HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.council.regular.20050110
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
January 10, 2005
5:00 P.M.
I. ANNUAL MEETING - ASPEN PUBLIC FACILITIES
II. Call to Order
III. Roll Call
IV. Scheduled Public Appearances
a) Outstanding Employee Bonus Awards
b) GIS Presentation
V. Citizens Comments & Petitions (Time for any citizen to address Council on issues NOT on the
agenda. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes)
VI. Special Orders of the Day
a) Mayor and Councilmembers' Comments
b) City Manager's Comments
c) Board Reports
VII. Consent Calendar (These matters may be adopted together by a single motion)
a) Resolution #1, 2005 - Posting of Public Notices
b) Ski Company Special Event Sign Variance Request
c) Board Appointments
d) Minutes - November 30, December 13, 2004
VIII. First Reading of Ordinances
a) Ordinance #1,2005 - Little Ajax PUD P.H. 1/24
b) Ordinance #2, 2005 - Code Amendment - Seasonal Outdoor Food Vending P.H. 1/24
c) Ordinance #3, 2005 -1201 Riverside Drive Rezoning P.H. 2/14
d) Ordinance #4, 2005 - 701 West Main Street Historic Lot Split P.H. 2/14
e) Ordinance #5,2005 - Code Amendment - Commercial Design/Pedestrian Amenities P.H.
2/14
IX. Public Hearings
a) Ordinance #49, 2004 - Highlands Villas Annexation
b) Ordinance #37,2004 - Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Master Plan/SPA
c) Ordinance #39,2004 - Bar/X Annexation Continue to 2/14
d) Ordinance #40,2004 - AMCORD/AVL T Annexation Continue to 2/14
e) Ordinance #47,2004 - Bar/X Ranch Final PUD and Initial City Zoning Renotice for 1st
reading on 1/24
X. Action Items
a) Clarification on Adoption of Ordinance #35, 2004 - Code Amendment - TORs for ADUs
b) X Games Winter Concerts - Noise Variance
XI. Adjournment
Next Regular Meeting January 24. 2005
COUNCIL SCHEDULES A 15 MINUTE DINNER BREAK APPROXIMATELY 7 P.M.
APRES X CONCERTS TRANSPORTATION
I) Specific information about how the extra numbers of people that will come into town
because of the concerts will be accommodated.
How wiD buses leaving Buttermilk be identified?
All buses will be signed designating where they are going as well as announcements from
bus drivers as to where they will be staged after the concert. Bus placards will also
designate destinations.
How late will the buses run into town?
They will run into town untill 0:30.
Where will these buses drop off?
They will drop of right on Durant directly in front of Wagner Park.
Where will the buses go after their round trips into town from Buttermilk are over?
They will stage on Durant in front of Wagner until the conclusion of the concert. They
will server a dual purpose of sound mitigation and blocking rubbernecking from passing
cars.
2) Specific information about how the extra numbers of people that will need to go back
out of town after the concerts will be accommodated.
How will these buses be identified?
Signs will be on buses designating them as X Games buses. Drivers will announce where
they are headed before departing. Bus placards will also designate destinations. Signs will
be located along Durant for different destinations designating where each bus is headed.
Where will they go?
They will run to Buttermilk, Cozy Point and Snowmass Village. They will stop at the
RAFT A Buttermilk stop and at the Intercept Lot for Cozy Point
How late wiD they run out oftown?
They will run out of town from Wagner Park up until 30 minutes after the conclusion of
the concert or until everyone is accommodated. Those that stay in town to party past the
30 minutes after the concert will be serviced by RFTA going down valley or to the
Intercept lot and Snowmass Village on their normal service which has a fee.
APRES X CONCERTS
MITIAGTION FOR NEIGHBORING LODGES
Representatives of the Aspen Skiing Company and ESPN Winter X Games Nine met
with Stan Hajenga of the Mountain Chalet, Dale Paas of the Limelight Lodge and Scott
Kirkwood of The Prospector on January 4,2005 to inform the lodges of the plans for the
concerts and to discuss their concerns. Everyone agreed that the major impacts on these
lodges would be noise and loss of parking.
ASC and ESPN informed the lodge representatives that the volume of the music at the
edges of the park will be much lower than in the center of the crowd by tightly
controlling the sound dispersal area of the speakers to the center of the park. This will
allow the concert fans to fully experience the impact of the music while lowering the
decibel level outside the park. Everyone understands that the music will still be loud in
the surrounding areas but not as loud as it might have been in years past with older
technology. The fact that the music will only go until 11:30 pm was also appreciated.
The lodge representatives agreed to collaborate on an alternative event for any of their
guests that might want to be somewhere other than their rooms or at the park during the
concerts. ASC and ESPN will contribute appropriate items to the parties when the plan is
finalized.
Mitigation for the loss of parking on Monarch Street was addressed with the City of
Aspen Parking Department by ASC. It was agreed that all parking on Cooper Street
between Monarch and Aspen Street and on Monarch between Durant and Dean Streets
would be signed as permit parking only on January 28 and 29 from 6:00 pm until
midnight. Each of the three lodges named above will be given permits for their guests to
use in these areas. The City of Aspen Parking Department will not ticket or tow cars
parked in these locations that do not have the permits.
Mr. Paas, Mr. Hajenga and Mr. Kirkwood all expressed tremendous support for the
concerts in the park and for all of the events that the Aspen Skiing Company produces in
the core area. This collaboration between ASC, ESPN and the lodge properties is another
example of the outstanding spirit of community and cooperation that exists in Aspen.
APRES X CONCERT SERIES
JANUARY 28 AND 29, 2005
January 7, 2005
To Whom It May Concern:
Aspen Skiing Company will appear before the Aspen City Council on Monday, January 10, at 5 pm for final
approval of a requested Special Event permit by Aspen skiing Company and ESPN for two nights of concerts in
downtown Aspen.
This event will be another major step in establishing AspenlSnowmass as a cutting edge leader in resort
activities. While a concert can be held in many different locations such as conference centers, nightclubs,
stadiums or even on-mountain we want to showcase what is unique to our community, our one-of-a-kind
downtown core. Wagner Park will be turned into an exceptional spectator venue for the world to see.
The downtown location was chosen to create a synergy between the concert and Aspen Mountain and to bring
X Games activities into town. While ASC often hosts races/competitions on the mountains, we are now looking
to combine core action sporting events with nationally known music acts, to deliver the City of Aspen's
mindlbody/spirit message to an even wider audience. This unique concept will appeal to local residents,
visiting guests and their families, which is important to our future growth as a resort
Please refer to the following information and the attached map for an explanation of how the venue will be set
up and how it will operate.
Location
Wagner Park
Type of Event Free Concerts Over Two Nights
Setup 1/25 9am
Event Starts 1/28 9:30 pm
1/29 9:30pm
Event Ends 1/28 11 :30 pm
1/29 11:30 pm
Dismantle 1/30 9 am- 5 pm
2/1 9am-5pm
The concerts will be held on Friday and Saturday nights, January 28 and 29, 2005 from 9:30-11 :30 pm, as part
of the celebration for the Winter X Games Nine, and will be free and open to the public. Attendance each night
is estimated at 5,000 - 8,000. There will be an opening act that plays 15-20 minutes, a 15-20 minute
changeover followed by the main act playing for about 60-70 minutes.
The concert is free and open to the public of all ages
SITE PLAN - See Attached Map
-/
WAGNERPARK
A mobile 50' x 40' stage will be placed on Wagner Park at the North end. This stage is self contained within a
semi trailer. It takes about 3 hours to set up and take down. The stage deck is about 5' high and there is a load
bearing, hydraulic roof at about 30' high. The stage will play south towards Aspen Mountain. Behind the stage
will be one construction type trailer for band dressing room or production. Power will be drawn from the
existing power drop in the North East corner of the park.
The stage, trailers and other equipment will be placed in position on Jan. 25-27 beginning at 9 am. The tents
will be erected on Thursday, Jan. 27. The potties will be place in the park on Friday morning Jan. 28.
The stage, trailers, tents and potties will be removed from the park by the end of the day Feb.!.
The venue will include the entire park. On the West edge of the park along Monarch Street, about halfway back
will be a 40'x60' tent with a 1O'x60' patio area in front. This will be the sponsor tent. In the South West corner
of the park will be 10-15 port-a-potties. Along the South side of the park (Durant Street) will be a 20'x40' tent
for sponsor displays which may include cars and other sponsor equipment and displays within the tent. The
North wall of the tent will be a clear side wall. Next to that will be a 20'x20' tent for sale of band, X Game and
AspenSnowmass merchandise. The North wall of the tent will be a clear side wall.
Street and parking closures
Monarch St. between Hyman and Durant will be closed for parking from Jan. 26- Feb.!. All parking on
Cooper Street between Monarch and Aspen Street and on Monarch between Durant and Dean Streets will be
signed as permit parking only on January 28 and 29 from 6:00 pm until midnight. The east side of Monarch St.
will be used for event parking and storage
Securitv Plan
A security presence will be strong in and around the venue from I hour before the event until 1 hour after the
event. The majority of security will be provided by private security crews. Private security will number 25-50
persons and will be placed in the following areas:
Stage I Production Area - Continuous from the time stage and production equipment are in place
until it is removed.
Traffic barricades - From 8 pm until approximately 11 :30 pm.
Crowd barricades - From 8 pm until approximately 11 :30 pm.
Front of stage barricade - From 8 pm until approximately 11 :30 pm.
Medical Plan
An ALS ambulance will be on site to handle any medical incidents. It will be positioned at the corner of Mill
Street and Durant, across from McDonalds. It will act as both a frrst aid station and transport if needed. Staffing
will be two Paramedics and one EMT. The ambulance will be on site from 8:30 pm until Y:, hour after the
concert is over.
Accessibility Plan
There will be a clear path of travel from the end of the Cooper St. mall to the ADA viewing area. Existing City
of Aspen parking and RAFT A public transportation will provide other required services. There will two
disabled parking spots on Mill Street between the end of the Mill St. mall and Durant St. A minimum of 10% of
portable restrooms will be accessible?
Sanitation & Recycling Plan
Number of trash cans with lids: 30-50 open boxes lined with bags, no lids
Number of dumpsters with lids: 2 large dumpsters on Monarch where all trash will be collected
Number of recycling containers: 10-12 in the park and 1 dumpster on Monarch where all trash
will be collected
Sanitation Company: Wally's
Cardboard trash box containers lined with plastic trash bags will be placed about every 50 feet on Wagner Park.
These will be removed each night after the event
Portable Restrooms
Total number of portable toilets: 20-30
Number of ADA-accessible portable toilets: 2
Hand washing station: 2
Parking & Transportation Plan
Two crossing guards will be stationed at the cross walk on Durant Street and Mill. These guards will control
traffic to allow pedestrians to cross alternating with traffic flow through the intersection. The south end of the
park along Durant St., between Mill and Monarch will be fenced to discourage pedestrians from going into or
out of the park in the middle of the block. All advertising and event notices will encourage the use of alternative
transportation and announce the street and parking closures.
Noise
A noise variance until 11 :30 pm on Jan. 28 and 29, '05 has been requested. The arrangement of loud speakers or
the sound instruments will be such that it minimizes the disturbance to others resulting from the position or
orientation of the speakers. All reasonable measures will be taken to baffle or reduce noise impacts on the
neighbors. Event organizers have agreed to cooperate with the Police Department in addressing noise
complaints from neighbors.
APRES X CONCERTS TRANSPORTATION
1) Specific information about how the extra numbers of people that will come into town because of the concerts
will be accommodated.
How will buses leaving Buttermilk be identified?
All buses will be signed designating where they are going as well as announcements from bus drivers as to
where they will be staged after the concert. Bus placards will also designate destinations.
How late will the buses run into town?
They will run into town until 1 0:30.
Where will these buses drop off?
They will drop of right on Durant directly in front of Wagner Park.
Where will the buses go after their round trips into town from Buttermilk are over?
They will stage on Durant in front of Wagner until the conclusion of the concert. They will server a dual
purpose of sound mitigation and blocking rubbernecking from passing cars.
2) Specific information about how the extra numbers of people that will need to go back out of town after the
concerts will be accommodated.
How will these buses be identified?
Signs will be on buses designating them as X Games buses. Drivers will announce where they are headed
before depaning. Bus placards will also designate destinations. Signs will be located along Durant for different
destinations designating where each bus is headed.
Where will they go?
They will run to Buttermilk, Cozy Point and Snowmass Village. They will stop at the RAFT A Buttermilk stop
and at the Intercept Lot for Cozy Point
How late will they run out oftown?
They will run out of town from Wagner Park up until 30 minutes after the conclusion of the concert or until
everyone is accommodated. Those that stay in town to party past the 30 minutes after the concert will be
serviced by RFT A going down valley or to the Intercept lot and Snowmass Village on their normal service
which has a fee.
The impact of our event on the homeowners and businesses in this downtown area is of concern to us. If you
would like to talk to someone about any questions or issues please call Avalanche Productions at
544-2068 and leave a message with your name and number and we will call to discuss with you.
Thank you for your support,
John Rigney
Managing Director, Event Marketing
Aspen Skiing Company
r-
3'
~
CD
r-
8.
cc
CD
1---
1
t:
",I
:;1
~I
<<I
3;1
01
.:
1
I
I
I
L____
....
o
"'
![
~
o
o
3
'D
o
<:
"
"-
...
D'!
o
>0
< 0
m'D
. ~
r-
3'
m
;;;;
CD
r-
8.
cc
CD
......
11:
o
::l
ll)
Cl
::l'
f!l
'D
o~
01;:
"'D
g-~
.. g
",-<",Om
=::rScCl:m
iirrDC::~O::1
a.::I:"'mllll~
tJJ 6-cD ~ Ie
"
m
o
:;;
o
m
~... :
. :
:T._._....-..._..__..._..._...............'1~;
ID
\
\
'" \
I 0 \ m
\ 2m
: \ s. 5
..-'t...................................................\::..........~..i:;
I , tJJ 1
I ' i
I ',i
I ~
I 1'-
"'!!l
J'l l? Ol
~ ~cg
'"
OJ
'"
!!1
~
"!
~
> !>
0"0
o ill>
m :>;~ ts
.. OlD
is' ~
:::J Qoo
CD r
00(1)
){ ft-g
"',.."
,q :s
, ~
,
,
,
/
/
/
, /
.!~ /
.1' /
.-: ',/
~ ./
.1
t1
~ ~
.i .
; I~I 0 .
~..............._.........._............+~i._._..:..~._;:;..................-.... ......,i
----------------------~ -------
~~
s::o
......xa
"'.... 0
~gi
Ol~g
0..
" m
~
'9AV lUBJna
[] . ,! H 1j). . ~~~I 0 I I . I ,
~:" [J . . I !
;.. .
;.;. 0 "'ll . 1
G) m G) "'ll )> .
m CD ., 0 0 3 c: 0 ~ Dl -g s;e ~ . I
.
ll) :I (") D) = C" 3 ::1- c: ~ " 0 . I
~ ~ ;; lil !:. , . , ....
0 '0 .,
... l!l. , ;a, 0 :g iil lil I < CD
0 a 0 0 m g '<:-~co 0 en ~ ~ lD lQ
o "C (J) :3 CD "
- ~ - 0 iiI l!l. 0 ;:: CD -l 0 c: c: CD
i. ::l CD ""
:x: CD (j)" ll) :0- lD 0 CD CD lD :l
0 ::l lD "- lil ~ '<
m 0 iii' 0 CD -n <II C.
c: c. ,.. ;a. ::1- 0
m 0 ~ ;<' CD <::
CD C. 5' ll) ~ ::l "
- ~ :0- S" 0 "-
lD CD
'" 0 CD Ol
::l ::l ,.. ~ -<
-
'"
OJ
s::~ ~
~~
-
D 0
)(
-
q
~
-.;
en 1;'->
q ~
;::~
~~
..... ~
'" J tl-
w f -
0 il<
I ~
- N is
- 00
8 ~ "l:l "
.'" n
11 N ~ ::l.
0 [('
0
'" :I.
n
..
s::~
~~
>
",0
.,>
'D"
.. ..
o_
m'"
"
"'
~O
~~ ill
0" -<>
~!!.
0"
'D-
~
en
,...
-.r:
MEMORANDUM
To:
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Kathryn Koch, City Clerk
DATE:
January 3, 2005
RE:
Annual Meeting of the Aspen Public Facilities Authority
SUMMARY: The articles of incorporation of the Aspen Public Facilities Authority state
that the annual meeting shall be held in the second Monday in January.
BACKGROUND: The Aspen Public Facilities Authority is a "non-profit corporation
and an instrumentality of the City of Aspen for certain limited purposes".
The Board of Directors of the Authority is the members of the City Council, the City
Finance Director and the City Clerk. The officers at the last annual meeting were:
President
Vice President
Secretary
Asst. Secretary
Treasurer
Helen Klanderud
Terry Paulson
Kathryn Koch
Torre
Paul Menter
The By-Laws state the President shall be the Mayor of the City of Aspen. The Vice
President and Assistant Secretary shall be members ofthe City Council and shall hold
office so long as he or she remains a member of the City Council ofthe City of Aspen.
The Treasurer shall be the Finance Director of the City of Aspen. The by-laws also state
if the office of vice president or assistant secretary become vacant, the corporation shall
elect a successor from its membership at the next regular meeting, and such election shall
be for the unexpired term of said office.
The Public Facilities met in May in order to authorize refinancing of the certificate of
participation for the parking facility. Those minutes are also attached.
The Bylaws of the Authority require that an annual meeting be held on the second
Monday of January at 5:00 p.m. at the regular meeting place of the corporation. The
Bylaws state the following order of business for regular meetings:
1. Ro 11 call
2. Reading and approval of the minutes ofthe previous meeting (minutes of
January 12, and May 25,2004 attached)
3. Bill and Communications
4. Report of President
5. Unfinished business
6. New business
7. Adjournment
The Authority was formed to assist in financing the construction of the Parking Facility.
The Authority initially leased the ground for the parking facility from the City, owned the
facility and leased the ground and facility back to the City. All of the Authority's interest
in the Parking Facility leases and subleases related to the Parking Facility has been
assigned to a trustee.
In 1995 the Authority passed two resolutions; one which allowed the refinancing of the
parking garage bonds, and one which entered into a similar lease arrangement for Cozy
Point.
The Ground lease requires that the Authority "maintain its corporation existence, .. will
not dissolve or otherwise dispose of all or substantially all of its assets and will not
consolidate with or merge into another corporation..." during the term of the ground
lease.
Rel!ular Meetinl!
Aspen City Council
J anuarv 12. 2004
ASPEN PUBLIC FACILITIES MEETING
President Klanderud called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. with members
Paulson, Torre, Semrau, Richards, Menter and Koch present.
Paulson moved to approve the minutes of January 13,2003; seconded by
Semrau. All in favor, motion carried.
Semrau moved to nominate Torre for Assistant Secretary; seconded by
Paulson. All in favor, motion carried.
The officers are:
President
Vice President
Secretary
Asst. Secretary
Treasurer
Helen Klanderud
Terry Paulson
Kathryn Koch
Torre
Paul Menter
There were no communications or other business.
Torre moved to adjourn at 5: 10 p.m.; seconded by Paulson. All in favor,
motion carried.
COUNCIL MEETING
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION
1. David Laughren, Avalanche Productions, requested Council add to
their agenda a discussion of street closures for a live band performance put
on by the Aspen Skiing Company in conjunction with Railvolution. Council
added this to the agenda as the first action item.
2. Toni Kronberg thanked Mayor Klanderud and Councilman Semrau
for quick action when the parking became unbearable at the ARC. They
asked the parking department to monitor the lot on weekends. It has become
much more manageable. Ms. Kronberg said she hopes there are plans to tell
people when the lot is full and where alternative parking is located. Ms.
Kronberg said the ARC advisory group has a lot of ideas similar to hers.
The advisory group has asked for a business plan study to be done so when
the plan is completed, they can prioritize and move forward with plans for
2
Relwlar Meetinl!
Aspen City Council
Mav 25, 2004
ASPEN PUBLIC FACILITIES MEETING
President Helen Klanderud called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. with
members Richards, Torre, Semrau, Paulson, and Menter present. Koch was
excused. .
Christine Lay, Kutak Rock, told Council this resolution authorizes the
refmancing of certificates of participation. The original fmancing for the
parking facility was issued in 1989, andrefinanced in 1995. This transaction
will refinance the 1995 certificates. The financing structure is such that the
properties owned by the city Win be leased to the public facility authority
and the authority leases the property back to the city. The city makes lease
payments, which are accumulated by a trustee and used to make payments
on the COPs. There is a ground lease where the city leases the property to
the authority; the lease purchase agreement where the city makes the lease
payment. These payments are subject to annual appropriation. There is a
mortgage on the property. Ms. Lay went over all the documents necessary
including approving Menter as the treasurer of the corporation. When the
underwriter gets the best possible price, Menter can approve or disapprove
that and execute the documents. Menter told Council interest rates have
gone up in the last 6 months, which is eroding the savings from this
refunding. Menter said he would like permission to move forward if there
are savmgs.
Richards moved to approve the resolution for the Aspen Public Facilities
Board for the certificates of participation; seconded by Semrau. All in favor,
motion carried.
Semrau moved to adjourn at 5:15 p.m.; seconded by Paulson. All in favor,
motion carried.
ASPEN CITY COUNCtL MEEtING
Mayor Klanderud called the meeting to order at 5:15 withCouncilmembers
Paulson, Semrau, Torre and Richards present.
PROCLAMA TION- Month of the Young Child
Mayor Klanderud and Council proclaimed Mayas the Month of the Young
Child, extended thanks and appreciation to all who care for the youngest
2
\V~
Congratulatiol):S Walter, you have received this award per the Cities Review Committee.
You most assuredly deserve.there~og"ition and. any award that comes withthaL Thanks
for all you have done for the schools, it is noticed by all out here and very appreciated.
Respectfully,
Brad Onsgard
Aspen Police Department
Aspen School District SRO
To the Bonus Award Review Committee,
Nov.4th, 2004
This letter is to nominate Walter Chi with the Aspen Police Department, for an
Outstanding Employee Award. There are many reasons Walter should be picked for this
award. Many of which are not listed here, but that are a part of the day-to-day workings
of the Aspen Police Department.
My reason for nominating Walter is his new assigned duties for this 2004-2005 school
year. Walter was assigned as the 2nd School Resource Officer for the Aspen School
District this year. As thefirstSRO and assigned SRO for the district 1 am working very
closely with Walter during this school year and am aware of his efforts and duties.
1 believe the reasons for this nomination, which I outline in the remaining part of the
letter, exceeds expectations in the areas of Teamwork, Customer Service, Work Ethic,
CommunicatiQll and especially Safety.
In all of the various projects that 1 mention in this letter, Walter has worked diligently to
include all those people necessary to complete these tasks and informed school officials
of any change~ ):hat may affect things at school prior to implementing such projects. This
1 believe exemp]ifi... Teamwork.and.Commllni~"tion at its. highest. level. In this position
we must include principals, superintendents, teachers, parents, other law enforcement
personnel and supervisory staff as well as the {}ther agencies that may be involved in
some of these Jf.arious projects. All of these people must be on board and understand what
we are trying tp-"~~omp]i.hbefore.we.can move forward. This he has accomplished on
these projects mentioned.
All of these prpjects Walter has started or completed, embody the main principles of law
enforcement and.that.is. Safety. He has exhibited a keen eye for things necessary to bring
improved safety to many areas ofthe school system and the daily routines involved
therein. This he has done using the values imbued in our daily work ethic. He has worked
on these proje~s with honesty, integrity and professionalism and when these projects
have involved fiscaL e"ppnrlitllres,. I believe he has looked for.the most. efficient ways to
accomplish the task at hand. One such example might be the improved surveillance at the
schools. This project is just beginning, but! can tell he is closely looking at the most
efficient way to accomplish this ifthere is supervisory approval from the others involved
and this moves forward.
When you make some of the changes and improvements here listed, you can't help but
affect hundreds. of peopl". But when the work you do helps the majority by making things
more efficient, safer etc., that is what I would look for and would call Customer Service.
Apart from our regular duties, these many things outlined below, Walter has taken on
under his own in;ti~tive.. These projects have and. will further the safety and security of
the 1500 plus students and 200 plus faculty members at the Aspen School District.
When Walter first started this year he had many questions about what to expect. 1
explained to him-that this is a job that greatly entails being watchful and looking for
things that we can accomplish to improve safety issues as well as traffic flow, crime
reduction and education for all the people at the schools. He took this advise to heart and
has been developing new programs and solutions for areas of concern on an almost daily
basis. Below aj:e some examples of the programs. he either has initiated or already put into
place in just 2 short months.
First and foreIppst, he convinced the schools to install the visitor pass system which
identifies all v~rs at the schools. with a. visible badge and a sign in for those parents or
visitors stopping by the school for any number of reasons. This provides immediate ill of
anyone on campus that we may not know as a teacher or staff member, providing greater
safety to the children as well as a log for the schools of all who volunteer as well as who
may be on caQ)pUs in case of a fire or other evacuation type emergency.
Next, he made improvements to the school's parking pass program for students and
faculty to ill all cars park-edatthe schools. This in turn would provide us with an idea of
any cars that n;lllybe do not belong at the schools, or helped us to identify ways to have
specific group~ park in specific assigned areas. This along with a set of warning tickets
that also reminded visitors to get their visitor permits, helped to resolve some ofthe
parking issues that occur on a daily basis.
One other problem we are faced with everyday is the large amounts of parents that drive
.their kids. to.school causing traffic snarls at the. beginning and end of-each. day. He began
by using the parent newsletter as a way to encourage the use of the school buses. When
that didn't produce the results we needed he has now connected with Lynn Rumbaugh
and TOPS, to JNrite a grant to provide incentives to parents and students to both car pool
and at least try riding the bus. He has also looked into adding additional school bus routes
where necessary to accommodate those people who feel the current bus stops do not meet
their needs.
Last year, 1 set up an at school finger printing program that was carried out by the Pitkin
County Jail Staff. This year Walter took that on to speed up the.fingerprinting of the
many parent voltmteers, teachers and anyone else associated with the schools. This
provided a very fast and convenient way for many of these folks to get fingerprinted
without having to rely on the sporadic schedule of the Jail.
He also spearheaded outfitting each patrol car with access openers to the school gates to
provide acces~ to police cars in case of an emergency requiring multiple agency response.
The latest project he has taken on is seeing if we can find a way to get students to be
trained at the Bridgestone Ice and Snow driving school that takes place at Steamboat
Springs each winter. This would be provided for students who drive and whose parents
feel it would ~ valuable. for their child to have this extra knowledge for safer winter
driving. .
He has also met with the Aspen Parks Department to set up signage and a possible
change of route for those adults who bike through the school district at sometime high
speeds, creating a safety issue for the kids on campus. This should be completed by
spring, 2005. Just in time for the biking season.
Another project he took on was the Safe Schools Training provided by the Attorney
Generals Office.. He_vohmt~ered to fly staffmernbers in his own plane, to the training, to
get as many school members to go as possible. Along with attending that training is the
requirement of setting -up the program. He has undertaken that project as well. Part of this
program entails a new state system called Safe To Tell. This program will take a little
work to put intp place, but once it is in place, with Walters's help and guidance, we will
have a program that can significantly reduce bullying or other safety concerns in the
schools.
And finally, but maybe just the beginning, but due to his vast knowledge in the area of
computers and sofb~aTe,. he is looking into improved surveillance on campus to provide
for an even safer educational experience at our schools.
Some of these projects I will assist with and offer my help, but for the most part he has
taken these thipgs-on.as he became aware of the need for these improvements. Also in his
first two months here he has become a much loved and trusted figure to all the students
and faculty. To accomplish this alone in that amount of time, is truly a feat in itself This
alone speaks to his character, bis outgoing nature and a person one knows they always
can turn to for ,help with almost any request.
His addition to the School Resource Officer Program has added immensely to all facets
of what we do each day to provide for a safe environment and the best educational
experience for the children and parents in our community.
After I closely reviewed the examples of bonus award criteria, I believe that Walter Chi's
work here covers most of those examples, and maybe some additional ones not
mentioned. I am very happy and proud to nominate Walter for this award and am
available. for any questions or additional information needed to bring him this much-
deserved recognition.
Respectfully Submitted,
Brad Onsgard SRO for APD and ASD
Joanne Ihrig, 03:27 PM 12/2/2004, Recommendation for Walter Chi
Page I of I
Received: from babel.cLaspen.co.us (babel.cLaspen.co.us [205.170.51.225])
by commons.cLaspen.co.us (8.8.8+Sun/8.8.8) with ESMTP id PAAI2465
for <randyr@commons.ci.aspen.co.us>; Thu, 2 Dec 2004 15:27:06 -0700 (MST)
Received: from pOOml73 .mxlogic.net (pOOm 173 .mxlogic.net [66.179.109.173])
by babel.ci.aspen.co.us (8.12.10/8.12.10) with SMTP id iB2MR5N5011677
for <randyr@ci.aspen.co.us>; Thu, 2 Dec 200415:27:05 -0700 (MST)
Received: from unknown [129.19.62.2] (EHLO IASPENEXCHANGE.admin.aspen.1ocal)
by pOOmI73.mxlogic.net (mxl_mta-2.5.0-54)
with ESMTP id 9b69faI4.208076.10997.pOOmI73.mxlogic.net (envelope-from <jihrig@aspenkI2.net>);
Thu, 02 Dec 200415:27:05 -0700 (MST)
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="= _reb-rI9361759-t4IAF96BA"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.6944.0
Subject: Recommendation for Walter Chi
Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2004 15:27:05 -0700
Message-lD: <C620 184A 7F89B54 7B863 E4 7E3 DCD4B3466C3 5 8@IASPENEXCHANGE.admin.aspen.local>
Thread-Topic: Recommendation for Walter Chi
Thread-Index: AcTYvg04DNRd2jubTDCWC3rgjVFK6Q==
From: "Joanne Ihrig" <jihrig@aspenkI2.net>
To: <Randyr@ci.aspen.co.us>
X-Processed-By: Rebuild v1.50-1
X-Spam: [F~0.0001020200; B=0.500(0); HS=0.500(900); S=O.OIO; MH=0.500(2004120210); R=0.010(s2/n932)]
X-MAIL-FROM: <jihrig@aspenkI2.net>
X-SOURCE-IP: [129.19.62.2]
X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information
X-MaiIScanner: Found to be clean
I want to add my support to the nomination of Walter Chi for a City of Aspen Award for his work here in the school district.
Although I have not directly worked with Walter. I have seen and heard the results of his contributions to our district. He's not
one to sit back and do nothing. In the short time he has been here, he has implemented an incredible number of positive
things. Some of those things are:
. Trying to find solutions to the traffic and parking problems on campus
. Helping to re-direct bikers around the school so they don't zoom through when kids are walking
. Directing visitors to the main offices of the schools so they can check in for identification
. Trying to encourage students (and parents) to ride school buses for greater safety
. Implementing the "Safe School Initiative" at the middle school as well as "Safe to Tell"
. Working directly with kids to help them understand how to stay out of trouble.
All in all. Walter is just a great guy. He has a smile wherever he goes, and he is affable and happy. and a great representative
ofthe police department. We LIKE himlll!
Sincerely,
Joanne S. Ihrig. Ph.O.
Superintendent
970-925-3760 x 4005
Printpn for RHnnv Readv <randvrla.l.ci.asoen.co.us>
1/4/2005
\Va,
.
THE CITY OF ASPEN
January 3, 2005
Dear Wheeler Opera House Staff Members (Nida Tautvydas, Jeanne Broussard, Scot
Burckhardt, Martha Horan, Jeanne Kayne, Jennica Lundin, Stephanie Sommers, Brett
Spradlin, Andrew Donnelly, Tony Kirk, Ned Sullivan, Cody Lyon, Neil Jung, Steve
Skinner, Taylor Vories):
CONGRATULATIONS! It is my pleasure to inform you that you have been selected
to receive a City of Aspen Outstanding Employee Award for the third quarter of 2004.
Please plan to attend the January 10, 2005 City Council meeting to formally receive your
award.
This award is primarily based on your exemplary work, dedication, creativity and
community-minded spirit in the development and presentation of the Wheeler Opera
House Halloween Carnival and Haunted House.
This project was very complex and involved a greater degree of planning and follow-
through than most events at the Wheeler.' Although the Wheeler Halloween Carnival and
Haunted House began as Nida's idea to create a free event for Halloween that would
enhance the spirit of the community and give families a fun event to celebrate Halloween,
it very quickly became a tremendous group effort. Our committee developed the idea of
the movies, carnival games, and the haunted house, and made all the pieces come
together. This project involved a great commitment from the staff from beginning to end,
and included: concept and design development, construction and decoration, marketing,
event logistics, performances, etc.
The success of the Halloween event was the direct result of vision, planning, effective
artistic and technical skills, professional experience, teamwork, and communication of all
Wheeler staff involved. This was a true team effort that involved months of preparation
and a staff utilizing all of their special talents and skills. Throughout the process the staff
consistently embodied the City's core values of communication, teamwork, safety,
customer service and work ethic. They managed their already heavy workloads while
devoting significant amounts of time to this demanding project. Each member of the team
acted to support each other and worked to benefit the community through creative
programming.
Additionally, the day of the event other Wheeler and City staff members participated as
costumed characters. (Rebecca Doane. - Witch, Stephen Kanipe - Spam, Paul Kulik -
Mummy, Erich Grueter - Grim Reaper, Doug MacDonald - the Candy Man, Marge
130 SOUTH GALENA STREET . ASPEN, COLORADO 81611-1975 . PHONE 970.920.5000. FAX 970.920.5197
www.aspengov.com
Printed on Recycled Paper
MacDonald - Lolli the Clown, Denise Lock - the Merry Widow, Steve Skinner - the
Mad Scientist, Valerie Braun - the Cow, Tara O'Bradovich - Decaying Person, Justine
Keough - Big Chicken, Erin Hutchings - Gorilla, Polly Ross - Devil with a Blue Dress
On, Barbara Young - Ballerina Bartender, Brett Spradlin - Scary Tree, Taylor V ories-
Latex Operator). Other staff helped with last minute decorations and clean up (Maria
Marquez, Ira Halim, Evvie Condit, Tim Bauer) It was great to see the enthusiasm brought
to the event by these additional staff members. They really got into the spirit ofthings!
725 people attended the event with 367 intrepid souls venturing into the haunted house.
This free event was great entertainment, fostered a sense of community, and put the City
in a positive light. The Wheeler has received many thanks and lots of positive feedback
from the community about this event. With the overwhelming success this first year, staff
now plans to include this event as an lmnual Community Series program.
In addition to the Halloween event that initially earned you this Outstanding Employee
Bonus A ward, two more recent happenings are worthy of note and congratulations. On
December 5 in the early afternoon the sprinkler system alarm went off due to a pipe
bursting on the top floor. In a matter of a couple of minutes the water was shut off. Staff
members on duty that afternoon were busy preparing for a major Aspen Wilderness.
Workshop benefit presentation that evening. Due to the quick response from everyone,
damage to the building was minimized. What should have taken several hours to assess
and manage in conjunction with a live performance, took only two and a half hours to
control and correct. The "show went on" as scheduled due to the heroic efforts and
teamwork of the Wheeler staff. Aspen Wilderness Workshop was very appreciative of
the time and energy put in to make their event happen smoothly and successfully.
Finally, the annual Wheeler Holiday Open House in December has become a cherished
tradition during Aspen's holiday season. This year the 5th Annual Open House was a
huge success, as the Wheeler hosted over 460 guests who enjoyed the free holiday-
oriented entertainment, refreshments, cookie decorating and a visit from Santa. The
community appreciates all the hard work and creativity that the Wheeler staff members
put into the Open House each year.
Again, congratulations on behalf of the City Manager's Office and everyone in the
community who attended any of the wonderful events that you made happen this fall.
Thank you! It is a pleasure to work with you, and the City is proud to recognize you with
this bonus award.
Sincerely,
~#
Randy L. Ready
Asst. City Manager
v \\ a-,
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Kathryn Koch, City Clerk
DATE:
January 3,2005
RE:
Meetings
Resolution Designating the Public Place for the Posting of Notices of Public
Pursuant to 1991 legislative amendments to the Colorado Open Meeting Law as Section
24-6-402(2)( c), City Council is to annually designate at its first meeting for each calendar year a
public place for the posting of notices for meeting. By properly designating a place for posting
meeting notices, a public entity will be deemed to have given full and timely notice of any
meeting so long as notice thereof was posted as the designated place at least twenty-four hours in
advance thereof. Posting notices as the designated place will also suffice for municipal boards
and commissions.
Attached is Resolution #1, Series of2005, which identifies the glass case in the first floor
lobby of City Hall as the designated place for posting of meeting notices. Approval of the
consent calendar will adopt this resolution.
RESOLUTION #1
Series of 2005
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO,
DESIGNATING THE PUBLIC PLACE FOR POSTING NOTICES OF PUBLIC MEETINGS.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado, deems it in the public
interest to provide full and timely notice of all of its meetings; and
WHEREAS, the Colorado state legislature amended the Colorado Open Meetings Laws,
Section 24-6-401, et seq., C.R.S. to require all "local public bodies" subject to the requirements
of the law to annually designate at the local public body's first regular meeting of each calendar
year, the place for posting notices of public hearings no less than twenty-four hours prior to the
holding of the meeting; and
WHEREAS, "local public body" is defined by Section 24-6-402 (l)(a) to include "any
board, committee, commission, authority, or other advisory, policy-making, rule-making, or
formally constituted body of any political subdivision of the state and any public or private entity
to which a political subdivision, or an official thereof, has delegated a governmental decision-
making function but does not include persons on the administrative staff ofthe local public
body".
