HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.su.Aspen Center
.,...':.-""'~
'0lI.~ e,';H~(~l'.8.'l.e(l,
Regular Meeting
OLD BUSINESS
,Rio Grande j
Subdivision
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
As en Plannin & Zoning
1
Leaves
A ril 1 , 1974
Ms. Baer stated that since the project was in the C-l
District, were not allowed to buyout parking
Yaw stated that in the event they did not hav enough
parking, would have to request. a variance.
Ms. Baer stated that there was no hardship.
Vice Chairman Schiffer stated that he felt th
Inspector should determine how many spaces wo
quired before the Commission acted on final a
Building
Id be re-
proval.
Vagnuer made a motion to table final approval on the
Stevens-Ginn Building until the calculations 'ere com-
plete on the parking and then be put on the n xt avail-
able agenda. Motion seconded by Jenkins. All in favor,
motion carried'.
Vice Chairman Schiffer stated that this was a problem
of Rio Grande Subdivision versus Aspen Center Subdivi-
sion.
Bartel stated that the legal notice for the reliminary
plat indicated that it was for the Rio Grand Subdivi-
sion, that it was the Rio Grande Property inllUding both
sides of Mill Street. Stated that there is 0 public
notice for final plat.
Bartel stated that the drav.rings on the subdi ision sh01/;'
a 3-1ot subdivision. One lot, the ll~' acreSifor theCit
lot 2, which is the Aspen Center and lot 3 w ich is the
remaining lot of that 3 acres~ Stated that he sheets
in the proposal first show what amounts to a boundary
survey for the 11!:; acres, a fairly detailed schematic
site plan for Lot 2 and nothing on Lot 3 wit language
on the plat that all that is being approved n Lot 3
is the ~oundary, that there are no developm nt plans
being approved for Lot 3.
Bartel further stated that the minutes for t
nary plat meeting on March 5th are approved
requires specific action to correct the reeo
that the minutes for the final plat have not
mitted and corrections there could be made a
they are acted on.
e prelimi-
o tha t
d. Stated
been sub-
the time
Vagneur stated that she had never understood in any of
the meetings that Rio Grande was mentioned.
Schiffer stated that it had always been discussed as thE
Aspen Center and had always looked at j as a condomi-
nium subdivision and just looking at the. bu' 1ding in re'
lation to Lot 2. Repeatedly the point had een made no'
to discuss Lot 3. Assumed that the land ha been sub~
divided.'
Johnson stated that those were his feelings also.
Jenkins stated that he had no feelings to t e contrary.
Schiffer stated that the problem is' tlwt th minutes in
dicate that the Commission approved tho: 1\5p'n Center
Subdivi.si.on, and the City Council approved h" final
plat for the Rio Grande subdivision. State that the
noti.ce r~qui.r.C'mcnth.1s heen sati.sfit'd, and n:'suJn<1bly
anyone who would 1\.:lVL~ coml~ to tilt., public he' \l~ i II(.! to
-21,.
, ,-
'Illl~.. c. r. Il'lrc~t~ 8. I,. ~ l. C(I,
ReguJ.ar -T.tee.t~ng
oj
.
Stevens-Ginn
Building ~
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
I
1 ~ Leav~s
A ril 16, 1974
As)en Plannin .& Zonin
voice any objections would have been there be ause of the
notice. The only problem is that the Commiss'on did not
discuss at the public hearings the division 0 the land.
Stated that it meets all the requirements of he subdi-
vision regulations. Stated that they could r hold the
public hearings, but that would hold up Schot land.
Johnson stated that he could see no reason to rehold
the public hearings.
Ms. Stuller pointed out the overwhelming hard
would be imposed on Schott land if he was aske
through this allover again. Stated that if
the Commission's intent to handle the Rio Gra
vision, can do that by correcting the minutes
hip that
to go
twas
de Subdi-
Bartel stated that what they were trying to d is cor-
rect what should have been the responsibility of the
seller and both Bartel and the City Engineer anted to
get something on file of what the City purcha cd and
it has been On all the maps. Reminded the Co mission
that Lot 3 carries with j,t no development app oval,
and whether a condominium plat is SUbdivided for Lot 2'
or not, still must meet the subdivision requirements
for the entire thing.
Schiffer stated that he felt the Commission ad approved
the condominium subdivision before approving the land
subdivision.
Bartel stated that on the plat it states, "L t 3, Rio
Grande Subdivision as herein shown is accept d and
recordation of this plat approved only as th exterior
survey boundary and does not constitute an a proval
of the tract as specifying the design reguir ments
20.7 of the Municipal Code of the City of As en prior
to the issuance of'a permit. Forconstruct.:i. n thereon
Lot 3 shall be resubdivided or subdivision effdeed all
as provided for by Chapter '20 which is the Sibdivision,
regulations of the Code and approval shall b, contained
On satisfaction as to the design requirement of said
Section 20-7 at such time permanent dedicati n of right-
of-way, utility and public easements shall b finalized
and any landscaping requirements satisfied."
Ms. Stuller stated that it would be possible to start
allover on Lots 1 and 3.
Schiffer stated that he felt that was the on
Commission could handle the problem, and try
some way to allow Schottland to go ahead wit
ject.
y way the
to find
this pro-
Schiffer suggested continuing the meeting
day in order that the City Attorney could
a solution.
Jenkins made a motion to continue the meetin to Thurs-
day at 5:00p.m. Motion died for lack of a second.
Yaw stated that he had just found the calcu ations.
Stated that the parking as calculated on'sgcnre feet of
certain different types of use, just applie thc Code
to them. Stated that they have two parking spaces to
spnr(< Stated that his C<:ll(~U]<lt-iong cOmc' U' wi t 11 (1
requirement of 27 spaces and. .:ll"C providi.ng 8. Ih'-
-22-
i
,I
~
15:11
/"""'I
Aspen City Council
April 8, 1974
R.egular Meeting
'I
i
!
ORDINl\NCE #8, SERIES OF 1974, l\N OImINANCE FOR 1'HE HEGULl\'I'ION OF THl\FFIC BY TIll'1 CITY
OF l\SPEN, COJ,ORllDO, FOR TilE PURPSOE OF PROVIDING l\ SYS'mll OF TRAFFIC REGULi\'rIONj
CONSlS'!'ENT WI'fH S'I'l\'fE Li\\"1AND GENERA.LLY CONFORMING 'ra SHIlLt\R HEGUr.^,l'IONST!~ROqG!IOU'l'
THE STl\'rE:; l\DOP'rING RY REFERENCE TilE 1973 EDITION OF TilE "MODE'" 'l'H.~FFIC CO')~ :
FOR COLORl\DO IIUNICIPl\LI'l'IES'" REPREl\LING l\LL ORDINl\NCES IN CONFLIC'I' 'l'IIEllEWI'l'Il;j' AND
PROVIDING PENALTIES FOR VIOLl\'l'ION 'l'lIEREOF was read by title by the City Clerk. I
I
Councilwoman Pedersen moved to adopt Ordinance fl8, Series of 1974. Seconded b~
C.ounc:Hmal1 Walls. Roll call Vot8 - Councilmembcrs Pedersen aye; Breasted aye: !De-
Gregorio aye; Markalunas aye; Walls aye; Behrendt aye; Mayor Standley aye. Mo~icn
carried. . I
I
I
~
,
Ordinance #9, Series of 1974 - Mayor Standley opened the public hearing.
i
and retainjjng.
I"':C\V' constrllictlon.
I
of 1974 on second rcadina.
, "
curried. i
I
I
ORDINANCE #9, SERIES Of" 1974, AN .oRDINANCE, ADOP'l'lNG BY REFERENCE TIlE UNlf:'OP.tV, SujIL8ING
CODE, 1973 EDI'rION, TOGETHER WI'fH'I'IIE UNJFOP.r.1 BUILDING CODE S'l'j\NDARDS, 1973 EDliTIO~;
AMENDING CEnTAIN SEC'l'IONS OF SAID CODES: PROVIDING PENAr.'rJ~;S FOR 'fHE VIO~,NrTONSi O~ SAID
CODE; l\ND REPEALING SEC'I'IONS OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE INCONSl STEN'l' 'J'IlEHEI'lITIl was L1ead
by title by the City Cl.erk,
Att.orney Stuller pointed out Section 1507 relating
walls le.n-Jes many non-confo,rrning uses, enforcement
Mayor Standley closc:d the public hearing.
Councilman DeGrcgt>rio moved to reud Ordinance #9, Series
Seconded by Councilwoman Pedcrzcn. 1"\.11 in favor, motion
to corn0.r fences
being applied to
I
i
Councilv.'Oman Pedersen moved to adopt Ordinance #9, Se~ies of 1974 on second rc~dillg.
Seconded by Councilman Walls. Rollcall vote - Councilmcmbcrs Behrendt aye: W~lls
aye; Markalunas aye: DeGregorio aye; Breasted aye; Pedersen aye; Mayor Stancle~ aye.
Motion ca.rr ied. !
,
I
I
(
ASPEN CENTER - FINAL PLAT
Assistant Planner Baer and City Engineer Ellis
regulations: P & Z has recommended approval; P
rather than ,the lanc1which amounts t.o $69,800.
stated plat and agreements meet lall
& Z recommends 4% cash dcrlicati911
I
,
It was pointed out the correct name of this !>ubdivision is Hio Grande Subdivis:iJol1: Cit_y
is a pC:1J':ticipate in the subdivision. AI.so pointed out that c1.nythin~.f 5.one on r.qt
1 or Lot 3 wouldreguire the approval process by the P & Z and Council. At th~s
time do not have an exact alignment on Lot 1. I
City Attorney Stuller stated there
is still encumbered at this tj,me.
with the subdivision plat.
are addition.:!l agreements relating to Lot 3 jWh.i.Ch
'fhose agreements ':Jill be fi led sirr:ultaneousJlv
I"
Engineer Ellis pointed out the easement shown on Pclge
easement; allowed 40' street with the condition there
plus considered the area tha t would be served by thQ t
I
2 o! tho plat j.s an exis~ing
be no on-street parking dllowod
street. i
!
Ms. Bacr stated pro..rutcd dedicDtion payments was approved on the condition thctt
entire amount would be due if certificate of occupancy is desired prior to fin~l
payment.
Councilman D€:!Grcgorio moved to approve the final plat. Seconded by Councilm~n :Wnlls.
All in favor, motion carried.
Councilman Walls moved to approve the provisions of the subdivision agrcements
Seconded by Councilman Behrendt.. All in favor, motion carried.
DESIGN PLl\N PROPOS^L
Councilmnn Walls moved to table consideration until the next meeting.
Councilman Bcbrendl. All in favor, motion c.;:trricd.
Seconded by
I
APPOIN'fEI'1ENTS, HI'S & P & Z
Councilman \"alls moved to appoint Norman Burns to fill the vac.J.ncy on IIPC.
by Councilwoman Markalunas. All in favor, wi th exception of CouhcilwolUan
who abstained. Motion carried~
Councilmnn DeGregorio moved to table consider.:1tion of'P &Z
applicants have been interviewed. Seconded by counci.lwoman
motion carried.
Scconded
Pe(.1c~sen
,
,
,
appointments untiliall
Pedersen. All in lavor,
ii
Ii
"
Ii
"
"
II
g
i'
"
"
"
,I
I:
"
,
Ii
'i
Ii
Ii
,I
I;
11
i'
I!
i'
,I
I
Employee Hctircmcnt Bonrd - Council request. t1w two vacanc ies lJQ advertised.
Sl\I,l\RY INCREl\SE - COUNCIl,
No Counci)m(~mhcr who voted on the pr.evai.ling side at the last meeting W<lS agreoable
to making the motion to rnconsidcr. !
l\IRI'OH1' l\U1'1I0Rl'I'Y ~mET1NG
------_. ...-
Ccmnc.ilnwmbnrs were invited to mc(~t wi.th the Commi!JsioneTr:> <lnd Aut.horit.y on r1o~d<lY,
April l~th iJt 5:00 p.m., Courthouse.
~c\ ~ __
,~
~
~
TO: Bill Caille
FROM: Planning Office
SUBJECT: Aspen Center Subdivision
DATE: 4/8/74
Last night Council gave final plat approval to the
above, captioned subdivision.
There are numerous conditions that will require follow up
over a considerable length of time. Has Dave talked to
you about setting up a follow up check list system? We
are going to have to have a system whereby each of us is
responsible for some follow up items, etc. and we might
as, well start on this one.
You should get a copy of the signed subdivision improvement
agreement for RiEXg this subdivision from Lorraine for your
file.
~
--_..-......
./"""'0,
~
CITY OF ASPEN
aspen.colorado,81~11 hox v
MEMORANDUM
TO: Art Daily
FROM: Sandy Stuller
DATE: April 2, 1974
RE: Rio Grande Subdivision Approval; Amended Subdivision
Agreement
HAND DELIVERED
Art,
To advance the possibilities for approval by Council on
Monday, IIm having Sharon deliver this proposed "counter_
offer" for your consideration. It incorporates the thoughts
of Dave and myself. The provisions for the 4% dedication
you will have to work out with Mick Mahoney directly, as
neither Dave, Mick or myself can completely understand
your proposal.
Initially, let me comment:
1. We cannot understand why the access easement has been
qualified as "subject to the liens of any deeds of trust" when
Trueman and Tri-South have agreed to waive this qualification.
In addition, we would like not to have the statement of Uses
delimited to only "roadway, trail and underground utility
purposes" unless you add "or other public purposes."
2. I am perplexed about the addition of the phrase
"requiring subdivision approval" in the notation on pg. 3B
of the plat. It is my understanding that we agreed to comple
review of Lot 3 prior to issuance of any building permits so
as (a) to realign any proposed easements, etc., and (b) to
assure us of unqualified dedications and grants of easements.
3. It was my further understanding that the question of
the assumption of the cost of relocating the water pipeline
would be resolved before execution of the Subdivision Agreeme t.
,-
-,
Art Daily
Page 2
April 2, 1974
Please respond to my earlier letter (March 22) stating our
position.
4. On the plat, the trails in Lot 2 are given with a
qualified grant (subject to liens and encumbrances). It was
my understanding that only those easements in Lot 3 were to
be so qualified.
5. No reference is made to a 15% surcharge agreed upon f r
city handling of capital improvements. The same has been inse ted
in the attached copy.
6. A paragraph has also been inserted providing for the
scheduling of the projects by the city.
Various other amendments have been made. In addition,
Dave will not have estimates for the escrow amounts for the
possible Monday Council meeting, but perhaps Tom Wells'
office will have the landscaping estimate. Please advise
Dave if this is the case. Finally, Dave is going to suggest
to the P & Z that the road be named Rio Grande Drive and
this agreement reflects this possible change.
SMS:sd
cc: Mick Mahoney
Dave Ellis
111 ~ '
.~..-/~'" '"~
,,,"v;'<^',-"'''''' _""
.
aspen
cenTer
RICHARD SCHOTTL.AND
March 5, 1974
Herb Bartel
Planning Office
City'of Aspen
Aspen, Colorado 81611.
Dear Herb,
In reference to our discussion regarding the deficit employee
housing, the area on the attached plat map indicates the area
that we will provide ,such housing in our next phase. We
look to your office to determine the exact number of bedrooms
needed.
In reference to Aspen employers that lease apartments in
Silver King for their employees, the following informati.on
was proyided by their resident manager, Ollie Fields:
Aspen Chateau
Aspen Airways
Ptarmigan
Holiday Inn
3 apartments
2
2
3
Total
10
These apartments are leased for 6 months to one year.
Enclosed is a letter agreement regarding your request for
the parking pE;>rmits.
Sincerely,
~~
Richard Schottland'
RS:sb
Enclo,sure
cc: Ms. ,Sandy Stuller
PeO. sox 471.
.
ASPEN, COL.ORADO 8'" 1
.
(a:OJ) 8ZIe1821
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
It is our understanding that the City of Aspen is I
in the process of formulating new off-street parking I'
regulations for the commercial areas of the City, perhaps
involving a system of parking permits, and that the City I
would like the proposed Aspen Center commercial project :
to be subj ect to such permit system at such time as it is 1
enacted into law. Please be advised that the Aspen Center I
Company desires to cooperate with the City in this regard,
and hereby covenants and agrees on behalf of Aspen Center
Company, its successors and assigns, that upon final
passage of a parking permit ordinance in the City of
Aspen, all outdoor public parking spaces \inthe Aspen
Center project shall automatically be deemed subject to
such ordinance, subject to the following:
:
,
, l~H.
1
ASfEN CENTER COMPANY, I
a Colorado partnership !
By ~"'~ ~~\--L
R~chard Schott an , ~ "
a General Partner :
I
I
I
I
,
i
I
:
City of Aspen
Attn: Mr. Herb Bartel, City Planner
P.O. Box V
Aspen, ColOrado 81611
Re:
Aspen ,Center - Off-Street
Parking Regulations
Dear Herb:
1. This Agreement shall only be effective if all
outdoor parking spaces provided for use by the shopping
public on commercial property within the City of Aspen
are also subject to said parking permit regulations; and
Z. This Agreement s,hall apply only to outdoor, un-
covered parking spaces in the Aspen Center ,project.
-lIT I1l.. /J
~ day of v/~\.
Executed and delivered this
,(
)y1l,~
\~~
~~
I
~
000
[]
r-
I~I
I ~':::Z LY\ \
III ~
~ '1 t
U I
i~ I II
1\ II ~
II Jj LJ
. . u
\
~
..-'/
~
~
,-.,
TO: Planning & Zoning Commission
FROM: Planning Office
SUBJECT: Aspen Center Subdivision
DATE: March 5, 1974
Plat Recommendations
1. Engineering Department Recommendations
2. Pedestrian trail along Rio Grande Dr. should be
separated from and in addtion to Rio Grande Drive ROW.
3. An acceptable landscape plan, detailing ground cover,
buffers, borders, speeies, etc., should be provided.
