Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.950 Matchless Dr.A001-02CASE NUMBER A001-02 PARCEL ID # 2737-074-02003 CASE NAME Alpine Acres PUD Amendment PROJECT ADDRESS Lot 4A Dunn/Bishoo Subdivision PLANNER / James Lindt CASE TYPEf~ PUD Amendment OWNER/A~?LICANT Alan Becker REPRE'~;ENTATIVE Alan Riehman DATE OF FINAL ACTION 3/25/02 CITY COUNCIL ACTION Ord. 8-2002 P~ ACTION ADMIN ACTION Aooroved BOA ACTION DATE CLOSED 3/26/02 BY J. Lindt DEVELOPMENT ORDER of the 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. Alan Becker, 950 Matchless Drive, Aspen, CO 81611 Property Owner's Name, Mailing Address and telephone number Lot 4A, Alpine Acres Subdivision Legal Description and Street Address of Subject Property Substantial pLrD Amendment to Allow Lot 4A to be eligible to apply for It?C Bonus Written Description of the Site Specific Plan and/or Attachment Describing Plan City Council Ordinance # 8-2002, 3/25/02 Land Use Approval(s) Received and Dates (Attach Final Ordinances or Resolutions) April 6, 20O2 Effective Date of Development Order (Same as date of publication of notice of approval.) April 7, 2005 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 6th day of April, 2002, by the City of Aspen Community ~e~velopment Director. ~//~fie Ann Wt~ods, Co~ra~'~'i~velo~ent Director TO: Mayor Klandemd and City Council TItRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Development Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Directorc.j4~ FROM: James Lindt, Planner RE: Alpine Acres Substantial PUD Amendment ' 2''a Reading[ of Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2002 DATE: March 25, 2002 APPLICANT/OWNER: Alan Becker, Owner of Lot 4A, Alpine Acres Subdivision/PUD; 950 Matchless Drive REPRESENTATIVE: Alan Richman, Richman Planning Services LOCATION: Lot 4A, Alpine Acres Subdivision/PUD CURRENT ZONING: R-6 PUD PROPOSED LAND USE REQUEST: Amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development SUMMARY: The applicant requests an amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the purpose of allowing Lot 4A of the Alpine Acres PUD to be eligible to apply for a 500 square foot FAR bonus from the Historic Preservation Commission if it is found that a proposed project on this lot is "an outstanding preservation effort". The Alpine Acres PUD limits Lots 4A, 4B, and 5 of the Aspen Alps Subdivision to 2,486 square feet of countable floor area per dwelling unit, which does not currently allow for the HPC to grant the property a Historic Preservation FAR Bonus. REVIEW PROCEDURE A substantial amendment to an approved Planned Unit Developmem may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by City Council at a public hearing after considering recommendations from the Community Developmem Director and the Planning and Zoning Commission pursuant to Section 26.445.100(B). STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant, Alan Becket, represented by Alan Richman, requests an amendmem to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Developmem (PUD) for the purpose of allowing Lot 4A, Alpine Acres Subdivision to be eligible to be granted a 500 square foot FAR bonus from / Vicinity Map Alpine Acres Lot 4a Lot 4a the Historic Preservation Commission if it is found that a proposed historic renovation/addition project on this lot is "an outstanding preservation effort". The Alpine Acres PUD was approved in 1987 and restricted each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres to 2,486 square feet of countable floor area because of the narrow width of the lots. Lot 4A contains a historic landmarked single-family residence and an accessory dwelling unit. The lots regulated by the PUD are allowed to receive all of the exemptions that are normally granted under the current land use code. However, because the PUD limits the countable floor area rafio, currently the subject parcels are not eligible to receive a 500 square foot FAR bonus for an "outstanding preservation effort" that may be granted to other historic landmark designated properties pursuant to City Land Use Code Section 26.415, Development Involving the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures or Which Occurs In An "H," Historic Overlay District. Lots 4A, 4B, and 5 of the Alpine Acres Subdivision are the only properties that are within the Alpine Acres PUD and all of the owners of these lots have consented to allow the applicant apply for the PUD Amendment for his lot. STAFF ANALYSIS: If Lot 4A were to be allowed to apply and receive an HPC bonus of 500 square feet, then it would be allotted an allowable FAR of 2,986 square feet if the bonus was granted by HPC. At the time that the PUD was established, Lot 4A would have been allowed 3,795 square feet of FAR under the underlying R~6 (Medium-Density Residential) zoning regulations. Under the current R-6 (Medium-Density Residential) zoning regulations, Lot 4A would be allowed approximately 3,500 square feet of FAR. Thus, the allowable FAR on Lot 4A with the proposed 500 square foot bonus is currently about 15% less than if it did not have the PUD floor area restriction. Staff believes that even with the addition of a 500 square foot Historic Preservation FAR bonus (if granted by HPC to the site specific project), that Lot 4A will still be proportionate in size and massing to the surrounding properties that are also zoned R-6 (Medium-Density Residential) or R-6 PUD. Also, the Historic Preservation Commission has reviewed the compatibility of the proposed addition to the Historic Structure on Lot 4A and has approved the final site-specific design. The Historic Preservation Commission has also determined that the site specific proposal qualifies for the 500 square foot FAR bonus for an "outstanding preservation project". The Historic Preservation Commission found that the massing and scale of a site-specific proposal on Lot 4A is also compatible for the lot and has granted the 500 square foot bonus contingent on City Council approving the proposed PUD Amendment. The applicant is proposing to amend Condition A of the Alpine Acres PUD (attached as Exhibit "C') as follows: A. Each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres shall be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2,486 square feet, plus any floor area bonus that might be awarded by the HPC to Lot 4A for an outstanding preservation effort for a historic landmark pursuant to Section 26.415 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. Staff feels that the aforementioned language is consistent with Aspen Area Community Plan Action Plan Priority No. 31 that requires "staff to investigate ways to encourage the restoration and improvement of existing buildings", in that the amendment will allow the 2 subject lot to take advantage of a preservation incentive that was m)t available at the time the PUD was enacted. Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment to the .Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the purpose of allowing for Lot 4A, Alpine Acres PUD, to be eligible to apply for an HPC bonus pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.415. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that City Council approve the proposed ordinance approving a substantial amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the purpose of allowing each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres to be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2,486 square feet, plus any floor area bonus that might be awarded by the HPC to Lot 4A for an outstanding preservation effort for a historic landmark pursuant to Section 26.415 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously recommends that City Council approve the proposed substantial amendment to the Alpine Acres Pl~amed Unit Development (PUD) for the purpose of allowing each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres to be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2,486 square feet, plus any floor area bonus that might be awarded by the HPC to Lot 4A for an outstanding preservation effort for a historic landmark pursuant to Section 26.415 of the City of Aspen Municipal Code. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE PROPOSED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2002, approving the proposed amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development (PUD), Condition "A", for the PUrpose of allowing for each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres to be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2,486 square feet, plus any floor area bonus that might be awarded by the HPC to Lot 4A for an outstanding preservation effort for a historic landmark pursuant to Section 26.415 of the Aspen Land Use Code. '~ CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B -- Application Exhibit C -- Ordinance No.35, Series 1987 approving Alpine Acres PUD Overlay Exhibit D ~- Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution ORDINANCE NO, 8 (SERIES OF 2002) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY coUNcIL OF TIlE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING THE ALPINE ACRES PUD TO ALLOW FOR LOT 4A, ALPINE ACRES SUBDIVISION TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR A500 SQUARE FOOT HISTORIC PRESERVATION FLOOR AREA RATIO BONUS FOR A OUTSTANDING PRESERVATION EFFORT, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the Alan Becker, represented by Alan Richman, for an amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow for Lot 4A to be eligible for a 500 square foot historic preservation FAR bonus above and beyond the allowable FAR set out forth in the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.445.100 (B), that City Council, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter, shall by ordinance approve, approve with conditions, or deny a Substantial PUD Amendment, after considering a recommendation by the Community Development Director and the Planning and Zoning Commission pursuant to Section 26.430.020; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the proposed application to amend the Alpine Acres PUD to allow for Lot 4A, Alpine Acres Subdivision to be eligible for a 500 square foot Historic Preservation floor area ratio bonus for an outstanding preservation effort and recommended approval; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider the proposed PUD Amendment, took and considered public testimony and the recommendation of the Community Development Director and rec6mmended by a six to zero (6-0) vote, that City Council approve the proposed PUD Amendment; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission found that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable standards and that the approval of the proposed PUD Amendment, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and, WHEREAS, City Council reviewed and considered the recommendations of the Community Development Director, the Planning and Zoning Cm~mission, and members of the public during a duly noticed public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed PUD Amendment meets or exceeds all applicable standards and that the approval of the Code Amendments, are 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. Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2002 Page i of 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Condition A of the Alpine Acres PUD is hereby amended to read as follows: A. Each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres shall be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2,486 square feet, plus any floor area bonus that might be awarded by the HPC to Lot 4A for an outstanding preservation effort for a historic landmark pursuant to Section 26.420.020 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. Section 2: 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 construed and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 3: 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 4: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 25th day of March, 2002, at 5:00 p.m. in the City' Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, f~tf~een (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by 1aw, by the City Council of the City of Aspen at on this 25th day of April, 2002. Helen Kalin Klandemd, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2002 Page 2 of 3 FINALLY, adopted, passed, and approved this 25th day of March, 2002. Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Approved as to form: John P. Worcester, City Attorney Ordinance No. 8, Series of 2002 Page 3 of 3 EXHIBIT A ALPINE ACRES PUD AMENDMENT REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS A. General requirements. L The proposed development shah be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. 2. The proposed development shah be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. 3. Theproposeddevelopmentshallnotadverselyaffectthefuture development of the surrounding area. 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 Staff finds that the proposed PUD Amendment is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan and the character of the surrounding land uses on Lot 4A in that even by allowing for the HPC FAR bonus on the subject lot, it will still be allowed a more restrictive FAR than can legally be constructed on the surrounding parcels which have an underlying zoning of R-6 (Medium-Density Residential). In order to receive an HPC FAR bonus, any proposed development to the historic structure on Lot 4A will have to meet the HPC's criteria to be deemed "an outstanding preservation effort". In achieving the bonus, HPC will review to make sure that the proposed development is compatible with the historic structure. An addition to the historic structure on Lot 4A will be exempt :[rom the Growth Management Quota System because it involves the restoration or expansion of a single- family residence pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.070(A)(5). Staff finds the criterion to be met. 