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN, COLORADO, THAT:
Section I
A public notice of each meeting held by the City Council of the City of Aspen and each
meeting of any other board, committee, commission, authority, or other advisory, policy-making,
rule-making, or formally constituted body of the City of Aspen, shall be posted by the City Clerk
at least twenty-four hours prior to the holding of the meeting in the enclosed glass case in the
lobby of City Hall, 130 South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado.
Section 2
The City Clerk shall notify each board, committee, commission, authority, or other
advisory, policy-making, rule-making, or formally constituted body of the City of Aspen of the
contents ofthis resolution and the other general requirements of the Colorado Open Meetings
Law, C.R.S., Section 24-6-401, et seq.
Dated: ,2005.
Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor
I, Kathryn S. Koch, duly appointed and acting City Clerk do certifY that the foregoing is a
true and accurate copy of that resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Aspen,
Colorado, at a meeting held January 10,2005.
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
MEMORANDUM
V\\ b
TO:
Mayor and City Council
THRU:
Chris Bendon, Community Development Director
. SO
Sarah Oates, Zomng Officer
FROM:
DATE:
January 10,2005
SUBJECT:
Exceptions from the City of Aspen Sign Code for the 2005 X-Games
The Aspen Skiing Company is requesting two exceptions in Gondola Plaza in
conjunction with X-Games events. The first inflatable is a Budwiser inflatable with TV
screens. Council and staff have approved this inflatable in the past in conjunction with
other Aspen Skiing Company events and Zoning staff has not received any complaints
with regards to this inflatable. The proposed location for this inflatable is near the
sidewalk on the North of Nell side of the plaza.
The second is for a Nintendo truck and trailer gaming system that proposed to be located
on the Little Nell side of the gondola plaza and will contain Nintendo games for the
public to use. This inflatable is proposed to be located in the Gondola Plaza for the
duration of the X-Games.
As part of the Special Events Committee approval, the Aspen Skiing Company is
required to do the following with regards to the inflatables if approved by Council:
1. Keep at least a five (5) foot travel lane on the sidewalk adjacent to Gondola
Plaza.
2. Keep the area that is a loading zone only at the Little Nell free and clear of
vehicles.
Staff does have concerns that these inflatables may encourage other sponsors of the X-
Games to place inflatables around town but we have successfully worked with the
organizers in the past to discourage unapproved banners and inflatables in town.
Further, staff believes requests such as these will become more frequent for other special
events. As part of the sign code revisions staff is developing standards to deal with these
requests. The Planning and Zoning Commission is reviewing the proposed sign code
amendments on January 18, 2005.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of two inflatables in the
Gondola Plaza as part of the X-Game activities.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: ~.;' -<n.<~~ , _~S\
~
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve two inflatables to be located in the
Gondola Plaza as part of the 2005 X-Games."
.'
'iU'III~ICiUIR I,.. ~118111Rn1Jtlblfl
Dynamic Impact Day AND Night!
Enjoy the Presence Power ollhe BP-3
Increase Budweiser awareness and visiblily at local events with the
lraffic-stoppingpresence of the BP-3. It's perfect for Music Events,
Sporting Events, Festivals, Street Parties and any other place where
Budweiser consumers can be found. The BP-3 can be purchased
or rented with or without projection equipment.
During Ihe Day. . .
. The BP-3 commands a presence from multiple angles.
. On each side, 7' X 9' changeable banners can be customized
for your specific event.
. The inflatable can also become a customer contact kiosk by
converting one side into a multi-purpose information booth.
And at Night. . .
. The BP-3 transforms into an illuminated
messaging presence with video projection
configuration sure to attract attention.
. Video is projected from inside the tower
onto the 7' x 9' screen mounted on one
side of the inflatable.
Note: It ls~wholtl$alel'$relipcinsI~,tq:OI1~,~!m.PP",*_
those persons"11kene6$8SOfto play~'~~~:!Ill.lSIci\idec)Sor~"
video projection $CRlE!n. *AddIUonaIIy, no ~:commerol8 '
thevideoprojectJonscreenwithoutprlorAnheuser~~I.
VI\ c
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
Kathryn Koch, City Clerk
DATE:
January 6, 2005
RE:
Board Appointments
By adopting the consent calendar, Council is making the following
appointment:
Wheeler Opera House
CCLC
Jim Berdahl - Music Representative
Terry Butler
Shae Singer
Don Sheeley
Stan Hagenga
Brian Speck, alternate
Michael Hoffman
Jeff Wertz
P&Z
HPC
LLA
We will reschedule interviews with Board of Adjustment applicants when
Council gives us a date.
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
VI" ~
MEMORANDUM
Mayor Klanderud and City Council 11' A I A 1\
Chris Bendon, Community Development Directol/'VW V I
James Lindt, Planner -:,\1.---
1st Reading of Ordinance No. L, Series of 2005, Little Ajax
Affordable Housing Project- Rezoning, Consolidated Conceptual!
Final PUD, Subdivision, Subdivision Exemption for a Lot Line
Adjustment, Condominiumization, Residential Design Standard
Variances, and GMQS Exemptions for Affordable Housing
January 10, 2005
PROJECT: LITTLE AJAXAFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECT
REQUEST: The Applicants are requesting the appropriate land use approvals to
construct a 100% affordable housing project at the base of Shadow
Mountain on the sonth side ofW. Hopkins Avenue. The project is
proposed to contain sixteen (16) for-sale deed-restricted affordable
housing units.
EXISTING ZONING: R-15' (Moderate-Density Residential)
PROPOSED ZONING: Affordable Housing PUD (AH-PUD)
LAND USE Rezoning, Consolidated Conceptual! Final PUD, Subdivision,
REQUESTS: Subdivision Exemption for a Lot Line Adjustment,
Condominiumization (plat to be handled administratively after review
of other requested actions), Residential Design Standard Variances,
and GMQS Exemntions for Affordable Housinl!
STAFF Staff recommends approval upon first reading of the attached
RECOMMENDATION: ordinance.
PLANNING AND The Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation will be
ZONING COMMISSION included in the 2nd reading memorandum and will be presented at the
RECOMMENDA TION: January 24th public hearing.
SUMMARY OF REQUEST AND BACKGROUND:
The Applicants, Burton Kaplan and Peter Gluck, are requesting the appropriate land use
approvals to construct a 100% affordable housing project consisting of sixteen (16) deed-
restricted, for-sale units on several parcels of land (Lots I and 2 of the Little Ajax
Subdivision) containing a total of 26,596 square feet, located on the south side of W.
Hopkins A venue at the base of Shadow Mountain. The Applicants have proposed fifteen
(15) Category 4, three-bedroom units and one two-bedroom unit. Of the sixteen (16)
- I -
units proposed, five (5) of the units are proposed as flats and the remainder are two-floor
townhouse units.
The proposed development consists of one three-story building that is configured in a u-
shape. On the first level of the building, tuck-under parking is proposed along with two
(2) of the affordable housing units and the trash facilities for the building. On the second
floor, the Applicants have proposed three (3) of the single-floor flat units and the first
floor of the eleven (II) townhouse units. The third and final floor consists of the upper
floor to all of the townhouse units. In total, the building is proposed at an FAR of .94: I
and at a height of thirty-five (35) feet tall.
LAND USE ACTIONS REQUESTED:
The Applicants are requesting the following land use actions to construct the proposed
affordable housing project on W. Hopkins Avenue:
. Rezoning to AH/PUD Zone District
. Consolidated Conceptual/Final PUD
. Subdivision
. Subdivision Exemption for a Lot Line Adjustment
. Special Review to establish the AH Parking Requirements
. Variances from the Residential Design Standards
. GMQS Exemptions for the development of Affordable Housing
The Applicants have requested that the Community Development Director combine the
review of the aforementioned land use requests pursuant to Land Use Code Section
26.304.060(B)(1), Combined Reviews. Staff believes that the combination of reviews
will reduce duplication in the amount of review time and will ensure the clarity of the
final decision. Therefore, the Community Development Director has consented to allow
for the consolidation of reviews on this particular proposal. Thus, City Council will be
the final decision-making authority on all of the land use requests associated with this
proposal after considering recommendations from the Housing Authority, Aspen/Pitkin
County Housing Board, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and the Community
Development Director.
- 2 -
SITE DESCRIPTION:
The site is located on the south side ofW. Hopkins Avenue and contains three (3) vacant
parcels known as the Little Ajax Subdivision as can be seen on the site plan below:
In conjunction with the PUD portion of this application, Lots I and 2 of the Little Ajax
Subdivision are to be merged into one parcel by means of a subdivision exemption for a
lot line adjustment in order to construct the proposed affordable housing development.
The City is currently exercising an option established in the pre-annexation agreement
that was executed to purchase a conservation easement on Lot 3 ofthe subdivision, which
is located further up Shadow Mountain to the south of Lots I and 2. The pre-annexation
agreement specifically established that the City has the option to purchase a conservation
easement on Lot 3 within six months of recording the approved document for the original
subdivision. The City is currently pursuing the purchase of the conservation easement on
Lot 3 of the subdivision based on the purchase terms established in the pre-annexation
agreement.
PREVIOUS ApPROVALS:
Earlier this year, the Applicants received subdivision approval to create the three (3)
parcels of land known as the Little Ajax Subdivision. The subdivision approval
described above approved the construction of three (3) single-family residences on the
three (3) parcels and is memorialized in City Council Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2004.
However, prior to approval of the subdivision, the City and the Applicants entered into a
pre-annexation agreement that established that the Applicants would make application for
an affordable housing project on Lots I and 2 of the Subdivision prior to constructing any
of three (3) single-family units that were approved in Ordinance No. 21, Series of 2004.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT:
As was previously stated, the Applicants are requesting the ability to construct a sixteen
(16) unit affordable housing project.
- 3 -
.>-,,--,--_.~_...~.,._-, ._.....-..,~._^--.-.,-.-.--
The proposed dimensional requirements of the proposed development are as follows:
Dimensional Proposed AHlPUD Current R-lS Zone
Requirement Dimensional Zone District District
Requirements Reauirements Requirements
Minimum Lot Size 6,000 SF Established bv the PUD 15,000 SF
Minimum Lot area per 1,000 SF for every Established by the PUD No Minimum Lot Area
dwelling unit 2-bedroom Unit for Multi-Family
1,500 SF for every Buildings- Multi-Family
Buildings are not a
3-bedroom Unit pennitted use.
Minimum Lot Width 135 Feet Established by the PUD 75 Feet
Minimum Front Yard Ten (10) Feet Established by the PUD Twenty-five (25) Feet
(W. Hopkins Frontage)
Setback
Minimum Side Yard Five (5) Feet Established by the PUD Ten (10) Feet
Setback
Minimum Rear Yard Ten (10) Feet Established by the PUD Ten (10) Feet
Setback
Maximum Site 50% (13,050 Square Established by the PUD No Requirement
Coverage Feet of Structure)
Maximum Height 35 Feet Established by the PUD 25 Feet
Minimum Percent Open 28% of Lots I and 2 Established by the PUD No Requirement
Space are not to be
covered wi
Structure
Allowable External .94: I (22,430 SF) Established by the PUD No Allowable FAR for
FAR Multi-Family Buildings-
Multi- Family Buildings
are not a oennitted use.
Minimum Off-Street 1.56 Parking Spaces Established by the PUD Two (2) Parking Spaces
Parking per unit (25 parking for each unit of two (2)
spaces for 16 units) or more bedrooms
STAFF ANALYSIS:
PROPOSED AFFORDABLE HOUSING USE:
In reviewing whether the proposed affordable housing use is appropriate for the site and
the neighborhood, Staff believes that the proposal would integrate a significant number of
affordable housing units into a part of town that does not already have an abundant
supply. With the exception of the 7th and Main Affordable Housing Project and the West
Hopkins Affordable Housing Project, the remainder of the neighborhood primarily
consists of a mix of smaller lodges, free market single-family residences, and several
free-market multi-family buildings. That being said, Staff feels that incorporating
additional affordable housing into this section of town is consistent with the intent
statement of the Housing Chapter of the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) that
encourages the community to create an affordable housing environment that is
"distributed throughout old and new neighborhoods" ofthe community.
-4-
DENSITY AND DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS:
As was previously stated, the Applicants have proposed a structure that is to contain
sixteen (16) affordable housing units consisting of primarily three (3) bedroom units.
Staff believes that the density being proposed is appropriate given the density guidelines
in the AH-PUD Zone District in which the Applicants are proposing to rezone the
property. The density guidelines that exist in the AH-PUD Zone District establish that
there should be approximately 1,000 square feet of lot area for each two-bedroom unit
and approximately 1,500 square feet of lot area for each three-bedroom unit.
Lots I and 2 of the existing subdivision contain a combined lot area of 26,596 square
feet. Using the AH-PUD density guidelines, the one 2-bedroom unit would require 1,000
square feet of lot area and the fifteen 3-bedroom units would require 1,500 square feet of
lot area a piece to add up to a total of 23,500 square feet of the lot area needed for the
proposed development. The 23,500 square feet of lot area meets the required area for
the development, therefore, Staff feels that the density being proposed is
appropriate.
The Applicants have proposed a total of 22,430 square feet of FAR, which equates to an
FAR of .94:1, when considering the lot area of only Lots I and 2 of the Little Ajax
Subdivision. Several of the buildings in the surrounding neighborhood have comparable
square footages. For comparison purposes, the Boomerang Lodge located across West
Hopkins Avenue contains approximately 18,788 square feet of FAR and the Christiania
Lodge Development, which is located a block to the north of the proposed development
contains 21,800 square feet of FAR. Staff feels that the FAR proposed for the site is
consistent with the buildings in the immediate neighborhood as is required by the PUD
review standards.
The overall height proposed is thirty-five (35) feet to the top of the flat roof on the
southern portion of the building. The majority of the building is around twenty-five (25)
feet. That being said, the height limit that exists on many of the surrounding properties is
twenty-five (25) feet as measured by the height methodology established in the Land Use
Code. The majority of the structures in the immediate vicinity have pitched roofs that
extend over thirty feet to the ridge. Additionally, the neighboring Boomerang Lodge has
a height in the lower 30s.
ARCHITECTURE:
In looking at the architecture of the project, Staff feels that the design complements the
architectural style of the existing Boomerang Lodge that is cattycorner to the
development site. The W. Hopkins Street fayade contains roof elements and pitches that
emulate the Boomerang's roofline. The W. Hopkins Street fayade also contains window
patterns that are similar to that of the Boomerang Lodge. That being the case, Staff
believes that the proposed architecture fits well within the context of the neighborhood in
which the development is prQPosed.
- 5 -
^C,__,____.__..__.._,~~._____~,..,-._._ -,
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARD VARIANCES:
All new structures in the City of Aspen are required to meet the residential design
standards or obtain a variance from the standards pursuant to Land Use Code Section
26.410, Residential Design Standards. The proposal has been designed to meet the
majority of the design standards. The two (2) design standards that are not technically
met by the proposal are the Secondary Mass standard and the One-story Element
standard. Given that the proposal is a multi-family building, Staff believes that it is
difficult to technically meet the Secondary Mass and One-story Element standards.
In reviewing the Secondary Mass variance, Staff feels that the proposed design meets the
intent of the standard as the Applicants have argued given that the building is broken up
by several stairway openings that appear to break the one building up into several
different buildings or masses. Additionally, in reviewing the One-story Element
variance, Staff feels that the street facing fa<;ade is in scale with the other buildings in the
immediate vicinity. Staff also believes that the W. Hopkins facing fa<;ade has elements
that provide a pedestrian-friendly scale to the fa<;ade such as recessed, street-facing 2nd
story decks that give the impression that living space below them is a one-story element.
Therefore, Staff supports the two (2) required residential design standard variance
requests.
GMQS IMPLICATIONS:
The Applicants have requested approval of a GMQS exemption for the construction of
affordable housing. In reviewing the GMQS exemption, Staff believes that the proposed
affordable housing meets the review standards for a GMQS exemption to develop
affordable housing units. Staff feels that there certainly is still a need for the
development of affordable housing in that we are still under the projected need of
800 to 1300 additional affordable housing units that is set forth in the 2000 Aspen
Area Community Plan's Housing Policies. Moreover, Staff believes that the
proposed development on a site that is in an appropriate location for the
development of affordable housing since it is in close proximity to the commercial
core and well within the Urban Growth Boundary as is mandated by the AACP.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING SUBSIDY:
The pre-annexation agreement established that the City would subsidize the project
at a subsidy of $72,128 per bedroom as long as 47 affordable housing bedrooms are
approved to be developed. If the number of bedrooms were to decrease as a result
of the review of the affordable housing project, the pre-annexation agreement gives
the Applicants the right to withdraw the affordable housing application and
construct three (3) single-family residences on the lots created and approved in the
original subdivision (Phase I Development).
AFFORDABLE HOUSING REQUIREMENTS:
The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Board has reviewed the proposed development and
has indicated that the units appear to meet the livability requirements for sale units that
are established in the affordable housing guidelines. The sizes of the three-bedroom units
- 6 -
are between 1,20 I square feet and 1,226 square feet as is consistent with the size
requirements for Category 4 units in the Affordable Housing Guidelines.
The two-bedroom unit is 917 square feet, which is slightly under the unit size
requirements of the Affordable Housing Guidelines. The Affordable Housing Guidelines
set forth a minimum lot size of 950 square feet for a Category 4 two-bedroom unit.
However, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Board reviewed the units and recommended
that approval of a variance from the minimum unit size because the unit is above-grade
and the unit has some storage exterior to the unit.
TRAIL EASEMENTS:
The Applicants have proposed to grant a public trail easement across the southern portion
of Lot 3 after the City purchases the conservation easement on the property to allow for
the City to extend the Midland Trail. The Applicants have also agreed to provide a
temporary trail easement along the eastern property boundary of the affordable housing
site to allow for the City to connect the Midland Trail to the Hopkins Avenue Trail that
runs adjacent to W. Hopkins. It is proposed that the temporary trail easement would
remain in place until the City is able to secure easements on properties further to the west
to extend the trail. Granting of the above described trail easements has been
reinforced as conditions of approval in the attached ordinance.
SOIL STABILITY AND REINFORCEMENT:
The development is proposed on the flat bench area just north of Shadow Mountain.
However, it is apparent that the site contains the remains of unprocessed rock (mine
waste rock) from the mining activity as well as a potential abandoned mine shaft under a
portion of the property. In addition, the southerly portion of the property contains steep
slopes that are subject to potential rock fall hazards. In order to properly mitigate the
mine tailings on the site, the consultants recommend keeping the mine waste rock on-site
by covering it with pavement, where allowed, and in landscaped areas by implementing
the performance standards in Ordinance 25, Series of 1994 which have been incorporated
as conditions of approval. (Ordinance 25, Series of 1994 made amendments to the
Municipal Code establishing "Regulations and Procedures for Excavations and
Development in the Smuggler Mountain Superfund Site".)
The procedures contained within Ordinance 25 are commonly used as a guide in
reclamation and handling of other mining sites within the city. In addition, mine tailings
should be covered by a minimum I-foot of clean soil in exposed and landscaped areas. If
the project has excess soil and removal from the site is required, removal of native (clean)
soils is recommended, versus the removal of fill or mine waste rock so that these may be
covered on site to minimize contamination of other areas. Further, the consultants also
recommend analysis of the native soils prior to removal. It is possible that metal
concentrations in native soils will also be elevated and that proper disposal will be
necessary. As a result of this and in keeping with the recommendations of the consultants,
a condition of approval will be to require the Applicants to complete a "material handling
plan" that incorporates proposed methods of compliance with the performance standards
- 7 -
in Ordinance 25, Series 1994 prior to on-site construction to be reviewed by the City
Environmental Health Department prior to the issuance of a building permit.
MINE SHAFT/ SUBSIDENCE:
According to the Environmental Assessment and Geologic and Geotechnical
Investigation conducted by CTL Thompson, Inc., a mineshaft exists on the east side of
the site. The study indicates that the underground location is not certain and may
represent subsidence issues.
The consultants recommend the Applicants contact a specialist to perform a geophysical
investigation to determine the exact location of the shaft or other potential voids in the
soil. Staff will require the Applicants to contact a specialist to have this analysis
completed for review by the Community Development Department prior to the issuance
of building permits. In addition, Staff will require the Colorado Geologic Survey to
conduct a site analysis for review by the Community Development Department Engineer
prior to the application of building permits. This is included as a condition of approval.
During a site visit to the property, Staff found what might appear to be a mine opening
that has been boarded up on the southerly portion of the property among the mature
conifers. Staff suggests as a condition of approval that the Applicants shall consult with
the Colorado Geologic Survey to examine this potential mine portal and comment on its
impact, if any, to the stability of the slope and, the proposed development. The results of
this analysis shall be presented in a report from the Colorado Geologic Survey to the
Community Development Department Engineer prior to the application for building
permits.
GREEN BUILDING REQUIREMENTS:
The pre-annexation agreement that was executed set forth that an affordable
housing project to be constructed on this site would have to make a commitment to
environmentally sensitive building by obtaining a score of at least 130 points under
the Aspen/Pitkin County Efficient Building Program. This is reinforced by a
condition of approval that has been included in the attached ordinance.
PM-tO MITIGATION:
The Environmental Health Department calculated that the proposed development would
be expected to generate approximately 121 additional vehicle trips per day. The
Applicants have proposed the following PM-1O mitigation measures:
I. Providing secured, covered bike storage.
2. Basing homeowners association fees on a sliding scale depending on the
number of cars owned.
3. Joining the Transportation Options Program.
4. Providing a temporary trail easement from the Midland Trail to the W.
Hopkins A venue Trail as was described in the trail easements section of this
memo.
- 8 -
The Environmental Health Department and the Planning Staff have reviewed the
Applicants' proposed PM-I0 mitigation measures and found them to be sufficient to
mitigate the PM-I0 generation resulting from the development.
DECISION ISSUES:
AFFORDABLE HOUSING CATEGORY MIx:
All of the units proposed in the development are proposed at the Category 4 income
levels as is consistent with the terms established in the pre-annexation agreement.
However, the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Board has indicated that they believe there
should be a more diverse mix of categories that average a Category 4. That being said,
the Applicants have indicated that varying the categories will affect the amount of
subsidy that the Applicants will require from the City to develop the project. This raises
a decision that City Council must make in reviewing this proposal. The Housing Board
recommended that City Council increase the amount of subsidy to allow for a range
of income categories between Category 2 and Category 6.
HOUSING LOTTERY:
The Applicants have requested that that they get the ability to choose the purchaser of
two (2) of the units within the development. The Housing Guidelines allow for a
developer to assign as many as 1/3 of the units within the development. Since the City is
subsidizing the project, the Applicants recognize that the amount of units allowed to be
assigned should be reduced proportionally based on the amount of the City's subsidy to
the project. One-third of the units in the development would be approximately five units
and the City is subsidizing the cost forty percent of the development. Therefore, the
Applicants have argued that sixty percent of abovementioned five units is still three units,
which is more than the two units that they are asking to assign. Thus, the assignment of
two of the units falls below the three units that are entitled to be assigned in the
Affordable Housing Guidelines.
The Housing Board felt that it was acceptable to allow for only one of the units to be
purchased by a person involved with the construction of the development without
competing through the Housing Lottery as long as the person chosen meets all of the
top priority requirements, including the standard that requires the person to have
worked in Pitkin County for at least four (4) years. However, the Housing Board
felt that the development should not be allowed the assignment of more than one of
the units within the development because the City is subsidizing it. Housing
Authority Staff has indicated that assigning one-third of the units is only a right that
is reserved for affordable housing that is developed completely with private funds.
Additionally, the Housing Board recommended that if the person chosen to occupy
the one non-lottery unit is single with no dependents, they should only be allowed to
purchase the two-bedroom unit. Once again, this is an issue that City Council will
have to make a determination on.
-9-
ONStTE PARKtNG:
The Applicants have proposed to provide twenty-five (25) parking spaces for the sixteen
(16) affordable housing units to be included in the project, yielding a parking ratio of
1.56 parking spaces per unit. The land use code typically requires two (2) off-street
parking spaces for every unit of two (2) or more bedrooms. The Applicants have
proposed to provide some incentives for residents to use alternative transportation
methods, such as providing for protected bike storage. The Applicants have also
proposed some parking disincentives such as basing the Homeowner's Association fees
on a sliding scale depending on number of cars owned by an occupant.
Staff believes that the there is sufficient parking proposed on-site given the auto
disincentives to be implemented and the close proximity of the development to the
commercial core. Moreover, Staff feels that proposed parking ratio is consistent with
that of several other affordable housing developments that have been constructed within
the City of Aspen. For comparison purposes, the 7'h & Main Street, DRACO, and Music
Associates of Aspen Affordable Housing Projects each had parking ratios at or below one
parking space per unit. The Truscott and Burlingame Parcel D Affordable Housing
Projects that are located between the town core and the AABC were approved at around
1.75 parking spaces per unit.
PARK DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES:
The Applicants have made a request that the City waive the Park Development Impact
fees associated with the proposed development given that it is a 100% affordable housing
project. Section 26.610.080, Affordable Housing, indicates that City Council has the
authority to reduce or waive the Park Development Impact fee for affordable housing.
On this matter, the Applicants have argued that they have offered the City a conservation
easement on Lot 3 of the subdivision at a discounted price for the purpose of permanently
maintaining the parcel as open space and that this should serve as their land dedication.
However, the Parks Department has recommended that the Park Development
Impact Fees not be waived for the development because they feel that even though
the project is affordable housing, its occupants will still have impacts on the Parks
Department's facilities. Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.610, Park
Development Impact Fees, a park development impact fee for the proposed
development shall be assessed based on the following calculations, unless waived by
City Council.
Proposed Development:
15 (three-bedroom employee housing units) multiplied by $3,634 per unit = $54,510
I (two-bedroom employee housing unit) multiplied by $2,120 per unit = $2,725
Total: $57,235
SCHOOL LAND DEDICATION FEES:
The Applicants do not believe that the school land dedication fees should apply to the
proposal because they have requested a subdivision exemption for a lot line adjustment
- 10-
and not a full subdivision. The proposal requires a full subdivision review because the
project involves the development of a multi-family residential building of more than three
(3) units pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.480, Subdivision. By definition, this
project is a subdivision and is subject to School Lands Dedication. Although the land
dedication standard is part of the Land Use Code, the City has no authority or jurisdiction
to waive or reduce the requirement.
That being the case, Staff would recommend that the Applicants be required to pay
school land dedication fees pursuant to the methodology established in Land Use Code
Section 26.610, School Land Dedication Fees. Staff cannot calculate the fee as of yet
due to the fact that an appraisal has not been completed for the property at this time. That
being the case, Staff has included a condition in the proposed ordinance requiring that the
Applicants have an appraisal of Lots I and 2 completed prior to issuance of a building
permit.
REFERRAL AGENCY ISSUES:
The proposed application was referred to the City Engineering Department, Parks
Department, Water Department, Electric Department, Environmental Health Department,
Building Department, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District, and Aspen Fire Protection
District for comments on technical issues. Comments from the referral agencies have
been incorporated into the proposed conditions of approval as appropriate.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
In reviewing the proposal, Staff believes that the project is generally consistent with the
terms of the pre-annexation agreement as well as the applicable review standards in the
City Land Use Code. As was previously stated, Staff also feels that there is certainly a
need for additional affordable housing development in this area of town, which is located
near the Commercial Core and close to mass transportation options. Moreover, from a
technical perspective, streets in this area have the capacity to handle additional vehicle
trips that would result from the proposed development.
This development project presents a much less impactive form of development than what
has previously been proposed. The development sticks to the lower, flatter portions of
the land in order to minimize the impacts on Shadow Mountain. Staff would recommend
that attached ordinance upon first reading.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and Zoning Commission is reviewing the proposal at a continued
public hearing on January 4th, which is after the City Council packet deadline for
the January 10th meeting. The staff memorandum for 2nd Reading will detail the
Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation and Staff will present the
Commission's recommendation at the January 24th public hearing.
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS:aAA~ ~ aM- (;J"~
- II -
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve upon first reading, Ordinance No. ~, Series of 2005, approving with
conditions, the Little Ajax Affordable Housing PUD and associated land use requests to
construct sixteen (16) for-sale affordable housing units on the property known as the Lots
I and 2 of the Little Ajax Subdivision, City and Townsite of Aspen."
ATTACHMENTS:
EXHIBIT A - REVIEW CRITERIA AND STAFF FINDINGS
EXHIBIT B - REFERRAL COMMENTS
EXHIBIT C --ApPLICATION
- 12 -
ORDINANCE NO.-L
(SERIES OF 2005)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE LITTLE
AJAX AFFORDABLE HOUSING CONSOLIDATED PUD AND ASSOCIATED
LAND USE REQUESTS TO CONSTRUCT A SIXTEEN (16) UNIT AFFORDABLE
HOUSING PROJECT ON LOTS 1 AND 2, OF THE LITTLE AJAX
SUBDIVISION/PUD, CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO.
WHEREAS, the Applicants, Aspen GK, LLC, Burton B. Kaplan, Peter L. Gluck,
represented by Joseph Wells Land Planning, submitted an application requesting
rezoning, subdivision, a subdivision exemption for a lot line adjustment,
condominiumization, a consolidated conceptuaVfinal PUD, GMQS exemptions for
affordable housing, variances from the residential design standards, and special review to
establish the affordable housing parking requirements on Lots I and 2 of the Little Ajax
Subdivision/PUD; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.304.060(B), Combined
Reviews, the Community Development Director in consultation with the applicants has
concluded that a combined review of the land use requests associated with this
application would reduce duplication and ensure economy of time, expense, and clarity;
and,
WHEREAS, upon review of the application and the applicable code standards,
the Community Development Department recommended approval of the proposal, with
conditions; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearings on December 7, 2004, and
January 4, 2005, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the proposed
Consolidated Conceptual/Final PUD and associated land use requests to develop the
proposed sixteen (16) unit affordable housing project on Lots I and 2, of the Little Ajax
Subdivision; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development
proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has
reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the
Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and
considered public comment at a public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds
all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal,
with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community
Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for
the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT:
Section 1:
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code,
City Council hereby approves the Little Ajax Affordable Housing PUD and all of the
necessary associated land use actions to construct a sixteen (16) unit affordable housing
development on Lots I and 2, of the Little Ajax Subdivision, with the conditions contained
herein:
Section 2: Rezoninl! to AHlPUD
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in City of Aspen Land Use Code Section
26.310, Amendments to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map, City Council
hereby rezones Lots I and 2, of the Little Ajax SubdivisionIPUD to the AHlPUD Zone
District.
Section 3: Subdivision/PUD Plat and Al!reement
The Applicant shall record a subdivision agreement that meets the requirements of Land
Use Code Section 26.480 within 180 days of approval. Additionally, a final
SubdivisionlPUD Plan shall be recorded in the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder's
Office within 180 days of the final approval and shall include the following:
a. A final plat meeting the requirements of the City Engineer and showing: easements,
encroachment agreements and licenses (with the reception numbers) for physical
improvements, and location of utility pedestals.
b. An illustrative site plan of the project showing the proposed improvements,
landscaping, parking, and the dimensional requirements as approved.
c. A drawing representing the project's architectural character.
Section 4: Buildinl! Permit Application
The building permit application shall include the following:
a. A copy of the final Ordinance and recorded P&Z Resolution.
b. The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set.
c. A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District.
d. A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval
from the Parks Department Director for off-site replacement or mitigation of any
removed trees. The tree removal permit application shall be accompanied by a
detailed landscape plan indicating which trees are to be removed and new plantings
proposed on the site.
e. A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed
Civil Engineer, which maintains sediment and debris on-site during and after
construction. If a ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation report will
be required to correctly size the facility. A 5-year storm frequency should be used
in designing any drainage improvements.
f. A construction management plan pursuant to the requirements.
g. A fugitive dust control plan to be reviewed and approved by the Environmental
Health Department
Section 5: Trails
The Applicant shall grant trail easements meeting the approval of the City of Aspen Parks
Department prior to recordation of the final subdivisionlPUD plat. The temporary trail
easement shall remain in affect until such time as the City is able to secure trail
easements on properties located to the west in order to extend the Midland Trail to
connect to S. Seventh Street.
Section 6: W. Hopkins Avenue Curb and Gutter
The Applicant shall construct curb, and gutter along the West Hopkins Avenue frontage
of the property being subdivided prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for any of
the units in the project. The timing of this installation may be changed if approved by the
City Engineer. The driveway access shall meet the City Engineering Department's
standards for drive ramps. If the E. Hopkins Trail is altered during construction, the
Applicant shall repair the trail to the condition it was prior to construction.
Section 7: Landscapinl!:
The Applicant shall install a tree root barrier on the trees that are to be planted within ten
(10) feet of the E. Hopkins trail to prevent future root damage and trail upheaval. The
Applicant shall also install tree saving construction fences around the drip line of any
trees to be saved subject to the following provisions:
a. The City Forester or his/her designee must inspect this fence before any
construction activities commence.
b. No excavation, storage of materials, storage of construction equipment,
construction backfill, foot or vehicular traffic shall be allowed within the drip line.
Section 8: Soil Subsidence and Rock Fall Hazards
The Applicant shall submit geotechnical and soil stability reports performed by a qualified,
licensed engineer demonstrating the land is suitable to handle the proposed development.
The Applicant shall also submit a report from a qualified, licensed engineer demonstrating
that rock fall from the slope above the proposed development will be sufficiently mitigated
to prevent rock fall hazards. The Applicant shall also contact a specialist to conduct a
geophysical investigation regarding the location of the mineshaft in order to determine the
potential for subsidence. This report shall be submitted for review by the Community
Development Department prior to the issuance of full structural building permits.
~"__","~_"._~.".___w__",~_-_..-_~~,__._"~"~_.~_..,,"_.._ "__._ .,,,__.__~."-~...",--,,~---.,..~
Section 9: Mine Waste
The Applicant shall provide prior to submitting a building permit application, the City
with a mine waste testing and handling plan that complies with the following conditions
of approval as memorialized in Ordinance No. 25, Series 1994 regarding the handling of
any contaminated soils encountered on the property:
a. Any disturbed soil or material that is to be stored above ground shall be securely
contained on and covered with a non-permeable tarp or other protective barrier
approved by the Environmental Health Department so as to prevent leaching of
contaminated material onto or into the surface soil. Disturbed soil or material need
not be removed if the City's Environmental Health Department finds that: I) the
excavated material contains less than 1,000 parts per million (ppm) of total lead, or
2) that there exists a satisfactory method of disposal at the excavation site.
Disturbed soil and solid waste may be disposed of outside of the site upon
acceptance of the material at a duly licensed and authorized receiving facility.
b. Non-removal of contaminated material. No contaminated soil or solid waste shall
be removed, placed, stored, transported or disposed of outside the boundaries of the
site without having first obtained any and all necessary State and/or Federal
transportation and disposal permits.
c. Dust suppression. All activity or development shall be accompanied by dust
suppression measures such as the application of water or other soil surfactant to
minimize the creation and release of dust and other particulates into the air.
d. Vegetable and flower gardening and cultivation. No vegetables or flowers shall be
planted or cultivated within the boundaries of the site except in garden beds
consisting of not less than twelve (12) inches of soil containing no more than 999-
ppm lead.
e. Landscaping. The planting of trees and shrubs and the creation or installation of
landscaping features requiring the dislocation or disturbance of more than one cubic
yard of soil shall require a permit as provided in Section 7-143 (4).
f. Any contaminated soil or mine waste rock to be left on-site shall be placed under
structures or pavement. Soils used in landscaped areas or engineered fills shall be
covered by a minimum of I foot of clean soil that contains less than 1,000 ppm
lead.
Section 10: Septic System
In the event that the Applicant encounters an existing septic system or any part thereof,
the Applicant shall provide a handling and waste disposal plan that complies with City
Environmental Health Department requirements for the abandonment of said septic
system.
Section 11: Fire Mitil!:ation
The Applicant shall install a fire sprinkler system and alarm system that meets the
requirements of the Fire Marshal. The water service line shall be sized appropriately to
accommodate the required Fire Sprinkler System. Use of charcoal grills shall be
prohibited in this development because of fire danger concerns. This prohibition shall be
included in the HOA documents for the development.
Section 12: Water Department Requirements
The Applicant shall comply with the City of Aspen Water System Standards, with Title
25, and with the applicable standards of Title 8 (Water Conservation and Plumbing
Advisory Code) of the Aspen Municipal Code, as required by the City of Aspen Water
Department. The Applicant shall also enter into a water service agreement with the City
and complete a common service line agreement. Each unit shall have individual water
meters. Additionally, the Applicant shall tap the water service line from the building into
the six (6) inch diameter water main located in W. Hopkins Avenue.
Section 13: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Requirements
The Applicant shall comply with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District's rules and
regulations. No clear water connections (roof, foundation, perimeter drains) to ACSD
lines shall be allowed. The interior driveway and carport parking areas shall not be
connected to the sanitary sewer system. (Improvements below grade shall require the use
of a pumping station). Cottonwood trees shall not be planted within five (5) feet on
either side of the main sewer line.
Section 14: "Efficient Buildinl!:" Requirements
The Applicant shall obtain a score of at least 130 points under the AspenlPitkin County
Efficient Building Program. Such scoring shall be confirmed through the review of
construction drawings at the time of building permit application submittal. A building
permit shall not be issued unless the project meets this 130 point score. Change orders to
the original building permit shall not reduce the projects score below 130 points.