4. Sinclair service station should be relocated on the
property at time of4evethpmemtsof the first phase.
5. Necessary housing should be built in conjunction with
development of the first phase.
Subdivision Imprevement Agreement
1.
Engineering Department considerations.
'4. Off
and the
letter
I
I
I
,
I
I
,
3. Performance bond and timing for implementation of landsc~ping
plan. i
I
,
street parking management agreement between the deve~oper
city, as proposed by the developer in ;his agreement!
of 3/5/74. r
I
2. Cash dedication of 4% of the purchase price of the
entire property.
() :n(if
i ~y Vv"-d 0\/\
\:>1 (' ), '( &"\
I I \ \
I ,:;1, '1 '1'\ H' e....
I I _
I \" -,,'
\.-iv..., '\ _,
i
\,"' I
I
0---... i
I
I
I
I
:
I
- i
""A" $." '
',II 7) Q .p ,Je
~
"',.",' .~;
Po .
:-' \ '? \'~""~"'-.. 'jl
-1 ks '^" <J ~ \;,e.
'fl~.
'-O'_.~'>"___~""""'''':':'' >
l.--~,:.
f,~.,.,..,..,:.."..~ ","^..~,... ....."".-_.. . _, "'~,--:_.... .........~:"""'~ _ ...''':" "', :::,"~~~''''7 ~:"" < ',....~,~~,"";.-" -',~ """"~,' ^"'~,_"':""W~'"."""_"_ '.... "',.....-."._r-I"'.,'..~,..".:.~
'"._;;,............~... ,"'""'''''.
.~ I ~ ____,~___~~.....:...:-. ,..~~~:.~:',..;"",,~.";':":';.J;.,~~...........,....."..._~~~...._'..._......;'--..,:..;,<.....:w... .;.,...;,..~
o
.~ .:' .'0 ~l
,'.t ';"1-"
. ~
..... :.1--
... '" :Y ~ I"
_ ':'.Ul
.. ,....::t:Ul
~, ~.. rI'
~ '~ ':'
"l '. .~ ~ I~
':: ,,,
~~...~;-~
:rC':'.""
,.,.c. "';::l'
~~ .
C :.~.:..,.,.
~ ,;.
," ~
':".;) ::l'
~ ....:f. ~
........:" (/l
.... I-" ,~ .. ro
, ..
t1 ... - 0
llt C.:" 0
,.,.~~.:. ~
. . 0
/"l'....~ ='
....C /"l':: rI'
Q 0. "'I III
~ <
Q- /"l' ~ ....:(
?1:r;:. ::: 0
c. = c
,.,.,.,.~-'....
.... ;::;":"0.
::I ::r:o-.,
(,) ["J r. C"
-- .
"",":;
Or:.:) r.l
""' ~ :-:;1
l'l'''''''l'l'
I': ': e
~ .,
~g, I
.
,
~
w
,
"
~
;:.
~
c
:::
;:
if
,
~
.'. ,t
.t. ...~.,
.:. ,~.
"
"
"
1.1
"
:;. ,~ .; (t. _
~;~~,:,'}~ -
...: .~ ~ \)
.... ., t.. -
....1-
....... ll"
(:":,...,,,
l'oI"'I=" ...
1t'1"......
>O;~ ,.:l-
o ~ -......
C 1-"': ... -
....::'1"1
:n i: -. <; -
Or..-.., :n
(tll-.... .
C C...;
....= .:.I'....
~ ,
, ~<
I': __
".-. r.:
~5"
~-.
'"
':::"0"
C ""'0 ~
(': 1-'::
r: ....::
c, C
,.,:ilrl'
~ ~. -
.' ,
.. -
, 0
= 0
C 0
~ C
" <
. ,
.. ~~
,'.
:~~~>
s,.
"
~
ii.
,
~ ':
" ... ~,' ;'1 I.
':' " ~., ," ,,, ..
:,. I';" ..~ '"
:: :~~~~;f
~. .... n ,,1
~ ,:. ,.. ,.. I:
,-;>,.....,:... f'"
=' ~'\" tr. ':: .....~ ,:;
':". .... Il.",-
,:,'.... "1.:'
t'"::"r..-~
;:'" /"l' C ...'
,-;>,::r:~ ,~O ~
~.~ ........
.r..- r.... ~ >:"
,,:"0 -..I,::" /"l'~
"'I C -;7
"'It:~C"C
-="OC' i:
....,OC'~<~
..;., (tl C'" c; ~
(':: ~ C 1-'....
~ I:l""'~::"
" C' C. ~..:
....,..., "<
Oe.~~ C
,,=,::lCl"
c..c tIl e
-, 'O
:;I...."".."
.Ql~' 0.......
='"....Q."'l
o e ~ ,...;::
ro "0 l".l 0-=
""\"I'c:_
~t: ......
-oo-.:.oe
~:'j-cr:
:( en :;:I :n ~:
. ,
(II ~ "'I ...
Cil ::i
..... ~=
0:( I':l ro .,.
g. c
...
......:.;
...--;:
.,~
o -
<
S' ~
~...
"'-
c
~-
.
"
< -
'"
~
<
.'
"
.... -.
g..
r:...
S
"-
.'-
~
o
., .
.
~
..
S
,
...
~
,
.,. /"l'''' C ~..,:
-::~, ':. .......::-
"', 0"::' ,.,.~.
'1;: ;:.-6"-: ~
':J ~,,;:.
;;; I!; ....r..- ':.
=r.3~~-:'
_. ......,; ~::
-:. .... ~ (.,;... ':.
'/.0-:""-" :::-.
.... '/l ",:"
"'",t'l ....'-:....
:: ~ '':,0 ':. ~
.~. :: . ~... :..
...,. ...' ...,. "-~... ...
-:::::"".
.... t"~'...- ......~
(l,:.o ~.<;::-:
...o--:.::.:t:,.<;:,,',
.... ~........
:.:1'....:"....:::
,~, :r;; ,.. r. ",
.~ IT,'~ ... :.. ''''!
;r:J ~ ~ ,o,
'.-: ...).r....
't:J .....
." "I.- .~ 'I. ::
l:-:,.....' ..
r,'..:;' :0...
~.. ..., ... '. ., ::
...: ."~:,,
;:, r~. il ~:. ~~ ~;,
'I. .;. ~., ::
.. IT~" '. ", ...
.....1.'....-:;:
:;.."-:"~
I!.";l :..
;.. .~." ." ~.
'J. .. ,. .~~.
'l'-:'J"""""
", :1:1 o'
".S-: '..'J"
\1 ~':.o t.. ".
ft.f,"I'J""1
':1 ~r") 'I ~~
.0 ~. ~ '."
" U:.I
(l 'J
" 1I
,
T. ~ ....,::...; - ....c..::. ....,0 I"'l
g~ g =i[ ~ ~ 3:~,g ~,~'
.......:" -no "'.... (0 -:. ~ fl.
.... 0 .". _. :::........-: ,fJ'. M
~ :: :.. t'l -..0:' .&....,::;1.
....::;1 ':.:: 0'-: :: ...00:'':''
:::-\"1'<";"'::::'; .::....
.... . c..::::lI:1'::" =-
'1' ......, ::&.t:l'.... "00 ",
... ...' ,.,.... .c. -, c::: ~
.... ~~..:;. ...,':::- rt c -:. 0' 1'1
:.. ...' r. ::: 0 ':. ::r~. ~ ....,...- -
......,;;; ::::::.; ~ ., ....::: 'fl
:r':;';,:' ltl-....r. f) f',
:.....~ !::l:" =
"r...,:J".!....-n. "...,:.;
r...,;;; i'~~' ~;; .-:.:::.~.~.
fJ,t""'.... ... (U..:1':-
.~ C ". Ql ,....... ... -~.
::r ,J :.. ... "':" C' ~: 1 l'J
t"J I" I-" ~..:.. III l? .r; ::.l
., ... '. ....tt."'! 0I.....''1}
. ,t-- ~ :.. '1':' .... Cl~. I :;. ....,
1-'1-";; n.... ~ -: ,.: .. ~,.
:.l 'f, ~.. n. ... ", n. ..:.. ".
:: r", '1. :J ....:.. ~, '-: '; "l
I.. "'. :1 'fl ~ ~~. H,:';
Or:..", "', '..
,.; "',";'f,.;.,.:1 t,. - t--.:......
100 ., I'l 'I. ..., ,:", 'i ~'"
ffl '/, ;: f\I :~.... tt '(, ~l
I: J, ft. :. .~ I.' ;; "l 'n
,"1 ,;' ~.. 'f. t..~, 1#:"
'1!1": ... ...... ;J....
"'....,t:;.,.::...;,.:l
"..';.,f}....."". " '.
ft...:: .,. :"':',,"
:1"" t1' ,t,.,) "I'''d:
"I"'....-::...'.Ito....,I... r..
'", "',r:., "'''.
rt'f ... :..", H';, 11 {.. 10.
0"::" :J....:I'.:: III 'I.
,"lit.... ct':,(jf!.l"
... :.... '1::1:1
"'J ., ()..: '.":'
.; ~. ... .t:1
"J 't Ill,.,.
~l ltI
<.......
~
.
'C
.
.
"
.
,
~
.
"
..
~
.
.
~
'"
...
.
~
"'14C:!:
'j'.......,fJI
".il> 0,
;'~.E ~
".::;l ~
'.o"::":i
.- =.,
-::....,"-
~. ':r _. 'Il
:..::....
':' ..<";1:01
". r.....
;;;~"'l 'tI.
~~~ ;.~
r",,.:.,,.,.
....::: :1'
... ....:,;
::: :;{.-:....
". ~.'g '1'
'/,'1. 'll
-:. 0 ;J
"
..,;:(,....
:r....} _~
:.0 l:,......
.. t~ ~.:tl
:r''''I.'.
"',r,,:"J
:!:1
';";;;.')'/'
:;1""""
....,'f,I..
.- ,- ::.,,~
.......' Il
~: .F: ~ ;-:
'f.,,"
..,t {)
:"'/)";:1
:J "'II'
'1''''
'{,IlI'Ii.:
'; 1 fl.':'
:1'1
. ffO
.?
....... .z.-.._.........., '-:-,"''''.: .......:'1~~:..'-_....,~..:...._.........;.......:..._~~"',..",.,.,.;..~'...,
c'"'
~", J",'
;,r,:' "':,.A' .~/
,', ..
....,'
'''':i>,,:'.'
,':"
to.;.::
,"
... "....'\..:'.,'1
I,\! ........:.' :~.
"'I .). t~ ~,.1. ~
1"1 ~1 :. >:I ;\'
rtI I-'~
~~ 11 1.."::< .~...:
"'.)"'1-...:.,
(':' ~ ,,.-.;-itI:r
..;.' .t' :;.-.....:~ '....
",::s,'"",,,
Q, I-'~"'I
~: '" tIl () ..
:r. a...... ~ .... ~l
~, Q~
....,.,. 1: C
::I" '" ~' ,.,.,,~
>11 lr.::r~
('t 'tl ~.,,,,
O. ~ (II ~
........'o:e
........i.'.:(:o"
., C", QI.~
ro....'".(II"
'0'.....1'" tt:.
....0........ ...
t::I::s::s::r...;
n ."
11l n ff':;l
alOe: o.Q
,.ff
rtc.::r,/"l'
=,,,,,(::rtI:l'
001'1''<
I'TI-"~Ct""
O't:l'::"trlr"
QOetrl::r
c. C:i.'
,(1) "l '"I 3
1-'Q.,i'::Q:(
1"'" r:., Q. ~
. C -<
.....~;: r:t
:::l::l';i::l'/"l'
Qt Or.: ro:::-
~ ::: r.:
. 0. -<
0. .
, I
'"
"
~
"
"
""..,
1-'" ~..
0'-
.-
,..
.
.
.
"
.
0.
-,
o
"
"
"
...
...
.
~
.
"
"
~
~
'"
.
~
~
'"
.'
.
<
o
c
~
0.
"
.
.
o
o
o
~
0.
.
~
o
0.
rt ~, ,1
"-, '"~)
O' .,
1"-"'"
. ",
~.... ~'1.
::r':::l,1I
l"rI'l-1
'"-.;1lIil>
.'ff
:1::;.....
.00
.0..
~
"~
.O~
.
~o.
o
/"l' 0' P-3
..'"
~ 0
>:
0.'"
~'" ...
0"
~.O
N
.",,,,
. 0.'
"
.
'"
"'.
. ...
~
""
. 0
0'"
"C
o
..
~~
. .
~
.~
o.N
,..::-:
:.......
~:;
rr;:
~'"
.
g f
, ~
'"
,-
s.:=
..... ~:
~' :e
0.
.......
Q,~
. ..
C,
~
,
""::
r: :':
n ,
c .:;
'O.
~,
.
",.:,.
1"":0
o
.
"
.
"
"
C
..
.
.
'"
"
0.
.
'"
o
c
~
~
'"
o
..
~
~
'"
o
"
o
<
.
.
.
.,~
o
o
~
o
.
~
~
~
.
~
"
o
'O
.
0'
I
~: ;rr ,,": '"
I\' 11' ~. .~
,........."'1
,!, ~-..:"
" .,
...".....
:.1'~...
ll.'''::
......(11,
:-,1'
....,',:"
::r,'""
<\I"I.t-
0_
.
. ff
< "
.
~, ~
.
'O~..
" .. 0
Or.:
< ..
" < .
;3C:Q.,
o ~
;lQo.
..."l....
. .
. n
:( ....c:
o ~.
C:C::(I1
...~m
Co/"l'c.
CIl '0':(
l!t:;l....
ff_ ff
.' '"
. <
~..~
'<0'"
o
~'"
"'.
00.
':'/.'
'= ~:
~
.1.....
,- .
"
~I fl'
.:'01
:::I....
,U
;'l'o.
v'""
,~
~.
...
.:l'<
',' ~I .t I. ,t.r.; '0
",."'''",,1':.'<.'
I\' \1' .1' .~..:' ... j,~, :'
~ ... .' ,. .~ ;v ,:, t~
..., '~~1 ,:- "'I ....
...;,,,.1...:.1.
::r:' '" V ., ,r
c.. j,. " ,. <J '1
....-..;.. '.I",:,; \l'
I-" _,~ ::<...
0";:,',,,:::.-:.1-"
..... ~~ v 0
::I.:.;.........:::"
.c ....I-'O~,.,.
.:l,,; 0 .....\.Q
..::Ct(')I-".
..-.-... '1 ....-
~:!-... ....0....
::r " ....0 tIl ...()
~'.J .. :;I tIl 0 0
tr."'! \Il::l
"'O't"ll;ilI en
:( " ;: ::l::;l c:
O,,~c.o. ....
C~<:' "'J/"l'
...... '" :( .... I'll III
Coro ::r:::'''lr'l"
~ r:i ., ....
0'... '1 "< f':) 0
r.l ::r-:,I'll ....0
m:;- "11-"
::::I '7/"l'ltl :(
o rt' 0 n (01 .....
..." C; 0... /"l'
I'll III "ICT3Ct::r
C.:::r:'13....
CIl :;:-....(') i.I =
0........:;1 ::s CoO
:;I 0 ,-I,Q 0. .....
l"I C ... rt'''<
/"l' ;;I " ,... o.::l'
::r(1)~::;l llt (')
Q ,,;r. c.<... I'j
~ 0
.... .... ~~::r ::l' Ul
....::l.- Q QUI
, -
.~~
....::rr;
.~
'1I() .,,
..' ~ . ,:-
i\<-i1' ,I
,II, ..';
.ll' ,,,
'. \I'
n ~}. I'
lll)
:.J~' .',
,t ,:,
t..,\, ,!,
'1', "
.~; I~
~U.: ~:
"
,.
"
..
"
"
"'~
'0
0.
"''''''
O~~
~..
....('t'11
0- .
, ,
00.
00
. .
~
.'."
."
CO
O~
0..'
... i!-
"'.
. .
...H
.'<
>
~'" "
::r:ol ~
0 =
0. ;;
" "
<'< 0
C' .
0..
_.ff .
< . r,
"',"" r.
" . 0
....~ .
0 '"
.~ 0
'" 0.
"
~ '"
. ;;
"
0 .
0
0 ~
0 O'
c
~ ,
,.
..
,..
"
,.
"
Q
0
.~
"
"
ff
."
"
,
"
0
"'11r:t~rt"~9ZC...rt'~o.~Q::r<~~~"'''''~'''~'''!\Il~~CIl~~
::r~::l'NOI'llOQl~::r;7l-"rom~~.... ~"1~:::O~ ....c:~....'::r....~
r.lao.. o.::I~llItlItlI,.,. (D~~::I~O,"::,;".:o.',~~u"1ll1"'lll..r.:
::: l1' c: =<: tl III r.rI'''' rT, ~ tl ,.,. "l n :'''''0 ,...:::.... '-:::"-'....::: 'O,.,.:i
~l1' a:::o,.,.~~ ....."0::.; ~r..-mQ ~.... ~~ ~
~1~:O'.~.,(1)m~,....~~..."on~..."I~.~~.... c..lnon~rrc
~~.........ror. ", ::l'....~mHo~::rO=....O::r,...~~O,.,.~O~~"
(D~~~"(1),.,.-orom~~O" mc~~"~"~~~. ",~
~~~,C~~~,...~2Ql8....ag~~m=rr~~~~.~'~g;~'~~m
<:.o\"l'~'OO::r (D<~~~GC,.,.?ro=C_E~~ ~~....~~
~~'1=CC"1~,~~~::: c:...."~ oe .~,...'~~ /"l'l'J.,n.
:.ro ~,Z.&!:'~'\"I' ~ I'll Ct :.~.~ g,t....,~."':::.;"~; ~ t~ ~..g b:;; ~ Ql
OtlW ~~~~~ ~.... ~ n~ ~~ ~~~~ ~
~~(II"C,.,.rt . ~~~Q""~""O~"1,~O ~"g(D,....mtr~n
f\I O"~lm~.&.m~~"1~~~~~~~~=:::",'m~~ ~ 0
o~ng~tlIo'm:::."c~~ ~... "" l1' ~UQnO'....n....
