SW area). . Â· 1 ,6. , *:' Â· ft ?5Â·xâ€¢.04 * ' t-z. 2. Two (2) 1-bedroom lodge ' 4.-7 & units. Each unit would be . .... 2. #LF'M- about 960 square feet. . - ,>i:, -C'-,I,6.IMLEâ€¢Â·7dp. Ut,-'...NAL -4- ~1 . .....,7 : .-0 .1 ..... 1 * 3. Two (2) affordable , 2.. ... M 4. .*1 + : 1 .Â» 1 housing units. Each unit e.......6 : e'. would consist of about 700 square feet. - This photo shows the stub of 4th St. with the subject 4. A bathhouse for guest use. property located to the right at the bottom of the mountain. The 4th St. stub serves as a trail head for The 1 -bedroom lodge units, the trail behind the property and up the mountain. affordable housing units, and bathhouse would be constructed in one building. In total, the project would add 17 lodge bedrooms in seven (7) lodge units, and two (2) affordable housing units. Community Development Staffbelieves the spirit and intent of the proposed project meets the goals of the lodge preservation and affordable housing programs. The Aspen Area Community Plan calls for increasing the lodge accommodations and affordable housing units in town. Staff also appreciates the proposal to maintain the site in its natural condition to the greatest extent possible, to connect each chalet to a new sidewalk with a pedestrian path, as well as to limit the measured height to 23 feet for the chalets, and 25 feet for the lodge/bathhouse/AH building. However, Community Development Staff has five concerns about the proposed expansion: (1) no on-site parking is proposed; (2) the GMQS Exemptions, which were granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, for lodges and affordable housing for two 1 -bedroom affordable housing units as rental units. In light ofthe recent Colorado Supreme Court decision that may render the rental caps unenforceable, the exemptions may not have been properly granted. (3) no financial security is provided for the affordable housing units as proposed by the applicant. The units are proposed to be constructed in Phase 2; (4) the street-orientation of the buildings; and, 3 (5) the proposed location of the trash dumpsters. 1) Parking The first and most important concern is that the site plan does not include any on-site parking. The Applicant contends that no on-site parking is needed for several reasons. One reason, according the er ./.- application, is that 27 parking <,/ ~4 4 4" ~â€¢. 1/.pv... ...............b- *.0 spaces are provided "on-site" 4 3 at the Boomerang Lodge. W Most of the spaces are located *' in the public right-of-way on 49 68, m -'L 4tll Street and W. Hopkins -2 LA Avenue. Unfortunately, the * ** ~ = application does not include a .. w..~V/ili~g .1 4 1 , site improvement survey for I, .41 1,#K, . the existing lodge showing the .+ rÂ».L location of the 27 parking L .1 -A .--*~*- 1 6. M: I. r.1. spaces, or whether the spaces -- # b i .."Â»4 Â¥., Â· .- meet the City Code of 8.5 feet MUNE,7 -4<:19-7.4-' fo...~-,11.-1 by 18 feet. Although the 0,~*FfÂ· z .: '* *: *, ': .7 *. .Li existing lodge is not the 'TÂ¥:..... ..Â· ~ IÂ·. F',0,4 Â·. # /2 ..7~.- 2 4â€žt.. 3,4 >, r.f .....:44%' subject of this application, . :,ff e .: I Staff believes it is important . . to clearly identify parking D ilill'll'll'.~~~~~~~I" spaces on that parcel because Existing parking at the Boomerang Lodge is denoted by an "X". the Applicant is proposing to Proposed parking for the expansion would be provided at the utilize the spaces for the new existing Boomerang Lodge as well as in the public right-of-way lodge and affordable housing along W. Hopkins Avenue. units. Staff believes expanding the - I -26 lodge is an appropriate /? r 1 + .ff opportunity to bring parking E: 1. j.,i. I . requirements into compliance with the Municipal Code. If .201.*Nrmo>-: 4=-4)"/ te approved, Staff recommends a r Â·Â·Â· ' Â· Â· I. ./ . I .. 5- * condition of approval that the : - -14 3 '; An .: 7 - Boomerang Lodge lease all 3522* >.16 _.::t <1..2,2 - -Â· spaces within the public right- of-way from the City and that all on-site spaces (in the alley) tus <tÂ«e. be striped. tf ' 1 The photo shows the right-of-way along the front of Additional reasons for not the subject property on W. Hopkins Avenue. providing on-site parking is that the lodge operates a shuttle service for its guests on an as needed basis; the lodge is 4 located within walking and biking distance to town, recreation areas, and RFTA bus stops on Main Street. The Applicant also contends that the public right-of-way along W. Hopkins Avenue could accommodate up to 30-34 parallel parking spaces for lodge use. (It should be noted that W. Hopkins is signed as a pedestrian/bike path during the summer.) The Lodge Preservation Overlay Zone District requires 0.7 spaces per bedroom, or establishing the number spaces pursuant to a PUD. If the 0.7 space per bedroom standard were imposed, the 17 new lodge rooms would require 11.9 on-site parking spaces, and the two affordable housing units would require one per unit, for a total of 13.9 on site parking spaces. Staff believes the lodge's location, shuttle service, and existing parking spaces alleviate the need for 13.9 on-site parking spaces for the expansion. However, Staff strongly believes that 5-7 parking spaces should be provided on-site for the following reasons. First, visitors and tenants will likely park along W. Hopkins Avenue because it is closer to the chalets, new lodge units or affordable housing than parking on the existing lodge site. Staff strongly believes that parking can be accommodated on this vacant lot rather than on the street. Second, the street already experiences a high volume of pedestrian and bicycle traffic; this street is a designated pedestrian and bicycle corridor during the summer months. In addition, the Parks Department is concerned about parking along W. Hopkins Avenue in front of this property as well as any potential for parking in the 4th Street stub because of the potential for complications for future trail plans for the Shadow Mountain Trail. One alternative for the Shadow Mountain trail is to extend the trail at its terminus at 4tli Street and bring it down on to the South side of Hopkins Street in the right-of-way. An eight to ten foot trail along Hopkins may be in conflict with the proposed parking for the new lodge and affordable housing units. Third, the Application states that fire access to the property would be from W. Hopkins Avenue. Staff is concerned that this right-of-way is being designated for too many uses - lodge parking, fire access, and a public trail. Providing 5-7 parking spaces on site would alleviate the need for parking on the street, leaving the street primarily available for public use - people using the pedestrian and bicycle corridor, trail users, and fire access for this property. Fourth, Staff believes it is the responsibility of developers to provide their fair share of on-site parking for their projects, particularly in cases where vacant lots are being developed and parking can be accommodated on-site. Finally, the existing Boomerang Lodge provides very few "on-site" parking spaces. Most of the spaces are located on City property in the public right-of-way. The Planning and Zoning Commission strongly endorsed this project with the condition that the Applicant include five (5) on-site parking spaces, with two (2) of the spaces designated for the affordable housing units. 5 Staff does not believe the proposed project meets the PUD dimensional requirements of criteria B(3): The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. b) The varying time periods Of use, whenever joint use ofcommon parking is proposed. c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. d) The proximity Of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. 2) GMQS Exemptions Applications to increase the number of lodge units and the number of affordable housing units are subject to employee housing mitigation requirements pursuant to Section 26.470 of the Land Use Code pertaining to lodge preservation and affordable housing exemptions. The Planning and Zoning Commission is charged with determining whether an applicant is proposing to provide adequate employee housing to mitigate for the increased number of workers generated by a development - in this case an expansion - after considering a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The Applicant is proposing to provide two (2) 1-bedroom affordable housing units, which would provide affordable housing mitigation for 3.5 employees (1.75 per unit). On April 19, the Housing Authority recommended the Planning and Zoning Commission approve this level of mitigation for the lodge expansion. Detailed Housing Authority and Staff referral comments are included in Exhibit B. On June 6, the Planning Commission approved the lodge preservation and affordable housing exemptions. Staff is concerned that the Colorado Supreme Court decision may render the rental caps unenforceable, thus not ensuring perpetual affordable units. This issue was not discussed during the Planning and Zoning Commission public hearing as Staff was not fully aware of the Court decision at that time. Staff plans to meet with the Applicants and their representatives prior to First Reading at City Council on Monday, June 12, to work out an agreeable solution to both parties that will provide enforceable mitigation. 3) Phasing of Development Two phases of the development are proposed. Phase one is proposed to consist of building the three chalets at the easterly portion of the lot - next to the 4tll Street stub. Phase two is proposed to consist of the other two chalets and lodge/bathhouse/AH building. The reason for the separate phases is critical for the Applicant to finance the project. The Housing Authority recommended a condition of approval that the affordable housing units must be started no later than 36 months after the completion of Phase 1. 6 Staff is concerned that there is no financial security guaranteeing the two affordable housing units will ever be built. Staff plans to meet with the Applicants and their representatives to discuss this issue as well prior to First Reading at City Council. 4) Street Orientation Staff' s fourth concern is that the proposed chalets are not oriented toward the street. Instead, they are oriented toward the mountain in a manner similar to one section of the existing lodge and the duplex across 4tli Street to the east. Even though these units are not subject to the Residential Design Standards, Staff believes it is important that the units address the street in a manner which creates a consistent facade line. The vast majority of all structures in this area are parallel to the street, including the front doors and porches. Staff does not believe the proposed site plan meets PUD site design criteria 3: Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. The Planning and Zoning Commission members support the proposed building orientation. 5) Trash Dumpster Staff' s final concern is over the placement of trash dumpsters at the corners of W. Hopkins and 4th Streets and W. Hopkins and Fifth Streets. The Applicant has agreed to move the dumpsters to a less prominent location on the site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Applicant revise the site plan to include at least 5-7 on- site parking spaces, with the chalets oriented to the street. Staff further recommends that City Council table this request until such a plan is submitted to staff for further analysis, and to find a method to further address the GMQS issue and phasing. RECOMMENDED MoTION: "I move to table Ordinance No. 2~f Series of 2000, until to allow the Applicant to revise their site plan." ALTERNATIVE MOTION : "I move to approve Ordinance No. 22 , Series of 2000, approving the rezoning to R- 15/Planned Unit Development/Lodge Preservation and minor PUD. with the conditions in the ordinance." (Council will need to decide on an option related to Condition 16 regarding security for the affordable housing units.) 7 CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B -- Referral Agency Comments Exhibit C -- Development Application C:thorne\nicki\Active Cases\Boomerang\CC 1st Reading.doc 8 ORDINANCE 30. 41.2 (SERIES OF 2000) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE BOOMERANG LODGE MINOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, REZONING TO R-15, MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, WITH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND LODGE PRESERVATION OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICTS, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No. 2735-124-66-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Charles and Fonda Patterson, owners, represented by Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, LLC, and Haas Land Planning, LLC, for Conditional Use approval for affordable housing, Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemptions for lodge preservation and affordable housing, a Minor Planned Unit Development (PUD), Rezoning to Moderate Density Residential, R-15, with Planned Unit Development and Lodge Preservation Overlay Zone Districts for a property consisting of portions of Lots A-I, Block 32, City and Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is approximately 19,287 square feet, and is located in the R-15 Zone District; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.310 of the Land Use Code, the City Council may approve Amendments to the Official Zone District Map, during a duly noticed public hearing after taking and considering comments from the general public, and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission, Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445, the City Council may approve a Planned Unit Development, during a duly noticed public hearing after taking and considering comments from the general public, and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission, Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommended denial of the Minor PUD, finding that the PUD dimensional requirements for on-site parking and building orientation have not been met; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 6,2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 29, Series of 2000, by a five to zero (5-0) vote, approving a conditional use for affordable housing and GMQS Exemptions for lodge preservation and affordable housing, and recommending City Council approve the Boomerang Lodge Minor PUD and Rezoning to R-15/PUD/LP; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.100.104 - Definitions, the definition of a lodge is the following: "Same as hotel, except that lodges in the Lodge Preservation Overlay District must be available for overnight lodging by the general public on a short-term basis for at least six months of each calendar year, and may have kitchens within individual lodge rooms"; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen/Pitkin County Community Development Department issued a Land Use Code Interpretation o f the term "general public" as used in the definition o f lodge, which states that the term does not allow for an owner of a lodge unit to perpetually occupy the unit; and that the requirements for a lodge apply uniformly to all lodge units within a lodge and each lodge must conform to the lodge provisions, unless the use of that specific unit has been appropriately approved for another land use; and, WHEREAS, on February 14,2000, at a duly noticed public hearing, City Council upheld this Land Use Code Interpretation; 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 Planning and Zoning Commission, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Board, the Community Development Director, 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: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Boomerang Lodge property, Parcel Number 2735-124-66-001, shall be rezoned from R-15 to R-15 with Planned Unit Development and Lodge Preservation Overlay Zone Districts. Section 2 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Boomerang Lodge Minor PUD is approved, subject to the following conditions: 1. A PUD Agreement shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval by City Council and shall include the following: a. The information required to be included in a PUD Agreement, pursuant to Section 26.445.070(C). b. An agreement to enter into a future lease agreement for on-street parking spaces for guests of the lodge, if necessary. 2. A Final PUD Plan shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval granted by City Council and shall include: a. A final plat meeting the requirements of the City Engineer and showing easements, encroachment agreements and licenses with reception numbers for physical improvements and parking spaces within City rights-of-way, and location of utility pedestals. b. An illustrative site plan of the project showing the proposed improvements, landscaping, parking, and the dimensional requirements as approved. c. A drawing representing the project's architectural character. d. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado 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 2-year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. e. Five (5) on-site parking spaces, including two (2) on-site parking spaces designated for the affordable housing units. 3. The PUD Agreement and the Final PUD Plans shall be recorded with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. 4. The building permit application shall include: a. A copy of the final Ordinance and recorded P&Z Resolution. b. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. c. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. d. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval from the Parks Department Director for off-site replacement or mitigation of removed trees. e. A completed curb, gutter, and sidewalk agreement, if necessary. f. A completed agreement to j oin any future improvement districts formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in adjacent public rights-of-way. 5. The building permit plans shall demonstrate an adequate fire sprinkler system and alarm system for the new buildings. 6. Prior to issuance of a building permit: a. The primary contractor shall submit a letter to the Community Development Director stating that the conditions of approval have been read and understood. b. All tap fees, impacts fees, and building permit fees shall be paid. If an alternative agreement to delay payment of the Water Tap and/or Parks Impact fee is finalized, those fees shall be payable according to the agreement. c. The applicant shall submit a detailed landscape plan to the Community Development Department showing the size, species, quantity, and location of all existing and planned native vegetation on the site. The final landscape plan shall be approved by the Community Development Director after considering a recommendation by the Parks Department. The Applicant shall contact the City Forester regarding the correct seed mix for replanting disturbed areas with native species. If required by the City Forester, the landscape plan must show that cottonwoods will be planted in the buffer zone between the potential trail and the Applicant' s structures. 7. No excavation or storage of dirt or material shall occur within tree driplines or outside of the approved building envelope and access envelope. 8. All construction vehicles, materials, and debris shall be maintained on-site and not within public rights-of-way unless specifically approved by the Director of the Streets Department. 9. The applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. 10. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction. 11. All uses and construction shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code as they pertain to utilities. 12. The Applicant or owner shall mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. 13. A fugitive dust control permit will be required during construction. 14. Slope stabilization, erosion control, and sediment control measures need to be implemented before, during, and after construction. 15. The Parks Department shall approve the location ofthe proposed sidewalk to ensure that it does not conflict with future trail plans in the area. 16. Construction of the affordable housing units shall begin no later than 36 months after the completion of the three (3) chalets on the eastern portion of the lot. Prior to the application for building permit for any aspect of this project: a) the Applicant shall place a deed restriction on the Applicant' s triplex located at 1020 Waters Avenue as a for-sale, Category 3 building until the affordable housing units are issued Certificates of Occupancy (CO) on Parcel Number 2735- 124-66-001. After the COs are issued, the deed restriction may be removed. b) If construction does not begin on the two affordable housing units within 36 months of the completion of Phase 1, the Applicant shall pay the cash-in-lieu fee at then current Aspen/Pitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines rates to mitigate for 3.5 employees at the Category 3 level. 17. Five (5) on-site parking spaces, including two (2) on-site parking spaces designated for the affordable housing units. 18. Each Boomerang lodge unit shall conform to the provisions of Section 26.100.104 - Definitions, Lodge, and any change in the lodge's operations must be reviewed, approved, and mitigated for (employee generation) pursuant to the then current Land Use Code and Aspen/Pitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines. Section 3: 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 3: 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. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution 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. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 12th day of June, 2000. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Rachel Richards, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 26th day of June, 2000. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Rachel Richards, Mayor Approved as to form: John Worcestor, City Attorney EXHIBIT A BOOMERANG LODGE EXPANSION REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS Section 26.310.020, Standards Applicable to Amendments to the Official Zone District Man In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. Staff Finding: This application requests to rezone from R-15, Moderate Density Residential, to R-15 with Planned Unit Development and Lodge Preservation Overlays. Rezoning is required to allow the lodge use on the site and the PUD allows the Applicant to establish dimensional requirements for the new lodge and affordable housing units on the site. Staff does not believe rezoning this parcel would be in conflict with any portions of this title. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding: Staff believes rezoning the parcel will not conflict with the AACP. The AACP encourages maintaining the community's lodging base, increasing the number of affordable housing units, and locating development within the Aspen Community Growth Boundary and close to transit. Rezoning this parcel to include PUD and LP Overlays will allow the Boomerang Lodge to expand its operations and provide affordable housing to its employees or qualified local workers, thereby fulfilling several AACP goals and objectives. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Finding: Staff believes the proposed rezoning is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses. The site is located across the street from the existing Boomerang Lodge, and near the Christiania Lodge, L'Auberge (lodge), detached single family homes, duplexes and multi- family residential buildings, recreation areas, and Main Street. Zone districts within about a three-block radius include R-6, R-15, Park, LP Overlay, PUD Overlay, and Office. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. 9 Staff Finding: Rezoning the property would increase the intensity of the uses allowed from one single family residence to multiple lodge and affordable housing units. If developed as proposed under the R-15/LP/PUD, traffic generation will increase in the neighborhood as well as road safety issues. A single family residence in Aspen generates between 5 and 10 automobile trips per day. According to the application, Jay Hammond, P.E. evaluated potential traffic generation caused by the Boomerang expansion. Mr. Hammond believes that the developed site under the proposed zoning could generate up to fifty-three (53) automobile trips per day. However, the lodge's location and shuttle service should help reduce traffic generation from the site. Staff believes that road safety would be improved if some parking were provided on- site, thereby removing parked cars from the street and out of pedestrian and bicyclists way. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such facilities, including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Staff Finding: All appropriate utility agencies and the City Engineer were referenced on this application and reported the ability to serve this project. A condition of approval shall be that the owner(s) mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. School, park, water, sanitation, and other impact fees will be due prior to the issuance of building permits. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Finding: Rezoning the property will not itself create adverse impacts on the natural environment. Rezoning the property would increase the potential use of the property from residential to lodge and affordable housing. Combining the rezoning with a PUD will increase the intensity of uses on the site which could adversely impact the natural environment to a greater extent than the development of one single family home. However, the Applicant has represented that as much of the natural vegetation and terrain will be maintained as possible, and Staff has every reason to believe this to be the case because the Applicant has a vested interest in the neighborhood. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff Finding: Staff believes rezoning the property is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen, particularly because rezoning the parcel will allow for lodging 10 and affordable housing uses - both of which are important to maintaining the community character. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff Finding: The community has lost more than 300 lodge units over the past decade due to redevelopments, and the increasing service demands by Aspen' s visitors, residents, and second homeowners continues to create a need for workers and affordable housing in town. In addition, two consecutive slow ski season' s has hurt the local economy. Increasing the lodging base and number of affordable housing units in town are convincing reasons for supporting the rezoning. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. Staff Finding: Staff does not believe the proposed rezoning would be in conflict with the public interest and believes it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Land Use Code. Again, rezoning the property would benefit the City from gaining lodging and affordable housing. 26.445.050 Review Standards: Minor PUD A development application for Conceptual, Final, Consolidated Conceptual and Final, or Minor PUD shall comply with the following standards and requirements. Due to the limited issues associated with Conceptual Reviews and properties eligible for Minor PUD Review, certain standards shall not be applied as noted. The burden shall rest upon an applicant to show the reasonableness of the development application, and its conformity to the standards and procedures of this Chapter and this title. A. General requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding Staff believes rezoning the parcel will not conflict with the AACP. The AACP encourages maintaining the community's lodging base, increasing the number of affordable housing units, and locating development within the Aspen Community Growth Boundary and close to transit. Rezoning this parcel to include PUD and LP Overlays will allow the Boomerang Lodge to expand its operations and provide affordable housing to its employees or qualified local workers, thereby fulfilling several AACP goals and objectives. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. 11 Staff Finding The proposed development would be consistent with the character of existing land use in the surrounding area, which include lodge; residential - detached single family, duplex, and multi-family; park; offices; and trails. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Staff Finding Staff does not believe the proposed development would adversely affect future development of the surrounding area. The surrounding area, with the exception of a large vacant lot immediately to the west, is mostly built out, consists of trails, or is in the county and would be subject to county land use code regulations which severely restrict development on steep slopes and in wildfire areas. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. Staff Finding The Applicant is requesting seven (7) LP tourist accommodations allotments and two (2) affordable housing unit allotments for this development. The lodge and affordable housing units are exempt from the GMQS scoring and competition requirements. The LP tourist accommodations allotments are available, and the affordable housing units ceiling level of allotments are also available. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD as described in General Provisions, Section 26.445.040, above. The dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. The proposed dimensional requirements shall comply with the following: 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following innuences on the property: a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b) Natural or man-made hazards. c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and landforms. 12 d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. Staff Finding Staff believes the proposed dimensional requirements are appropriate and compatible for the proposed lodge and affordable housing units proposed for the site. The dimensions appear to be compatible with existing and potential developments in the neighborhood. The site is relatively flat and avoids natural hazard areas. No existing man-made features exist on the property. Staff believes it will be necessary to re-evaluate all dimensional requirements if City Council requires the Applicant to provide 5 on-site parking spaces. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. Staff Finding The proposed scale and massing appear compatible with the surrounding area. Site coverage is proposed to be 35% and open space is proposed to be 55%. The measured height of the chalets is proposed to be 23 feet, which is 2 feet below the R-15 height limit. The sixth building - AH and lodge units, and bathhouse - is proposed to be 25 feet. Overall, the dimensional requirements appear appropriate for the property given its location at the base of Shadow Mountain; however, Staff believes it will be necessary to re-evaluate all dimensional requirements if City Council requires the Applicant to provide 5 on-site parking spaces. 3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. Staff Finding No on-site parking is proposed. Staff strongly believes that 5-7 parking spaces should be provided on-site for several reasons. First, W. Hopkins Avenue is a designated pedestrian/bike path during the summer and experiences a high volume of pedestrian and bicycle traffic. In addition, the Parks Department is concerned about parking along W. Hopkins Avenue in front of this property as well as any potential for parking in the 4th Street stub because of the potential for complications for future trail plans for the Shadow Mountain Trail. 13 Second, the Application states that fire access to the property would be from W. Hopkins Avenue. Staff is concerned that this right-of-way is being designated for too many uses - lodge parking, fire access, and a public trail. Third, Staff believes it is the responsibility of developers to provide their fair share of on-site parking for their projects, particularly in cases where vacant lots are being developed and parking can be accommodated on-site. Finally, the existing Boomerang Lodge provides very few "on-site" parking spaces. Most o f the spaces are located on City property in the public right-of-way. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to service the proposed development. b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance to the proposed development. Staff Finding There are no infrastructure capacity issues that would prohibit the amount of development being considered. Staff does not recommend any reductions in the development being proposed. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground instability or the possibility of mud flow, rock falls or avalanche dangers. b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and consequent water pollution. c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City. d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. Staff Finding Staff does not recommend reducing the allowable density within the PUD because no natural hazards or critical natural site features exist on the parcel. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development 14 patterns and with the site's physical constraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if: a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area plan to which the property is subject. b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in subparagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided, or those characteristics mitigated. c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern, land uses, and characteristics. Staff Finding The applicant is not requesting an increase in density beyond what is allowed within the PUD. In addition, the site's physical capabilities can accommodate the single family residential use. C. Site Design. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. Staff Finding The proposed development complies with the natural features o f the site to the greatest extent possible. The notable natural site feature is the dense vegetation. No historic structures or other unique features exist on the property. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. Staff Finding The structures are spread out across the lot, which is the length of one city block. The only open space remaining on the lot will be the 14-16 feet between the structures, the spaces within the setbacks, and small pockets in front of or behind four (4) of the proposed chalets. Vistas would be preserved by limiting height to 25 feet, which is allowed in the R-15 Zone District. 15 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. Staff Finding Staff does not believe the chalets are appropriately oriented toward W. Hopkins Avenue. Instead, the structures are oriented toward the mountain in a manner similar to one section of the existing lodge and the duplex across 4tli Street to the east. Even though these units are not subject to the Residential Design Standards, Staff believes it is important that the chalets address the street in a manner that creates a consistent facade line. The vast majority of all structures in this area are parallel and square to the street. If the chalets were oriented toward the street, Staff believes the units would significantly contribute to the rural context of the neighborhood and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. Staff Finding The Aspen Fire Marshall has reserved comment on the access until a building permit application has been received by the City. A condition of approval is that the Aspen Fire Marshall shall approve emergency access to the property prior to the issuance of a building permit. A second, related condition of approval is that the buildings be sprinkled. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. Staff Finding Pedestrian and handicapped access will be provided via the proposed sidewalk along W. Hopkins Avenue. The ground floor lodge room in the building near the corner of W. Hopkins and 5th Street is proposed to be handicapped accessible and in compliance with the UBC and ADA. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. Staff Finding A condition of approval is that a drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer which maintains sediment and debris on-site during and after construction, be approved by the City's Engineering Department prior to the issuance of building permits. If a ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 2-year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. The City drainage criteria needs to be implemented. 16 The Applicant is proposing to accommodate drainage on site through the use of roof drains, downspouts, and dry wells to maintain the site's historic runoff and drainage patterns. 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. Staff Finding Although the primary use of the property would be lodging, no programmatic functions are proposed. D. Landscape Plan. The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. Staff Finding Staff supports the Applicant's proposal to preserve and use as much of the native vegetation on site as possible for landscaping. The Parks Department recommends that the Applicant contact the City Forester regarding correct seed mix for replanting disturbed areas with native species. Another recommendation is that the planting of cottonwoods in the buffer zone between the potential trail and the Applicant's structure would be the most beneficial. E. Architectural Character. It is the purpose of this standard is to encourage architectural interest, variety, character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the building's proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of materials, and other attributes which may significantly represent the character of the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development shall: 17 1. Be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the intended use, and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less-intensive mechanical systems. 3. Accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice, and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. Staff Finding Staff believes the architectural character of the proposed buildings will enhance the visual character of the City, appropriately relate to the existing architecture of the Boomerang Lodge, and represent a character suitable for the location at the base of the mountain. It is difficult for the property to incorporate any natural heating because of its location at the base of Shadow Mountain; similarly, natural cooling is accomplished by the shade provided by the mountain. The storage and shedding of snow and ice is proposed to be accommodated by roof overhangs to the entry of each unit; the roof pitches will also shed snow away from the entrance and walkways. Storage of snow from the proposed sidewalk along W. Ilopkins Avenue can be accommodated through shoveling snow into the 10 foot setbacks. F. Lighting. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic concerns. The following standards shall be accomplished: 1. Alllighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. Lighting of site features, structures, and access ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. 2. All exterior lighting shall be in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD documents. Up-lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements, and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. Staff Finding All new lighting for the proposed residence must be in compliance with the City's lighting code adopted in November 1999 and Uniform Building Code for safety. The new lighting shall be designed to minimize glare onto adjacent properties, Highway 82 and Power Plant Road. 18 G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area. If the proposed development includes a common park, open space, or recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD, the following criteria shall be met: 1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses and property users of the PUD. 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar manner. 3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through a legal instrument for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Staff Finding No common park or dedicated open space is included in this application for this lot. However, the Applicant proposes that 55 % of the site will serve as required open space. In addition, Applicant plans to maintain the native vegetation and to replant disturbed areas with native species. Common areas are located in front of or behind four of the chalets in the center of the property. H. Utilities and Public facilities. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. Staff Finding All appropriate utility agencies and the City Engineer were referenced on this application and reported the ability to serve this project. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. Staff Finding 19 Staff recommends a condition of approval be that the owner(s) mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. Staff Finding No oversized utility stubs were requested to be installed with this development. I. Access and Circulation. (Only standards 1&2 apply to Minor PUD applications) The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: 1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. Staff Finding Access to the lodge and affordable housing units would be provided via a proposed sidewalk along W. Hopkins Avenue, and each chalet, lodge unit, and affordable housing unit would have access to the sidewalk via a paved path from the front door to the sidewalk. The application does not include vehicular access to the site. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. Staff Finding Staff believes the proposed parking arrangement along W. Hopkins Avenue would create traffic congestion on the streets surrounding the parcel because no on-site parking is proposed. The proposed sidewalk along the avenue would provide for safe pedestrian traffic off of the road. J. Phasing of Development Plan. (does not apply to Conceptual PUD applications) The purpose of this criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the 20 adopted final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with the following: 1. Ali phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. Staff Finding Two phases of the development are proposed. Phase one is proposed to consist of building the three chalets at the easterly portion of the lot - next to the 4th Street stub. Phase two is proposed to consist of the other two chalets and lodge/bathhouse/AH building. The reason for the separate phases is critical for the Applicant to finance the project. The Housing Authority recommended a condition of approval that the affordable housing units must be started no later than 36 months after the completion of Phase 1. Staff further recommends than the Certificates of Occupancy (CO) not be issued for the two (2) westerly chalets or 1 -bedroom lodge units until the COs are issued for the affordable housing units. 2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. Staff Finding The physical distances between the two phases will be fourteen (14) feet, which is the distance between the two chalets in the middle of the property. The Applicant will notify owners of the eastern chalets prior to the start of construction of Phase two. 3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in- lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. Staff Finding Staff recommends that all impact fees be paid prior to the issuance of building permits for phase one, and that if construction of the affordable housing units does not begin within 36 months o f the completion of phase one, that 100 percent of the affordable housing mitigation fees be paid cash-in-lieu. 21 EXHIBIT B REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS MEMORANDUM To: Chris Bendon, Planner From: Ben Ludlow, Project Engineer Reference DRC Caseload Coordinator Date: April 11,2000 Re: Boomerang Lodge Expansion The Development Review Committee has reviewed the Boomerang Lodge Expansion application at their April 5,2000 meeting, and has compiled the following comments: General 1. Sufficiency of Submittal: DRC comments are based on the fact that we believe that the submitted site plan is accurate, that it shows all site features, and that it is feasible. The wording must be carried forward exactly as written unless prior consent is received from the Engineering Department. This is to alleviate problems related to approvals tied to "issuance of building permit." 2. R.O.W. Impacts: If there are any encroachments into the public rights-of-way, the encroachment must either be removed or be subject to current encroachment license requirements. Site Review 1. Site Drainage - Requirement - A drainage report was not submitted with the application. The site development approvals must include the requirement meeting runoff design standards of the Land Use Code at Sec. 26.580.020.A.6.a and a requirement that, prior to the building permit application, a drainage mitigation plan (24"x36" size plan sheet or on the lot grading plan) must meet the requirements of the Engineering Department Interim Design Standards and must be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Department. The mitigation plan must also address the temporary sediment control and containment plan for the construction phase. If drywells are an acceptable solution for site drainage, a soils report must be provided with a percolation test to verify the feasibility of this type of system. Drywells have depths well below depth of frost (10' minimum) to function in cold weather. The drainage plan must contain a statement specifying the routine maintenance required by property owner(s) to ensure continued and proper performance. Drywells may not be placed within public right of way or utility easements. The foundation drainage system should be separate from storm drainage, must be detained and routed on site, 24 and must be shown on drainage plans prior to application for building permit. The drainage may be conveyed to existing landscaped areas if the drainage report demonstrates that the percolation rate and the detention volume meet the design storm. Information - The City drainage criteria needs to be implemented. This includes but is not limited to erosion control, soil stabilization, and vegetation disturbance. Also, there needs to be an analysis of where the drainage will flow and what adverse affects may arise from potential mud and debris flow. 2. Community Development - Information - The following request was provided by the Planning Department: NO INFORMATION AT THIS TIME 3. Fire Protection District - Information - The following information has been provided by the Aspen Fire Protection District: NO INFORMATION AT THIS TIME 4. Streets Department - Requirement - As of the request of the Streets Department revisions need to be made as follows: a. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction. 5. Parks - Information - The following information has been provided by the Parks Department: a. Since the applicant wants to have the natural look for the landscaping, then Steve Ellsperman, the City Forester, should be contacted for the correct seed mix to use in the disturbed areas. b. The Midland Trail would be most effective if it is extended behind the property location. This may require a trail easement. c. The planting of cottonwoods in the buffer zone between the potential Trail and the applicant's structures would be most beneficial. 6. Engineering - Requirement - The following requirements have been provided by the Engineering Department: a. ROW permits and Encroachment licenses will be required during construction if applicable. b. A Fugitive dust control permit will be required during construction. 25 c. Drainage and soils problems in the project location may require the installation of curb and gutter. If not during the construction, then a curb, gutter, and sidewalk agreement will be made. d. A full soils report and drainage report are needed before the issuance of the building permit. Presenting it in a timely manner is beneficial to the applicant as well as the reviewer. e. The south elevation of the building has a few open doors and windows that can be subject to mud and debris flow. It is not a requirement of the City of Aspen Engineering Department to control design for this at this point. But, one must be prepared for the possibility of structural and aesthetic damage if a debris flow would occur. Engineering - Information - The following information has been provided by the Engineering Department: a. The parking design for the project is somewhat inadequate. One suggestion is to do a geometric design to the west half of 4tli St. to allow for parking along that area. b. Another parking consideration is to allow parking in the front of each building via the planned sidewalk locations. c. A final parking consideration would be to allow parking access from the south end of the property. 7. Utilities: A utility plan needs to be submitted before any real comments and conclusions can be drawn by the utility companies. - Water: City Water Department - Requirement - The following information was given by the City of Aspen Water Department: a. All uses and construction will comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal code as they pertain to utilities. b. A distinction during the design phase will need to be made as to whether there will be separate or shared service lines - Wastewater: Aspen Consolidated Waste District - Information - As a request of the Consolidated Waste District, revisions need to be made as follows: a. A set of drainage plans needs to be provided to Peg at ACSD so that an estimate of fees can be processed. 26 b. Each proposed building will need a separate tap or they will be subject to a shared service agreement. c. An 8 inch PVC sewer line runs through the middle of the property and needs to have an easement. In worse case it may need to be moved. - Electric a. Currently the City wants to extend the electrical service to that property and other property in the neighborhood. b. There needs to be a lighting agreement similar to the sidewalk, curb, and gutter agreement to insure that the lighting will be the same for the neighborhood. - Construction: Work in the Public Right of Way - Requirement - Given the continuous problems of unapproved work and development in public rights-of-way adjacent to private property, we advise the applicant as follows: Approvals 1. Engineering: The applicant receives approval from the City Engineering Department (920-5080) for design of improvements, including grading, drainage, transportation/streets, landscaping, and encroachments within public right of way. 2. Parks: The applicant receives approval from the Parks Department (920- 5120) for vegetation species and for public trail disturbance. 3. Streets: The applicant receives approval from the Streets department (920- 5130) for mailboxes, finished pavement, surface materials on streets, and alleyways. 4. Permits: Obtain R.O.W. permits for any work or development, involving street cuts and landscaping from the Engineering Department. DRC Attendees Staff: Phil Overynder Applicant's Representative: Sunny Vanh Chris Bendon Mitch Haas Ben Ludlow Nick Adeh 27 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director~~Â© FROM: Nick Lelack, Planner~~~j RE: Boomerang Lodge Expansion - Rezoning, Growth Management Quota System Exemptions, Conditional Use, Minor Planned Unit Development DATE: June 6,2000 1- 4 . -â„¢GÂ¢i~ - Main St. . I. . TIn'.0.-F 21"84/Ii Boomerang Christiania Lodge ~~,ZEâ€ž~ ~~tâ€ž~;~ Lodge 4. . . . 1 + , ' . 3., Ol#FÂ¢' Â¥2 M /1, , m lul. 34 . Proposed . h i. 2 %3 . 2.4. 9â€ž.5'Ve* r 5 '. Expansion of : *pzÂ·z::' ~**â€¢,4,,1 1 4AL- W. Hopkins Boomerang . Lodge 44, 1 ' 11 1 L./ 0 1. 