Section 15: PM-10 Mitil!:ation
The Applicant shall mitigate for the anticipated PM-IO generation by providing the
following:
a) The homeowner's association shall join the Transportation Options Program.
b) Secure, covered bike storage shall be provided.
c) Basing a portion of the homeowner's association dues on a sliding scale dependent
on the number of cars owned by an occupant. A homeowner with one car will pay
15% more in homeowner's association dues than an owner with no cars. A
homeowner with two cars will pay 25% more in homeowner's association dues than
an owner with no cars.
d) Providing a temporary trail easement along the eastern edge of the property to link
the W. Hopkins Avenue Trail to the Midland Trail as described in Section 5 of this
ordinance.
Section 16: Maintenance of Rock Fall Mitieation
The City shall grant an easement to benefit the Little Ajax Affordable Housing
Homeowner's Association at the time that the City purchases a conservation easement on
Lot 3 of the Little Ajax Subdivision for the development of rockfall protection consisting
of bruge fencing and berms. Additionally, the City shall grant an access easement
benefiting the Little Ajax Affordable Housing Homeowner's Association across the
southern portion of Lot 3 for the purpose of allowing the Homeowner's Association to
complete routine maintenance on the rockfall mitigation elements to be constructed on
Lot 3. The Homeowner's Association shall be responsible for maintaining the rockfall
mitigation measures to be installed on Lot 3 of the subdivision.
Section 17: Dimensional Requirements
The dimensional requirements established in this PUD are as follows:
Description of Dimensional Approved Dimensional
Requirement Requirements For the affordable
housing development (To be
constructed on the land known as
Lots 1 & 2 ofthe Phase 1 Little
Aiax Subdivision)
Minimum Lot Size 6,000 SF
Minimum Lot area per dwelling unit 1,000 SF for every 2-bedroom Unit
1,500 SF for every 3-bedroom Unit
Minimum Lot Width 135 Feet
Minimum Front Yard (W. Hopkins Ten (10) Feet
Frontage) Setback
Minimum Side Yard Setback Five (5) Feet
Minimum Rear Yard Setback Ten (10) Feet
Maximum Site Coverage 50% (13,050 Square Feet of
Structure)
Maximum Height 35 Feet
Minimum Percent Open Space 28% of Lots I and 2 are not to be
covered wi Structure
Allowable External FAR .94:1 (22,430 SF)
Minimijm Off-Street Parking 1.56 Parking Spaces per Unit
Section 18: Sale of Housine Units
All of the units shall be sold through the Housing Lottery process with the exception of
one of the units. The developer shall have the ability to choose the first purchaser of one
of the units within the development, but the person chosen must meet all of the top-
priority requirements established in the affordable housing guidelines. If the person
chosen by the developer is single, they may only purchase the two-bedroom unit.
Section 19: Deed Restrictions
The Applicant shall record a deed restriction on the units prior to issuance of a certificate
of occupancy on any of the units within the development.
Section 20: Park Development Impact Fees
Park Develooment Imoact Fees of $57,235.00 shall be assessed. Amendments to the
Project or to the fee schedule adopted prior to issuance of a building permit shall require
a new calculation. The following fee total is based on the current fee schedule:
Park Fees-Proposed Development:
15 (three-bedroom employee housing units) multiplied by $3,634 per unit = $54,510
I (two-bedroom employee housing unit) multiplied by $2,725 per unit = $2,725
Total: $57,235
Section 21: School Land Dedication Fees
School Land Dedication Fees shall be assessed on the proposal pursuant to Land Use
Code Section 26.630, School Lands Dedication, and shall be due at the time of building
permit issuance. The Applicant shall have an appraisal done and the fee shall be
calculated on Lots I and 2 of the Subdivision prior to obtaining a building permit for any
of the units within the development.
Section 22: Previous Approvals
Phase I Development Approvals to construct the single-family residences on Lots I and 2
of the Little Ajax Subdivision shall be null and void upon recording a plat for the Phase 2
development approvals.
Section 23: Wildlife Trash Containers
The Applicant shall install a wildlife-proof trash container meeting the requirements of
the Environmental Health Department.
Section 24:
The Applicant shall record a condominium plat when nearing completion of the
development. The condominium plat shall be reviewed administratively pursuant to
Land Use Code Section 26.480.090, Condominiumization.
Section 25:
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 26:
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 27:
A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 24th day of January, 2005, in the City
Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City
Council of the City of Aspen on the lOth day of January, 2005.
Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by a vote of _ to _ L-~, this 24th
day of January, 2005.
Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
John P. Worcester, City Attorney
EXHIBIT A
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (POO)
Review Criteria & Staff Findings
In accordance with Section 26.445.030(2) of the Land Use Code, due to the limited
extent of the issues involved, the Applicant has requested a consolidated conceptual/final
PUD. This two-step process consolidates the conceptual and final development plan
reviews by the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Council, with public
hearings occurring at both.
Section 26.445.050, Review Standards: Minor PUD
Section 26.445.050 of the Regulations provides that development applications for Minor
PUD must comply with the following standards and requirements.
A. General Requirements.
1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area
Community Plan.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposal is consistent with many objectives of the Aspen Area
Community Plan. The Applicants have appropriately proposed to develop affordable
housing in close proximity to the Commercial Core of the City as is consistent with the
housing policies that are set forth in the AACP. In addition, the Interim Aspen Area
Citizen Housing Plan states that citizen housing should be provided within the metro area
and in close proximity to public mass transit as the proposed development is. Staff finds
this criterion to be met.
2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing
land uses in the surrounding area.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposed development is consistent with the character of the
existing land uses in the immediate vicinity in that the uses in the immediate vicinity are
diverse. There is a mix of small lodges, multi-family residential buildings, and some
single-family residences in the immediate area. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development
of the surrounding area.
Staff Finding
Staff does not believe that the proposed expansion will adversely affect the future
development of the surrounding area in any manner. Thus, Staff finds this criterion to be
met by the proposal.
- 13 -
4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is
exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the
proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final
PUD development plan review.
Staff Finding
The Applicants have concurrently applied for a GMQS Exemption for the development
of affordable housing on the site. Staff finds this criterion to be met if the GMQS
exemption is granted.
B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements:
The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for
all properties within the PUD. The dimensional requirements of the underlying
zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for
the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility
with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns shall be emphasized.
1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate
and compatible with the following influences on the property:
a) The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future
land uses in the surrounding area.
b) Natural and man-made hazards.
c) Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area
such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and
landforms.
d) Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and
the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian
circulation, parking, and historical resources.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposed dimensional requirements are compatible with the
existing and expected structures in the immediate vicinity. As was discussed in the body
of the staff memo, the Applicants have proposed a total of 22,430 square feet of FAR,
which equates to an FAR of .94:1, when considering the lot area of only Lots I and 2 of
the Little Ajax Subdivision. Several of the buildings in the surrounding neighborhood
have comparable square footages. For comparison purposes, the Boomerang Lodge
located across West Hopkins Avenue contains approximately 18,788 square feet of FAR
and the Christiania Lodge Development, which is located a block to the north of the
proposed development contains 21,800 square feet of FAR. Therefore, Staff feels that the
FAR proposed for the site is in character with the buildings in the immediate
neighborhood as is required by the PUD review standards.
The overall height that is proposed is thirty-five (35) feet to the top of the flat roof.
However, the majority of the building is around twenty-five (25) feet.. That being said,
the height limit that exists on many of the surrounding properties is twenty-five (25) feet
as measured by the height methodology established in the Land Use Code. The majority
of the structures in the immediate vicinity have pitched roofs that extend over thirty feet
to the ridge. Additionally, the existing Boomerang Lodge has a height in the lower 30s.
" 14-
The proposed building is sited on the flat bench area located just below Shadow
Mountain rather than on the hillside. Staff feels that by siting the building on the flat
bench area, the Applicants are preserving a great deal of the valuable natural
characteristics of the site by minimizing the disturbance created by the development.
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 the massing and scale of the proposal are appropriate. As discussed in the
staff memo, the Applicants have broken up the building by providing walkway breaks on
the second floor of the structure to make the building appear as several different
structures. Additionally, the design proposes the street facing element to be not more
than the twenty-five (25) foot height limit, which the majority of the surrounding
neighborhood is restricted to. The larger mass is setback from W. Hopkins and is viewed
as a subordinate element behind the street facing fayade of the u-shaped building. Staff
also feels that the proposal protects a great deal of open space by placing a conservation
easement over Lot 3 of the subdivision. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
3. The appropriate number of off-street parking spaces shall be established
based on the following considerations:
a) The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed
development including any non-residential land uses.
b) The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking
is proposed
c) The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities,
including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize
automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development.
d) The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and
general activity centers in the city.
Staff Finding
The Applicants have proposed to provide twenty-five (25) parking spaces for the sixteen
(16) affordable housing units to be included in the project, yielding a parking ratio of
1.56 parking spaces per unit. Additionally, the Applicants have proposed to provide
some incentives for residents to use alternative transportation methods, such as providing
for protected bike storage. The Applicants have also proposed some parking
disincentives such as basing the Homeowner's Association fees on a sliding scale
depending on the number of cars owned by an occupant.
Staff believes that the there is sufficient parking proposed on-site given the auto
disincentives to be implemented and the close proximity of the development to the
commercial core. Moreover, Staff feels that proposed parking ratio is consistent with
that of several other affordable housing developments that have been constructed within
the City of Aspen. For comparison purposes, the 7'h & Main Street, DRACO, and Music
- 15 -
Associates of Aspen Affordable Housing Projects each had parking ratios at or below one
parking space per unit. The Truscott and Burlingame Parcel D Affordable Housing
Projects that are located between the town core and the AABC were approved at around
1.75 parking spaces per unit. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
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
Staff believes that sufficient infrastructure capabilities exist to accommodate the
proposed development. The adjacent public right-of-way on West Hopkins is a seventy-
five (75) foot wide right-of-way and is already sufficient to accommodate the required
fire protection, snow removal, and road maintenance for the proposed development. The
City of Aspen Fire Marshal, Streets Director, and a representative from the Aspen
Consolidated Sanitation District have reviewed the proposal and have proposed
conditions of approval to mitigate for any insufficiencies. Staff finds this criterion to be
met.
5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there
exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the
maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if:
a) The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground
instability or the possibility of mud flow, rockfalls or avalanche dangers.
b) The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural
watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion, and consequent water
pollution.
c) The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in
the surrounding area and the City.
d) The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway, or
trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or
causes harmful disturbance to critical naturalfeatures of the site.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the site is suitable for development provided that the Applicants
follow the controls recommended by their engineers, CTL/Thompson, Inc.
Additionally, Staff has required that the Applicants abide by the contaminated soil
controls that were established in Ordinance No. 25, Series of 1994. Staff finds this
criterion to be met with the conditions proposed in the attached ordinance and strict
adherence to the controls proposed by CTL/Thompson Inc.
- 16-
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 paUern
compatible with, and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and
expected development pattern, land uses, and characteristics.
Staff Finding
The Applicants are not requesting to increase the allowable density through the proposed
PUD. The proposed density is in conformance with the guidelines established in the
proposed AHIPUD Zone District. Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable.
B. Site Design:
The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is
complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent
public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed
development shall comply with the following:
1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique,
provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to
the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate
manner.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the Applicants are proposing to construct the development on the flat
bench area at the base of Shadow Mountain in order not to interfere with the natural
features of the site. Additionally, the only significant man-made feature on the site is the
mine shaft that exists. Staff feels that the mine shaft needs to be removed for safety
reasons. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open
spaces and vistas.
- 17 -
Staff Finding
There is only one building proposed for the site and it is proposed on the lowest portion
of the site in order to preserve the vistas, open space, and natural features of Shadow
Mountain. Therefore, Staff finds this criterion to be met.
3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the
urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and
engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement.
Staff Finding
Staff feels that the proposal is appropriately oriented towards W. Hopkins Avenue.
Additionally, Staff believes that the building has occasional one-story elements to
provide a pedestrian scale to the building. Staff also finds that the proposed architectural
style provides a visually interesting development for passers by along W. Hopkins
A venue. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency
and service vehicle access.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposal situates access ways in a manner that allow for emergency
vehicles to easily access the site. The site is served by a 75 foot wide public right-of-way
that provides sufficient emergency access to the site. Moreover, the Fire Marshal has
reviewed the proposal and has indicated that he is satisfied with its emergency service
access. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided.
Staff Finding
The Applicants have proposed to provide graded sidewalks and units that meet the
building department's accessibility requirements. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical
and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding
properties.
Staff Finding
The Applicants have submitted a site drainage plan that was prepared by a licensed
engineer. The proposed development shall not increase historic flows of the property.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
7. For non-residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately
de-signed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the
use.
- 18 -
Staff Finding
The Applicants are not proposing to construct any non-residential structures on the site.
Staff finds this criterion not to be applicable.
C. Landscape Plan:
The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed
landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and
with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed
development shall comply with the following:
1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designed treatment of exterior spaces,
preserving existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity
and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate.
Staff Finding
The Applicants are proposing to maintain the significant native vegetation that exists on
the southern portion of the property. The Applicants shall submit a right-of-way
landscaping plan for review by the Parks Department prior to issuance of a building
permit for the project. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide
uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an
appropriate manner.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposal is preserving the natural features of the site. Please see
Staff s response to PUD Review Standard B(l) above. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape
features is appropriate.
Staff Finding
The Applicants have proposed and are required to provide tree protection fencing around
the drip line of any tree that is to be preserved on-site. Additionally, no construction
activity or storage of construction materials shall be allowed within the drip line of any
trees to be preserved on the site. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
D. Architectural Character:
It is the purpose of this standard to encourage architectural interest, variety,
character, and visual identity in the proposed development and within the City
while promoting efficient use of resources. Architectural character is based
upon the suitability of a building for its purposes, legibility of the building's
use, the building's proposed massing, proportion, scale, orientation to public
spaces and other buildings, use of materials, and other attributes which may
significantly represent the character of the proposed development. There shall
be approved as part of the final development plan and architectural character
plan, which adequately depicts the character of the proposed development. The
proposed architecture of the development shall:
- 19-
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.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposed architecture is compatible with the scale and style of
structures in the immediate vicinity. . Staff finds this criterion to be met.
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.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that natural heating on the site will be minimal because the proposed
development will be blocked by Shadow Mountain. However, Staff does believe that the
units will be cooled naturally by the shade that exists on the site from Shadow Mountain.
The Applicants have also consented to utilizing efficient hydronic heat and efficient
boilers. Staff finds this criterion to be met to the extent possible.
3. Accommodate the storage and shielding of snow, ice, and water in a safe an
appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance.
Staff Finding
The roofs are flat and wont shed Snow, however, roof drains are proposed to adequate! y
handle ice and snow build-up. Additionally, the Applicants have proposed to store snow
between the two (2) rows of parking as can be seen on the site plan. Staff finds this
criterion to be met.
E. Lighting:
The purpose of this standard i.~ 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 kIng to adjoining streets or lands. Lighting of site
features, structures, and access ways is proposed in an appropriate manner.
Staff Finding
The development shall meet the City of Aspen Lighting Code requirements and the
Applicants shall submit a lighting plan for the Zoning Officer to review at the time of
building permit submittal. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
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.
- 20-
Staff Finding
The development shall meet the City of Aspen Lighting Code requirements and the
Applicants shall submit a lighting plan for the Zoning Officer to review at the time of
building permit submittal. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area:
If the proposed development includes a common park, open space, or
recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD,
the following criteria shall be met:
1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open
space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed
development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural
landscape features of the properly, provides visual relief to the property's
built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses
and properly users of the PUD.
Staff Finding
If the City purchases a conservation easement on Lot 3 of the Subdivision, it will be
maintained as open space. The design of the development provides access from W.
Hopkins to the Midland Trail and the open space that is to be created on Lot 3. Staff
finds this criterion to be met.
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.
Staff Finding
A proportionate amount interest in the common areas on the affordable housing site will
be deeded to the dwelling owners in perpetuity. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through legal instrument for the
permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and
shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future residential,
commercial, or industrial development.
Staff Finding
The protective covenants shall provide permanent care and maintenance of the open
spaces and shared facilities. A subsequent PUD amendment shall also be required for
future development of the common spaces on the site. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
H. Utilities and Public Facilities:
The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose any
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.
- 21 -
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the vehicular access points proposed as part of the development are
adequate to avoid traffic congestion on W. Hopkins Ave. which is not a heavily traveled
street. Moreover, the parking is configured in such a manner that it will not block
incoming or outgoing vehicles accessing the development. Staff finds this criterion to be
met.
J. Phasing of Development Plan.
The purpose of these criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not
create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners
and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the
development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted final
PUD development plan. The phasing plan shall comply with the following:
1. All phases, including the initial phase, shall be designed to function as a
complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases.
2. The phasing plan describes physical areas insulating, to the extent
practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases.
3. The proposed phasing plan ensures the necessary or proportionate
improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-lieu,
construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the PUD,
construction of any required affordable housing, and any mitigation
measures are realized concurrent or prior to the respective impacts
associated with the phase.
Staff Finding
The Applicants are not currently proposing to phase the construction. Therefore, Staff
finds this criterion not to be applicable.
- 23-
GMQS EXEMPTIONS
Section 26.470.070(J), Affordable Housing GMQS Exemption
Section 26.470.070(J) of the Regulations provides that, "All affordable housing deed
restricted in accordance with the housing guidelines of the City Council and its housing
designee shall be exempt [from the GMQS scoring and competition procedures]."
Review is by City Council. The section goes on to state that,
The review of any request for exemption of housing pursuant to this Section shall
include a determination of the City's need for such housing, considering the proposed
development's compliance with an adopted housing plan, the number of dwelling
units proposed and their location, the type of dwelling units proposed, specifically
regarding the number of bedrooms in each unit, the size of the dwelling unit, the
rental/sale mix of the proposed development, and the proposed price categories to
which the dwelling units are to be deed restricted.
Staff Finding
The Applicants are proposing a total of sixteen (16) affordable housing units that are to
be deed restricted as Category 4 sale units. Staff feels that there certainly still is a need
for the development of affordable housing in that we are still under the projected need of
800 to 1300 additional affordable housing units that is set forth in the 2000 Aspen Area
Community Plan's Housing Policies. Moreover, Staff believes that the proposed site is
located in an appropriate location for the development of affordable housing in that it is
in close proximity to the commercial core and well within the Urban Growth Boundary as
is mandated by the AACP. Moreover, the Housing Authority has found that the proposed
development complies with the Aspen/Pitkin County Affordable Housing Guidelines and
has granted a unit size variance to the two-bedroom unit. Staff finds this criterion to be
met.
- 24-
REZONING
REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS
Pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.310, in reviewing an application for an
amendment to the official zone district map, the Planning and Zoning Commission and
City Council shall consider the following:
1. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable
portions of this Title.
Staff Finding
Staff does not believe that the proposed rezoning to the AH/PUD Zone District is in
conflict with any portion of the City of Aspen Land Use Code. Staff finds this criterion
to be met.
2. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of
the Aspen Area Community Plan.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposal is consistent with many objectives of the Aspen Area
Community Plan. The Applicants have appropriately proposed to develop affordable
housing well within the Urban Growth Boundary and in close proximity to the
Commercial Core of the City as is consistent with the housing policies that are set forth in
the AACP. In addition, the Interim Aspen Area Citizen Housing Plan states that citizen
housing should be provided within the metro area and in close proximity to public mass
transit as the proposed development is. Moreover, the proposal encourages the private
sector's participation in the development of affordable housing in that the project
provides the development of voluntary affordable housing on the site. Staff finds this
criterion to be met.
3. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with the
surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land
use and neighborhood characteristics.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposed rezoning is compatible with the surrounding zone
districts and land uses. The neighborhood primarily contains multi-family residential
buildings and small lodging facilities. Additionally, there are several affordable housing
projects in the area such as the 7th and Main Affordable Housing and the West Hopkins
AH project. Therefore, Staff believes that the proposed uses of affordable housing and
multi-family residential building are consistent with the remainder of the neighborhood.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
4. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and
road safety.
- 25-
Staff Finding
Staff does believe that the proposal will generate a considerable amount of traffic.
However, the Applicants' engineer believes that the W. Hopkins Avenue right-of-way is
currently underutilized and that the street can accommodate the anticipated additional
usage. The City Engineer has reviewed proposal and agrees with the assessment.
Therefore, with the. required conditions of approval, staff finds this criterion to be met.
5. Whether the extent to which the proposed amendment would result
in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which
the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public
facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities,
sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and
emergency medical facilities.
Staff Finding
All major utilities, including water, sewer, electric, natural gas, telephone, and cable
television are currently in place and serve the site from existing lines located within the
surrounding street network. The Applicants have consented to paying for any required
improvements that result from the development. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
6. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposal will not significantly impact the natural environment in
that the development is proposed on the flat bench area at the base of Shadow Mountain
and not further up the hillside. Staff finds this criterion to be met. .
. 7. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with
the community character of the City of Aspen.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposal is consistent with the community character of Aspen and
the character of the immediate vicinity in that there exists a considerable amount of free
market multi-family buildings and affordable housing in the immediate area. Staff finds
this criterion to be met.
8. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject
parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed
amendment.
- 26-
Staff Finding
The changed conditions are that the new ownership group of the property is willing to
develop the site with a 100% affordable housing project that satisfies many of the City's
housing goals. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
9. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the
public interest and whether it is in harmony with the purpose and
intent of this Title.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposal serves a public interest in that it provides a great deal of
affordable housing units within a close proximity to the commercial core area of town.
Staff feels that the proposed multi-family residential use is also appropriate for the site.
Therefore, Staff believes that the proposal is .consistent with the purpose and intent of the
Land Use Code. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
- 27-
LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS
A Lot Line Adjustment may be authorized if the following review standards are met.
1. It is demonstrated that the request is to correct an engineering or
surveying error in a recorded plat or is to permit .an insubstantial
boundary change between adjacent parcels; and
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposed lot line adjustment is an insubstantial boundary change
between adjacent parcels. The lot line adjustment will not affect the development rights
of any of the parcels involved. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
2. All landowners whose lot lines are being adjusted shall provide written
consent to the application; and.
Staff Finding
All of the landowners whose lots are being adjusted are party to the application.
Additionally, the owners whose lots are involved in the lot line adjustment will have to
sign the amended plat prior to it being recorded at the Pitkin County Clerk and
Recorder's Office. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
3. The corrected plat will meet the standards of this Chapter, and
conform to the requirements of this Title, including the dimensional
requirements of the zone district in which the lots are located, except in
cases of an existing nonconforming lot, in which the adjustment shall
not increase the nonc01iformity of the lot. The plat shall be submitted
and recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder.
Failure to record the plat within a period of one hundred eighty (180)
days following approval shall render the plat invalid and
reconsideration of the plat by the Community Development Director
will be required before its acceptance and recording; and
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposed lot line adjustment is not in conflict with the dimensional
requirements that are proposed in the consolidated PUD. Additionally, all of the lots
subject to the proposal are conforming in regards to their minimum lot size that was
established in the original Little Ajax Subdivision/PUD approvals. Furthermore, the
proposal will not create any non-conformities in regards to required setbacks. Therefore,
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
4. It is demonstrated that the lot line adjustment will not ojJect the
development rights, including any increase in FAR, or permitted
density of the affected lots by providing the opportunity to create a new
- 28-
lotfor resale or development. A plat note will be added to the corrected
plat indicating the purpose of the lot line adjustment and the
recognition that no additional FAR will be allowed with the
adjustment.
Staff Finding
Staff finds that the proposed lot line adjustment will not affect the development rights,
allowable FAR, or permitted density on any of the parcels involved because the
developments dimensional requirements and density is being established through the PUD
review. Therefore, Staff finds this criterion to be met.
- 29-
Subdivision
REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS
Section 26.480 of the City Land Use Code provides that development applications for
Subdivision must comply with the following standards and requirements.
1. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the Aspen Area
Comprehensive Plan.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposal is consistent with many objectives of the Aspen Area
Community Plan. The Applicants have appropriately proposed to develop affordable
housing well within the Urban Growth Boundary and in close proximity to the
Commercial Core of the City as is consistent with the housing policies that are set forth in
the AACP. In addition, the Interim Aspen Area Citizen Housing Plan states that citizen
housing should be provided within the metro area and in close proximity to public mass
transit as the proposed development is. Moreover, the proposal encourages the private
sector's participation in the development of affordable housing in that the project
provides the development of some voluntary affordable housing on the site. Staff finds
this criterion to be met.
2. The proposed subdivision shall be consistent with the character of
existing land uses in the area.
Staff Finding
Staff feels that the proposal is consistent with the land uses in the immediate vicinity in
that there are a considerable amount of multi-family residential buildings in the
immediate area. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
3. The proposed subdivision shall not adversely affect the future
development of surrounding areas.
Staff Finding
The proposed development will not adversely affect the future development of the
surrounding area in any way. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
4. The proposed subdivision shall be in compliance with all applicable
requirements of this Title.
Staff Finding
As was detailed in the staff memo, Staff believes that the proposal is generally m
compliance with all portions of the land use code. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
- 30-
B. Suitability of Landfor Subdivision
a. Land suitability. The proposed subdivision shall not be located on land
unsuitable for development because of flooding, drainage, rock or soil creep,
mudflow, rockslide, avalanche or snowslide, steep topography or any other
natural hazard or other condition that will be harmful to the health, safety, or
welfare of the residents in the proposed subdivision.
b. Spatial pattern efficient. The proposed subdivision shall not be designed
to create spatial patterns that cause inefficiencies, duplication or premature
extension of public facilities and unnecessary public costs.
Staff Findinl!:
Please see Staffs response to PUD Review Standard 8(5). Staff finds this criterion to be
met.
C. Improvements. The improvements setforth at Chapter 26.580 shall be provided
for the proposed subdivision. These standards may be varied by special review (See,
Chapter 26.430) if the following conditions have been met:
1. A unique situation exists for the development where strict adherence to
the subdivision design standards would result in incompatibility with the Aspen
Area Comprehensive Plan, the existing, neighboring development areas, and/or
the goals of the community.
2. The Applicant shall specify each design standard variation requested
and provide justification for each variation request, providing design
recommendations by professional engineers as necessary.
Staff Findinl!:
The Applicants have consented to install the required subdivision improvements that are
applicable to this proposal as is detailed in the application. Staff finds this criterion to be
met.
D. Affordable housing. A subdivision which is comprised of replacement dwelling
units shall be required to provide affordable housing in compliance with the
requirements of Chapter 26.520, Replacement Housing Program. A subdivision which
is comprised of new dwelling units shall be required to provide affordable housing in
compliance with the requirements of Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota
System.
Staff Findinl!:
The entire development is proposed as affordable housing and the Applicants have
concurrently applied for a GMQS exemption for the development of affordable housing.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
- 31 -
E. School Land Dedication. Compliance with the School Land Dedication
Standards setforth at Chapter 26.630.
Staff Findinl!
The Applicants have requested a waiver from the school land dedication standard, but there
is not provision in the City Land Use Code to allow for such a waiver to be granted.
Therefore, a condition of approval has been included requiring the Applicants to pay the
school land dedication fees prior to receiving a certificate of occupancy. Staff finds this
criterion to be met.
F. Growth Management Approval. Subdivision approval may only be granted to
applications for which all growth management development allotments have been
granted or growth management exemptions have been obtained, pursuant to Chapter
26.470. Subdivision approval may be granted to create a parcel(s) zoned Affordable
Housing Planned Unit Development (AH-PUD) without first obtaining growth
management approvals if the newly created parcel(s) is requiredto obtain such growth
management approvals prior to development through a legal instrument acceptable to
the City Attorney. (Ord. No. 44-2001, ~ 2)
Staff Finding
The Applicants have requested approval of the applicable GMQS exemptions to develop
the proposal. Action shall be taken on the proposed GMQS exemption at the same time
that action is taken on the subdivision and PUD portions of the application. Staff finds
this criterion to be met if the GMQS exemption is approved.
- 32-
VARIANCES FROM RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS
SECONDARY MASS AND FIRST STORY ELEMENT STANDARDS
REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS
Land Use Code Section 26.410.020, Variances, establishes that a variance from the
residential design standards must:
1. Provide an appropriate design or pattern of development considering the
context in which the development is proposed and the purpose of the particular
standard. In evaluating the context as it is used in the criteria, the reviewing board
may consider the relationship of the proposed development with adjacent structures,
the immediate neighborhood setting, or a broader vicinity as the board feels is
necessary to determine if the exception is warranted; or,
2. Be clearly necessary for reasons of fairness related to unusual site-specific
constraints.
Staff Finding:
The .variances from the residential design standards that are needed to construct the
proposed development include variances from the Secondary Mass and First Story
Element Standards. In reviewing the variance requests, Staff believes that the structures
in the immediate neighborhood do not meet the residential design standards from which
the Applicants are asking for relief. Therefore, Staff feels that granting a variance from
the secondary mass and first-story element standards for the proposed development
allows the structure to include design elements that are in context with the other buildings
on West Hopkins Avenue.
Staff believes that the proposal meets the intent of the secondary mass and first-story
element standards even though the design does not technically meet the requirements.
The massing of the proposal is broken up by pedestrian walkways that traverse the site
and make the street facing fa9ade appear to be several buildings. Additionally, the street
facing fa9ade contains elements that are one-story of living space with a deck above to
make it appear as a one-story element. Staff finds these criteria to be met by the proposal.
- 33 -
'4'\ \ '0
MEMORANDUM
THRU:
Mayor Klanderud and City Council
Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~
James Lindt, Planner 6L
First Reading of Ordinance No.)&; Series of 2005- Seasonal Outdoor Food
Vending GMQS Exemption
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
January 10, 2005
SUMMARY:
City Council approved a temporary land use code amendment in June 2004 inserting language
into the land use code that allows for restaurants and retailers in the Commercial Core Zone
District to conduct seasonal outdoor food vending on private property, private open space, or
public property that is subject to a mall lease for outdoor restaurant seating. Ordinance No. 23,
Series of 2004, included a stipulation that the land use code language that was approved would
only be in place until December 31, 2004. This sunset stipulation was included because the
seasonal outdoor food vending was proposed to be a one summer experiment to be revaluated
after the summer concluded. Staff is bringing this code language back to City Council to see if
Council would like to extend the ability to conduct outdoor food vending in the Commercial
Core for another summer.
Ev ALUA TION OF EXPERIMENT:
In evaluating this past summer's experiment to allow for outdoor food vending in the
Commercial Core, Staff did not encounter any major problems in relation to the allowance. of
outdoor food vending or the regulating criteria that were enacted in Ordinance No. 23. However,
the lack of problems observed by Staff could be due in part to the fact that Staff did not see very
many requests to conduct outdoor food vending activities.
Staff recommends that City Council extend the language approved in Ordinance No. 23 for
one more year. Staff feels that there could be more interest in seasonal outdoor food vending
this coming summer if business owners know well in advance that this allowance exists. This
past summer, the code amendment allowing for outdoor food vending was not approved until
June, which did not give any time for business owners in the Commercial Core to plan to conduct
outdoor food vending activities. Additionally, Staff anticipates an increase in activity because
the Community Development Staff received some inquiries this past summer that did not turn
into official requests to conduct outdoor food vending activities.
EXISTING CODE LANGUAGE:
The code language that was approved in Ordinance No. 23 reads as follows:
Section 26.470.070(E)(3), GMQS Exemptionfor Outdoor Food Vending:
A temporary use of outdoor food vending by a restaurant or retailer on private property, private
open space, or public property that is subject to a mall lease for food vending or outdoor
restaurant seating in the Commercial Core (CC) Zone District shall be reviewed by the
Community Development Director. This exemption is available provided that the following
criterion are met:
1. The area of outdoor food vending activities may not exceedfiffy (50) square feet. The
area of outdoor food vending activities shall be defined as a counter area, equipment
needed for the food vending activities (e.g. cooler with drinks, snow cone machine,
popcorn machine, etc.), and the space needed by employees to work the food vending
activity.
2. Temporary outdoor food vending may only occur by or in association with restaurant
or retail uses and with the approval of the restaurant or retail establishment's owner
in which the outdoor food vending is associated and located adjacent to.
3. An application to the Community Development Director for temporary outdoor food
vending shall only be submitted and approved subsequent to submitting and obtaining
approval of a food service plan from the Environmental Health Department. The
area of outdoor food vending activities shall include a waste dil>posal container that
shall be emptied daily and stored inside at night and when the outdoor food vending
activities are not in operation. Additionally, no outdoor, open~f1ame char-broiling
shall be permitted pursuant to Municipal Code Section 13.08.100, Restaurant Grills.
4. The Community Development Director shall waive affordable housing mitigation fees
associated with the temporary new net leasable square footage being created by
outdoorfiJOd vending activities.
5. The temporary outdoor food vending activities shall be limited to the seasonal time
period between June t" and October 31". An application for and an approval of
temporary outdoor vending activities shall not constitute nor be interpreted by any
property owner, developer, vendor, or court as a site specific development plan
entitled to vesting under Article 68 of Title 24 of the Colorado Revised Statutes or
Chapter 26.308 of this Title. Approvals granted in this subsection are subject to
revocation by the City Manager or Community Development Director without
requiring prior notice.
6. An application for temporary outdoor food vending activities shall not diminish the
general public health, safety or welfare and shall abide by all applicable City
regulations, including but not limited to building codes, health safety codes, fire
codes, liquor laws, sign and lighting codes, and sales tax license regulations.
2
7. Each vendor wishing to operate outdoor food vending activities shall apply for and
be approved for a permit (no fee required) to do so prior to commencing operations.
Applicable Environmental Health Plan Review fees shall apply.
Section 26.575. 030(A) (J 0), Open Space Commercial Restaurant Use
10. Commercial restaurant use. The provision above notwithstanding, required open
space may be used for commercial restaurant use if the Planning and Zoning
Commission determined by Special Review (See Chapter 26.430), that such use is
compatible with or enhances the purposes of these open space requirements and that
adequate pedestrian and emergency vehicle access will be maintained, unless
otherwise approved as set forth in Land Use Code Section 26.470.070(E)(3), GMQS
Exemptionfor Outdoor Food Vending.
EXTEND TO LANGUAGE TO WINTER SEASON:
Staff has had several inquiries from people who would like the outdoor food vending exemption
extended to the winter months as well, so that they could set up an outdoor food vending
operation. City Council may extend the exemption to the winter months by simply
amending subsection 5 of the proposed language (italicized above) to change the dates to
include the winter months.
In evaluating whether the outdoor food vending exemption should be extended to the winter
months, Staff sees no reason why it should not be extended. Extending the exemption to the
winter months may enhance a visitor's experience in town and encourage them to return to
Aspen. Staff believes that extending the outdoor food vending exemption to the winter months
may further enliven the commercial core and mall area.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
As was previously discussed, Staff would recommend that City Council extend the
language approved in Ordinance No. 23, Series of 2004, for another year so that Staff can
continue to evaluate the experiment of allowing for seasonal outdoor food vending in the
Commercial Core. Moreover, Staff does not feel that this past summer was a good
indicator of the successes and possible problems of the seasonal outdoor food vending
program.
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: ~~-c..9 W"..fv<;-.-{'.
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve upon first reading, Ordinance No. d., , Series of 2005, extending the time
period in which the land use code language approved in Ordinance No. 23, Series of 2004 is
active, until December 31, 2005."
Attachments:
Exhibit A: Review Criteria and Staff Findings
3
ORDINANCE NO. c2::..
(SERlES OF 2005)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO,
APPROVING A CODE AMENDMENT EXTENDING THE ACTIVATION PERIOD OF
THE LAND USE CODE LANGUAGE APPROVED IN
ORDINANCE NO. 23, SERIES OF 2004
WHEREAS, the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission (CCLC) indicated to the
City Manager's Office that they would like to provide the ability for retailers and restaurants in
the Commercial Core to do seasonal outdoor food vending in May of2004; and,
WHEREAS, amendments to Title 26, the City of Aspen Land Use Code were required
to provide such allowances for seasonal outdoor food vending; and,
WHEREAS, City Council approved land use code amendments to create a GMQS
exemption to allow for seasonal outdoor food vending pursuant to Ordinance No. 23, Series of
2004, in June of2004; and,
WHEREAS, the GMQS exemption for seasonal outdoor food vending was considered
experiment and Ordinance No. 23, Series of 2004, included code amendments that would be
rendered null and void on December 31, 2004, unless City Council readopts the language; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on January 24, 2005, the Aspen City
Council reviewed and approved by a _to _ L - -'> vote, a request by the City of Aspen
Community Development Department to extend the time period by one year in which the land
use code language approved in Ordinance No. 23, Series of2004, would actively apply; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed code amendments to Sections
26.470.070, Growth management exemptions, and 26.57S.030(A)(lO), Open Space Commercial
Restaurant Use, meet or exceed all applicable amendment standards and that the approval of these
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; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDERED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ASPEN THAT:
Section 1
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, City
Council hereby extends the time period by one year in which the land use code language
approved in Ordinance No. 23, Series of2004, would actively apply.
Section 2
The land use code language that was approved and added to the code pursuant to Ordinance No.
23, Series of2004, is to remain active until December 31, 2005, reads as follows:
Section 26. 470. 070(E)(3), GMQS Exemptionfor Outdoor Food Vending:
A temporary use of outdoor food vending by a restaurant or retailer on private property,
private open space, or public property that is subject to a mall lease for food vending or
outdoor restaurant seating in the Commercial Core (CC) Zone District shall be reviewed by the
Community Development Director. This exemption is available provided that the following
criteria are met:
1. The area of outdoor food vending activities may not exceed fifty (50) square feet.
The area of outdoor food vending activities shall be defined as a counter area.
equipment neededfor the food vending activities (e.g. cooler with drinks, snow cone
machine, popcorn machine, etc.), and the space needed by employees to work the
food vending activity.