~~~~~,.,.~~ .... ....:::'~~~~Q~rT~~= m~o""
,.,. ;::: 0 ~'.t }, ~ ';' ~ " ". ~~. I') ~ ~ " t ~ ~,.,. ''':::;f r: ~ n,2.0 .!. g,?
~ lQ::;I....:l'tIltIl'"'.I, ~ .,.~. .,hO....""Q. ..':;r....,.,. .0. ;"r.~."1.i.,...
~tIlm (1)~U:,.,. ~'.....;...~~~ ,... ~~.-::::'~o~o~m""
:'l,.,:;:fII,' . III :..- . 71 t:t I-':'l"w::-,...... r,o !') I::: ", "I"; 'Q ....:..
... "'. ~ n -rtl .., I.. . ,- :-,~ 11 ... rt I "'..' ~l' (;It '1 -:: :1 c..,'l I') () fr>
1: ""':'O'(.:O:O"l'~ .. .-....'" t ..... 111':'...,;::...~...-:{...~' ....J.~
(., ~:;; ~~ II> ;';.'2 ~ :: ;'. "l ':;' c... ~ 4~:" ;; ~ r.. :J"':; :; ~;. ~ ~~ ;;; !,~.~
... c,. (J ';:.,;:J ',., ,. ":.- :..,,.:.~ (1 .~ ',: 'I. '1> 'I.:J I" .'
>'l.....C"OI.~(DI-"~..... "";l"rtl..:r:I-'.~"';:I....r..~~.....-:,.. t..,,... n'~
".. "'. 'f. ') I'i ft '.,0 :1 ,..-: l'~ rt ;r'.,:.. f.. ~ ': " :..:~ -:" :1' l. :1
~=~t:~3{"~~~~~:;l"~~~~~!;~~~1'~~~:Jtt(l,~"n
....' ,... ,., 1ft:.o;I" It f\I "I -:. I.. I; l~ 'to r: I' .t (. '1"10'
f) w';: I) I) t"J :1 ~ '" ,. I....) " :: rt ." .' "I.. r,. :;. t1 'tl .~. ..", it, ,~
:l ;1 ",o () :1 :1 ,~~.. ; I 'J '!:I' ,t :r to. !,,'~ '.. ,~ 'l '. ',' ;10 " "'1' It.
~t {.It 1; :'; ,; ,.: f; ,.,.,fi. ~ :l ':: ~ It. ,. :-: ~ ~: i:' ;.~ ~: :~, ::. i!. ~r ,t ii": ,!': .:!.?:
!To, r' 'J" p. I., ~.. :!' I'''f' .t ,.. I. t.. {, lot '" .t " j 'I : 1 ~.."J : " , , .; f;
ftt ~ ~~. It !~ t a 'tl f} t,' ~. f~ t':~ .. '" ~ ~ IQ ~. .:;,~ 't:; .:~ ;~ 7: :~. ~i.':I; ;1
itl~'~::ln~~~It,,~t;~~l.~::~~~~~~~IooU~~::~
..... ,r "'J :1/ fJ .. ~."I :~ 'J :1' I" .' .t '} 110 "I '.. <:, :.. 'I. ., 'II ',' tit
"' ~r'''J- "'.'J ''-: ~ tlI:l t<"I,:I'.-) ,,,:J lot ' It.'" ,,,'" lot ,. '..
rl It> ,: i' '-: '" III '~'fJ '-:' II, tt 1\1 fJ'" :r " ... I. I.. I.. .,. III .. of) .'
r1, ., .,. t.. II I' t. 'I ""1' 101 :1 1<.'~ " \oJ'" .' '/
(It n (J U'I. ,':J lot"1 ,I .t 'I" I,,, .~.. ~ :1 lot :1 i.
S ~ a R tlI2~~ ~:1'tlI7. "~ ~iL.... ~~
:: I ~.::J "In I':'~
,
~
:;
o
"
o
~
~
~
~
;::
.."'"U..d,;,.;-,.".....:'l.
~
.'
"
o
'C
...
.
o
o
.'
.
~
<
.
Hi'
, , , " .
..........."'.,~._'-,. .--:--..,,~~..., "".."'...........~ ,~-;..
--",,..' "
"::',:,;V
"'t:
.,,'.
:,>,?;;",
";':'~;'~'il~~~~!~
.:' 'c'~, "~ ,..~"!....., :"i\::-:~,-
,,',", ".....".~,,'......'.........._.
~ o.
" ~
,,,
~,O
QI'i
n
~.
~
.'
...
..
~
'<
o
C
.
0;;
.
.
.'
.
.
.
.
~
.
,."'....i;.:..._.,_.:,;,;".
.-.
::/l,i~jjJ
-'.: :',",'.. ,
...... '" .
.',,'.....' :,..~:~.,,~,,::.,','"i';<r;>,',', :' "..',,,,.~,"
"'"";.,.J$r.i;~~,,,',:l!!,.",,,'" " 'ilf.I"''''\
'" ""t'?:;.;;.; \\1.:"~~' ,:l;,:";:~~,J2St':.~"':\
L
':"
1
.,,~",......-.!-.
'.., __.-1.
I ~"__'O<."
I
,
,
I
,
I
I
,
,
"
I'
,
,
1
~, '1':'"'
.,
~" ,,~.
)
."\lI'
"
"
.1 (~
0','
~ \1'
~"
.~, .:.'
~
t-r,'l'
"
~
00
o ~
.
< .
" 0
'"
" ~
0..-
.
~ff
o
.
ff~
.-
" .
o
".
.'0
ff
-<'O
o
........
~.
~
~
" ..
" .
'<
~
. .'
o.
0"
0.-
.
0.
"
e '"
"
.'1 i 0
I~ , "
: 0
0
eo 1 ~
Ig '0
~' , "
! 0
" , "
I '"
[g 1 '"
0- , ~
, : z
I~ '"
,0 :
,. '"
1-' ,
,. ,
'" I
!
)
1 I
L~ I
,0 1 0;
I'
,....1 Q
': i r-
~
"
.. I <
\I-"i 0
~
I~ I
I~'
~,
:
Ii\' i
~I
:;1
"I
~I
51
;;',1
....!
:
,
,
,
I "
'"
~I "
" I 0
121 "
0
j~ ! 0
I~I ~
I~ , '0
"
0
~ i "
'"
" I '"
. , ~
"'I z
\,1 '"
rJ:
:'1 '"
'::'1
r;1
.'
~
,
,!:'I
~ ' 1
,
,.,1
'"'
'1,1
'-I
,
I
I
,
,
! '
_,~,-.L_,':.L::.::::, "
,
I
~
~
...
.
~
~
,-"",:
,
I
:.~,::,bi'
-'
<,-,;";',
,"',;
)S'
./
-'7
."-7'-',,,'.'-,.,.. .
.....,.,...::......_,__.'_...._____'...0.-
''''''''-
..... --....'"'""..........>-.-. ._".._..~- ~,. -,,'.,,-,~.....-':
....,
.' ,~
, "
;,.
~:- t:
.c
"
,
;'1
~, ,.,
,'" ~.
"
.. ,~
."1:,
~
~"
- .
.~
~
".
..' ,~
,
~"
"
o
-(.:'
. 0
~rl'
.
'0
C 111
~
..
~ 0
000
,
'::0;
co
. ,
...
00
..
o
,
~
0'
,
":'!:'w{.j
:.. ...~ r..
[~~
r-~,'",'
,
;;, ;;'fIl
, .
'::'"rI'....
,"",=;-';J
,..
..,
r"
,
". "f ~~
.... ~;"
....:..r..
.... ~'.
....to:,.
(J r~
"
".
.,r-.
.. ~ I' ,I"
"...
;.;, q
...,r..,<;.
., :J~
"'.>-;....
'. ,~
',.'r;
"
()
...'1
i;
.,".
".,',
"
'''I;
r.. ,:, ~
.,".."
;;;"'..
"
,.(,(,
........,
,
,,.
"----.;,,..
u'...
:" ~,
'l;..
;,..:.,;
'"
~ ~.
"
,.
"
\."""t..'
',' '1>.'
,\'I h 11.
:. 11>.-:'
..' .,>,
II' - ':' ..:
:'\"',,1'..
,~, ;V ,1. ~,
~", ;.
~.:~3'~~
,:> 0
... ~. OJ
;.ti .... ~
1'1' .:-~ :r
<0.::.,.. It'
~
0.-: ,-.:.' tt'
_ , 0
'O.:..c,gj
1-o','T I"'f
o ("I'C
:( ,~'::!'
r.t ::!,,':) 0
0.;:0;: ""i
....-;:< 0 >.:-
:s ~ < 0.':"
,.,;':'-.l.
rt:'\"::tC-
:r ClOl,;:'-
m:::t:Srt,1
..0:: rt S
(. Q<
",..,.,;;1 :.:
::I., .....,
rt~_
10 01 s:: 0_
t'I ....0:::
e-"'l:S
::' 0 n
000
~ ,
I':ll""::l
~ 0 "',
~ ,
'"
...
,
~
'"
~
~
..
.
,
"
o
~
3
,
~
;;.
....-:: ~'':''..,:t '!l~?'
C ": '" ".; ::r'.... - '1
0:. G'::', <:; rt "': r!i
(f, """': ;;1'.. <
-=- r, ,~; ",. -:l
.-, =-:. 0 (1"" 0;..
"Q,I=~~.C-:'
:::l ....; 0 fIl
"';$; ...
...."":<:;fIl-;".f.
. >o:...,.'C....
'J. (,,: :S?"'e
~,Ill :r. '.0 ... ...
~ 'I> 5g ib :;'i
'1...".... Q,I
Ito...~.... \"1'-
'tJ CI.......:;:.
". .,:~ r;!.l CJ:'
... I'\) ':': ~".... "': :s '.
::: tIl~ ....~.
,..~-: ;;:.....~ ;:;'
" ": o.,~. '"!
".>-: '/,
r ':' r~ .. ~,'
~, ',,' . . .--.
,.......,.
~ ~;.,. g',"
'. ~. -
'i, "
" . ~ 'I, .' '"
.. ~~ (J ~
>-; ., " ~; ."
.' '1; l"'W '/'
" ,. ";1:.'
'I, .. .~ : r ;~ ".;; ~~
'. "I:',"..'
.' l'~, ;,' If J.",
:1",-:111 '";:'''.
,.!t> ~,''1 'II
:-r I\;,,"r:or
.\ ,t>:..
;; "';..
"....
I~ i.'
.. ,~ ,.
"
'1"0.:
"
"
- ,-
~. ,-' ~'
"~
1 ,~
,1'"
.:::. '-~
:.'....
~. '1\ ="
.. O,~'
. ~
.. ....,..
, ~
,"'f'>w:l
- ,:..
"
5 c
5 c. g
,~ g'l""
g ~ 9'
....o'c
~c:
""'("1'
. "',
o
, 0
.:. 0" C
ill ~~
~,.
_ 0 .
, c
C
..IT....
"'"
Q
="
o ,
'C:.
l'f"_.
"'.=
:J':';
1'If~
~'~
o
c-
, ~
,
"'=
~,
" <
" -,
t
,
,,;,,'d,'
:,'1' ~~"II :--
,I' ,~ >I'
~:J "~j
..:,,:0...,:..,,:
,\I ;.....,:'
'f. :n....,.,
"
l'T ~ ,:> c.
::T''':''1l1,. .""
ill,,'" .1.'~;;:
~ ~, ~ ,,,: ,"t
ll> "",.:..:",
(1'...., 1"".:-
m.....Q....
'1 '1..:'
.. ,1,1':-
I-"":l" ;:,.
. ~ ,
c,.....:;;::;<
O:l':l ;;:
::I e.Q,;-S
llIC;/1I-..:;
"~ .0
<O,';:'!"'f''C''''
.... a Q'1. ,.,.
< 1:' :J'i?
1Il;;l :r.
:l.,.-""e,";l
0'
Q,:::-o.,.-:r.
CI,~ 1'1' e
'< c,n
.c ~ 0
t'fCl~,=
:;(1:1 :II
= r.t '0....
rr S.... C.
e m 0 ;:
C-:l'C"'l
<"tel:)
..., :1\.....
.,..,,!:l,...
C I't ....0
.0 ,
.
Cl>
",
~<
-,
"",-
. -.
~~
.'"
"'.. ,.~
"':1
I',r,
-
. ,
"
c-
(t;'!I
"~
~.
. ~
"
'"
'C
,~
'"
7,' ';.0
!:,.,
.g ::1'
-,
o
."..
'" ~...
,
~; ~;
'.
"
o
. -.
....'.
"
,:
"
,. ~,
"
f,'.
':1:"
'"
,
'"
"
'co
r,', ::.I'.... ~ ~ - rT'tI]:J ('.',,\"I':c:: "'\"1' t-
oC"o::r~ ., ....... o:::~ ::':;':J
:lI ~'(fl :l.> ~::l. .. ,,:,,~!;)
......~. ........" ". r. c-
o ::l.z. ::: ;3, ,..... ""':;;. ""'....,,.;."lj "'l
t'f 0 ....""'r;.',':. ,0 ....0,::::: "'l--:
is :l .-:, \"I' ... _ O'..c :: .....::; .... 0
al r. Itr 1"""': Itl (f, '1 ....' '.,J.;3
'1 ':; 'C :: 0::" r. r. :..
... 0,... ... '". ....r:, ........ s: "f:'C 0' C.
I"I\C~ ....'E Itl r;:l =:....~=,(I'....
c: ....:: f;> >1"."" <'to =',S: :3..
Ill... I t'f". rt'...,., '.0:....,..'. to
-:." r, -r.-: - ....:.:'c- ~ 'J."
t:I ':<,... r.. .... ...."~ 'i'; 'r,,'~ 'f, 0 !t
.:. ::I'~ r...:.r 'Jl -'.:l fj
:::,.... ....~l"::;' :-: >'1'~ >:- c......
,;: ~~' ~'~'~,'E. ;2. ~I.: ~ :.: ~;.
'f. _ ~ rt ,::;,_qll~, :::;i,r;.',........;::
.... , ~f},,,,,,-: "",'1'"...,...0
r:. ...'~ .,,, Ito ~. ~ ..',:;', :J rt
::: 't"'~ r.. ..' . -. I::l" :;:..,:" r.I ...
~. ........ ". ". '....... '1"......'/.1'
'II ;;:;~.~ ~ .:;:;, ~r.;-,':;.~.l ~~:~.. 0....
". ..::: :>I, ...' ',' ,r. :.. ... ", :J .~
r, " ,r, ~! ';: '"' ,"" .,..-:...
r, (f' t: ;r~. '.; ..,. ". " 'r,
", " '.'" rr .' '" .~";1'
,. I: ;'.',- :l" ,.,.., .,,:-- '/r~ ",
:1:"1" 'Ii ,"r...';"; r)
r...., " (,. ~;:,;,. ,., ~ ;:.: " ";('~J n
t.:,...',!! 'f!' ,'".....,.".
.~ r. ~~, ',~, " " .,...'1,
r."rr";"'- ;.,...;,t r"... "'1'
t~ ..' ',,'r ,',
.,'J-'l.. " ". .. ,~ ".., I" f,
" "l.o ",r,. ::"'; ,(J;'"
,.~;;~ 'f~" ~,:~ ~;"" ~~ ;.,;,,;" :.,
'I:' tl,of:;...,.f.. ,,..,;
:,J I .. '. .... '. r, " ,'. ~, ", ,~ '1 "J
r.. {) .., w " ;1 .) " "':1. I' 'f
'f')'.' ,:",'1.. <',
h.", "~'" I,
I"J ;1 t,~
<.
-
_r
~ ::
:j,..
",
~~
-
"
o
. -
"
,-
,.
j
~, ~'= "
.., ~l .,
..,~. .1,
'" ~t I'
:~,~h:
r:':;
P;f'"ro
.
:.f....
:...'....
..
'"
~t' ,:-
10,":
!R'"
.... ,~
~}, ~
11',"
:"~.
"
"
~" ;.:
~ ~
" ...
-'
~. ....
.~~~
" 'h;,
~.G' ~1
"
~. .... ,,'
~ \11 ~
.''0"'1
'"
=" '1 ~:
.0,-,
.;;,:;'
0,.
..1-'1
~g.,.-
::.g.:::'"
:''1 ("I'
..::,0....
" '"
-c,....
:....(r.
, .
o.
-:-:st:
-n(ll
::'(.1
, ~
1-'::'"
~o
i~,l<l
, ~
- 0
",~
-g,
~rt'
~".
.::;:,
~~
'"
<
"l,.{tl
.~ ..a
.0
" "
,... ~
. ~
",
::'0
...
....,0-
~o
~
< .
" 0
. 0
,
:;rr
.,:;r
"0
o
,
~
-
'<
oc
"
",c-
o....
c--,
~~.
,
3"
0"
...'<
,
'<::
.
'"
,..,~,;""",",,............
~
~
~l .. ~ ,,'--'
,-' ,: "'-" ~,
.'~ ,'."", :,.
.....:,'.....:.'
..~ ....... (~
:" ..: ,) ..~
...'\11'::,
. ~
..'.,....::1
::! 0;:'
::- ::I ~,.
"
::"'''h,
,~ 0\:1,
,
'" .
.. 10 ~
"X,n-
''1','....
"':1 C
""0::1
"'..
","IT
0"
, .
~
"'....
::'11(1'
:'\"0;;1'
....51 Q
.
~rr,n
"'"
:r.lll Q
o .
no.""
01;), ::t
, ~c
c.,"'.,.....
Q ::1'1
e"....:e:
..0
............
:r,0 :a
!:l::l~
,
0'
'"
..
.
"
"
"
.
o
~
",
o
.
o
.
,
,
",
"
00
n
""
;,
..