9 - 9% '1 APPLICANT: SUMMARY: Charles & Fonda Patterson The purpose of this application is to expand the Boomerang Lodge across W. Hopkins to a vacant lot. Specifically, the REPRESENTATIVE: Applicant proposes to add five (5) chalets, two 1 -bedroom Sunny Vann lodge rooms, two 1-bedroom affordable housing units, and a Mitch Haas bathhouse. The lodge rooms, AH units, and bathhouse would be combined in one building. LOCATION: South of 500 W. Hopkins LOT SIZE: CURRENT LAND USE: 19,287 sq. ft. Vacant CURRENT ZONING: R-15 PROPOSED FAR: PROPOSED LAND USE: 12,060 sq. ft. 7 Lodge units (five 3- PROPOSED ZONING: bedroom chalets, two 1 - R-15 with PUD Overlay & PROPOSED PARKING: bedroom lodge units), & two Lodge Preservation Overlay No on-site parking 1-bedroom AII units 1 As *14 M REVIEW PROCEDURE â€¢ Rezoning & Minor Planned Unit Development Reviews: The Planning and Zoning Commission shall by resolution recommend City Council approve, approve with conditions, or deny the rezoning and Minor Planned Unit Development requests. â€¢ GMOS Exemption - Lodge Preservation: The Planning and Zoning Commission shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application for GMQS Exemption for a lodge preservation application after considering a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority regarding whether employee housing or cash-in-lieu will be provided to mitigate for additional employees generated by the development. â€¢ GMOS Exemption for Affordable Housing: City Council shall approve, approve with conditions or deny an application for a GMQS Exemption for affordable housing after considering are recommendation by the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. â€¢ Conditional Use: The Planning and Zoning Commission shall by resolution approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a development application for a conditional use. STAFF COMMENTS: Charles and Fonda Patterson (Applicant), represented by Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, LLC, and Mitch LIaas of Haas Land Planning, LLC, have submitted an application to expand the Boomerang Lodge across the street on a vacant parcel at 500 West Hopkins Avenue. Specifically, the Applicant is requesting approval to construct: . 1. Five (5) chalets. Each chal.et Â· would consist of 3 bedrooms 3.5 bathrooms, and approximately .4 . 7 41 2,180 square feet of total area - . . 119 . *:t''A... 0 -19& .... (1,610 square feet of floor area). 75 2. Two (2) 1-bedroom lodge units. .1 ... . Â¢: .1 .r...:L G.*M .i: ./ Each unit would be about 960 , b. 1 19, square feet. 0... . 1'. 3. Two (2) affordable housing , - -26.-4....=- -1.4-* 4.=- .a, -.>--* -Ab- .2 . r.,..4>- - â€ž. units. Each unit would consist . i of about 700 square feet. .1 -:PX-M 4. A bathhouse for guest use. The 1 -bedroom lodge units, affordable - This photo shows the stub of 4th St. with the subject - housing units, and bathhouse would be property located to the right at the bottom of the constructed in one building. In total, mountain. The 4th St. stub serves as a trail head for the trail behind the property and up the mountain. the project would add 17 lodge rooms in seven (7) lodge units, and two (2) affordable housing units. 2 The application requests the following land use approvals: 1. Rezoning from Moderate Density Residential, R-15, to R-15 with Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlays. 2. Minor Planned Unit Development to establish dimensional and parking requirements for the site. 3. Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) exemptions from scoring and competition for two (2) affordable housing allotments, and seven (7) Lodge Preservation - Tourist Accommodations allotments. 4. Conditional Use to allow affordable housing on site. The Lodge Preservation Overlay District allows affordable housing for employees of the lodge; conditional use is required to allow non-lodge workers to live in the affordable housing units. 5. Vested property rights. Ordinance No. 5, Series of 2000, automatically grants vested rights status for three years for approved developments, so this request will be acknowledged if the project is approved. â€¢ Community Development Staff believes the spirit and intent o f the proposed project meets the goals of the lodge preservation and affordable housing programs. The Aspen Area Community Plan calls for increasing the lodge accommodations and affordable housing units in town. Staff also appreciates the proposal to maintain the site in its natural condition to the greatest extent possible, as well as limiting the measured height to 23 feet for the chalets (peak height 28 feet), and 25 feet for the lodge/bathhouse/AH building. However, Community Development Staff has three concerns about the proposed expansion: (1) parking, (2) street-orientation of the buildings, and (3) the proposed location o f the trash dumpster. Parking The first and most important concern is that the site plan does not include any on-site parking. The Applicant contends that no on-site parking is needed for several reasons. One reason, according the application, is that 27 parking spaces are provided "on-site" at the Boomerang Lodge. Most of the spaces are located in the public right-of-way on 4tll Street and W. Hopkins Avenue. Unfortunately, the application does not include a site improvement survey for the existing lodge showing the location of the 27 parking spaces, or whether the spaces meet the City Code of 8.5 feet by 18 feet. Although the existing lodge is not the subject of this application, Staff believes it is important to clearly identify parking spaces on that parcel because the Applicant is proposing to utilize the spaces for the new lodge and affordable housing units. Staff believes expanding the lodge is an appropriate opportunity to bring parking requirements into compliance with the Municipal Code. If approved, Staff recommends a condition of approval that the Boomerang Lodge lease all spaces within the public right- of-way from the City and that all on-site spaces (in the alley) be striped. 3 Additional reasons for not providing on-site parking is that the lodge operates a shuttle service for its guests on an as needed basis; the lodge is located within walking and biking distance to town, r.////910. 9, recreation areas, and RFTA bus . *i irt> 'E . f stops on Main Street. The . I / 4 4-~~....2 1 Applicant also contends that the /, 4 ... , . 7.-J public right-of-way along W. Hopkins Avenue could / I accommodate up to 30-34 , It ,/I parallel parking spaces for lodge . use. 4 0. 1 1 2 The Lodge Preservation Overlay Zone District requires 0.7 . S spaces per bedroom, or , establishing the number spaces /.' .. pursuant to a PUD. If the 0.7 U + r e .W'. 1 I ..., . - ... space per bedroom standard 0 19**tcl ' . were imposed, the 17 newlodge ..cykl. 762/â€¢ 1/*.. . L rooms would require 11.9 on- site parking spaces, and the two i . - ./ .4 â„¢ , i. .l.VI~ + N 19&/2/".I:2979 affordable housing units would 1 - 3 A I . f ... ./ r. a . require one per unit, for a total Existing parking at the Boomerang Lodge is denoted by an "X" of 13.9 on site parking spaces. Proposed parking for the expansion would be provided at the existing Boomerang Lodge as well as iii the public right-of-way along W. Hopkins Avenue. Staff believes the lodge's location and existing parking spaces alleviate the need for 2 13.9 on-site parking spaces for ..er.. .9 Â¥ \ Mt the expansion. However, Staff .,11 Li strongly believes that 5-7 /hailk,Ati .2.#45#.4737:~54 ..., . 4,1 parking spaces should be .....Ablw'EM-84 6-Af-_.1 lai'4â€¢74Â· L.~ provided on-site for the Wildfi*,7 --I.....:'5+-/4,-'....* -t I following reasons. First, 61:.CÂ· 1.. :- .- :-:0-- . 4 . .. I + visitors and tenants will likely 1%.4.......Je,U'- .. . 4,4.... park along W. Hopkins Avenue Â·st,exÂ·sÂ·n,Â·"24*,W- I because it is closer to the limhibilif~*SIM- 4:? 41'... chalets, new lodge units or affordable housing than parking ARF./*...agr . on the existing lodge site. Staff ... ..1....... strongly believes that parking The photo shows the right-of-way along the front of can be accommodated on this the subject property on W. Hopkins Avenue. vacant lot rather than on the street. Second, the street already experiences a high volume of pedestrian and bicycle traffic; this street is a designated pedestrian and bicycle corridor during the summer months. In 4 44' S addition, the Parks Department is concerned about parking along W. Hopkins Avenue in front of this property as well as any potential for parking in the 4tll Street stub because of the potential for complications for future trail plans for the Shadow Mountain Trail. One alternative for the Shadow Mountain trail is to extend the trail at its terminus at 4tll Street and bring it down on to the South side of Hopkins Street in the right-of-way. An eight to ten foot trail along Hopkins would be in conflict with the proposed parking for the new lodge and affordable housing units. Third, the Application states that fire access to the property would be from W. Hopkins Avenue. Staff is concerned that this right-of-way is being designated for too many uses - lodge parking, fire access, and a public trail. Providing 5-7 parking spaces on site would alleviate the need for parking on the street, leaving the street primarily available for public use - people using the pedestrian and bicycle corridor, trail users, and fire access for this property. Finally, the existing Boomerang Lodge provides very few "on-site" parking spaces. Most of the spaces are located on City property in the public right-of-way. Staff does not believe the proposed parking meets the PUD dimensional requirements criteria B(3): The appropriate number of Off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. b) The varying timeperiods ofuse, wheneverjoint use ofcommonparking is proposed. c) The availability of public transit and other transportationfacilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. Staff also does not believe the proposed parking meets the Lodge Preservation GMQS Exemption criteria 4: Adequate parking spaces and public facilities exist, will be provided for the development, or that adequate mitigation measures will be provided. An existing deficit of required parking may be maintained through redevelopment. Street Orientation Staff' s second concern is that the proposed chalets are not oriented toward the street. Instead, they are oriented toward the mountain in a manner similar to one section of the existing lodge and the duplex across 4tli Street to the east. Even though these units are not subject to the Residential Design Standards, Staff believes it is important that the units address the street in a manner which creates a consistent facade line. The vast majority of all structures in this area are parallel and square to the street. Staff does not believe the proposed site plan meets PUD site design criteria 3: Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context 5 where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. Trash Dumpster Staff s final concern is over the placement of the trash dumpster at the corner of W. Hopkins and 4th Streets. The Applicant has agreed to move the dumpster to a less prominent location on the site. Affordable Housing Mitigation Applications to increase the number of lodge units and the number of affordable housing units are subject to employee housing mitigation requirements pursuant to Section 26.470 of the Land Use Code. The Planning and Zoning Commission is charged with determining whether an applicant is proposing to provide adequate employee housing to mitigate for the increased number of workers generated by a development - in this case an expansion - after considering a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The Applicant is proposing to provide two (2) 1-bedroom affordable housing units, which would provide affordable housing mitigation for 3.5 employees (1.75 per unit). On April 19, the Housing Authority recommended the Planning and Zoning Commission approve this level of mitigation for the lodge expansion. Detailed Housing Authority and Staff referral comments are included in Exhibit B. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission table the proposed site plan until the Applicant provides a site plan including at least 5-7 on-site parking spaces, and chalets oriented to the street. If the Applicant chooses not to submit a new site plan, Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission deny the Boomerang Lodge expansion. RECOMIMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE PROPOSED INI THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to approve Resolution No~A Series of 2000, approving the Conditional Use for affordable housing and GMQS exerliptions and allotments for lodge preservation and affordable housing; and recommending City Council approve rezoning to R-15/Planned Unit Development/Lodge Preservation and minor PUD, with the conditions in the draft resolution." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B -- Referral Agency Comments Exhibit C -- Development Application 6 RESOLUTION NO. .~ ~ (SERIES OF 2000) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM (GMQS) EXEMPTION FOR LODGE PRESERVATION, AND RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL OF THE BOOMERANG LODGE MINOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, REZONING TO R-15 MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WITH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND LODGE PRESERVATION OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICTS, AND GMQS EXEMPTION FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No. 2735-124-66-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Charles and Fonda Patterson, owners, represented by Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, LLC, and Haas Land Planning, LLC, for Conditional Use approval for affordable housing, Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemptions for lodge preservation and affordable housing, a Minor Planned Unit Development (PUD), Rezoning to Moderate Density Residential, R-15, with Planned Unit Development and Lodge Preservation Overlay Zone Districts for a property consisting of portions of Lots A-I, Block 32, City and Town Townsite of Aspen; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is approximately 19,287 square feet, and is located in the R-15 Zone District; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310 of the Land Use Code, the City Council may approve Amendments to the Official Zone District Map after taking and considering recommendations from the Community Development Director, the Planning and Zoning Commission made at a duly noticed public hearing, and taking and considering public testimony at a duly noticed public hearing; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445, the City Council may approve a Planned Unit Development, during a duly noticed public hearing after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission made at a duly noticed public hearing, comments from the general public, a recommendation from the Community Development Director, and recommendations from relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommended denial of the rezoning and Minor PUD, finding that the PUD dimensional requirements for on-site parking have not been met; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.425.040, the Planning and Zoning Commission may approve a Conditional Use during a duly noticed public hearing after considering a recommendation from the Community Development Director, comments from the general public, and recommendations from relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommended approval of the Conditional Use for affordable housing; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.470.070(J), the City Council may approve a GMQS Exemption for affordable housing after considering a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority; and, WHEREAS, during a duly notice public hearing on April 19, 2000, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority recommended approval of the GMQS Exemption for affordable housing; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.470.070(M), during a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning and Zoning Commission may approve a GMQS Exemption for lodge preservation after considering a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority and Community Development Director; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority recommended approval finding that the affordable housing mitigation requirements were met, and the Community Development Director recommended denial finding that the parking standards were not met; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 6,2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved this resolution, by a _ to _ C-_) vote, approving a conditional use for affordable housing and GMQS Exemption for lodge preservation, and recommending City Council approve the Boomerang Lodge Minor PUD, Rezoning to R- 15/PUD/LP, and GMQS Exemption for affordable housing; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission 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 Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission 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 Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission 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 OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION as follows: * /.0 Section 1 The conditional use for affordable housing in the Lodge Preservation Overlay Zone District is approved with the following condition: 1. The Aspen City Council approves the rezoning for the subject property to R-15/PUD/LP. Section 2 The GMQS Exemption for lodge preservation is approved. Section 3 That the Boomerang Lodge expansion to Parcel Number 2735-124-66-001 to include six detached buildings, including five (5) chalets, and sixth building containing two (2) affordable housing units, two (2) 1-bedroom lodge units, and a bathhouse, is approved, subject to the following conditions, and that the Aspen City Council should approve rezoning the subject property to R-15/PUD/LP, the GMQS Exemption for affordable housing, and Minor PUD: 1. A PUD Agreement shall be recorded within 180 days ofthe final approval by City Council and shall include the following: a. The information required to be included in a PUD Agreement, pursuant to Section 26.445.070(C). b. An agreement to enter into a future lease agreement for on-street parking spaces for guests of the lodge, if necessary. 2. A Final PUD Plan shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval granted by City Council and shall include: a. A final plat meeting the requirements of the City Engineer and showing easements, encroachment agreements and licenses with reception numbers for physical improvements and parking spaces within City rights-of-way, and location of utility pedestals. b. An illustrative site plan of the project showing the proposed improvements, landscaping, parking, and the dimensional requirements as approved. c. A drawing representing the project's architectural character. d. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado 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 2-year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. e. Two (2) designated on-site parking spaces for the affordable housing units either on the existing Boomerang Lodge site at 500 West Hopkins Avenue or across West Hopkins Avenue on the site of the expanded lodge and affordable housing units. 91 + ea'J..44.Ts 9110(,GRS Â£ 6,B. 40-0 43Â£1.31,9,9, Cri.- site, -17,33.0 41-- 0,474 1\,2 \+ & 6344 for- 4-ba--- 4 Ati Vw*S . r 3. The PUD Agreement and the Final PUD Plans shall be recorded with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. 4. The building permit application shall include: a. A copy of the final Ordinance and recorded P&Z Resolution. b. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. c. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. d. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval from the Parks Department Director for off-site replacement or mitigation of removed trees. e. A completed curb, gutter, and sidewalk agreement, if necessary. f. A completed agreement to join any future improvement districts formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in adjacent public rights-of-way. 5. The building permit plans shall demonstrate an adequate fire sprinkler system and alarm system for the new buildings. 6. Prior to issuance of a building permit: a. The primary contractor shall submit a letter to the Community Development Director stating that the conditions of approval have been read and understood. b. All tap fees, impacts fees, and building permit fees shall be paid. If an alternative agreement to delay payment of the Water Tap and/or Parks Impact fee is finalized, those fees shall be payable according to the agreement. 7. No excavation or storage of dirt or material shall occur within tree driplines or outside of the approved building envelope and access envelope. 8. All construction vehicles, materials, and debris shall be maintained on-site and not within public rights-of-way unless specifically approved by the Director of the Streets Department. 9. The applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. 10. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction. 11. All uses and construction shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code as they pertain to utilities. 12. The Applicant or owner shall mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. 13. A fugitive dust control permit will be required during construction. 14. Slope stabilization, erosion control, and sediment control measures need to be implemented before, during, and after construction. 15. The Parks Department shall approve the location of the proposed sidewalk to ensure that it does not conflict with future trail plans in the area. 16. Construction on the affordable housing units shall begin no later than 36 months after the completion of the three (3) chalets on the eastern portion of the lot. If the construction does not begin on the two affordable housing units within this time frame, the applicant shall pay the cash-in-lieu fee at the then current rates to mitigate for 3.5 employees at the Category 3 level. Section 4: 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 5: This Resolution 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. Section 6: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution 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. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the Planning and Zoning Commission ofthe City of Aspen on the 6th day of June, 2000. APPROVED by the Commission at its regular meeting on June 6,2000. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney Robert Blaich, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk EXHIBIT A BOOMERANG LODGE EXPANSION REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS Section 26.310.020, Standards Applicable to Amendments to the Official Zone District Ma In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this title. Staff Finding: This application requests to rezone from R-15, Moderate Density Residential, to R-15 with Planned Unit Development and Lodge Preservation Overlays. Rezoning is required to allow the lodge use on the site and the PUD allows the Applicant to establish dimensional requirements for the new lodge and affordable housing units on the site. Staff does not believe rezoning this parcel would be in conflict with any portions of this title. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Staff Finding: Staff believes rezoning the parcel will not conflict with the AACP. The AACP encourages maintaining the community' s lodging base, increasing the number of affordable housing units, and locating development within the Aspen Community Growth Boundary and close to transit. Rezoning this parcel to include PUD and LP Overlays will allow the Boomerang Lodge to expand its operations and provide affordable housing to its employees or qualified local workers, thereby fulfilling several AACP goals and objectives. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Staff Finding: Staff believes the proposed rezoning is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses. The site is located across the street from the existing Boomerang Lodge, and near the Christiania Lodge, L'Auberge (lodge), detached single family homes, duplexes and multi- family residential buildings, recreation areas, and Main Street. Zone districts within about a three-block radius include R-6, R-15, Park, LP Overlay, PUD Overlay, and Office. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. 7 Staff Finding: Rezoning the property would increase the intensity of the uses allowed from one single family residence to multiple lodge and affordable housing units. If developed as proposed under the R-15/LP/PUD, traffic generation will increase in the neighborhood as well as road safety issues. A single family residence in Aspen generates between 5 and 10 automobile trips per day. According to the application, Jay Hammond, P.E. evaluated potential traffic generation caused by the Boomerang expansion. Mr. Hammond believes that the developed site under the proposed zoning could generate up to fifty-three (53) automobile trips per day. However, the lodge's location and shuttle service should help reduce traffic generation from the site. Staff believes that road safety would be improved if some parking were provided on-site, thereby removing parked cars from the street and out of pedestrian and bicyclists way. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such facilities, including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Staff Finding: All appropriate utility agencies and the City Engineer were referenced on this application and reported the ability to serve this project. A condition of approval shall be that the owner(s) mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. School, park, water, sanitation, and other impact fees will be due prior to the issuance of building permits. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. Staff Finding: Rezoning the property will not itself create adverse impacts on the natural environment. Rezoning the property would increase the potential use of the property from residential to lodge and affordable housing. Combining the rezoning with a PUD will increase the intensity of uses on the site which could adversely impact the natural environment to a greater extent that the development of one single family home. However, the Applicant has represented that as much of the natural vegetation and terrain will be maintained as possible, and Staff has every reason to believe this to be the case because the Applicant has a vested interest in the neighborhood. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Staff Finding: Staff believes rezoning the property is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen, particularly because rezoning the parcel will allow for lodging 8 and affordable housing uses - both of which are important to maintaining the community character. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Staff Finding: The community has lost more than 300 lodge units over the past decade due to redevelopments, and the increasing service demands by Aspen's visitors, residents, and second homeowners continues to create a need for workers and affordable housing in town. In addition, two consecutive slow ski season's has hurt the local economy. Increasing the lodging base and number of affordable housing units in town are convincing reasons for supporting the rezoning. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title. Staff Finding: Staff does not believe the proposed rezoning would be in conflict with the public interest and believes it is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Land Use Code. Again, rezoning the property would benefit the City from gaining lodging and affordable housing. 26.445.050 Review Standards: Minor PUD A development application for Conceptual, Final, Consolidated Conceptual and Final, or Minor PUD shall comply with the following standards and requirements. Due to the limited issues associated with Conceptual Reviews and properties eligible for Minor PUD Review, certain standards shall not be applied as noted. The burden shall rest upon an applicant to show the reasonableness of the development application, and its conformity to the standards and procedures of this Chapter and this title. A. General requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding Staff believes rezoning the parcel will not conflict with the AACP. The AACP encourages maintaining the community's lodging base, increasing the number of affordable housing units, and locating development within the Aspen Community Growth Boundary and close to transit. Rezoning this parcel to include PUD and LP Overlays will allow the Boomerang Lodge to expand its operations and provide affordable housing to its employees or qualified local workers, thereby fulfilling several AACP goals and objectives. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. 9 Staff Finding The proposed development would be consistent with the character of existing land use in the surrounding area, which include lodge; residential - detached single family, duplex, and multi-family; park; offices; and trails. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. Staff Finding Staff does not believe the proposed development would adversely affect future development of the surrounding area. The surrounding area, with the exception of a large vacant lot immediately to the west, is mostly built out, consists of trails, or is in the county and would be subject to county land use code regulations which severely restrict development on steep slopes and in wildfire areas. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. Staff Finding The Applicant is requesting seven (7) LP tourist accommodations allotments and two (2) affordable housing unit allotments for this development. The lodge and affordable housing units are exempt from the GMQS scoring and competition requirements. The LP tourist accommodations allotments are available, and the affordable housing units ceiling level of allotments are also available. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD as described in General Provisions, Section 26.445.040, above. The dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. The proposed dimensional requirements shall comply with the following: 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following innuences on the property: a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b) Natural or man-made hazards. c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and landforms. 10 d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. 3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: e) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. f) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. g) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. h) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities, or other utilities to service the proposed development. b) There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance to the proposed development. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground instability or the possibility of mud flow, rock falls or avalanche dangers. b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and consequent water pollution. c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City. d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development 11 patterns and with the site's physical constraints. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be increased if: a) The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area plan to which the property is subject. b) The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in subparagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided, or those characteristics mitigated. c) The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern, land uses, and characteristics. Staff Finding Staff does not believe adequate on-site parking is included in the site plan. Despite the lodge and affordable housing units' location to transit, town, and recreation areas, many visitors and tenants will continue to need a place to park their cars. This is a vacant lot and Staff believes parking can be accommodated on the site rather than on the street. The Parks Department is also concerned about parking along the W. Hopkins Avenue because of the potential for a trail in this area. Providing 5-7 on-site parking spaces would likely change the proposed dimensional requirements on the site. Staff recommends that the Applicant submit a site plan with on-site parking, and then the dimensional requirements can be more appropriately analyzed for the parcel and neighborhood. C. Site Design. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. Staff Finding The proposed development complies with the natural features of the site to the greatest extent possible. The notable natural site feature is the dense vegetation. No historic structures or other unique features exist on the property. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. 12 Staff Finding The structures are spread out across the lot, which is the length of one city block. The only open space remaining on the lot will be the 14-16 feet between the structures, the spaces within the setbacks, and small pockets in front of or behind four (4) of the proposed chalets. Vistas would be preserved by limiting height to 25 feet, which is allowed in the R-15 Zone District. 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. Staff Finding Staff does not believe the chalets are appropriately oriented toward W. Hopkins Avenue. Instead, the structures are oriented toward the mountain in a manner similar to one section of the existing lodge and the duplex across 4tl, Street to the east. Even though these units are not subject to the Residential Design Standards, Staff believes it is important that the chalets address the street in a manner that creates a consistent facade line. The vast majority of all structures in this area are parallel and square to the street. If the chalets were oriented toward the street, Staff believes the units would significantly contribute to the rural context of the neighborhood and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. Staff Finding The Aspen Fire Marshall has reserved comment on the access until a building permit application has been received by the City. A condition of approval is that the Aspen Fire Marshall shall approve emergency access to the property prior to the issuance of a building permit. A second, related condition of approval is that the buildings be sprinkled. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. Staff Finding Pedestrian and handicapped access will be provided via the proposed sidewalk along W. Hopkins Avenue. The ground floor lodge room in the building near the corner of W. Hopkins and 5111 Street is proposed to be handicapped accessible and in compliance with the UBC and ADA. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. Staff Finding A condition of approval is that a drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer which maintains sediment and debris on-site during 13 and after construction, be approved by the City's Engineering Department prior to the issuance of building permits. If a ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 2-year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. The City drainage criteria needs to be implemented. The Applicant is proposing to accommodate drainage on site through the use of roof drains, downspouts, and dry wells to maintain the site's historic runoff and drainage patterns. 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. Staff Finding Although the primary use of the property would be lodging, no programmatic functions are proposed. D. Landscape Plan. The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. Staff Finding Staff supports the Applicant's proposal to preserve and use as much of the native vegetation on site as possible for landscaping. The Parks Department recommends that the Applicant contact the City Forester regarding correct seed mix for replanting disturbed areas with native species. Another recommendation is that the planting of cottonwoods in the buffer zone between the potential trail and the Applicant's structure would be the most beneficial. E. Architectural Character. It is the purpose of this standard is to encourage architectural interest, variety, character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's use, the 14 building's proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public spaces and other buildings, use of materials, and other attributes which may significantly represent the character of the proposed development. There shall be approved as part of the final development plan an architectural character plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The proposed architecture of the development shall: 1. Be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the city, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for, and indicative of, the intended use, and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade, and vegetation and by use of non- or less-intensive mechanical systems. 3. Accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice, and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. Staff Finding Staff believes the architectural character of the proposed buildings will enhance the visual character of the City, appropriately relate to the existing architecture of the Boomerang Lodge, and represent a character suitable for the location at the base of the mountain. It is difficult for the property to incorporate any natural heating because of its location at the base of Shadow Mountain; similarly, natural cooling is accomplished by the shade provided by the mountain. The storage and shedding of snow and ice is proposed to be accommodated by roof overhangs to the entry of each unit; the roof pitches will also shed snow away from the entrance and walkways. Storage of snow from the proposed sidewalk along W. Hopkins Avenue can be accommodated through shoveling snow into the 10 foot setbacks. F. Lighting. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic concerns. The following standards shall be accomplished: 1. All lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. Lighting of site features, structures, and access ways is proposed in an appropriate manner. 2. All exterior lighting shall be in compliance with the Outdoor Lighting Standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD documents. Up-lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements, and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. 15 Staff Finding All new lighting for the proposed residence must be in compliance with the City's lighting code adopted in November 1999 and Uniform Building Code for safety. The new lighting shall be designed to minimize glare onto adjacent properties, Highway 82 and Power Plant Road. G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area. If the proposed development includes a common park, open space, or recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD, the following criteria shall be met: 1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses and property users of the PUD. 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar manner. 3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through a legal instrument for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Staff Finding No common park or open space is included in this application for this lot. However, the Applicant plans to maintain the native vegetation and to replant disturbed areas with native species. Common areas are located in front of or behind four of the chalets in the center of the property. H. Utilities and Public facilities. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. Staff Finding All appropriate utility agencies and the City Engineer were referenced on this application and reported the ability to serve this project. 16 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. Staff Finding Staff recommends a condition of approval be that the owner(s) mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. Staff Finding No oversized utility stubs were requested to be installed with this development. I. Access and Circulation. (Only standards 1&2 apply to Minor PUD applications) The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: 1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. Staff Finding Access to the lodge and affordable housing units would be provided via a proposed sidewalk along W. Hopkins Avenue, and each chalet, lodge unit, and affordable housing unit would have access to the sidewalk via a paved path from the front door to the sidewalk. The application does not include vehicular access to the site. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. Staff Finding Staff believes the proposed parking arrangement along W. Hopkins Avenue would create traffic congestion on the streets surrounding the parcel because no on-site parking is proposed. The proposed sidewalk along the avenue would provide for safe pedestrian traffic off of the road. J. Phasing of Development Plan. Woes not apply to Conceptual PUD applications) 17 The purpose of this criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted final PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with the following: 1. All phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. Staff Finding Two phases of the development are proposed. Phase one is proposed to consist of building the three chalets at the easterly portion of the lot - next to the 4th Street stub. Phase two is proposed to consist of the other two chalets and lodge/bathhouse/AH building. The reason for the separate phases is critical for the Applicant to finance the project. The LIousing Authority recommended a condition of approval that the affordable housing units must be started no later than 36 months after the completion of Phase 1. Staff further recommends than the Certificates of Occupancy (CO) not be issued for the two (2) westerly chalets or 1 -bedroom lodge units until the COs are issued for the affordable housing units. 2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. Staff Finding The physical distances between the two phases will be fourteen (14) feet, which is the distance between the two chalets in the middle of the property. The Applicant will notify owners of the eastern chalets prior to the start of construction of Phase two. 3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in- lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. Staff Finding Staff recommends that all impact fees be paid prior to the issuance of building permits for phase one, and that if construction of the affordable housing units does not begin within 36 months of the completion of phase one, that 100 percent of the affordable housing mitigation fees be paid cash-in-lieu. 18 26.425.040 Conditional Use Criteria When considering a development application for a conditional use, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider whether all of the following standards are met, as applicable. A. The conditional use is consistent with the purposes, goals, objectives and standards of the Aspen Area Community Plan, with the intent of the zone district in which it is proposed to be located, and complies with all other applicable requirements of this Title; and Staff Finding The Lodge Preservation Overlay Zone District permits "affordable housing for employees of the lodge", and "affordable housing" for the community in general as a conditional use. The Applicant is requesting conditional use approval for affordable housing in the event that Boomerang Lodge employees already have a place to live and do need the on-site affordable housing unit. This approval would allow the Housing Office to fill the unit with a qualified local worker. Staff believes the conditional use is consistent with all aspects of the AACP as well as the zone district and all other applicable requirements of the Land Use Code. B. The conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development and surrounding land uses, or enhances the mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development; and Staff Finding Affordable housing is consistent with the character of the immediate area. The Christiania Lodge contains a deed restricted affordable housing unit, and the Ullr Commons is in the process of becoming a local employer owned affordable housing building containing 26 residential units. Other duplexes and multi-family buildings exist in the immediate area. C. The location, size, design and operating characteristics of the proposed conditional use minimizes adverse effects, including visual impacts, impacts on pedestrian and vehicular circulation, parking, trash, service delivery, noise, vibrations and odor on surrounding properties; and Staff Finding The proposed units would be located in a building that also includes lodge rooms and a bathhouse for lodge guests at the western end of the parcel. Staff believes the location, size, design and operating characteristics of the conditional use and entire development would work together in a coordinated fashion. The units would be located within walking distance to transit, employment, shopping and recreation centers. Staff recommends a condition of 19 approval that two parking spaces be designated on-site at the expanded or existing Boomerang Lodge for employees. D. There are adequate public facilities and services to serve the conditional use including but not limited to roads, potable water, sewer, solid waste, parks, police, fire protection, emergency medical services, hospital and medical services, drainage systems, and schools; and Staff Finding All appropriate utility agencies and the City Engineer were referenced on this application and reported the ability to serve this proj ect. E. The applicant commits to supply affordable housing to meet the incremental need for increased employees generated by the conditional use; and Staff Finding This conditional use mitigates itself. 26.470.070(M) Lodge Preservation Program. Development, or redevelopment after demolition, of properties zoned Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlay to increase or decrease the number of lodge units, the number of affordable housing units, or the amount of accessory commercial square footage, or the change in use between said uses, shall be exempted from the growth management competition and scoring procedures, provided that the Planning and Zoning Commission determines, at a public hearing, that the following criteria are met: 1. The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Staff Finding Staff does not believe this project will conflict with the AACP. The AACP encourages maintaining the community's lodging base, increasing the number of affordable housing units, and locating development within the Aspen Community Growth Boundary and close to transit. Rezoning this parcel to include PUD and LP Overlays will allow the Boomerang Lodge to expand its operations and provide affordable housing to its employees or qualified local workers, thereby fulfilling several AACP goals and objectives. 2. The proposed development is compatible with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area and with the purpose of the Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlay Zone District. Staff Finding Staff believes the proposed development is compatible with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area and with the purpose of the Lodge Preservation Overlay Zone District. The site is located across the street from the existing Boomerang Lodge, and within two blocks of both the Christiania Lodge and L'Auberge Chalets; residential uses are also 20 abundant in the immediate vicinity, as are recreation areas to the south on the mountain and commercial uses to the north on Main Street. Staff also believes the proposed development is consistent with the purpose of the zone district, which is to provide for and protect small lodge uses on properties historically used for lodge accommodations, to permit redevelopment Of these properties to accommodate lodge and affordable housing uses, to provide uses accessory and normally associated with lodge and affordable housing development, to encourage development which is compatible with the neighborhood and respective ofthe manner in which the property has historically operated, and to provide an incentive for upgrading existing lodges on-site or onto adjacent properties. The goal of this application is a replica of the purpose ofthis zone district. 3. Employee housing or cash-in-lieu will be provided to mitigate for additional employees generated by the development or to mitigate for the demolition of multi-family housing, as required by section 26.530. This shall include an analysis and credit for existing employee generation and the incremental impact between the existing development and the proposed development. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be considered for this standard. Staff Finding Applications to increase the number of lodge units and the number o f affordable housing units are subject to employee housing mitigation requirements pursuant to Section 26.470 of the Land Use Code. The Planning and Zoning Commission is charged with determining whether an applicant is proposing to provide adequate employee housing to mitigate for the increased number of workers generated by a development - in this case an expansion - after considering a recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority. The Applicant is proposing to provide two (2) 1-bedroom affordable housing units, which would provide affordable housing mitigation for 3.5 employees (1.75 per unit). On April 19, the Housing Authority recommended the Planning and Zoning Commission approve this level of mitigation for the lodge expansion. Detailed Housing Authority and Staff referral comments are included in Exhibit B. 4. Adequate parking spaces and public facilities exist, will be provided for the development, or that adequate mitigation measures will be provided. An existing deficit of required parking may be maintained through redevelopment. Staff Finding Staff does not believe adequate on-site parking is included in the site plan for the expanded lodge. Despite the lodge and affordable housing units' location to transit, town, and recreation areas, many visitors and tenants will continue to need a place to park their cars. This is a vacant lot and Staff believes parking can be accommodated on the site rather than on the street. The Parks Department is also concerned about parking along the W. Hopkins Avenue because of the potential for a trail in this area. 21 Providing 5-7 on-site parking spaces would likely change the proposed dimensional requirements on the site. Staff recommends that the Applicant submit a site plan with on-site parking, and then the dimensional requirements can be more appropriately analyzed for the parcel and neighborhood. 5. There exists sufficient GMQS allotments to accommodate the proposed development and the allotments are deducted from the respective Annual Development Allotment and Metro Area Development Ceilings established pursuant to Section 26.470.050. Staff Finding Approximately 36 Lodge Preservation - tourist accommodation allotments exist, which is more than adequate for the seven (7) allotments required for this application. 22 r.â‚¬Â·14/3.1.Â·.+t'-,164 * + .: AC . Â¥81'.-:2 ... 4*~w~. 4,~~.~.. ~,72; W.'. fT~D: 922:,91 117~.1*Â·t , 1-,0 2.Mi.* f...., I.'4422.83:~fk: .* T:'I . â€ži ..Â·~ -~ ft.Â·f 436'Vic,rp,13 Â·9'Â·i;. ' Â· .7014, 1.:,;6 ~it.4 t.. .70* 3 qi*t r I 94?14 Â·Â·Â· .4 ...r ...., 4i,/"4#9 4.; Z.: 't . Â·4 ~':'. . *4,1, â€ž - B ..2, --- 05 -- 4... . . . .* I :..' I .' /0 .... -' M -/"b- <7Â£.4 *9+M~~.4> .4 N. , ..Ie- -2 - #FhA A il : * . 4 . . /1*f 9 .i ,Â·te) .- - '' *2 '21-0,t-eâ€ž ., ' '*:'-# ,-k 1'/17.. /. ' e â€¢ A / . h>AbÂ¥4 '. ....1..& *.3 ... . 0.- 4 8 . .,...... , .2.4194:J .eu? .i ..: .. -lili -1- I . ....- 4, 02*43-1~ o.-1-i. .rk 'gatÂ¢31**'r, . (*141â€¢ 2.'.. 4, .. . . .., 3,2%14'. .~Â» =%.k J,-, 4 ./. 9%*.132#rÂ· Â·4 .Â« 7/.I-- I.AE#*';t**,.~~,e, Â·J...14 .0/ rf#* ,r-, - 7< 7.4. 4~r~~~3:74'~~~~Â·;.111~4~~1 Â· 12Â·-A .'/ i'-: 7. - Trift.,arr~~, .4 3.4,.'.9 , 4-514.*illi .. ./ = h.' f...'4 I r. LK > . 4 . t,Ir t,.., All'll'll'll'll'll'll./.- 4* '4 ' ..lir /5-3. 5,4 1 9& 1 AIMI . r.--44 46, - *34+ C: Of,VS,4 .A 44 - - 19 . ?-ilit.,3. 0 1 1 ... 1 9 151 71 ri . - Â¢ 9-9 (t\(e-7 i)Jele '1/ 7 | 11 + -6 1,-- El/â‚¬+ 9 20-r -i 3%_A- 1/â‚¬- jr M %/f :~ .. *4 . ':Ae.... 1 4.4 1 . 1 I . . -- . ... 11 4 ' / A-((â‚¬7 /-1 2 9 1-- .6 1-9 6 1 Â·th:M--#b-WJ//Aâ€¢-=u 7 q L- - :/-& -LVV'...-.' - I la - f. f 4,2~2-- CA \. '' , 12:*Ei~, l.- .7 6.* 4,6 .. -2,=VI.":. .... + r ..4 . 9.1*=:, ti W.b . .r, Â¥0Â· I Â· ..' ,â€¢i , Â· 1Â·. + .," 484 . * .. f . ./ h .1 . 1 . ' 1 4 1 . 1 'f ....1 .. .., 4. . 4 4 .... N.: .1 ... ' .. 1 4 :4,24: 332#*1=1:= .~,i~ 9,7}Al R . I , .- . /f 56 -4 ' lo" : â€¢ ... 4 â‚¬Â¥:./4,4 ' ' C d. Â·41' I - 14!+ . .:'. 1 .4.,% .;: , 9~ 4. 4 1 4 11.1 , 11, 1 . . , .+ 1,2~ 4 t . . . -p...' ' . Y W- 1/ . ..,rhka&,3,?*It'R~.~~'' Â· 1,1~Â·L'L',;i 5 42 Â¥4~:.4, . I ' imol J j I., . 4 " 1 7%:,72 I# 4.2 Aâ‚¬400,r .., Â·,4,8/.9.1,24*21.'' t,tffi~21 ~- 34,2 J. -â€¢ta~a. . 0 .4 4 t~ i: ' 1* 'L .4 9 11.idfpr *".'.qG~><.04'.Â·:Â·i'*, i -3.L: 14 1 . C * ..0.12 : 1/PRDY''taL 39*/1/* 0*i ~222@delit#(/ 1/, . 5 . I 494 r ,uu..1-~ .a L ./6.' * m; ' --3.Fg. - .. ...t t. 7 ./. . 