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: 4 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the snbject 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 finds that the proposed amendment on Lot 4A is consistent and compatible with the surrounding land uses and will allow for an allowable floor area ratio that is actually less restrictive than what the current underlying zoning allows for. If Lots 4A and 4B did not have a PUD overlay, they would be allotted an allowable FAR of approximately 3,$00 square feet in the underlying R-6 (Medium Density Residential) Zone District. The proposed amendment would allow the single-family residence with an ADU on lot 4A to build out to a maximum floor area ratio of only 2,986 square feet, if the Historic Preservation Commission were to grant a bonus for an outstanding preservation effort on the lot. The result of the proposed amendment is that the floor area ratio allowed on Lot 4A, with the proposed bonus, is still more than 500 square feet less than is allowed in the underlying zoning for lots of this size. Stafffinds this criterion to be met. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scaler 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 Staff believes that the proposed amendment on Lot 4A would have an inconsequential impact on the scale and massing of the historic structure because in order to gain the 500 square foot FAR bonus, the proposed project would have to be found to be outstanding preservation efforts by the Historic Preservation Commission. In reviewing the proposed site-specific project on Lot 4A, the Historic Preservation Commission has approved the conceptual site-specific plan and has indicated that it is an "outstanding preservation effort", and the Commission has determined that the proposed scale and massing is appropriate for the lot. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The appropriate number ofoff-streetparMng spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: 5 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 Staff finds this set of criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 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 The proposed amendment does not reduce the maximum allowable density within the PUD. Staff finds this set of criteria not to be applicable t° the proposed amendment. 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 mudflow, rock falls or avalanche dangers. b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soll 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 The proposed amendment does not reduce the maximum allowable density within the PUD. Stafffinds this set of criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 6 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 There is no increase in density as part of this application. Staff finds this set of criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 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 prop°Sed 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. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. 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 movemena 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the Proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. Staff Finding Staff finds that the proposed amendment will not affect the site's access and that any significant man-made features will be preserved through the Historic Preservation Commission's review of a proposed development on Lot 4A. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 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: I. The landscapeplan 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 finds this set of criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment~ 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 develbpment. 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: 8 1. Be compatible with or enhanCe th~ bisUai 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 In order to gain the 500 square foot FAR bonus that would be allotted by the proposed amendment, any site-specific development plan must be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission. In reviewing a site-specific development proposal for Lot 4A, the HPC found the scale and massing to be appropriate for the site. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 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 The applicant must meet the outdoor lighting requirements set forth in the City of Aspen Lighting Ordinance. Staff finds that this criterion is required to be met by all development within the City of Aspen. 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, ithe following criteria shall be met: l. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed 9 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 intercst 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 The proposed amendment does not affect the amount of required open space within the PUD. Staff finds this set of criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 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. Adequatepublic infrastructurefacih'ties exist to accommodate the development. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. 3. Oversizedutilities, publicfacilities, orsiteimprovementsareprovided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. Staff Finding The public infrastructure is already in place. The lot subject to the proposed amendment contains an existing structure with existing services. Allowing this lot to be eligible to obtain a 500 square foot FAR bonus upon review by the Historic Preservation Commission will not put an undue burden on the on the City's infrastructure capabilities. Staff finds this criterion to be met. L Access and Circulation. (Only standards l&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 facih'ties and minimizes the use of security 10 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 ~as adequate access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to publlc or private use. 2. Theproposed development, vehicular accesspoints, andparking 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. 3. Areas of historic pedestrian or recreational trail use, improvements of, or connections to, the bicycle and pedestrian trail system, and adequate access to significant public lands and the rivers are provided through dedicated public trail easements and are proposed for appropriate improvements and maintenance. 4. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan and adopted specific plans regarding recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and transportation are proposed to be implemented in an appropriate manner. 5. Streets in the PUD which are proposed or recommended to be retained under private ownership provide appropriate dedication to public use to ensure appropriate public and emergency access. 6. Security gates, guard posts, or other entryway expressions for the PUD, or for lots within the PUD, are minimized to the extent practical. Staff Finding The proposed amendment does not affect access to the PUD. Staff finds this set of criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 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 individualphase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shah be defined in the adopted final PUD developmentplan. Thephasingplan shall comply with the following: i. AH phases, including the initial phase, shah be designed to function as a complete development and shah not be reliant on subsequent phases. 2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, tO the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. 11 3. Theproposedphasingplan ensures the necessary orproportionate improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in- lieu, construction of any facilities to be asedjointly by residents of the PUD, construction of any required affordable hoasin~, and any mitigation measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. Staff Finding There is no phasing proposed for the redevelopment of Lot 4A. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 12 February 7, 2002 Mr. James Lindt, Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: ALPINE ACRES PUD AMEND~LENT Dear James, This letter is in response to the recent conversation we have had regarding the application to amend the PUD for Lots 4A and 5 off the Alpine Acres Subdivision. Based on the concerns raised by the staff, I am hereby withdrawing Lot 5 from this application. This means that the proposal wiI] only apply To Lot 4A, which is the property owned by the applicant Mr. Alan Becker. Please feel free to contact me ff any other ~ssues arise with respect to this project. Very truly yours, ALAN RICItMAN PLANNING SERVICES Alan R/chman, AICP December 31, 2001 Mr. Chris Bendon, Senior Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: ALPINE ACRES PUD AMENDMENT Dear Chris, This is an application to amend the PUD for Lots 4A, 4B, and 5 of the Alpine Acres Subdivision (note: Lots 4A and 4B are also known as the Dunn/Bishop Subdivision Exemption). The PUD designation was applied to the property by the Aspen City Council pursuant to Ordinance 35, Series of 1987, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit #1. This Ordinance rezoned these lots R-6/PUD. Subsequently, the City designated the structure on Lot 4A as an historic landmark pursuant to an ordinance adopted in 1998. A vicinity map depicting the entire subdivision and surrounding properties is included with this application. The application is being submitted by the owner of Lot 4A, Alan Becker (hereinafter, "the applicant"). A copy of the title commitment for this property, demonstrating that he is the owner, is attached as Exhibit #2. Letters from Mary Sabatasso the owner of Lot 4B, and Shirley Peterson and Chris Dodaro, the owners of Lot 5, joining in and Consenting to the sfibmission of this application, along with proof that these individuals are the owners of the subject properties, are attached as Exhibit #3 and Exhibit #4. A vicinity map showing the location of these properties within the City is also provided on the next page. The applicant is being represented by Alan Richman Planning Services for purposes of this application. A letter from the applicant confirming this arrangement is attached as Exhibit #5. I held a pre-application conference with you on December 19, 2001, to identify the City's review procedures that would apply to this proposal (see Exhibit #6, Pre-Application Conference Summary). During this meeting, you verified that this application would be processed as a two step PUD Amendment, with review by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council. The applicant's responses to the relevant standards of the Land Use Code are provided below. First, however, it is essential that we provide you background information on these properties, to better explain the need for this PUD Amendment. Mr. Chris Bendon December 31, 2001 Page Three Property History In November, 1986, Mr. Dunn and Mr. Bishop, the owners of w[iat was then known as Lot 4 of the Alpine Acres Subdivision, submitted an application to the City to split the lot into Lots 4A and 4B. At the time, Lot 4 contained two individual victorian residences on a single property. The owners sought the ability to give these residences their own distinct lots, rather than to make them conforming by joining them together inio a duplex on a single lot. As review of the application proceeded, the City discovered an error in its official zone district map. The map showed the Alpine Acres zoning designation as R-6. However, research indicated that the property had actually been zoned R-15 upon its annexation to the City in 1976, and had remained so ever since. Since Lot 4 consisted of just 15,890 s.f., the lot split would have been prohibited since it would create two nonconforming sized lots. To resolve this problem, the City agreed to sponsor a rezoning of the property and then to grant the rezoning pursuant to Ordinance 35, Series of 1987. As part of this Ordinance, the City made a finding that "due to the existing narrow lots and large front yard setbacks of Lots 4 and 5, a Planned Unit Development Overlay is appropriate to allow for the creation of new lots not meeting the minimum lot width requirement and to maintain the ex/sting character of the front yard setbacks". Therefore, the City placed a PUD Overlay on Lots 4 and 5, subject to the following conditions that were offered by the lot owners: A. Each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres shall be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2,486 sq. ft. B. Front yard setbacks of Lots 4 and 5, and subsequently re-subdivided Lots 4A and 4B, shall be a minimum of 25 feet. C. The minimum lot width of newly created Lots 4A and 4B shall be approximately 45 feet and 39 feet, respectively. It is the first of these conditions that the applicant seeks to amend. Proposed Amendment The applicant seeks authorization from the City to be able to apply for one of the City's historic preservation incentives, this being the ability to obtain up to a 500 sq. ft. floor area bonus for "an outstanding preservation effort" for a historic landmark (see Section 26.415.010 C.5 of the Aspen Land Use Code). This authorization would also apply to Lot 5, which presently contains two historic structures, neither of which is presently a landmark, but both of which are on the historic inventory and could be eligible for such designation. It would not apply to Lot 4B, since the residence on this property was built in the 1980's. Mr. Chris Bendon December 31, 2001 Page Four To accomplish this proposal, we would ask the City to amend Condition A. of the PUD to read as follows: "A. Each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres shall be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2,486 sq. ft., plus any floor area bonus that might be awarded by the HPC to Lot 4A or Lot 5 for an outstanding preservation effort for a historic landmark pursuant to Section 26.415.010 C.5 of the Aspen Land Use Code." We believe this proposal is consistent with the City's original intent in designating this site as a PUD. At that time, the owners agreed to limit the buildout to 2,486 sq. ft. of countable floor area per unit, which was well below the floor area that would have been allowed in the R-6 zone at that time (3,795 sq. ft. would have been allowed on each of Lots 4A and 4B). Since that time, many changes have been made to the City's floor area regulations. The floor area for the R-6 zone was reviged in 1989, reducing the maximum allowable floor area for Lot 4A to about 3,475 sq. ft. In addition, various floor area bonuses and exemptions have been authorized, including the exemption for accessory dwelling units (which has been modified several times) and the bonus for historic landmarks. The owners could not have anticipated that the City would have created such incentives. We believe it is only fair to give them the opportunity to apply to utilize one of these tools, which is designed as an incentive for historic restoration and preservation projects such as this, especially since their resulting floor area will still be well below that allowed for similarly sized properties in the R-6 zone district, as was the intent of the original PUD~ Response to PUD Review Standards To determine whether this proposal is appropriate, you have asked us to respond to PUD review standards A, B~i. and B.2 found in SeCtion 26.445.040 of the Code. The applicant's response to these standards is as follows. A. General Requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. Response: The City has adopted a set of historic preservation incentives as a means of implementing the historic preservation elements of the AACP. It would be consistent with the AACP to provide the opportunity for the historic structures within this PUD to avail themselves of the opportunity to apply for the floor area bonus if the owners can demonstrate they would be developing an outstanding preservationt effort. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. Mr. Chris Bendon December 31, 2001 Page Five 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the fixture development of the surrounding area. Response: The City will maintain ample protection for the character of this area following this amendment. All this amendment accomplishes is to authorize the submission of an application to HPC for a preservation project. The applicant must still demonstrate that the project not only meets all of HPC's guidelines, but also that it is an outstanding preservation effort. These are very strict standards for any applicant to meet, and ensure that the resulting product will truly compliment the neighborhood and achieve the City's historic preservation and community character goals. 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 development plan review. Response: The proposed development will be eligible for a growth management exemption, both because it would be a residential remodeling/expansion project and because it will involve the expansion of a historic landmark. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The final PUD development plan shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the pUD, as described in General Provisions, Section26.445.040, above. The dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district shah be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. During the review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses andexistingdevelopmentpatternsshaHbeemphasized. Theproposeddevelopmentrequirements shall comply with the following: 1. The proposed dimensional requiremo~ts for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following htfluences on the property: a. The character of, and compalibility 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. Mr. Chris Bendon December 31, 2001 Page Six 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massin& and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding areas. Response: Following is an analysis of the proposed dimensional requirements for Lot 4A (which is the only lot with current development plans). This lot is currently improved with two structures. The residence, located towards the front of the lot, contains approximately 1,075 sq. ft. The garage, located towards the rear of the lot, contains approximately 670 sq. ft., of which 375 sq. ft. is exempt floor area, while 295 sq. ft. counts. Above the garage, the applicant built an accessory dwelling unit several years ago, that contains approximately 680 sq. ft. Even though this structure is detached from the main residence, it counts fully as floor area due to the City's new ADU regulations (although it could have been eligible for a partial floor area exemption under the City's prior regulations). Therefore, the countable floor area on this lot today is as follows: 1,075 sq. ft. (house) 295 sq. ft. (garage) 680 sq. ft. (ADU) 2,050 sq. ft. This leaves 436 sq. ft. of floor area that could be built today, given the PUD limit of 2,486 sq. ft. The historic preservation bonus would increase this amount to 2,986 sq. ft. of floor area, which still about 15% less than would typically be allowed on a lot of this size in this zone district, continuing to fulfill the City's intent, expressed in Ordinance 35, Series of 1987, to keep these units from developing out of character from surrounding structures. It will allow the main house to grow to about 2,000 sq. ft. of countable floor area, so it will still be a home that is in character with its neighborhood. In fact, in recent years, nearby houses along Gibson Avenue have developed at much higher intensity than these small homes, which remain quite modest in size and would still be relatively small compared to their neighbors if this bonus were obtained. In conclusion, I believe the applicant has responded to the direction given during the pre- application conference. Please let me know if there is anything else you require. Very truly yours, ALAN RICHMAN PLANNING SERVICES Alan Richman, AICP EXHIBITS ,11 ZOO'& 6GGI'b,, XH/X£ 90:~I I0/9Z/60 EXHIBIT #2 COMMITMENT LO~.N ~0 6785783 NO~WE~T MORTC~%GS, INC. 3601 MINNESOTA DRIV~ STE 200 1. EfEec=~ve Da~e~ F~ ~, a~ 7~00 ~ Order No. 40S302 -C ~ K. BEC~ 3. ~tLTA Loan Poltcia~ ~ou~lt: $ 43S,000.00 ~ORWEST MORTGAGE, iNC., its Successors a-nd/or Assigns covered herein Owner's Premium: $ ASP~/~ TITLE CORPORATION Lender's P~em/um: $ S86.00 600 EAST HOPKINS ~'1 Cha~e~: $ F~ 970-920-4052 T~ Certi~icat~ $ I0.00 PH 970-920-40~0 ~orsem~n~ Ch~: $ TS.00 ~ Cha~ee, ~ ~S: $ 671.00 FiRST~I~TITLE IN--CE C0~ 090-d _ 900/ZOO'd 090-1 ZSO$'OZBOIO S~!~p~ ~ ~:~H~,.~,~Cy.,~_i~L/ .-moJ me : tnn2-fl2-Rn FIRST A~E~ICA~ TITLE INSUrAnCE COMPANY ~1 DOO'd 6SSI'.N Xlt/X£ 90:g~ I0/9g/60 e~cu=~d ~ ~uly [~le~ fo~ ~eco=d, to wit: 1. Release by the ~lic T~=e~ of Pitkin Co~y K. B~cker for the use of B~lus Mortgage Co~., ~: Assignat of ~= ~ov= Deed of T~st to ~e Firet National B~ of Chicago as T~stee, recorded ~ril 18, 1997, ~C R=cep=ion No. 403~47. 2. Deed of ~st from ~ K. BEC~R to the ~lic T~s~ee of PitOn ~ty for the usu of NOR~ST MORTGAGE, INC., its SuccessOrs ~d/or Assi~, to se~re ~ MOR~GE ~LICY, ~ ISS~. WI~ NOT CO~N EXtEriOrS 4, ~ WILL CO~A~ ~ORSE~ ~ 100, PROVID~ ~T (A) OF I~I~ AG~ OR FIN~ ~FIDAVIT ~ AG~ ITS DULY AU~ORIZED AG~, (B) ~E COMP~ OR ITS D~%f A~ORI=~ A~ RECEI~S ~ ~DRO~S ~ IMPROVEM~T ~CATIO~ CERTIFI~TE PROP~Y C~TIFI~ BY REGISTE~ S~R OR ENGI~ER~ ~ (C) ~LI~LE S~D~ ~S IN T~ ~0~ OF $45.00 ~E PAID TO ~ COMP~ OR ITS DULY A~0RIZED A~. THE MOR~E ~LI~, W~ ISSUED, WILL CO~ FO~(S), PROVID~ ~T ~LI~LE S~EDU~FD ~L~W~G ~ ~RS~ ~ ~D ~ ~ COMP~ 0R ITS D~Y ~ORIZED AG~. 8.1 $~0.00 FIneST ~RICAN TITLE INS%TR~/~CE SC~XDU'n~ ~ EXCEPTIONS O~d~ ~oo 40S302 -C The po1£C!~ or pol£cies to be ieeued will contain exceptions to the ~ollow~ngma=ters ~= w~ch coul~ be a~c~r=~ned by ~ i~pec=~o~ of said l~d or by ~ktn~ i~i~ of persons in po~u~sion uhereof. 2. Eascm~s or claims of ~a$~nts, not sho~ by th~ p~lic rucords. 3. D~scre~ci~s, conflic=s in bo~ry linus, shot=age in ar~a. cncroac~en=s~ ~d ~y ocher facCs which a correc= su~ey would disclo~ and which are not sho~ by uhe ~!ic records. 4. ~y li~n, or r~ght =o a lien for ~e~tces, l~r or material hereKo~or~ or hereafter hereof, bu= prior to =he ~aUc =he proposed insured ac~tr~S of record ~or valu~ ~ ~s=a~ or in~e~ot or mortgag~ thereon covere~ by this C~tmen=. 6. T~es ~ue and payabl~ ~d ~y =~, ~ecial a~e~men~s, ch~ge o= 1~ i~osed for w~r or ~awer se~ice, or for an~ other sp~c!al ~ing d~str~c=. 1. T~e~ ~d ~ment~ for year 19~7, a l~en now due ~d Day'lc, but not yet delin~nU. T~s and aes~ssm~ts for the year 1998, a li~n no~ ~= ~u~ ~ pay~le. 69. 3. Right of ~y for ~tches or c~als cons=~ct=d bY ~h~ au=horley of ~h~ ~t~ S~a=es, as rcs~ed In Uni~e~ States Pa==nt recorded Nov~r 25, 19S8, in B~k 185 on ~ook 324 a= Pa~e 6ST. R~strictio~, w~ch ~o no= conta~ a forf~i=~e or rever~er clau~e, as con=a~ned in ins~men= recor~ April 26, 1977, ~n Book 31T at Pa~ 887. (Continuua) FIRST A~ERICAN TITLE I~SUR~/~CE COMPANY BgO-d 900/~00'8 099-1 [] 900'a 6s~i'oN x'l{/×£ 90:z~ t0/9z/60 ' 6. Statement of Exemption between Luke W. AnDhO~y ~nd th~ City of Aspen, rcco=~ed Au~/et 4, 1977, in ~ook 333 at Page 4. 7. Agreement b=tw=en Luke W. Anthony and Charles D. ~!shop et al., recorded December 30, 1983, in ~ook 4S8 Page 149. 8. Statement of Bxccption between Chip ~ishop, et al. and the City of Aspen, recorded December 11, 1987, in Book 552 at Page 876. 9. A~CCss easument as shown on the Plat of said Subdivision, said easement being 20 f=et in width along the Northerly port/on of subJuct prop~rty. 10. Front Yard =etback llne a~ shown on the ~let of said s%~bdtvi~ion, eatd caeem~n~ being 2~ feet in width along the Southerly portion of sub~ect property. 11. Encroachment of He=Ton Drive onto ~ubJect property as shown on th~ Pi~ of said subdlvi~£on. Restrictions, which do no= contain a forfeiture or reverter clause, as ehown on t~ filed Plat of =aid subdivision. FIRST~4~ICA~TITLE INSD~J%NCE COMPASS/ EXHIBIT #3 Mr. Chris Bendon, Senior Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: ALPINE ACRIgS PUD AMENDMENT Dear Mr. Bendon, I am the owner of Lot 4B of the Alpi~e Acres Subdivision. Proof that I am the owner of this property is attached. As the owner of the property, I would like to inform you that I consent to the application that Alan Becket is submitting to amend the PUD that applies to Lots 4A, 4B, and $ of the Alpine Acres Subdivision. Since my property does not contain a historic structure, I understand that the proposed amendment would not apply to my property, but I consent to the amendment applying to Lots 4A and 5. Should you have any need to contact me during your review of the application, please do so at the address and telephone number below. Sincerely, Mary ,~batasso 940 Matchless Drive Aspen, Colorado 81611 925-7735 12/20/01 18:30 TX/RX N0.1611 P.007 [] EXHIBIT Mr. Chris Bendon, Senior Planner City of Aspen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: ALPINE ACRES PUD AMENDMENT Dear Chris, I hereby authorize Alan Richman Planning Services to act as my designated representative with respect to the land use application being submitted to your office for my property, located at 950 Matchless Drive. Mr. Richman is authorized to submit an application to amend the Alpine Acres PUD. He is also authorized to represent me in meetings with the City of Aspen staff, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the City Council. Should you have any need to contact me during the course of your review of this application, please do so through Mr. Richman, whose address and telephone number is included in the land use application. Sincerely, Alan Becker 950 Matchless Drive Aspen, Colorado 81611 925-1462 SPECIAL WARRANTY DEED HARY L. SABATASSO FAMILY TRUST, dated November 18~ 1998 County Pitkin, I IIIIII IIIII IIIIII IIII IIIII IIII!11 IIiil III IIIII II!1 IIII I or' I R 6.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CO 12/27/01 11:$? FAX 970 925 7224 ALAN BEC~ 1~1;02 ]EXHIBIT #4 City of ~pcn 130 South Galena Stmc{ ~ ~E AC~ PUD ~~T ~d 5 of thc ~pinc P~ ~andm~t rapr~gve, ~au ~c~an PJ~g S~, ~a ~b~t I~S aPp~O~ on o~r ~. Shoed you 5ave Shirley I~etc. fion Chris IDodaro · ~pc~ Colorado 816]~ 970-54~1054 William G. Peterson 12/26/01 17:36 TX/RX NO.l~13 P.O01 [] 12/27/01 11:57 F~ 970 ~25 7224 A~ BB~ ~o02 EXHIBIT ~4 Ci~ of ~pcn ~~ Dcvclopmc~ Department 130 South Gal~a St~c~ ~p*n, Co[orado 81611 ~d 5 of thc ~pin~ Act= Sub--ion- We ~o Msh ~ j0~ t~s appH~tio% so ~t thc P~ ~eudmcnt m m~o apply to our propers. We h~eby au~ Mr. B~-~er and h~ Shoed you have ~y n~d m contain u~ dur~ yo~ renew of the appH~flon, pl~e do so at the a~ and te~onc nmb~r be~w. Shlrl~y Petof$On ~r~ ]Dodc~ro 920 Ivl. atehless Drive 930 Mal~lms DrNe .~pe~ Colorado 81611 ~po~ ~lorado 8161~ 970-54~ 1054 7~-737-6782 William G. Peterson 12/26/01 17:36 Tx/RX NO.1613 P.001 I EXItIBIT #6 CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Chris Bendon, 920.5072 DATE: 12.19.01 PROJECT: Alpine Acres Lot 4a Substantial Planned Unit Development Amendment REPRESENTATIVE: Alan Richman 920.1125 OWNER: Alan Becker 925.1462 TYPE OF APPLICATION: 2 Stepl Planning and Zoning Commission, City Conncil. DESCRIPTION: Applicant is seeking an amendment to the PUD limitation of"countable" square footage to allow the application of"bonus" square footage granted by the HPC. Land Use Code Sections: 26.445 Planned Unit Development 26.304 Common Development Review Procedures. Review by: Staff for completeness and analysis; Community Developmdnt Director for recommendation; Planning and Zoning Coimnission for PUD recommendation (PH) City Council for PUD (PH); Public Hearing: Yes, for meetings above noted by (PH). 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 govermnent, 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: Historic Preservation Officer Planning Fees: Planning Deposit Minor: ($1 }205) Referral Agency Fees: None. Total Deposit: $1,205. For 6 hours, additional hours are billed at a rate of $205/honr. Fee schedule is subject to change. To apply, submit the following information: I. Proof of ownership. 