~~
~:
~
,
.;
"
,,,
.,
.
~.
:'
,i' '~.;
:::r ~l
"
"'''
0':'
.,,";,
"'"
o
:S'(II
',,",!,
::c.:..
. ~
n "
,::r,c,
~
~
."
"',
,'Ort'
~
"'..
0"
0"'
".
",
0'0
. "
o 0
u,
.
o
~
<
.
"
.
",
.
",
~
o
"
~
o
1-'::'> n'(jl 0:.:,
\D'=Ol'tl')
-lQ.i!....=
.:>oS ::r
r-t....O(/;
....::r1J> "" 0
o l'> (II =
'1rt'",.'O
0....::
., r. ::/ ~ >:-
(DO ,::/....
~ :; :l'7''CIl
"',"ljCl ~
a....fIl?!
:;: j". c....
....~,fIl'
....r;.:r'(T
0'-':'>
"'l rtrf
"': 11/-...
fl _ r, '~
o ~,O </. -:
.8 ~'f..fr '.,
I--.r;....."
11>".....'.,.:..
:', r"....
n'li r..
rO..:..ti;
,:',.. ",
~: ,)
'...'.,',1..
"..,,;'.'.,'.;
;,.'.,..,..f) -:
"">1
,.,(,,',1/,.,.
',. ':',,~
Itl.",;,,:,!
"l 'r.~,
t,o:\ r;
;,:'~:;C 'II :~
;1 <1 'J
,f1..."I""'"
~n . h 'J.
to, ..,1"
". : " ~.
,~ I...
.:~'-""""""""""''''
,.
~
~
;,1'(~ \lI (.,
0',;',1,0
,i':""U;"
~. j,~ ,.. ~<
('I...: ....1/).
:l..:n 0
....11> :1
1<1,...
",. ~.. :J
00 CI
:<:)1:1-
"
.,.~
.0.
"
IQ,3,
'.0
~Xrt"
;::1m....
1'1';30
(1)""::1
"'~
.........
0='
, .
'" ~
. ~
:::l'1rr
;:orO::l'
"'..
,
lArt''-r
:1"'0
UI<OI1
. 0.
n Q, QI
g,~~
o.....=:
1O'::I'1l)
o."".n
..'"
f't",.rt'
"'0
..
o
'"
e'
;1
~
.
3
"
11
..
",
o
.
Q
o
"
"
",
.
0.
;.....'DI'.l,;,:
1lI!--'1;.',;"
~),.:I' t'. !l
:.'.,....
C".;'I:' tl1
:", ~'.'n ~"'i:'
~,'.=;'.-r,n~
n t1'....
0'<:'0 N 111
:::l'... (1'1,'"
CIl .... tIl ~
........ C',ll.' ,.,
Q.n tr .~
1tI i:' o,,~..~
1"1 ....C
.\11 0 < '0,(1'
rt.,"'.....,.
.... fIl It) ~
0.....,.... X'fT
::1:;'0"
tIl,\:I::I .....
."
rt'I:'1'I1:r....
::l":llll....fJl
.,...a '" n
\"1'.... C:r.(
. ~ .
:::l It) Il> fT fIl
ltI(tI(I'(D
Q,.,...~OQo
0."".0 :r
(p,,':l:l:;:l'1
c,.c III ",.Q
000
totO ClC
(D Q I-',m
01 "0,20: I-',cn
0$:1 (tl"( '<'\'
1-0',,'....
<\"I'.....:E:rt
""S::I' 00
::IQ,(D,C
<0::1'11-'0
~ 0.0
rl' ,:s.
ri'
ll>>-l:;r:;::X:rT:;!:
~::l" 0 "".1lI _ 0
0.1-" C.... ,r:.....
tIlfll........""=::J.
..... ro,'....'1tl "":j
0100.(11... .....z::
1:',':3" '!:l ..... 0 (II
","01:: 1'1'
....'n-,'....,rt'~1I>
........00,::1' ,.. (I'
:Sl'\) III I'\)
O':::r","'":rT....O'
rt I\J"O! ....
::I",........O'l'1'7o,rt
r., ...."0.,; 0 r" ;.T,
--: rt II>
_It>'\1I O;.T.... 1'1'
o ...... r~
....' tr ~" ,.,~,. .,
:Slllltl "J',r.:lI
,,,',,"<:c- P..rt
""'" 1I>....::r
r. II> ~,.:l ro
o rl,''''''i'-~ '1
,1,'\1''', ..;
lit f.:'::";r'
"",)"'::1'
"':1 ',Ill
III", ~:.,
!'I:J
""J,',;", .t
.. I;; .: ~..
Ill- 'l 'j ~" ;., r J'
., ,..: 1 ,t ~.
[" ,. .. "~
~'. :,1.... I,'
':',.(/ :~" "
t<< 'i'I":"
;l",q ;r'l: (" ro
".'Il' .'
: 1 ''-' ~"" "
'0 '" >t, <1,:-.
I'f'\ !Y',r<".
/~. :'; ~~. ,~ ~. ~'
,,,-" 'I,,,, : ~ '1
I, Ii; "."..
"
c
-',,,
..,-'~~-,"..;' '..--..,,-.'.
C""ll,tol
tl .11 N
ti t'h ,~,
~I; ... ~ I
Il":'f'tl
:0 ~"I'
.....".h
:C t""t'
"'O,:t
0:1
:.r ~h
.r,~' '{
. 1"\'
"
on'
~; ,t
fl':"
~1- .1I
,..
"
e,
"'
",
t:
.. I.. ~.
:":.,\'1
,\'1':(1'1
,;'I...
, "
'1"11>....
. . .
...,"t,,1
,.,. ~ :.J
o 0
.. n., C
=,,'1
e' '"
, .
';;IH>,.,
OmOl
....'1"1\\"1'
<(I'm
1:0 c.
Oo~
,,~
."
o
.~
.
.~
~'"
",0
, ,
"'"
. .
" 0
.
.
".
.
o
'0
. .
,,~
,~
m....
'0
"~
,
rt'O
.....
00
:l.>1lll"tf":l
:s r.l _
l'tQ.~z.
.... Q....
9,'rrP"l\-f
:tl:r....S
,:.,> :0.
~'"
'"
~'Cl
" ",
tll"C,....
"-
3"'l ,...
t.>;r.rn
"'"
ri' = 'I>
ro'f',.
, ,
. "
II> .... ~
;..r....f...
OC
f::'>rt
\-.....:.:"
n,.... :.
,;. ~ I'~
II> "
,..:,.
,..,
,.
"
,.'11
" '
~,.'~ "
"
~: HI'
:J:.or"
~, :'
~'. : I, ','
I-o'~ .~
Wo
I; ....
n ()
"
,)(.,
ll',1'
'1':'
.. :v
.,.,..
.ro,.
.1. ~l
~1
.'";'
8
,
'"
o
0.
~
".
"
.
o
~
",
C
,
"
~
~
",
,
~
o
<
o
"
.
o
~
.'
o
,
o \"I' 'll..::.~.... c..
.....-: ....::: ~~ :,. 0
"t: .... ~":;; !Il
........-::>'1/tl _
.....r. ~ ::u '1::" (fl
-: ~ 'i:S:;' 0
.-:r:....\"I'''e :l
... ....r;.,ft; ~
'!.t .~:; (t; ::"'1> tIl
,,:, '/lrt
fIlOl ....0' III
.............:::;"'-:r:;("I'
<t:l '" ..../tI
C':'.l.{.:...."" "'"
':.....".., ....
.... Ito \"I'''~'''''''
.... Q ;r
l).,;....r.>Ij c;i
:;:.... ..,....'\"1'
>-;.J' ~'~ 'J:;....
C \-~", r;, r" '''-':';
_ r..,.......",,"1
....~ ,..1',.,. I>>
::.. >" '. f~
S:',.,. ....,
.~~ ;~.: f~';~: i; 11.
,.~ ".~, ~'" J: .,.
",:1"-
:.. f', .'. .~
rt. "1'. ;1'"
".. . ",~" ,,...
j; ", "" "~~
'f !., ~; '. ;.;
,~ .' f''; : \ ~,'~
( . ' , ~ ~
:... :I;'~ ~'j J' ;; ~
" "":..1:
,,,,I"J"", "
~. :.. ,:"
"011'" 1\,
,~ .. <} 'J' .,t
<I,lt>
,~, ....,~ .-r .:
.:>, ,:- ~, :,' II'
:l~ :.; ~;, .,. ':J
....,"....;:-.,\1
,"",ct,l'lt::
..; ....''-'>-t
...."".....',.\'1
,~ "'l :;I ':I ;:J
_ ~... Il1
~~ ',., "~'},
..... :r-.:',.-lI
:....t,l\11:<
,,,c.......rtll:l
::" .1'
'i:l c.c.o '19
.......... 0
ll,>.:....""rt
,('T ...,....
(/:'('T::IO
(11.,.;;1'111::1
'0 c Ill'''''
(11 .....
n,.... n 111 ::r'
..../'J 0 C I>>
....,.,::ltrrt
w. 0. 0.
n ('T "'..... rt
0.0.....<:3"
.... ........lll
...;:0,,0(1:1
'< >1':ll-'.n
.....tIlOO
I:lc.o:S~
C/,'1-.:l'I--'.
.....Gl.....Ol
~ ..
Ca,fi'....
'<, Q 0
.. .....:(;:1
",
rt'O\"I'1lI
::r,lll:r"lj
." 'C
rt rTtoI
rt :r0
"..
~ .
'l:r'
,1111
:,f.11
,1.11
1''';1
"
;':11
,~ .11
.~ :1
"
"
"
..
>..
"
"
~
'U
,-
W
,>
03:
~O
~~
"'''
.'<
.....
'"
C
c-
o
,
..
.
'"
Q
.
'"
0,
.
,
o
.
j
1
I
L
I
j
I
:
:
~ !
"
f..
.
j
:
i
'U
~I: i
t i' ~
It!
;~. i'
'"
"
"
"
~ ,
)
"
,..
"
"
"
'V
,-
"
~1
;'J
",
,
,
o
.
00
:0
'"
'"
C
:0
C
C
~
~
o
.
",
,
'"
"
:0
C
'"
'"
'"
s:
"
"
'"
)
"
"
",
~
e
e
~
,
e
.
N
~
~
~
~
"
"
$' !'
E.. i~
~ i:
"
~ j:
~ !.
",
.
)
:0
'"
. " "
. . C
0 c S
0 .
~ ,
I c
0 '" ~
00 ~
, . "
.. " :0
. ["
", j 0
~ I~ "
" ! '"
" '"
0 ~ I 0
. 0, "
, '"
.. I" I
0 I '"
C!C "
;; ,.. ,
I" ,
" " I
"
" I
"
,. I
~,. }
'"
"
,"
"
" i'.,
0>,
., " -,
H' i'
" :'" :;-'
,,, :;.
'0 ~
14:
i,:
,
I
I
,
I
!
I
:
",..+
/
...~' ,-.I' _,:.bf
~~".1:;~~~~~'!:...!::.~.~'-~!!:._-~---
Regular Meeting
J
I SUBDIVISIONS
'i Aspen Cen tel"
Final Plat'
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
--""--..,-----------------T~=~=~~="
Aspen Planning i; Zoning Marc 19, 1974
that both houses should be restricted in rega d to the
number of dwelling uni 1:s. Motion seconded by Ivagneur.
All in favor, motion carried. I
:
!
:
:
on whether; or not the
recommcnddtions on thE
!
!
j
,
Departme~t was not
today, b~t that they
Chairman Gillis closed the public henring.
101airman Gillis questioned Del Duca
Engineering Department, had prepared
Aspen Center.
Del Duca
prepared
would be
stated that the Engineering
to give the recommendations
ready within 10 days.
!
,
:
three hou~s with the
prcvious~riday and
had been made.
i
i terns on the pI.:
!
Schott land stated that he had spent
City Attorney and Cit,y Engineer the
understood that all the corrections
Del Duca stated that they had found three
whi.ch nGeded correction.
I
!
Jim Reser, from Tri-Co Management I stated tha~ there were
a number of corrections that needed to be mad~ on the
plat: based on previous submission. St~ted th~i.;:. he and
the City Engineer had gone over the plat that :afternoon
and thought t.here were only b.!o problems they 1still have;
(1) the:: extension of the (; I sidewalk which vi[l~ an error
of ommission on his part; and (2) a technical !problem re-
garding storm so<..;cr easement in the vicinity qf the r4iddl(
School. i
,
Schottlund stated that it was his understandi1g t.hat a fu:
study \.,as done on the plat by Dave Ellis up tq this point
Friday he spent time goi.n~r over and maki.ng al~ these cor-
re-ctions a.nd the City Att.or:-:c:y had dsme some \~ork with
attorney Art Daily in reference to that. Statlcd that
they have a very critical time problem i1nd modcy problem.
Stated that he understood they\vcre to have t~is in ten
days prior, but have gotten tremendous stat.ic Ifrom the
City Engineer and vlould like to ask and see iil in the
next 48 hours, since the Engineering Department has done
95% of the work already, they could finish it iup and al-
low the applicant to come in on Thursday's moqting.
"
Chairman Gillis stated that_ the City has coopdrated by
getting the applicant on the agenda because triey said the~
would be ready and it was rushed and there woJld be no
way thf' commission would ru;:.;h through this. !
I
I
Schott land ques'tioned the Commission as to whdn the next
possible date would be to get on the agenda. :
I
,
Chairmiln Gillis stated that would be April 2nd.
Bartel qtH,stioned Schottland as to what, date ~e had plann,
to be on the agenda for the City Council final! plat con-
sider" tion. I
Sehot,tland stated it would be either the fOll<j"ing Monday
or the next mt':!cti.ng, as soon as nossiblc.
. :
Bart."l stated that they were not on the next ~londiiY' s
ag(mda, butwo111d be,on the agenda of the 8th lof l\pril,
consequently the final plat could be considcrdd by tho
-7-
.,
,',,"
,o~.. '. C. f. W.r~"\. 6.".. l. '0.
Regular Meeting
J
J
ORDINMiCE U9
Land Use Plan
Independence pass/
Rubey Park Public
Hearing -
Reschedule
-
ORDINi\:iCE #19
Land Use Plan
i
,
!
\00 Leaves
i
Aspen P ] ilnnin~::~~:;--=='- -"""-:-~~~J I ;'-"~-~;4
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
i
Planning & Zoning Commission on April 2nd at their next
regular meeting and still be ready for the earliest time
that it could be placed on the Council agenda,l
Chairman Gillis stated that the Aspen Center -I Subdivision
Final Plat would be on the agenda for April 2'i 1974.
i
,
Bartel stated that he would be showing the ComJ\tission the
work that has been done to date for the area atound Aspen
Mountain. Pointed out that they huve given th~ Commission
preliminary presentD.lions on the mixed resid(~n~ial areas,
bu.t have not shown them anything for the orang~ area on
the map. i
Bartel request that the public hearing for thel Indepen-
dence Pass/Rubey Park View Pla.nes be rescheduled for a
regular meeting date. Stated that the date pr~viously
scheduled in this meeting, April 9th, was not? regular
meeting date~ i
i
i
Jenkins made a motion to withdraw the motion setting the
public hearing for April 9th, Vagneur wi 1:hdreo/ her second
All in favor, motion carried. i
Jenkins made a motion to reschedule the publici hearing for
the Independencc" Pass/Rubey Park Vie".., Plane f~r hpril
16th, 1974, ~loti.on sc,conded by Vagneur. All ~n favor,
motion carried.
Assistant Planner John Stanford submitted Oc.gitlning analy-
sis of the Ordinance #19 Hap which is the recrifation-ac':'
conunodations. Stated thDt the varic'\us shades ?f gray in-
dicate various levels of slope - the. darker the gray, the
steeper the slope. Map showed tbe 8040 line it: green and
the proposed transit route, City property, etcl..
i
Stanford stated that they are in the process nbw of be-
ginning to work on land ownership and existingl land use.
I
Bartel stated that there are several significaht parcels
of City o\vncrship and cit.culat.ion aspects. Stb.ted that
first, the City did receive from the Ski Corp ),t the time
of the Number One Lift a fairly sizeable area bn Dc-an
Street and aneaserncnt extending up to and .an easement for
ski purposes only up to the b""c of the arca of the N"mber
One-A Lift. In addition to that., the City hasl some public
owner~:hip at the end of Mill Street:, which is VC.flCrallY
not a public kno\.;n f.=lct. Indicatod on the map: the .series
of lots ,,,hich are public.
I
Bartel statod that at the time of the Mountainl Queen sub-
divisi'on plat, the City Council by agreement, l[llade pro,-
vision for a street extension fr:omNonarch to Mill and
the provi.sion in that agl~cemcnt is that the Cit:y would
make every effort to acquire that by donation. I If t.hat is
not possible the City then would proceed \,'ith pondemnation
and the COt;ts covered by the Silv<or Queen projf'ct, So in
this area, one of the t.hin~,s desirable to fOllfW up is
that connecting link. from Nonarch to Mill.
Bartel pointed out on the mnp t.h(~ area which i l the ac-
commodat.i.ons area ilnd the aCCOnlm0c1;;1tions a,rca[transiti.On
which recommonded n very low dellBit.y - smaller buildings -
so that th(!rc be a blendj nq trom the built up l, rCi1 into
the mountainsi.de. Sbtlcdth.:lt 1:ho l::nginL~(~rinq! Office has
-8-
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Building Inspector
FROM:
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Ordinance
19 Review, Subject:
~~
g-~ 7-,/
the planning commission reviewed
On
the above building permit and it was
~ approved
denied
Conditions:
~~.~.
. '-I'~ "j "Tr- ~ ~
~~ tJ',
'~
-"'
Planning Office
Dated this
/sli da.y of ~"- , 19~
~"
""
A~ ,_,"O..,.:;~;.;,-
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
I
:
I
:
I
lPO Leaves
'"r"======
7,1974
I
continued 14eeting
_!.'!!'." "..5' T."O[~~tl..!:..!:..!~:..-.-__,----___~
Harch
.;
Aspen Center -
Food Store
Aspen Planning & Zoning
where there is not.