19'' .+E' 74.I.? it>f &321<.7 ,# . â€ž 3 I p .,-1 *:. . I I Â£ 0 ' - -f : ' S ... t~.Am:4?2 2,~~ L~: 64 441kl 'RI ..11 7 . in 7- .,9%/4 9 - , f - 1 -Â·Â»9 44:49 1 . -6 1 2 - -- 1-1 4- I - - - 4 4 . jr'r 1 I . A-- k k. -I * j . .... , 7....a..... .Â¥57; . ':- .44Â».r- r . 7. L. ...r 4 4' ; ..:.'4. '' . .(t.,0 -14':IÂ·, ' '<'2' . 1<'4 ./1;â€¢'~~~ '~ ~~ el . , .- p. 7FkÂ· p:. :74 6. I.'. f rt.,-0 I i .., 3 f.~~*I~~94-9.-2 QW:.Â· â€¢ p f : 0,7.:119:..% ;901*:Â·103,9?4*;,4.:,1-" , .0 -r:tÂ·'*,-Â£ Â· 0 "14:..,1...AL,6 . : . #4 0'...-. / . ~t ~.'I~(- ~4 4 'I ~4~~r~~AJ~ ~~I ~' ' t.iâ‚¬y'. i/ . y. Â» Â·44- , el Â· '-:WKÂ· .id tffat Y.,4>fs'*,4 - . 1,04. - >.6 'ff,24111'4#4. .1 1 Â¥ b. IÂ· 1:8 . .,Ial#, ' . 1 . 4 ik?% f. 1 , 4.Â·:IM.Â¢~1*kf.**44 .4 1 . 44 4 4, tÂ»'4'4 Â· , 44.91 . ~ ~~~~*W;a;~ii ~ ~~j~~ ~~ -i<17,f,t . ~ 1 /**2-522#'21%6144 I. ~ , ' . . 12 Z Af ~ ;0 *takiÂ·ti 92-~ 2,~Â·-1.. f - #4~ Â·Â· -, Â·, Â· . \4 // Id -id~~Rf, ./ 4. 0 â€¢ 4,4, f9/**A:Â«1 725' ~ , 4.i r-:P -J -- 8 't .-I -.z-- 1 r - - ' - r<l . .' 4 Â¥3 6 i. 4 1- ...........ill....haAE"#All'll'll.........F - .4 , ~ --1 ---. .. 4, 1 . 4 ?k 'â€¢ 4, 64 t /* < * /4/j~* , , .If 4 . ., r. *31 . Ge . ,, "' .... t. ' t. t. . . - 4. . 1., 0 . .. '%**4 Â¥ a.=LÂ· u 9 'Al: - 3...i:k - 16 t: W.Zika- 4. 1//Irry ./. I ~~Â¥ 4. .~ ,- :97..... I 11 -1 J - 2&a D t=_iii, -10,1 ..,R g 1/il-1- a ,-4 '11, f i. j 1 - 4 I 7 --'~re,-1 A 1-* I.* --.. , .. 14,' 1Y WELCOME TO THE ASPEN PED/BIKE WAY SYSTEM . 4 f .'1............7/'611/18< 3 16##*444,6 r#~W:Wj9A0 2- .* .1 . .MI ..n r ...fri ---8 id i, f E~IM./.=JIB*013L.â€¢ 67-Agmaiall/~ ~ , 39 .' '. t. 4 L *216,1,1 '.Te,t 144466':-At'** 160'.,Mis,A,Ii=Â·râ€ž 4 -* i * 4/"wfLÂ·t 12#Utgr, 9. CEâ‚¬rÂ£75,24.,4/â‚¬:~ LE1884/hmer*4.1 ' 6 - 4/*69,55Â£40**te#=9&44* r . f.fr.fÂ·,4,-, 1 .. 4 1.~.A $ -3,"Â£Al'i .6 * . 19--Il . .42, /,5/ ..>A r. 1. e , , . 1 -4 1.%*i v.~ . t,9,"~ 2...1, i j . - ' I. . -1 1-MI ' Willa-PV.4 . .,7Â£4:(L *Â·" " 4.& 48*11:10- /14,~ . iÂ¥' Â·t *,4// I I - 4,2..~' . -&- â€¢/t. 0. 4, . ' 'A' I - .. / LE ''*4* . I 'g 4 **I .9.. - I a.* $7 I ~19 il ' Â·gâ€¢Â· , ,-7 1 * I 0 4 - ifi, câ€¢x i . , I i - 04 1% I.-I.-I ,-/ ..4 . - ... /2, ' I :194 224.1.0 4# . I. 71,1. 451-1 -ile.'Â· ' r I . ~Â·Â·arâ€¢2'7 :'.41-~12+4~; r, ~.r.,1'f*glfrÂ¢.,Ottfditje<~1,Â· '7Â§..: Â·'Â·Â·~ . , t. L -2 , 4 24 - *&. I , 1: I ./r 'R ': K t.; - . / eâ€¢ 4.'4 , 41,4, 4/7425 1., ... 4 ,...f'' 1 46 J./*Â¥Vt , .* 47~w.' , / . 0 A-gr 91; .. -,4 4 A J . I . . A) . 4 4.-f . .i , .*, - . -,1Â» ': 4?14.1:4<~9444*4 ;4' '4'1~U!.Cabl#rn.,7, i . 95 1. -grl~ *d,8 $ -\,~1,169442#.4.J~AREYS'<.~62 962;19.~44~ ~ * a j,< 1 1 - . ., Â· 14-1 5, 1 : e. 04< ' f~~1''W$"24 44$~.~ -'.f'l.r~=rs'.7.1..~.(1* 1% %4.* 04 :tz:.3>]1'EN ti.Sd.W:fi2-,Si~lipLAyliGYLE}:~ 1, " Â· 4 f ' u ~ , .0 ~ t ~ &~ '0'3 1 'Â· ,'1 9.9, .*X,<*4 4.~'0~*Â·*~~' '41. levy, Â·r $,Â·Â· 2-JVQ~~0/J~/~- ce. - .1 :Â· 222 .. , t.*20 ' I .. -r- #. 9 Â· . 1Â»â€¢ 240..4: 0..,Â».:WA. . h 0.. -1 - 11~,~ 62.3.,3Â¢1., .4~ r. e. ''-1914 - 17.4,5~ 1/'-,4. 54'T ,<iitti 4,~,.~,~'9*CI:*1Â¥=.'Â·p' Â·4<,1, .-~ ' 10*~ -60*t - .- Af -*/ . - 1/3. 1 . I . 1. , - .- -10 jwl/i /Â£ .':44. I J.6 -I-.I / ig-.- 2 . 2- - \ 9.k mt. - -,44 1-~i k . |'/Fl.Â·| 11,~H' - /////11 1/// pj/ -1 . E. 0 1 -- a ftp -4. ~al. , 0 -4 . 4 . 03 . 1 1 ..1 :~,7 e .. , -r .- - : - . - : -: 4 2 -r #t-1 '*- -: -8- - 79%1*Wrijoiweicipit'ai '.?{.uv>2 9#3,29*157~FF/Ak#%5"IL,~'Em ..3 :. â‚¬f/:%1611Â£96%2-M.3.A ' .JWE+Mil~- -1,4....*-a*&%25~91 - 4 + Nf . -~r~ 644;fiÂ·'25#'7*r.Â· 4*EM.64. . 4 .. r *07-4 -7 46 w 1 - 79. - r il 1 , fl .-C 4. 1.9 64 *... * /. 4 r F bli, , 4 - 12 6,1 I 1 .. I .. ...95? / 1 Ifc - /- f 7/.1"aul,FL.+2*.1/117%,atif~liff ~14 - /1 l + : , , *. ---Â£â€žÂ·Illp'r + ./ *.-..Z '-'-%2*5faE==-- -EL 1 t .4 '2.'fi"'4 . ",<, 321 -Â¢%7~2 Im . 2-. T -. Â·r /1 'TrÂ· ~ R 9 *le .. 1 -2.Â·.33. '4 .Â» 4.51 - ,- b. 1,-1 - 0 4. . 94 . . ' : ..... -Il ' '. Â· . :.eÂ· ..:LU jÂ·.Â· Ay. ~. L r Â¢ . I. e > r <,1 t. .+ 7- r ..9.*.19/4".4,2,07'Fl . J '. ,Â».+ . - I . t A J...Â· - 9 I , : le.-U. 1. Â· -' P. :Â·kzmwip. N , 1 1 1Â· 41':c a - '10: 1 '1-\, t '4},f p' 41 ... * 1* r -,44Â£9 -44.* 4.4.--149-r . 4 I . I ./ . I. ,.... 4*.47 7.4.. . r , ... I Â· .f, . b. *Il P ~Â· I ..14 A r .. ... I. - . . 41.. " . / I Â· 44 . r ' 4 4- ~ -4/- 1 D. , ;HA044?6/.~, Â·~ '"-'Â·'- ' . 'L \RP-Ftc I:.1 . 11 0 1 --4 . -. - - - - - 277 - D I . I. - . ... I lili 51>f-/8146+ 23, 20Â° i /t & CO '107 : 95 I. . --i- 1.4-, h '*S: I -. 24* 0.3- + 3 1 , . t -, 7 ...lf li lill lill / 2 'll i - M-W 4 -:*.. /4 -... - ----/----.- -- . :id . 7., , - t 40Â£ 4 // 1 i., .-t :4.77.-r~,26't 0,04r .0- .*.7/P/- & 7 - 1/4,9.4 1 'Â£4,11 4 &*.1.-7.- 1 t KIL'354; Â· -- C 0 -"...N---U.*--*..--.1~ -I'./."/- '- - I ITARrum -0-.~1 - ... '' fall . .. Ir, A.-11,1, 1. <4. . I 1424 9.- 497'. r 1%69~.* ,*6- r Â·Â·I. . :Â·Â·:. ~ '.Â· 4- -- 0.( 4 1-4 - fr - %2.i :--- -zÂ·'iÂ·tÂ·:Â·04':114'Â· r/:lt'..../-:f. tÂ·.Â·.I >I.~~2..6 . -:71.- -~~33- 11.2"*074-:Et ti,41- 436* -~ i.f- -: ,-.-*~.fEd.Â· uÂ·f- - ' OSE J :'91 -6,5 443'91 -6 W...Whs' d'COLK</.41*p, . f- : - ~iÂ¥(tz..'ftÂ·.pi>*34 z, ,, ,-,~p, A-*~T,%.*~~ - z .~,MV 4{ JÂ·iK-4'71 -C :' ~*422102' ' 1 44,Â·,. Â·Â·*4- .4,24-Â·Â·)~ t. tr:.4.4.. ?. f.-< R 8.4$24Â·4'64*Hu'ki:'.t*,14:4 '~ 2?fÂ¥'.-:.?.'2*13;'I . .:lll B. â‚¬*bXA:41:,4 4 -29 416" 1 r 'Â·eÂ·s.ul:z<- **c,~N . ' 21 -*- 4Â«*it- .,.0 f ...fÂ· 44 ' . ~... l.f'. .- ' -Kat~1 L .Ab' 1. - 2Â· Â·rÂ· .41, . . '. 9Â¥~-,7&~~i -3 1.4-â€žIliff<it-*I/Â»S 1,~ 47&% J- 4 /- - p: 1:i.9.41;3?'Tlk .IÂ·f. 9 ..It, ~*:9<--.2', #:*: .*711.4~-4..1,4-bfrr::'I.L: .-I . g, AiLÂ· Â· L >1" -12** Â· I ... ..:?T -1 .h.. '1 . ..0 W -Â· .. ,.4. Â· ~Â·r, :4<tÂ·:/.Â·. j- t ,0 &11, 1. / ./ I. -23.."A . .0 ... C - 61 . 14~11Â· .7' - - .-FT,m* '-' L. ~.. ' ~ WELCOME . - l\ ..1 -. - Â·Il TO TIC ASFEIi 10 ' 2 a - - 04'R M.Dot,(E WAY ' SISTEM -, 11-.4 - %-43 .6, Â· 41 r ..3'.ki i 1 <5 1.4 ., '.i J U -1 . 11 t '.81.Jr' | 2: -. 1 - :V- .:19:..,A~Â·. ./ '4 A./ 3: . pum., 4.4* .:-3.'-~. ... lix J \A./~ - 1 - ... <r . - ..39.1 . I .f:. . #I- --- 6 * . Mt?h , V - Â·- 9*j. 1 .. - ~1.4.../CY# 0 421/70mmil"Numvhim"P#gi W %4'alla/4/lut .. .1 4''Alilli.,,..4 , #:181'42,#FL- "~1, ~4,~I42up .~ ~~*'4 47:F2 : 4 K Â· I Â·Â· . . 9. I '4 4 14 U 4../... 1 1 I. A ,,4. I , *A * 34Â· 4 -j 1 - -- 4401 ..6. Â¥ EXHIBIT B REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS MEMORANDUM To: Chris Bendon, Planner From: Ben Ludlow, Project Engineer Reference DRC Caseload Coordinator Date: April 11,2000 Re: Boomerang Lodge Expansion The Development Review Committee has reviewed the Boomerang Lodge Expansion application at their April 5,2000 meeting, and has compiled the following comments: General 1. Sufficiency of Submittal: DRC comments are based on the fact that we believe that the submitted site plan is accurate, that it shows all site features, and that it is feasible. The wording must be carried forward exactly as written unless prior consent is received from the Engineering Department. This is to alleviate problems related to approvals tied to "issuance of building permit." 2. R.O.W. Impacts: Ifthere are any encroachments into the public rights-of-way, the encroachment must either be removed or be subject to current encroachment license requirements. Site Review 1. Site Drainage - Requirement - A drainage report was not submitted with the application. The site development approvals must include the requirement meeting runoff design standards of the Land Use Code at Sec. 26.580.020.A.6.a and a requirement that, prior to the building permit application, a drainage mitigation plan (24"x36" size plan sheet or on the lot grading plan) must meet the requirements of the Engineering Department Interim Design Standards and must be submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Department. The mitigation plan must also address the temporary sediment control and containment plan for the construction phase. If drywells are an acceptable solution for site drainage, a soils report must be provided with a percolation test to verify the feasibility of this type of system. Drywells have depths well below depth of frost (10' minimum) to function in cold weather. The drainage plan must contain a statement specifying the routine maintenance required by property owner(s) to ensure continued and proper performance. Drywells may not be placed within public right of way or utility easements. The foundation drainage system should be separate from storm drainage, must be detained and routed on site, 23 and must be shown on drainage plans prior to application for building permit. The drainage may be conveyed to existing landscaped areas if the drainage report demonstrates that the percolation rate and the detention volume meet the design storm. Information - The City drainage criteria needs to be implemented. This includes but is not limited to erosion control, soil stabilization, and vegetation disturbance. Also, there needs to be an analysis of where the drainage will flow and what adverse affects may arise from potential mud and debris flow. 2. Community Development - Information - The following request was provided by the Planning Department: NO INFORMATION AT THIS TIME 3. Fire Protection District - Information - The following information has been provided by the Aspen Fire Protection District: NO INFORMATION AT THIS TIME 4. Streets Department - Requirement - As of the request of the Streets Department revisions need to be made as follows: a. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction. 5. Parks - Information - The following information has been provided by the Parks Department: a. Since the applicant wants to have the natural look for the landscaping, then Steve Ellsperman, the City Forester, should be contacted for the correct seed mix to use in the disturbed areas. b. The Midland Trail would be most effective if it is extended behind the property location. This may require a trail easement. c. The planting of cottonwoods in the buffer zone between the potential Trail and the applicant' s structures would be most beneficial. 6. Engineering - Requirement - The following requirements have been provided by the Engineering Department: a. ROW permits and Encroachment licenses will be required during construction if applicable. b. A Fugitive dust control permit will be required during construction. 24 c. Drainage and soils problems in the project location may require the installation of curb and gutter. If not during the construction, then a curb, gutter, and sidewalk agreement will be made. d. A full soils report and drainage report are needed before the issuance of the building permit. Presenting it in a timely manner is beneficial to the applicant as well as the reviewer. e. The south elevation of the building has a few open doors and windows that can be subject to mud and debris flow. It is not a requirement of the City of Aspen Engineering Department to control design for this at this point. But, one must be prepared for the possibility of structural and aesthetic damage if a debris flow would occur. Engineering - Information - The following information has been provided by the Engineering Department: a. The parking design for the project is somewhat inadequate. One suggestion is to do a geometric design to the west half of 4th St. to allow for parking along that area. b. Another parking consideration is to allow parking in the front of each building via the planned sidewalk locations. c. A final parking consideration would be to allow parking access from the south end ofthe property. 7. Utilities: A utility plan needs to be submitted before any real comments and conclusions can be drawn by the utility companies. - Water: City Water Department - Requirement - The following information was given by the City of Aspen Water Department: a. All uses and construction will comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal code as they pertain to utilities. b. A distinction during the design phase will need to be made as to whether there will be separate or shared service lines - Wastewater Aspen Consolidated Waste District - Information - As a request of the Consolidated Waste District, revisions need to be made as follows: a. A set of drainage plans needs to be provided to Peg at ACSD so that an estimate of fees can be processed. 25 b. Each proposed building will need a separate tap or they will be subject to a shared service agreement. c. An 8 inch PVC sewer line runs through the middle of the property and needs to have an easement. In worse case it may need to be moved. - Electric: a. Currently the City wants to extend the electrical service to that property and other property in the neighborhood. b. There needs to be a lighting agreement similar to the sidewalk, curb, and gutter agreement to insure that the lighting will be the same for the neighborhood. - Construction: Work in the Public Right of Way - Requirement - Given the continuous problems of unapproved work and development in public rights-of-way adjacent to private property, we advise the applicant as follows: Approvals 1. Engineering: The applicant receives approval from the City Engineering Department (920-5080) for design of improvements, including grading, drainage, transportation/streets, landscaping, and encroachments within public right of way. 2. Parks: The applicant receives approval from the Parks Department (920- 5120) for vegetation species and for public trail disturbance. 3. Streets: The applicant receives approval from the Streets department (920- 5130) for mailboxes, finished pavement, surface materials on streets. and alleyways. 4. Permits: Obtain R.O.W. permits for any work or development, involving street cuts and landscaping from the Engineering Department. DRC Attendees Staff: Phil Overynder Applicant's Representative: Sunny Vanh Chris Bendon Mitch Haas Ben Ludlow Nick Adeh 26 Joyce Ohlson Tom Bracewell Beeca Schickling Memorandum TO: Nick Lelack, Community Development FROM: Rebecca Schickling, Assistant Parks Director DATE: May 25,2000 RE: Boomerang Lodge Expansion John Krueger, Patrick Duffield and myself did a site visit to the lot and have the following concerns and comments. The proposed on street parking for the project presents a few complications for future trail plans for the Shadow Mountain Trail. One alternative for the Shadow Mountain trail is to extend the trail at its terminus at 4th Street and bring it down on to the South side of Hopkins Street in the right-of-way (ROW). An eight to ten foot trail along Hopkins would be in conflict with the proposed parking for the Lodge and Condominiums. This may also present a problem along 4tll Street as well. I f the trail were to stay behind the Boomerang lot, then access to the property would need to be from Hopkins or 401 Street. The trail may continue along the alley and old Midland ROW and then extend up the mountain. The Parks Department could support their request to adjust the lot line along Lot G, however, an adjustment to include in their property boundary the southerly portions of Lots D&E would severely encroach upon the trail. 27 JOHN R. BEATT. TRADELAW ATTOI~NEY AT LAw INTERNATIONAL LEGAL SOLUTIONS Trade 8 Investment RECEIVED 520 E. Cooper, Suite 211 Asset Protection P.O. Box 207, Aspen, Colorado 81612 tel: 1-970-920-1522 Venture Capital JUL 2 4 2000 fax: 1-970-920-2465 ASPEN / PITKIN Taxation COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT iheattv@tradelawusa.com www.tradelawusa.com July 21, 2000 Sydney, Australia P.O. Box R230 Mayor Rachel Richards & the City Council, COPY The City of Aspen, Sydney, NSW 1225 tel: 4-61-2-9908-3381 130 S. Galena Street, 01?144*1999(9909 Aspen CO 81611 fax: +61-2-9974-4896 RE: BOOMERANG LODGEEXPANSION Dear Mayor and Council members: I am writing on behalf of Mrs. Mary Hugh Scott in opposition to the above referenced proposed rezoning, minor PUD and GMQS Exemption. Mrs. Scott's interest in the Patersons' application is threefold: (i) she is a neighbor who is directly affected by any development that occurs on the property; (ii) she sold the land to Mr. Paterson and has an ongoing security interest in the property and considers the present application to be a breach of the agreements reached in connection with the sale; (iii) as a long time resident she is concerned about the precedent that approval of the application may create. It is noted that the application is being made by Charles and Fonda Paterson, and the application further states that the applicant, Mr. & Mrs. Paterson are the owners of the property. This representation is incorrect. Title to the property is recorded in the sole name of Charles Paterson. Mrs. Scott holds a purchase money Deed of Trust from Mr. Paterson overthe property with a principal balance of $1,500,000 and any assignment of an interest by Mr. Paterson would be a breach of that Deed of Trust. It is understood that title to the Boomerang Lodge property is in the name of a corporation, and not that of the applicants nor of the owner of the property. SUMMARY Mrs. Scott is strongly opposed to the proposed re-zoning and minor PUD on a number of grounds, which may be summarized as:- 1. The proposed rezoning is significant and inappropriate in that it permits a density some two and one half times or more than that permitted under existing zoning, the proposed intensity of development on the site is excessive and is inconsistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan, the neighborhood and the surrounding Licensed in Colorado, Australia (NS\*9 2 England , July 21, 2000 Page 2 open space and represents an intrusion of commercial use into a quiet neighborhood setting. 2. A Lodge Preservation overlay to the property is neither appropriate nor legally supportable. The properties are not in the same ownership; they are not contiguous; the proposed development is not of the same or even similar nature; and is more in the nature of a townhome than a lodge. 3. The proposed rezoning and development sets an inappropriate precedent for future applications. 4. We believe that the application is contrary to certain private agreements entered into when Mrs. Scott agreed to sell the property to Mr. Paterson. That may be an issue for private enforcement, but to better understand Mrs. Scott's postion, you need to know the basis for the sale and terms she imposed when she sold the property. It is submitted that, to-date, Council has neither sufficiently considered nor appreciated the significant neighborhood impacts of the proposal, and has been too distracted from the real issues by the side issue of parking. We appreciate that the Patersons are long time residents and have been active in the community, and while it is tempting to want to help out an old time lodge owner, this should not be at the significant cost to surrounding home owners and the community that this proposal imposes. There is a big difference between helping a marginal lodge operation survive in order to preserve the existing lodge bed-base and the acquisition of a new, non-contiguous parcel in separate ownership and rezoning it for significantly denser development that is inconsistent with its surrounds and out of sync with the Aspen Master Plan. This is especially so when there has been no change of circumstances that justifies the rezoning and all evidence suggests that the existing lodge operation is, by all accounts, highly successful and is not in danger of closure. BACKGROUND Mrs. Scott and Mr. Paterson are both long time Aspen residents, and Mrs. Scott during the thirty-five or more years that she has known the Patersons, has had the pleasure of seeing the Paterson's prosperand build theirsuccessful lodge operation. Overtheyears, they have had many discussions regarding what she believed was a mutual interest in preserving the essential nature of this particular property as a buffer to Shadow Mountain. The Patersons now wish to intensively develop the property for their own financial gain and without regard to the history, feelings of, orimpact on, the surrounding neighbors and without respect for the very basis of the sale of the property to Mr. Paterson. As you are well aware, the property abuts Shadow Mountain, and has a popular hiking trail on one side and a very popular summer bicycle and pedestrian way (Hopkins) on the other. The property has been vacant for many years, and has wild grass, sagebrush and wildflowers. , July 21,2000 Page 3 It is clearly a property that requires sensitivity as to its development. The Patersons claim that they are being sensitive to the land, but building to the maximum FAR, maximum height (or very close to) and significantly reduced setbacks that could be obtained underany scenario, does not suggest sensitivity. Mrs. Scott endorses Mr. Paterson's statement in his letter to her of July 12, 2000, a copy of which Mr. Paterson copied to City Council, that "We have always felt very strongly that the transition of Shadow Mountain to the town lay at the base, specifically on Block 32, and we were happy that Mrs. Paepke did not wish to sell her land during her lifetime so it would remain as wild grass and sagebrush with wildflowers sprinkled throughout". Mrs. Scott acquired and held the property vacant in order to continue Mrs. Paepke's legacy, and sold it to Mr. Paterson only because he led her to believe that he would continue to respect and preserve the property. What Mrs. Scott strongly objects to, is the next sentence of Mr. Paterson's letter: "Unfortunately this was not to be forever". Mrs. Scott acquired the property from Mrs. Paepke in early 1995 for the express purpose of preserving the property and protecting it from intensive development. In fact, at the time Mrs. Scott purchased the property, there were discussions between various neighbors, including Mr. Paterson, regarding the possible joint acquisition of the property in order to preserve it as a neighborhood amenity. Ultimately, Mrs. Scott decided to acquire the property individually. Mrs. Scott resides at the corner of 3rd and Hopkins, across and just down the street from the property proposed for development, and any development on the property will directly impact her views to the west. |SSUESARISINGFROMTHETERMSOFSALE In August, 1999, Mrs. Scott agreed to sell the property to Mr. Paterson specifically because she believed that he would be sensitive to the special nature of the property and based on his representations to her that he planned to preserve it's nature and to develop it in a manner consistent with existing zoning, i.e., a single family residence for himself or possibly as a low impact duplex that would permit some employee housing (in the form of one or more ADU's) that would be available for employees of the Boomerang. The sale to Mr. Paterson was consistent with its present zoning as a single family lot with R-15, Moderate density residential zoning, for a price of $2.5 million. Most of the consideration was carried in the form of a low interest installment note secured over the property. Although the City may well regard the restrictions placed on the property in conjunction with the sale to be a private matter, and in one sense that is true, Council should understand that Mrs. Scott's opposition to the development is entirely consistent with the restrictions she imposed and the representations made to her by Mr. Paterson in conjunction with the sale. The relevant portions of the specific express contractual restrictions are: "Buyer agrees that it shall not, nor will it allow, the Property to be improved (1) as an employee housing project in which the primary purpose of the Property is to provide , July 21,2000 Page 4 housing for individuals employed in Pitkin County or in the City of Aspen, or (2) as a townhome project in which townhomes occupy nearly all of the open space on the Property, as now exists at "The Fireside" project. Nothing in subsection (1) of the preceding sentence shall, or be interpreted to, limit Buyer's right to construct one or more affordable or employee housing units as part of a development plan, the primary purpose of which is not to provide housing for individuals employed in Pitkin County or the City of Aspen". The rationale for the covenant against an employee housing development per se was not that Mrs. Scott doesn't believe that there is not enough employee housing in town, but that she felt that the intensity of development and traffic that such a project would generate was simply inappropriate for this particular parcel. As to the second restriction, referencing The Fireside, the present proposal before Council is just the sort of development that she sought to prevent. While perhaps Council is not the appropriate forum for arguing the similarities or differences between the two, at the very least, it should be readily apparent to Council that the townhome nature of the Paterson project is quite similar to the Fireside. While with hindsight it would seem that Mrs. Scott should have included a specific covenant limiting development to that permitted by existing zoning (single family, possibly a duplex of no more than 5,100 square feet), in not doing so, Mrs. Scott relied on the present zoning, as she was clearly entitled to do under Colorado law. The sale was made, with Mr. Paterson's full knowledge and agreement, on the basis of the current zoning. Mr. Paterson is fully aware, that if Ms. Scott had been aware as to the Paterson's plans for the land, she would not have contemplated making the sale. And if Mr. Paterson was, or is, at all confused about the position, Ms. Scott is quite willing to reacquire the land from him and refund him the money. It is important to point out, that Ms. Scott's right to rely on existing zoning is supported by a long line of Colorado cases. Colorado case law also make it clear that, absent a significant change in circumstances, such as a material change in the character of the neighborhood that requires rezoning in the public interest (which has clearly not occurred here), there is no legal basis for special zoning treatment to be afforded to a particular piece of property (see Clarke v City of Boulder, 146 Colo 526,326 P.2d 160.). In the light of the case law, it is submitted that it would inappropriate for the City to approve what is in reality a significant spot rezoning of this property. More particularly so, because the proposed rezoning involves a significant increase in density and the extension of commercial use into a residential, relatively low density, neighborhood without any justifiable basis other than economic gain of the applicants. While ultimately the contractual issues are a private matter that will be resolved by