2. Signed fee agreement. 3. Applicant's name, address and telephone number iii a letter sigued by the applicant which states the name, address and telephone number of any 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 of a current certificate from a title insurance company, or attorney licensed to practice in the State of Colorado, listing the names of all Owners of the property, and all mortgages, .iudgments, liens, easements, contracts and agreements affecting the parcel, and demonstrating the owner's right to apply for the Development Application. 5. Documents limiting square footage with proposed amendment language. 6. Letters from ail affected land owners consenting to submission of PUD amendment. (See note.) 7. Total deposit for review of the application. 8. 18 Copies of the complete application packet and maps. HPC = I2; PZ = 10; GMC = PZ+5; CC = 7; Referral Agencies = I/ea.; Planlq;ing Staff= 1 9. An 8 1/2" by 11" vicinity map locating the parcel within the City of Aspen. Attached 10. Site improvement survey - Waived. I 1. List of adjacent property owners within 300' for public hearing. Obtain at the GIS Department, first floor of City Hall - 920.5453. 12. Response to application criteria. (See attached application packet.) Notes: 1. The scope of project does not warrant the major deposit fee and only the minor deposit shall be required for. application submittal. 2. Application only needs to respond to PUD criteria A, BI, and B2. Ali other PUD criteria are not applicable to this amendment. 3. The application should clarit3, whcther thc FAR limitution affects only lois 4a, 4b, and 5 or if the limitation affects all 5 original lots of the subdivision. 4. At a minimum, the land owners party to the FAR limitation are required to consent to the application to amend the restriction on Lot 4a. A letter stating the land owners name, legal description of their property, and indication of consent is needed. 5. If the land owners subject to the FAR limitation wish to join the application and be party to the amended language, an indication of joining the application, proof of ownership, and any representative authorization is also needed. 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, and upon thctual representatkms thai may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. 547 - OP. DiN c NO. (Series of 19~) ~----~'~ O ~ O~IN~ ~ZONING ~ A~I~ A~S SUBDI~IO~ CITY ~F ASPEN, PITKIN CO~Y, CO~ ~OM R-15 (~SI~I~) T~ R-6 (~SIDENTI~) ~D P~CING A P~D ~IT D~~ (PUD) O~Y ON ~I~ AC~S ~TS 4 ~D 5 ~AS, an application and petition have been submitted by Joseph Dunn, Cha=les Bishop and other owners of the Alpine Acres Subdivision to rezone to R-6 (Residential) Alpine Acres and to place a Planned Unit Development Overlay on Alpzne Acres Lots 4, subse~ently resubdivided Lots 4A & 4B, and Lot 5; and ~AS, the subdivision is presently zoned R-15 (Residen- tial); and ~E~, all of the owners of Alpine Acres Subdivision have agreed to re~est a voluntarily ~mposed maximum floor area (FAR) of 2,486 s~are feet per dwelling unit; and ~E~AS, as part of the rezoning request, Joseph Dunn and Charles Bishop have submitted a subdivision exception request for the purpose of creating two lots; and ~AS, at a duly noticed public hearing held on July 21, 1987, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Co~ission did reco~end that the subdivision exception and rezoning be approved; and ~AS, the application has been found to be generally consistent with Section 24-12.5 of the Land Use Code which establishes criteria for rezoning; and ~AS, the City Council has found that due to the existing narrow lots and large front yard setbacks of Lots 4 and 5 a Planning Unit Development Overlay ~s appropriate so to allow for the creation of new lots not meeting the mznimum lot width retirement and to malntaln the existlng character of the front yard setbacks; and W~IEREAS, the Aspen City Council has considered the recommen- dation of the Planning and Zoning Commission and has determined the proposed rezoning to be compatible with surrounding zone districts and land use in the vicinity of the site. NOW, THEI~EFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: Section 1 That it does hereby rezone to R-6 the Alpine Acres Subdivi- sion and place on Lots 4 and 5 of Alpine Acres a Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay subject to the following conditions voluntarily imposed by the subdivision property owners: A. Each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres shall be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2,486 square feet. B. Front yard setbacks of Lots 4 and 5, and subsequently resubdivided Lots 4A and 4B, shall, be a minimum of 25 feet; and C. The minimum lot width of newly created Lots 4A and 4B shall be approximately 45 feet and 39 feet respect- ively. Section 2 That the Zoning District Map be amended to reflect the rezoning described in Section 1 and the City Engineer be author- ized and directed to amend the map to reflect the zoning change. Section 3 That the city Clerk is directed upon adoption of this ordinance to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 4 If any section, sub-section, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 5 A public hearing on the ordinance will be held on the /~ of ~ , 1987 at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing notice of the same was published once in a news- paper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, tAEAD AND ORDERED published as provided by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the /~W~-~ of~~ 1987. .~ ~'"'" ~ ~ . William L. Stirling, Mayor Kathryn ~och, C~ty Cler~ . ~PR~?~Y adopted, passed and approved this /~day o AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE STATE OF COLOR,ADO ) Count} of Pitkin ) / being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado~ hereby personally certify that I have complied with the public notice requiremems of Section 26.304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following manner: VPublication of notice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen at least fifteen (15) days prior :o the public hearing. A cop? of the publication is attached hereto. Posting of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained from ~e Community Development Deparunent, which was made of suitable. waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide it~d,tweni~J-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of ietters not ?~ ~:teks than one inch in heigl'/t. Said notice was posted at least ten (10) days r. 'prior to the public heating and was continuously visible from the day of :> .... .- : 15 , 200 , to and including the date and time of the public hearing. A photograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. Mailing of notice. By the mailing ora notice obtained from the Community Development Department, which contains the information described in gection 26.304.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At [east ten (10) days prior ro the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class, postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subjec[ to the developmem application, and, ac [east fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, s[a~e, county, municipal government, school, service distr/.ct or other governmental Or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pitkin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A copy of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto &ontinued on next page? Rezoning or text amendment, Whenever the official zoning district map is in any way tc be changed or amended incidental to or as part of a general revision of this TitIe, or whenever the text of this Title is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use reguiation, or otherwise, the reqoirement of' an accurate survey map or other sdfficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of owners of real proper~y in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during ali business hours for fifteen (I 5) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments, The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice was ac~to~ed before me th~s I I day. of ~zw-~.-. .200,3->by~ ._.)c'3.___.o__~.~-~ s~. WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL m~ ~,p~. My co~ission expires: Not~y COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOG~PH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LiST OF THE O}~ERS AND GOVE~:~[ENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED P105 R~SOLUTION N0. ~ (SE~ES OF 2002) A ~SOLUTION OF T~ CITY OF ASPEN PL~NG ~D ZO~G CO~ISSION ~COMENDING T~T CITY COUNCIL ~PRO~ ~ ~MENT TO T~ ~PI~ AC~S PL~D ~IT DE~LOP~NT TO ~LOW FOR LOT 4A, ~PI~ AC~S PLIED ~IT DE~LOP~, TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR A 500 SQU~ FOOT msTomC P~SERVXTiON FLOOR ~A ~TIO BONUS FOR ~N OUTSTAYING P~SERVATION EFFORT, CITY OF ASPEN, PITON CO~TY, COLO~DO~ WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the Owner, Alan Becket_ represented by Alan P,_ichman, for an amendmanr ro the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Developmem (PUD) ro allo~v for lot 4A, Alpine Acres PUD, to be eligible for a 500 square foot historic preservation FAR bonus above and beyond the allowable FAR set forth in the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Developmem; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.445, City Council may approve a substantial amendment to an approved Planned Unit Developmem, during a duly noticed public hearing, after considering comments from the general public, a recommendation from the Commnnity Development Staff, a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, and recommendations from relevant referral agencies; WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the request for an amenciment lo the Alpine Acres PUD to allow for lot 4A to be eligible for a 500 square foot historic preservation FAR bonuses and recommends approval of the proposed amendment; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission has reviewed and considered the development proposal trader the applicable provisions of the Mu~'cipal Code as identified herein, has revie~ved and considered the recommendation of the Commmuity Development Department, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a pnblic hearing; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds ali applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, ~vith 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. WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on February 19, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that City Council approve, by a six to zero (6 - 0) vote, a substantial amendment to the Alpine Acres Plarmed Unit Development (PUD) for the purpose of allowing lot 4A to be eligible to receive 500 square foot historic preservation FAR bonuses ptursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.415; and, P106 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLA~NrNING AND ZONING COMMISSION as follows: Section I Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that City Council approve the proposed application to amend Condition A of the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development to read as follows: A. Each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres shall be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2,486 sqnare feet, plus any floor area bonus that might be awarded by the HPC to Lot 4A for an outstanding preservation effort for a historic landmark pursuant to Section 26.415 ' of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. Section 2: 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 3: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of tkis 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. Approved by the Commission at its regular meeting on February 19, 2002. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney Jasmine Tygre, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk TO: Mayor Klanderud and City Council THRU: Julie Ann Woods, Community Deve~pmem Director Joyce Ohlson, Deputy Director FROM: James Lindt, Planner RE: Alpine Acres Substantial PUD Amendment - 1st Reading of Ordinance #~7, Series of 2002 DATE: February 25, 2002 APPLICANT/OWNER: Alan Becker, Owner of Lot 4A, Alpine Acres Subdivision/PUD; 950 Matchless Drive R~Pm~SENTATIW: Alan Richman, Richman Planning Services LOCATION: Lots 4A, Alpine Acres Subdivision/PUD CURRENT ZONINC,: R-6 PUD PROPOSED LAND USE REQUEST: Amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development SUMMARY: The applicant requests an amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the purpose of allowing Lot 4A of the Alpine Acres PUD to be eligible to be granted a 500 square foot FAR bonus from the Historic Preservation Commission if it is found that a proposed project on this lot is "an outstanding preservation effort". The Alpine Acres PUD limits Lots 4A, 4B, and 5 of the Aspen Alps Subdivision to 2,486 square feet of countable floor area per dwelling unit, which does not currently allow for the HPC to grant the property a Historic Preservation FAR Bonus. REVIEW PROCEDURE A substantial amendment to an approved Planned Unit Development may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by City Council at a public hearing after considering recommendations from the Community Development Director and the Planning and Zoning Commission pursuant to Section 26.445.100(B). STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant, Alan Becker, represented by Alan Richman, requests an amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned unit Development (PUD) for the purpose of allowing lot 4A to be eligible to be granted a 500 square foot FAR bonus from the Historic Preservation Commission if it is found that a proposed historic renovation/addition project on this lot is "an outstanding preservation effort". The Alpliie Acres PUD was approved in 1987 and restricted each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres to 2,486 square feet of countable floor area because of the narrow width of the lots. Lot 4A contains a historic landmarked single- family residence and an accessory dwelling unit. The lots regulated by the PUD are allowed to receive all of the exemptions that are normally granted under the current land use code. However, because the PUD limits the countable floor area ratio, currently the subject parcels are not eligible to receive a 500 square foot FAR bonus for an "outstanding preservation effort" that may be granted to other historic landmark designated properties pursuant ro City Land Use Code Section 26.415, Development Involving the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures or Which Occurs In An "H." Historic Overlay District. Lots 4A, 4B, and 5 of the Alpine Acres Subdivision are the only properties that are within the Alpine Acres PUD and all of the owners of these lots have consented to allow the applicant apply for the PUD Amendment for his lot. STAFF ANALYSIS: If Lot 4A were to be allowed to receive an HPC preservation bonus of 500 square feet, then it would be allotted an allowable FAR of 2,986 square feet. At the time that the PUD was established, Lot 4A would have been allowed 3,795 square feet of FAR under the underlying R-6 (Medium-Density Residential) zoning regulations. Under the current R-6 (Medium- Density Residential) zoning regulations, Lot 4A would be allowed approximately 3,500 square feet of FAR. Thus, the allowable FAR on Lot 4A with the proposed 500 square foot bonus is currently about 15% less than if it did not have the PUD floor area restriction. Staff believes tha! even with the addition of a 500 square foot Historic Preservation FAR bonus, that lot 4A will still be proportionate in size and massing to the surrounding properties that are also zoned R-6 (Medium-Density Residential) or R-6 PUD. Also, the Historic Preservation Commission has reviewed the compatibility of the proposed addition to the Historic Structure on lot 4A and has determined that the site specific proposal qualifies for the 500 square foot FAR bonus for an "outstanding preservation project". The Historic Preservation Commission found that the massing and scale of the site specific proposal was also compatible for the lot. The applicanl is proposing to amend Condition A of the Alpine Acres PUD (attached as Exhibit "C") as follows: A. Each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres shall be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2,486 square feet, plus any floor area bonus that might be awarded by the HPC to Lot 4A for an outstanding preservation effort for a historic landmark pursuant to Section 26.415 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. Staff feels that only allowing for lot 4A to be eligible for an historic preservation bonus would be compatible with the dimensional requirements on the surrounding parcels and recommends amending Condition A of the Alpine Acres PUD as follows: Staff feels that the aforementioned language is consistent with Aspen Area Community Plan Action Plan Priority number 31 that requires "staff to investigate ways to encourage the restoration and ~mprovement of existing buildings", in that the amendment will allow 2 the subject lot to take advantage of a preservation incentive that was not available at the time the PUD was enacted. HOwever, staff als° feels that by limiting the eligibility of the bonus to Lot 4A that the compatibility of the massing and size of structures will be maintained within the Alpine Acres PUD. Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the purpose of allOWing for Lot 4A; AlPine AcreS PUD, to be eligible for an HPC bonus pursuant to Land Use Code SectiOn 26.415. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that City Council approve the proposed ordinance approving a substantial amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the purpose of allowing each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres to be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2,486 square feet, plus any floor area bonus that might be awarded by tile HPC to Lot 4A for an outstanding preservation effort for a historic landmark pursuant to Section 26.415 of the City of Aspen Land use COde. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning CommissiOn unanimouslY recommends that City Council approve the proposed substantial amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the purpose of allowing each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres to be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2,486 Square feet, plus any floor area bonus that might be awarded by the HPC to Lot 4A for an oUtStanding preservation effort for a historic landmark pursuant to Section 26.415 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE PROPOSED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to approve Ordinance No. ':~, Series of 2002, approving the proposed amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development (PUD), Condition "A", for the purpose of allowing for each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres to be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2~486 square feet, plus any floor area bonus that might be awarded by the HPC to Lot 4A for an outstanding preservation effort for a historic landmark pursuant to Section 26.415 of the Aspen Land Use Code." CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B -- Application Exhibit C -- Ordinance No.35, Series 1987 approving Alpine Acres PUD Overlay Exhibit D -- Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution Exhibit E -- Vicinity Map EXHIBIT A ALPINE ACRES PUD AMENDMENT REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS A. General requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. 3. Theproposeddevelopmentshallnotadverselyaffectthefuture development of the surrounding area. 4. TheproposeddevelopmenthaseitherbeengrantedGMQSallotments, 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 Staff finds that the proposed PUD Amendment is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan and the character of the surrounding land uses on Lot 4A in that even by allowing for the HPC FAR bonus on the subject lot, it will still be allowed a more restrictive FAR than can legally be constructed on the surrounding parcels which have an underlying zoning of R-6 (Medium-Density Residential). In order to receive an HPC FAR bonus, any proposed development to the histuric structure on Lot 4A will have to meet the HPC's criteria to be deemed "an Outstanding preservation effort". In achieving the bonus, HPC will review to make sure that the proposed development is compatible with the historic structure. An addition to the historic structure on Lot 4A will be exempt from the Growth Management Quota System because it involves the restoration or expansion of a single- family residence pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.070(A)(5). Staff finds the criterion to be met. 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: 4 1. The proposed dlmensional 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 finds that the proposed amendment ou Lot 4A is consistent and compatible with the surrounding land uses and will allow for an allowable floor area ratio that is actually less restrictive than what the current underlying zoning allows for. If Lots 4A and 4B did uot have a PUD overlay, they would be allotted an allowable FAR of approximately 3,500 square feet in the underlying R-6 (Medium Density Residential) Zone District. The proposed amendment would allow the single-family residence with an ADU on lot 4A to build out to a maximum floor area ratio of only 2,986 square feet, if the Historic Preservation Commission were to grant a bonus for an outstanding preservation effort on the lot. The result of the proposed amendment is that the floor area ratio allowed on lot 4A, with the proposed bonus, is still more than 500 square feet less than is allowed in the underlying zoning for lots of this size. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 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 Staff believes that the proposed amendment on Lot 4A would have an inconsequential impact on the scale and massing of the historic structm'e because in order to gain the 500 square foot FAR bonus, the proposed project would have to be found to be outstanding preservation efforts by the Historic Preservation Commission. In reviewing the proposed site-specific project on lot 4A, the Historic Preservation Commission has determined that it is an "outstanding preservation effort", and the Commission has determined that the proposed scale and massing is appropriate for the lot. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: 5 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, wheneverjoint 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 Staff finds this set of criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density ora 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 The proposed amendment does not reduce the maximum allowable density within the PUD. Staff finds this set of criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUl) may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: aJ The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground instability or the possibility of mudflow, rock falls or avalanche dangers. b) Theeffectsoftheproposeddevelopmentaredetrimentaltothenatural 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 The proposed amendment does not reduce the maximum allowable density within the PUD. Staff finds this set of criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 6 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 There is no increase in density as part of this application, Stafffinds this set of criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 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 shah 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 pas6 or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. 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. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. 7 6. Sitedrainageisaccommodatedfortheproposeddevelopmentina practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommOdate any programmatic functions associated with the use. Staff Finding Staff finds that the proposed amendment will not affect the site's access and that any significant man-made features will be preserved through the Historic Preservation Commission's review ora proposed deVelopment on Lot 4A. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 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 propased features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: i. 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 finds this set of criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 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: 8 l. Be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the citg, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the proper~y, 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 In order m gain the 500 square foot FAR bonus that would be allotted by the proposed amendment, any site-specific developmem plan was reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission. In reviewing a site-specific developmem proposal for Lot 4A, the HPC found the scale and massing To be appropriate for the site. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 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 shah be accomplished: L Ail lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lauds. 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 The applicant must meet the outdoor lighting requirements set forth in the City of Aspen Lighting Ordinance. Staff finds that this criterion is required to be met by all development within the City of Aspen. 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 9 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 ail 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 The proposed amendment does not affect the amount of required open space within the PUD. Staff finds this set of criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 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. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary ~mprovements at the sole cost of the developer. 3. Oversizedutilities, publicfacilities, orsiteimprovementsareprovided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. Staff Finding The public infrastructure is already in place. The lot subject to the proposed amendment contains an existing structure with existing services. Allowing this lot to be eligible to obtain a 500 square foot FAR bonus upon review by the Historic Preservation Commission will not put an undue burden on the on the City's infrastructure capabilities. Staff finds this criterion to be met. L 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 10 gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shah meet the .following criteria: L 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. 2. Theproposeddevelopment, vehicularaccesspoints, andparking 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. 3. Areas of historic pedestrian or recreational trail use, improvements of, or connections to, the bicycle and pedestrian trail system, and adequate access to significant public lands and the rivers are provided through dedicated public trail easements and are proposed for appropriate improvements and maintenance. 4. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan and adopted specific plans regarding recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and transportation are proposed to be implemented in an appropriate manner. 5. Streets ln the PUD which are proposed or recommended to be retained under private ownership provide appropriate dedication to public use to ensure appropriate public and emergency access. 