Ingham stated that the Parlour Bar had apP~OXimatelY
1600 square feet and the Oyster Bar is app~oximately
700 to 800 square feet. Stated that the o~her side
where the new bar is and where they dance ~s 25 x 100,
of which the dance floor is only 200 squarJ feet.
:
Ingham submitted photographs of the interi~r of the
Paragon. I
I
Hs. Baer stated that she thought it might J'ell be a
misunderstanding. Stated that the essence of the pro-
blem is the Cow~ission's ability to enforc uses.
I
,
Vagneur stated that in a situation where i~ is really
an obviously flagrant misrepresentation then should
request building inspector to revoke occup~ncy per-
mit, but did not feel that this was. :
I
,
Johnson stated that he agreed with vagneur.1
,
Ingham pointed out that as they were in th~ process of
the remodel, the Fire Marshall did come in land the
building department did go over it and the Ihealth de-
partment went over it. ,
,
,
,
Hs.Baer stated that the Building InspectoJ! thought
this was a restaurant. Stated that the pldnning Of-
fice was not particularly concerned about this pro-
ject, but' concerned about enforcing uses. I
I
Schiffer did not participate in this discu~sion due
to a conflict of interest. I
I
Johnson request the following statement, bi him, be
read into the record: 1
"It has come to my attention thai
our meeting of March 5, 1974, has cre+
ated a situation in regard to the Asp~n
Center that I never intended to creat~
and don't believe the rest of the Com+
mission intended. I
I have received information that I
Hr. Schott land is contacting parties !
interested in the grocery aspect of tme
Center and telling them there is a po~-
sibility of having a 20,000 square f00t
supermarket. i
Of course this makes the Center at-
tractive to all the big chains and puts
Mr: ~chottland in a much better bar- I'
ga1.n1.ng pos1.t1.on.
It was never my intention to all1'W
this size of an operation in the Cent r,
or indeed, the whole City, even if a
size variance were allm'lcd. I was th, nk-
ing in ,terms of a food store, not som~-
thing YO~' ,"ould find i.n ~inderella City.
My ldco, and I rcallze I speak I
only fo:r: myself, waG to allow a store I
of about 12,000 square feet of selling
area and perhaps 3,000 square feet of'
-20-
~,
,....,
I
I,"",... ""'''''''".,.u,,
I Continued Meeting
i
I
I
i
i
I
:
I
j~
I
Leaves
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Aspen Planning & Zoning
March
t 1974
i
I
i
:
I
i
I
I
!
.
.
storage, if it could be allowed.
I think if this is what the
rest of the Commission envisioned
that we should go on record to that
affect, and put to rest any further
speculation to the contrary.
As for myself, I want to go on
record as being completely opposed
to any store having more than 12,000 :
square feet of selling area or a totat
square footage in excess of 15,000 i
square feet. 11 i
,
Vagneur stated that she thought the Commis~ion
said 16,000 square feet. i
:
Johnson 3tated that the 20,000 square feetlwas what
he had mentioned as what Safeway of King Super would
want and would provide the large general mJrchandise
areas, and that is not what he had in mind, and that
is what Schottland is approaching operator~ with.
I
not feel any o~ the Com-
see a huge cha~n like
i
i
Landry stated that she recalled the Safewa~ argument
at the shopping center, and at the time of 'I the last
discussion, wanted to ask Schott land if he had a
serious offer from Safeway. I .
Johnson stated that he was certain SChottlJnd never
has, but is now approaching them. I
Johnson stated that he himself has been qudted to
people at City Market as having said that He favored
21,000 square foot supermarket. I
I
Chairman Gillis stated that he thought the imotion
did say that the Commission would endorse ~ variance
which would allow them to go somewhere in tihe vicinity
of 14,000 to 15,000 square feet. :
i
I
Johnson stated that he did not think the c~mmission
put a square footage li.mit in the motion. i
Ms. Baer suggested the Commission write a ~etter to
Schottland to clear up the matter. I
had
Vagnuer stated that she did
m1SS1on members intended to
a King Super.
1;
r
Johnson made
by Jenkins.
adjourned at
a motion to adjourn the meeti~g, seconded
All in favor, motion carried. 1 Meeting
8:35 p.m. I
4~J1~.Ltliim
cc"Lf-;YArmstrong, A~'0tary
~ :"
r
~
~.~
Ml!:MO
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
.-.,
P&Z,
ED DEL DUCA
3/5/74
-.,
RIO GRANDE SUBDIVISION
After reviewing the preliminary plat submitted for
the above mentioned project I have the fOllowing
comments.
The right-of-way for Mill Street
dedicated for both lots 2 and J.
dedication is for the portion in
1.
should be
The present
lot 2 only.
Easements for the existing sewer lines and
proposed storm drainage facilities in lot 3
should be granted.
2.
I
An easement for the water line in lot 2 ShOUli
be granted upon relocation.
for access
access ease-I
3.
A dedicated 40 foot right-of-way
from Mill Street to the existing
ment should be provided.
4.
The 10 foot trail easement shown within the
proposed roadway should be removed from the
roadway and a separate easement should be
provided for the reasons following:
Presently proposed is a 40 foot right
-of-way which is to be used for a 10
foot trail easement and a 30 foot roadr
way. The subdivision regulations requtre
a minimum of 42 foot of roadway, exclu~ing
curb and gutters, within a 60 foot right
I
~of-way.(Sec 20-7 l(c)). So the propo?ed
roadway does,not meet the regulations even
if the entire R.O.W. were used excluSirlelY
for roadway.
The present proposal does not allow adhquate
space for pedestrian access to and fro~
Lakeview. l
The minimum roadway acceptable for acc. ss
is 32 feet excluding curbs & gutters. ihiS
would not allow any parking butwouldllow
for auto breakdowns, snow removal & et .
A bike and trail easement requires a m'nimum
of 10 foot and a pedestrian walk requires a
minimum of 6 feet totaling 50 feet. I
The proposed roadway will serve Smuggl~r
Street in the Lake View Addition, WhiC~ has
a 45 foot right-of-way and which has a its
only access the proposed 30 feet of ro d
right-of-way. I
6. The landscape plan presented is not adequate.
5.
a)
b)
c)
d)
7. The area to be vacated by the city should be
designated.
8.
A portion of Lot 3 is presently being
for purchase by the school board.
considrred
I
J..
^
.1""\
.,
9. Improvement district agreements are not in
the best interest of the city in this particu ar
project: An agreement to do the necessary im-
provements in coordination with the city woulf
be a much better arrangement.
,
The above nine items are the major items which need
clairification prior to preliminary plat approval.
are other minor items which may be easily resolved,
are also noted on the plat in red.
Th re
th se
&?? .0# LJ~-
r-~
(""'\
^
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Regu.lar Meeting
~~:';i:::-';::. l".,~~wm,lf. !:.!~~~----'-'---~--~-'-"""'------';
Aspen Planning & Zoning
Agenda Items
SUBDIVISIONS
Margaret Meadows -
Preliminary Plat -
PublicHeOlring
. ;1"",..,_.......,"''-,
,~~ \ P '\
\ '\ '.
~\, \
Aspen Center - ' )
PreliminarYPla~ _/
Public Hearing
.It
~
,
j,.
." ,
1 00 Leaves
March ?.! 1974
-,"'-'''''-..'- -,,-"---
-----'---- --..
Jenkins made a motion to adopt the proposed wat,er ,,~~r-
vice area with the condition that the commisLonh,as
a closer look at the area within the City ofTAspen
and the direction it is going in. Hotion s9.onded by
Schiffer. All in favor, motion carried.
Chairman Gillis stated that the Commission
at the luncheon study session that day that
next possibly 6 or 7 meetings, will not acce
new projects for the agenda. Sta~ed that th
too many items which the commission needs to
in order to revise the Land Use Plan and the
Plan.
h d decided
or the
t any
re are
consider
Master
Chairman Gillis opened the public hearing on Margaret
Meadows - Preliminary Plat.
Gillis stated that the Olpplicani:: '",as not pre ared for
the presentation at this peint.
, Chairman Gillis closed the public hearing on Margaret
~adows - Preliminary Plat.
Johnson made a motion to conti hue the public hearing
on Margaret Meado,,;s tc March 19, 1974, secon ed by
Schiffer. All in favor, motion carried.
Chairman Gillis opened the public hearing on Aspen
Center Preliminary Plat.
Ed. Del Duca, Assistant City Engineer submitt.d com- j
ments to the Commission.
Del Duca stated that basically, most of the roble!l1s
have been resolved.
Del Duca stated that he felt there ,was an er
dedication, in that the entire right-af-way,
was that entire' right-of-way be dedicated, b
that it was an error on the plat that it was
shown. Stated that must be corrected.
or an the
intent
t felt
not
Del Dllca further stated that easements for t.e exist-
,.ing sewer lines and propsed storm drainage f cilities
in lot 3 should be granted. Stated that the have had
a drainage studY,by Wright-McLaughlin and th y conform
with the intent of the study.
Further pointed out that an easement for the
in Lot 2 should be granted upon relocation.
,dedicated 40 foot right-of-way for access fr
Street to the,exi.sting access easement shoul
vided.
water lin~
150, a
m Mi.ll
be pro-
Del Duca stated that the 10 foot trail easem nt shown
within the proposed roadway should be remover fron>
the roadway and ,a separate easement; should b pr:ovi ded
for the fol1owir,ii'reasons: (1) Presently pre po,;ed is
a 40' right-af-way Which is to be used fOl: a 10' trail.
easement and a 30' roadway. 'I'he. subdivision rc:gula-
tions require a minimum of 42' roadway, excl'ding
curb and gutters,within a ~D' right-of-way, so the
proposed roadway does not meet the r'"gulatior s even if
-5-
_"""'\... J:, F. "lla~Il.El 8'. &... L. ",
;ltegular Meeting
".-,- -..
- '-,.. ,- -' ~
-. .
- ... ,," - -- - -- - .,:-..
- '"-, .. ...-. --,,,.,..-
<
~. . '.
r-..,
',,,,,,\
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1 00 Liaves
I
Aspen Planning <<Zoning March 5, 19741
the entire right-of-way were used exclusively ~or
rOadway; (2) 'The present propOsal does not al~ow ade-
qeate space for pedestrian access to and. from t,ake-
view; (3) The minimum roadway acceptable for' ccess
i.s 32 'excluding curbs & gutters, This \vould ,ot al-
10wany parking but would allow for OlutO break owns,
snow removal, etc... A bike and trail easement re-
quires a minimum of 10' and a pedestrian walk equires
amnimum of 6' totalling 50': and (4) The pro osed l
roadway will serve Smuggler Street in the Lake vie'/l 1
Addition, which has a 45' right-of-way and whi h has .
, ~
as its only access the proposed 30' of road riJht-of- ,
'.1,,'
way. f
~
~
I
I
Del ~uca included the following comments: (1) 'The
1andscapeplOln presented is not adequate; (2) The
area to be vOlcated by the City should be desi nated;
(3) a portion of Lot 3 is presently being co sidered
:for purchase by the school board: and (4) Imp ovement
district agreements are not in the best inter st of
~e ,City in this particular project: An agre ment
to do the necessary improvements in coordinat'on with
the City would be a much better arrangement.
Schiffer stated that under the subdivision re
i.t requires 60' unless there is some unusual
size or shape of the property, etc.. Questio
D~caif that is how he felt and why he was re
1-e'ss .: . ~ .
~~. .D~C~ stated that since Smuggler does not 40 througt
and~probably never will, the Engineering Department
:feels that a 40' road is adequOlte. I I
S,-<3iHfetquesttoned if there was anything abo~t the I
~~e . itself . that would preclude this reqUiremrnt. , .
Bel Duca stated that there is also a si te Pla~ problem.
as~bras land use. Stated that originally 6 " was I
tequiied, however, there has been a lot of 09 rdina-
~iOn!;).etween the developer and the City, and' his' rec-- I
~"",uen, da, do, n is the result ,of that coordinatio. Felt!
~h, e tra,il should not be included wi thin the rpadway.,.
Felt the trail .s.hoUld be' 'sOIlIeplace ell"e. '., I .' : r
. , .,.,~' . ,
Scl:)iffer, stated that rather than set a prece ent by
aHow-ingC less tl1an the required '60' ; ,felt th "Engineer.
'''inq:'iIi~partin~:mt sr,ouldexplai~. their reasonsf[or. th.eir
f....~~p~endat:ton. , . '1 '." ..
,:"p.e}: pUFa. stated t, hat hedi?~ot feel the fUIJ. 60' was'
~cessary ,becau$"e of .the llm;l.ted .area .of,ser .:l;ce.
Chairman Gillis questioned if the drainage W,S sub-
surface.
ulations 'j
opographYll
ed Del :!l
ommendins
., Oell Duca stated that the Wright-McLaughlin s udy, show€(
these as SUrface drainage. Stated that he h d sketche'
them on the plat, with the ,exception of one hich they
'feel is not necessary. POinted out that the 30" pipe
would be shared expense between the owner an the City
Stated this would be in the subdivision agre ement.
DelDuca stated that the devel9per has agree to con-
. -6-
~rJR"'~_~~~' ~ L. (;~.
Regular ~eeting
.t
t
,
.
;
;'
.,...
;",';",1.
1""'\
,-"
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
i
100 Weaves
!
-- --::=-:<! - -:--:.-:;'::::=-.~.
March 5, 1]974
Aspen Planning & zoning
form to the, intent of the Wright-McLaughlin study.
,
i
Schiffer questioned if the deficiencies which iwere
pointed out in the January hOld been corrected ,I with
the exception of those pointed out at this tne'1ting.
Bartel stated that there were three things wh~ch he
had corr~ents on under subdivision: (1) Will need
language on the final plat saying that no devdlop~
ment is to occur on Lot 3 until City has sitelplans
submitted and approved because the only area ~hat
have detailed site planning is Lot 2; (2) Sta1i:ed
that have discussed with Schottland on the dedication
requirement that it be cash rather than publici: land
dedication; (3) For the final subdivision plat agree-
ment, will need a landscaping plan because ca~not be
defi~itive at this scale, so that a dollar am~unt can
be assigned to be included in the subdivision I agree-
ment for landscaping. '
i
Bartel pointed out that there is one ownership that
fronts on Monarch and another ownership that fronts
on Mill Streeet. Stated that this is an issue, for the
regrading.
,
I
Schiffer questioned if all the referrals werejpositive.
j
Bartel stated that the school's comment is no~ a con-
dition for preliminary plat approval.
i
Chairman Gillis stated that according to the Code, the
developer has followed everything and things Ilook good
from a subidivision standpoint ,for preliminar~ plat.
i
I
Schiffer stated that he would like to specifi on the
right-of-way where the 40' is being recommen~ing plus
the 10' trail easement, that Commission specilfy that
there are conditions that warrant that kind oJf vari-
ance from the subdivision regulations for thijs pro-
:ject. '. i
j
,
i
he was to come in ]under for
Schottland questioned what
the ma,in part of Lot, '3.
i
I
Bartel stated that this subdiviSion plat not !be used
as the site plan. S~atedthat they wou+d be]required
to have a detailed site Plan for Lot 3,the same as
for 1,ot2, before development can proceed. . i
, .
SchottlOlnd guestioned,whatwould happen in tqe
they do 'not subdivide Lot 3.
e:vent
. ,I.
. I
Barte~ stated that the City would want the.s~e re-
view, C1.nd stOlted that if they condominiumize; they
i -
would be required to return anyway. .
i
Attorney Art Daily ,vas present, representi.ng i the de-
veloper, and questioned if that Lot was not$ubdivided
is it really appropriate to require site pla~ review
in the future of that. i
I
I
, I
Bartel stated thnt he would like Ell~s to coIlnment on
that, but felt thnt a great deal of the worklwhich
was done in Lot 3 area was really done conc('~tually.
i
I
-7-
f""""..
^
f<eg1.11ar Meeting
Aspen Planning & zoning
i
100 tleaves
I
~~-=====
!
March 5,1 197"
RECORD OF PROGEEDINGS
(Illl'>l ", c. ,.,...)tCKE,~,~;,!J. a c co-.
::=:=--
,
Was not done as the only opportunit:\:' to look 1t drain-'
age, easement alignment, etc... ,
i
,
Ellis stated that the onlv alternative to that would
be absolute dedication of " all those rights-of-fl'lays
and easements which are at this point not, contemplated
to be dedicated absolutely. r' ,
Vagneur questioned if the developer'were to s~ll a por"'
tion of that property to the school, would th~t im-
mediately mean sUbdivision of Lot 3. I,
Bartel stated that it would.
Schott land stated that, in reference to the aaditional
10', just found out about it today. I
i
I
Architect Tom Wells stated that they had spen~ a great
deOll of time with the Planning;Office determi~ing
their site plan, the location of the road, t~e possible
Railroad right-of-way, etc. .'. and the possibillity of
the Sinclair Station. Stated that it is all ,fairly
tight design through there. Stated that the laddition
of the 10' is a last minute thing.
~.
Ellis stated that the developer had been
cerning that easement previously.
i
nodfied
I
i
con-
,
.1
1
,
J
1
l
I
I
,
I
,
, .
,
I
f
1""
I
I
.,
, '
Wells stated that if the easement goes exactly as
the Engineering Department had indicated, th~ property
is certainly usable, but would question whet4er or not
there could be a Sinclair Station. Stated that at
this point, Schottland does not have assurande that
there will be a Sinclair Station. Stated that that
easement would give them 90 feet rather than:lOO.
I
Schott land stOlted that originally the Engine~ring De-
partment had informed them that they wanted 60 feet.
That was to include a 20foot railroad. NOw Up to 70
feet. " . ..' :), .
Del Duca stated that 60 feet including t~e r~il~oad,
trail'and road is different than 20 feet fori the .rail-
I
road and 40 feet for the road; " i
. , .