2. Temporary outdoor food vending may only occur by or in association with
restaurant or retail uses and with the approval of the restaurant or retail
establishment's owner in which the outdoor food vending is associated and located
adjacent to.
3. An application to the Community Development Director for temporary outdoor food
vending shall only be submitted and approved subsequent to submitting and
obtaining approval of a food service plan from the Environmental Health
Department. The area of outdoor food vending activities shall include a waste
disposal container that shall be emptied daily and stored inside at night and when
the outdoor food vending activities are not in operation. Additionally, no outdoor,
open:flame char-broiling shall be permitted pursuant to Municipal Code Section
13. 08.1 00, Restaurant Grills.
4. The Community Development Director shall waive affordable housing mitigation
fees associated with the temporary new net leasable square footage being created by
outdoor food vending activities.
5. The temporary outdoorfood vending activities shall be limited to the seasonal time
period between June 1st and October 3rt An application for and an approval of
temporary outdoor vending activities shall not constitute nor be interpreted by any
property owner, developer, vendor, or court as a site specific development plan
entitled to vesting under Article 68 of Title 24 of the Colorado Revised Statutes or
Chapter 26.308 of this Title. Approvals granted in this subsection are subject to
revocation by the City Manager or Community Development Director without
requiring prior notice.
6. An application for temporary outdoor food vending activities shall not diminish the
general public health, safety or welfare and shall abide by all applicable City
regulations, including but not limited to building codes, health safety codes, fire
codes. liquor laws, sign and lighting codes, and sales tax license regulations.
7.
Each vendor wishing to operate outdoor food vending activities shall apply for and
be approvedfor a permit (no fee required) to do so prior to commencing operations.
Applicable Environmental Health Plan Reviewfees shall apply.
Sectiun 26.575.030(A)(10), Open Space Commercial Restaurant Use
10. Commercial restaurant use. The provision above notwithstanding, required open
space may be used for commercial restaurant use if the Planning and Zoning
Commission determines by Special Review (See Chapter 26.430), that such use is
compatible with or enhances the purposes of these upen space requirements and
that adequate pedestrian and emergency vehicle access will be maintained, unless
otherwise appruved as set furth in Land Use Code Sectiun 26.470.070(E)(3),
GMQS Exemption for Outdoor Food Vending.
Section 3:
This ordinance shall be in place until December 31,2005, at which time it will become null and
void unless readopted by City Council.
Section 4:
This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any
action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue ofthe ordinances repealed or amended as
herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances.
Section 5:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason
held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a
separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions thereof.
Section 6:
A public hearing on this Ordinance was held on the 24th day of January, 2005, at 5:00 p.m. in the
City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado.
INTRODUCED, READ, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City
Council of the City of Aspen on this 10th day of January, 2005.
ATTEST:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor
FINALLY, adopted, passed, and approved this 24" day of January, 2005.
ATTEST:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor
Approved as to form:
John Worcester, City Attorney
EXHIBIT A
AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE CODE
REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS
Section 26.310.040, Text Amendment Standards of Review
In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, the City Council and the
Commission shall consider:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of
this title.
Staff Finding:
Staff does not believe the existing code language is in conflict with any other applicable portions
of this title or the Municipal Code. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen
Area Comprehensive Plan.
Staff Finding:
Staff does not believe that the eXlstmg code language is in conflict with the Aspen Area
Community Plan. Generally, Staff believes that the existing code language on this matter will
allow for additional vitality in the commercial core area. However, Staff has intended the
language to allow for an experimental time period that could lead to permanent allowance for
outdoor food vending if the negative impacts are moderate. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts
and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics.
Staff Finding:
This standard is primarily geared towards rezoning applications. Staff does not find this criterion
to be applicable.
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety.
Staff Finding:
Staff does not believe that the existing code language will have a significant impact on traffic
generation or an impact on road safety. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in
demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed
amendment would exceed the capacity of such facilities, including, but not
5
limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks,
drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities.
Staff Finding:
This criterion applies to rezoning applications and does not apply to this text amendment.
F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in
significant adverse impacts on the natural environment.
Staff Finding:
Staff does not feel that the existing code language will result in adverse impacts on thc natural
environment. Staff has added a criterion to the proposed GMQS exemption that requires that a
waste disposal container be provided at each outdoor food vending area. Moreover. Staff is
requiring that these waste disposal containers be taken inside during the evening and when
outdoor vending activities are not occurring. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the
community character in the City of Aspen.
Staff Finding:
Staff believes that the existing code language is consistent with the community character of
Aspen and the messy vitality that Aspen has traditionally displayed and been proud of. Staff
finds this criterion to be met.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the
surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment.
Staff Finding:
This criterion applies to rezoning applications and does not apply to this text amendment.
I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest,
and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title.
Staff Finding:
Staff feels that the existing code language will likely bring added vitality to the commercial core
area and may increase dwell times in the commercial core area as was encouraged by the analysis
provided by financial consultants Frick and Beer and is in the public interest. Staff finds this
criterion to be met.
6
ORDINANCE NO. 23
(SERIES OF 2004)
AN ORDINANCE OF TlIE CftYCO(JNca OF THE c:IT'f9FA5P}j;N, C:OLORADO,
TO AMEND LAND USE CODESECTIt)1Ii 26.4'7I1.iJ711,' GkOWih MANAGEMENT
EXEMPTIONS, AND LAN)) tjSECOIj'ESECTION2'6.575:O:3"~(A)(1.1I), (iPElV$P;{C1J
COMMERCIAL RESTAUkANT USE; to CREAtE A REVlEW. PROGESS FOR
SEASONAL OtJTDOOR Foo]j~mc'm'"'1':H'E'''C9~ERCjALtCOR:EIN
WHICfI AFFORD.A:lJLE.....H OtJS.i1N.C." MTI......TIGATIO. ri'REQtJ'1REMENfSAR'k'WAtVEn;
AND DECLARING AN EMERm:N'CY. ." ." .
WHEREAS, the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission (CCLC) indicated to the
City Manager's Office that they would like to provide the ability for retailers and restaurants in
the Commercial Core to do seasonal outdoor food vending; and,
WHEREAS, amendments to Title 26, the City of Aspen Land Use Code are required to
provide such allowances for outdoor food vending; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed code amendments to Sections
26.470.070, Growth management exemptions, and 26.575.030(A)(1O), Open Space Commercial
Restaurant Use, meet or exceed all applicable amendment standards arid that the approval of th~se
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; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 4.11 of the Charter, the City is authorized to adopt
emergency ordinances for the preservation of public property, health, peace, or safety; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDERED.BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ASPEN THAT:
'-'.--:
Section 1
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code, the
Code Amendment application to amend the land use code to allow for an administrative GMQS
exemption process for outdoor food vending is hereby approved.
Section 2
Land Use Code Section 26.470.070, GMQS exemptions, shall be amended to add Section
26.470.070(E)(3), GMQS Exemption for Outdoor Food Vending to read as follows:
Section 26.470.070(E)(3), GMQS Exemption for Outdoor Food Vending:
A temporary use of outdoor food vending by a restaurant or retailer on private property,
private open space,' or 'public property that is subject to a mall lease for food vending or
outdoor restaurant seating in the Commercial Core (CG) Zone District shall be reviewed by the
_;.L~.~
Community Development Director. This exemption is available provided that the following
criterion are met:
1. The area of outdoor food vending activities may not exceed fifty (50) square feet.
The area of outdoor food vending activities shall be defined as a counter area,
equipment needed for the food vending activities (e.g. cooler with drinks, snow cone
machine, popcorn machine, etc), and the space needed by employees to work the
food vending activity.
2. Temporary outdoor food vending may only OCcur by or in association with
restaurant or retail uses and with the approval of the restaurant or retail
establishment's owner in which the outdoor food vending is associated and located
adjacent to,
3. An application to the Community Development Director for temporary outdoor food
vending shall only be submitted and approved subsequent to submitting and
obtaining approval of a food service plan from the Environmental Health
Department. The area of outdoor food vending activities shall include a waste
disposal container that shall be emptied daily and stored inside at night and when
the outdoor food vending activities are not in operation. Additionally, no outdoor,
openllame char-broiling shall be permitted pursuant to Municipal Code Section
13.08.100, Restaurant Grills.
4. The Community Development Director shall waive affordable housing mitigation
fees associated with the temporary new net leasable square footage being created by
outdoor food vending activities.
5. The temporary outdoor food vending activities shall be limited to the seasonal time
period between June 1" and October 31". An application for and an approval of
temporary outdoor vending activities shall not constitute nor be interpreted by any
property owner, developer, vendor, or court as a site specific development plan
entitled to vesting under Article 68 of Title 24 of the Colorado Revised Statutes or
Chapter 26.308 of this Title. Approvals granted in this subsection are subject to
revocation by the City Manager 01' Community Development Director without
requiring prior notice.
6. An application for temporary outdoor food vending activities shall not diminish the
general public health, safety or welfare and shall abide by all applicable City
regulations, including but not limited to building codes, health safety codes, .fire
codes, liquor laws, sign and lighting codes, and sales tax license regulations.
7. Each vendor wishing to operate outdoor food vending activities shall apply for and
be approved for a permit (no fee required) to do so prior to commencing operations.
Applicable Environmental Health Plan Review fees shall apply.
Section 3
That Land Use Code S~etion 26.575.030(A)(IO), Open Space Commercial Restaurant Use,
shall be amended to read as follows:
10. Commercial restaurant use. The provision above notwithstanding, required
open space may be used for commercial restaurant use if the Planning and
Zoning Commission determined by Special Review (See Chapter 26.430), that
such use is compatible with or enhances the purposes of these open space
requirements and that adequate pedestrian and emergency vehicle access will be
maintained, unless othenvise approved as set forth in Land Use Code Section
26.470.070(E)(3), GMQS Exemptionfor Outdoor Food Vending.
Section 4:
This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any
action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as
herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances.
Section 5:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason
held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a
separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining
portions thereof.
Section 6:
The City Council recognizes that the recent national and local economy has caused many local
businesses in the City of Aspen commercial core to suffer and there is an urgent need to increase
tourist traffic through the comm~rcial core thus benefiting the entire Aspen economy; therefore,
the City Council hereby determines that there is an urgency and need for amending the Aspen
Land Use Code as hereinbefore proposed in order to preserve public property, health, peace and
safety. This ordinance shall take effect upon final passage.
Section 7:
This ordinance shall be in place until December 31, 2004, at which time it will become null and
void unless readopted.
Section 8:
Second Reading of the Ordinance was held on the 15th day of June, 2004, at 5:00 p.m. in the City
Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado.
INTRODUCED, READ, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as an emergency ordinance as
provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on this 14th day of June, 2004.
. '''J''"~ "- "J
ATTEST:
"':"". '~
FINALLY, adopted, passed by a four to zero (4-0) vote and approved this 15th day of June, 2004.
. . i
.,~~.. .
ATTEST:
Approved as to form:
'~r/7h'~
~ orees er, City Attorney
-"......""2'...' "J.,;.'"."'",-_.,
Outdoor Food Vendinl!: Extension Notes
This is a public hearing to consider extending the GMQS exemption language that was put into
the land use code to allow for seasonal, outdoor food vending on private property, private open
space and public right-of-way that is subject to a mall lease for outdoor seating in the
Commercial Core without requiring employee housing mitigation. This language that was put
into the land use code contained a provision that it would expire on December 31 sl of this past
year. The expiration date was put into the code language because allowing for seasonal outdoor
food vending was intended to be a one summer experiment to bring some added vitality and life
to the commercial core.
In monitoring the success of the language, Staff did not get very many requests from restaurants
or retailers to provide outdoor food vending this past summer. However, Staff would
recommend that City Council extend the GMQS exemption language for another summer. Staff
feels that this past summer was not good barometer of it's success in that it was passed in mid
June last summer and commercial core business owners did not have much time to plan to
provide outdoor food vending. Additionally, Staff has been contacted by several people
interested in doing outdoor food vending for this coming summer. The language proposed in the
attached ordinance is identical to that which existed in the code for this past summer.
Therefore, Staff would recommend that Council approved the attached ordinance to extend the
GMQS exemption for outdoor food vending for one more year to expire on December 31 st, 2005.
MEMORANDUM
\/\\\c.,
DATE:
Mayor Klanderud and City Council nIl!
Chris Bendon, Community Development Directorl}\J~~
James Lindt, Planner 3'l.--
1st Reading of Ordinance No.3, Series of 2005- Rezoning of 1201 Riverside
Drive to the R-6 (Medium-Density Residential) Zone District
January 10,2005
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
RE:
ApPLICANT /OWNER:
Dale Hower
LOCATION: 1201 Riverside Drive
PARCEL ID NUMBER: 2737-181-00-024
CURRENT ZONING: R-15 (Moderate-Density Residential) zone district.
PROPOSED ZONING: R-6 (Medium-Density Residential) zone district.
? SUMMARY: The Applicant requests to rezone the property located at 120 I Riverside Drive from
the R-15 zone district to the R-6 zone district in order to construct two (2) detached residential
dwelling units rather than a single-family residence on the subject property.
ApPROVED AND CURRENT LAND USE: 1201 Riverside Drive currently contains a single-family
residence that is zoned R-15 (Moderate-Density Residential).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Approval
SUMMARY:
The Applicant is requesting to rezone 1201 Riverside Drive (see Exhibit "B" for vicinity
map) from the R-IS (Moderate-Density Residential) zone district to the R-6 (Medium-
Density Residential) zone district in order to construct two (2) detached residential structures
as is allowed in the R-6 zone district pursuant to Land Use Code Section 26.710.050, R-6
(Medium-Density Residential) Zone District. The zoning map originally showed the property
as being zoned R-6, and the Applicant designed two (2) detached residential dwelling units
for the property and applied for a building permit. However, during the building permit
review process for the property, a neighbor contested the zoning of the subject parcel
contending that the zoning map was in error and that the property was really zoned R-15.
Subsequently, the Community Development Director issued a land use code interpretation
that established that a property has to be rezoned by ordinance regardless of what the official
zone district map indicates, in order for a rezoning to be considered legal. The Applicant
appealed this interpretation to City Council and City Council upheld the interpretation of the
Community Development Director. After the appeal concluded, the Applicant filed a lawsuit
against the City and an agreement was reached in which the Applicant was directed to file a
rezoning application to rezone the property to the R -6 zone district.
REVIEW PROCEDURE
Rezoning (Two Step Review). City Council may approve or deny an application for
rezoning, after considering a recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Commission, a
recommendation from the Community Development Director, and after considering public
comment.
STAFF COMMENTS:
Rezoning:
The subject property abuts land to the south that is zoned R-1S and land to the north that is
zoned R-6 (please see zoning map attached as Exhibit "C"). That being the case, Staff
does not believe that the proposed rezoning application would be considered "spot zoning",
which is discouraged as a method of fundamental planning. Additionally, a large portion
of the subject property was not located in the original Riverside Subdivision (please see
Exhibit "E" for map identifying the portion of the property that was located in the original
Riverside Subdivision), which is the subdivision located to the south of the property and is
zoned R-1S in its entirety. Thus, Staff does not believe that the property has a significant
historical relationship with the properties in the R-1S zoned Riverside Subdivision in terms
of lot layout and characteristics.
In comparing the allowable development rights between the existing and proposed zoning,
Staff believes that the proposal to rezone the property will actually reduce the allowable
floor area ratio (FAR) that can be constructed on the site. Under the existing R-1S zone
district requirements, the Applicant could only build a single-family residence and it would
be allowed a total FAR of about 4,440 square feet. Under the proposed R-6 zoning, the
Applicant would have the ability to construct two (2) detached single-family residential
units or a duplex with a total.combined allowable FAR of about 4,390 square feet.
Staff also feels that allowing for two (2) smaller residences to be constructed on the
property instead of one large residence will likely reduce the apparent mass of structures on
the site. Additionally, the property is currently non-conforming in relation to its lot size in
that the property is only 14,179 square feet and the existing R-IS zoning has a minimum lot
size of 15,000 square feet. The proposed rezoning would bring the lot into zoning
conformance with respect to its lot size. Moreover, the proposed rezoning would not
create any zoning non-conformity in relation to the existing single-family residence on the
property.
TRAFFIC GENERATION:
Staff does believe that the development potential of the property after the proposed rezoning
could allow for development that would increase the amount of traffic on Riverside Drive
given that the proposed zoning would allow the Applicant to construct one more residential
unit than would be allowed under the existing zoning. However, Staff believes that the
amount of additional traftic provided by the one additional unit allowed under the proposed
zoning would be minimal.
2
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff finds that the proposed rezoning application meets or exceeds the requirements set
forth in Land Use Code Section 26.310.040, Amendments to the Land Use Code and
Official Zone District Map, to approve an amendment to the official zone district map.
Staff recommends that City Council rezone the property at 1201 Riverside Drive to the R-6
zone district.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the rezoning request and unanimously
recommended that City Council rezone the property at 1201 Riverside Drive to the R-6
zone district. The Planning and Zoning Commission's resolution is attached as Exhibit
"E" and the minutes from the December 7''' hearing will be included in the City Council
packet for 2nd reading of the proposed ordinance.
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS:
~n" d '~~lyJ ~i )?{:, ){Qi~
RECOMMENDED MOTION (ALL MOTIONS ARE PROPOSED IN THE AFFIRMATIVE):
"I move to approve, upon first reading, Ordinance No. :5 , Series of 2004, rezoning the
property located at 1201 Riverside Drive, Lots 6-9, and a portion of the alley, Block 24,
Riverside Addition to the City and Townsite of Aspen, from the R-IS Zone District to the
R-6 Zone District."
Attachments:
Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings
Exhibit B -- Vicinity Map
Exhibit C -- Current Zoning Map
Exhibit D -- Map Indicating Subdivision Makeup of Property
Exhibit E -- Planning and Zoning Commission Resolution
3
ORDIANANCE No.3
(SERlES OF 2005)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REZONING 1201 RIVERSIDE
DRIVE TO THE R-6 (MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) ZONE DISTRICT, LOTS
6-9 AND A PORTION OF THE ALLEY, BLOCK 24, RIVERSIDE ADDITION TO THE
CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO.
Parcel ID: 2737-181-00-024
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from
Dale Hower, requesting to rezone 1201 Riverside Drive from the R-15 (moderate-density
residential) zone district to the R-6 (medium-density residential) zone district; and,
WHEREAS, upon review of the application, the applicable code standards, the
Community Development Department recommended approval for the proposed rezoning
application; 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; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on December 7, 2004, the
Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 19, Series of 2004, by a seven to
zero (7-0) vote, recommending that City Council rezone the property at 1201 Riverside Drive
to the R-6 (medium-density residential) zone district; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the development
proposal under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has
reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission, the
Community Development Director, the applicable referral agencies, and has taken and
considered public comment at a public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on February 14, 2005, the Aspen
City Council approved Ordinance No. _, Series of 2005, by a _ to _ L-~ vote,
rezoning the property at 1201 Riverside Drive to the R-6 (medium-density residential) zone
district; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or exceeds all
applicable development standards and that the approval of the development proposal, with
conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the
promotion of public health, safety, and welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,
COLORADO THAT:
4
Section 1:
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Land Use Section 26.310, Amendments to
the Land Use Code and (}fficial Zone District Map, City Council hereby rezones the property
located at 1201 Riverside Drive to the R-6 (medium-density residential) zone district.
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 was held on the 14th day of February, 2004, in the City
Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City
Council of the City of Aspen on the lOth day of January, 2004.
Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved by a vote of_ to _ L---.J, this 14th day of
February, 2004.
Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
John P. Worcester, City Attorney
5
EXHIBIT A
REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS
REZONING FROM THE R-15 (MODERATE-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) ZONE DISTRICT TO THE
R-6 (MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) ZONE DISTRICT
REVIEW CRITERIA & STAFF FINDINGS
In reviewing an amendment to the official zone district map, City Council shall consider:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable
portions of this title.
Staff Finding
Staff does not feel that the proposed rezoning application is in conflict with any portion of
the Land Use Code. Actually, the proposed rezoning will allow for the subject parcel to be
brought into conformance with zoning in relation to its minimum lot size. In addition, the
proposed rezoning application will not create any zoning non-conformities with respect to the
existing residence. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the
Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposed rezoning application is consistent with the Aspen Area
Community Plan. The future land use map that is included in the AACP envisions this site a
residential property, by which the proposed rezoning is consistent. Additionally, Staff feels
that the proposed rezoning would allow for the possibility of having two (2) smaller
residences on the property as opposed to one large residence, which would likely break up
the apparent mass of structures on the site as is encouraged by the residential design
standards that are included in the land use code. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone
districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood
characteristics.
Staff Finding
The subject property abuts land that is zoned both R-6 and R-IS, so the proposed rezoning
application would not create spot zoning. Additionally, the allowable FAR for the site would
be similar regardless of whether the property is rezoned or not as was detailed in the staff
memo. The allowed uses under both the existing and proposed zoning are similar in that they
both are primarily intended for the development of single-family and duplex residential
development. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
D. The effect ofthe proposed amendment on traffic generation and road
safety.
6
Staff Finding
Staff does not believe that the proposed rezoning will have a significant effect on traffic
generation or road safety because the proposed rezoning would at most add one additional
allowed residential unit to the property. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result
in demands on public facilities, and whether the extent to which the
proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such facilities,
including, but not limited to, transportation facilities, sewage facilities,
water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities.
Staff Finding
Staff does not feel that there will be an increase in the demand for public facilities as a result
of the proposed rezoning request. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result
in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment.
Staff Finding
Staff does not believe that the proposed rezoning application would result in significant
adverse impacts on the environment. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the
community character in the City of Aspen.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposed rezoning application is consistent with the community and
neighborhood character of the area in that the new zoning would only allow for detached
single-family or duplex residential dwelling units as is consistent with the predominant uses
in the area. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel
or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed
amendment.
Staff Finding
Staff has not identified any changed conditions in the neighborhood that would support the
proposed amendment; however, the proposed rezoning would correct the existing non-
conformity in relation to the property's lot size. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public
interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this title.
Staff Finding
Staff believes that the proposed rezoning application would not be in conflict with the
purpose and intent of the land use code or the public interest. In fact, the proposed rezoning
application would bring the subject parcel into complete zoning compliance. Staff finds this
criterion to be met.
7
Exhibit "8"
1201 Riverside Drive Vicinity Map
N
100
I
200
I
400 Feet
w
E
I
o
s
Exhibit, 'C"
1201 Riverside Drive Zoning Map
N
o
175
350
700
1,050
1,400
Feet
Makeup of Subject Property
Exhibit ".1)"
! /
f/
;
f
.-
1"':-'"
...,.'- -----,
Iff" ,~ \
f t \ 1.
r ! \ \
j \ \
{ \ i
\ \ i
, I \
'. Ii
, I I
, I
L,
I,
",-' j
, I
g
N
100
I
200
I
400 Feet
w
E
I
o
s
"':: [.',
., ~
~ ~ .
!WI'!I ~
':JiQ~h~. -
1{,,!11i '
,..., .I,. .
.,i't ","
ml;.:j .
..lj 4 ~li '
:8~PP
Hhl,l
l~ ~;':\
'1;!!ii
1(lil11
.a..d~'
r~
'11".,-
/""'~
\-0
,
~
" .
~ r::~
;J~~~
~pg~ .....
f~~~ ~
~g'i.~ r
~1:~:~
:"'55.3
,-;z.
g -i
'"
~
~8~ .~
Z;;oVl' --0
-tOo :'D
xt:fTl 0
~ V>
. n <
o}:i::-. fTl
~~~o ~
~-fT1o '11TJ
_~~ffi -t Z
~o~z~ -l
~
::_/~~g~ 0<>
~~~.-l6-,
i :;0 ~nVl '
~ ~~;-gfT10 0
" o-lm))T1 \J
~,..,"'" :;:lo 0
ozzZ')>G)
'::0 r::O
~n::OofTl P.
;;~:::;~x lJ
-~!:ri-;~ I
-<-i()['1t----;
:::OO~::On
~Z..-
DU~ U)
~.l::oO C
fll~fT1 .::0
;:o;:.[j <'
~ fTl
-<
~. t;
...'~. ~
H
f ~
'a
:-' P
g ~
" 8
\, ;~ \ \ \~:.. :
~., ,> . ~t.,!I'I.lllrf1II'O'I'
, ~\\'" '\:~ ,.".~,(",-""~I:~~ ,,,., ~':lj ;,,,:' .:,IIIUI,IS
\ ':. \: \\\ .~: \\\~. \ <..~ ' . I
\ ~". ,,<\,:..\";' \ .' "( <' \ ~. ----''"''.,.....---.---'.. - -
\ \ . ~. ,.". ~. -' .
,\ " J \ ~\'\""\ \f!~ \ \' ~\\\ \it ,..,: ~r~\
\~... "\"''' "1 u \ \ - i ~
'-- t.. ~ ';.. ~ ':',,"~ ,,.,,'1;,; ~ ~ \ ~
."\\ ~ \oo:;\..\,~.,\ '1\ \\ \ \ "
.' ,I ,\ "\ \
i Ii \ I' ~ .1 .;,j~ \ \ \
1 111 1 t':~J .~ \ \ \ \ "'.
I II r 1 1 \.~ 1 \ \ \
I \ I I :~. \ \ '~'" \ ~
.~,.H,J..~1.\ \ \ -"
. Alii r" '\ \ Iii 1~
" .' -.'1/ ~\I I' \!':'" i~ ;i~
\': 10{1 I ~t: \ \ \ !~'~
ii' I I ~ \ \ \ ~ i
II. .111\ I . ~; \ \ \ \ ,:1
\!'N I I ',U: \ \ \. ~ii
IjJ ... \ 1'(
III I.:t~jf ~ '."""",~")'-)4 i' I
I III Ilt/ .~ 'i"7~/!gc I /)~ I'
_~ I . I .~' 1ft I
I fl'! : 1 ,j !~l.r;." - t~1 I,
I. I d./ '. /1 j'j I ~~ ~;;1": .1'
I l '., . . ' 'r. j.
) / i.i~;~!. \. '-".! ~ I \ \\ \ - ;li "
.i ""~,.,~, . I'fl "" ,i! 'I . ~'" '1'
~.. --,.' J ". y--<-- \ \.
..~_ ,~;J:I,,"----- ',,~ I :", \ ?' _..c"- ~ h 1 '\
?l '1;- l . \' /:. ( ,,-' :..5, "
. '. .' :":;) ) \ ;;, I ',', '- ~ ~r'
." \\ i ,.,' /,,:. 'f" '-'~ 'l' ",
,/ :i': IJI . '\/" ',:. .i \ 'I' : \\'/~IY''/
.G' ", . ' ~~ r G l5 ... ,.J
,.~' "~. w'/' )..' <l.\ ~..'" i: to"
l:P":J ' ' .~...~ / slit \11 t: /" '
. ,oo~~.a;'.['-{" ';~ v//."'" .~. .' 1~ !;;: lA" '
'..i "..",.,/ I"~ ,.,. _ : "". .' "~ 'f \
".. "1" it ':...; ,;",'! / \."7 ",',.., ,:'\'OO'IO,<\-.f:! ,f~
""./,..." ,,::: ::', . ./ '" ,.,,' " II .,.,,' '. l"d!t"_ f'
~---"_ ,,' _ " :";' ",,,,,i.""'''' , .
lACfTlUiiii,Vi----.L- ,','. i \ \ "'"'''.'.''' - .'----
'"'-4I".n .SIOH / ---. - T _ _ ~ . ~ ... \ Q" ~~.~. .t~. "----..
""'" ".. _-,-_~_ '0 r .r".'- -,
/ ,.',' / -'- \, "" "
/ .-J,'. / LACf - & .:,,~.; ,
/ .' , / .... I 5UBOI-;;"."- - - ;: "... :i
",~...... / ' ,......" ",' ~ :. ~~:; '.'i~
,.,' / . . ~ - ,I "". ..
f / " '. ":"... t:~~_~ ~r
.. . Ii "
....' / i""" .".' .~ ';'\ =~~: .:~
.,' ~ "'.ii:'~I~=iai:~E:-,r"i~~ n ,'~~t;i'.W ~
a ~~~~_..!:s: ~I ~-~~ ~J. ~;~ l't. ..
.. a ,. .,.." -. ,,''t'. ,,'"'.~'; "'....
_,'" '~Iil.i:g<il~~ ~lBl=i.1 Ei .:~;; , l" ,...,,'''' ,.u".,
'i"j,l, ;,1,1'1 ,~" ' ,_..\"",;.:,,;,\:,iii~:,":::',~.,-../:,
~";" .I;" j' . i ,II
~~~~(, ti~ / ~!: 2,~
I";": '!'l," u;'
.-~e~!s I~ i;; i ~~ '~Nr1.
/~r.' ,!II';' ,:',
_I-~a ~:l "'I 'it ! A: ~
.. ::;~~!: ~ ; :'~' ~ :-....A
',...: 1""1' - 'E"
~ j~.~~f:~ "r; -i ~ !I~
i iJ:lIl:/i~:t-r.~I~ ~~9.
" ~::.d,i;~ 'x i! j" r ~i8
'i~::~II: "',,..n'i:~~
.. ;!/g: ~ ~ ~ ?: I ;~~
, ",,!' i" I - :,~
~ 'i;~i5~ ~ :;i" : ~ ~~~
!Ill' __ : ." ,,,a
l<~..i~f :; li~ ;~ ~d~
id~~9~ iii / --:; !~.Ii
~~':l~",1iI \:' _! ['. ~.ll~
;;:~~;i Il: ' ~ if;
i~~all:f' ~ "I~X
~,i;l~~ ~;
~~.i~ ~
I
! "1'<'"
~ _I tOg~I\:~GO..f~
I :; Il.QJ)' r -------\---
',- -----------".__-1'.............."'" ii\' II;'
, '''.. III \ . a~
0;7(:;;:" " \ in \.
,:'1>- II.i. Ij ,
,t" "~I' .'._1 ;,1," ;1! 11,...i \ ~.,,\ '
I; " / ' \ ,; \ II
~f;1 ~ '1~ Ii \ ~i
E '1 '\" ,i.i .
~.: . 'j' I, (I:;; \. .......
, .. I II' .;. .. I.i)
~ ~J ~. ;'.~~! ~ ~!J~i~
:;,,, , ~ J '1 \ 5'f~i
ii ~
ii iI11;'~ .:
~ ~ ,.,:. '~'"" t '''',1
/ l":;'~" "", ,r"
J'.." w 1II j
...../ {: i ~,
~I
i~
:
.
'I
J
.
11
"
a~
~ i~
,~~ Ef
.- /.
, "
, II
r'
-,
~,J
!!
" [:
~-~
~:r ~
--~
~::
~.~}!'
. z",13
~,
~
,
[
~~
it';
,"i
"
..... XI'
C \. I '~J} .
\-,------------.---------~
'/1<;:"
',' \ \
..,'.' "l":A~"'" ..;....J~,Ki
,,,,,,'Ut,,.,,,, I'" J::Il ---,II""
",,--J.1, __< 1_,:-- . l ii ' ".- . t - .
" : I_~ . Ii ,,,.~, . .'., I Ii'-- 1,.,
0:0 . ,<- I' .'. I. .:~ '
'-1/) ,,' . ,'. 1,'1 ii .....- r '/ I, '''J~l
,; H "! ,'!~, W,' i: .... if : ,.." .
;:: ;_~ ' ~ r\ I~~ ~I Ii ~ I~/" ~il i
~.~ ; , . r I' ill jl/"f~\i ~i',~
~ ......."., ..... " I.' ,;,l;;:{" I~' / / Ii
p "."""",,,,,,,,,, Ii' .. It' \ '
, ,..,wo..,--" Ir, :. .,;;....
, 'to ",,,,,--;-,,T\.r-- ~ _ ;........If~, .'j, -
~l~"
_ _ ~ f~
~
Cl
C')
~,
....,
.,~
C',l
=
C...::l
h
~,'
...u.,' _,'
~
~ i
i I
I
."
fij
~~:'"
,
~'"
;:!,$,
,~
~~
~;; J:
"-0 !iI,"
.:;
!@
~
i
,
i
.
I,
"
11
.
~
.... b;~O~~i-,"t~ ..~"
hA!:'~.f."~ ~&d1!:~:;:i
~~~~:~~i! ~t~~~~'i"
ii: ;! ~; . ,~ "i ~, ~
. j.lllE~ le!l,p,
io.gE2.'; ~~/E:~~
~~~:i~g ~~~.i~:~'~
,,~..~r'.... l!lz..~~-W
!..~il:;~~ ~~~~:8r~
l;!!.H~'~ .ll".o':l~~~~ "
he! "!,:(;i'~!':l-.. ~ S el
;!~",..l~~ ,t;:~iI~~~r:
~g~I~;': 8i4~:a~{~'
'iI';,! 11 !. i ~ l.',' ;. .. 1':1'
~_ ill ;;.." - c ,,~~ ~
'!. 0'1 'i:"'"
"M.i:~ ~.. ~!;f~~~~!
$i ~ ,-iii.... ,'- --; ~ ~..
~..!:~i~! iEg!<;:fi
, _ r.I iI ~ -'Ij{ Ii' .....,;i
!:~~...~!;{ '~. ,,::f:
B'il;.~t:lF3 rtr<~'(<l
... ~.. r ~;i .. ~.... 1
~ r,6 ~~ol:Q
<> ~ ;E t~
. ,
, ; i"
!
,
~
~ .
,
r;?:11 , kJ / f \ 'f; i/
RESOLUTION NO. 19
(SERIES OF 2004)
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT CITY COUNCIL REZONE 1201
RIVERSIDE DRIVE TO THE R-6 (MEDIUM-DENSITY) ZONE DISTRICT, LOTS
6-9 AND A PORTION OF THE ALLEY, BLOCK 24, RIVERSIDE ADDITION TO
THE CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO.
Parcel ID: 2737-181-00-024
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application
from Dale Hower, requesting to rezone 1201 Riverside Drive from the R-15 (Moderate-
Density Residential) Zone District to the R-6 (Medium-Density Residential) Zone District;
and,
WHEREAS, upon review of the application, the applicable code standards, the
Community Development Department recommended approval for the proposed rezoning
application; 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; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on May 18,2004, the Planning
and Zoning Commission opened and continued the review of the rezoning request to June
1,2004; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 1,2004, the Planning
and Zoning Commission opened and continued the review of the rezoning request to June
15, 2004; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on June 15,2004, the Planning
and Zoning Commission opened and continued the review of the rezoning request to July
6, 2004; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on July 6, 2004, the Planning
and Zoning Commission opened and continued the review of the rezoning request to
August 17,2004; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on August 17, 2004, the
Planning and Zoning Commission opened and continued the review of the rezoning
request to October 19, 2004; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on October 19, 2004, the
Planning and Zoning Commission opened and continued the review of the rezoning
request to November 16,2004; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on November 16, 2004, the
Planning and Zoning Commission opened and continued the review of the rezoning
request to December 7,2004; and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on December 7, 2004, the
Planning and Zoning Commission approved Resolution No. 19, Series of 2004, by a
seven to zero (7-0) vote, recommending that City Council rezone 1201 Riverside Drive to
the R-6 Zone District; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that the development
proposal meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the
development proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area
Community Plan; and.
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission finds that this resolution
furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING
AND ZONING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1:
Pursuant to the procedures and standards set forth in Land Use Section 26.310, Amendments
to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map, the Planning and Zoning
Commission hereby recommends that City Council approve the application to rezone
1201 Riverside Drive to the R-6 (Medium-Density Residential) Zone District.
Section 2:
All material representations and commitments made by the applicant pursuant to the
development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or
documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission or City Council, are
hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied
with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity.
Section 3:
This 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 4:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this resolution is for any
reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion
shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions thereof.
APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this 7th
day of December, 2004.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
COMMISSION:
City Attorney
ATTEST:
Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
PLANNING AND ZONING
Jasmine Tygre, Chair
,;J
,.1' '.1' ~,~ ~:.
~ ~~~ \I ":~A,__
I IHI.of Ilfi'l' (~.),:~ ~
I, ::.. :=~
E5';~ Ill' lEI
: . \
!'i.~. '\~Ni;
J ~.~ 't ~'.,.
(!' ;- \.
"'-
~~ \
i. \ \
,!.'lJ '''';''1'
\ '. \
~ \
~! E!
Ii
!
~ ~
'. ~<<
t:.'!T. ~M
:?l' J'! ~
O...,?cl;;'5
- ...,...;( .,
J: III.... J
.. ,'" :4'
,~~:~,~
C i:1:: B~ l:I
> '" <> U,... "
'" w '" '" c
;:, 0" '0- _,
\II >': i!i -,... l-
5o-::>:;_~g:l
~~~~i:,-'~
_HU'a~.
~':i? '" ... \:: i! l
:~~;:;~~
,,... .. ;I;.VI .
'" :f:;'..: ,- ~.... 'j
~"":~iol....
l.o. ~:;:. ~...:: ~
F- ,." CI II< ,.. U .,
~{ '" ,. w OJ W::r: I- VI
t:J~:~~~~
.. "I- "'.VI::>: 5l'
~ --: ':;; 31'.i:! u 'g
~~~ti....~~!\
Cl.... w:>: '" _
~o-... tl!i L,;o
~ t ~::; a!? l' 3:.