negotiation between the parties or by a court (Mrs. Scott is actively considering filing a complaint in Pitkin County District Court against Mr. Paterson), it is important for the City Council to at least understand that the issues exist, the nature of the issues, and, more importantly, (a) that Mrs. Scott's opposition to the Paterson's proposal is consistent with the basis and terms on which she sold the property and (b) that in framing the terms of sale, she Â· July 21, 2000 Page 5 relied on existing zoning and her belief that the City Council would not improperly consider a spot zoning of the property without adequate justification. |NAPPROPRIATENESS OFLoDGE PRESERVATION OVERLAY Section 26.710.320 states that the purpose of the Lodge Preservation (LP) zoning is "to provide for and protectsma// lodge uses on properties historically used for lodgeaccommodations.... to encourage deve/opment which is compatib/e with the neighborhood and respective of the manner in which the property has historica//y operated, and to provide an incentive for upgrading existing lodges on-site or on to adiacent properties" (emphasis added) It is noted that as best as can be determined, the present application appears to be the first case involving an extension of the LP zoning to a parcel of land that is vacant and does not already have an existing lodge on the property. City Council, should, therefore, be particularly mindful of any precedents that their actions on this property may create. We do not believe that rezoning of the property in this case is proper or appropriate for the following reasons: a. The property is not in the same ownership as the existing lodge and is not, therefore, "an upgrade of an existing lodge"; b. The proposed "upgrade" (if it is that) is not on-site or on to an adjacent property. The property is separated by not only a street, but one that is a popular pedestrian and bike path in the summer; c. The proposal is not an "upgrade of an existing lodge", but an entirely new development; d. The proposal is much more than an "upgrading of the existing lodge" - it is a separate parcel, with a different style of units that are not of a lodge style; e. There is no case made, or that can be made, that the granting of the application in any way "protects" the existing lodge. There is no suggestion that the existing lodge is uneconomic or needs this addition in order to ensure its survival or even that this expansion will help to ensure its survival- in fact all indications are to the contrary - that the existing lodge is successful and profitable. The proposal is, in any event entirely separate from the existing lodge; f. The proposal is neither compatible with the neighborhood nor "respective of the manner in which the property (which, for the purposes of the ordinance, can only refer to the property that is the subject of the application) has historically operated - the property has historically been open space for many years and has effectively open space on one side, and, other than the Boomerang across the street, is surrounded by residential properties (see further discussion below). In relation to the ownership issue, it is important to note that not only is there no commonality of ownership between the existing Boomerang Lodge and the property, there is no legal tie existing nor proposed, that would ensure that the proposed development remains in perpetuity tied to, or integrated with, the Boomerang Lodge. There is nothing to prevent it , July 21, 2000 Page 6 being operated as a separate property with the attendant increases in employment requirements and traffic. INCONSISTENCY WITH THE AspEN AREA COMPREHENSIVE PLANI The proposed project is clearly inconsistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. It is recognized that one of the components of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan (AACP) is to maintain the community's lodging base, but that is just one, not the sole, criteria for development in the AACP. As stated above, the provisions related to the LP zoning are expressed in quite limited terms, and it is submitted that the expansion of a commercial use into a well established and long standing medium density residential zone on a "spot" basis is inconsistent with the AACP when taken as a whole. The area surrounding the project may be characterized as a strip of main street commercial fronting Main Street, with a parallel strip of R-6 Residential running between the alleyway and Hopkins, with The Boomerang being the only commercial intrusion into that strip, followed by a strip of R-15 Residential between Hopkins and Shadow Mountain. This stepped zoning provides a clearly appropriate transitioning from Main Street commercial to the open space of Shadow Mountain. The proposal interferes significantly with this. The extension of commercial use or even a townhome use onto this property, as is proposed by the application, is clearly inconsistent with the underlying assumptions of the AACP. The Boomerang is already an intrusion into the residential neighborhood, and the proposal, if approved, would significantly extend the high density commercial intrusion even further into the residential neighborhood and into a lower density portion of the neighorhood. There is no justification for this intrusion and it is clearly inconsistent with the AACP. "The fact that the property may not be used as profitably for residential purposes as for commercial uses, furnishes no justification for special treatment thereof"1 It is irrelevant that Mr. Paterson can use the property more profitably as an expansion of the Boomerang than for its properly zoned residential use. It is important to note that if the application was for construction of townhomes in exactly the same configuration as the proposal, it is extremely unlikely that the proposal would even be considered for approval. Yet there is nothing at all to prevent the applicants or a future owner of the property (who may or may not also own The Boomerang) coming back to the City for approval to convert the then existing buildings into separate condominiums (or as a time share or other fractional ownership), and in fact, the project appears to have been clearly designed with this possibility, if not likelihood, in mind. There is also no legal basis proposed that would require the subject development, if approved, to continue to be operated as part of The Boomerang. Rather, the City Council appears to have simply assumed that this will be the case, whereas in fact there are no assurances that the new development will continue to be operated as an integrated unit 1 Clarke v City of Boulder, 146 Colo 526,362 P. 2d 160, quoting Hoskinson v Arvada (1957,136 Colo. 450,319 P. 2d 1090. July 21, 2000 Page 7 with the existing Boomerang, or indeed, that it ever will be. Once approved, the City would have no power to prevent the property being operated as a separate unit. Further, given that the property will remain in the R-15 zone district with an LP overlay, there also does not appear to be any legal restriction on the townhomes, if constructed, being leased on a long term basis rather than as short-term lodge units. One of the significant SPECIFIC |SSUES WITH THE PROJECT Density: The proposal seeks to increase the density on the property by over two and one half times, when calculated on an FAR basis, and by a factor of 3 to 5, when calculated on a use basis, i.e., The proposal contemplates some 34 guest pillows, plus the two employee housing units, plus facilities that will presumably be used by guests accommodated in the existing Boomerang Lodge across the street. This is an exponential increase over the use factor for a single family or duplex residence, even with ADU's. Comments were made by those supporting the application at the First Reading that seemed to assume that under current zoning the property could be effectively covered by a huge single family house or duplex. Yet, even if all available FAR were to be built on a single level, over 70% of the property would remain open space, and this open space would be more available than the fractured open spaces between buildings in the applicants' proposal. Given that it is likely that any single family or townhome constructed would be on more than one level, the footprint would be even less and open space increased further. This density is clearly out of character with the neighborhood, especially when viewed in the proper context of the south side of West Hopkins, which is, consistent with the zoning on that side of the street, single family residential. Orientation: Mr. Paterson, on behalf of the applicants, stated to the City Council on the First Reading of this proposal, that he specifically designed the proposed development as separate townhomes "because he thought that that was what Mrs. Scott wanted" in that she had expressed to him at the time of sale her concern that any development not end up a wall of buildings along Hopkins. Yet the design is such that, from Mrs. Scott's property, the development, if approved, would constitute just such a wall of buildings. The orientation of the buildings is such that any spaces between the buildings will be invisible from her property, and the stepped effect of the design is such as to increase the effect of the mass of the buildings. When this was pointed out by the writer to M. Paterson right after the meeting, Mr. Paterson's response was that he fully recognized that this was the case, and that he had designed it that way specifically so as to preserve the view lines from The Boomerang and to maximize sun. This is totally at odds with the representations he had just made to the Council. . I . 1 . July 21, 2000 Page 8 Set back Ordinance 26.710.320 specified that the dimensional requirements for all uses in the LP Overlay Zone is the dimensional requirements established for the underlying zoning, in this case, R-15. The ordinance does contemplate the possibility of variation of these pursuant to a PUD, as the applicant has proposed. However, this is not without criteria - the criteria being neighborhood compatibility and the dimensional requirements regulations surrounding districts. The applicants seek to reduce the minimum setback requirement from the 25 feet required by the underlying zoning to 10 feet, and then to seriously further encroach in to this setback by having rooflines extending to 5 feet or less from the front and rear boundaries. This setback is entirely inconsistent with, and incompatible with, both the surrounding neighborhood and surrounding districts. Height Although it is recognized that the applicants claimed height for the buildings is equal to (the building at the west end of the property) or less than, that permitted under the R-15 zoning, it is submitted that a lower height limitation is more appropriate for the property given its sensitive location between the pedestrian-way of Hopkins and Shadow Mountain. Parking Much of the discussion on the First Reading was regarding parking. The original proposal was to provide no parking, although we understand that the latest proposal is for 10 - 12 underground parking spaces. The report from City Staff notes that the LP overlay zone district designation requires 13.9 spaces, but goes on to suggest that the applicants should be relieved of that, in part, on the basis that The Boomerang Lodge operates a shuttle service for its guests. Again, this is a situation that the Council seems willing to assume will continue, without there being any legal requirement for the operator to do so. It is noted, however, that the parking is provided in the last phase of the development, and it is submitted, that even if approval were to be granted, the applicants should be required to post a substantial bond to ensure that the parking is in fact provided within a reasonable period of time, and that on-street parking not be permitted and that adequate interim off street parking be provided on-site. Affordable Housing The proposal contemplates provision of housing for 3.5 full time equivalent employees (FTE's). While we also agree with the applicants' contention that the FTE number of 35 determined on a square footage basis is excessive, we do submit that the FTE generated is, nevertheless, greater than the 3.5 proposed. The applicants' calculation assumes extension of services from the existing lodge, but given that they have not offered to in any way legaly combine the two, this is an illusory assumption. They further claim credit based on the availability of a tri-plex for employees of the existing lodge, yet again, it does not appear that there is any July 21, 2000 Page 9 legal restriction on the use of the tri-plex for employee housing, and again, without such an enforceable deed restriction, the credit is illusory. One comment that should be made is that the FTE count of 35 based on square footage clearly further emphasizes the density of this proposal. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS Comments were made at the First Reading regarding the comparative density of development on Mrs. Scott's property. It is important to note that Mrs. Scott's property is in a higher density zoning that the property that is the subject of the application, and is entirely consistent both in terms of use and density with the other properties on that side of Hopkins. Finally, it should be noted that Mrs. Scott would have raised all of the above issues before the Planning & Zoning Commission, but had no opportunity to do so because she did not receive any notice that the proposal was being considered. The first notice that was received was the day prior to the First Reading before City Council. In this context, Mrs. Scott fails to understand how Mr. Paterson can possibly claim to be surprised by her opposition to the proposed development of the property. Mrs. Scott has consistently made it clear to the Patersons that she did not want such intense development, and it is disingenuous for them to claim that they were not aware that she would not have sold the land to them if they had indicated their intention to propose such an intense development. In summary, it is submitted that the City Council needs to carefully examine all aspects of the proposal before it, and if they do, they will come to understand that it is not in the best interests of the neighborhood or the City as a whole. We look forward to having the opportunity to further explain our position at the hearing scheduled for Monday, and to responding to any questions any City Council member may have. Sincerely, John kldatty q CC: Mrs. Mary Hugh Scott Mr. & Mrs. C. Paterson Michael Hoffman, Esq., City of Aspen Planning Office .. - *y k 4-1. 1. Public Hearing to consider Ordinance No. 29, Series of 2000. 1 -Jfj r 2. The Application is to expand the existing Boomerang Lod~ across the street, W. Hopkins Avenue, to a vacant parcel/ This is one of the first, big lodge preservation applications submitted under the new lodge preservation program. 3. The proposed site plan has changed since First Reading in response to City Council's and neighbors comments . The applicant is continuing to propose 6 buildings, which include: a. 5 chalets - each about 1600 sq. ft. of FAR, 700 sq. ft. footprint, 2,180 square feet overall. Each would be 3 bedrooms and 3.5 baths. b. A 6th building to contain: 2 1-bedroom AH units (700 sq. ft. each), 2 1-bedroom lodge units (960 sq. ft. each), and a bathhouse & and second floor lap pool. c. A total of 7 lodge units and 17 bedrooms. d. New: 10-12 car underground parking garage. 4. Specifically, the request, review procedure, action: a. See Staff Report, page 2. 5. Community Development Staff believes the spirit and intent of the proposed expansion - meets the goals of the lodge preservation and AH programg KA d- fW- A-4-6(3- ~ckt-/ Purpose of Lodge Preservation Program: See Ordinance #39 The AACP calls for "maintaining the community's lodging base". ,~0 The AACP program calls for increasing the number of AH units w= in town, and AH program encourages the provision of AH on- site, which is what this applicant is proposing. Staff also appreciates the connectivity on the site - connecting each chalet to the street with a pedestrian path. R . L Staff also appreciates the Applicant's proposal to maintain the site in its natural state to the greatest extent possible. The 6th building is proposed to be 23 feet - 2 feet shorter than the underlying code, while the chalets are proposed to be 25 feet tall - the same as the underlying zone district. Staff also believes the proposed site plan is compatible with the neighborhood, including the density, FAR, open space, height etc. The proposed parking garage (storage) would take cars off of the streets to preserve the pedestrian/bike ways - and allow cars to exit without backing out, minimize curb cuts to just one, maintain the streetscape - although the entrance would appear y fit out of character. r -0 p Or k 6. There remain some key issues that Council needs to be aware @ 19 &* A oil. 6 05 a) Streetscape & condition of approval Â·r- 12~4*a~-- 3%. '' -0 0\ b) Building placement Â·-,~CU f *-1+ Fq '- by 67 4%> c) GMQS Exemptions & condition of approval #s 17 & 18. Â·94 496 d) Phasing of development - temporary parking structure and et Kil/y cash-in-lieu for AH mitigation. Condition 2(d) for parking, 6(c) for landscaping, Condition 16 for AH e) Covenants Recommendation: See page 5 of the staff report Polo\(c c 0.Â« Mevbty . 1 Beul PÂ»De-- Â«Aâ‚¬31Â»% bldhe- LitrZE -~ t.9 t-EN tp 6-19 I-- tÂ« 10Â« 2- 0 1,4 Ag~ 0 L F 53 2 0 #-0 OIL ra-Â£ 4-wg- 1- ef-. e fift,-4â‚¬/ f f.901/.10)70-Ell- 2219 W~Â·-Â»- D-2~113 6277 ' F7 8*4 L 11â‚¬., vulu- ly<'9 2owe- 3*-vtÂ·- cf Der wil C,kak,~ 7 TLL 07(14 n* 1/54-2 401 e L? O ve*ki,~ , 17- 1 Se 93Â«711 4 t j 34 %6 @40 - 3 44 i 64 4 4-0 + FKVQA,2t it rel fluÂ·4 , 91 p ifloi 32 < 1 bki Oo_A43 41*Axb 4 *,Ah,We . 27 4/ \40 jr rea.(9411 04 50 4/ 20Â«19 . 1-9 69 - *<2/ 4 4- 1 Ttlp, 0% 1Â£&9 fs-fv+5 . cir 666* E 36+ 2 Qg-Vi 98 <M le- Plan . / 1 + HARÂ·prop , - Ft-An-A-10 Am ENDS- HERE-' C Ll-! ic Â»t L /*WADED -8-9â‚¬Â»â€¢ OFÂ»00~ .FOR. 12 CAAS D NDER.-G 12%919-D- ENTR.y --7--- - - I-- St>Gs -TrO GrAAAGK f . 24'-6" ar li~W,Zikyrir,Of,11514*f~rhbrit'ili I,; 1 i Il -~ f 0 ~ 1-1 1 -- -- 411 'C- FAn-1 1 42Â» ~ CE- ~ -1 ~IW Fjot L.I. f--- 'n , 2~Â·ff'thol' i LI crith ' . ' 4..2 L ' f . m m li i / , .\\\\\\\.1 m-il--). Fierliypicâ‚¬Arl- 1 - 4- KoeF LINE- 1 '21 \\\,\ 1\\1 OK]rySUC.'<Le . /7 -. fy nÂ· 14.- \ 1 15-OR>/ ~,7 3 4 , 1. < PP. R.'<:t., 2 0 / Mod! 9-0-AjA L=-- J ; fa . ~~- ,~ 1, --- / 2 1 2- I e ED'kooM j j ~Â·15' \3 \~ --.5- 2 FRON'it.rÂ·9 / TES Le %\ 4 0 IL_ / / 941 \ e V ,- SHRUB 5 , b''4 -p 'Poust'N 6 2# 466 41| UN ers Afp.5 I 1 li pof,HASE z , 1% Okâ‚¬ Wl,46./ I /\ A"(2Rr,Fir I ~Â·.c,r-4ffl\/'fFp ELC>Â·D t'l. ~ FOR-VAAâ‚¬ E 1 1 , 1 /1 3('- k\\ i |" %'it. 2,9- 2* 664<ox '/kÂ° 'Â· 6 &.Appet Dx 4.60 0 /' 1 1 . ,/-'\ 1 \\ Â«h / \ \ \ 0; / 1\ U . 41-1>60 P><Â·124, 1 2/, t \\ 3 ' - /6/ i y K22---(DGE.CAO: 1 N rk \ - -3 r ' Y A \ - apr W Ouse 4 'ISOLD" - \ 1 1 , i \ \ +1511 Â«la .. --/ <70 74 C e CH AL-â‚¬T- A 1 1.- \ III FooT DQ' N 1- , 4.ANT-ED WALL Op I LAR,= E BOO'-PEELâ‚¬ . ' 1 FA 1-4 1 6 1 \ L D VVER. / \ \ ;70â„¢RA c., , 1 - X 1 ' COU RIT-7Â»90 F-*nA E ==.E u F p '409 -Ary DOWNSTAR S YED FDOWÂ·,9 . 1 -F 3 :R E OF PRÂ»PE CT>/ --- ' TE,TRALE 41 -- . -- -- A i - f ! D - - - ---1, 1 1 3 0 L D" 4 H E - ..L j CHAR.LES PATER.SON , DESIGNE-ig F -Râ€¢kiSE -CLIi_J_1Â£Ly-490 1-3, L C 3 <21< 32 i SCALE /31 -8 11.-Ch" - A -I !97-jn0 - 0 -4 L =A. 0- ' 11 1 98Â·â‚¬7 3 - 1 - -- F .67_6z _ .-- _{37 42 QfÂ»Â·0_ GE- _ - ~1 ... 4 1, 1 1 f. 7, i i' -h ' 1 ." 11 i 1 r F IAIL E =_-511-4: 1 E:2 - u .7/00,35 El ic---- r-z=5' U&:62 1 ELE Â¢. UP j 1 ; f . Ly url 41 1 fâ‚¬Â«EF:==:~ \ \ / / OF...44 i i ,\ 1 L.4 1) \ 3, U 11 . -6 0 \0- 4 i \ 7. H TY=t \ . ~ - i - IRE--W-Abl-:CA L '/\ i -- . 11 1 il i i 1 -9- 00Â« -- -7 r " I i CAK GrA- A. .A <1 2- 40Â¢275: , 1+00 0 1 1 1 - /// 9 MA li 11 /1/N /30#0% 1 r 1 k= 1 4 0 III ! lit- :1 ti * : r-11 \ \ h Â·Â· u .1 tr-'I, 11 ' | 04-.....f /1 , ;P==2 12 - s P 1~ h,~ =r---4-7 7 4/\ \. \ --*- -- -- .*===91 !4=4 L K ~23 1 19 \ \ LAP I Â·~1! w A. q u , 1 1 1., P (D (3 L. 'li s j 144-1-1 U ; 1 -9 ~ b 'h 11 1 i Â«90 R AAST pRO :-F-*MT- 7 Lilli 242 1 1 \ f % \ 9 - - 4 PLAN OF: SAÂ· 62.-MENf-7- c- T- -11,-3E-5 1-1.. E ,J [) _. i~ 1-1.- 02 1 64* CR . 1-3 El . . S 6- -L' 5:DOM\EFLAN S LODGE- ADDing,tÂ·4 -- 3 L 0 0Â¥< Aspen Times City of Aspen -1 Lodge plan advances Plans to expand the Boomerang Lodge moved-- ahead a step Monday night, though the Aspen City Council directed the lodge's owners to come up with more parking spaces. The council adopted an ordinance, on first read- ~ ing, to allow Boomerang owners Charlie and Fonda Paterson to build five chalets, two condo units and two affordable housing units on a parcel of land across from the Boomerang. The original proposal called for no on-site park- ing except for two spaces dedicated to the affordable housing. The Patersons, according to consultant Sunny Vann, feel their proximity to Main Street buses and their provision of a shuttle service pre- clude the need for cars, and therefore the need for parking spaces. But the council members said they believed the project might lead to added parking congestion in the neighborhood. It was pointed out that, under the city's codes, the project could be required to include 13 parking spaces. One issue that only came up at the end of the dis- cussion was whether the chalets and new lodge condo units would be sold under"fractional owner- ship" arrangements. Vann noted that. if that is ever the case, the Pater- sons are required by city regulations to get permis- sion from the city. A public hearing on the Boomerang proposal is now set for July 10: lit ./ R /2,3 7/ - I - 1, % . 4 - ./ . I .1 . r ,-I .. +ropgrty LingJ ~ t. E- .:. diT - *r + 1 . . 6...... 11. m 1 . - ,Â§4% < I - A -' f./ - . " 14. . ... 9 ...4".4, 1 14 8:,~ 4 4.0 ? :4 ./ 1 M . , 1 :. 1 .. 1 . ....> 4 0 .UMM 4 1. Â· 6 + - . I -= * + t.. . 4 , 1 j 1. I .4 * ~* Boomerang ~.5 trail I r. 4 4 4.04 96 I . . I . . I I. .r , a I .... 4 .0 'll , I ... .. . e 4 6 .-9 - I - $ 1 1: .. . 6. 4 , I 4 e 6 . . . . . t-,1 + 4 . I 9 4 I 1 . /1 1,1.%1 4.. .- 1..... 9 . F : 0% 7 + N ..: , . 7. . r 4 Â· .4 I. ir I# It I 1 1 3,! ' + 0 4 ' dity 1 . -- 11# n 9 ... I + ,. ..,4,1.7 . 11 62 4 4. , 1 4. - , kit*~i-Â¥~970-0 kf,22 47 477 -Ch - $ 3-1 -*4%7 6 2.43 7299 9 44 7 27 -2 9767 49- Â»48 3 %<r * 62)0 ) 2- 1/1/ 39/0-~ 11Â·f 1 4477Â» S 41 41 0 MP 2 1,39 b 1315 Â» \ D LA LÂ« <tÂ» 449 64 0 /9 1% 4/ rÂ©1 4 j 13 4 1%- 9 36-1 996 u.3 b \ 1 4. 9 14\ 1/1-1 0 6 1 9. 6/ 41 CÂ« -4 e , (3) \~\ 11 . ... I ..4 , ...1 '14. . 41)â€¢ a I 1 Property Line 1 . .0/dip - - 1 -F,r.~~59*7 r + U 33-- IFTÂ¢,gilill/Ar/Ed-/Â·fil#le"FL,Â·6,1'H;* .., I./4 4.16 . .. I . 2. , 14 0. I Â· . ..1 .P'. V 16. . I. 4. 4 " ..... 4,i ' UK. . .,5 i ? .... I + . 4 .. . I "4 PFEÂ¤HiÂ»-An=Â«- -t $ C :11 Boornerang_~ v . 4 * . h * --I--I'la'* $ D .. . A + - . ..6 2 4. :91 10. t' . , 1. Si,-~ .Ud r $< 2 -A=- il-. A , af0 t.1 1 4 Â¥ m L. ./ e.. .* .* 4 **,0 - '.3 . - 4 , f. 4 :.M I . -2.- r . 04 I * I r -4 .-11 41 2 11Â¥ 1 I â€¢ J -Ff 0-0 -f-Â»_yl ~_ -- Lt*zk249 c) -~pA~3~---~ --iD/tv 999 U-- 7177 3 30Â«0 4 9-* Â»9 Â® K~Â«h , A 0 1 0 10 2 f - 2-251 -P 4-M + 4 Pup 4 -2-t/3 /7.9 3 Fet i--~ 41 Â»Â«-9 1 7 193- Â»f -LA-4 9 02 trifF~1 + f P W .-FU ,-2:13 /9345 -10 4â€ž -412= 0 64 679 J.9 *Â«2fn~VI Vk 9~/9 0 V 9* 1 3 A Â» 9 Â»45 - VI-1 0? 0 0 b -ja :p-99â‚¬ 9Â° f-03 g fer,f JÂ« 43 16 Â£*Aff@ . c.~ wq<322.0 1.reGO 4-99 2 my '5 -f' a --4Â»20 0- *.0/If/1 5 8 Tin ' A ~ lu'.J 1-4/ --4%,-8 --1#D vt/L~ 42 5 U Â» 9 */3 9 . .T . , + Â»ir " . 4. 151.6 3 1 1 r.;14 ..e....' +roperty Link 1 + /- . - 1"5; 3/Bil...................8..iqi'll/A 7r- Till"lilikil .. 4%/ + i .f , I y.4 . /6. . 1 . e ,Â¢ 1 , 4 ./ . . , .. * Boomerang ~ * A I .4 1 I. St# 1~-il.le/ . . . 9 4 0 $ 4 ' + I . , h ' 7 - 44, 0: 4.4, .. R. 2,1 Â· A . 4 4:- : .. 1 0 -4.~Â· 0 . R 1 + 8 . 1/ m ' ./4 B . 94% 1 14 I . 1, 0 r. . 40. s . .7 + I Â·A . I I . . 6 16 2 9 - . - City *A 1 . ..0. I. *. I 9 5 *4- 3 41 Q -091 -lu- 9 4 41 6vrqu vt-_ 0454Â« /O - ovw 041- 40Â» AlÂ«2 24 0/in Lit -nA 4- 1 Y rjul Â» 000-\4 r f-- (/ LL_ 6/0.03 c * a Â« Hâ‚¬iLa ~ AP 1 1 10(.#972_ &_13 kou-*\Pt .PE L>Ar GLE ~1 Utta. 6- 3 +0.-a g 2Â·r 0 \.1 V <4 tA 1. uwo*:- 1 Ov 1/ {37 00- 0; b k, 3/ . Â»1//.Â«FUE-- /012-he 11 9 1 Â»WO/--PiG>i.flope 73 -yv â‚¬/Aol/p LK) - 9-EL r- 44 463 3 -freÂ© 0 9-- 140Â»4Â«4_, Olpe 44-3 242 11 ria- 40--3 , FrES - / L /4= 9/7 4 1. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager John Worcester, City Attorney Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director FROM: Nick Lelack, Planner RE: Boomerang Lodge Expansion - Rezoning & Minor Planned Unit Development - First Reading - Continued DATE: June 26,2000 On June 12,2000, City Council continued the First Reading for the application submitted by Charlie and Fonda Paterson (Applicant) to rezone and create a Planned Unit Development for the property located across the street from the existing Boomerang Lodge to June 26,2000. Please find attached a revised site plan for the Boomerang Lodge Expansion proposed by the Applicant, and letters from neighbors concerned about the project. The revised site plan includes five (5) on-site parking spaces. Designated parking spaces for the two (2) affordable housing units would be located at the existing lodge, along the 5th Street side of the structure. Each proposed on-site parking space would require a curb-cut. It is highly unlikely that the City Engineer will issue more than one (1) curb cut to this property. The proposed on-site parking would be inconsistent_with_ths-31 -Hopkins Avenue streetscane, except for the four (4) head-in parking spaces across the street near the 4th .-. Street intersectignÂ· Parking along W. HÂ®kins Avenue is primarily either parallel or gn- -sitevia alliaccess from the back of the properties. Staff believes TIiat-the Applicant can provide on-site parking behind the chalets and lodge/bathhouse/affordable housing building in a manner that preserves the native vegetation in the back of the property. Locating parking behind the structures would maintain the streetscape and reduce the presence of automobiles on W. Hopkins Avenue. far more people - pedestrians, bicyclists, and automobile traffic - would be exposed to the hERin parking along W. Hopkins Avenue than would pedestrians and bicyclists using the trail behind the property, especially since much of the mature vegetation is not on-site, but rather on City property along the trail. Community Development Staff continues to believe that the Applicant should consider developing a new site plan with buildings oriented toward the street and adequate on-site parking (depending on the number of units, bedrooms, and square footage). 