,
,
Schott land stated that they are providing lo~s of
trails through the property and this would, d~stroy
what they are trying to do here. Feel it isi not cor-
rect to put the 10' trail easement on. I
Wells stOltedthOlt in thei~ original convers~tion with'
'the Engineering Department, they discussed'610", in":'
,eluding road,trail and railrq,ad, so either !the trail
,'. is going' to break that into 40' and 20'. FeJel the
trail should still ,be in that total. Felt ~hat may-
be it is possible ,that the trail could go 01'\ the othe,
side. I
Sehottland pointed out that the existing right-of-way
is 16'. I
i
Ellis stated it', was 25 I dedicated easement. I
I
I
Schott land stated that they have, accordinglto what
i
-8-
~;"~ltt1':!:.a.3,&~.CJ.
~
Re.gulaJ;" Meeting
f
"
.,
t"""'\
i'''''
!
i
I
,
I
1_~~_~~~~__=
March 5, f974
I
Del DUCOl stated at lunch, 32'of paving Olnd 8 I ! of side-
walk. Ques,tioned w'hy they are requesti.ng side\~alk for
pedestrians and additional la' for trail. '
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Aspen Planning & Zoning
Del Duca stated that it was poor design to put bicycle
and pedestrians on same easement. Stated the i 10' ease'.
ment would be all-purpose. Stated it would g6 across
the river. Stated it would be. part of the overall
trail system. I
i
Schiffer stated that his problem was that the] subdi-
vision regulations require a 60' road right-olE-way,
and instead, they are> talking about 40' plus ~O',
which is still below the 60' required. .
Wells stated that he had always
was for 24'.
,
,
,
thought the a~reement
~
,
Ellis stated that there was not one plan .wheDe he had
put his okOlY on a 24,' right-of-way. Ellis st~ted they
need either a specific easement for trails o~ need
to work out. an on-site agreement guaranteeing that
there would be public access along the front~ge throug}
the site for pedestrian traffic. i
,
i
Wells stated that they would not like to co~it to
something which would prevent the Sinclair S~ation
from coming in. Feel they 'could work someth~ng out.
I
Wells pointed out that they have
parking than is required for the
provided 50%
project. '
more
I
Ellis stated that the idea of no parking on the street
herelt was their agreement and hoped it woutdbe in
the subdivision agreement. Stated that 24' in his
opinion would be inadequate because of neces$ity for
any type of vehic.les to stop,. etc.. ,Do not feel that
you can totally preclude the fact that thereimight
be loading zones, either pOlssenger or freigh~ at the
c1U'b. "j '.
.'.'0' . . !'
Schott land stated that he felt they had.work~d every
way th~y could with the City, and now ,it is ~etting ,
to the point where ,it cuts into their proper~y and
precludes One of the major things they are t~ying to,
get in, ,which the City has re,~uested they inlclu~e.
Wells'stated that theirsite.plan, Olllow for! the side-
'walk t'O be :on the property on the .one side. [Stated
that until they really get down to a site p]an all the
way across including the Sinclair Station., ~eally do
not know what to do about the:situation. .~'e.el it is
a matter of design where the tra.il easements 'go. .'
. .'.' I .
.' ..
Ellis stated that he felt the situation cou~d be workE
out. Ellis stated that the Railroad right-of-way seeD
to be a problem in trying to utilize that f~r north-
easterly corner of the property. '
Bartel stated that Del Duca had looked at a*out 3 dif'
ferent alignments for a possible RR right-of-\Vay, and
this particular one would require acquisiti<!ln of ad-
ditional property. Stated that when Kravat$ky did t.h,
site plan for the ll~ acres felt that the place to
I
I
-9-
, "'~'" ,=,r,"")ECl(n~,6,.e; ~.C,.
Regular Meeting
ASPEN CENTER
Ordinance #19 -
Preliminary &
Final
j4-
"
j,.
,
'!
t
-
,-...
.~
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1 0 Leaves
Aspen Planning & Zoning
March 5, 1974.
terminate the rail might be back further be ause of
the problems with crossing Hill Street and roblems
on the ll~ acres.
Johnson questioned how long it is reserved for.
Bartel stated it is reserved until Lot 3 is resub-
divided, when the decision would have to be made.
Ellis pointed out that it could not be rese ved in-
definitely.
Chairman Gillis closed the public hearing.
Schiffer made a motion to approve the prelim'nary
subdivision plat on the condition that the E gineer-
ing Oepartment'sconditions be met and a sol tion
is arrived at to the trail. Motion seconded by Vag~
neur. All in favor, with the exception of L ndry who
abstained. Motion carried.
City Economists Larry Simmons and Francis MO'o sub-
mitted an evaluation of the economic impact tudy sub~
mitted in support of the Aspen Center and As en Center
Apartments.
,
Complete evaluation is available on file in he office
of the City/County Planner. The conclusion, s as fol-
lows:
"We do not wish to be d'~rogatory to the
effort put in by Peter Cunningham. The task
is extremely difficult even for one wit wi-
der-ranging experience in this field du to
a lack of data. Given this difficulty nd,
the magnitude of this project, we feel hat
the impact statement should have been w,it-
ten by a professional. As we collect m re
data and refine our conceptualization of the
Aspen ~c~nomy, there will be,a far bet~e
basis' on which the prOfessional 'can 'oj:>€"n.te.,
Overall, we must have bettc!r data estima es
and better conceptualization than€xists
,in this study. .
We would alsO' like to point out tha
there were many points of ommission in t is
study such as effects on traffic, the ne d
for,such a center to increase the shoppi g
opportunities of 'residents;, the positive. .
impact of greater selection and conver.i-
'ence to the people who have,done'w;ithout
or wasted time in getting wanted items.
Though som.e, of these are not quant'ifiabJ.:
they do have an economic impact by ch~mg
ing resident spending patterns and gener 1
consumer behavior.
One very positive effect of the Asp n
Center that was not noted in the study i
the development of resident oriented con
sumer outlets. This has the effect of k
ing Aspen income in the Aspen economy an
lessening the dependence on tourist spen -
-10-
~---..:-.-- '
~
1"""\
R.ECORO OF PROCEEDINGS
10 Leaves
_:~";;- ~, c..,. "OSCK~~ II. 9. tt L. C~
Regular Meet:ln
As en Planning & Zoning
March 5, 1974
:lng wh:lle making the economy more vi-
able and more respondent to resident
needs. It should be noted that the
impact, of t.his center is consistent
with the objectives of the Aspen Land
Use Plan of 197:5 in that it affords
an opportunity'for greater utilization
of existing services and facilities,
while providing fora more balanced
economy as it pertains to the tourist
and non-tourist elements."
Simmons did aod that it would seem possible
of,the Sinclair Station and parking and traf
the downtown area that it would also fit in
concept of the mall. Felt this should have
cluded :In the study. '
Bill Dunaway, editor of the Aspen Times, po:l ted out
that at one time, the Commission for the' County, had
said that a second market coming in would be llowed
to have the same amount of square footage as ity
Market. Pointed out that this was at the tim of the
Safeway proposal. Stated that he understood ity Mar-
ket had over 14,000 square feet. Questioned w at the
limit on the grocery store in this particular pro-
ject would be.
n terms
ic in
ith the
een in-
.
Johnson stated that he thought the limit on a build-
ing for one particular use was 12,000 square eet un-
der the existing ordinance.
Ms. Baer agreed. Stated that the ordinance
ten after that discussion took place.
Johnson stated that he thought City Market ha
square feet, and further stated that he felt
square feet of total space for a food outlet
not be adequate.
13,200
,000
Quld
,
Johnson stated that a grocery store ~16ng the 'same
line as Safeway or Ki.ng super would ,not even 1 ok at
a .site unless they could look at 19;000 to 21,000
square fe,et. . StOlted that that would be in a pace
1ike Grand Junction or Denver, and the situati n here
would be different;
schottland stated that :In reference to his app oachin<j
various Inarket operators, almost all of them s y that
they are' not Olble to operate ,in'a 12,000 squar foot
store, so it means that they have become very im:lted
as to "the type of operation that they would be able
to accommodate. Stated that since the City,Ec nomist;s
have said that they feel that the possibility houla
be explored of a larger store and the Commissi n, if
they feel this is something the developer ShOUld look
in to, would possibly help if they had a reCOil endaticn
from the Commission to the BOard of Adjustment to per-
haps allow mor~ square footage for the market. Felt
that it is something that should be resolved fai.rly
soon.
Chairman Gillis stated that when he heard the c ncept
felt this would be a placement store. Stated t at
-11-
~
1""'\
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1 0 Leaves
"('l'llll I" C. f. ..,~(;J{~1. e. ~. !O L. co.
--- '-~--'--'-""----,..
. ---,-- ._--,-
Regular Meeting
Aspen Planning & Zoning
March 5
1974
there were two problems which he hoped wau."
dealt with - the SinCIOlir Station and Tom's
Stated that this would not be a replacement
Market.
be
1-1~;rket .
for Tom's
Schottland stated that he had discussed the
with Curt BOlar, and BOlar stated that he was
young man and did not want that size of a m
on his business, and offered to sell Schott
business. Schottland pointed out that he w
estate developer and not a market operator,
was left at that.
matter
not a
rtgage
and his
s a real
and it
Johnson stated that it would still solve a p oblem
downtown in that it would alleviate a lot of traffic
downtown.
,
J
j
I
i
i '.
I
Chairman Gillis stated that there would stil be the
problem of Tom's Market.
Schottland stated that he felt what was need d was a
first class market operator in a good size sore.
Stated that everyone knows the problems at C ty Mar-
ket because of, the small size of the store. Stated
that he had discussed with City Market the s'te and
it doe,s not really help them because they ne d a lar-
ger store. Feel that based on what Simmons ad said,
if the Commission felt that it was something they
shoUld explore; feel they would be intereste in
looking into that because they are having pr blems
getting a market operator into 12,000 square feet.
Stated that because they are required to have stor-
age, it cuts their floor space down to 8900 s uare
feet.
Dunaway questioned if the ordinance was writt n to
provide for storage space.
Bartel pointed out that it could not be wareh u~ing
type storage . "
Johnson stated that you cannot build a buildi g twenty
thousand square feet and say 12,000 square fe t'is
sales area and the rest of it is storage. St ted
that the ordinance is not written that way.
Dunaway pointed out that the ordinance is wri ten to
provide for, supplemental storage.
Johnson questioned how you define warehousing storage.
Bartel stated that he 'felt it was primarily s ace for
the transition of items from the truck to the shop.
Johnson pointed out that City Market transists those
items every day. Felt that if you are saying hat
what you put in your back room and put out tha day
is not warehousing then feels that the Commiss'on
should be able to look at something a little b't
larger. Feels this town needs a larger and be ter
equipped supermarket.
Schottland stated that they would look into th sto-.
rage business, and see about 15,000 or 16,000 'qUiU.,'
-12-
1""'.
,-.,
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
10 Leaves
..""'...,.,\ e_I'."<J~CltE'. a,'.&. & L. ~~.
'----.'-
Regular Meeting
Aspen Planning & Zoning
March ,1974
feet.
~ohnson stated that he thought in a grocery peration
and most supermarkets today do not look stri tly at
grocery sales as their business. Stated thac. most
supermarkets have what is known as general m rchan-
dising departments, which take anywhere from 3 to
4 thousand square feet in the store. Stated that if
you are just looking at a grocery outlet, fe t that
.in the area of 15 to 16 thousand square feet could
adequately serVe and do a good job of just g ocery
sales.
Economist Mojo stated that the definition of ware-
housing space is spOlce for hire..
Bartel stated that there were two things spe
that the Planning Office followed up on and
that he had called Daily and mentioned to Sc
his concerns.
ifically
third
ottland
"
Bartel stated that Schottland had written a
a's part of the handout given to the ,Commissi
the luncheon that day saying that they will
to parking management consistent with an ove all park-
.ing plan for the open parking provided that 't is
applied uniformly downtown. Stated that it overs
all the private spaces.
Bartel further explained that he and Schottl nd had
discussed the housing and there would be 13 nits
with either 19 or 20 bedrooms. Stated that he had
indiCOlted to Wells approximately a month ago that
it really changes the concept tha.t he worked ut
hreaking up the bulk of the project if they tied to
add more housing here, plus having, he felt, ollie
:l;'eally detrimental spillovers to the adjacent resi-
dential neighborhood. Stated that Schottland has:
(1) Submitted in a drawing the ,location of ho sing
:for the next phase, which is near the existin area
zoned for residential develbpment; and (2) ftu mitted
after Checking with' Silverking and Silverking is
Leasingapa.rtments'for certain businesses in own,
and the business then makes those apartments vailable
to employees, so there is that additional opp rtunity
for housing in the project.
Bartel stated that he had called Daily and as].ed that
tbey take another look at the Sinclair Statio pro-
~lem a.nd.indicated'his concern tp Schottland nd
would like them to respond. to that.
Schott land stated that he had discussed the s tuation
with TOm Wicks today. Stated that Wicks' lea e
- comes J.lp for' renewal in June and Wicks said t. at what
he" would like to try to do is he felt the tim ng for
him would be to pour the footings this fall s that
he could be in early next spring. Felt that 'f he
could do it earli.er, would be advantageous to him,
but that at the latest he would l,ike to see i. done
in the fall. Stated that that was the secono, dis-
cussion they had had in reference to this. Sated
that: he had discussed wi.tl1Wells, and Wells f,lt that
what was very importa,1t for them to do is to 0 a
..
-13-
"
,,-..,
,,.-;.,,'
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1 0 Leaves
i"J"'l;.n"' C.F.I!I1.ECl(!:'L!I.,a.&l,CG.
Regular Meeting
Aspen Planning I< Zoning
March 5 1974
Xaster Plan on the site and feel t)"'ElY could have that
done within 90 days, and then could 'see how that fits
:in with what they are doing.
GillisstateCl that the Commission, etc.. ha all a-
:greed that they wanted the Sinclair station in that
area, but also all agreed that they did not want to
see anything else in the remainder of the p operty
until the 1st phase is approved. Felt that it is
premature to discuss the remainder of Lot 3.
Bartel stated that the agreement is for 52, 00 square
feet not including the housing. Feel there is only
'one pQssible location for the Sinclair Station and
that is on Mill Street. stated that he woul want
!:hat ,access to the arterial street and feel hat the
site planning really involves is taking a 10 k at
,how that relates to the adjacent use, and do s not
~eel that must involve all of Lot 3.
SchOttland stated that before they do anythi geIse,
~eel an obligation to Master Plan the rest 0 that.
'Stated that to put in a specific use without that
IlIaster :Plan would be'a mistake. Feels that ow is
the time that they need to do this and have lways
worked very hard with the Engineering Depart ent and
"t::be Planning Department to keep that 100' op.n for
bhestation and would like to study the poss ble air
,rights over Sinclair and how that relates to adjacent
uses" etc...
Chairman Gillis stated that,the developer co
b>erPlanif for himself, but felt that the c
of the Commission was not to look at any thin
the first phase.
Id Mas-
ncensus
beyond
J.enkinsstated that he concurred with Gillis
SchottlandstOlted that he was not asking abo
future phases. "
Schiffer questioned if the nUIllbers questiOn
resolved regarding the housing and the parki
.Bartel stated that the Planning Office' is no recom-
Rending additional housing units as part of his
imilding. Feel that'1.t destroys all of the quality
and good work that Wells has done. Stated that the
pJ,.a;n,ning OffiCe had asked them to show the 10 ation
~or. hous,ing on the " next phase.
been
:Bartel stated that the parking spaces exceed he mini-
mum Code requirement. Stated that on the f?in lair
Station, his concern is j:.hatgoing throught t e first,
phase, weare not relocating use which has be n a
problem use downtown for at least 4 years, an feel
that it is important to get the committment t the
eX,tent that Sch,ot tland is able to make it, th t he
will'make a site available for the Sinclair S ation.
If the Sinclair Station rejects it, then ,nust state
the reasons for it. Does not want to see ano her
building season go by with no corrunittment tha' that
is one pftl1e uses which will be relocated as part
of this project.
-14-
/'
~'''>O!'i~tK~.aa!lL'''.
I<e<fular .,Meeting
I'
ii
^
1"'"\'
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
10 Leaves
~----,,-
---.--.
As en Plannin &, Zoning
March 5, 1974
Schottland stated that he i"ants the Sinclair StOition
in the project and would make a committment hat they
would use their best efforts to get the stat'on down
there as Soon as possible, hopefulLy within 0 days
can have concrete answer. .
Jenkins stOlted that he felt the housing was
Simmons stated that basically, it is a matte
orities, whether greater shopping facilities
residents as contrasted to creating more emp
housing. Stated that he did not, feel there
anyone who could Olfford to put in total empl
ing - not in Aspen with these land prices.
nadequate
of pri-
for the
oyee
ould be
yee hous-
Senkins stated that ~n effect, are telling p
go down the valley to find housing.
Simmons stated that he felt it would have to e dealt
with as a regional concept of Aspen versus do n the
valley.
Wells stated that this has been a very consci us to
be part of the overall plan. Felt the Commis ion
should look at housing areas shown on the Mas er Plan.
.
Schiffer stated that he agreed with Jenkins t
but would not say that we should eliminate so
that thiscol1ununity needs just becaUse we are
to create another problem in another area.
a point,
ething'
going
Schiffer pointed out that the Commission gave concept-
ual approval conditioned. on working out the h using
and parking problems and those have been work1d out.
Bartel stated that the specific proposal was~o'ShOW
the location for the housing for the next pha e and
the letter of intent to agree 'to the parking. anage-
ment. ;
Johnson questioned if the management parking
elude that which is in the building.
Bartel stated that it would not.
Del Duca stated that he felt the Commission was making
a mistake by not looking at the whole plan. Felt that
it would be possible for businesses to lease h using.