:Q- 5 ~ Cl ~ \II ::; \II
W D t--~, \II W
"u'" '" ....",,, '"
~"tI~i!'~~~
- \II .. >- u
:t ~'~ ;:; fJ t;; 51~'
:-;::i!::t~~~t;
^
~~
-,
~~!
:i~~. za
~~~
. 'i;;;;
~~~ ~
i,"'l!l
~;~ ~
~~: J
cSt B
..~: ~
g!~ li
.: li: ~
bl.: IL,
"rf ~
~~: ~
'!i-u .,
::J~~ ~
:f...... ~.
...~l'l ~
:;~~ 't~
'{"0 r
,~. ~
'".
H W
~~! ~~
~ ~~: .~
~ .:~~ .E
.
g
OWl-....
..J:EM..
it"'::'
>-..;...~it;
>-%%1-- .
.~"''''~'''l!
fl~a:t;:~
,."':"
"'jp~-
~I-~:;;p~
",:;:,'5t ~
Wh. "'VI
J: ''"It'=>
B~i'1!r
,,,.:".
'1'....,::.....-
~~~~~:
8:t"'A..~
"'-~l'."..
~1" j"
"et:~o-'~
~~~~:~.
toie"'..l'
"'.... .."'..
fi~:.::;\.Xil
U\'!'iI"'::.'
. w a
~~B:~:::
O:-'il:~=~
. .-..
"':J:"'"....
:r....,:p..,:
.' .u'_
...:t:;;...;~
Z"W:EQ:
-tl;!:....O~
~....V1~~~
"'~... u
;""~t:a~li
p ..:4't..U.
",,,............
" ....;11 ...
~jlla~'6i:;
'1 "'u....
J::;~H_ll...
~6:i:::~....~
.5~15~a\o>
"'..............,.,
..d~ ~~~d
::! ~
~; .5 i...
...,-....:;1'" n.
~2~(]:h~
~~~~td";'
~5~~~;~
,,~~ '" ...
~~"'.~~~~
i2 0 W '" '" "'-
u g;!f:.;' ej;
""''''0''->"
~,..; i d !i'~~
'. ... ~ 5 i Q;O:
VI.... ",' _ <to...
~ VI '" w (]......
~dP:2~t1i
......."" ...
~,.;~~~i~
~~;:tl;,~~
0",~~",l:!:i!
.... ;'w........ '!!:J
... .... ~.... ~ t"'"
tf;~i",~[fi
;;: VI \oJ ,~~ ~
;: ~ ~ z \ ";;';
~i. ~-~~
u '" '" i!i... ..
'" f fi VI .. ~.u ,
'" -... ""~... '"
~ (].... ,.I..... ~w
'" '::(:.::;: ~ j~::;
;:) III % ",,;:I[ -w"
::;!;~~[,3~~
u
'"
~ j b
o ~ ~ 0
>: .... '" ~,
!: ~ >oJ
!; ,; ;
, ~'i ~_. ~
;~;~:~
'~li S ..... ....
;if; e g' g,
"l'",O::lj;::;
... ..........
l'" u""11
'~~ ~~'; ~..
:''=:9~i~
:.r= -g ~ ...~
~: ~ ~~ r
t;:-! 1" ~~ ~~
~~ li ~'" l;;t
..... "- "'.. 11:-
;J L"..
"'~ ~ ,~ .~
~~ ~ ~i 3~
to. ... - -.
",tr",::ei::l:l
!o ~ X~ X"
{~'; u~Lu~
~: 5 ~~!~s
,~:~ E~ E~
....--"'...;:
n~... .... U'"
;;
f
;:
~
.
, ,
J'
.
~
o
.
..
.
~
>01-'oOr'I "11'1 ."." J. JI .bo ~.
IlO.. ''''''~lJ)" t)d '1:" J,",OO,l' ,}
, :::i~ ;~ :;~ ~ ::~:;~:~~:: ~.\.,-...ut
J.OO,'1'0:S \~~d:..
.. ,U',~ ~~:: _
-:;,"!' l~~;" ':i::!
~l ~; 2 ~ ~i
:~!::!! '"
. ,-'. ::;"'.. ,_:,~
~.~ .:~~w~:
_ r ..~, ~"
1'~ ,."~~?1_ t~
~: ~~~~ ~~
~H::;
h~::.
...""",
~ ...@
,
i
"
:; ~
o .
--.... ~ ~lll JOYd H'U IYl'"
~OISI^IOUnS IlJVl
---\~----
\ O"'t
\ \
....
,.
:=;~~
~3~
!! ~
I
I
I
I
I
I
f~'!. !"
~-~ "......~'
--, ,1
\{ i!
,~ II ~
~/ \\ a
,: I ;
.lI/Jr'l .;
. t.llll'~
/,f!> rl I'
.' :!'I.y 'o! ""
{, ~Oi.~ \ .
t ;"'. \ I
\ s; ~L "i'J: '\ ' \ I
. :~E I( ~'l I.
;'0 ;~~, I . <,0/ I w
~~ n3ff ~ '. ~
"", ll'''I-'' ''''_ _
~i j~ll. f
11 ill '~;f . / /
\/>J~ - ~-(--,UQrrilJ'.:..(S1ltl,
;. 1 11.~ I . .6(1,~' .bo ~11"O"
, ~ !loG \ ,.,
a~~ \ .
t.'oW \ \
g~ \
j:' \ \
\ \
\ \
\
\
\
\
\
!
"
.
J
.:!-f
,,::...~ Ri~'~~~~~t'1r.~~~~~~SI
~~I"I t.}"Ol.OO-S.,.;'
~. .
~~. EN
Xl ,
~!
l'> ~,.-------,;
Vl'r ":
~s \ ffJ
-'~ ;
,..It
~..~..
........,
"t..\
",
'G;;;,~y /
/ .. "..r.... '
..J ", "e -/1 Q ..~
\'? ,//: !..
',::,;,. '\ \</ ..,,~o.~.o
~, f I ~~~&
" \ > \ I ',. ~
'. ,.,t ~" ,,~
)\e.,}.I!:~. ( t"
..~ "'1'1' ~ >
. IIY?I I
I ,I:) I
,~ ,,' I f I
; .Ji:/I 1 I
'", /o~""~ I I II
w fJ ~ It\
I I re~~
I " 1 II, I
I <r~i~? f
I 'IJ<5 1:.\;
1111 '. '..0'
I "g ".~'.
;:., " 1'1<\;' .
"",~ l .
'0,'. .', \ . .
\ "~" I "<r \ j"i; , ·
\:~>%; II \ I
f ~ 1 II .
p~'~ I I I L 1
\'b \\~ Ir./
\ \~, \\
~ r-~\ ~ ~. ~~
'j\ ".,01<.# .f'.,.... 'b.~
~~~ '/', ,\,C\,g< \ r "
'\';:\ \\;. ~\\ . \\
\~b~~:'~' \~.,. \\
\ "i~~\'\ '\'0
SPl II RAIL 'l~tl
\
,
'.
.,
~~'t
,
..
<;.'t4 .J
".
~ y':
..,......."
,"
--hI
L"
1:~
~ .
c
"
,
o
o '"
m
"~~
"0
~ m
~ N
m
.
.
~
\
\
\
11 :
.'
.
~.~
1\.
""
.',
'.
~
"
~
H.n'
~-
~;J
z_
-0
".
g~
z.
0,
~
"!;:~~ 1
0__
m,
...,5l..
........":
.~.
.w'
x_
a2
~-
Q'
o~
~
\
\
\ e.
"~'
\ ~'
\ \ I ~
\ ~d
\ \ \ \ ~~\~
\ \ \ \ \ \:;,.
: ~ \\\\\
, .\ \ ;. \ \
~ r '~~\ \ ,,; \
I: / ~ ,," . \ ,\
\'-l(z~'" . \'.~"
.~{~~ foi
1,-~.......,-uiji1l"r'0i~"~
-l ' "ri;
-.....,
I
;;~
'"
,.
!i
z'
M:!~
~
~
E~
'\.;.~
,
, ~. JOY.! It. ~d JY1" 1
SnnlHlnOOHOJ I) UlldM1S
;~\
.
~
'"
\. ~".t;.
.\ "q.....b". ,
.. ~... ,0
.~."'.,..-t-;.
,,\,;t,t.,
'... "',"-.'j.
,11 1'",\ ....1-......
\ ~,3.
C< c
\ ",~
'>'l.
\""6./
\ "1''d.
"
~
\
\
i
r
\
\
\
\
\
1)::
,.
""
'.
J;
,
,
~:r
i
>-
w
>
0:::
=:J
VJ
o
o
o
,
H
'"
"'
DJYlO:
liJNW
WNO
O"f'tr
;:EnS
~ZW
"'00::
..J~
::5U1->-
~I--~!z~
O.......u=:rw
X::Jwo>
wOo::u;r'.
-1zzz0
<Co-........
C1<l:: ;;W
!- UJI-- 0
tLr:t:m......1---l
DWmQVl
U 0::
VI .- lU
01-- .'=t'>
Z-<:{'<;f"I-O----O
<(IN 0::
..J.... LL
WZlXOO
:r:......~WN~
I- 2:uT"""
ow..............
LLWI'-LL
DmQl1...
~,,~'~D
U'W
VlO:c
WW....
00
0::20
. Vl 0......
"'u
W
Ir
;l: l,j
"' J
" ,
~ u
, "
~ !
u
c
o
<
.
c
a ,.:
u "
o
o
"
h, Jl.
~ <::
,I ~ .1
rJl'~1
....'.
z
~J
;
"
w
,-
,
o
. :-~
!/
C..J
c:::J
~~
w
~
~
~
.;
:c
CL
<1:
0::
CJ
o
CL
o
I~
o(J
oc
o
r
w
z>
o <r _
I-- :J w'~
f- VI "5;:dN
::J 0 J :::l
:t: :i:~~!
U LI~5;;
, :;/iHI;
r- z U >-
eJ 2;G~~
OJ'II"''''
o '" ~
"'w
~
. 0
<r
"-
.'
,.....
.h I
,!,
,~
',. '<'(
" ~ ,.0
=:i.. r
'.~'.J.J
ii
oc
~
.,
l-"
/:
,
B
u
~
~
~
1:--
U
o
;:'
q
"
"'
~
w
.
a
"
..
:)
"'-
.
"
I-
Z
W
2
W
>
o
0::
0.:.
2'
;
..
w
"
,
~
u
~
.
,."S~
,,D'll
.,.'
"
,.
/ I'
/ ....<f
/ <.,rf,'"
/ '1-,""$'
,....
/ ,..oJ.."'"
/ ..,""
/ +.....""-J' / III l::tfd H'U 1\'1dJ
.L /' / HVISIMuuns !JiV:l
~ - -/- -~--'---tJ-"'>--
/ ,
'" I1Yl' lr.oU. .!',Il.UU"" .. tK
III uq.l, UJH. ,n,U.Oll HI !d ~.~~
.....~ / 'J (.
] . f ",00 S ,
,SIl'<J6
^v
'"
ii
,,-
;
l'
~i
,~
"
~i
~~
;
5
,"
i~
/
/
.0
'ig ~
'. y:"
. \,-)~ _,,_ --,,\)-"~H..:!~'L!!J~"o2....U'o.!'_-,p
, ':"-". 'I
j . \ /~ttf .(. ~~/
i, \:' /i(~I~~~'~.' 1 ,(
~... IV,!:''.,.';I:\ ~.'"
. '~J/' .. ,,. I~" ~
".-i1: ~I I~- i, P
~? ../~.; ~i; ,. '~';. I
t... <i'., '"'"I.. "'- ,;,.: "~11' "..'.. '
. /" ... t.\t.>l> .. .... "'.."
l:Jl?P:O~~Y" i~i .,~ "~/li fa
a~o .. :;; r:f'- '! ... ..J .,. ;.
:-j., ~!, ;.~ fl ~ llOU' JH~JMlJ
,,",y- ....~.....".. t ",\
OJ 1 _,~ ~;. l
.,,,':' ~f- '::.~ ... ~l. \ ~
.. ,.-- ~ )1\ lst-ll-IJ~B'U Sf HI\:MIIIIl Y1M\ 0"
"," r . I \ ! " lallO loti A,~l^ll/lIl1l)1'~lUJ ~o .-W
.... f :JHTIlUllIm lJIj, lsn 1I0J JlI:t1)11l9J,
\ '.i"/ ~:
i "\ ...---,>\ \ ; '"
.; ___ 0 i ~e,
-S" ,,' " r
~ . :.0---------- f 'I /
in J . .\" It ....j
,." ~
~ lbg
L
i,
.
"";:",
'" H,O'
o
.
.
<
o
~!
/
/
"
"
"
t;;
,
N
"
,
"'
u
~
o
..
.'
.".r;!
~i
0:::
tn!
0::0
w:C
>--
....i
't;
.\~
"
o
"
"
.~.
0'
n
,
'I'
<
~
o
a
o
.
~
~
~
.
~~
'::'
o.
="
~J
"
~
~~
~~
~~
=
.x
!
~
~
=
i~
',11
e I
~ l
~ :
.. ">-
..,
€l
'" ~,
i
i
\;, i l
r ~J
1--- ~:
": ~""~
(I1'"l';,
~ :n.,..8
,l ~~'
:t., ~.....
\; r1~~
"
,
'';f
,
<
Ii i:;,-"
"b F
I. ~~ ,E i'I'
· (I.. b ~
.H!"
G.."., h'':!'"
-.. ....."
i;'i,=bll
Li_' .E
P -Ii"
.. i i~ .~ '6
~...~ t"
d,j'~,
--j'"
n,:, tj
""'- 11 il~
.-:! ..~t'l; E"
= 2 "'I; /:.- ~
,.5.1" .
';::.-bl"nu.
=nc ~.-::
..,~.. b ~ .....-.
..." L"e...,..
:1 l'-.-:r
li~:~fi~~
j
.
('
"I.t;
:n
.f,'
,;
~'~:::,,: .,
. "
"
. ~:>
".,~
o
~
.
',~/:.~ :
".
,"
e.{/.,
".
1..'
g~
.
a",!~~'
J":~,:."
"
,
'1:0
/
z
o
~~
;:"
./ ~~
/ g J;,,-
" / 0" 'i>l~
E~' '~(~ ~f i j~~
+ J i....,\l ~~ ~~
-:---... __ ---' ;lJJJnI'~""'" "'fr '5:' ~
\ ,.oftf. ,=
" . -",'.:' '-'
~I i~" ..
~ !~. ~ r
';: l~." .1 ; ,:' i: L #
f Fr', ,~
. .- <i "'1"~
,. \ (I ~1lI ~1i _.~~$ ~
t'lJ .;" + "'.~~!:J.{'r
,,,,,."~,,",,_~..b-----~:ml >i :
O"(l ~
/A "OO,l'I.oo.S I
lJ .00,",00 SI "0%'1-.
"4 ~
, .~
s ;1 ~
~ ,j ~
;'i~ -~"
~j..~ 3
8":" ~
li,P
;~
~E
::-
J:.
"
~ ~'I;> :i''', , '", ,,>
ij~~j~~~~Y~~~7~~~cr
,
oN
.
N
g~
.,
IN
~
~~.
o
il
'"
o
I
"
"
~8
.
h
-"
~
a
~
.
~ ~
~ ~ 3 ~
ti..-< ::i
B ~j 8~,~
l:l u ~..J~
::I ;:I IHI uf'j
G ~.. ~~~!~9
~ ~~ ..J;~ ~w~;:~2~~
~ ttla~~~~S~~Et~:~n~
J ~1>r.~30..J~~%~~U~~~
. ;11;;i'5j:...[;::!j;il~~fj~~..,
"
~
,
.
.
<
.
. It, .Jn~ Il'~\l lY1~'
snnlHIMOONOJ IJ UJldnl\
,
MEMORANDUM
Vl\\4
FROM:
Mayor Klanderud and Aspen City Council
Chris Bendon, Community Development Director Q.lAwi
Amy Guthrie, Historic Preservation Officer
TO:
THRU:
RE:
701 W. Main Street- SUb<1).vision Exemption/Historic Landmark Lot Split- First
Reading of Ordinance No. , Series of2005
DATE:
January 10,2005
SUMMARY: The subject property is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites
and Structures and contains two structures, a cabin and an outbuilding. The year of construction
on record with the Assessor's office is 1935.
The applicant wishes to receive approval to relocate the cabin on the site, to demolish the non-
historic outbuilding, and to complete a Historic Landmark Lot Split. Either this owner, or a
future owner, will restore the cabin to the extent possible, and develop the two halves of the lot
as residential or mixed use. In order to pursue this redevelopment, a variance from the minimum
lot size for a Historic Landmark Lot Split is needed, because 701 W. Main Street is a non-
conforming parcel. The variance was granted as part ofHPC's review, subject to Council's final
approval of the lot split. HPC has also approved on-site relocation of the cabin and demolition of
the non-historic outbuilding.
Staff and HPC recommend that a Historic Landmark Lot Split be supported. The review
criteria are met and the Lot Split is a good tool for removing development pressure from a
small building.
APPLICANT: Wes and Susan Bailey Anson, owners, represented by Jake Vickery, architect.
PARCEL ID: 2735-124-46-004.
ADDRESS: 701 W. Main Street, Lots H and I, less the west 2.35 feet of Lot H, Block 19, City
and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado.
ZONING: 0, Office.
HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT
In order to complete a Historic Landmark Lot Split, the applicant shall meet the following
requirements of Aspen Land Use Code: Section 26.480.030(A)(2) and (4), Section
26.470.070(C), and Section 26.415.11O(A.) The first two citations are discussed below. Section
I
26.470.070(C) establishes the Historic Landmark Lot Split as exempt from Growth Management
through a separate Community Development Director approval, and Section 26.415.110(A) lays
out the review procedure, which has been complied with.
26.480.030(A)(2), SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS, LOT SPLIT
The split of a lot for the purpose of the development of one detached single-family dwelling on a
lot formed by a lot split granted subsequent to November 14,1977, where all of the following
conditions are met:
a) The land is not located in a subdivision approved by either the Pitkin County Board
of County Commissioners or the City Council, or the land is described as a metes
and bounds parcel which has not been subdivided after the adoption of subdivision
regulations by the City of Aspen on March 24, 1969. This restriction shall not
apply to properties listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and
Structures; and
Staff Finding:
The property is part of the original townsite and has not been previously subdivided. Most of the
Historic Landmark Lot Splits that have been approved occur in neighborhoods where residential
development is the only option. Although this property is in the Office Zone district, a condition
of approval will be required to make it clear that the development occurring on the vacant parcel
at 701 W. Main Street must be a single family residence per the introductory statement to these
criteria, unless a future code amendment lifts this restriction. The lot that contains the cabin can
be developed as either residential or mixed-use.
b) No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split, both lots conform to the
requirements of the underlying zone district. Any lot for which development is
proposed will mitigate for . affordable housing pursuant to Section
26. JOO. 040(A)(I)(c).
Staff Finding:
The property is a non-conforming 5,765 square foot lot as a result of an adverse possession by
the adjacent neighbor. This proposal will create one 3,000 square foot lot (which is the minimum
size required for a Historic Landmark Lot Split), and one 2,765 square foot lot. HPC has granted
a variance from the minimum lot size requirements, pending final approval of the lot split by
Council.
Council has recently adopted new benefits for historic properties, pursuant to Section 26.420 of
the Municipal Code, which states that affordable housing mitigation will not be required for
properties created through a historic landmark lot split.
c) The lot under consideration, or any part thereof, was not previously the subject of a
subdivision exemption under the provisions of this chapter or a "lot split"
exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.040(C)(I)(a); and
Staff Finding:
The land has not received a subdivision exemption or lot split exemption.
2
d) A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this chapter, and conforms to the
requirements of this title, is submitted and recorded in the office of the Pitkin
County clerk and recorder after approval, indicating that no further subdivision
may be granted for these lots nor will additional units be built without receipt of
applicable approvals pursuant to this chapter and growth management allocation
pursuant to Chapter 26.100.
Staff Finding:
The subdivision plat shall be a condition of approval. It must be reviewed by the Community
Development Departmentfor approval and recordation within 180 days of final land use action.
e) Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat shall be recorded in
the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder. Failure on the part of the
applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty (180) days following
approval by the City Council shall render the plat invalid and reconsideration of
the plat by the City Council will be required for a showing of good cause.
Staff Finding:
The subdivision exemption agreement shall be a condition of approval.
f) In the case where an existing single-family dwelling occupies a site which is
eligible for a lot split, the dwelling need not be demolished prior to application for a
lot split.
Staff Finding:
No dwelling will be demolished as part of this lot split. The outbuilding along the alley is
proposed to be demolished. It is currently being occupied as a residence illegally, which must be
corrected.
g) Maximum potential buildout for the two (2) parcels created by a lot split shall not
exceed three (3) units, which may be composed of a duplex and a single-family
home.
Staff Finding:
The parcel currently contains a single family home. The proposal will add one new homesite. No
more than two units in total can be created as part of this redevelopment based on the size of the
lots.
26.480.030(A)( 4), SUBDIVISION EXEMPTIONS, HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT
The split of a lot that is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and Structures
for the development of one new single-family dwelling may receive a subdivision exemption if it
meets the following standards:
a. The original parcel shall be a minimum of six thousand (6,000) square
feet in size and be located in the R-6, R-15, R-15A, RMF, or 0 zone district.
3
Staff Finding:
The subject parcel is 5,765 square feet and is located in the Office Zone District. A variance is
was requested and approved in order to meet the minimum lot size stated above.
b. The total FAR for both residences shall be established by the size of
the parcel and the zone district where the property is located. The total FAR for each lot
shall be noted on the Subdivision Exemption Plat.
In the Office zone district, the following shall apply to the calculation of maximum floor
area for lots created through the historic landmark lot split. Note that the total FAR shall
not be stated on the Subdivision Exemption Plat because the floor area will be affected by
the use established on the property:
If all buildings on what was the fathering parcel remain wholly residential in use, the
maximum floor area will be as stated in the R-6 zone district.
If any portion of a building on a lot created by the historic landmark lot split is in
commercial/office use, then the allowed floor area for that lot shall be the floor area
allowed for all uses other than residential in the zone district. If the adjacent parcel
created by the lot split remains wholly in residential use, then the floor area on that parcel
shall be limited to the maximum allowed on a lot of its size for residential use according to
the R-6 standards.
If there is commercial/office use on both newly created lots, the maximum floor area for all
uses other than residential in the zone district will be applied.
Staff Finding:
The maximum floor area for the original parcel, containing a historic landmark in the Office
zone, is 3,174 square feet for residential development, or 4,324 square feet for mixed use. The
applicant intends to develop the corner, smaller lot as mixed use. This lot will contain the
historic building and may have an FAR of up to 2,074 square feet under current zoning. The new
lot must be developed as a residence, and at this time the allowable residential floor area for a
3,000 square foot lot in the Office Zone District is 2,400 square feet. None of these FAR figures
should be represented on the plat in case future code amendments affect the development rights.
c. The proposed development meets all dimensional requirements of the
underlying zone district. The variances provided in Section 26.41S.120(B)(1)(a),(b), and (c)
are only permitted on the parcels that will contain a historic structure. The FAR bonus
will be added to the maximum FAR allowed on the original parcel.
Staff Finding: No variances can be granted for the vacant new lot under the HPC review
criteria.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff and HPC recommend that Council approve the request for a
Historic Landmark Lot Split at 701 W. Main Street.
4
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: a ~ J~' -
! d~ ;;(;A.iJ: ~A ~
o m/)~ <h-< ~- r--~1 '
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve Ordinance No._, Series of 2005, for a
Historic Landmark Lot Split at 701 W. Main Street, on First Reading."
Exhibits: 11
Ordinance No..:t-, Series of2005
A. HPC Resolution #34, Series of 2004
B. Application
5
ORDINANCE NO. Ii
(SERIES OF 200sr-
AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL APPROVING A
SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION FOR A HISTORIC LANDMARK LOT SPLIT AT
701 W. MAIN STREET, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY,
COLORADO
Parcel ID #:2735-124-46-004
WHEREAS, the applicants, Wes and Susan Bailey Anson, represented by Jake
Vickery, architect, have requested a Historic Landmark Lot Split for the property located
at 701 W. Main Street, Lots H and I, less the west 2.35 feet of Lot H, Block 19, City and
Townsite of Aspen, Colorado; and
WHEREAS, in order to complete a Historic Landmark Lot Split, the applicant
shall meet the following requirements of Aspen Municipal Code: Section
26.480.030(A)(2) and (4), Section 26.470.070(C), and Section 26.415.010(D.), which are
as follows:
26.480.030(A)(2), Subdivision ExemDtions, Lot SDlit
The split of a lot for the purpose of the development of one detached single-family
dwelling on a lot formed by a lot split granted subsequent to November 14, 1977, where
all of the following conditions are met:
a) The land is not located in a subdivision approved by either the Pitkin
County Board of County Commissioners or the City Council, or the land
is described as a metes and bounds parcel which has not been subdivided
after the adoption of subdivision regulations by the City of Aspen on
March 24, 1969; and
b) No more than two (2) lots are created by the lot split, both lots conform to
the requirements of the underlying zone district. Any lot for which
development is proposed will mitigate for affordable housing pursuant to
Section 26.100.040(A)(I)(c).
c) The lot under consideration, or any part thereof, was not previously the
subject of a subdivision exemption under the provisions of this chapter or
a "lot split" exemption pursuant to Section 26.100.040(C)(I)(a); and
d) A subdivision plat which meets the terms of this chapter, and conforms to
the requirements of this title, is submitted and recorded in the office of
the Pitkin County clerk and recorder after approval, indicating that no
further subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional units
be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this chapter
and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.100.
e) Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat shall be
recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder. Failure on
the part of the applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty
(180) days following approval by the City Council shall render the plat
invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the City Council will be
required for a showing of good cause.
t) In the case where an existing single-family dwelling occupies a site which
is eligible for a lot split, the dwelling need not be demolished prior to
application for a lot split.
g) Maximum potential buildout for the two (2) parcels created by a lot split
shall not exceed three (3) units, which may be composed of a duplex and a
single-family home; and
26.480.030(A)(4), Subdivision ExemDtions. Historic Landmark Lot SDlit
The split of a lot that is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and
Structures for the development of one new single-family dwelling may receive a
subdivision exemption if it meets the following standards:
a. The original parcel shall be a minimum of six thousand (6,000)
square feet in size and be located in the R-6, R-15, R-15A, RMF, or 0 zone district.
b. The total FAR for both residences shall be established by the
size of the parcel and the zone district where the property is located. The total FAR
for each lot shall be noted on the Subdivision Exemption Plat.
In the Office zone district, the following shall apply to the calculation of maximum
floor area for lots created through the historic landmark lot split. Note that the
total FAR shall not be stated on the Subdivision Exemption Plat because the floor
area will be affected by the use established on the property:
If all buildings on what was the fathering parcel remain wholly residential in use,
the maximum floor area will be as stated in the R-6 zone district.
If any portion of a building on a lot created by the historic landmark lot split is in
commercial/office use, then the allowed floor area for that lot shall be the floor area
allowed for all uses other than residential in the zone district. If the adjacent parcel
created by the lot split remains wholly in residential use, then the floor area on that
parcel shall be limited to the maximum allowed on a lot of its size for residential use
according to the R-6 standards.
If there is commercial/office use on both newly created lots, the maximum floor
area for all uses other than residential in the zone district will be applied.
c. The proposed development meets all dimensional requirements
of the underlying zone district. The variances provided in Section
26.415.120(B)(I)(a),(b), and (c) are only permitted on the parcels that will contains a
historic structure. The FAR bonus will be applied to the maximum FAR allowed on
the original parcel; and
26.470.070(C). GMQS ExemDtion. Historic Landmark Lot SDlit
The construction of each new single-family dwelling on a lot created through review and
approval of an Historic Landmark Lot Split shall be exempt from the scoring and
competition procedures. The exemption is to be approved by the Community
Development Director, but is not to be deducted from the respective annual development
allotments or from the development ceilings; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director reviewed and recommended
approval of the application, finding that the applicable review standards have been met;
and,
WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on December 8, 2004, the
Historic Preservation Commission recommended, by a five to zero (5-0) vote, that City
Council approve a Historic Landmark Lot Split at 701 W. Main Street; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Sections 26.415.110 of the Municipal Code, the City
Council may approve a Historic Landmark Lot Split Subdivision Exemption during a
duly noticed public hearing after taking and considering comments from the general
public and recommendations from the Historic Preservation Commission (hereinafter
HPC) and Community Development Director; and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the development proposal meets or
exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the development
proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for
the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT:
Section 1
Pursuant to Sections 26.480.030(A)(2) and (4), Section 26.470.070(C), and Section
26.415.110(A) of the Municipal Code, and subject to those conditions of approval as
specified herein, the City Council finds as follows in regard to the subdivision exemption:
1. The applicant's submission is complete and sufficient to afford review and
evaluation for approval; and
2. The subdivision exemption is consistent with the purposes of subdivision as
outlined in Section 26.480 of the Municipal Code, which purposes include: assist
in the orderly and efficient development of the City; ensure the proper distribution
of development; encourage the well-planned subdivision of land by establishing
standards for the design of a subdivision; improve land records and survey
monuments by establishing standards for surveys and plats; coordinate the
construction of public facilities with the need for public facilities; safeguard the
interests of the public and the subdivider and provide consumer protection for the
purchaser; acquire and ensure the maintenance of public open spaces and parks,
provide procedures so that development encourages the preservation of important
and unique natural or scenic features, including but not limited to mature trees or
indigenous vegetation, bluff, hillsides, or similar geologic features, or edges of
rivers and other bodies of water, and, promote the health, safety and general
welfare of the residents of the City of Aspen.
Section 2
Pursuant to the findings set forth in Section 1, above, the City Council does hereby grant
a Historic Landmark Lot Split Subdivision Exemption for 701 W. Main Street, Lots H
and I, less the west 2.35 feet of Lot H, Block 19, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado
City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado with the following conditions:
1. A subdivision exemption plat and subdivision exemption agreement shall be
reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department and
recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder within one hundred
eighty (180) days of final approval by City Council. Failure to record the plat and
subdivision exemption agreement within the specified time limit shall render the
plat invalid and reconsideration of the plat by City Council will be required for a
showing of good cause. As a minimum, the subdivision plat shall:
a. Meet the requirements of Section 26.480 of the Aspen Municipal Code;
b. Contain a plat note stating that the lots contained therein shall be
prohibited from further subdivision and any development of the lots will
comply with the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code in effect at
the time of application;
c. Contain a plat note stating that all new development on the lots will
conform to the dimensional requirements of the Office zone district,
except the variances approved by the HPC.
d. Contain a plat note stating that the lot that does not contain the historic
structure must be developed as a single family residence.
e. Contain a plat note stating that the FAR on the two lots created by this lot
split shall be based on the use of the buildings. The maximum FAR for
each lot may be affected by applicable lot area reductions (i.e., slopes,
access easements, etc.). The applicant shall verify with the City Zoning
Officer the total allowable FAR on each lot, taking into account any and
all applicable lot area reductions. The property shall be subdivided into
two parcels, comer Lot A, which is 2,765 square feet in size, and interior
Lot B, which is 3,000 square feet in size.
2. Sidewalk. Curb and Gutter - The site is located on Main Street, where pedestrian
improvements are an important goal. The applicant must refer to the City
Engineering Department for required Sidewalk, Curb, and Gutter in front of the
property.
Section 3:
This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement
of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or
amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded under such
prior ordinances.
Section 4:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any
reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion
shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions thereof.
Section 5:
A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the 14th day of February, 2005, in the
City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado.
Section 7:
This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final passage.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City
Council of the City of Aspen on the 10th day of January, 2005.
Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this 14th day of February, 2005.
Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Approved as to form:
John P. Worcester, City Attorney
further subdivision may be granted for these lots nor will additional units
be built without receipt of applicable approvals pursuant to this chapter
and growth management allocation pursuant to Chapter 26.100.
e) Recordation. The subdivision exemption agreement and plat shall be
recorded in the office of the Pitkin County clerk and recorder. Failure on
the part of the applicant to record the plat within one hundred eighty
(180) days following approval by the City Council shall render the plat
invalid and reconsideration of the plat by the City Council will be
required for a showing of good cause.
t) In the case where an existing single-family dwelling occupies a site which
is eligible for a lot split, the dwelling need not be demolished prior to
application for a lot split.
g) Maximum potential buildout for the two (2) parcels created by a lot split
shall not exceed three (3) units, which may be composed of a duplex and a
single-family home; and
26.480.030(A)(4), Subdivision ExemDtions. Historic Landmark Lot SDlit
The split of a lot that is listed on the Aspen Inventory of Historic Landmark Sites and
Structures for the development of one new single-family dwelling may receive a
subdivision exemption if it meets the following standards:
a. The original parcel shall be a minimum of six thousand (6,000)
square feet in size and be located in the R-6, R-15, R-15A, RMF, or Q zone district.
b. The total FAR for both residences shall be established by the
size of the parcel and the zone district where the property is located. The total FAR
for each lot shall be noted on the Subdivision Exemption Plat.
In the Office zone district, the following shall apply to the calculation of maximum
floor area for lots created through the historic landmark lot split. Note that the
total FAR shall not be stated on the Subdivision Exemption Plat because the floor
area will be affected by the use established on the property:
If all buildings on what was the fathering parcel remain wholly residential in use,
the maximum floor area will be as stated in the R-6 zone district.
If any portion of a building on a lot created by the historic landmark lot split is in
commercial/office use, then the allowed floor area for that lot shall be the floor area
allowed for all uses other than residential in the zone district. If the adjacent parcel
created by the lot split remains wholly in residential use, then the floor area on that
parcel shall be limited to the maximum allowed on a lot of its size for residential use
according to the R-6 standards.
If there is commercial/office use on both newly created lots, the maximum floor
area for all uses other than residential in the zone district will be applied.
c. The proposed development meets all dimensional requirements
of the underlying zone district. The variances provided in Section
26.415.120(B)(I)(a),(b), and (c) are only permitted on the parcels that will contains a
historic structure. The FAR bonus will be applied to the maximum FAR allowed on
the original parcel; and
26.470.070(C). GMQS ExemDtion. Historic Landmark Lot SDlit
The construction of each new single-family dwelling on a lot created through review and
approval of an Historic Landmark Lot Split shall be exempt from the scoring and
competition procedures. The exemption is to be approved by the Community
Development Director, but is not to be deducted from the respective annual development
allotments or from the development ceilings; and
26.415.010(D). Historic Landmark Lot Split
A Historic Landmark Lot Split is a two step review, requiring a public hearing before
HPC and before City Council; and
WHEREAS, in order to authorize a variance from the dimensional requirements of Title
26, according to Section 26.314.040, Standards Applicable to Variances, the HPC must
make a finding that the following three (3) circumstances exist:
1. The grant of variance will be generally consistent with the purposes, goals,
objectives, and policies of the Aspen Area Community Plan and this Title;
2. The grant of variance is the minimum variance that will make possible the
reasonable use of the parcel, building or structure; and
3. Literal interpretation and enforcement of the terms and provisions of this Title
would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other parcels in the
same zone district, and would cause the applicant unnecessary hardship or practical
difficulty. In determining whether an applicant's rights would be deprived, the
board shall consider whether either of the following conditions apply:
a. There are special conditions and circumstances which are unique to the
parcel, building or structure, which are not applicable to other parcels,
structures or buildings in the same zone district and which do not result from
the actions of the applicant; or
b. Granting the variance will not confer upon the applicant any special
privilege denied by the Aspen Area Community Plan and the terms of this
Title to other parcels, buildings, or structures, in the same zone district; and
WHEREAS, in order to authorize a demolition, according to Section 26.415.080,
Demolition of designated historic properties, it must be demonstrated that the application
meets anyone of the following criteria:
a. The property has been determined by the city to be an imminent
hazard to public safety and the owner/applicant is unable to make the needed
repairs in a timely manner,
b. The structure is not structurally sound despite evidence of the owner's
efforts to properly maintain the structure,
c. The structure cannot practically be moved to another appropriate
location in Aspen, or
d. No documentation exists to support or demonstrate that the property
has historic, architectural, archaeological, engineering or cultural
significance, and
Additionallv. for aDDroval to demolish. all of the followiDl! criteria must be
met:
a. The structure does not contribute to the significance of the parcel or
historic district in which it is located, and
b. The loss of the building, structure or object would not adversely affect
the integrity of the historic district or its historic, architectural or aesthetic
relationship to adjacent designated properties and
c. Demolition of the structure will be inconsequential to the historic
preservation needs of the area; and
WHEREAS, in order to approve relocation, according to Section 26.415.090.C,
Relocation of a Designated Property, it must be determined that:
1. It is considered a non-contributing element of a historic district and its
relocation will not affect the character of the historic district; .!!!
2. It does not contribute to the overall character of the historic district or
parcel on which it is located and its relocation will not have an adverse
impact on the historic district or property; .!!!