6. Security gates, guard posts, or other entryway expressions for the PUD, or for lots within the PUD, are minimized to the extent practical. Staff Finding The proposed amendment does not affect access to the PUD. Stafffinds this set of criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 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 individualphase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted final PUD developmentplan. Thephasingplan shall comply with the following: L Allphases, including the initialphase, shall be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. 2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. 11 3. Theproposedphasingplan ensures the necessary orproportionate 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 There is no phasing proposed for the redevelopment of Lot 4A. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 12 ORDINANCE NO. ~ , (SERIES OF 2002) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING THE ALPINE ACRES PUD TO ALLOW FOR LOT 4A, ALPINE ACRES SUBDIVISION TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR A 500 SQUARE FOOT HISTORIC PRESERVATION FLOOR AREA RATIO BONUS FOR A OUTSTANDING PRESERVATION EFFORT, CITY OF ASPEN, PITI(IN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the Alan Becket, represented by Alan Richman, for an amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development (PUD) m allow for lot 4A to be eligible for a 500 square foot historic preservation FAR bonus above and beyond the allowable FAR set out forth in the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.445.100 (B), that City Council. in accordance with the procedures, standards, and limitations of this Chapter. shall by ordinance approve, approve with conditions, or deny a Substantial PUD Amendment, after considering a recommendation by the Community Development Director and the Planning and Zoning Commission pursuant to Section 26.430.020; and, WHEREAS, the Community Developmem Department reviewed the proposed application m amend the Alpine Acres PUD to allow for lots 4A, Alpine Acres Subdivision to be eligible for a 500 square foot Historic Preservation floor area ratio bonus for an outstanding preservation effort and recommended approval; and, WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission conducted a public hearing to consider the proposed PUD Amendment, took and considered public testimony and the recommendation of the Community Development Director and recommended by a six to zero (6-0) vote, that City Council approve the proposed PUD Amendment; and. WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission found that the proposal meets or exceeds all applicable standards and that the approval of the proposed PUD Amendment, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Commarfity Plan; and, WHEREAS, City Council reviewed and considered the recommendations of the Community Development Director, the Planning and Zoning Commission. and members of the public during a duly noticed public heating; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed PUD Amendment meets or exceeds all applicable standards and that the approval of the Code Amendments, are 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. Ordinance No. , Series of 2002 Page 1 of 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, Condition A of the Alpine Acres PUD is hereby amended to read as follows: A. Each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres shall be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2,486 square feet, plus any floor area bonus that might be awarded by the HPC to Lot 4A or Lot 5 for an outstanding preservation effort for a historic landmark pursuant to Section 26.420.020 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. Section 2: 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 3: 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 nor affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 4: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 25th day of March, 2002, ar 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior ro which heating a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen at on this 25th day of April. 2002. ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor Ordinance No. , Series of 2002 Page 2 of 3 FINALLY, adopted, passed by a ro __ (_-~ vote and approved this 25th day of March, 2002. ATTEST: Kathryn S. Koch. City Clerk Helen Kalin Klandemd~ Mayor Approved as to form: lohn Worcester, City Attorney Ordinance No. , Series of 2002 Page 3 of 3 February 7, 2002 Mr. James Lindt. Planner City of ,~spen Community Development Department 130 South Galena Street Aspen, C016radb 81611 RE: ALPINE ACRES pUD AMENDMENT Dear James, This letter is in response to the recent conversation we have had regarding the application to amend the PUD for Lots 4A and ~ off the..,.~Alpine Acres Subdivision. Based on the concerns raised by the staff. I am hereby withdrawing Lot 5 from this application. This means that the proposal will only apply to LOt 4A. (vhi~h ii the~5i:bperty-6~ed by/he applicant Mr. Alan Becker. Please feel free to contact me if any other issues arise with respect to this project. Very truly yours, ALAN RICYIMAN PLANNING SERVICES Alan Richman, AICP AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAND USE CODE ADD.SS OF FaOP T¥: )5/'el , CO STATE OF COLORADO ) County of Pitkin ) I, ~/-~/ .~-'r~-Z~'~--.. (name, please print) being or representing an Applicant tO the city o~-Ah ' certify that I have complied with the public notice r, (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the following l//?~blicationq/'nocice.· By the publication in paper or a paper of general circulation in the days prior to the public hearing. A coPY oft V/Posting of notice: By posting of notice, wh community Development Department, whi, waterproof materials, which was not less th~ and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which less than one inch in heightl Said notice W~ prior to the public hearing and was continue ~-~ca'~' , 200 ~.--, to and includi hearing. A photograph o.['the posted notice ~ Mctiling of notice. By the mailing ora aoti{ Development Department, which cort~ains 26.304.060(£)(2) of the Aspen Land Use C public hearing, notice was hand delivered U.S. mail to all owners of property within t subject to the development application, and public hearing, notice was hand delivered c U.S. mall to any federal agency, state, cou~ service' district or other governmental or qu property within three hundred (300) feet development application. The names and those on the current tax records of Pitkin C sixty (60) days prior to the date of the publ governmentctl agencies so noticed is attach~:~~, (contimted on next P~gO Rezoning or text amendment, Wb. enever the official zoning district m~.p is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part ora general revision of'this Title, or whenever the text of this Tide is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment or' a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the reqvirement of an accurate survey map or other sufficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of'owners of'real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency dvring ail business hours for fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments. $ignatvre ,Ag Z- ~ of '7'~7.~ ,200.~., by · .. ..%..--, ... < WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL ubIic - ATTACHMENTS: COPY OF THE PUBLiCATION PHOTOGRAPH OF THE POSTED NOTICE (SIGN) LIST OF THE O~VNERS AND GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED B Y MAIL AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED BY SECTION 26.304.060 (E), ASPEN LAxND USE CODE ADD.SS OF PROPERTY: , . , aspen, CO STATE OF COLORA. DO ) Count} of Pitkin ) being or representing an Applicant to the City of Aspen, Colorado, hereby personally certify that I have complied with. the public notice requirements of Section 26 304.060 (E) of the Aspen Land Use Code in the followtng manner: ~'~ Publication oJ'norice: By the publication in the legal notice section of an official paper or a paper of general circulation in the City of Aspen ar least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing. A copy of the publication is attached hereto. ?osring of notice: By posting of notice, which form was obtained fro¢ the Community Development Department, which was made of suitable, ~),2 waterproof materials, which was not less than twenty-two (22) inches wide and twenty-six (26) inches high, and which was composed of letters not less than one inch in height. Said notice was posted at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing and was continuously visible from the day of ,200 , to and including the date and time of the public he, ming. Aph, otograph of the posted notice (sign) is attached hereto. ~: 'Ma!ling of notiCe. By the mailing ora notice obtained from the C~mmunity · Development Department, which contains the information describ~:d in Section :~5.~34.060(E)(2) of the Aspen Land Use Code. At least ten (10) &ays prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class, postage prepaid U.S. mail to all owners of property within t~ee hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application, and, at least fifteen (15) days prior to the public hearing, notice was hand delivered or mailed by first class postage prepaid U.S. mail to any federal agency, state, county, municipal government, school, service' district or other governmental or quasi-governmental agency that owns property within three hundred (300) feet of the property subject to the development application. The names and addresses of property owners shall be those on the current tax records of Pi[kin County as they appeared no more than sixty (60) days prior to the date of the public hearing. A cofly of the owners and governmental agencies so noticed is attached hereto. (continued on next page) Rezoning or text amendment, Whenever the official zoning district m~.p is in any way to be changed or amended incidental to or as part ora genera[ revision of this Title, or whenever the text of this Tide is to be amended, whether such revision be made by repeal of this Title and enactment of a new land use regulation, or otherwise, the requirement of an accurate survey map or other s0fficient legal description of, and the notice to and listing of names and addresses of o~vners of real property in the area of the proposed change shall be waived. However, the proposed zoning map has been available for public inspection in the planning agency during all business hours for fifteen (I 5) days prior to the public hearing on such amendments, The foregoing "Affidavit of Notice was acknowledged before me this .P day of "~2'-~r~ff~..~ ,200~_ by ~: LOTS 4^ A~OpUO~^~Am~'~AC~S SU~O~V S~O~ WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL ~men... be eligible for a590 sq Not=y COPY OF THE PUBLICATION PHOTOG~PH OF THE POSTED NOTICE fSIGN) LIST OF THE 0 ~ERS AND GO VE~MENTAL AGENCIES NOTICED B Y &~IL PUBLIC NOTICE RE: LOTS 4A AND 5 ALPINE ACRES SUBDIVISION SUBSTANTIAL PUD AMENDMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, February 19, 2002, at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m. before the Aspen Plarming and Zoning Commission, Sister Cities Meeting Room, City Hall, 130S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by Alan Becker requesting approval of a substantial PUD amendment to allow lot, 4A ~, Alpine Acres Subdivision, to be eligible for a 500 square foot Historic Preservation Floor Area Ratio Bonus pursuant to city land use code section 26.415.010(c)(5). The property is described as lot, 4A ~l~ Alpine Acres Subdivision. For further informatipn, contact James Lindt at the Aspen/Pitkin Commmfity Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO (970) 920-5095, iamesl~ci.aspen.co.us s/Jasmine Tygre, Chair Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times On February 2, 2002. City of Aspen Account ARCtlULETA KEITH ARCHULETA KEITH ASPEN BASE OPERATION INC 132.,~LE LN PO BOX 2755 69 E AIRPORT RD A~~. ~KO 81611 ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81611 BECKER Al,AN K BENTLEY CARL F BDYLE JOI IN R PO BOX 119 427 PARK CIR 121 MAPLE LN WOODY CREEK CO 81656 ASPEN CO 8161I ASPEN CO 81611 BREBNER RICHARD IIRIGI IT GALEN I/ROOKS VICKI I24 MAPLE LN PO BOX 1848 .328 COWPER ST #A ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81612 PALOALTO CA 94301-150t BUREK DEBORAH J CAIN JOHN J TRUST 170 BOX 812 C/O JOHN J CAIN (',ARSON BARBARA ASPEN CO 81612 620 FOUNTAIN AVE I:'O BOX 10298 REDLANDS CA 92373 ASPEN CO 81612 CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL COLORADO MOUNTAIN NEWS MEDIA COSTELLO STEPHANIE ANN 131) MAPLE LN 500 DOUBLE EAGLE CT 328 OAK. LN ASPEN CO 81611 WASHOE NV 89511 ASPEN CO 81611 C[/~,,~NGHAM CAITLYN E CUNNINGHAM .lAMES MURRAY CURTIS DEBRA 425 PARK CIR #Al PO BOX 9333 142 MAPLE LN ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81611 D'ARI A T DAVIS D STONE AND PO BOX 2178 RUSSELL LYNN C DAY ISABEL T & ESTER T ASPEN CO 81612 PO BOX 8904 120 TURTLE COVE ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81611-9610 DODARO CHRISTINE M & PETER W DUNAWAY WILLIAM R 1509 WOODLEA DR SW FARR TENA D EISENBERG NORTON AND JANET LEESBURG VA 20175 PO BOX E 407 PARK AVE gA ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81611 EPLER ANDI E FEINSTEIN JEROME D FAMILY TRUST FISHER CONSTANCE A PO BOX 785 120 SI'RING ISLE TRAIL 330 ANAYA RANcH RD ASPEN CO 81612 ALTAMONTESPRINGS FL 32714 GALISTEO NM 87540 F. JEBORAH FONTANA WILLIAM FUNK WILLIAM E 616 E HYMAN PO BOX 3313 123 MAPLE LN ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81611 GALLUCCIO VINCENT GIPE DONALD D GOODMAN RAYMI COATES ~X 8065 PO BOX 2032 F'O BOX 9671 ] CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81612 GRAHAM, BII.I. I IATANAKA HOWARD H 11ESSELSCI IWERDT MARK P BOX 1455 980 KING ST PO BOX 2522 ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81612 ,lANE TAYI.OR JOIIN CYNTB1A ELI,EN & KUSCHEL KAY HIGHT NElL C& SEWELL KATIIRYN 520 E CO()PER AVE LINDA