Schiffer stated that he felt that, would be il. p
for businesses owning spaces in the 'project. D
think you can ask a developer ,to guaranteeemp
housing when he does not know what employees a
to be there and what kind of uses are going to
oblem
not
oyee
e going
be made.
Bartel pointed out. that this is the final phas of
Ordinance #19. out .not the final phase of subd vi.sion.
SChiffer questioned if they now have a fini'll s te
plan.
Bartel stated that there is a sepa.rate site pI
file with the Building Illspector and this is a
resentation of it. Stated that everything is
n on
rep-
vail-
-15-
./
,~
. ' ,
1"""\
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
10 Leaves
_. .L'''~~~' ,::.f:'>t";':l(H.:.!I. Ii L CJ,
Regular Meeting
Aspen P:!.anning& Zoning
March 5 1974
able that is required under Qrdinance #19.
Schiffer questioned what had been decided a.out the
proposed market.
Schott 1 and stated that he would research what is in-
volved as far as how much sPCice the law allo's.
Johnson quoted from the zoning ordin;'ince (Co
Core): "All permitted and conditional commer
retail business u,ses shall, be restricted to'
mum gross fleor area of 12,000 square feet,
any basement area used eXclusively for stora
poses or underground parking, etc..." Felt
.12,000 square feet is thegros.s allowable.
the only thing that might except that. is pub
sportationfacilities, City or Ceunty ~uildi
houses, and all uses of theAR-l accommodati
reation district permitted under paragraph 2
shall not have a square footage limitation,
might mean that they could build a warehouse
out that a grocery store could not operate 0
levels.
Schiffer stated that he would like to recomm
variance to provide for more square footage
'ma.rket. Feels it is essential to have an ef
type ef market in that area.
ercial
ial and
maxi-
xcluding
e pur-
hat
elt that
ic tran-
gs, ware-
ns- rec-
-7 (c),
hich
Pointed
two
Landry stated that she was abstaining from ,di-cussicn
and voting on this project.
l
I
,
I
Schiffer stated that since the Planning
recommended no more employee housing in
would go along with that.
Offic
this
had
hase,
~'
i
,
t
Schott land stated that what is happening, is hat they
vdll provide the housing, just not at this po nt.
~
f:
,
i..
~
I'
I
I
Vagneur made a motien to approve the prelimin
final under. Ordinance #19 presentation for 'th
Center with the recommendation that the Cemmi
would encourage a variance for a reasonable i
.in the grocery store space Should that be nee
make it more feasible and that the developer
best possible efforts to work with Sinclair.
seconded by Johnson.
"
ry and
Aspen
sion
crease
'Jenkins stated that his vote would be conditi
on whether or not Sinclair should be down the
until the Commission faces the problems which
create when they permit this to happen, canno vote
on another project like this, Feels that it generates
toe much of a prOblem for the City.
STEVENS ANNEXATION
All in faver with the exception of Jenkins who voted
nay and L~ndry who abstained. Motion carried.
Bob Stevens was present and submitted map of t e pro-
posed annexation.
Main Motion
Stevens sta tad that t~hey were trying to annex
of Aspen, the Little Cloud Lode Mining Claim,
Lode Mining Claim, etc...
.he Pria,
,ibJ.iw}
-16-
/
RONALD C MCLAUGHLI N
KENNETH R WRIGHT
HALFORD E ERICKSON
DOUGLAS T SOVERN
JOHN T, McLANE
,.-J$E.'\INETH ASH, MANA,C;ER
/"''\ ",'OPf,"" OFFICL
P,O: I)OX 2810
1\.,,1-"[,< coc.O 8\Gll
WRIGHT.McLAUGHLlN ENGINEERS
ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS
!3,\\2~ ^l,CPTTs;;"f.~'::~T,:,/:
OENVER, eOLORAClO 80211
,303', 45'8_6201
COIolPLe:TEENGINe;EIUNG is R,VICE'S
IN THE SPECIAL'T'Y F1EL.DS ..
WATER SUPPLY
WATE;RAND
February 14, 1974
INOUSTRIAL WASTES
S'I"ORM DRAINAGE
FJ..OOD CONTROL ANO
O,...,ER W...'J'ER.O,RUi:H ltP
Mr. Dave Ellis
City Engineer
P.O. 80x 5
Aspen, Colorado 81611
.
RE: The Aspen Center Preliminary
Drainage Plan.
Gentlemen:
This letter report evaluates the drainage aspects of the proposed ASpe
Center development according to our proposal of January 3, 1974,. Snowmelt,
rainfall and ground water drainage aspects are reviewed along with the pol-
lutional impact of the proposed development. The key factor of this pro-
posed plan is the compliance with the goals, objectives and needs of the As
Urban Runoff Management Plan of August 1973.
LOCATION
The proposed Aspen Center site is west of Mill Street and the parking
area and complex of the City, and east of the Roarking Fork River and the
Aspen Sewer Plant, The location of this site is quite important because it
is immediately southeast of the proposed Aspen Storm Runoff Storage Pond, an
In fact, this site partially holds the key to the workability of the Urban
Runoff Management Plan.
t"'"
SITE DESCRIPTION
The main portion of the site is located on a glacial-fluvial terrace wh
is approximately 20 feet vertically above the Roaring Fork River and about 3
to 500 feet south of the River. The eight-acre site also has areas of fin
is traversed by an old railroad bed. A commercial condominium and an assoc.i
parking area is presently planned for the southerly third of the site. The est
of the site is being left open for future development. We understand that t .!lo
proposed USeS of the site will include business offices, retail shops and ge
commercial uses. We understand that the remainder wi n be developed slmil,\r y
"
The Aspen Center Preliminary Drainage Plan
2.
I"'" except for the northeast corner near Mill Street which will be used for a ro~
posed filling station. The site is above the flood plain of the Roaring F rk
River.
ASPEN URBAN RUNOFF MANAGEMENT PLAN
This site is one of the focal points of the proposed Urban Runoff Manage~
ment Plan because it is located in the general area where the Urban Runoff
collection and transmission swales must join together and travel to the storm
runoff pond to the northwest of the property. The function of the storm ru ~
off pond is to collect and regulate urban runoff from the main portion of t e
Town to the Aspen Metro Sewage District system for treatment. The topograp y
and location of the site lends itself as the best location for transmission
swales as compared to other alignments.
The first swale comes from the east and the Original Street storm sewe
system, carrying approximately a 48 cfs (cubic feet per second) flow. The
second swale flow, 17 cfs, comes from the south from the Mill Street storm
sewer system which carries runoff from downtown Aspen. These two swales
0 would join near the proposed entrance of the Aspen Center and would travel
along the entranceway road almost to the location where the road leaves the
f"
property on the western property. There, a swale from the southwest,
carrying 16 cfs from the Center Street.' (Garmisch) storm sllW""
system would join. These flows then travel to the north along the western
side of the ra i I road embankment unt i 1 they can enter the Aspen Storm Runoff
Storage Pond. These alignments are slightly different than as depicted in
Urban Runoff Management Plan drawings because it has become apparent throug
the detailed topographic mapping provided on the Thomas Wells and Associate
drawings that the newly proposed al ignments are more suitable to the overall
designs of the Urban Runoff Management Plan. Drawing No. I in the back of
letter report illustrates the proposed rlght-of~way that we think would
necessary to provide suitable room for swales to comply with the n,eeds of,.t
Urban Runoff Mana;Jement Plan. The final location of these, rights-of-way and
channel shapes have to be worked out In conjunction with the flMI design
"f the swales and the usage of the site as indicated by the site .planneralld
City Planning Office.
The Aspen Center Preliminary Drainage Plan
3.
~ The projected monthly and mean annual storm pollution loads from the ite
are listed in Table I below and as compared with the estimated loads from he
entire town, one can see about an average 3.8 percent Increase due to this
site, assuming 8 acres are developed ultimately. However, we antIcipate t at
with good site malntanence and pavement cleaning practices that this site ou
cut down on these projected loads by as much as 50 percent. It is importa t
that the concrete lined swales through the parking area not be used as a dls~
posal point for sweepings, debris, trash or. general disposal. The parking
structure and adjoining parking areas should be frequently cleaned with ac
cumulations disposed of in the local solids disposal area.
TABLE 1
ASPEN CENTER
PROJECTED MONTHLY POLLUTION LOADS
(POUNDS)
TOTAL
BOD COD SOLIDS
Janua ry 7 61 1,250
~. February 7 58 1,190
March 17 145 2,960
Apri I 14 lIS 2,340
May 12 100 2,030
June 8 70 1,420
July 11 89 1,820
Augus t 11 93 1,900
September 11 91 1,860
October 11 95 1,950
November 10 81 1,650
December 9 73 1,480
TOTAL 126 1,071 21,850
MEAN ANNUAL STORM 3 26 520
LOCAL DRAI.NAGE ASPECTS
We have calculated various historic and future projects of runoff hydr -
("'""< graphs to evaluate the needs and sizes of drainage swales and detention
~
f'.
("'""<
"
-~ --
The Aspen Center Preliminary Drainage Plan
4.
facilities. Table 2 below tabulates the various tributary areas and peak
flows through the site to give a general understanding of the range of flo s
that are of concern.
TABLE 2.
Tributary Areas and Discharges
Area
Tributaries
(acres)
Historic Peak
Di scharge
100-yr. freq.
(cfs)
Ul t imate Devel ped
Discharge Wi thut
Detent i on Faclljt i es
I OO-yr. fre (cfs)
Locat Ion
South edge of proposed
construction
immediately north of presently
proposed developmetn
Immediately north of
ultimately proposed
development
1.36
2.19
2.19
3.29
3.57
6.36
6.85
6.33
13.66
Roof Top Ponding
Much of the roof area in the presently proposed development is flat.
We propose to uSe roof top ponding to generally regulate flows from roofs
to an equivalent !-inch per hour rain fall rate. Ponding on the approxima ely
23,500 square feet roof surface area will significantly reduce additional
detention and channel size requirements. The device which will cause the
ponding during a !DO-year type event wi 11 not create problems of icing during
the winter because there remains substantial openings for the typical steady
roof snowmelt. The noticeable ponding will occur rarely as the majority of
the rainfall events will be passed easily by the ponding devices. Only during
really heavy rainfall events will ponding occur and then only for a period
of a few hours. The normal building code requirements for snowmelt loads a d
water proofing will provide adequate protection for ponding. Drawing No.
illustrates the area on which we anticipate pondlng will occur.
Loca I Dra I nage Swa 1 es
The present concept of drainage swales on the site is as follows:
l. Interception of runoff tri butarl es to the site at the southern edge of
the building and transmission through the building in a small concrete
trapezoidal channel as shown. In Detai I A on Drawing No. I. The genera
.~.
f'
,....,
,
The Aspen Center Prel imlnary Drainage PI,Ul
5.
2.
3.
alignment of the channel was laid out. to avoid the bui ldlng column.s
and provide a simple alignment. It is anticipated that the channel
would be covered with a continuous length of grating that would be
capable of handling traffic loads.
A grass 1 ined swale with a cobble I ined low flow channel would carry he
runoff from and through the bui.lding area to the north. The final sh ping.
and alignment of this channel need not be an engineered "straight sho"
trapezoidal section channel. The swale may meander and have variable
cross sectional shapes, however, it muSt have the channel cro.ss secti n
area/depth/width relationship as shown ie> Detai 1 B of Drawing No.1.
After crossing under the main road way in an IS-inch culvert, the swale
will continue to the north in the right of way designated for the Urban
,
Runoff Management Plan transmission swales. It is anticipated that these
swales from hereon to the north would be of a .temporary nature, though
stablely constructed, which would be enlarged at a later time when the
City transmission swales are constructed.
Detention Ponds
A local detention pond is proposed to be located near the road where
exits from the site on the west. This pond would have approximately 6200 c
of storage capacity which would provide adequate detention volume for both he
presently proposed development and the remainder of the area that will be
ultimately developed. We are assuming here that the ultimate development w 11
be developed in a similar fashion and have the same proportion of roof are
that has detention ponding. If this relationship is not followed, we would
anticipate that more detention facilities would be necessary. A weir, as sown
on Detail C of Drawing No. I, has been devised which will store local deten ion
yet allow passage of flow from the city transmission swales.
We recommend that From here on that a similar temporary swale be con-
structed along the western boundary, but that the swale not completely tray
to the Roaring Fork, but discharge on to the present grassy area of the pr -
posed storm runoff storage pond.
~.
~.
("'""<
The Aspen Center Preliminary Drainage Plan
6.
Proposed Filling Station
The proposed filling station is located On the northeast corner of th
site near Mill Street and has a relatively insignificant effect on surface
runoff flow and as such, no substantial detention facilities are required.
However, we would recommend that the filling station drain to a grass or
gravel strip on the northerly border which would essentially behave as a
fi Itering/treatment area so that the substantial pollution which can come
off from a filling station will be reduced somewhat. We would anticipate
that the flow would join the existing swale along the west side of Mill St eet
which travels to the north. We would anticipate that this swale would eve
travel to the north and then to the west to the present County snow dumpin
area north of the Aspen Sewage Plant. This swale would be constructed in
junction with the City transmission swales and is not required solely for
this site.
GROUND \4ATER
The Chen and Associates report of October 5, 1973
most part, ground water is to be anticipated at depths of 10 to 14 feet bel w
the existing ground level and as such, should not present serious difficult
We do, however, anticipate that problems could occur In the construction on
the steep bank on the south west corner of the property building site.
fore, we recommend that plans be made to install a perimeter drain system i
these areas to daylight in the proposed surface runoff drainage swales. Fu ther
drainage systems could become necessary and apparent upon construction, par icu-
larly during spring when water tables are higher, but we do not anticipate his
to be the case.
MILL STREET MODIFICATIONS
The proposed Mill Street regrading should have no serious impact upon
the site or upon the Urban Runoff Management Plan scheme as long as the roa
way is properly curbed so that additional tributary drainage does not enter
the site. ProvisiOns should be made, however, so that the mean annual flow
can enter the City collection and transmission swales. As indicated in the
Urban Runoff Management Plan, the Mill Street storm sewer will have to daylight
and this rise of the street grade would probably aid the engineering aspect
of the design of that storm sewer. We would suggest that before the time 0
The Aspen Center PrelIminary Drainage Plan
7.
1"""
any regrading, that the city construct any modifications to the Mill Stre t
Storm Sewer as required by the Utban Runoff Management Plan so that theS reet
need not be rebuilt twice.
f"
The proposed conceptual drainage scheme discussed in this report and
shown in Drawing No.1 provides the following basic items:
I. The plan compl jes with and enhances the Aspen Urban Runoff Management
Plan by providing right-of-way necessary for the City transmission
swales, by providing detention and flow control facilities and
maintenance practices to control pollut'ion from the commercial site.
2. The plan provides a sufficient meanS of passing upstream tributary n
through the site without increasing upstream problems.
3. The various detention facilities meet all present and future proposed
state requirements.
The proposed plan is prel iminary and is intended ,to be reworkec;l among
the various concernS until a final solution is reached. The attached dra,Wil19
is not a final plan and cannot be used as a design drawing for constructio
purposes. If you have any questions or need further information to explai
this preliminary plan, please feel free to call.
CONCLUS IONS
Very truly yours,
WRIGHT-McLAUGHLIN ENGINEERS
By
I.
William C. Taggart
Kenneth R. Wright
By
\>ICT: KRW: ekb
("'""<
t""'\
,-,
'"
.
"
j;:'Jt
,,~:;~):~~~~'f;~S~f;!',\. . .
C ITY,)r%',"OFA''S PEN
, ' , ,~, , .
aspen.ct?lorado. aIG!" box v
,:; ., ,';:if
I.o~');"'-j",i.,.....,< ,j;"{~
''''''''a':''
February 12, 1974
Richard Schottland
Schottland and company
PO Box 4795
Aspen, Colo. 81611
Dear Dit:k,
As Ed Del Duca informed you on Friday, Feb.8, Herb,
Sandy and Mick will be unable to attend the meeting.
With these people absent, I do not see how we can
come to any further decisions beyond what we arrived
at last week. We are continuing to work with Tri.Co.
on those matters.
Sincerely,
~~.~
Dave Ellis
City Engineer
.J
I
cc: Donna Baer ~
DE/dc
r----
I
I
I
I
I
"'
'"
o
'"
'"
....
".
M
S;
~';::;
"'0
'70
"''''
~ .~
MO
o~
Mtij,
-U
- .
- .
W:(jj
- '"
'" C
0'"
" .
o 0
,...J
o .
O~
UN
...
e .
. .
0. ,
. C
'" .
>
l!').q:
",e
.... 0
"."
X~
0-
",,,,
'0
0....
.0
"--
I"">-
,'-'"
--
February 7, 1974
Dave Ellis
City Engineer
Post Office Box "V"
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Aspen Center
Dear Dave,
On Wednesday, February 6, 1974 a lengthy four hour work session
was held. The participants included:
Dave Ellis .
Clayton Mayerling
Bill Kalley
Thomas Wells
James Reser
Richard Schottland
Jack Perlmutter
Ed Del Duca
In excess of 50 items were discussed relating to utility location
and easements, fire protection, Lakeview addition access road,
trails, railroad R.O. W., drainage, open space, etc. Substantial
progress has been made on these items.
We desire to have our Preliminary and Final Ordinance 19 review
and Subdivision Review before P & Z on Tuesday, February 19, 1974.
Due to the size and impact of Aspen Center and due to the many
complexities including legal and political, we have decided to hold
a meeting at City Hall at 9:00 a.m., Thursday, February 14, 1974.
In order to reach mutually agreeable decisions on these items, we
respectfully request the following persons to attend this meeting:
MAN AG E RS OF INV ESTM ENT PR OPE R TIES
[^''''',."
~i:'j';,:':!,....-_
,t>....
l
-,<--~.,,','<.<c'
I"""'>
~
'"J
.