1 RECOMMENDATION: Staff continues to recommend that the Applicant revise the site plan to include at least 5-7 on-site parking spaces appropriately located, with the buildings oriented to the street. Staff further recommends that City Council table this request until such a plan is submitted to staff for further analysis. RECOMMENDED MOTION : "I move to table Ordinance No. _, Series of 2000, until to allow the Applicant to revise their site plan." ALTERNATIVE MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No. , Series of 2000, approving the rezoning to R- 15/Planned Unit Development/Lodge Preservation and minor PUD, with the conditions in the ordinance." (Council will need to decide on an option related to Condition 16 regarding surety for the affordable housing units proposed in the second phase.) CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Original Staff Report Exhibit B -- Revised Site Plan Exhibit C -- Letters Exhibit D -- Code Interpretation of the term "Lodge" C:\home\nick]\Active Cases\Boomerang\CC lst Reading CONTD.doc 2 steve@goldenberg.com, 10:10 AM 6/22/00 -0500, Re: Boomerang "Open Space" To: <steve@goldenberg.com> From: Nick Lelack <nicki@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Re: Boomerang "Open Space" CC: Bcc: Attached: There is no open space requirement for the R-15 Zone District. The application proposes to establish 55% open space as a minimum, if I remember correctly, and he contends that 70% of the site will actually remain open space. His argument, I think, is this: the site is 19,000+ square feet; each chalet would have a footprint of approximately 740 square feet, which equals 3700 square feet for the five chalets (1 don't have the proposed footprint for the large sixth building immediately available); so, the aggregate of the building footprints (in terms of square feet) would be about 30% of the site's total square footage. As a result, 70% of the site would remain open space. The allowed FAR for a single family residence on this site would be approximately 4750 square feet (the Boomerang proposal is for 12,060 square feet of FAR). This property would be eligible for an FAR exemption of up to 375 square feet for a residential garage, so a residence could actually be as large as 5,125 square feet above ground. The site might be eligible for a duplex, meaning that the FAR could be increased to 5160 square feet of FAR with 750 square feet of FAR exemption for the two garages, so 5910 square feet may be visible above grade on this site under that scenario. To take this exercise one step further, each duplex could have up to a maximum of an 800 square foot detached ADU. So it appears that the maximum FAR for this site, if a duplex is even eligible, could be up to about-LEQ~squEÂ£1~LQLEAEithe ADUs are exempt from FAR calculations IF they are BOTH detached and deed restricted to mandatory occupancy). So, with the potential FARs available under different residential scenarios compared to what Charlie is proposing, I doubt that the duplex with ADUs scenario would actually cover more of the site than the proposed 5 chalets and mixed-use building, unless the structures were primarily 1- story and expanded across the lot. It is more likely that the duplex would be 2-stories above ground like the Boomerang proposal to capture the views of Aspen Mountain (or is it Ajax?). The 2-story buildings - whether it be a duplex or chalets would likely result in less site-coverage because of FAR limitations. In addition, the Boomerang application proposes to establish setbacks of 10-feet in the frontand ~Les (the rear yard setback is proposed to be "per approved PUD planÂ§" which seems to be 5- 10 feet based on the locations of the chalets). The R-15 Zone District [Qguires 25-foot fronterq set back, 10 foot side-yard setbacks, andQ foot-FEFEEsetbagE-for accessory buildings and 10 7-@TEr a residence. This geETTMo the point that the Boomerang proposal establishes less ' 705trmti0eset-6-5-ERs which allows for the buildings to be spread out more across the site than a duplex or single family residence. I could easily go on and on with this discussion, but I have to turn my attention to other cases. 1 hope this information gives you some understanding of the differences between their proposal and what current zoning allows. Printed for Nick Lelack <nicki@ci.aspen.co.us> 1 lay. June 26, 2000 â€¢ The Aspen Times 5.A Boomerang seeks expansion and 'fractional ownership' â€¢ Proposal project. not involve actual ownership of The proposal has received the the property by deed. fractional before city tonight unanimous endorsement .of the ownership does. city's Planning and Zoning Com- Critics . of the plan are con- By John Colson mission and Housing Board, and cerned that fractional ownership Aspen Times Staff Writer goes before the City Council for will result in increased numbers At least some of the debate the second time tonight, at a hear- of visitors to the neighborhood. tonight over expansion of the old ing continued from June 12. resulting in added traffic and Boomerang Lodge property will Included in the council mem- parking congestion, environmen- deal with an unspoken but con- bers' meeting packets are letters tal impacts and safety problems, troversial part of the pro- according to letters from several posal - whether or not the neighbors and others. new lodging should allow And Planning Director Julie 'fractional ownership." "Basically, it's simply Ann Woods said Friday that city Boomerang owners officials, too, have some con- Charlie and Fonda Pater- what the industry calls cerns about the fractional owner- son have applied to the city ship idea. She said city codes to develop a parcel of land 'hot beds.' " deal at some length with the they recently bought, locat- time-share concept. but fractional ed across West Hopkins - Sunny Vann, or "interval" ownership is not Avenue from the specifically addressed. Boomerang. planning consultant She said the idea of time-share According to the appli- ownership has come up before. cation. the Patersons want and that one developer was con- to build five chalets. two sidering the idea of buying a sin- one-bedroom lodge units, gle-family home in the West End two one-bedroom affordable from neighbors worried about the and converting it to fractional housing units and a bathhouse on Patersons' exploration of the idea ownership. If that were to hap- the 19.000-square-foot parcel. of rrtaking the chalets -fractional pen. she said. it would likely have The formal application scarcely ownership," which is a variant of considerable impact on the West mentions the fractional owner- the time-share concept. Under End, at least in terms of traffic ship idea. but the Patersons' plan- this concept, different people buy and parking. ning consultant confirmed last specific time intervals throughout Sunny Vann, the planning con- week tha[ the couple is exploring the year as vacation time. But sultant working on the the idea as a way to finance the where time-shares normally do I See Boomerang on page 14-A Boomerang - i continued from page 5-A understanding of the issues Boomerang proposal. said that involved. noting. "Frankly. peo- the question of fractional own- pie single it out und they use it ership is "still up in the air." He as a scare tactic. Basically. it's said it should make no differ- simply what the industry calls ence to the city or the neighbors 'hot beds, .,Â· meaning there is an whether the Boomerang remains increased likelihood of higher u traditional lodge or changes to occupancy with fractional own- fractional ownership, because ership. ideally. lodge rooms are occu- City planning officials also pied all the time anyway. are concerned about a lack of All fractional ownership off-street parking spaces to go would mean, he said. is an infu- with the expanded facilities, and sion of money right away to have asked the Patersons to help finance the expansion pro- rework their plans to include up ject. to seven on-site parking spaces "He was looking for a differ- rather than have their patrons all ent product to supplement what park on the street. hes got there already," Vann Tonight is the first reading of said of Charlie Paterson's view the proposal; it is not a public of the matter. hearing. The council meeting He dismissed the neighbors' starts at 5 p.m. in the basement complaints ils h.9~1 An ni,r',r 1/ 17 FROM : Steve Goldenberg PHONE NO. : 1 970 925 1294 Jun. 15 2000 04:37PM Pl DRAFT MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Councilltikk Ldack> Charlie Paterson FROM: Stephen Goldenberg SUBJECT: Boomerang LodgeINoiling & Expansion DATE: June 19, 2000 1. Apolicability of"Lodge Preservation GMOS Exception" The applicant has stated that he intends to sell seven 4'time shares" in each ofthe 5 "chalets" for from $300,00-$400,000 per share. That works out to 10-14 million dollars, plus the sales price ofthe 2 employee units and the value ofthe 2 lodging units. Ifthis is still his intention, the Lodge Preservation Regulations ("short term") do not apply and the application should be withdrawn or denied. Ifthe applicant has changed his mind and there is no longer such intention, the property should be contractually deed restricted so that it cannot be sold offor separated from the existing Boomerang Lodge in case he changes his mind again after the project is completed. The intention to time share the project was stated to me, and on different occasions to Cheryl, Renee Marcus, John Staton, and Martha Madsen and appears in writing in exhibit #2 ofthe "Lodge Preservation" application, a copy ofwhich is attached. 2. Rezoning from 1 Private Home to 5 Private Homes plus 2 Employee Units and 2 Lodging. Units There is little or no public benefit derived from up zoning this property. Each ofthe five "chalets" will contain 2,100 square feet of living space with 3 bedrooms. If not time shared, they will rent for more than $2,000 per night. Even without the 2 lodge and 2 employee units, this represents 3 or 4 times the density allowed in an R-15 zone. That is why the site plan looks so packed and why there is no room for the required offstreet parking. 3. Ignoring the Onsite Parking Requirements Twenty bedrooms require approximately 14 off street parking spaces. The Boomerang van does not generally pick up or drop offat the airport. People paying $300,000+ for a 1/7* timeshare or $2,000+ per night are probably going to rent a car even if they don't use it often. That's actually worse because the unused cars will sit on Hopkins Ave. all night and all day. Ifthe guests don't use their cars, that's even more reason to keep them off the street and out of sight. There should be at least 10 onsite garages or parking spaces. There should be no on street parking for the "new" or the old Boomerang. 'rhe present neighbors always park in their required garages to keep Hopkins Avenue uncluttered for pedestrian use in the summer, to assist with snow removal in the winter and for esthetic reason all year round. There is no parking in the proposal because there are too many buildings for the site. 4. Impact on Natural Environment The seven proposed buildings will certainly have a more adverse impact than one single house with one ADU or even a duplex. 5. Phasing ofConstruction The project as proposed is very "rich" and could easily be linanced and built in one shot. The application is phased so that the profits from the sale of the phase I "times shares" can pay for the construction of Phase II. The public benefit ofthe two affordable units should come at the beg~ming rather than at the end. 6. Traffic. Road Safety. Service Vehicle and Emergencv Access A residential unit generates 5-10 auto trips per day. For a pedestrian street that's a lot more traflic. The present Boomerang guests and we exit and enter from the alley, to 44 and on to Main Street. Guests ofthe new Boomerang will have no choice but to use Hopkins coming and going. Adults and children using the Boomerang pool will have to run across Hopkins and back, as will the cleaning, maintainance and other staffall year round. An unobstructed street and a striped pedestrian cross walk will be necessary to minimize accidents and provide somewhat better access for service and emergency vehicles. No lettered parking pennits should be issued to any Boomerang guests. 7. Employee Mitigation The employee mitigation calculations appear to be understated and have to be carefully reviewed by the Staff. Normally, a new hotel room requires 0._ new employees. That would work out to new employees instead ofthe calculated in the application. 8. Sununarv The very high density ofthe project as proposed causes all ofthe above problems. Reducing the number of "chalets" to 2 or 3 would reduce the density, traffic, environmental impact, and safety problems leaving room for open space and garages to keep the autos off the street and out of sight, and to allow the entire project to be built in one phase. MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Steve Barwick, City Manager Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director FROM: Nick Lelack, Planner 4,?Â»- RE: Boomerang Lodge Site Visit DATE: June 14,2000 A site visit to the property located across W. Hopkins Ave. from the existing Boomerang Lodge is scheduled for Monday, June 19, at 1:00 pm, immediately following City Council's brown bag session. Transportation will be provided. ORDINANCE N0. (SERIES OF 2000) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE BOOMERANG LODGE MINOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, REZONING TO R-15, MODERATE DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, WITH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND LODGE PRESERVATION OVERLAY ZONE DISTRICTS, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. Parcel No. 2735-124-66-001 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Charles and Fonda Patterson, owners, represented by Sunny Vann of Vann Associates, LLC. ind Haas Land Planning, LLC, for Conditional Use approval for aftbrdable houshg, Growth Management Quota System (GMQS) Exemptions for lodge preservation and affordable housing, a Minor Planned Unit Development (PUD). Rezoning to Moderate Density Residential, R-15. with Planned Unit Development and Lodge Preservation Overlay Zone Districts for a property consisting of portions of Lots A-I. Block 32, City and Townsite of Aspen; and. WHEREAS, the subject property is approximately 19.287 square feet. and is located in the R-15 Zone District; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.310Â·,of the Land Use Code, the City Council may approve Amendments to the Official Zone District Map. during a duly noticed public hearing after taking and considering comments from the general public. and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission. Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and. WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.445. the City Council may approve a Planned Unit Development, during a duly noticed public hearing after taking and considering comments from the general public. and recommendations from the Planning and Zoning Commission, Community Development Director, and relevant referral agencies; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommended denial of the Minor PUD, findirig that the PUD dimensional requirements for on-site parking and building orientation have not been met; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 6.2000, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 29. Series of 2000. by a five to zero (5-0) vote, approving a conditional use for affordable housing and GMQS Exemptions for lodge preservation and affordable housing, and recommending City Council approve the Boomerang Lodge Minor PUD and Rezoning to R.-15/PUD/LP: and. WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.100.104 - Definitions. the definition of a lodge is the following: "Same as hotel, except that lodges in the Lodge Preservation Overlay 1 District must be available for overnight lodging by the general public on a short-term basis for at least six months of each calendar year. and may have kitchens within individual lodge rooms"; and. WHEREAS, the Aspen/Pitkin County Community Development Department issued a Land Use Code Interpretation of the term "general public" as used in the definition of lodge. which states that the term does not allow for an owner of a lodge unit to perpetually occupy the unit; and that the requirements for a lodge apply uniformly to alllodge units within a lodge and each lodge must conform to the lodge provisions, unless the use of that specific unit has been appropriately approved for another land use: and. WHEREAS, on February 14. 2000, at a duly noticed public hearing, City Council upheld this Land Use Code Interpretation; and. WHEREAS, the applicant voluntarily desires to deed restrict the Â§1* 0;'~0/ affordable housing units to restrict the amount of rent that can be charged consistent with the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority Housing Guidelines : and. WHEREAS, the Colorado Supreme Court in the case entitled Town of Telluride v. Lot Thirtv-Four Venture L.L.C. (case No. 98-SC-547, decided June 5,2000) held that Section 38-12-301. C.R.S., prohibits the enactment of an ordinance that imposes rent controls; and, WHEREAS, Section 38-12-301, C.R.S., states that the rent control statute is not intended to impair the right of a municipality to manage and control any property in which it has an interest through a housing authority; and. WHEREAS, the applicant desires to grant to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority an interest in the property: and. WHEREAS, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority has consented to accepting an interest in the property on conditions that it be indemnified and held harmless from any claims, liability. fees or similar charges related to ownership of an interest in the property: 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 Planning and Zoning Commission. the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Board. the Community Development Director. 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: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Boomerang Lodge property, Parcel Number 2735-124-66-001, shall be rezoned from R-15 to R-15 with Planned Unit Development and Lodge Preservation Overlay Zone Districts. Section 2 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Boomerang Lodge Minor PUD is approved. subject to the following conditions: 1. A PUD Agreement shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval by City Council and shall include the following: a. The information required to be included in a PUD Agreement, pursuant to Section 26.445.070(C). b. An agreement to enter into a future lease agreement for on-street parking spaces for guests of the lodge. if necessary. 2. A Final PUD Plan shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval granted by City Council and shall include: a. A final plat meeting the requirements of the City Engineer and showing easements. encroachment agreements and licenses with reception numbers for physical improvements and iarking spaces within City rights-of-way, and location of utility pedestals. b. An illustrative site plan of the project showing the proposed improvements, landscaping. parking, and the dimensional requirements as approved. c. A drawing representing the project's architectural character. d. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado 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 2-year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. e. Five (5) on-site parking spaces. including two (2) on-site parking spaces designated for the affordable housing units. 3. within 180 days after final approval by City Council and prior to applying for a building permit. the applicant shall record a PUD Agreement and the Final PUD Plans with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder binding this property to this development approval. This agreement shall reference the applicant' s desire to convey to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority interest in the property and that such conveyance shall take place on or before the application for building permits. Failure to affirm the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority interest in the property shall render the approval null and void. The agreement shall indemnify and hold harmless the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority from any claims. liability, fees or similar charges related to ownership of an interest in the property. 4. The following dimensional requirements o f the PUD are approved and shall be printed on the Final Illustrative Plan: a. Minimum Lot Size. 15,000 square feet. b. Minimum Lot Area per dwelling. No requirement c. Maximum Allowable Density. 1 lodge or dwelling bedroom per 1,000 square feet of lot area. d. Minimum Lot Width. 75 feet. e. Minimum Front Yard. 10 feet. f. Minimum Side Yard. 10 feet. g. Minimum Rear Yard. As shown on Final PUD Plans. h. Maximum Site Coverage. 35 percent. i. Maximum Height. 23 feet for the west end building. and 25 feet for the chalets. j. Minimum Distance Between Buildings. 14 feet. k. Minimum Percent Open Space. 55 percent. 1. Trash Access Area. As shown on Final PUD Plans. m. Allowable Floor Area Ratio. 12.060 square feet. n. Minimum Off-Street Parking. 5 spaces. 2 of which shall be designated for the affordable housing units. 5. The building permit application shall include: a. A copy o f the final Ordinance and recorded P&Z Resolution. b. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. c. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. d. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval from the Parks Department Director for off-site replacement or mitigation of removed trees. e. A completed curb, gutter. and sidewalk agreement. if necessary. f. A completed agreement to join any future improvement districts formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in adjacent public rights-of-way. 5. The building permit plans shall demonstrate an adequate fire sprinkler system and alarm system for the new buildings. 6. Prior to issuance of a building permit: a. The primary contractor shall submit a letter to the Community Development Director stating that the conditions of approval have been read and understood. b. All tap fees, impacts fees. and building permit fees shall be paid. If an alternative agreement to delay payment o f the Water Tap and/or Parks Impact fee is finalized. those fees shall be payable according to the agreement. c. The applicant shall submit a detailed landscape plan to the Community Development Departnient showing the size, species, quantity, and location of all existing and planned native vegetation on the site. The final landscape plan shall be approved by the Community Development Director after considering a recommendation by the Parks Department. The Applicant shall contact the City Forester regarding the correct seed mix for replanting disturbed areas with native species. If required by the City Forester, the landscape plan must show that cottonwoods will be planted in the buffer zone between the potential trail and the Applicant's structures. 7. No excavation or storage of dirt or material shall occur within tree driplines or outside of the approved building envelope and access envelope. 8. All construction vehicles. materials. and debris shall be maintained on-site and not within public rights-o f-way unless specifically approved by the Director o f the Streets Department. 9. The applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. 10. The applicant shall not track mud onto City streets during construction. A washed rock or other style mud rack must be installed during construction. 11. All uses and construction shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards and with Title 25 and applicable portions of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code as they pertain to utilities. 12. The Applicant or owner shall mitigate any public impacts that this project causes, including but not limited to utility expenses and sanitary sewer and water lines. 13. A fugitive dust control permit will be required during construction. 14. Slope stabilization, erosion control. and sediment control measures need to be implemented before, during. and after construction. 15. The Parks Department shall approve the location of the proposed sidewalk to ensure that it does not conflict with future trail plans in the area. 16. Construction of the affordable housing units shall begin no later than 36 months after the completion of the three (3) chalets on the eastern portion of the lot. If the project is built in phases, prior to the issuance o f building permits for the first phase. the Applicant shall provide financial guarantee acceptable to the City for the fractional employee generated by the first phase at the Category 3 level at the then current Aspen/PitkinÂ·County Affordable Housing Guidelines. In the event that a building permit is not issued for the affordable housing units within 36 months o f the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the first phase buildings, the City shall have the right to obtain complete payment for the fractional employee generated by the first phase at the then current Aspen/Pitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines. The financial guarantee shall be provided for the second phase of the project. including the affordable housing units contained therein. All conditions in this ordinance shall be memorialized in the Final Plat and Planned Unit Development Agreement. 17. Five (5) on-site parking spaces, including two (2) on-site parking spaces designated fur the affordable housing units. 18. The Applicant shall convey an undivided fractional interest in the ownership of the two affordable housing units to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority for the purposes o f complying with the recent Colorado Supreme Court Decision regarding rent control legislation. The Applicant may submit an alternative option to satisfy the rent control issue acceptable to the City 19. Each Boomerang lodge unit shall conform to the provisions of Section 26.100.104 - Definitions, Lodge. and any change in the lodges operations must be reviewed. approved. and mitigated for (employee generation) pursuant to the then current Land Use Code and Aspen/Pitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines. Section 3: 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 3: 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. Section 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution 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. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the 12th day of June, 2000. Attes.. Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Rachel Richards, Mayor FINALLY, adopted. passed and approved this 26th day of June. 2000. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Rachel Richards, Mayor Approved as to form: John Worcestor, City Attorney 09<f 1. First Reading to consider Ordinance No. 29, Series of 2000. 2. The Application is to expand the existing Boomerang Lodge across the street, W. Hopkins Avenue, to a vacant parcel. This is one of the first big lodge preservation applications submitted under the new lodge preservation program. 3. The proposal is for 6 buildings, which include: a. 5 chalets - each about 1600 sq. ft. of FAR, 700 sq. ft. footprint 2,180 square feet overall. Each would be 3 bedrooms and 3.5 baths. b. A 6th building to contain: 2 1-bedroom AH units (700 sq. ft. each), 2 1-bedroom lodge units (960 sq. ft. each), and a bathhouse. c. A total of 7 lodge units and 17 bedrooms. d. No on-site parking is proposed. 4. Specifically, the request review procedure, action: a. Rezoning from R-15, Medium Density Residential, to R- 15 with PUD and LP Overlays, b. Minor PUD c. GMQS Exemptions for AH & LP d. Conditional Use for AH 5. Review procedure: a. Rezoning and PUD are recommendations to City Council b. GMQS Exemption for lodge preservation is determined by the PZ c. Conditional Use for AH is determined by PZ d. GMQS Exemption for AH is decided upon by City Council with a recommendations by the PZ & Housing Authority. 6. Community Development Staff believes the spirit and intent of the proposed expansion - meets the goals of the lodge preservation and AH programs. Staff also appreciates the Applicant's proposal to maintain the site in its natural state to the greatest extent possible. 7. Staff has 5 concerns with the proposed site plan: a. The AH units are proposed to be built in the second phase. However, o financial security is provided for the affordable housing units as proposed by the applicant. Condition 16. b. The GMQS Exemptions may not have been property granted for lodge preservation & AH. Both exemptions require the appropriate mitigation of affordable housing for employee generation created by developments. However, last weeks supreme court decision may render the rental caps on the proposed units unenforceable. The Applicant and Staff have worked out proposed conditions of approval - No. 18 & 3 to satisfy any concern over the provision of AH. c. Trash - the applicant has agreed to relocate the trash dumpters off of W. Hopkins Avenue. The first 3 concerns have been agreed to by Staff and the Applicant. However, two significant issues remain: d. Building Orientation: Building (structure) orientation is part of the PUD's site design criteria. Staff' s concern is that the proposed chalets are not oriented toward the street. Instead, they are oriented toward the mountain in a manner similar to one section of the existing lodge and the duplex across 4th Street to the east. Staff believes it is important that the units address the street in a manner which creates a consistent facade line. Staff appreciates that the entrances face the street and paths connect each unit to each building. PZ disagreed with Staff and supported the proposed building orientation. Staff does not believe the proposed site plan meets PUD site design criteria 3: Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. e. Parking: The application does not propose any on-site parking and instead proposes for existing parking at the Boomerang Lodge and along W. Hopkins Ave. be used for guest and resident parking. The applicant contends that: (1) 27 spaces at the Boomerang Lodge - most of which are within the public right-of-way and not actually on-site. (2) Location near transit town, recreation areas, etc. (3) shuttle service on an as-needed basis. (4) code would require 13.9 parking spaces for the lodge rooms and AH units. Staff agrees that this is excessive given the previous information. Potential trails could be located around the lot, fire access is required, and parking is needed. Staff believes that because this is a vacant lot, parking can be provided on site for at least 5-7 spaces - about one per building. High pedestrian and bicycle activity on this corridor into town. Precedent for other developments to not provide on-site parking when an opportunity exists. Staff visited the site Friday morning - a busy morning at the lodge given the food and wine festival. About 2/3s of the lodge' parking spaces were occupied - about 1/3 were vacant. Nevertheless, visitors and residents will park on the street outside the doors of their units. The Applicant proposes parking on the 4th St. right of way. This is a trail head. Does not meet PUD criteria B(3) - appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established. Lodge Preservation GMQS Exemption criteria 4 - adequate parking spaces and public facilities exist, will provided for the development or that adequate mitigation measures will be provided. Staff recommends that the Applicant revise the site plan to include at least 5-7 on-site parking spaces, with the chalets oriented to the street. Staff further recommends that City Council table this request until such a plan is submitted to staff for further analysis, and to find a method to further address the GMQS issue and phasing. ' P-,1*/bl LP 'A*AAe , . ORDINANCE N0.39 (SERIES OF 1999) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, TO AMEND THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM, SECTION 26.470, AMEND THE LODGE PRESERVATION OVERLAY (LP) ZONE DISTRICT, SECTION 26.710.320, AMEND THE DEFINITIONS OF "LODGE" AND "SHORT-TERM," SECTION 26.104.100, AND AMEND THE OFF-STREET PARKING REGULATIONS, SECTION 26.515.030 OF THE LAND USE CODE. WHEREAS, the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen directed the Planning Director of the Community Development Department to propose amendments to the Lodge Preservation Program provisions o f the land use code pursuant to sections 26.208 and 26.212; and, WHEREAS, the amendments requested relate to Section 26.470.26.710.320. 26.104.100, and 26.515.030 of the land use code of the Aspen Municipal Code; 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 conditions, or denial by the Planning Director and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. Final action shall be by City Council after reviewing and considering these recommendations: and. WHEREAS, the form of land ownership known as "condominium" is an allowed form of ownership in all Zone Districts of the City of Aspen. including the Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlay Zone District, even though the term is not proposed as a listed use in the zone district; and. WHEREAS, the Planning Director recommended approval of amendments to Sections 26.470,26.710.320.26.104.100. and 26.515.030 ofthe land use code of the Aspen Municipal Code as described herein; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened the public hearing to consider the existing and proposed Lodge Preservation Program on June 8, 1999, and continued the hearing to July 20.1999. and then to August 24, 1999. took and considered public testimony and the recommendation of the Planning Director and recommended. by a six to zero (6-0) vote, City Council adopt the proposed Lodge Preservation Program amendments to the land use code by amending the text of sections 26.470,26.710.320, 26.104.100, and 26.515.030 of the land use code of the Aspen Municipal Code as described herein. WHEREAS, City Council reviewed and considered the recommendations of the Community Development Director. the Planning and Zoning Commission, and members of he public during a duly noticed public hearing; and, Ordinance No. 39, Series of 1999. Page 1 $ WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the text amendments to Sections 26.470, 26.710.320,26.104.100, and 26.515.030 of the land use code of the Aspen Municipal Code, as described herein, and commonly referred to as the "Lodge Preservation Program," meet or exceed all applicable standards and that the approval 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 COUNOIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT: Section 1: Section 26.470.070(M). which section defines, authorizes, and regulates the process for exempting certain types of development in the Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlay Zone District from the competition and scoring procedures of the Growth Management Quota System (GMQS), is hereby amended by replacing. in total, the language in said section with the following text: M. Lodge Preservation Program. Development. or redevelopment after demolition. of properties zoned Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlay to increase or decrease the number of lodge units. the number of affordable housing units, or the amount of accessory commercial square footage. or the change in use between said uses, shall be exempted from the growth management competition and scoring procedures. provided that the Planning and Zoning Commission determines, at a public hearing. that the following criteria are met: (1) The proposed development is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. (2) The proposed development is compatible with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area and with the purpose o f the Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlay Zone District. (3) Employee housing or cash-in-lieu will be provided to mitigate for additional employees generated by the development or to mitigate for the demolition of multi-family housing, as required by section 26.530. This shall include an analysis and credit for existing employee generation and the incremental impact between the existing development and the proposed development. A recommendation from the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall be considered for this standard. (4) Adequate parking spaces and public facilities exist, will be provided for the development, or that adequate mitigation measures will be provided. An existing deficit of required parking may be maintained through redevelopment. Ordinance No. 39, Series of 1999. Page 2 \ \ (5) There exists sufficient GMQS allotments to accommodate the proposed development and the allotments are deducted from the respective Annual Development Allotment and Metro Area Development Ceilings established pursuant to Section 26.470.050. Section 2: Section 26.470.080(B)(3), which section defines the review procedures for granting development allocations exempt from the competition and scoring procedures of the Growth Management Quota System (GMQS), is hereby amended by including the following language as subparagraph (c) and reallocating the letter designations o f the following subparagraphs accordingly: 3c. Planning and Zoning Commission Review. Applications for lodge, affordable housing, or accessory commercial square footage development within the Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlay Zone District shall be forwarded to the Planning and Zoning Commission for review and consideration at a public hearing after the Community Development Director has determined that the application for exemption is complete and has made a recommendation for approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval. Notice ofthe hearing shall be by publication. posting, and mailing (See Section 26.304.060(E)). The Planning and Zoning Commission shall by resolution approve, approve with conditions. or disapprove the application. In the event that there are insufficient allotments available to accommodate all applications for exempt development, a random drawing shall be held in accordance with the standards of Section 26.470.080(B)(4) Section 3: Section 26.470.080(B)(5). which section defined, authorized, and regulated the review procedures for granting development allocations to development within the Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlay Zone District. the previous LP Program being replaced by this Ordinance, is hereby amended by striking, in its entirety, subparagraph (5). Section 4: Section 26.470.050(A)(1), which section defines the Base Allotment Pool corresponding to the desired annual growth rate within the Aspen Metro Area according to land use type, is hereby amended with the addition of the following language: Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlay Zone Tourist Accommodations: 11 Units Section 5: Section 26.470.050(C)(1), which section defines the process for determining the Standard Maximum Allotment Pool corresponding to the number of allotments available in any given year considering any accumulated deficit/surplus froin previous years, is hereby amended with the establishment o f the accumulated allotment surplus, denoted as factor Ordinance No. 39, Series of 1999. Page 3 I . "A" in the equation provided in said section, as 27 units for the growth management year beginning June 1 of 1999. Section 6: Section 26.710.320, which section defines the purpose of, and regulates permitted uses, conditional uses, and dimensional requirements for properties within the Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlay Zone District, is hereby amended by replacing, in total, the language in said section with the following text: 26.28.320 Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlay Zone District. A. Purpose. The purpose of the Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlay zone district is to provide for and protect smalllodge uses on properties historically used for lodge accommodations, to permit redevelopment of these properties to accommodate lodge and affordable housing uses, to provide uses accessory and normally associated with lodge and affordable housing development. to encourage development which is compatible with the neighborhood and respective of the manner in which the property has historically operated. and to provide an incentive for upgrading existing lodges on-site or onto adjacent properties. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the LP Overlay zone district. 1. Lodge; 2. Boarding house; 3. Dormitory; 4. Affordable housing for employees o f the lodge; 5. Accessory use facilities intended for guests of permitted lodge units. boarding house or dormitory. which are commonly found in association and are for guests only, including office, lounge, kitchen, dining room. laundry, and recreational facilities; 6. Accessory buildings and uses. 7. The permitted uses of the underlying zone district. C. Conditional Uses. The following uses are permitted in the LP Overlay zone district, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.60 of this Code. 1. Affordable housing; 2. Restaurant; 3. Timesharing; 4. The uses allowed as conditional uses in the underlying zone district. D. Dimensional requirements. The dimensional requirements for all uses in the Lodge Preservation Overlay (LP) Zone District shall be the dimensional requirements established for those uses in the underlying zone district. Upon consideration of neighborhood compatibility and the dimensional requirements regulations of surrounding Ordinance No. 39, Series of 1999. Page 4 1 , V zone districts, the dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district may be varied pursuant to section 26.445, Planned Unit Development. Section 7: Section 26.104.100, which section defines terms used in the Land Use Code, is hereby amended to include the following terms to read as: Lodge. Same as hotel, except that lodges in the Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlay Zone District must be available for overnight lodging by the general public on a short-term basis for at least six months of each calendar year, and may hare kitchens within individual lodge rooms. Short-Term. The occupancy of a Hotel or Lodge unit for a rental time period not exceeding one (1) month in duration. Section 8: Section 26.515.030, which section defines and regulates the amount, characteristics of. and process for varying, the number o f required o ff-street parking spaces, is hereby amended to read as follows: The off-street parking spaces established below shall be provided for each use in the zone district. Whenever the off-street parking is subject to establishment by adoption of a Planned Unit Development Final Development Plan, that review' shall be pursuant to Section 26.445. Planned Unit Development. Whenever the parking requirement is subject to special review or may be provided via a payment in lieu, that review shall be pursuant to the procedures set forth at Chapter 26.430 and the standards set forth at Section 26.515.040, below. Section 9: Section 26.515.030. which contains a chart defining the number of required off-street parking spaces according to zone district designation. is hereby amended by replacing. in total, the language in the chart under Lodge Preservation (LP) Overlay Zone District with the following text: LP Overlay 0.7 spaces/bedroom *, unless otherwise 4 spaces/1000 square feet unless otherwise established pursuant o f net leasable area. established pursuant to Section 26.445, unless otherwise to Section 26.445, Planned Unit established pursuant to Planned Unit Development. Section 26.445, Planned Development. Unit Development. Section 10: That the City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this Ordinance, to record a copy of this Ordinance in the office ofthe Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Ordinance No. 39, Series of 1999. Page 5 . - 1 Section 11: 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 12: 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 13: A public hearing on the Ordinance was held on the 12th day of October, 1999 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 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 this 13th day of September, 1999. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Rachel E. Richards, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this day of ,1999. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Rachel E. Richards, Mayor Approved as to form: City Attorney C:\home\CHRISB\CASES\LP_PROGR\LP_ORD.doc Ordinance No. 39, Series of 1999. Page 6 4 4LA n, -C N.-#.- -.4-~III~,â€žâ€ž-6 W r 6,7 ;9.-36WD 4/;0/ ,;0;/ --I='W-Ill~---Il-lk 1 j 2. P 4--4- . j.4 -'1\,vl 3 4~ ' 4 5 b p.. li SAA n aw -4 2 )LP)0 04./ff , ;1 -1 Us 4. 4.6-Â·31 . /2 M - 7ii, ~ rlo46 1 ipia~:n, efkv. 4-1,4,,) / i 6,4 15~1 -(v ol.4.1&~ , //24;13 7.4 /1-0 /r-v 1*. Al. 4 9 0 tf 2 JA ~t,-+Ar * Sre + ir il- 1 f:"16 9 .*.0,464-, ).1,1/ YL-,w -; 6,46 i -) kw# A ".~41> ) 199 " - 91* i*. 4/6- Pi. F. 0.4 1 S .52.. 0,1 de., 214 Mi Nu 1 ;6 07 641106=k U. . - 41,4 ,+ 67â‚¬1 - /1\64-,r . - 1 5 4. .U,Lk- *9~ 9 4 .4,5fo0,G/Ab Vt 1 ---1 1001 /42 1/- IN #1â€žÂ« X (/ / 244 X < ) A';9*'4Â« /Auv Ct Â»0 1-JU 61*JA 2-e 41 Lk-01 1,Â»14/ 1,7/cr ~Vt} 4# Mnig -7. - - r. 4 7 \ t .---+1 1 .9 - f.==P J -1. 10-24 i . b -4,44 04 6 - 1 , li l: i ./1 _- .1Â·- Â·tÂ»---t - r I ~Cz=*1= 1 te=1-{t I I (I 4 L.fb,00.4 27 i--4 EliÂ¥ UP 1 '2=4 1 9 1 13. 1 '71 -1 -7*/ L// ' , 2. --h r f-- 42* 1 1 f i Ill. 4 Fl) i 2 - 1 I PAâ‚¬,fil li . 1 3\ / f tj' Â·' 4 At i 80331 uÂ·Â·--'-I----Â·- --~ / } 11=r -ill-i j v 663*4 0 1 , /# SEro N IEF-Coo Rt-4 ~ P FLA 4.4 -0 m #-fk L.-1 NeÂ«> 6 I -9 d \ -142.+rAK!.tek. l.. / 1 1- -. -8.DOM 1 1- CARI- reT'-A. -~ - 1 -A:.-ee- P- Â£4(224 4.- Ppfr==1â‚¬aÂ» ; 2+00 0 4/ 1] 4 \ li .1 1 = 1 1..\ \ lir=1f t t L__11 01 - 94=IN, 1 1 1 f lf.*34 i / If 11 1 2--.11 3+1 1 f ' \ 4 1 -'i k i 1 .-h r-. 31 ft $ 1 jj ~4:i f l,Gog:i'~2-4-~fE*- , 1 4 \ n ''! 7 0- --1 4 -1 --h ~U --~\ ~'\ ~ LAP ~ ~ f \ 1 It-- k k Â· = H . 4 -\ . 'POOL ! ?t n \ ...V.-,2Â» 1 11\ *Â·-4- -0.- .. PRO, PE-Rry U N 9 .. 1. Â«27 b -4 \ \ h.} 0/\\ 1 1.\\ /WHitâ‚¬Lf>aol 7 k - 3 1<\ 4\ 1 " i 6. 41 PLA N OF ~-BASEME>.33- \ 74 1 U *2-ACE)Â·44 * 1...Le" PboOMEIRDAN- 6 -1-0.2697 ADDIT~iC>~-N - JULL.- 15-1 20.00 -9 423. .. ...47 1~IV +1.: lit~R#/gra,wdld '..'2* ar- 0 .p,IM,I. L ~ . - .. Propgrty Link -m,?rÂ·re W-t:r- Â·-$Â¥ 9.*-f--4.7-/ 9 1#ta. 41.:ty:tjAL d ~rt t <- I . -.Ill - 44. 4 0 E. . . - 2 .4.11)14# . .14.7 49.. . J~irMilifillililillillillill'llillililillaillillill' i I.' Â· t , t.i Â·Â· 7, 1 . . T- - 6 . .*, 4..,1~ *a , . 4 9 .409:f: .23 $ ; 0-7 4- . , . I b $ . "0... . 4 % # AriÂ· - K / ..17 4~ : e. C .Â· 4% S 4& 4 Boomerang ~ Traill -- r :91 2 * .'N . .0 -1 . . I . I ... , 4 9 : #16 Â·" ~'~ ~ #1. â€žÂ· *a tt I â€ž 4. r 44,& 0 . ' 6 FÂ» r Pet' ~- 1. m.% .1,12 +*i N '. F. 4,# 4 : I :...8 4 6 *" '' 1 00, 1. 1 .f I t. 4 . 6 - m 2 * 1 f .1 4 W~- E M . %. le-JA S , 20 - .9. I ..:1.P.+ 11 >.M . 0 Â¥ 41â€¢4'. *- City I x 1* f./* # Â·râ€¢ I S . r. $ ... . -1. -Vilk#ix'-t 1.,t I .4- jj..4 I / 0 1 \ 0 I : 0- . 4 1, h 2190Â· ' .. ./ W + 01 %1, . .@ 1-I 1'' .M .. 1 , 6- :41 51%=Ar r*.0 Â·Â· -#1. .4 .-1~V'"Â·-~rfmn'mb Â· % 11 -Ii Â·Â·-Â·Â·Â· ~ Â·â€¢ M I W 4 I. $49 1 . .m * 7Â·,i * i 1 i .- 4 2 k 1 %1 4 .1 .... 1 ...Â·.. M 3 Alt. ..1.: 00. I . 9. I â€ž. I . a. 6 , + - 1 1 ..1 1 1% Â· . 1 %.1 rÂ· . 44 + 1 Â· .... Â·P.i~ Â·Â·Â· EM. Â·el : . -'E'EÂ·Â· twsr . * 1 1 . Â·Â· 1% :9 1.1 --4,1 1 .-: '19& . Â· 3,Â· 1/0. H % 6 1 -r 341. I I I. 6 .1..:'. 1 M h . > I . I I -/ I I /..../.. I I.Â· 41 - . : ... te> - Mil I i j .dAblf i ... Â·: ''11% .1 . I. 'reer 1 $ 1,1.4: : ' U. ... M= . 1 ./ 1% . t.. th 8, I a :. .. ...... a ... . ..=88=88880=108-- Â·:21111~1 4:~AW.%1 -2 ISSâ‚¬ tip.AllitÂ·':taÂ·Â·:~ f. I . E---* 4~6Â·" "Pm' m I. . ...r . 90 . / -4 - -0 2 + I Â· 1 . . 1. .. 1, â€¢ Si .+D.. . 4 10! 4 .. 1.1. 4 1 * ..2 , + : 1 ...AJ'-l v F .1...2 : 9 -. ..6. . :. . 4 :r " I JE" ~' .:.I. .~. ~. , 'El M#.10 . .: 29 I 1% 4 N E .. + * 4 6 1.4. ..~ 51*4 . / . * MI 1 47 I .1 .M M .4 1 1 - L *4 1~'Â· 1 4. 1 1. - ... 'Â¢ . 2 7 6 , ' Â·9 4 I. .9.. ' . 0. M . 4 4.- 1 t. ... %:1.k, I . /1 + 11 1 : a E 1,4 I 4 4 4,&- ./ I -."i#Ah . Â£ 1/.il i John Krueger, 07:20 AM 5/30/00 -0500, Re: Fwd: Boomerang - parking on 4th right of way Page 1 of 1 X-Sender: johnk@commons X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 07:20:15 -0500 To: Rebecca Schickling <rebeccas@ci.aspen.co.us> From: John Krueger <johnk@ci.aspen.co.us> Subject: Re: Fwd: Boomerang - parking on 4th right of way Cc: nicki@ci.aspen.co.us Becca, Yes, we ned to limit them as much as possible. A trail along Hopkins with a buffer zone is the part of many plans. It is part of a two trail approach. A hard surface trail in this area and a soft surface back country trail on Shadow Mountain. I would hate to lose the possiblity on Hopkins since we face many hurdles up on the mountain. johnk At 05:45 PM 5/23/00 -0600, Rebecca Schickling wrote: >John, >What do you think? I don't think we can tell them no they can't park there >but maybe require them to install a 5 foot sidewalk and 5 foot buffer zone. > > >>X-Sender: nicki@comdev >>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2 >>Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 17:12:56 -0500 >>To: Rebecca Schickling <rebeccas@ci.aspen.co.us> >>From: Nick Lelack <nicki@ci.aspen.co.us> >>Subject: Boomerang - parking on 4th right of way >> >>Hi Becca, >>Mitch and I have been talking about the possibility of Boomerang being >>allowed to park on the 4th Street right-of-way beyond W. >>Hopkins. Engineering does not have a problem with this and I need to >>check with Parking. But Parks may have an interest because this is in the >>undeveloped stub of 4th street basically at the base of the mountain >>(where Boomerang wants to expand and put chalets, etc.). There is a trail >>just above the 4th street stub. Any thoughts or official comments? >>Thanks. >> >>Nick Lelack >>Planner, City of Aspen >>(970) 920-5095 >> > >Rebecca Schickling >Assistant Parks Director >City of Aspen John D. Krueger Trails Coordinator City of Aspen Printed for Nick Lelack <nickl@ci.aspen.co.us> 5/30/00 MEMORANDUM TO: Plans were routed to those departments checked-off below: 4 ...........City Engineer 0........... Zoning Officer 44........... Housing Director 1* .......... Parks Department 4.......... Aspen Fire Marshal ~.......... City Water ............ Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District O........... Building Department O ........... Environmental Health O........... Electric Department O........... Holy Cross Electric 0. City Attorney ............ Streets Department O ........... Historic Preservation Officer O........... Pitkin County Planning FROM: Chris Bendon, Planner Community Development Department 130 So. Galena St.; Aspen, CO 81611 Phone-920.5090 Fax-920.5439 RE: Boomerang Lodge Expansion Hopkins Between 4th and 5th Streets (vacant w/ no address) Parcel ID # 2735.124.66.001 DATE: March 29,2000 REFERRAL SCHEDULE DRC MEETING DATE (1:30 p.m. in Sister Cities): April 5,2000 FINAL REFERRAL DUE TO PLANNER: April 21, 2000 Thank you, Chris. HAAS LAND PLANNING, LLC March 27,2000 Mr. Chris Bendon 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO 81611 RE: Boomerang Lodge Application Dear Chris: The attached land use application for the Boomerang Lodge Expansion project includes all required materials. You will please note, however, that neither the letter of authorization for Vann Associates, LLC, and Haas Land Planning, LLC, to represent the owners/ applicants (Exhibit #4), nor the fee agreement (Exhibit #6) have been signed. The Patersons are currently out of town and arrangements could not be made to obtain the necessary signatures prior to their departure. Signed copies of these required documents will be provided upon the Paterson's return. In the interim, it would be greatly appreciated if the application review process could be initiated. If you should need any additional copies of any materials or if you should have any questions, please feel free to contact me at the numbers and address provided on the bottom of this page, or by email at mhaas@gateway.net. Yours truly, HAAS~AND PLANNING, LLC 4-0 Mitch Haas, AICP Owner/Principal c:\my documentsladministrativelboomerang letter3 â€¢201 N. MILL STREET, SUITE 108â€¢ ASPEN, COLORADO 81611â€¢ â€¢PHONE: (970) 925-7819 â€¢ FAX: (970) 925-7395â€¢