S I IANEK FLOCKHART JEANNE & JOI INSON 231 COTTONWOOD LN ELIZABI~TH A ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 PO BOX 1413 ASPEN CO 81612 KELSO, DOUGLAS P. KERR RICHARD KERR~ RICHARD 134 MAPLE I,ANE 138 MAPLE LN 138 MAPLE LN ASPEN, CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN, CO 81611 KHALAF DALAL & RALPH KINKELAAP, EIIJ~;EN M KIRKWOOD .IUNE R 1050 MATCI ILESS DR 85 MI~ADOWOOI) #B I 318 ()AK I,N ASPEN CO 81611 CARBONDALE CO 81623-9214 ASPEN CO 81611 K~xtEBEL KATHLEEN KROMELOW BASIL M & LAUREANNE L LANG DONALD W PO BOX 910 55 W DELAWARE PL PO BOX 4166 ASPEN CO 81612 CHICAGO IL 60610 ASPEN CO 81612 I,EWIS I,ORA J IIOEBEF, I,INDENAII BEYRON R & SCOTT A LOEWEN. STERN CAROL REVOCABLE TRUST 935 GIBSON AVE 320 ()AK LN ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 910 GIBSON AVE ASPEN CO 81611 LUU TONG KHON MAGILL REBECCA N 60% IN3' MAPLE CHARLES A & BRYCE M 435 E MAIN ST MILLER THOMAS F 40% INT - .IT TENANTS 927 GIBSON AVE ASPEN CO 81611 227 COTTONWOOD LN ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 MC, CLUP, 17~ WILLIAM & R()XANNE MCCROSKEY PAMELA MEDINIS BEYRON 32. ()AK I,N 2260 S COOK 320 ()AK LN ASPEN CO 81611 DENVER CO 80210 ASPEN CO 81611 · CALF F MEAD MICKEY JAMES & MARLENE MILLER LEE L PO BOX 32 931 GIBSON AVE 11575 FOLSOM POINT ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81611 FRANKTOWN CO 80116 MILLER THOMAS F 40% MORK IIALBERT L FAMILY TRUST NARAT BENJAPORN  OTTONWOOD LN 77 ASPEN WAY ELAT 9 22 RED LION ST N CO 81611 ROLL!NG HILLS CA 90274 I,ONDON WCIR4PS UK NICHOI,S GARY T& [,UCINI)A C & NP.I I~AI¥1'NERS I,I,C PAl)DEN KEVIN J & NINA K KENNETI I E 57{I S RIVERSIDE AVE 224 CO'I'TONWOOD LN PO BOX 8116 ASPEN CO 816il ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO g1612 PATTERSON KAREN & CHARLES PATTERSON. KAREN REED AND PAUL1DES BROOKE A 129 MAPLE LN PATTERSON, CHARLES 129 MAPLE LANE PO BOX 11023 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN, CO 81611 PAULIDES HERBERT B & CAROLYN F PERKINS WENDY PETERSON ANNE BYARD ANNE PETERSON RICHARDS BYARD C/O 160 CONCORD RD PO BO~X 9825 LONGMEADOW MA 01106 ASPEN CO 81612 35 LOCUST MILL VALLEY CA 94941 PETERSON St IIRLEY 11 LIVING TRUST RI.:YNOI,I)S TI lOMAS S FISI IER MOR(iAN Iz. ICKI'iN BA (JG} I ANNE 1909 E RIVER PKWAY PO BOX '2342 22g COTTONWOOI) I,N MINNEAPOLIS MN 55414 ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81611 .. ~,JGIERI LISA ANN RYAN MARTHA SABATASSO MARY L FAMILY TRUST 136 MAPLE LN 127 MAPLE LN 64 OCEAN VIS ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 NEWPORT BEACH CA 92660-6224 SALTONSTALL ANDREW C SCIILUNDT SUSAN SINGER DAVID J B PO BOX 911(12 4 I- I' REE SILVER C I 4(19 PARK CIR #4 ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611-2478 SMALLS RAY SMISEK I,INDA L E SMITH KATHLEEN M PO BOX 3 I97 429 PARK CIR C-3 1023 WILLITS LN ASPEN CO 81612 ASPF, N CO 81611 BASALT CO 81621 SMUGGLER MOBILE HOMEOWNER'S SMUGGLER RACQUET CLUB SNOW ORCHID LLC ASSOCIATION C/O SUE COOK I36 MAPLE LN PO BOX 8788 1125 SAN MATEO DR ASPEN COSI611 ASPEN CO 81612 MENLO PARK CA 94025 ,~K KlM .IENNIFER TARBET JOSEPH R TAYLOR .lANE I'O BOX 9912 TARBET BARBARA P ItANEK LINDA S ASPEN CO 81612 980 GIBSON AVE 231 COTTONWOOD LN ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 TEUSCItER JONATHAN W TOLAND RAY VANHOY DONNA & JERRY' 126 MAPLE LN PO BOX 10478 323 OAK LN ~[EN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81612 ASPEN CO 81611 WALDRON K BRENT VON RENKL KALLEN COATES REID & WALDRON C/© WARMING SOLVEIG 221 CDTTONWOOD LN 720 E I-IYMAN AVE PO BOX 5177 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81611 ASPEN CO 81612 WIRTII JANET B ZIRBEL NANCY P O BOX 9525 PO BOX 8998 ASPEN CO 81612-9525 ASPEN CO 81612 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission THRU: Julie Ann Woods, CommUnity Development Director JoYce Ohlson, Deputy Director ~ FROM: James Lindt, Planner ~--'-[...~ RE: Alpine Acres Substantial PUD Amendment - Public Hearing DATE: February 19, 2002 APPLICANT/OWNER: Alan Becket, Owner of Lot 4A, Alpine Acres Subdivision/PUD; 950 Matchless Drive I~PRESENTATIVE: Alan Richman, Richman Planning Services LOCATION: Lots 4A, Alpine Acres Subdivision/PUD CURRENT ZONING: R-6 PUD PROPOSED LAND USE REQUEST: Amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development SUMMARY: The applicant requests an amen&nent to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the purpose of allowing Lot 4A of the Alpine Acres PUD to be eligible to be granted a $00 square foot FAR bonus from the Historic Preservation Commission if it is foUnd that a proposed project on this lot is "an outstanding preservation effort". The Alpine Acres PUD limits Lots 4A, 4B, and $ of the Aspen Alps Subdivision to 2,486 square feet o£ countable floor area per dwelling unit, which does not currently allow for the HPC to grant the property a Historic Preservation FAR Bonus. REVIEW PROCEDURE A substantial amendment to an approved Pla:reed Unit Development may be approved, approved with conditions, or denied by City Council at a public hearing after considering recommendations from the Community Development Director and the Planning and Zoning Commission pursuant to Section 26.445.100(B). STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant, Alan Becker, represented by Alan Richman, requests an amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the purpose of allowing lot 4A to be eligible to be granted a 500 square foot FAR bonus from the Historic Preservation Commission if it is found that a proposed historic renovation/addition project on this lot is "an outstanding preservation effort". The Alpine Acres PUD was approved in 1987 and restricted each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres to 2,486 square feet of countable floor area because of the narrow width of the 10tsl Lot 4A contains a historic landmarked single- family residence and an accessory dwelling unit. The lots regulated by the PUD are allowed to receive all of the exemptions that are normally granted under the current land use code. However, because the PUD limits the countable floor area ratio, currently the subject parcels are not eligible to receive a 500 square foot FAR bonus for an "outstanding preservation effort" that may be granted to other historic landmark designated properties pursuant to City Land Use Code Section 26.415, Development Involving the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures or Which Occurs In An "H," Historic Overlay District. Lots 4A, 4B, and 5 of the Alpine Acres Subdivision are the only properties that are within the Alpine Acres PUD and all of the owners of these lots have consented to allow the applicant apply for the PUD Amendment for his lot. Staff Analysis If Lot 4A were to be allowed to receive an HPC preservation bonus 0f500 square feet, then it would be allotted an allowable FAR of 2,986 square feet. At the tinge that the PUD was established, Lot 4A would have been allowed 3,795 square feet of FAR under the underlying R-6 (Medium-Density ReSidential) zoning regulations. Under the current R-6 (Medium- Density Residential) zoning regulations, Lot 4A would be allowed approximately 3,500 square feet of FAR. Thus, the allowable FAR on Lot 4A with the proposed 500 square foot bonus is currently about 15% less than if it did not have the PUD floor area restriction. Staff believes that even with the addition of a 500 square foot Historic Preservation FAR bonus, that lot 4A will still be proportionate in size and massing to the surrounding properties that are also zoned R-6 (Medium-Density Residential) or R~6 PUD. Also, the Historic Preservation Commission has reviewed the compatibility of the proposed addition to the Historic Structure on lot 4A and has determined that the site specific proposal qualifies for the 500 square foot FAR bonus for an "outstanding preservation project". The Historic Preservation Commission found that the massing and scale of the site specific proposal was also compatible for the lot. The applicant is proposing to amend Condition A of the Alpine Acres PUD (attached as Exhibit "C") as follows: A. Each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres shall be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2,486 square feet, plus any floor area bonus that might be awarded by the HPC to Lot 4A for an outstanding preservation effort for a historic landmark pursuant to Section 26.415 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. Staff feels that only allowing for lot 4A to be eligible for an historic preservation bonus would be compatible with the dimensional requirements on the surrounding parcels and recommends amending Condition A of the Alpine Acres PUD as follows: Staff feels that the aforementioned language is consistent with Aspen Area Community Plan Action Plan Priority number 31 that requires "staff to investigate ways to encourage the restoration and improvement of existing buildings", in that the amendment will allow the subject lot to take advantage of a preservation incentive that was not available at the 2 time the PUD was enacted. However, staff also feels that by limiting the eligibility of the bonus to Lot 4A that the compatibility of the massing and size of structures will be maintained within the Alpine Acres PUD. Staff recommends approval of the proposed amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development (pUD) for the PurpoSe of allowing for Lot 4A, Alpine Acres PUD, to be eligible for an HPC bonus pursuant to Land Use Code Section 261415. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Plarming and Zoning Commission approve the proposed resolution recommending that City Council approve a substantial amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the purpose of allowing each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres to be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2,486 square feet, plus any floor area bonus that might be awarded by the HPC to Lot 4A for an outstanding preservation effort for a historic landmark pursuant to Section 26.415 of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE PROPOSED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE): "I move to approve Resolution No. ~ Series of 2002, recommending that City Council approve the proposed amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development (PUD), Condition "A", for the purpose of allowing for each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres to be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2,486 square feet, plus any floor area bonus that might be awarded by the HPC to Lot 4A for an outstanding preservation effort for a historic landmark pursuant to Section 26.415 of the Aspen Land Use Code." ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings Exhibit B -- Application Exhibit C -- Ordinance No.35, Series 1987 approving Alpine Acres PUD Overlay Exhibit D -~ Vicinity Map ExmmT A ALPINE ACRES PUD AMENDMENT REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS A. General requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. 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 Staff finds that the proposed PUD Amendment is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan and the character of the surrounding land uses on Lot 4A in that even by allowing for the HPC FAR bonus on the subject lot, it will still be allowed a more restrictive FAR than can legally be constructed on the surrounding parcels which have an underlying zoning of R~6 (Medium-Density Residential). In order to receive an HPC FAR bonus, any proposed development to the historic structure on Lot 4A will have to meet the HPC's criteria to be deemed "an outstanding preservation effort". In achieving the bonus, HPC will review to make sure that the proposed development is compatible With the historic structure. An addition to the historic structure on Lot 4A will be exempt from the Growth Management Quota System because it involves the restoration or expansion of a single- family residence pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.470.070(A)(5). Staff finds the criterion to be met. 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: 4 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 aud 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, parMng, and historical resources. Staff Finding Staff finds that the proposed amendment on Lot 4A is consistent and compatible with the surrounding land uses and will allow for an allowable floor area ratio that is actually less restrictive than what the current underlying zoning allows for. If Lots 4A and 4B did not have a PUD overlay, they would be allotted an allowable FAR of approximately 3,500 square feet in the underlying R-6 (Medium Density Residential) Zone District. The proposed amendment would allow the single-family residence with an ADU on lot 4A to build out to a maximum floor area ratio of only 2,986 square feet, if the Historic Preservation Commission were to grant a bonus for an outstanding preservation effort on the lot. The result of the proposed amendment is that the floor area ratio allowed on lot 4A, with the proposed bonus, is still more than 500 square feet less than is allowed in the underlying zoning for lots of this size: Staff finds this criterion to be met. 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 Staff believes that the proposed amendment on Lot 4A would have an inconsequential impact on the scale and massing of the historic Structure because in order to gain the 500 square foot FAR bonus, the proposed project would have to be found to be outstanding preservation efforts by the Historic preservation Commission. In reviewing the proposed site-specific project on lot 4A, the Historic PreServation Commission has determined that it is an "outstanding preservation effort", and the Commission haS determined that the proposed scale and massing is appropriate for the lot. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the followmg constderattons: 5 a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non-residential land uses. b) The varying timeperiods 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 ciO2. Staff Finding Staff finds this set of criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 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 atih'ties 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 The proposed amendment does not reduce the maximum allowable density within the PUD. Staff finds this set of criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 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 ora PUD may be reduCed if.. a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground instability or the possibility of mudflow, 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 The proposed amendment does not reduce the maximum allowable density within the PUD. Staff finds this set of criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment, 6 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) Thesite'sphysicalcapabilitiescanaccommodateadditionaldensityand 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 There is no increase in density as part of this application. Staff finds this set o£criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 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. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. 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. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. 7 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties' 7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. Staff Finding Staff finds that the proposed amendment will not affect the site's access and that any significant man-made features will be preserved tlu'ough the Historic Preservation Commission's review o£a proposed development on Lot 4A. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 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 landscapeplan 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 pr°tecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. Staff Finding Staff finds this set of criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 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 matertals, and other attributes, whtch 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 In order to gain the 500 square foot FAR bonus that would be allotted by the proposed amendment, any site-specific development plan was reviewed by the HistOric Preservation Commission. In reviewing a site-specific development proposal for Lot 4A, the HPC found the scale and massing to be appropriate for the site. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 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 safe~ and generai 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. Zighting 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 The applicant must meet the outdoor lighting requirements set forth in the City of Aspen Lighting Ordinance. Staff finds that this criterion is required to be met by all development within the City of Aspen. 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, considert~g existing and proposed structures and natural landscape features of the property, provides visual regief 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 The proposed amendment does not affect the amount of required open space within the PUD. Stafffinds this set of criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. It. Utilities and Public facilities. The purpose of this standard ist° ensure the development does not impose an undue burden on the ' ' ~ .... City s infrastructure capabtlit~es and that the public does not tncur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequatepublic infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements areprovided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportlonately for the additional improvement. Staff Finding The public infrastructure is already in place. The lot subject to the proposed amendment contains an existing structure with existing services. Allowing this lot to be eligible to obtain a 500 square foot FAR bonus upon review by the Historic Preservation Commission will not put an undue burden on the on the City's infrastructure capabilities. Staff finds this criterion to be met. I. Access and Circulation. (Only standards l&2 apply to Minor PUD applications) The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is eaMly accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security 10 gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: L 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. 2. Theproposeddevelopment, vehicular accesspoints, andparking 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. 3. Areas of historic pedestrian or recreational trail use, improvements of, or connections to, the bicycle and pedestrian trail system, and adequate access to significant public lands and the rivers are provided through dedicated public trail easements and are proposed for appropriate improvements and maintenance. 4. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan and adopted specific plans regarding recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and transportation are proposed to be implemented in an appropriate manner. 5. Streets in the PUD which are proposed or recommended to be retained under private ownership provide appropriate dedication to public use to ensure appropriate public and emergency access. 6. Security gates, guard posts, or other entryway expressions for the PUD. or for lots within the PUD, are minimized to the extent practical. Staff Finding The proposed mnendment does not affect access to the PUD. Staff finds this set of criteria not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 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 pnblic or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individualphase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted final PUD developmentplan. The phasingplan 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. 2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. 11 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 ~o the respective impacts associated with the phase. Staff Finding There is no phasing proposed for the redevelopment of Lot 4A. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable to the proposed amendment. 12 RESOLUTION NO. SE ES or 2oo2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMENDINGTHAT CITY cOUNCIL APPROVE AN AMENDMENT TO THE ALPINE ACRES PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW FOR LOT 4A, ALPINE ACRF~S~'L~ UNiT DEVELOPMENT, TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR A 500 SQUARE FOOT HISTORIC PRESERVATION FLOOR AREA RATIO BONUS FOR AN OUTSTANDING PRESERVATION EFFORT, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from the Owner, Alan Becker_ represented by Alan Richman, for an amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow for lol 4A, Alpine Acres PUD. to be eligible for a 500 square foot historic preservation FAR bonus above and beyond the allowable FAR set forth in the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development: and. WHEREAS, pursuam to Sections 26.445, City Council may approve a substantial amendment to an approved Planned Unit Development. during a duly noticed public hearing, after considering comments from the general public, a recommendation from the Community Development Staff, a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, and recommendations from relevant referral agencies; WHEREAS, the Community Development Department reviewed the request for an amendment to the Alpine Acres PUD to allow for lot 4A to be eligible for a 500 square foot historic preservation FAR bonuses and recommends approval of the proposed amendment; 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 Department, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and considered public comment at a public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commissioia 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. WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on February 19, 2002, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended that City Council approve, by a to (_ - _) vote, a substantial amendment to the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development (PUD) for the purpose of allowing lot 4A to be eligible to receive 500 square foot historic preservation FAR bonuses pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.415; and. 13 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION as follows: Section 1 Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommends that City Council approve the proposed application to amend Condition A of the Alpine Acres Planned Unit Development to read as follows: A. Each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres shall be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2,486 square feet, plus any floor area bonus that might be awarded by the HPC to Lot 4A for an outstanding preservation effort for a historic landmark pursuant to Section 26.415 of the City o£Aspen Land Use Code. Section 2: 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 3: 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. Approved by the Commission at its regular meeting on February 19, 2002. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: City Attorney Jasmine Tygre, Chair ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 14 ATTACHMENT 1 ASPEN/PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT City of Aspen Development Application Fee Policy The City of Aspen, pursuant to Ordinance 57 (Series of 2000), has established a fee structure for the processing of land use applications. A flat fee or deposit is collected for land use applications based on the type of application submitted. Referral fees for other City departments reviewing the application will also be collected when necessary. One check including the deposit for Planning and referral agency fees must be submitted with each land use application, made payable to the Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Department. Applications will not be accepted for processing without the required application fee. A flat fee is collected by Community Development for Administrative Approvals which normally take a minimal and predictable amount of staff time to process. The fee is not refundable. A deposit is collected by Community Development when more extensive staff review is required, as hours are likely to vary substantially from one application to another. Actual staff time spent will be charged against the deposit. Several different staff members may charge their time spent on the case in addition to the case planner. Staff time is logged to the case and staff can provide a summary report of hours spent at the applicant's request. After the deposit has been expended, the applicant will be billed monthly based on actual staff hours. Applicants may accrue and be billed additional expenses for a planner's time spent on the case following any hearing or approvals, up until the applicant applies for a building permit. Current billings must be paid within 30 days or processing of the application will be suspended; If an applicant has previously failed to pay application fees as required, no new or additional applications will be accepted for processing until the outstanding fees are paid. In no case will Building Permits be issued until all costs associated with case processing have been paid. When the case planner determines that the case is completed (whether approved or not approved), the case is considered closed and any remaining balance from the deposit will be refunded to the applicant. Applications which require a deposit must include an Agreement for Payment of Development Application Fees. The Agreement fistablishes the applicant as being responsible for payment of all costs associated with processing the application. The Agreement must be signed by the party responsible for payment and submitted with the application and fee in order for a land use case to be opened. The current complete fee schedule for land use applications is listed on the reverse side. ASPEN/PITKIN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Agreement for Payment of City of Aspen Development Application Fees CITY OF ASPEN (hereinafter CITY) and (hereinafter APPLICANT) AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1. APPLICANT has submitted to CITY an application for (hereinafter, THE PROJECT). 2. APPLICANT understands and agrees that City of Aspen Ordinance No. 57 (Series of 2000) establishes a fee structure for Land Use applications and the payment 0fait Processing fees is a condition precedent to a determination of application completeness. 3. 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 ii iS in the interest Of the parties that APPLICANT make payment of an initial deposit and to thereafter permit additional costs t0be billed to APPLICANT on a monthly basis. APPLICANT agrees additional costs may accrue follbwing their hearings and/or apProva s. 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 ihcurred. CITY agrees it will be benefited through the greater certainty of 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 i0 the Planning Commission and/or City Council t° enable the planning Commission and/or City Council to 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 application completeness, APPLICANT shall pay an initial deposit in the amount of $_11/~" which is for ~ hours of Community Development staff time, and if actual recorded costs exceed the initial deposit; APPLICANT shall pay additional monthly billings to CITY to reimburse the C1TY tbr the processing of the applicati0h mentioned above, including post approval review at a rate of $205.00 per planner hour over the initial deposit, sUCh perlodiC Payments Shall be made wi{hin 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 costs associated with Case processing have been paid. CITY OF ASPEN APPLICANT JulieAnn Woods · . / Community Development Director Date: ~--(-~ 9 Mailing Address: g:~sa ppor t\forms\agrpayas.doc 1/I0/01