3. The owner has obtained a Certificate of Economic Hardship; .!!!
4. The relocation activity is demonstrated to be an acceptable preservation
method given the character and integrity of the building, structure or object
and its move will not adversely affect the integrity of the historic district in
which it was originally located or diminish the historic, architectural or
aesthetic relationships of adjacent designated properties; and
Additionallv, for approval to relocate all of the following criteria must be met:
1. It has been determined that the building, structure or object is capable of
withstanding the physical impacts of relocation; and
2. An appropriate receiving site has been identified; and
3. An acceptable plan has been submitted providing for the safe relocation,
repair and preservation of the building, structure or object including the
provision of the necessary financial security; and
WHEREAS, Amy Guthrie, in her staff report dated December 8, 2004, performed an
analysis of the application based on the standards, and recommended the application be
approved with conditions; and
WHEREAS, at a regular meeting held on December 8, 2004, the Historic Preservation
Commission considered the application, found the application to meet the standards, and
approved the application by a vote of 5 to O.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That the HPC recommends Council approval of a Historic Landmark Lot Split 701 W.
Main Street, Lots H and I, less the west 2.35 feet of Lot H, Block 19, City and Townsite
of Aspen, Colorado, per the drawing labeled Lot Split Plan A, in addition to Demolition,
On-site Relocation, and Variances, with the following conditions:
1. A subdivision plat and subdivision exemption agreement shall be reviewed and
approved by the Community Development Department and recorded in the office
of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder within one hundred eighty (180) days of
final approval by City Council. Failure to record the plat and subdivision
exemption agreement within the specified time limit shall render the plat invalid
and reconsideration of the plat by City Council will be required for a showing of
good cause. As a minimum, the subdivision plat shall:
a. Meet the requirements of Section 26.480 of the Aspen Municipal Code;
b. Contain a plat note stating that the lots contained therein shall be
prohibited from further subdivision and any development of the lots will
comply with the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code in effect at
the time of application;
c. Contain a plat note stating that all new development on the lots will
conform to the dimensional requirements of the Office zone district,
except the variances approved by the HPC.
d. Contain a plat note stating that the lot that does not contain the historic
structure must be developed as a single family residence.
e. Contain a plat note stating that the FAR on the two lots created by this lot
split shall be based on the use of the buildings. The maximum FAR for
each lot may be affected by applicable lot area reductions (i.e., slopes,
access easements, etc.). The applicant shall verify with the City Zoning
Officer the total allowable FAR on each lot, taking into account any and
all applicable lot area reductions. The property shall be subdivided into
two parcels, Lots A, which is 2,765 square feet in size, and Lot B, which is
3,000 square feet in size.
2. Sidewalk. Curb and Gutter - The site is located on Main Street, where pedestrian
improvements are an important goal. The applicant must refer to the City
Engineering Department for required Sidewalk, Curb, and Gutter in front of the
property.
3. HPC hereby grants a variance from the minimum required lot size for a Historic
Landmark Lot Split, from 6,000 square feet to 5,765 square feet. In addition,
HPC grants a variance from the minimum required lot size for one of the newly
created parcels, from 3,00b square feet to 2,765 square feet. HPC did not grant
setback variances that were requested in the application.
4. The proposed demolition of the outbuilding is approved, but removing of a
portion of the cabin is not supported at this time due to lack of information.
5. On-site relocation of the cabin to Lot A (the corner lot) is approved, without
setback variances. Relocation of this building onto a new foundation, and
rehabilitation of the structure must be the first action that is taken to redevelop
this property. It will not be acceptable to move the building and "mothball" it, in
favor of undertaking construction on the vacant parcel.
6. A structural report demonstrating that the buildings can be moved and/or
information about how the house will be stabilized from the housemover must be
submitted with the building permit application.
7. A bond or letter of credit in the amount of$15,000 to insure the safe relocation of
the structure must be submitted with the building permit application.
8. A relocation plan detailing how and where the building will be stored and
protected during construction must be submitted with the building permit
application.
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION at its regular meeting on the 13th day
of December, 2004.
Approved as to Form:
David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney
Approved as to Content:
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
Jeffrey Halferty, Chair
ATTEST:
Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy Clerk
Land Use Application
I
~
THE CITY OF ASPEN
PROJECT:
Name:
\\
Location:
Parcel ID #
ApPLICANT:
Name:
Address:
Phone #: g:;;? ~
REPRESENTATIVE:
Name:
o ,~ I
TVPE OF ApPLICATION: (please check all that apply):
D Historic Designation
D Certificate of No Negative Effect
~ Certificate of Appropriateness
D -Minor Historic Development
R -Major Historic Development
~ -Conceptual Historic Development
D -Final Historic Development
D ~ -Substantial Amendment
.::8' Relocation (temporary, on or off-site)
':a' Demolition (total demolition)
)g;t Historic Landmark Lot Split
~.f:
rovals, etc.)
(Al12J77W "Di4:J2If116f)Ji
PROPOSAL: (descri tion of ro osed buildin s, uses, modifications, etc.)
Pt..-t:A*, 'X~ ~(A./. E'D Ii' W{2J1/czAJ ~( PT76Y~
RETAIN FOR PERMAHENT RECOki.
MAIN STREET
PAr.i< nF r1IRR
1.1
o
/'
\
DITCH
BASIS OF BEARINGS
S 7~)"CI9'11 "E 270.02'
JC\. HISTORIc:. MIXEr:> use r:>EMO.
':' ANr.:l RfLOc:.A TION PLAN - A
6It_DM-Rl.ClO-AI:2oeo4 ri-V
\,::>'\10
I
I~
,.
11),
0
I.:
<D
I:
0
16
0
"' I ~
n
" I
r
~
0
U' 1}
<0 I
N
o
~
~
~
~
SHED
57.65'
-:-4'
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
'"
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
----t-,
____I_j
I
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
FENCE I
TO Be REMOVED ----.-....:
I
I
I
I
r--T4'])----' I
<0 I I
WALK 1.0 I I
2-0------J ~II I
4. ~ I
SHED -I I
TO"" DEMOLISH." ----.-.... I BLOCK
____..l..8L______:....__l--f'it.g of
,,,7'0 ALLEY
19
spe1
9
5-1' 1 I /16"
"!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
$
I
I
I
I
I FeIC.
~ TO Sf: ~MOVEr:>
I
I
I
I
I .--------EXIST'6 TREE
p/ TO SE REMO:=D
-<>-------
<D
.;
N
1'-0"
r---
I 1 .2
I
INORTH
rOB.
I
y---
r I
I I
I I
I I
I I , S' R'i
II", I ~o ,I'
f?- J"'! "70
I^/""
I ! ~IOr:>w: ~O
liTO SE RfLO
I I
I I I
I I I
I I
~-!--_J ____ F'I
I r --, ^ I
: SOUTHPqRTl N L------WALK--
I I r ----
'----r'. .2 I
H I
I
o
=i
n
I
z
0)
M-
~
C/)
~
!:"J
t'tj
"--3
,.
o
U'
o
,.
<D
~ rri
v
o
o
o
o.
20.5
I
r
o
-<
"'
"
c:
-<
r
z
m
21'-1 19/16"
90'-0"
~'t------j-
I I
I-
I'"
L_____
db
S 75009'11 "E
57.65'
101 Y'lEST MAIN ST. ASP.N. <OOLO""'''O
JAKI: VIG~'\" ~HITeGTS
::10::1 eAST MAIN ST.
~N GO elbll ("1'0) "I2!H~bbO
MAIN STREET
DITCH
S 75('1-:'~-1'11 "( 270.02'
57~65'
90'-0" 1 21'-1 19/16"
51' 11 116"
I I I
I I I
I I I
I I~ I
r
()
c; -<
:;: 'll
0 r
,p =i
a. r
~ Z
~ m
"
8/ I I
a.
a.
I UJr I fJrr I
- () - ()-
()-j ~-j~
()
()UJ , Ul)>()
U\ U\ iU
0 11 11 (\
~ I I I
l'
I I I
~
a.
N
a.
- - - -
--------,--
S 75009'11 "E 57.65'
ALLEY
H\ 15TORIe. LOT
'f FLIT PLAN - A
it",~lt-$ It~AI:20e.04 flt.V
101 ~EST MAIN ST. ASPEN, COOLOIO.APO
a.
=<
"
T
z
OJ
c-+-
~
C/)
;S
t:t:J
t:t:J
'-3
~
~
o
~
o.~
~
~
ci
a.
a.
6
a.
BLOCK 19
City of Aspen
JAK!: VIG!<OVlY AlltCHITl:CT5
:40' eAST ""AIN ST.
A~N GO tM,11 (~~O) "'25-~60
'"
"
}-
r
rn
G
'"
o
Ui
"
rn
rn
-{
m
)>
U\
-I
m
r
m
<
)>
-I
()
Z
I
I
()
c
U\
m
z
()
AI
-I
I
m
r
m
<
)>
-I
()
Z
I
I
()
c
U\
m
101 ~EST JvIAIN ST. ASFEN. WLORADO
'"
il
-{
r
~
G
~
->
o
z
:r
o
Q
r
rn
~
o
~
->
o
z
Z
G
~
->
r
"
o
~
->
o
z
{]lrn
~x
0U)
~~
"Z
l>~
~l>
rn'"
~j!
Zl>
r
->
~
o
r
r
'"
o
z
~~
:>
o
o
"
:>
Z
Q
o
:>
'"
~\'1
0'"
,,->
zz
~~
'"
->
}-
Z
"
Z
~
'"
rn
l>
:r
:r
m
->
}-
r
X
I
JAKe VICKt~"( ARCHiTeCTS
202 f"'ST MilliN ST.
.~~"'.. ~~ "",-" r"''''A' "..,'" "':'L"'"
Z
o
"
-<
I
~
o
"
-<
5
Z
5 16'-€:>"
8'-11"
"'
0
c
-<
~ I
~
~ 0
m "
m
-< -<
5
Z
:2 \ U\
m ()
U\ 1 c
-\ -\
<JJm ii "m I
m ,,~ o~
r 0"' G 0", m
~~ G ~-<
m Z ~ z:z r
~~ ~IV m
< ~l> Z
a' "' <
)> -<"' 0 -<
m~ ~ l>
-\ "" Z )>
Zl> a
() r Z -\
-< IV
" "' ()
Z 0 m
I r l> Z
r I
I "' I
() \j I I
m
Z -< ()
C ~~ l>
U\ r C
m U\
m
~
l>
r
m
o
:;:
<J
G
r
m
~
o
"
-<
5
Z
"'
X
I
"1,..,1 WI"c,,. MAltJ c,,.
JAK~ VICKe~'r' ARCHITeCTS
:202 eAST MA.IN ST.
191<:1 O? -...
1'0''' J.S'o'OI ~O~
;'~;;)f?I^ ;;)l'o'r
oa~o'o?' NlildS~ 'lS NII,y'~ lS;M IOl.. 1>'0-0(';-(';1
^~ 1rO<:lO~I'o'-?'
~ - N~'d NOI.l.~?c
. Oy,jlila lilSn alilX Iy,j
J..377V- Q\'L.c,\,
') !fi-H3--r----------L-8r ----
{J () 7 El I ~ a;IHSI10y,j;IQ :l9 0.1.
1 1 ~ QilHS
I I !V O'vC;
I -..j
I : (J1 i-----;llfM
I I ()ll
: L____O.v.l__J
I
1
I
1',-
1 '------ a:=!l\oy,j~ ;I8 0.1.
I ;I?N;I:d
I
I
I
I
1
~
1
I
1-1----
L--j-----
I
I
I
I
1
I
I
I
1
I
I
1
1
1
I
I
I
ct>
I
I
I
1
1
1
I
H
--- 1
- ---
Z' L .,
I I
I
N Ij:~cbd H.LI1OS I
---- 1---~i
I I I
I
1 I I
I I
aa.L~ 01~;I8 OJ. 1 I
NOI 1 lil1aaly,j I I
i0' ~I
oL... i-vl <tr
.. 0\-1 I;;:
"3 )..s \, I
)..t\ I I
, I
, I
I I
, J
---f
I
;I801
HJ.~ONI
I
Z' L I
----!
,';9L<;
,,01/GI L-,U:
I
<:;'OC;
I
I I
_________,.J I
__>lllfM------i I
I
I ~ L
l<t
o
o
o
o
~
W N
~
m
.q-
o
If)
IS)
.q-
z
3" L l,600<;L S
-ct
-----,
-..jl
:""1
1 I
-l-------k.,:..
---
llJ
Z
-.-l
f-
-.-l
lL
IS)
f-
a
-.-l
---4'-
Q:=!I\Oy,j~ ;I8 OJ. ~
;I:nti 9,J.SIX3 1
1
I
1
1
a:=!l\oy,j~ 38 OJ. ~
;I?Na::l 1
~ 1
1
I
1
~
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
1
1
1
I
I
I
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
1
1
t
I
1
1
I
t
Ilo.-LO~
) 1191<:1 O? N:WS'o'
NI'o'l'lJ.S'o'i1 Z:;OZ:;
; ;'~;r.>i"I^ iI)i'o'r
OCl'v'1!I010?' N;;ldS'v' ".l.S NI~v-.l .l.S3M IOL VO-O<:-<:I
^~ v090i
'v'-
.J.01
r 0 finJ
)[J07EI
A 377f1
,C;9'LC; 3" L L,600C;L S
\J ~
[i IS)
04: If)
Ii--- Ii--- ~
U) () r-_
I--.Jf\I
ll-
lS)
(f)o
Ii--- 0
() 0_
--.Jm
1I'd 0., N;d9'o' 11'0'''"4-
I" 19'o'; Z:OZ: OQ~010?' N3dS"i 'lS NI'VJt..llS:3M IOJ.. vO-~-r;1 SNOI1"i^313 3SnOH .
~;;!)I"I^ ;;!)I'o'r
ill
U)
=:)
a
HE I
I
Z
a -.l I!)-
- <1:
1- ~ z
HE w D
<( 2: If)
2:
> <1: -.l
] -.l
W ()
ill If) Il!
HE -1 I!) ~
Z -.l
ill D If) <1:z
z Ill!
:r <1: s:: lLw
~ () Ifl~
1- If) D <1:~
I!) I!) z I!) <1:
HE Ii zz ~ zlL
i=iL -lL
a D to0
If)() ()
~- () xii'
Z ;;Sll! ()
s:: will
z
()
i=
Il!
()
lL
I
~
Il!
()
z
z
()
i=
Il!
()
lL
W
-.l
D
91~ O? N3dS'II
'IIY-I1S'II; 1:01:
'~;~?I^ ;~'IIr
OQ'I"~010? ' N3dS'I"
11'11"<4
t'O-<;l-i'::1 SNOIJ.'I"A3133S!10H
'.is NIV'~ .l.S~M 101-
[]
1I11-,t:d
,,9-,91
1
ill
U)
:=)
C)
:::t
I
Z
C)
~
<(
>
ill
-1
ill
:::t
~
:=)
C)
U)
--1
<(
;-
w
L
L
<(
w
lJ)
>!)
z
Cl
z
<(
;-
lJ)
>!)>!)
zz
i=iL
lJ)()
-()
~It
lJ)
3::
()
,Cl
z
3::
Cl
()
()
3::
>!)'
z
Cl
lJ)
--1
--1
()
It
;-
--1
<(z
IIt
ILw
lJ);-
<(;-
>!)<(
ZIL
-IL
~~
Xlt
wiD
,..
~mlIH
,
'M!
\
IHH IHHH IHIUIH IHHH IHHI
~~ ~
MEMORANDUM
VI" Q.,
TO:
Mayor Klanderud and Aspen City Council
RE:
Steve Barwick, City Manager
John Worcester, City Attorney
Chris Bendon, Community Development Director ~
Commercial Design Review and Pedestrian Amenity Code Amendments
First Reading of Ordinance No.I&, Series of 2005
Second Reading Scheduled for February 14,2005
THRU:
FROM:
DATE:
January 10,2005
SUMMARV:
This proposed ordinance creates a new section of the Land Use Code - Commercial
Design Review - and amends two others - Pedestrian Amenity (formerly known as
Open Space) and the Utility/Trash/Recycle Service Area requirements.
Commercial Design Review is intended to replace the subjective review of Growth
Management Scoring with a section dealing exclusively with the design of
commercial and mixed-use buildings. The growth management criteria addressing
the design of new buildings are very minimal and no standards currently exist. This
new review contains basic standards for judging the design of new commercial and
mixed-use buildings (and remodels) and requires a public hearing.
The Pedestrian Amenity section replaces the Open Space requirements. This new
section provides the City with the option of selecting Pedestrian Amenity on the same
site as the development, off-site, or through a cash-in-lieu payment. The proposal
focuses on the qualitative improvement to downtown that a project brings rather than
just the quantity of the parcel left undeveloped. The base requirement remains 25%
of the parcel, although provisions have been included to reduce the requirement as an
incentive for proposals bringing vitality to downtown and for already built-out
parcels.
Lastly, the Utility/Trash/Recycle Service Area amendment is essentially a "clean-up"
of existing text with slightly more space being required for recycling. It is this section
which requires space along an alleyway of commercial buildings be used for these
utilitarian functions.
Staff recommends adoption of Ordinance No. ~ Series of 2005, upon first
reading.
COMPONENTS OF AMENDMENT:
"Open Space:" The City has required 25% of each
parcel downtown remain undeveloped since the mid
1970's. This quantitative requirement has resulted in
some great urban spaces, such as the area in front of
Paradise Bakery and in front of Zele Coffe Shop. It has
also created many leftover spaces that detract from the
continuity of the retail district. The goal of a vital,
pleasant pedestrian environment is to provide not only a
sufficient quantity of public space, but areas of high
quality as well. Simply requiring all development to
leave 25% of the parcel undeveloped does not address
the qualities that make spaces great or make downtown great.
The philosophy of a Pedestrian Amenity requirement is that the
benefits of a project do not have to be limited to the parcel on
which it is developed; the project can improve the district as a
whole.
Good Pedestrian Space
The proposal maintains a 25% requirement but allows multiple
ways in which this requirement can be met - on-site amenity, off-
site amenity, or through a cash-in-lieu which the City could use to
improve the downtown. The City (P&Z or HPC, depending on
the nature of the project) chooses the method in which a
developer provides this amenity, thereby allowing the flexibility
to focus on truly great opportunities.
Not-sa-Good
Pedestrian Space
To incentivize projects that bring vitality to the downtown, the percentage can be
lessened to the point that no less then half the 25% requirement is provided. For
redevelopment of a site in which no, or little, pedestrian space currently exists, a
minimum of 10% of the parcel is required. These two provisions were requested by
City Council during work sessions on this matter.
Mechanics of the two code sections: Commercial Design Review is a new section of
the Land Use Code that replaces, and expands upon, the subjective "design quality"
review of Growth Management scoring. Because the Pedestrian Amenity section is
proposed as a qualitative review and in order to maintain a "city-choice," this section
also requires a review process. Staff has incorporated the review for Pedestrian
Amenity into the new Commercial Design Review section. Because these two
sections work in tandem, staff has included them in the same ordinance.
City Choice: During work sessions on this topic, City Council wanted to maintain a
choice in determining how the Pedestrian Amenity requirement would be met for
each project. The proposal allows the Planning and Zoning Commission to select the
method. In cases where HPC is already required to review the project, the developer
2
could consolidate the review with HPC. This was added to prevent two opposing
Board decisions on one project.
Combining Reviews: The Planning Commission recommended the Commercial
Design Review occur with the P&Z. HPC believes many of the standards address
criteria of the standard HPC review. Staff believes there is potential for a developer
to get two conflicting approvals. For example: An HPC project can take many
months of HPC review for Conceptual approval, starting with one or more work
sessions and typically two or three public hearings. If the project then proceeded to
P&Z for Commercial Design Review, the basic make-up of the project could be
. drastically changed leaving the applicant in a quandary as to which Board's direction
to follow.
The City's Land Use Code is complex and the potential for conflicting direction is
high. In the 1999 re-write of the Land Use Code, the City included a provision
allowing for the consolidation of reviews to maintain clarity. Such a consolidation is
at the discretion of the Community Development Director, in consultation with the
Applicant, and maintains all the established review criteria and noticing procedures.
This ability to combine reviews has greatly improved the City's development review
process. Prior to 1999, conflicting approvals were common.
Staff is proposing the ability to consolidate Commercial Design Review with other
reviews. This would likely occur when a project is within a historic district and
subject to HPC review. It could also occur when a project is being processed as a
PUD subject to Council approval, in which case the review could be combined with
Council's PUD review.
Council Call-Up Procedure: During work sessions on this topic, Council expressed
some interest in having oversight of this review. Staff does not recommend this
review rest with Council. This type of development review should rest with a
development review board that is already reviewing the project and is familiar with its
intimate details.
However, staff has included a mandatory noticing process and the ability for Council
to "call-up" a decision. This will keep Council informed of new projects and permit
it to review a specific project without requiring that all projects be reviewed at a
Council level. This is modeled on the HPC review process. There is also an appeal
process for aggrieved applicants.
Utility/Trash/Recycle Service Area Amendment: This is essentially a clean-up of
existing language, with one exception. The area requirement for utilities and trash
has been 15 linear feet. Staff added recycling to this list of service space needs and
upped the requirement to 20 linear feet. For small parcels (3,000 square feet or less)
the requirement remains 15 linear feet.
3
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS: '~'-<--<'rrlAW v.. Q ~N'~ ~ ;? ~_
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Ordinance No.S/, Series of2005, upon first reading."
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Review Criteria
B - Council Work Session Summary
C - Excerpt from 200 I Infill Report
4
ORDINANCE NO. E
(SERIES OF 2005)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,
COLORADO, APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO SECTION 26.412-
COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW, SECTION 26.575.030 - PEDESTRIAN
AMENITY, AND SECTION 26.575.060 - UTILITYITRASHIRECYCLE SERVICE
AREA OF THE CITY OF ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE.
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Planning and Zoning Commission of the
City of Aspen directed the Director of the Community Development Department to
propose amendments to the Land Use Code, part of the City of Aspen Municipal Code,
related to the Infill Report, a report developed by a city-commissioned advisory group,
the Infill Advisory Group, pursuant to sections 26.208 and 26.212; and,
WHEREAS, the purpose of the Infill Program is to implement action items
identified in the 2000 Aspen Area Community Plan, Barriers to Infill Development (a
report commissioned by the City of Aspen in 2000), recommendations of the Infill Report
(a report produced by the lnfill Advisory Group in January, 2002), and the
Recommendations of the Economic Sustainability Committee (a joint project between the
City of Aspen, the Aspen Chamber Resort Association, and the Aspen Institute
Community Forum concluded in September, 2002) that call for:
. intensification of land uses within the traditional townsite.
. focusing of growth towards already developed areas and away from undeveloped
areas surrounding the city.
. retention of existing commercial and lodging uses.
. increased vitality ofthe downtown retail environment.
. rejuvenation of aging commercial properties.
. development of mixed-use buildings with housing opportunities for locals.
. revisions to, or elimination of, identified barriers to successful infill development
such as the costs of development exactions, growth management penalties for
redeveloping buildings, and the length and uncertainty of approval processes.
. revisions to the strategy implementing growth management to emphasize quality
of development as opposed to just the quantity of development.
. balance between the community and the resort aspects of Aspen.
. sustainability of the local social and economic conditions.
. The creation of a development environment in which private sector motivation is
leveraged to address community goals; and,
WHEREAS, the amendments herein relate to the following Sections of the Land
Use Code, Title 26 of the Aspen Municipal Code:
26.412 - Commercial Design Review
26.575.030 - Pedestrian Amenity
Ordinance No._, Series of2005
Page I of 16
26.575.060 - Utility/Trash/Recycle Service Area; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the text of Title
26 of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval
with conditions, or denial by the Community Development Director and then by the
Planning and Zoning Commission at a public hearing. Final action shall be by City
Council after reviewing and considering these recommendations; and,
WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommended approval of
the proposed amendments, as described herein; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened the public hearing to
consider the proposed amendments to the above noted Chapters and Sections on
September 3, 2002, continued to September 17, 2002, continued to September 24, 2002,
continued to October I, 2002, continued to October 8, 2002, continued to October 15,
2002, continued to October 22, 2002, continued to October 29, 2002, continued to
November 5, 2002, continued to November 12, 2002, continued to November 19, 2002,
continued to November 26, 2002, continued to December 10, 2002, and continued to
December 17, 2002, took and considered public testimony at each of the aforementioned
hearing dates and the recommendation of the Community Development Director and
recommended, by a five to one (5-1) vote, City Council adopt the proposed amendments
to the land use code by amending the text of the above noted Chapters and Sections of the
Land Use Code; and,
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the
recommended changes to the Land Use Code under the applicable provisions of the
Municipal Code identified herein, has reviewed and considered the recommendation of the
Community Development Director, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and has taken
and considered public comment at a public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proposed text amendments to the Land
Use Code meet or exceed all applicable standards and that the approval of the proposal is
consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for
the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows:
Section 1:
Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Review, which Chapter describes process and
criteria for reviewing the design of commercial, lodging, and mixed-use buildings, shall
read as follows:
26.412
COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW
26.412.01 0
26.412.020
Ordinance No.
Page 2 of 16
Purpose.
Authority.
_' Series of2005
26.412.030
26.412.040
26.412.050
26.412.060
26.412.070
26.412.080
26.412.090
Applicability .
Procedure
Review Criteria.
Commercial Design Standards.
Suggested Design Elements.
Amendment of Commercial Design Review Approval.
Appeals
26.412.010 Purpose.
The purpose of Commercial Design Review is to preserve and foster proper commercial
district scale and character, and to ensure that Aspen's commercial areas and streetscapes
are public places conducive to walking. The review standards do not prescribe
architectural style, but do require certain building elements contribute to the streetscape.
The character of Aspen's commercial district is largely established by the variety of uses
and the relationship between front facades of buildings and the streets they face. By
requiring certain building elements to be incorporated in the design of new and
remodeled buildings, storefronts are more appealing and can contribute to a well-
designed, exciting commercial district.
Accommodation of the automobile within commercial districts is important to the
consistency and quality of pedestrian streetscapes. The standards prescribe certain
methods of accommodating on-site parking to achieve environments conducive to
walking.
Acknowledgement of the context that has been established by the eXlstmg built
environment is important to protecting the uniqueness of the town. To achieve
compatibility, certain standards require building elements to be influenced by adjoining
development, views, pedestrian malls, or sun angles.
Finally, along with creating architecturally interesting and lively primary streets, the
pedestrian nature of downtown can be further enhanced by making alleys an attractive
place to walk. Store entrances and display windows along alleyways are encouraged to
augment, while not detracting from, the pedestrian interest of primary streets.
26.412.020 Authority.
The Planning and Zoning Commission, in accordance with the procedures, standards, and
limitations of this Chapter and of Common Development Review Procedures, Section
26.304, shall approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove a land use application for
Commercial Design Review, pursuant to Section 26.412.050, Review Criteria.
If the land use application is subject to review by the Historic Preservation Commission
and the application has been approved for a combined review process, pursuant to
Section 26.304.060.B - Combined Reviews, the Historic Preservation Commission shall
approve, approve with conditions, or disapprove the land use application for Commercial
Design Review, pursuant to Section 26.412.050, Review Criteria.
Ordinance No._, Series of2005
Page 3 of 16
"...--.....-...-
26.412.030 Applicability. This section applies to all commercial, lodging, and mixed-
used development with a commercial component, within the City of Aspen requiring a
building permit.
Applications for commercial development may be exempted from the provisions of this
section by the Community Development Director if the development is:
I. An addition or remodel of an existing structure that either does not change the
exterior of the building or, in the opinion of the Community Development
Director, changes the exterior in such a minimal manner as to not justify this
review.
2. A remodel of a structure where proposed alterations affect aspects of the exterior
of the building not addressed by the Commercial Design Standards of Section
26.412.060.
3. A development activity not subject to any other reviews requiring approval by
either the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation
Commission.
26.412.040 Procedure
A. Pre-Application.
Pursuant to Section 26.304.020, Pre-Application Conference, Applicants are
encouraged to meet with a City Planner of the Community Development Department
to clarify the requirements of this section and to determine if a project may be
exempted from the provisions of this section. This step is not mandatory.
B. Application.
A development application for Commercial Design Review shall include the requisite
information and materials, pursuant to Section 26.304.030. In addition, the
application shall include scaled floor plans and elevations for the proposed
development. The Community Development Director, at his/her own discretion, may
require additional submission materials according to the complexity of the
development proposal. The application shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department along with any requisite review fees.
C. Community Development Director Review.
The Community Development Director shall review the proposed development in
accordance with Section 26.304, Common Development Review Procedures, and in
relation to Section 26.412.050, Review Criteria, and Section 26.412.060, Commercial
Design Standards.
D. Planning and Zoning Commission Review.
Applications for Commercial Design Review shall be forwarded to the Planning and
Zoning Commission along with a recommendation by the Community Development
Director. If the application is subject to review by the Historic Preservation
Commission and has been approved for a combined review process, pursuant to
Section 26.304.060.B - Combined Reviews, the application shall be forwarded to the
Ordinance No.
Page 4 of 16
, Series of 2005
Historic Preservation Commission along with a recommendation from the
Community Development Director.
The Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission, as
applicable, shall review the proposed development, at a public hearing in accordance
with Section 26.304, Common Development Review Procedures, and approve,
approve with conditions, or deny the application based on the criteria of Section
26.412.050, Review Criteria, and Section 26.412.060, Commercial Design Standards.
Public notice for the public hearing shall be provided by publication, posting, and
mailing. (See Section 26.304.060(E)(3)(a), (b), and (c).)
E. Notice to City Council and Call-Up
I. Notice to Citv Council. Following the adoption of a resolution approving or
approving with conditions a development application for Commercial Design
Review, City Council shall be promptly notified of the action to allow the City
Council an opportunity to avail itself of the Call-Up procedure set forth below.
Notification shall consist of a description in written and graphic form of the project
with a copy of the approving document. Also see appeal procedures, Section
26.412.090.
2. Call-Up. Following the adoption of a resolution approving or approving with
conditions a development application for Commercial Design Review, the City
Council may order call-up of the action within thirty (30) days of the decision, action
or determination. Consequently no associated permits can be issued during the thirty
(30) day call-up period. If City Council does not call-up the action within the call-up
period, the resolution shall ~be the final decision on the matter.
3. Citv Council action on call up. The City Council shall consider the application on
the record established before the Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic
Preservation Commission, as applicable. The City Council shall affirm the decision of
the Commission unless there is a finding that there was a denial of due process, or the
Commission exceeded its jurisdiction or abused its discretion. The City Council shall
take such action as is deemed necessary to remedy said situation, including, but not
limited to:
a. Reversing the decision.
b. Altering the conditions of approval.
c. Remanding the application to the Commission for rehearing.
26.412.050 Review Criteria.
An application for Commercial Design Review may be approved, approved with
conditions, or denied based on conformance with the following criteria:
I. The proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060,
Commercial Design Standards or any deviation from the Standards provides a
more-appealing pattern of development considering the context in which the
development is proposed and the purpose of the particular standard. Unique site
Ordinance No._, Series of2005
Page 5 of 16
_.._..---.-,.,---,",-~..
constraints can justify a deviation from the Standards. Compliance with Section
26.412.070, Suggested Design Elements, is not required but may be used to
justify a deviation from the Standards.
2. For proposed development converting an existing structure to commercial use, the
proposed development meets the requirements of Section 26.412.060,
Commercial Design Standards, to the greatest extent practical. Amendments to
the fa<;ade of the building may be required to comply with this section.
3. For properties listed on the Inventory of Historic Sites and Structures or located
within a Historic District, the proposed development has received Conceptual
Development Plan approval from the Historic Preservation Commission, pursuant
to Chapter 26.415. This criterion shall not apply if the development activity does
not require review by the Historic Preservation Commission.
26.412.060 Commercial Design Standards. The following design standards shall
apply to commercial, lodging, and mixed-use development:
A. Building Relationship to Primary Street.
A street wall is comprised of buildings facing principal streets and public pedestrian
spaces. Consistent street walls provide a sense of a coherent district and frame an
outdoor room. Interruptions in this enclosure can lessen the quality of a commercial
street. Corner buildings are especially important, in that they are more visible and their
scale and proportion affects the street walls of two streets. Well-designed and located
pedestrian open spaces can positively affect the quality of the district, while remnant or
leftover spaces can detract from the downtown. A building's relationship to the street is
entirely important to the quality of the downtown pedestrian environment. Split-level
retail and large vertical separations from the sidewalk can disrupt the coherence of a retail
district. The following standards shall apply:
I. Building facades shall be parallel to the adjoining primary streets. Minor
elements of the building fa<;:ade may be developed at irregular angles.
2. Building facades along primary streets shall be setback no more than the average
setback of the adjoining buildings and no less than the minimum requirement of
the particular zone district. Exempt from this provision are building setbacks
accommodating On-Site Pedestrian Amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030.
3. Building facades along primary streets shall maintain a consistent setback on the
first and second story.
4. Commercial buildings shall be developed with the first floor at, or within two (2)
feet above, the level of the adjoining sidewalk, or right-of-way if no sidewalk
exists. "Split-level" retail frontage is prohibited.
5. Commercial buildings incorporating a setback from a primary street shall not
incorporate a substantial grade change between the building fa<;:ade and the public
right-of-way. "Moats" surrounding buildings are prohibited.
Ordinance No._, Series of2005
Page 6 of 16
B. Pedestrian Amenity Space.
Creative, well-designed public places and settings contribute to an attractive, exciting,
and vital downtown retail district and a pleasant pedestrian shopping and entertainment
atmosphere. Pedestrian amenity can take the form of physical or operational
improvements to public rights-of-way or private property within commercial areas.
On parcels required to provide pedestrian amenity, pursuant to Section 26.575.030 -
Pedestrian Amenity, the following standards shall apply to the provision of such amenity.
Acceptance of the method or combination of methods of providing the Pedestrian
Amenity shall be at the option of the Planning and Zoning Commission, or the Historic
Preservation Commission as applicable, according to the procedures herein and according
to the following standards:
I. The dimensions of any proposed on-site pedestrian amenity sufficiently allow for
a variety of uses and activities to occur considering any expected tenant and
future potential tenants and uses.
2. The pedestrian amenity contributes to an active street vitality. To accomplish this
characteristic, public seating, outdoor restaurant seating or similar active uses,
shade trees, solar access, view orientation, and simple at-grade relationships with
adjacent rights-of-way are encouraged.
3. The pedestrian amenity, and the design and operating characteristics of adjacent
structures, rights-of-way, and uses, contributes to an inviting pedestrian
environment.
4. The proposed amenity does not duplicate existing pedestrian space created by
malls, sidewalks, or adjacent property, or such duplication does not detract from
the pedestrian environment.
5. Any variation to the Design and Operational Standards for Pedestrian Amenity,
Section 26.575.030(F) promote the purpose of the pedestrian amenity
requirements.
6. The Planning and Zoning Commission or Historic Preservation Commission, as
applicable, may reduce the pedestrian amenity requirement by any amount, such
that no more than half the requirement is waived, as an incentive for well-
designed projects having a positive contribution to the pedestrian environment.
The resulting requirement may not be less than 10%. On-site provision shall not
be required for a reduction in the requirement. A mix of uses within the proposed
building that enliven the surrounding pedestrian environment may be considered.
C. Street-Level Building Elements.
The "storefront," or street-level portion of a commercial building is perhaps the single
most important element of a commercial district building. Effective storefront design can
make an entire district inviting and pedestrian friendly. Unappealing storefront design
can become a detriment to the vitality of a commercial district. In order to be an effective
facility for the sale of goods and services, the storefront has traditionally been used as a
tool to present those goods and services to the passing pedestrian (potential customer).
Because of this function, the storefront has traditionally been as transparent as possible to
allow maximum visibility to the interior. The following standards shall apply:
Ordinance No.
Page 7 of 16
, Series of 2005
I. Unarticulated, blank walls are prohibited. Fenestration, or an alternate means of
fa9ade articulation, is required on all exterior walls.
2. Retail buildings shall incorporate, at a minimum, a 60% fenestration ratio on
exterior street-level walls facing primary streets. (For example: each street-level
wall of a retail building that faces a primary street must be comprised of at least
60% fenestration penetrations and no more than 40% solid materials.) This
provision may be reduced or waived for lodging properties with no, or limited,
street-level retail, office buildings with no retail component, and for
Service/Commercial/Industrial buildings.
3. Building entrances shall be well-defined and apparent.
4. Building entrances shall be designed to accommodate an internal airlock such that
temporary seasonal airlocks on the exterior of the building are unnecessary.
5. Non-traditional storefronts, such as along an alleyway, are encouraged.
D. Parking.
Parking is a necessary component of a successful commercial district. The manner in
which parking is physically accommodated has a larger impact upon the quality of the
district that the amount of parking. Surface parking separating storefronts from the street
creates a cluttered, inhospitable pedestrian environment. A downtown retail district
shaped by buildings, well-designed storefronts, and a continuous street wall is highly
preferred over a district shaped by parking lots. Well-placed and well-designed access
points to parking garages can allow convenient parking without disrupting the retail
district. The following standards shall apply:
1. Parking shall only be accessed from alleyways, unless such access is unavailable
or an unreasonable design solution in which case access from a primary street
shall be designed in a manner that minimizes disruption of the pedestrian
environment.
2. Surface parking shall not be located between the Street right-of-way and the
building fa9ade.
3. Above grade parking garages in commercial districts shall incorporate ground-
floor commercial uses and be designed in a manner compatible with surrounding
buildings and uses.
4. Above grade parking garages shall not reveal internal ramping on the exterior
fa9ade of the building.
E. Utility, Delivery, and Trash Service Provision.
When the necessary logistical elements of a commercial building are well designed, the
building can better contribute to the overall success of the district. Poor logistics of one
building can detract from the quality of surrounding properties. Efficient delivery and
trash areas are important to the function of alleyways. The following standards shall
apply:
I. A utility, trash, and recycle service area shall be accommodated along the alley
meeting the minimum standards established by Section 26.575.060
Ordinance No._, Series of2005
Page 8 of 16
,.__..N.<_..".___..;'~~_"~'"'_-~'~__~.__~_~"_ . ,.>.,._~._..._'.,~,~...,,---.
Utility/Trash/Recycle Service Areas, unless otherwise established according to
said section.
2. All utility service pedestals shall be located on private property and along the
alley. Easements shall allow for service provider access. Encroachments into the
alleyway shall be minimized to the extent practical and should only be necessary
when existing site conditions, such as a historic resource, dictate such
encroachment. All encroachments shall be properly licensed.
3. Delivery service areas shall be incorporated along the alley. Any truck loading
facility shall be an integral component of the building. Shared facilities are highly
encouraged.
4. Mechanical exhaust, including parking garage ventilation, shall be vented through
the roof. The exhaust equipment shall be located as far away from the Street as
practical.
5. Mechanical ventilation equipment and ducting shall be accommodated internally
within the building and/or located on the roof, minimized to the extent practical
and recessed behind a parapet wall or other screening device such that it shall not
be visible from a public right-of-way at a pedestrian level. New buildings shall
reserve adequate space for future ventilation and ducting needs.
26.412.070 Suggested Design Elements. The following guidelines are building
practices suggested by the City, but are not mandatory. In many circumstances,
compliance with these practices may not produce the most-desired development and
project designers should use their best judgment.
A. Sif!nal!e:
Signage should be integrated with the building to the extent possible. Integrated
signage areas already meeting the City's requirements for size, etc. may minimize
new tenant signage compliance issues. Common tenant listing areas also serves a
public wayfinding function, especially for office uses. Signs should not block design
details of the building on which they are placed. Compliance with the City's sign
code is mandatory.
B. Disvlav windows:
Display windows provide pedestrian interest and can contribute to the success of the
retail space. Providing windows that reveal inside activity of the store can provide
this pedestrian interest.
C. Lif!hlinf!:
Well-lit (meaning quality, not quantity) display windows along the first floor create
pedestrian interest after business hours. Dynamic lighting methods designed to catch
attention can cheapen the quality of the downtown retail environment. Illuminating
certain important building elements can provide an interesting effect. Significant light
trespass should be avoided. Illuminating the entire building should be avoided.
Compliance with the City's Outdoor Lighting code, Section 26.575.050, is
mandatory.
Ordinance No._, Series of2005
Page 9 of 16
D~ Orizinal Townsite Articulation:
Buildings spanning more than one Original Townsite Lot should incorporate fayade
expressions coincidental with these original parcel boundaries to reinforce historic
scale. This may be inappropriate in some circumstances, such as on large corner lots.
E. Architectural Features:
Parapet walls should be used to shield mechanical equipment from pedestrian views.
Aligning cornices and other architectural features with adjacent buildings can relate
new buildings to their historical surroundings. Awnings and canopies can be used to
provide architectural interest and shield windows and entryways from the elements.
26.412.080 Amendment of Commercial Design Review Approval.
A. Insubstantial Amendment.
An insubstantial amendment to a Commercial Design Review approval may be
authorized by the Community Development Director if:
I. The change is in conformance with the Design Standards, Section 26.412.060, the
change represents a minimal affect on the aesthetics of the proposed development, or
the change is consistent with representations made during the original review
concerning potential changes of the development proposal considered appropriate by
the decision-making body; and,
2. The change requires no other land use action requiring review by the Planning and
Zoning Commission.
B. Other Amendments.
All other amendments to a Commercial Design Review approval shall be reviewed
pursuant to the standards and procedures of this Section.
26.412.090 Appeals.
An applicant aggrieved by a determination made by the Planning and Zoning
Commission, or the Historic Preservation Commission as applicable, pursuant to this
Chapter, may appeal the decision to the City Council, pursuant to the procedures and
standards of Section 26.316, Appeals.
Section 2:
Section 26.575.030, Pedestrian Amenity, which section authorizes, describes, and
regulates requirements for development to provide pedestrian amenities, shall
read as follows:
26.575.030 Pedestrian Amenity
A. Purpose. The City of Aspen seeks a vital, pleasant downtown pedestrian
environment. Pedestrian Amenity contributes to an attractive downtown retail district by
creating public places and settings conducive to an exciting pedestrian shopping and
entertainment atmosphere. Pedestrian amenity can take the form of physical or
operational improvements to public rights-of-way or private property within commercial
Ordinance No._, Series of2005
Page 10 of 16
areas. Pedestrian Amenity provided on the subject development site is referred to as On-
Site Pedestrian Amenity in this section.
B. Applicability and Requirement. The requirements of this Section shall apply to
the development of all land within the area bounded by Main Street, Original Street,
Dean Street, and Aspen Street. This area represents Aspen's primary pedestrian-oriented
commercial district. The linear extension of the centerline of these streets shall be used
to determine the boundary in instances where these streets are not developed or do not
connect. Whenever a parcel straddles this boundary, the requirement shall be lessened
proportionately (based on land area) for that parcel.
Twenty-five (25) percent of each parcel within the applicable area shall be provided as
Pedestrian Amenity. For redevelopment of parcels on which less than this twenty-five
(25) percent currently exists, the existing (prior to redevelopment) percentage shall be the
effective requirement provided no less than ten (10) percent is required. For
redevelopment of parcels in which ten (10) percent of the parcel is the requirement,
provision of a cash-in-lieu payment shall be automatically permitted with no further
review.
Exempt from these provisions shall be development consisting entirely of residential
uses. Also exempt from these provisions shall be the redevelopment of parcels where no
on-site pedestrian amenity currently exists, provided the redevelopment is limited to
replacing the building in its same dimensions as measured by footprint, height, and floor
area.
C. Provision of Pedestrian Amenity.
The Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to the review procedures and criteria of
Section 26.412 - Commercial Design Review, shall determine the appropriate method or
combination of methods for providing this required amenity. Any combination of the
following methods may be used such that the standard is reached.
I. On-Site Provision of Pedestrian Amenitv. A portion of the parcel designed in a
manner meeting the Design and Operational Standards for On-Site Pedestrian
Amenity, Section 26.575.030(C). The Planning and Zoning Commission shall
review the site plan, pursuant to section 26.412, Commercial Design Review.
2. Off-Site Provision of Pedestrian Amenitv. Proposed pedestrian amenities and
improvements to the pedestrian environment within proximity of the development
site may be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to
Section 26.412 - Commercial Design Review. These may be improvements to
private property, public property, or public rights-of-way. An easement providing
public access over an existing public amenity space for which no easement exists
may be accepted if such easement provides permanent public access and is
acceptable to the City Attorney. Off-Site improvements shall equal or exceed the
value of an otherwise required cash-in-lieu payment and be consistent with any
public infrastructure or capital improvement plan for that area.
3. Cash-in-lieu Provision. The Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to
Section 26.412 - Commercial Design Review, may accept a cash-in-lieu payment
Ordinance No._, Series of2005
Page 11 ofl6
for any portion of required pedestrian amenity not otherwise physically provided,
according to the procedures and limitations of Section 26.575.030.E, Cash-in-
Lieu Payment.
4. Alternative Method. The Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to Section
26.412 - Commercial Design Review, may accept any method of providing
Pedestrian Amenity not otherwise described herein if the Commission finds that
such method equals or exceeds the value, which may be non-monetary
community value, of an otherwise required cash-in-lieu payment.
D. Reduction of Requirement. The Planning and Zoning Commission, or Historic
Preservation Commission as applicable, pursuant to the procedures and criteria of Section
26.412 - Commercial Design Review - may reduce the pedestrian amenity requirement
by any amount, such that no more than half the requirement is waived, as an incentive for
well-designed projects having a positive contribution to the pedestrian environment. The
resulting requirement may not be less than 10%.
The Historic Preservation Commission may reduce by any amount the requirements of
this section for Historic Landmark properties upon one of the following circumstances:
I. When the Historic Preservation Commission approves the on-site relocation of a
Historic Landmark such that the amount of on-site pedestrian space is reduced
below that required by this Chapter.
2. When the manner in which a Historic Landmark building was originally
developed reduces the amount of on-site pedestrian amenity required by this
Chapter.
3. When the redevelopment or expansion of a Historic Landmark constitutes an
exemplary preservation effort deserving of an incentive or reward.
E. Payment in lieu. When the method of providing pedestrian amenity includes a
cash-in-lieu payment, the following provisions and limitations shall apply:
Formula for determining cash-in-lieu payment:
Payment
Where:
[Land Value] x [Pedestrian Amenity Percentage]
Land Value = Value of the unimproved land.
Pedestrian Amenity Percentage = Percent of the parcel required
to be provided as a pedestrian amenity, pursuant to Section
26.575.030(B) lessened by other methods of providing the
amenity.
Land Value shall be the lesser of fifty (50) dollars per square foot multiplied by
the number of square feet constituting the parcel or the appraised value of the
unimproved property, determined by the submission of a current appraisal
performed by a qualified professional real estate appraiser and verified by the
Community Development Director. An applicant may only waive the current
appraisal requirement by accepting the fifty (50) dollar per square foot standard.
Ordinance No._, Series of2005
Page 12 of 16
Acceptance of a cash-in-lieu of Pedestrian Amenity shall be at the option of the
Planning and Zoning Commission, or the Historic Preservation Commission as
applicable, pursuant to Section 26.412 - Commercial Design Review. The
payment-in-lieu of pedestrian amenity shall be due and payable at the time of
issuance of a building permit. The City Manager, upon request, may allow the
required payment-in-lieu to be amortized in equal payments over a period of up to
five years, with or without interest.
All funds shall be collected by the Community Development Director and
transferred to the Finance Director for deposit in a separate interest bearing
account. Monies in the account shall be used solely for the purchase,
development, or capital improvement of land or public rights-of-way for open
space, pedestrian amenity, or recreational purposes within or adjacent to the
applicable area in which this requirement applies. Funds may be used to acquire
public use easements.
Fees collected pursuant to this section may be returned to the then present owner
of property for which a fee was paid, including any interest earned, if the fees
have not been spent within seven (7) years from the date fees were paid, unless
the City Council shall have earmarked the funds for expenditure on a specific
project, in which case the City Council may extend the time period by up to three
(3) more years. To obtain a refund, the present owner must submit a petition to
the Finance Director within one (I) year following the end of the seventh (7th)
year from the date payment was received.
F or the purpose of this section, payments shall be spent in the order in which they
are received. Any payment made for a project for which a building permit is
canceled, due to non-commencement of construction, may be refunded if a
petition for refund is submitted to the finance director within three (3) months of
the date of the cancellation of the building permit. All petitions shall be
accompanied by a notarized, sworn statement that the petitioner is the current
owner of the property and by a copy of the dated receipt issued for payment ofthe
fee.
F. Design and Operational Standards for Pedestrian Amenity. Pedestrian amenity,
on all privately-owned land in which pedestrian amenity is required, shall comply
with the following provisions and limitations:
I. Open to View. Pedestrian amenity areas shall be open to view from the street at
pedestrian level, which view need not be measured at right angles.
2. Open to Sky. Pedestrian amenity areas shall be open to the sky. Temporary and
seasonal coverings, such as umbrellas and retractable canopies are permitted.
Such non-permanent structures shall not be considered as floor area or a reduction
in pedestrian amenity on the parcel.
Trellis structures shall only be permitted in conjunction with commercial
restaurant uses on a designated Historic Landmark or within (H) Historic overlay
zones and must be approved pursuant to review requirements contained in
Ordinance No._, Series of2005
Page 13 ofl6
Chapter 26.415 - Development Involving the Aspen Inventory of Historic
Landmark Sites and Structures or Development within a Historic District. Such
approved structures shall not be considered as floor area or a reduction in
pedestrian space on the parcel.
3. No Walls/Enclosures. Pedestrian amenity areas shall not be enclosed. Temporary
structures, tents, air exchange entries, plastic canopy walls, and similar devices
designed to enclose the space~ are prohibited, unless approved as a temporary use,
pursuant to Section 26.450. Low fences or walls shall only be permitted within or
around the perimeter of pedestrian space if such structures shall permit views
from the street into and throughout the pedestrian space.
4. Prohibited Uses. Pedestrian amenity areas shall not be used as storage areas,
utility/trash service areas, delivery area, parking areas or contain structures of any
type, except as specifically provided for herein. Vacated rights-of-way shall be
excluded from pedestrian amenity calculations.
5. Grade Limitations. Required pedestrian amenity shall not be more than four (4)
feet above or two (2) feet below the existing grade of the street or sidewalk which
abuts the pedestrian space, unless the pedestrian amenity space shall follow
undisturbed natural grade, in which case there shall be no limit on the extent to
which it is above or below the existing grade of the street.
6. Pedestrian Links. In the event that the City of Aspen shall have adopted a trail
plan incorporating mid-block pedestrian links, any required pedestrian space
must, if the city shall so elect, be applied and dedicated for such use.
7. Landscavinf! Plan. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Community
Development Director shall require site plans and drawings of any required
pedestrian amenity area, including a landscaping plan, and a bond in a satisfactory
form and amount to insure compliance with any pedestrian amenity requirements
under this title.
8. Maintenance of Landscavinf!. Whenever the landscaping required herein is not
maintained, the Chief Building Official, after thirty (30) days written notice to the
owner or occupant of the property, may revoke the certificate of occupancy until
said party complies with the landscaping requirements of this section.
9. Commercial Activitv. No area of a building site designated as required pedestrian
amenity space under this section shall be used for any commercial activity,
including, but not limited to, the storage, display, and merchandising of goods and
services; provided, however, that the prohibition of this subsection shall not apply
when such use is in conjunction with permitted commercial activity on an
abutting right-of-way or is otherwise permitted by the City. For outdoor food
vending in the Commercial Core District, also see Section 26.470.040(B)(3),
Administrative Growth Management Review.
10. Commercial Restaurant Use. The provisions above notwithstanding, required
pedestrian amenity space may be used for commercial restaurant use if adequate
pedestrian and emergency vehicle access is maintained.
Ordinance No._, Series of2005
Page 14 of 16
Section 3:
Section 26.575.060, Utility/Trash/Recycle Service Areas, which section describes
requirements to provide areas within a lot for the purpose of housing utility, trash,
and recycling facilities, shall read as follows:
26.575.060 Utility/Trash/Recycle Service Areas.
A. General. The following provisions shall apply to all utility/trash service areas:
1. If the property adjoins an alleyway, the utility/trash/recycle service area shall
be along and accessed from the alleyway. Unless entirely located on an
alleyway, all utility/trash service areas shall be fenced so as not to be visible
from the street, and such fences shall be six (6) feet high from grade. All
fences shall be of sound construction and shall be no less than 90% opaque.
2. Whenever this Title shall require that an utility/trash/recycle service area be
provided abutting an alley, buildings may extend to the rear property line if
otherwise allowed by this title provided that an open area is provided which
shall be accessible to the alley, and which meets the dimensional requirements
of this section.
3. A minimum of twenty (20) linear feet of the utility/trash service area shall be
reserved for box storage, utility transformers or equipment, building access,
and trash and recycling facilities. For properties with 30 feet, or less, of alley
frontage, this requirement shall be fifteen (15) linear feet. For properties with
no alley access, no requirement shall apply. The required area shall have a
minimum vertical clearance of 10 feet and a minimum depth of 10 feet at
ground level. The required area shall not be used for required parking or as
vehicular access to a parking area.
4. The Planning and Zoning Commission may reduce the required dimensions of
this area by special review (see Chapter 26.430) and in accordance with the
standards set forth below at Section 26.575.060(B).
Section 4:
This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an
abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the
ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted
and concluded under such prior ordinances.
Section 5:
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this 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 6:
That the City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this Ordinance, to record a copy
of this Ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder.
Ordinance No._, Series of2005
Page 15 of 16
Section 7:
A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the _day of ,
2005, at 5:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado,
fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a
newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City
Council of the City of Aspen on the _, 2005.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Helen K. Klanderud, Mayor
FIN ALL Y, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of
,2005.
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Helen K. Klanderud, Mayor
Approved as to form:
City Attorney
C: IhomelinfilllCommerciallComDesignPedAmen.doc
Ordinance No. , Series of2005
Page 16 of 16
Exhibit A
Code Amendments: Commercial Design Review
Pedestrian Amenity
Utility/Trash/Recycle Service Area
STAFF COMMENTS: Text Amendment
Section 26.310.040, Standards Applicable to a Land Use Code Text Amendment
In reviewing an amendment to the text of this Title, the City Council and the Commission
shall consider:
A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable
portions of this title.
Staff Finding:
The proposed code amendments encourage the development and redevelopment of
commercial and mixed-use buildings to be of higher quality design. Review standards
have been incorporated to enable the P&Z or HPC to adequately concentrate on the basic
elements of design that typically result in successful mixed-use buildings. A city-choice
program for pedestrian amenity will allow the City to choose whether the open space
requirement is met on-site or through other means of improving the district. The utility
space requirement has been increased to account for recycling activities that typically
occur along the alleyway. No aspect of the proposed code amendment is in conflict with
other portions of the Municipal Code.
B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements
of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
Staff Finding:
Staff believes these changes to the Land Use Code are supported by the AACP. There are
many references to design quality and ensuring new development is compatible with
existing development. These code amendments provide for public input and provide
basic design standards to achieve high-quality development.
C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding
zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and
neighborhood characteristics.
Staff Finding:
This amendment does not affect the location of the commercial and mixed-use districts in
which it will be effective. Staff believes this criterion is met.
D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and
road safety.
Staff Finding:
The proposed code amendments are not expected to have any affect on traffic patterns or
demand. The utility/trash amendment is intended to require sufficient amount of land
reservation for the necessary utilitarian functions of a building to occur along the
alleyways. This should provide for fewer conflicts in the alleyways from new
staff comments - Com Design/Ped. Amenity. page I
development. Staff does not believe the amendments represent any safety issues on local
roads.
E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to
which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such
facilities, including, but not limited to, transportation facilities,
sewage facilities, water supply, parks, qrainage, schools, and
emergency medical facilities.
Staff Finding:
Staff does not expect any utility or infrastructure demands to change as a result of these
amendments.
F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would
result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment.
Staff Finding:
The amendments are essentially aesthetic reviews and are not expected to have an effect
on the natural environment. The utility area increase may provide for easier recycling
opportunities but no major change is expected in the participation rate of recycling
programs as a result of the code amendment.
G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible
with the community character in the City of Aspen.
Staff Finding:
The amendments provide a process for reviewing new commercial and mixed-use
development to ensure new development and major remodels are compatible with the
character of existing development. This type of review process is already in place for
projects within the Historic Districts and projects seeking Growth Management
Allotments. Staff believes these amendment are consistent with the community character.
H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject
parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the
proposed amendment.
Staff Finding:
The proposed amendment is not specific to one parcel. Staff believes this criterion does
not apply.
I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the
public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this
title.
Staff Finding:
This proposed amendment does not pose any conflicts with the public interest. The
AACP reflects a community desire for new development to be compatible with existing
development and to be of a high quality design. These code amendment will address
infill development and significant remodels and ensure that basic design principles are
followed and that public participation is achieved. Staff believes this Ordinance will
promote the purpose and intent of this Title.
staff comments - Com DesignlPed. Amenity. page 2
-G<MiDi-l- i?
Ii8
ASPEN CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION
MEETING NOTES
MEETING DATE:
July 19 & 20, 2004
AGENDA TOPIC:
Commercial Development - work session
PRESENTED BY:
Chris Bendon
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT:
Helen, Terry, Tim, Rachel, & Torre
SUMMARY OF DISCUSSION:
The purpose of the work session was to review the regulatory barriers to reinvestment in
commercial properties and how the City should address these barriers. Below are the topics
discussed and the resolution to each:
Previouslv Resolved Items:
Redevelopment projects should be permitted a creditfor their existing development. The City's
code permits the replacement of commercial square footage after demolition only if the project
mitigates for affordable housing as if nothing existed there before - no credit. This replacement
penalty is a significant barrier to redevelopment and removing it is a consistent theme of the infill
discussions. This redevelopment credit idea was implemented a few years ago in the Lodge
Preservation Program and has produced some positive activity. Providing this credit is similar to
the City's approach on Lodging development. Rachel expressed some interest in still requiring
some level of mitigation. This was not echoed by other Council members.
Pedestrian Amenity cash-in-lieu uses should not be broadened to include purchase of open
space viewable from downtown. Staffrecommended against this route. The reason for requiring
this space is to enhance the pedestrian environment and cash-in-lieu monies should be used to
directly affect this goal and not diverted to other community issues. This is especially important
in light of the City's recent analysis of downtown and a desire to implement improvements with
no funding source. There was not sufficient Council interest in pursuing this option.
Off-site affordable housing mitigation should be approved by P&Z while off-site, outside the
city limits should only be approved by City Council. This outside the city issue also was raised
by Council during lodging discussions with the preference being to permit such mitigation with
approvals from City Council.
Question: Should redevelopment of lots where no (or less than required) space is
currently provided be required to provide Pedestrian Amenity? Council decided to fully
exempt projects that are merely replacing and existing building. If the project is expanding
through redevelopment, a 10% requirement would apply which could automatically be able to
pay the cash-in-lieu.
Items Resolved in Work Session:
Pedestrian Amenitv:
Should the requirement be 20% or 25% of each lot? Council decided on keeping thl
standard at 25% with the ability for P&Z to lower the requirement to reward exceptional projects.
P&Z's criteria for exceptional should include consideration of the projects mix of uses and how
that mix contributes to an active downtown. ~
Question: Should the City permit outdoor merchandising in required open space?
Council decided to keep this item it in the realm of the Downtown Catalyst and not address it
through infill code amendments.
Note: Commercial design and Pedestrian Amenity sections are complete and ready to come
forward as ordinances.
Free-Market / Affordable Housinl! Mix.
Question: Should the mitigation requirement for free-market residential development
within mixed-use buildings be amended to be 60% of the free-market FAR for on-site
mitigation and 100% of the free-market FAR? Council directed staff to further analyze the
proper AH/FM mix.
LandinI! Historic TDRs
Question: Should the TDR Program be expanded to the Commercial Zones? Council
decided to not pursue a TDR program in commercial zones at this time.
Affordable Housinl! Mitil!ation TDR.
Question: Is City Council interested in staff exploring a transferable employee mitigation
system? Council decided to not pursue this idea in the infill code amendments. This idea should
instead be forwarded to the Housing Authority and Board to see if it should be pursued.
2
_ ,.,_..,....~._"'.,."_"'~...~_>__;.~__~.,.....,...,,."'-"'-_u_k'.'
Parkin/!:
Parking questions were not addressed. Rather, Council wanted these questions to be
included in the August 3rd Transportation work session.
Commercial Core and Commercial] Districts.
Council decided to provide a height limit of 42 feet, measured at the full extent of the roof. Staff
will research some ability to provide flexibility for modest increases to accommodate rooflines
internal to a project that are not visible from the street level. This would likely be a review done
by HPC as they already must review the design of each building.
Council agreed to a 42-foot height for flat roofs and 38 feet for midpoint of pitched roofs in the
C I zone. Staff will also carry this dual height limit into the Lodge district.
Question: Is Council interested in landing TDRs in these two zones? Should they
provide for additional height? What level of review should be required? (These are the
same questions as in the TDR section above.) Council decided against a TDR system in the
Commercial Zones.
Mixed-Use Zone (Main Street).
Question: Is Council comfortable with this dual height regulation - 25 feet for single-
family and duplex with either 30 or 32 for lodging, multi-family, and mixed-use? Council
accepted a 32 foot height for this zone
Question: Should the single-family and duplex FAR allowance be reduced to 80% of the
R6 schedule? Council did not address this issue.
Nei/!hborhood Commercial
Question: Is this an acceptable direction [providing dimensions similar to the Mixed-Use
zone] for addressing this zone? This question Council agreed to a 32-foot height limit. Other
dimensions were not discussed.
Service Commercial Industrial
Staff s approach to this zone is to clean-up some of the uses, clarify the amount of
retail/showroom space that can be provided, specify commercial use only on the ground floor,
and introduce some FAR linkage requirements between SCI uses and other uses that may be
more financially attractive. An FAR linkage requirement would require a minimum amount of
SCI use prior to any NC or residential use.
Staff is recommending the height remain at 35 feet with two ways to increase the height - for
additional ground floor height, and as an incentive to developing a minimum amount of SCI
space.
3
Question: Is this an acceptable direction for addressing this zone? Council agreed to a 35-
foot height limit with the ability to achieve one 5-foot increase for either greater 1 st floor head
height or a minimum amount of SCI development - but not two total increases. Other
dimensions were not discussed.
View Planes:
The City maintains seven protected view planes. These were initiated in the early to mid '70s,
some in response to specific development proposals. Certain view planes significantly limit
development and P&Z recommended the elimination of all accept the Wheeler view plane.
Question: Does City Council want to formally initiate a "Wagner park edge to Shadow
Mountain" view plane. Council preferred seeing the potential view plane and graphics analysis
of the 38 and 42-foot height restrictions within the Lodge district prior to initiating a Wagner
Park view plane.
Question: Does Council want to initiate other view planes? Which ones? Terry indicated
his support for several proposed view planes with pictures to describe each potential. Council did
not initiate any new view planes.
4
,. '_""'''-~ ..._w,_.~.~,_.__,~,<~.....,~.,....,_______..___,_.,_.",_.<_.~-..." ~,... -",.~--,,_..._..~
~;'ot~ ~
PEDESTRIAN AMENITY & CURRENT 25% UNDEVELOPED SPACE
Importance to Inti" Proaram Viabilitv: Critical effect on the Infill Program's
viability. Currently, the 25% undeveloped area provision in the code is a
significant barrier to a project's financial viability and has created some
unpleasant spaces.
Definition: Pedestrian Space is the area
owned by the public in the form of rights-of-
way and un-built, privately owned spaces
downtown that function as transition areas
between sidewalks and buildings.
Current Reaulation: 25% of each parcel
must remain open. The current 25% urban
open-space requirement (for each and every
downtown parcel) does not always create
interesting and vibrant public places. Some
very interesting public places have resulted
from this provision. And some dismal
spaces have been created, detracting from
the pedestrian environment.
The goal of a vital, pleasant pedestrian
environment can be reached with both the
quality of the public spaces and the quality
of buildings that frame that space.
Requiring all development to leave 25% of
the parcel undeveloped, with no qualitative
criteria, has resulted in disappointing spaces
- spaces for trash to blow around in a circle.
Duplicating adjacent public space also
lowers the overall quality of the pedestrian
environment and the strength of the retail
district. Concentrating each development's
contribution to the pedestrian environment
will produce meaningful, high-quality
pedestrian space.
Good pedestrian space
Not-sa-good pedestrian space
Recommendation: Implement a new requirement for improving the downtown
pedestrian environment with options of providing either on-site pedestrian space,
off-site pedestrian improvements where appropriate, or a payment-in-lieu
designated for downtown pedestrian amenities.
More Detail: Pedestrian Amenity Strategy - Section Four, page 6~
Section Two, Page 6
PEDESTRIAN AMENITY STRATEGY
A few members of the Infill Advisory Group and
City staff conducted a two-day charretle to
determine an appropriate strategy for
encouraging downtown pedestrian
environments. The following results of this
session were presented to the whole Infill
Group as a means of replacing the current
25% requirement.
Quality pedestrian space plays an important
role in Aspen's retail district and desirable
public places can be realized through revised
development regulations.
1. Reinforce building's relationship with
pedestrian
. Encourage simple, unobstructed
relationship between pedestrian and
public space.
. Prevent split-level buildings (where two
mediocre retail floors are created).
. Prevent "moats" around buildings.
. Transparency on first floor.
2. Reinforce historic development pattern
. Encourage buildings to build to property
line.
. Remove or substantially change view
plane regulations.
. Prevent duplication of existing public
space created by malls and sidewalks.
. Prevent or discourage office uses on
first floor in retail district.
. Reinforce historic vertical dimension of
buildings.
. No more open space unless "key"
location.
3. Encourage comfortable outdoor space
. Allow outdoor seating with no additional
review.
. Allow seating to be covered.
. Encourage provision of shade trees
Good Pedestrian Space
,I' _. ....~.!
,It'. .. I ar - I. -
1":"1 ~... .... · . .-
-. I.... ..... . ia . I
la _ .... 11M
..........1'1
pi III.Ii ... _ ..
-:I ! ... .. nl
., ....&1...
. ...... W
. .... - ...
.=. r_~""
Footprint of downtown Aspen
Section Four, Page 6
4. Encourage active public space
. Encourage active use of existing
outdoor public space (restaurant
seating)
. Consider expanding mall lease
zones.
5. Protect "key" private spaces.
. Possible spaces: Paradise
Bakery, Zele Coffee, Wolf Camera
(if redeveloped)
. Implement by using mitigation
funds to acquire easements, fund
pedestrian improvements.
6. Encourage redevelopment of "key"
private spaces and/or adjacent
building
. Hanibal Brown building - Aspen
Mountain Plaza
. Tom Thumb building
. T-shirt shop
. Wells Fargo Building
. Wolf Camera Building
7. Improve "Key" public spaces
. Implement DEPP and Wagner Park Plan
. Malls - Physical and programming, maintenance of trees/flowers
. Consider fire pit on the Cooper Mall
. Use mitigation funds to accomplish public improvements
8. Encourage development of significant parcels that could improve quality of
district
. Hunter/Hyman vacant lot
. Wheeler parcel (vacant parcel next to Wheeler Opera House)
. Fire Station
. Vacant parcel next to the Wienerstube restaurant
9. Encourage active use or beautification of spaces between buildings
. Identify ways city could facilitate agreements if areas between buildings are
being legally disputed.
Section Four, Page 7
\X ~
1M
l.YIe:n:J..o:raJ1d~
,~. Clly elllSllea
Clly lIIIereef's"
TO:
Mayor and Members of Council
FROM:
John P. Worcester
DATE:
January 10, 2005
RE:
Lot 10, Aspen ~ ijigh\ands Subdivision, Filing No. 2 Parcel Annexation -
Ordinance No. fL, Series of 2004 - Second Reading and Public Hearing
Attached for your consideration and review is a proposed ordinance which, if adopted, would
annex the Lot 10, Aspen Highlands Subdivision, Filing No.2 Parcel to the City of Aspen. This
matter is before you on Second Reading and Public Hearing.
The petition for annexation was filed with the City Clerk on September 24, 2004. On October
12, 2004, City Council adopted a resolution finding substantial compliance with Section 31-12-
107(1), C.R.S. A public hearing was held on November 22, 2004, at which time Council
determined that the proposed annexation was in compliance with ~~ 31-12-104 and 31-12-105,
C.R.S.
City staff will be present at the public hearing and second reading of the proposed ordinance to
answer any questions you might have on the proposed annexation and potential impacts the
annexation will have on City operations.
The decision to annex property to the City is a legislative act and is entirely within your
discretionary powers. You may annex, or not, for any reason, or no reason at all.
ACTION REQUIRED: A Motion to approve Ordinance No. 49 , Series of 2004.
CITYMANAGER'SCOMMENTS:~~ tfP~.
ORDINANCE NO. tfcr
(Series of 2004)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO,
APPROVING THE ANNEXATION OF CERTAIN TERRITORY TO THE CITY OF ASPEN,
COLORADO, TO BE KNOWN AND DESIGNATED AS THE "LOT 10, ASPEN
HIGHLANDS SUBDIVISION, FILING NO.2 PARCEL" ANNEXATION.
WHEREAS, on September 24, 2004, one hundred percent of the owners of the property
proposed to be annexed did file with the City Clerk of the City of Aspen a Petition for
Annexation of territory to the City of Aspen; and
WHEREAS, the petition, including accompanying copies of an annexation map, has been
reviewed by the City Attorney's Office and the City Engineer and found by them to contain the
information prescribed and set forth in @31-12-107, C.R.S.; and
WHEREAS, the owners of one hundred percent (100%) of the area proposed to be
annexed, exclusive of streets and alleys, have consented in writing to the annexation; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, by resolution (Number 96, Series of 2004) at its regular
meeting on October 12, 2004, did find and determine said Petition for Annexation to be in
substantial compliance with the provisions of@31-12-107, C.R.S.; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, by resolution (Number 114, Series of 2004) at its regular
meeting on November 22, 2004, did find and determine, following a public hearing, said Petition
for Annexation to be in substantial compliance with @@ 31-12-104 and 31-12-105, C.R.S.; and
WHEREAS, the City Council does hereby find and determine that approval of the
annexation of said territory to be in the City's best interest;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
Section I.
That the tract of land described in the Petition for Annexation,
commonly referred to as the" Lot 10, Aspen HigWands Subdivision, Filing No.2 Parcel", and
as shown on the annexation map, is hereby annexed to the City of Aspen, Colorado.
Section 2.
The City Clerk of the City of Aspen is hereby directed as follows:
(a) To file one copy of the annexation map with the original of this annexation
ordinance in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Aspen.
(b) To certify and file two copies of this annexation ordinance and of the annexation
map with the Clerk and Recorder of the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado.
(c) To request the Clerk and Recorder of Pitkin County to file one certified copy of
this annexation ordinance and of the annexation map with the Division of Local Government of
the Department of Local Affairs, State of Colorado.
Section 3. The City Engineer of the City of Aspen is hereby directed to
amend the Official Map of the City of Aspen to reflect the boundary changes adopted pursuant to
this annexation ordinance.
Section 4.
That if any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion
of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent
jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall
not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof.
Section 5.
That this ordinance shall not have any effect on existing litigation
and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue
of the ordinances amended as herein provided, and the same shall be construed and concluded
under such prior ordinances.
2
A public hearing on the ordinance shall be held on the _ day of
in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen, Colorado.
,2004,
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law by the City
Council of the City of Aspen on the day of , 2004.
Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
FINALLY adopted, passed and approved this
,2004.
day of
Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
JPW- saved: 12/7!2004-650-G:\john\word\ords\Aspen-Highlands-Annexation.doc
3
\~"
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor Klanderud and Aspen City Council
THRU:
John Worcester, City Attorney /\ I.. ~ .
Chris Bendon, Director of Community Development C)/WV}
Chris Lee, Planner
Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District Master Plan - 2nd Reading of
Ordinance No. 37, Series of 2004, Continued Public Hearinl!: from
November 22. 2004
January 10,2005
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
PROJECT: ASPEN CONSOLIDATED SANITATION DISTRICT
REQUEST Consolidated Conceptual and Final PUD and other necessary land
SUMMARY: use ~ approvals in order to remodel and expand the existing
maintenance facility, remodel and expand four existing affordable
housing units located above the district offices, demolish an
existing affordable housing building ( 4-plex), and
construct/remodel new affordable housing units and
drainage/riparian improvements over a 20-year build-out. At this
meeting, the Applicant is not seeking a final vote of approval,
but rather to gauge the response of the City Council to design
changes that have been made since the site visit on 12/13/04.
Staff recommends that the public hearing be continued to
January 24th after the update presentation by the Applicant.
ApPLICANT: Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District represented by Bruce
Matherly, District Manager, and Heather Stone, Associate, Design
Workshop
PROPERTY: ACSD Headquarters located at 565 North Mill Street.
PROCESS: The Applicant is revising the proposal based upon City Council's comments at
the site visit that took place on December 13th. At this meeting the Applicant would like
to confirm the direction that they received from City Council at the site visit in order to
make sure that the project is progressing in the right direction. The Applicant will present
a revised proposal at the January 24th meeting for Council's consideration.
PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant, Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD), is
proposing entitlement of a master plan that will permit the redevelopment of the District
-1-
headquarters property to accommodate additional facility needs, affordable housing, and
improvements to the site's drainage and riparian habitat.
The site currentlv includes the maintenance facility, district offices (including public
reception), five affordable housing units above the district offices comprised of one three-
bedroom unit, one one-bedroom unit, and three studio units. An affordable housing
building consisting of two two-bedroom units and two one-bedroom units exists separate
from the maintenance building. This affordable housing building was constructed about
25 years ago and houses district employees. The site is approximately 3.5 acres and was
at one point the primary treatment facility for the district. Treatment is now handled at
the new facility located below the Aspen Business Center.
Staff has not received a current proposal with alterations based on feedback received
during the 12/13/04 site visit. The Applicant envisions this meeting with the City
Council primarily as an opportunity to do an informal presentation of the changes that
have been incorporated into the plan and receive more feedback to about its viability.
ISSUES FROM FIRST READING: At the first Reading on November sth, members of the City
Council voiced a few items for further study and discussion. Those items are
summarized below:
Trail Impact (Visual) - There is a concern that the development will have a negative
visual impact from the Rio Grande Trail that runs near the property. This issue was also
raised and closely reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission. The concerns of
the P&Z Commission Members were addressed by the Applicant's presentation of a
rendering of the project from the trail that illustrated the site appropriate design of the
development. The plans have also been presented to, and received positive reviews from,
both the Parks Department and the Environmental Health Department.
Riparian Setback - There was also a question about potential environmental impacts to
the Roaring Fork River by the proposed Sanitation District Master Plan. The
Environmental Health Department does not foresee any detrimental affects of the
development on the river corridor. In fact, The Environmental Health Department
considers the proposed storm water detention/percolation areas and the reduction in sod
areas to be a significant improvement.
ISSUES FROM THE SECOND READING: At the second Reading on November 22nd, members
of the City Council voiced a few items for further study and discussion. Those items are
summarized below:
Height and Visual Impact - There was a strong concern that the Architect didn't know
the exact heights of the buildings proposed for the development. It was also determined
by the Architects that an image they previously provided was skewed and not done
precisely to scale. It was suggested that a site visit with height poles in place would be a
- 2-
O<<_"_M'~"""""___"""""''''_________~'.''''''_''_'_-e..+_,,.,~.,_
practical next step. Council voted to continue the project to January 10, 2005 and
consider it again after the visit.
ISSUES FROM THE SITE VISIT: At the site visit on December 13th, members of the City
Council, Parks Department and Community Development Department were present.
Members of the City Council voiced a few matters of concern. Those items are
summarized below:
Height and Visual Impact - Seeing the poles on site made the height issue more
apparent. There was concern about the structures being too tall and potentially blocking
the view plane from the trail. The Architects took all comments into consideration and
will strive to mitigate the height impacts.
Proximity to the Trail - The Applicant had already recognized that the area seemed a
little constricted for all four housing units and eliminated one. Even with one of the
complexes eliminated, however, there was still concern about the proximity of the
structures to the trail.
Landscaping - There was discussion about the type of landscaping that would be done
and how that would impact views from the trail. The Applicant is planning to more fully
Illustrate the landscaping strategies in future presentations.
PREVIOUS CITY ACTION:
The P&Z did see this plan during a work session primarily focused on the Civic Master
Plan. As part of the Civic Plan process, the Sanitation District began their master
planning of the property. Based on a limited number of issues raised during the work
session, staff accepted a combined conceptual/final PUD application.
P&Z reviewed the project over 2 hearings and recommended approval by a 5-2 vote.
ApPLICABLE LAND USE SECTIONS: The following land use approvals are requested and
necessary for approval of this project:
I.) CONCEPTUAL AND FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD): A PUD is requested
to I.) establish the density, open space, building height, parking, allowable floor area
requirements, and phasing for the proposal. Final Review Authoritv: City Council.
2.) GROWTH MANAGEMENT OUOTA SYSTEM (GMOS) EXEMPTIONS; GMQS Exemptions
are requested for replacement of multi-family housing, development of new
affordable housing, and expansion of an essential public facility. Final Review
Authoritv: Citv Council.
3.) SUBDIVISION; Subdivision review is required for the development of multi-family
housing. There are no proposed changes to the lot lines or creation of new lots. Final
Review Authoritv: Citv Council.
4.) AMENDMENT To THE OFFICIAL ZONE DISTRICT MAP (REZONING); The applicant
proposes to rezone the parcel to remove the SPA overlay and implement a PUD
-]-
overlay. All dimensions in the Public zone are established through adoption of a
PUD. Final Review Authoritv: Citv Council.
5.) VESTED RIGHTS: The applicant proposes to build this project over a long phasing
period and has requested a vested right for 20 years. Standard vesting is 3 years,
although completion of an initial phase may constitute common law vesting for later
phases. Final Review Authoritv: Citv Council.
6.) STREAM MARGIN REVIEW; All development within 100' ofthe mean high water line is
subject to this review. In this case, the re-grading for drainage purposes is subject to
the review s the structures are outside this 100' setback. Final Review Authoritv:
Planning Commission - approved.
7.) SPECIAL REVIEW; Off-street parking requirements for affordable housing is
established through Special Review. Final Review Authoritv: Planning and Zoning
Commission - approved.
8.) CONDITIONAL USE; Both the maintenance facility and affordable housing are
conditional uses in the Public zone district. Final Review Authoritv: Planning and
Zoning Commission - approved.
STAFF COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDA nON:
Based on the fact that the Applicant is not seeking a formal vote in this City Council
meeting, and that Staff has not yet received an updated Application, Staff has no
comments or recommendations.
ATTACHMENTS
Exhibit A - City Council Minutes
- 4-
---'
E>>i.\'~\ ~
-
Rel!ular Meetinl!
Asuen City Council
November 22, 2004
Mayor K1anderud opened the public hearing. There were no comments.
Mayor K1anderud closed the public hearing.
Councilman Semrau moved to adopt Ordinance #36, Series of2004, on
second reading; seconded by Councilman Torre.
Councilwoman Richards stated an affirmative vote on the allocation is not
predisposing an affirmative vote on the final project. Councilwoman
Richards said she would still like to see what the applicants can do to reduce
the overall mass of the building. Councilwoman Richards noted the area
where P&Z scored this project the lowest is maintaining design overall,
which may relate to people's sense of the building being too large for the
neighborhood.
Roll call vote; Councilmembers Paulson, no; Richards, yes; Torre, yes;
Semrau, yes; Mayor Klanderud, yes. Motion carried.
Councilman Torre moved to suspend the rules and extend the meeting to 10
p.rn.; seconded by Councilman Semrau. All in favor, with the exception of
Councilman Semrau. Motion carried
ORDINANCE #37, SERIES OF 2004 - Aspen Consolidated Sanitation
District PUDlMaster Plan
Chris Lee, community development department, told Council the ACSD is
located at 565 North Mill street. In 1997 the San District requested approval
for expansion of the property and they were asked by Council to do a master
plan for their entire'property. Lee said their plan contains ways to take care
of the environment in the area and to provide housing for their employees.
The San District would like to remodel and expand the existing maintenance
facility, 4 existing units above that facility, demolish an existing affordable
housing fourplex and construct new affordable housing units. At maximum
build out, there will be 21 affordable housing units with 35 bedrooms.
These units will be rented to ACSD employees. The applicants propose a 20
year build out. The city will require this be affordable housing in perpetuity.
Lee said they have generous setbacks from the river and a great system for
dealing with storm water.
Bruce Matherly, ACSD, reminded Council the Sanitation District is a special
district and a division oflocal government to handle waste water for the
17
.
.
,,' .. "''''''''-''-;'--''-_.'-,.,-"-,"^,,,~~_.._. """
Rel!:ular Meetinl!:
Aspen Citv Council
November 22, 2004
Aspen metro area. Matherly noted the ACSD operates as a non-profit
organization. Matherly said this site is the old treatment facility, whichwas
demolished in the 1980's and currently serves as district headquarters. This
site also houses 50% ofthe employees of the San District. Matherly told
Council they rent these units at 75% of the housing guidelines. Their oldest
units are 2 studios, 360 square feet, built in 1977. The smallest studio is 326
square feet. The modular fourplex has 2 one-bedroom and 2 two-bedroom
units and was built in the early 1980's. Matherly noted past Councils and
past P&Zs told the San District to master plan the site rather than get
piecemeal approvals. Matherly said one of the major goals is to replace
what is there with something more livable. Matherly told Council they have
low turnover and have looked at their needs over a 20 year period.
Heather Stone, Design Workshop, showed the location and the context to the
community, where the existing facilities are located. There are two major
sewer lines constraining the property; there are several buried structures,
which leaves a smaller area available for development. The second criteria
from the San District is to create a community with its own identity for its
residents, yet not make them feel like they live above the store. Ms. Stone
told Council adequate storage is important to the residents. Ms. Stone said
16 units could fit on this site, part of which will be retained as the residential
enclave. There will be covered parking separating the residential area and
the service/mechanical area; the covered parking will include storage. The
units will be in fourplexes. The existing affordable housing area above the
maintenance bays will be expanded 300 square feet. There will be 5 units
in this area.
"
Ms. Stone said the access to the San District property will remain the same.
The property on which the Rio Grande trail is located is Sanitation District
property; there is an license for this trail. The San District worked with the
civic master plan to fit their master plan into the larger civic master plan.
The desire for a storm water treatment area, which will be on the remaining
25% of the site, was a result of those meetings. This will be a combination
dry/wet basin area. All runoff from this site will be treated in these basins to
at least a 50 year event. This will provide a separation from the Rio Grande
trail and the San District property. That separation currently occurs with a
berm and a fence. The applicants propose to remove the berm and the fence
and do a stream margin conidor to extend from the riverside to the San
District property. Ms. Stone pointed out some views of Aspen mountain
from the Rio Grande trail will be blocked by the new construction.
18
.__._..._.-.-....._._.".......__~_"C_,_"
Rel!ular Meetinl!
Aspen City Council
November 22, 2004
John Cottle, architect, went over the model showing the existing structures,
the structures to the south, the trail and the river. Cottle showed proposed
additions to existing structures., the new parking Structure. The buildings
are predominantly flat roofed and they will keep some of the industrial-type
architecure using vertical metal siding aiId horizontal wood. Cottle noted
the main living spaces face south and they all have metal glazing, which will
provide heating. The south facing roofs can provide collectors to a solar
heating system in the basement. Cottle told Council they are also looking at
using a solar wall or metal siding for heat. One of these will be used. Cottle
noted this is the ultimate live/project work and a model affordable housing
project.
Mayor Klanderud opened the public hearing. There were~no comments.
Mayor Klanderud closed the public hearing.
Councilman Semrau asked if any applicant has ever received vesting for 20
years. Lindt said Council generally grants 3 year vesting with the ability to
request a 3 year extension. Councilman Semrau asked about the request to
deviate from the residential design standards. Lee said this is a request to be
exempt from all residential design standards as part of the PUD. Lindt noted
the residential design standards apply to all residential, multi family
included. Lindt said it is difficult for multi-family buildings to meet these
standards. Cottle said the applicant did not request this. Councilman
Semrau said he would like to know which residential design standards the
project will not meet.
Councilwoman Richards stated before Council votes on this project, they
should conduct a site visit, the applicant should put up story poles for that
visit. Councilwoman Richards said this is a very sensitive area and this is a
lot of development very close to the river. Councilwoman Richards said the
development should be scaled back significantly. The proportion of the
buildings is out of line. Mayor Klanderud said overall she finds this a
favorable project. Mayor Klanderud agreed about a site visit.
Councilman Semrau agreed Council should see story poles at the comer of
the ridge lines on each fourplex and on top of the existing building.
Councilwoman Richards said she likes the work proposed with the
habitation restoration. Councilwoman Richards said the proposed amount of
affordable housing may be too much for this area. Councilman Semrau said
19
Rel!ular Meetinl!
Aspen City Council
November 22. 2004
he would like more information on the recommendation of waiving the park
dedication fee. Councilman Semrau said he would like to see the deed
restrictions on this housing to see if this policy matches up with other
project. Councilman Semrau asked ifthe paving area needs to be as large as
proposed.
Councilman Semrau moved to continue this to January 10,2005; seconded
by Councilman Torre. All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Torre moved. to suspend the rules and extend the meeting to II
p.m.; seconded by Mayor Klanderud. Mayor Klanderud and Councilman
Torre in favor; Councilmembers Richards and Semrau opposed. Motion
NOT carried.
Councilwoman Richards moved to suspend the rules and extend the meeting
to 10:30 p.m.; seconded by Councilman Torre. All in favor, with the
exception of Councilman Semrau. Motion carried. Councilman Paulson left
Council Chambers.
RESOLUTION #118, SERIES OF 2004 - Adoption of 2005 Budget
Paul Menter, fmance director, presented a budget of expenditures for 2005
of $1 00,3 73,904 and revenues of $100,373,904. Mentertold Council these
figures include changes made through budget WTap up last week. These are
based on a 2% increase in revenue collections. The budget contains a 30%
one-time increase for health insurance, increases in some payroll ranges, 1%
across the board payroll increase - the details of which have not been
decided; and an increase in the goals bonus to $1200/year. The services and
training budget are increased 1 %. Revenues are illustrated by fund and by
type.
Menter reminded Council there are several decisions still needed; operating
reserve at 45 or 60 days by fund; Jazz Aspen's contribution; 2 grants The
Right Door and Colorado Big Country; and Red Brick improvements at
$600,000. Councilwoman Richards said she would like to discuss the grants
for Living Arts and the Dance Connection also.
Council agreed on a 60 days operating reserve. Council agreed to fund Jazz
Aspen at $25,000. Council agreed to contribution $10,000 to the Right
20
... ,~^,~-,_."~""""""".,,,,,".......-.._~,..,-,..~......_,~~..~,~ ".-
~~
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor Klanderud and Aspen City Council
FROM:
Steve Barwick, City Manager
John Worcester, City Attorney
Chris Bendon, Community Development Director QMM
Reconsideration of Ordinance No. 35, Series of 2004
Code Amendment for Non-Conforming Accessory Dwelling Units
THRU:
RE:
DATE:
January 10,2005
SUMMARY:
On November 22, 2004, City Council considered Ordinance No. 35, Series of 2004,
and voted to adopt it by a 3 to 2 vote. At the next regular City Council meeting,
December 13, 2004, City Council voted to reconsider the Ordinance with specific
questions regarding the number of Historic TDRs the Ordinance allows to be
transferred to a property.
The Ordinance was amended during the motion and discussion to permit up to 500
square feet to be transferred to a non-conforming property containing an Accessory
Dwelling Unit through the City's Historic TDR Program. This equates to two (2)
TDRs of 250 square feet each. The amended Ordinance also permits up to 500 square
feet to be transferred from a non-historic property to a non-conforming property
contain an ADU which is restricted to Mandatory Occupancy. There is no TDR
equivalency for this second option, only a square footage limit.
The specific question relates to the number of TDRs which Council intended to be
transferred to anyone property through Ordinance 35. City Planner James Lindt, who
presented the amendment, recalls the discussion leading up to the motion as involving
a total limit of 500 square feet, equivalent to two TDRs of 250 square feet each. The
code amendment application, submitted by Gideon Kaufman, requests the ability to
transfer 500 square feet and the Applicant's recollection of the hearing is that the
ability to transfer 500 square feet was approved.
City Clerk Kathryn Koch listened to the tape of the hearing. The motion included
reference to a maximum of 500 square feet and the discussion included a clarifying
question from Planner Lindt. Verbatim minutes are attached.
Staff believes Council's intent was to permit up to two Historic TDRs (500 square
feet) to be transferred to a non-conforming property containing and Accessory
I
Dwelling Unit and up to 500 square feet to be transferred from a non-historic property
to a non-conforming property containing an ADU restricted to Mandatory Occupancy.
Based on this review of the record, staff recommends City Council approve
Ordinance No. 35, Series of2004, as amended.
STAFF COMMENTS
Planning staff is satisfied with the result of the code amendment discussion of
November 22nd. Staff originally objected to the creation of another TDR program as
staff believed it could detract from the Historic TDR Program. The result of
Council's discussion on November 22nd is satisfactory in that it relies on the Historic
TDR Program in all cases accept when the Accessory Dwelling Unit is restricted to
Mandatory Occupancy. There are three properties containing ADUs restricted to
Mandatory Occupancy and staff does not believe this represents a significant threat to
the Historic TDR Program. Staff believes Ordinance 35, as amended, represents a
reasonable solution.
Staff amended Ordinance 35 according to the motion of November 22nd. These
amendments are reflected in the attached version of Ordinance 35, Series of 2004.
CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS:
C<1?-G{)~
~~
01~
Y
~I;~ 6-. ~~
RECOMMENDED MOTION:
"I move to approve Ordinance No. 35, Series of2004, as amended."
A TT ACHMENTS:
A - Proposed Ordinance 35, Series of2004.
B - City Council verbatim minutes of 11.22.04 motion and discussion.
2
"...~..-~...~"",.~-~-~.--_....,,...,
. 0-"'............__._..'. _. ...~.__.___..,..._.","
Ordinance No. 35
(SERIES OF 2004)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN,
COLORADO, AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE LAND USE CODE TO PERMIT
ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT ON PROPERTIES CONTAINING AN
ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT AND WHICH ARE NON-CONFORMING
WITH RESPECT TO FLOOR AREA - SECTION 26.312.030.C.3 OF THE CITY
OF ASPEN LAND USE CODE - NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURES.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Aspen directed the applicant to
submit an amendment to the Land Use Code, pursuant to sections 26.208; and,
WHEREAS, the applicant is Gideon Kaufman, Kaufman Peterson Dishier
Attorneys, representing Leonard Lauder, property owner; and,
WHEREAS, the requested amendment is to Section 26.3l2.030.C.3 of the Land
Use Code and would permit additional development on properties with an Accessory
Dwelling Unit and which are non-conforming with respect to floor area; and,
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310, applications to amend the text of Title
26 of the Municipal Code shall be reviewed and recommended for approval, approval
with conditions, or denial by the Planning Director and then by the Planning and Zoning
Commission at a public hearing. Final action shall be by City Council after reviewing and
considering these recommendations; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Director recommended denial of amendments to the
Land Use Code as described herein; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission opened the public hearing to
consider the proposed amendments, as described herein, on September 7, 2004, and
continued October 5, 2004, took and considered public testimony and the
recommendation of the Planning Director and recommended, by a three to two (3-2) vote,
City Council not adopt the proposed amendments to the Land Use Code, as described
herein.
WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the application
according to the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has
reviewed and considered the recommendation of the Community Development Director, the
Planning and Zoning Commission, and has taken and considered public comment at a
public hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the application meeting or exceeding all
applicable standards of the land use code of the City of Aspen Municipal Code and that the
approval of the proposal is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area
Community Plan; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for
the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare.
Ordinance No. 35, Series of2004
Page 1
_ ,_,__N~~~_...._ _ _ u_'__'_~___~^"'~""' ~
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows:
Section 1:
Section 26.3l2.030.C of the City of Aspen Land Use shall include a new subsection 3 to
read as follows:
3. Accessorv Dwelling Units and Carriage Houses. The only other exception to this
requirement shall be for a property with a detached accessory dwelling unit (ADU) or
Carriage House. Such a detached ADU or Carriage House structure may be enlarged or
expanded by up to five hundred (500) square feet of floor area, provided that this bonus
t100r area shall go entirely to the detached ADU or Carriage House and also provided that
the ADU or Carriage House does not exceed the maximum size allowed for an ADU or
Carriage House. The enlargement or expansion must comply with all other requirements
of this Title, and shall receive development review approval as required by 26.520,
Accessory Dwelling Units, and Special Review approval pursuant to Section 26.430.
The 500 square foot floor area expansion may be allowed if the unit complies with the
review criteria and standards of the Aspen Land Use Regulations Sections 26.520
including, but not limited to, a finding that the expansion shall be compatible with the
character of surrounding uses and is consistent with the purposes of the underlying zone
district. The expanded use shall not have adverse impacts on the surrounding uses or
those impacts will be mitigated. Only the t100r area which will increase the ADU or
Carriage House beyond the legally created non-conforming t100r area (the expansion
floor area) is required to be mitigated.
If the impacts of the expanded use cannot be sufficiently mitigated otherwise, ~ an
additional method for mitigating those impacts and other impacts considered in the land
use review, is to extinguish Historic Transferable Development Rights, pursuant to
Chapter 26.535, up to a maximum of 500 square feet.
In addition to the ability to extinguish a Historic Transferable Development Right, as
discussed above, an ADU deed-restricted as a Mandatory Occupancy unit, and only an
ADU unit that is deed-restricted as a mandatory occupancy unit, shall have the option to
apply to transfer up to a maximum of 500 square feet from a non-historically designated
property that has sufficient available floor area pursuant to the special review procedures
detailed in this section.
In addition to the special review criteria in Section 26.520.080, floor area from a TDR
may be approved pursuant to the following additional review criteria:
(1) The additional floor area is a conversion of existing square footage which was not
previously counted in t100r area. (Example: storage space made habitable.)
Ordinance No. 35, Series of2004
Page 2
(2) The additional floor area creates a more desirable, livable unit with minimal
additional impacts to the bulk and mass of the ADU structure.
(3) The additional floor area creates a unit which is more suitable for caretaker
families.
(4) The increased impacts from the larger size are outweighed by the benefits of
having a larger, more desirable ADU.
(5) No variance from setbacks can be required to accommodate the bonus floor area
approved through this section of the Code.
(6) The area and bulk of the ADU structure, after the addition of the bonus floor area,
must be compatible with surrounding uses and the surrounding neighborhood.
(7) Historic Transferable Development Rights, commensurate with the floor area
expansion, are extinguished pursuant to Chapter 26.535 - Historic Transferable
Development Rights.
(8) For the transfer of allowable square footage up to 500 square feet from a non-
historically designated property to an ADU deed-restricted as a Mandatory
Occupancy unit, the Applicant shall record an instrument in a form acceptable to
the City Attorney removing floor area from the sending property to the Mandatory
Occupancy ADU.
Section 2:
All material representations and commitments made by the developer pursuant to the
development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or
documentation presented before the Community Development Department, or the Aspen
City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same
shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific
conditions.
Section 3:
This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement
of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or
amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such
prior ordinances.
Section 4:
If any section, ~subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this 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.
Ordinance No. 35, Series of 2004
Page 3
Section 5:
A public hearing on the Ordinance was held on the 22nd day of November, 2004, at 5:00 in
the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to
which hearing a public notice of the same was published in a newspaper of general
circulation within the City of Aspen.
Section 6:
This ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final adoption.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law,
by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the _day of _, 2004.
Attest:
Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this _ day of
Attest:
Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk
Helen Kalin Klanderud, Mayor
Approved as to form:
John Worcester, City Attorney
Ordinance No. 35, Series of2004
Page 4
~~\bl+ ~
I\.~~.~
flA:.~t
To the maximum allowable FAR? So that would allow this to go the the Mt ~
Semrau would you consider amending your motion to include to the maximum
allowable FAR for an ADU?
Richards
1200 feet?
Semrau
Richards
Otherwise it's open ended?
I would support that
Lindt And to a maximum of 500 square feet for the transfer, which was what
was originally proposed?
Richards
Semrau
Paulson
I would agree to that
Do you agree, too?
Yes
~~
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Mayor and Council
FROM:
Kathryn Koch, City Clerk
DATE:
January 4,2005
RE:
Aspen Ski Company Apres X Concert Series January 28 and 29, Wagner Park
SUMMARY: Aspen Skiing Company has requested a special event permit for two Apres X
concerts January 28 and 29, 2005, 9:30 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. in Wagner Park (map of the venue
attached). In conjunction with the X Games, the Ski Company is sponsoring A.W.O.L. Sunday,
January 30th at the base of Aspen Mountain. A.W.O.L. is similar to Thanksjibbing held last year.
Ski and snowboard athletes will slide up and down a giant wall at the base of Aspen Mountain
while a band performs on the top.
The special event committee reviewed and recommended approval of both events. There is a
request for a variance from the sign code in conjunction with the A.W.O.L. event on your
consent agenda. Council has to review and approve or disapprove the request for a noise
variance from 9:30 p.m. to 11 :30 p.m. for the Apres X concerts.
DISCUSSION: The Special Event Committee met with the Ski Company, Avalanche
Production and ESPN December 28th. The applicants at this time do not know who the
entertainers will be. This makes it more difficult to determine public safety stafflevels. The Ski
Company has scheduled these concerts to start at 9:30 p.m. in order to attract people into town
after the X games are over for the day.
Section 18.04.050(a)(3) allowed noises states (3) Special Events or other events to which the
public is invited with the following conditions:
(a) The maximum decibel level at the perimeter of the event does not exceed 100
decibels; and
(b) Amplified noise shall be created only between the hours of9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m.;
and
(c) Neighbors within two hundred fifty (250) feet of the site ofthe proposed sound source
are notified. Such notification must be in writing and be done seven (7) days prior to
the starting time of the event; and
(d) The arrangement ofloud speakers or the sound instruments must be such that it
minimizes the disturbance to others resulting from the position or orientation of the
speakers or from atmospherically or geographically caused dispersal of sound beyond
the property lines.
This event is open to the public and is free. The decibel level will probably exceed 100 decibels.
The applicant states the sound will be directed south, toward the middle of the park, and
downward, which should help with the noise levels at the edges of the park. The Ski Company
and ESPN have metwith Mountain Chalet, Limelite and Prospector Lodges and discussed noise
and parking mitigation. The committee felt that Council should have final review authority on
proposed concert because of the proposed hour until 11 :30 p.m. and the location in the middle of
the commercial core. Council previously approved a request for noise variance for the Core
Party held last March at the comer of Cooper and Galena, which went until midnight.
OTHER ISSUES: Staff has requested an adequate snow cover on the park. If there is not
enough snow on the park, the Ski Company will have to make snow for this cover. That make
require another noise variance; however, this will be an unknown until the last week of January.
Staff also requests the Ski Company be ready to roll the park with a snowcat to prepare it for the
concert if city staff is busy with snow removal. This, too, will not be known until right before
the event.
The applicants are taking this concert into account as they arrange their transportation plan. At
this point they plan to have buses available to run until midnight to Cozy Point. This plan will
use the 30 buses they are leasing from Vail and not rely on RFT A. RFT A has commented they
will not be able to provide extra service for these concerts. The applicants will present a written
transportation and parking mitigation plan at the Council meeting.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: There will be overtime costs to the police department, the
parks department and the parking department. Staff has suggested a parks fee of $2,000; the Ski
Company requests waiver ofthat fee as well as the parking fees.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends support of this event.
ALTERNATIVES: The alternative is not to approve the concert. The Skiing Company states
they "hope to continue creating exceptional spectator venues which establish Aspen/Snowmass
as a cutting edge leader in resort activities". The special event committee asked why the
applicants did not apply for these concerts to be held at Cooper and Galena. The applicant feels
using the park rather than the streets will be less of an impact on surrounding property owners,
the traffic and the downtown in general.
PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve a noise variance for the Aspen Skiing Company
Apres X concerts in Wagner Park January 28 and 29 from 9:30 p.m. to II :30 p.m. (or some other
time Council may feel is appropriate).
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS, J f Aj:tt!:'~ ~~""""'~
...~.1t1,~'7;Q ~~A~~ ~ ;:h~~~'i4
..iw--f-o..Zi ~;fN.. ~, JI:t4.n ~ . ~o..t:eR- ~
Attachment 1 7 I Db ,0-' f r ..
Map of venue
Special Event Application
Summary of Eyent
Event Title APRES X CONCERT SERIESj
JANUARY 19$AND ., 2005
'P]
Location
Wagner Park
Type of Event
Free Concerts Over Two Nights
Setup
Date: 1/26
Time: 8 am
Day of the W eek: Wednesday
Event Starts
Date: 1/28
Date: 1/29
Time: 9:30 pm
Time: 9:30 pm
Day of the Week: Friday
Day of the Week: Saturday
Event Ends
Date: 1/28
Date: 1/29
Time: 11:30 pm Day of the Week: Friday
Time: 11:30 pm Day of the Week: Saturday
Dismantle
Date: 1/30
2/1
Time: 9 am- 5 pm Day of the Week: Sun
9 am - 5 pm Monday
DESCRIPTION (Please include approximate attendance numbers)
The concerts will be held on Friday and Saturday nights, January 28 and 29, 2005 from 9:30-11 :30 pm, as part
of the celebration for the Winter X Games Nine, and will be free and open to the public. Attendance each night
is estimated at 5,000 - 8,000. The show will operate in one of two ways. Plan A: there will be one main act per
night playing for 6O-7Otninutes. Plan B: there will be an opening act that plays 20-30 minutes, a 15-20 minute
changeover followed by the main act playing for about 45-50 minutes. At this time no artists have been
confirmed. This event will be another major step in establishing AspenlSnowmass as a cutting edge leader in
resort activities.
Expected Attendance: 5,000 - 8,000
The concert is free and open to the public of all ages
Contact Information
Event contact person:
David Laughren, Avalanche Productions, Inc.
Michelle Merwitzer, ESPN, I'ro\~ ~&
Business phone number: 970-544-2068, 970-300-7029
1-310-642-1506
970-925-1461
970-948-9930
860-559-3707
Mailing address: Box 1265, Aspen, CO 81611
Second contact (required): John Rigney
Business phone number: 970-300-7030
~
Home phone number:
Cell phone number:
Home phone number:
Cell phone number:
Mailing address:
970-925-9496
970-618-9165
C/O Aspen Skiing Company
117 AABC
Aspen, CO 81611
SITE PLAN - See Attached Map
WAGNERPARK
A mobile 50' x 40' stage will be placed on Wagner Park: at the North end. This stage is self contained within a
semi trailer. It takes about 3 hours to set up and take down. The stage deck is about 5' high and there is a load
bearing, hydraulic roof at about 30' high. The stage will play south towards Aspen Mountain. Behind the stage
will be one construction type trailer for band dressing room or production. Power will be drawn from the
existing power drop in the North East comer of the park.
The stage, trailers and other equipment will be placed in position on Jan. 26 beginning at 8 am. The tents will be
erected on Thursday, Jan. 27. The potties will be place in the park on Friday morning Jan. 28.
The stage, trailers, tents and potties will be removed from the park: by the end of the day Feb. I.
The venue will include the entire park. On the West edge of the park along Monarch Street, about halfway back
will be a 4O'x60' tent with a lO'x60' patio area in front. This will be the press/VIP tent. In the South West
comer of the park will be 10-15 port-a-potties. Along the South side of the park (Durant Street) will be a
20'x40' tent for sponsor displays. We are requesting the right to place two cars and other sponsor equipment
and displays within the tent. The North wall of the tent will be a clear side wall. Next to that will be a 20'x20'
tent for sale of band, X Game and AspenSnowmass merchandise. The North wall of the tent will be a clear side
wall. The press/VIP area will be fenced and staffed with security. We are requesting the right to operate a free,
open bar offering beer and mixed drinks will be inside the press/VIP tent only for properly credentialed guests.
We are requesting to place within the park venue Aspen/Snowmass, ESPN and other sponsor banners.
MQNAR{:H STREET I COOPER STREET I MILL STREET
We request that Monarch St. between Hyman and Durant be closed for parking from Jan. 26- Feb. I. We
request that eastern half of Cooper Street between Aspen and Monarch be closed for parking for Jan. 27 and 28.
We request that Mill St. between the end of the Mill St. mall and Durant St. be closed from 6:00 pm until
midnight on Jan. 27 and 28.
Both sides of Monarch St. will be used for the parking, storage and operation of the following:
1 Storage Container
2 8x20 Office Trailers (one 8x20 slip would potentially be a green room/star trailer)
Delivery location
Dumpsters
Security Stand Down/Check-in Tent (15xI5) w/Heat
Heavy equipment (1 Forklift, light towers), Gator, Back up Genie for stage
Propane Storage
Tour bus Parking
Generator location if deemed necessary
VIPlMedialStafl7V olunteer Check-in Location
A 15' fire lane down the middle of the street will be kept open and clear. The eastern half of Cooper St. would
be used for press/VIP parking during the shows.
Street and oarking closures will be as follows:
Have you hired a licensed professional emergency medical services provider to develop and
management your event's medical plan? No
An ALS ambulance will be on site to bandle any medial incidents. It wiD be positioned at the comer of
MiD Street and Durant, across from McDonalds, It will ad as both a first aid station and transport if
needed. Staffing will be two Paramedic: and one EMT, The ambulance wiD be on site from 8:30 pm until
y, hour after the concert is over.
Insurance Requirements
Insurance coverage must be provided for Special Events held.on City property. lfyour event includes alcohol, liquor liability coverage must also be included.
Commercial generalliabibty insurance is required in the minimum amount 0[$150,000 per personl$600.000 per incident. Before final permit approva~ a certificate of
insurance will be issued naming the "City of Aspen. its officers, employees and agents" as an additional insured. A copy oflhe certificate will be provided to the City of
Aspen Risk Management Department. Coverage must be maintained [or the duration o[the event including set up and dismantle dates.
Event Holder Insurance
Aspen Skiing Company
Accessibility Plan
Will there be a clear path of travel throughout your event venue?
From the end of the Cooper St. maD to the ADA viewing area.
Have you developed a disabled parking and/or transportation plan (including the use of public
transportation or shuttle services) for your event? Yes
Existing City of Aspen parking and RAFTA public transportation include required services.
There will two disabled parking spots on Mill Street between the end of the Mill St. mall and
Durant St.
Will a minimum of 10% of portable restrooms at your event be accessible? Yes
Will all food, beverage and vending areas be accessible? Yes
Will all signage be placed so pedestrian flow will not obstruct its visibility? Yes
Mitigation of Impact As an event organizer, you are required to develop mitigation
measures to accommodate the negative impact your Event may have on entities that may be
affected by your activities. The City of Aspen requires that notices be mailed or hand delivered
two weeks prior to your event to all entities impacted by event activities.
A copy of the notice that will be band delivered.
12 Sanitation & Recycling Plan City of Aspen
Number of trash cans with lids: 30-50 open boxes lined witb bags, no lids
Number of dumpsters with lids: 2 large dumpsters on Monareh wbere all trash will be collected
Number of recycling containers: 10-12 in the park and 1 dumpster on Monareb where all trash
will be colleded
Sanitation company TBA
Please describe your plan:
Cardboard trash box containers lined witb plastic: trasb bags will be placed about every SO feet on
Wagner Park. These will be removed each night after the event
Portable Restrooms
Do you plan to provide portable restroom facilities at your event? Yes
If yes, total number of portable toilets: 20-30
Number of ADA-accessible portable toilets: 2
Handwashing station: 2
If these will be on City property, describe location: Half at the South end of the park at the corner
of Monarch and Durant. Half at the South end of the park at the corner of Mill and Durant.
Restroomcomp~y: APS
Equipment setup Date: Jan. 28
Equipment pickup Date: Feb. 1
Time: 2pm
Time: 9 pm
Notification to Property Owners
Such notification will be in writing and hand delivered at least fourteen (14) days prior to the start
of the event. A copy of the letter to be sent to neighbors at addresses in close proximity to the
venue will be delivered to the Aspen City Clerk
Parking & Transportation Plan
Methods for mitigating traffic congestion:
Two crossing guards will be stationed at the cross walk on Durant Street and Mill These guards
will control traffic to allow pedestrians to cross alternating with traffic f low through the
intersection. We request placement of a police car with flashing lights at this intersection between
8:30 pm and one half hour after the end of the concert
The south end of the park along Durant St., between MiD and Monarch will be fenced to
discourage pedestrians from going into or out of the park in the middle of the block.
All advertising and event notices will encourage the use of alternative transportation and
announce the street and parking closures.
Noise Ordinance
Special Events, if they are open to the public, c~ exceed the zone-district noise levels up to 100
decibels between 9 am ~d 9 pm.
We request a noise variance until 11:30 pm on Jan. 28 and 29, '05
Ordin~ce l8-04.050(A)(3) governs pennits for Special Events or other events to which the
public is invited with the following conditions:
(a) The maximum decibel level at the perimeter of the event does not exceed 100 decibels
The maximum decibel level at the perimeter of the event will at times exceed 100 decibels
(b) Amplified noise shall be created only between the hours of9:00 am ~d 9:00 pm
We request a noise variance until 11:30 pm on Jan. 28 and 29, '05
(c) Neighbors within two hundred fifty (250) feet of the site of the proposed sound source are
notified.
Such notification will be in writing and hand delivered at least fourteen (14) days prior to the start
of the event.
(d) The arr~gement of loud speakers or the sound instruments must be such that it minimizes
the disturb~ce to others resulting from the position or orientation of the speakers or from
atmospherically or geographically caused dispersal of sound beyond the property lines
Yes
(e) All reasonable measures are taken to batlle or reduce noise impacts on the neighbors
Yes
(t) Event org~izers agree to cooperate with the Police Department in addressing noise
complaints from neighbors, which may include the termination of the event.
Yes
b
@
~
-'
(J)
~
cg.
c( '0 Ci
....0.."
LL. >-=
-N_
~o=>
ll.c
'"
u51i
=:;
:;
~
.. on
'1: g 8-
..
ell i N
1: 0
~ ~
.. 0.. N
.. ~ . -
" .. CO -
.. ~ N I
U ~ 0
~ ~ '"
;:l a;
~ a
...
.. ~
...
-<
U51i
=:;
:;
~
~
~
~
'"
"'
'"
~D
c;>
u5~
=:;
:E
"
C
GI
Cl
GI
...J
~
.,
'C
c:
;:l
o
to
'"
=>
c:
'"
>
OJ
c.;)
c:
OJ
"-
OJ
""
i'ii
I
I
I
I
I
I
.
.
~
oJ Q)
.S 06 f5
~E-;;
>.E~
~.1!8
Qa..<(
~
~
in
N
I
\
\
..
"
'"
~"
..
0..
a;
~
"" t:
~ ~ g
~ :'2 0
111
...
N
~
~
~
M
c:
Q;e:.~ ~
.!: .....
'co tS ~ "0
10... 1: Q) ~ c
~ 0 ~ ..... co
'(5 U '-' B en
10... Q) as ~
r-C)~o._
.~~~~~
~ ..... a.. (U Q)
o (J) :> Iii (J)
D IDm~ ·
Durant Ave.
'"
OJ
~
C.
,
ctl
,
t:
o
ll.
'E
2
OJ
'"
::>
o
J:
~ -
OJ - C. 0 0
" '" -
..... 0 co t5
ffi tr. 1ii Q; ctl
~~81~~1
.. .j} H . :::
~~~
'"
~
OJ
1ii
c.
E
::>
Cl
Cl
1m.
~~~~m~~~~~~~1
I
I
I
" c:
'" 0
5=<0
I:~x
'O'sN
-x~
~ :EtJ
o
on
N
I
I
I
I
I
mmmm:
I
I
I
:il I
I
0-
:!l,1; it
.so
c/)"'
DI
m(ij.21.g~
~~lXIu..Ia;
'i::()m;g!~
UJ :::l.2l~ I- CO
"'ll
in
N
....
....
....
....
'.
mm.
.
.
....
I
I
I
I
I
J
~
0",
TIo
8.-g
'" 0
Oll
Ii:
c;j
~
~
ctl
e:
o
~
io
...
1
I
I
I
~ :t
8. I
E I"
8 I f5
fj I a;
:z; I~
'5> I it)
.s I ~
:.
I
I
\:\.)
OJ
Cl
'0
o
...J
~
Qj
E
:.:::;
;;; ~
o.~
go<:
o
OJ
Cl
'8
...J
~
Qj
E
:.:::;