Page 2 of letter to Mr. Dave Ellis of 2/7/74
Dave Ellis
Herb Bartel
Phillip Mahoney
Sandy Stuller
Thomas Wells
Jack Perlmutter
Richard Schottland
James Reser
Art Daily
By assembling this august body, we should be able to accomodate
the city's desires and also our own.
If this time is convenient for you, please let me kr,ow.
Sincerely,
cJJ~~
Richard Schottland
RS:s
."~"'.":.:J
.~;.3
. .~,~" , ., '..
i
,
,
.
.
,
'i
,.
"
~,
-~
ii
".
!.
.c
~~
..
, I
.
!l
..
"
.
",
-
'"'
Ph..!cV
""
t I"
",i.o-l1... -n. <.-,"tt;:"".J.
r- .>l....t<--G" -~ {j.,b~'!
,\&..
OJ;; to
February 7, 1974
Herb Bartel
City - County Pl.nner
Post Office Box "V"
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re, Aspen Ce.nter
Dear Herb,
On Wednesday, February 6, 1974, a lengthy four hour work seasion
was held. The participants included,
Dave Ellis
Clayton Mayerling
Bill KaUey
Thomu Welh
James Reser
Richard Schottland
Jack Perlmutter
Ed 0..1 Duea
In exc..as of 50 items were discussed relating to utility location
and easemenh, fire protection, Lakeview addition acees. road,
trails, railroad R,O. W.. drainage. open apace, etc. Substantia.!
progress Ias been made On these item..
We desire to have our PreliJninary and Final Ordinance 19 review
and Subdivision Review belore P '" Z on Tuesday, February 19, 1974.
Due to the size and impact of Aspen Center and due to the many
complexitie8 including legal and political, We have decided to hold
a meeting at City Hall at 9,QQ a.m., Thur8day, February 14, 1974.
In order to reach mutual}y agreeable decillions On these items, we
re8pectfully request the following per80n~ to attend this meeting'
.C
.. A III AGE "' 0 ~ 'III Y faT.. E lilT PIl OPE II TIE.
.'"
'"
Page Z of letter to Mr. Herb Bartel of 2/7{74
Dave Ellis
Herb Bartel
Phillip Mahoney
Sandy Stuller
Thomas Wells
Jack Perlmutter
James Reser
Art Daily
By auembling this august body, We should be able to accomodate
the city'. desires andaho Our own.
If this time is convenient for you, pleas" let me know.
Sincerely,
cA.di.
Richard Schottland
RS:&
SCHIFFER:
JOHNSON:
GILLIS:
SHCHIFFER:
GILLIS:
SCHIFFER:
GILLIS:
JOHNSON:
SCHIFFER:
JOHNSON:
GILLIS:
/"""I
.t"",
ASPEN CENTER
Conceptual Presentation
under
Ordinance #19
February 5, 1974
I want to give conceptual approval.
Second.
DISCUSSION
Would you like to amend your motion concerning par -
ing management and housing, that it be considered
separately?
Yeah, I would, but I'd like to tie it down a littl
more.
We can't do that right now.
Yeah, I know. Well, okay. Let's condition it on
those two things.
Motion for the amendment?
Second.
I withdraw the motion.
I move that we give the project conceptual approva
conditioned on working out the housing problem be-
tween the Planning Office and the developer, and
working out the parking management problem.
Second.
All in favor?
ALL IN FAVOR, MOTION CARRIED.
-
aspen
cenTer
RICHARDSCHOTTLAND
-
ASPEN CENTER
ASPEN CENTER APARTMENTS
ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY
Prepared by Peter A. Cunningham
January 31, 1974
P.O. BOX 479$
.
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
.
(303) 925.1939
Property taxes
ASPEN CENTER
ASPEN CENTER APARTMENTS
ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY
Synopsis
$ 62,127
Sales taxes generated by Aspen Center
($6 million gross)
Total annual taxes
$420,000
j482,127
Plus labor during construction
.$920,000
ASPEN CENTER
ASPEN CENTER APARTMENTS
ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY
Aspen Ce::lter
1975 Aspen Center estimated value
C"rrent mill levy: 62.65 mills
300/0 appraised va1uei
Property tax
Aspen Center Anartments
I
.1975 Aspen Center Apartments
estimated value: .,
Current mill levy: 62.65 mills
300/0 appraised va1uei
Property tax
Total Property Taxes
Tota11974 Pitkin County estimated
property taxes:
Aspen Center and Aspen Center Apartments
percentage generated of total property
. . I
taxes: . .
$3,168,000
950,400
$ 137~ 500
41,250
$3,723,312
1.70/0
$59, 543
$ 2,584
$62,127
Econpmic Impact Study
Page'two
Pitkin CoUnty andCitv of Aspen School Systems (1)
1974 projected annual cost to educate one child:
$ 1, 5lZ
. Total projected property taxes generated by Aspen
Center and Aspen Center Apartments for the year
1975:
$6Z,lZ'(
I
,
Total 'amount of property taxes contributed to the
Pitkin County and City of Aspen School Systems:
. (Aspen. No.1 RE) (2)
$Z8,723
Colorado Mountain Junior College
Total amount of property taxes contributed to the.
Colorado Mountain Junior College:
$ 5,048
Total property taxes contributed to education
by Asp,en Center and Aspen Center Apartments:.
$33,771
Since Aspen Center and Aspen Center Apartments
will house no children, these projects will supply a
surplus of funds for the school systems in the amount
of $33,771.
Aspen Center and Aspen Center Apartments will
educate 19 students in the Pitkin County and
City of Aspen School Systems. This is 1.60/0 of
the total amount of students. (3)
This wiU in effect raise the quality of education in the.
county and city school systems by 1. 60/0 (4) or lower
the current cost of educating each child by $24. 00 (5).
(3)
(4)
(5)
(1) See letter dated December 27, 1973, from Mr. Richard
W. Lee, Superintendent of Schools.
1973 Aspen No.1 RE School District milllevys:
(As related to Aspen Center and Aspen Center Apartments
valuation of $991,650 or 300/0 of $3, 305, 500)
General Fund 21.2877 Mills
Bond Redemption 5.6770 Mills
Capital Reserve Fund 2.0000 Mills
28.9700 Mills
1221 students divided by 19 students x 100.
Total school budget: $186,490. $28,723 divided by $186,490 = 1. 60/0
$28,723 divided by $1,221 (Amount to educate one child) = $Z4.00.
(2)
$21,110
5,630
1,983
-$28,723
ASPEI'I SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1
Box 300
Aspen, Colorodo 81611
27 December, 1973
tel. 301925.2972
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
Richord W. Lee
superintendent of schools
Mr. Peter Cunningham
Shotland & Company
Box 4795.
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear Mr. Cunningham:
In reply to your request for information for possible incorporation
in the tax impact study with which YOl! are involved, basically the
total amount of the 1974 General Fund Budget for the Aspen School
District No. I eRE) is $1,846,490, including a $50,000 contingency
reserve. The budgeted amount includes the following categories:
Administration, Instruction, Attendance, Health Services, Trans-
portation, Operation of Plant, Maintenance of Plant, Fixed Charges,
Food Services, Student Body Activities, Community Services,
Capital Outlay, and Contingency Reserve.
Based on an average daily enrollment of 1221.3. students, the per
pupil expenditure for edu9ation is, in round figures, $1512.
Sincerely yours,
Richard. W. Lee
Superintendent of Schooll'
lb.
Economic Impact Study
Page three
(1)
CITY OF ASPEN POLICE DEPARTMENT
According to City of Aspen Police Chief R. A. Ritchey
Aspen Center and Aspen Center Apartments would
cause no additional increase in the city budget for
protective services.
(1) See letter dated December 13, 1973 from City of Aspen
Police Chief R. A. Ritchey
.' -~. -, ",.".,,"- -,,"_.>' ..~. ,
....,.-;{'~...
V!"'~~~:;'G
.l:,,?il/,lrl'h
~..\\~tl;.I??tf}. ;~
C Ir--rro.l. '\i'(("\)F\T':":I i1{'JC" PEN
; J..~yi~hjfrl.<tf?
aspen .CQlfll.rCll,~O,~1'9}1 hox v
~.'.....".'..<.....J'\.....'''''..<~~..,
. .....~--... ''>.Aj..''''''''''''--'" ...
'~'~'.i.;~jf".,.,'::2;~ ';;,~'r- '~.
,~~'"
December 13, 1973
Peter A. Cunningham
Project Coordinator
Shotland and Company
Post Office Box 4795
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear Mr. Cunningham
Pursuant our conversation 11 December 1973 reference any additional
costs for protective services for your company's proposed Aspen Center
at the present time I can see no extra costs to. the City of Aspen for
protective services because of your proposed construction. Our present
patrol force and investigative facilitie.s would handle the police pro-
tection equally with other businesses and residences within the. City
of Aspen. Unless the City Council would. authorize additional personnel I
for your particular project, the police budget would remain the same. \
. \
If you .think the need for special police protection in the Aspen Center\
project is great, there are several private organizations that do supply
watchmen or security guards. If we may be of further service, please \
feel free to contact' us . I
I
\
I
]
I
]
I
I
]
. Sincerely
l/7?tI:~UV'
/);.-7,. Ritchey
... Chief of Police '..... . ...'....
RAR:ksh
Economic Impact Study
Page four
(1)
City of Aspen Volunteer Fire Department
According to Aspen Fire Chief Willard Clapper, the Aspen
Fire Department is completely self-sufficient.
Mr. Clapper also indicates that neither Aspen Center nor
Aspen Center Apartments will cause any extra burden on
the fire department.
(I) See letter dated January 2, 1974 from Willard C. Clapper,
Fire Chief, Aspen Volunteer Fire Department.
'J
-',
Box 455
Aspen, Colo. 81611
January 2, 1974
Schott land & Company
Box 4795
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Attention: Pete Cunningham
Dear Mr. Cunningham:
I am writing this letter as you requested in our telephone conversation of
December 19 in regard to the additional burden on the fire district on your
proposed new area.
Our fire department is a fire district set up in 1953 and was re-districted
in 1967. It is a total voluntary group with no reimbursement of any type
for its menbers. It is operated on a tax levy and operated in 1973 at
eighty-four one hundreths of one mill. I feel this will go up in 1974 but,
as of this time, I am unaware of the total mill levy we will be looking at.
We carry thirty volunteers and four mobile units of which tfuree are .four
wheel drives. The other unit is used mostly in the downtown area, as it is I
not only a self-contained pumper, but also a fifty-five foot snorkel basket-\
truck for evacuation and high work in the downtown area. \
I
I
\
I
I see no problem on this project to further burden the fire department at
this time..
)1liZ;;;dJ~c-
Willard C. Clapper
. Fire. Chief
Aspen volunteer Fire Dept.
WCC/ec
,
I
I
I
\
1
Economic Impact Study
Page five
Sanitation Departments
According to information provided by Mr. Clint Sampson
Executive Secretary of both Aspen Sanitation and Metropolitan
Sanitation, Aspen Center and Aspen Center ApartInents
will create no additional burden to the tax payers as both
depaTtInents are self~sufficient. (1)
(1) See letter dated December 31, 1973 from Mr. Clint Sampson,
Executive Secretary, Aspen Metropolitan Sanitation District.
I~SPEi, 141E":'i~9POl,l~:r./~1\~" Sf\.NI"rA'I~ION
\
DISTRIC11
\
December 31,1973
Schott land and Co.
P.O. Box 4795
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Att: Peter Cunningham
Dear Sir:
Per our telephone conversation, this is to inform
you that the area we discussed is within the boundaries
of the Aspen Metropolitan Sanitation, and is presently
paying the mill levy that is assessed by the District.
The District sources of income to pay Operational Costs
and Bond Retiremr~t are Top Fees, Initial Fees, and
Advalorem Taxes. I .
I hope t.his is the information you are seeking.
Si~c:~e.~l~Y "}
~tJArv~
Clint Sampson
Executive Secretary
Box 2810 . Aspen, Colorado 816U' . 303/925-2537
, Economic Impact Study
Page six
The following six pages (Pages 7 .. 12) describe various situations
with regards to sales taxes generated by Aspen Center.
The estimated sales volumes included in this study are .as follows:
A - $4,000,000 gross sales
B - $5,000,000 gross sales ,",
C - $6,000,000 gross sales
We are anticipatiJ:lg the gross sales volumeJo be in the ranges
described above. We feel it is useful to show the effects of the
complete range of effects of these gross sales volumes.
Economic Impact Study
Page seven
1. 250/0 increase created from taking business
from the following:
a) Airport Business Center
b) City of Basalt
c) City of Carbondale
d) G1enwood Springs
e) Denver
f) Other
\
~4,000,00(O
I
I
\
\
$1, 000, OOlil
\
\
I
Dollars Generated by Sales Tax - Aspen Center
1975 Estimated Sales Volume:
New Dollar Volume Created by Aspen Center (1)
(500/0 of total gross of $2,000,000)
2. 250/0 of total gross sales from new
businesses created:
Total New Business Created:
$1,000,000\
I
$2,000,000 I
I
I
I
Tax Distribution of $4, 000, 000 Gross Sales Volume
State Sales Tax 30/0
County Sales Tax 20/0
City Sales Tax 20/0
Actual
$120,000
$ 80,000
$ 80,000
New Taxes Crea ed 2
$ 60,000
$ 40,000
$ 40,000
1974 estimated gross City of Aspen sales tax
tobe collected: $1,001,884
500/0 or $500,942 to Transportation
500/0 o.r $500,942 to. regular city budget
Aspen Center will provide 80/0 of the total, or:
$
80, 000
1974 estimates Pitkin County sales tax .
to be collected: $1,000,000
Aspen Center will provide 80/0 of the total which
is .$80, 000, 530/0 of which goes to the City of Aspen:
.$ 42,400
Total taxes to be distributed to the City of Aspen
from Aspen Center:
$ 122,400
(1) Marginal inctease.
(2) Portion of a.ctual sales taxes which 'are new taxes crea.ted
by mcre.aseof business.
Economic Impact Study
Page eight
Multiplying Effect (1)
Assuming gross sales of $4,000,000 and <J,ssuming a
marginal increase of 50"70, then Aspen Center and Aspen
Center Apartments will provide over $2,000,000 in new
business.
35% or $700,000 will be generated by stores and markets
having a multiple in this area of .1 (1). This means an actual
amoUnt of $70,000 that will remain in Aspen.
15% or $300,000 will be generated by stores and markets
having a multiple of .2 (1). This means an actual amount
of $60, 000 that will remain in Aspen.
50% or $1,000,000 will be generated by physicians, dentists,
lawyers and other businessmen having a multiple of .4 (1).
This is an actual amount of $400,000 that will remain in Aspen.
From $2,000,000 of new business created by Aspen Center,
$530,000 will remain in the community.
(1) See letter dates January 16, 1974 from Mr. Phil Mahoney,
Aspen City Manage r.
~Si~\~p
Sl',"i,,)Q
rl...\"';IN~
,. .!t~".I"j~~~.,^
CITX~,OF:A2~PEN
aspen .c~J,()rado. ~.~(;iU box V
"l(t">"'~"'l:;: /,/,r-, ""~:;;;;J~<:i~ .
""'.. '.", .. l.U.(........... ,.,..,,~'" .
~~;;:;;;~41'
January 16, 1974
Peter Cunningham
Schottland and Company
Aspen, Colorado
Dear Pete:
On reflecting somewhat on the multiplier question I woul
like to take a shot at it from the hip and estimate.that the
multiplier for:
Grocery-hardware-liquor-other low markup retail stores
would be. O. 1
High markup retail - 0.2
Professional - 0.4. I
I'm sure that the composite multiplier would be legitima~e
to use, however, I suggest that you look at the multiplier as I
rel.ates t.o t. hemagnitU.de Of. sa.l. .es of each outlet. I would es.t(mate
that you would get the great~st~alue from low markup outlets. .
.. .. Sincerely yours, .
\
\
I
I
~~ <), \M.c... "'-=--
Philip S. Mahoney, Ph. D.
City Manager
---
PSM:mw
Economic I1npact Study
Page nine
Dollars Generated bv Sales Tax - Aspen Center
1975 Estimated Sales Volume:
New Dollar Volume Created by Aspen Center (1)
(500/0 of total gross or $2,500,000)
1. 25% increase created from taking business
from the following:
a) Airport Business Center
b) City of Basalt
c) City of Carbondale
d) Glenwood Springs
e) Denver
f) Other
2. 25% of total gross sales from new
business created:
Total New Business Created:
Tax Distribution of $5, 000, 000 Gross Sales Volume
State Sales Tax 3%
County Sales Tax 2%
City Sales Tax 2%
Actual
$150,000
$100, 000
$100,000
1974 estimated gross City of Aspen sales tax
to be collected: $1, 001, 884
50% or $500,942 to Transportation
50% or $500,942. to regular city budget
Aspen Center will provide 10% of the total, .or:
1974 estimated gross Pitkin County sales tax
to be collected: $1,000, 000
Aspen Center will provide 10% of the total which.
is $100,000, 53% .of which goes to the City of ASPEln:
.. .. .
Total taxes to be distributed to the City of Aspen
from Aspen Center:
(1) Marginal increase.
(2) Portion of actual sales taXes which are new
taxes created by increase qfbusiness.
i
I
$5,000,0001
I
$1,250,000
$1,250,000
$2,500,000
I
New Taxes crea~ (2)
$ 75,000
$ 50,000
$ 50,000
$ 100, 000
$ 53,000
_$ 153,000
Economic Impact Si:udy
Page ten
Multiplying Effect (1)
Assuming gross sales of $5, 000, 000 and asswning a
marginal increase of 50%, then Aspen Center and Aspen
Center Apartments will provide over $2,500,000 in
new business.
35% or $87S, 000 will be generated by stores and markets
having a multiple in this area of .1 (1). This means an
actual amount of $87, SOD that will remain in Aspen.
lS% or $37S, 000 will be generated by stores and markets
having a multiple of .2 (1). This means an actual amount of
$7S, 000 that will remain in Aspen.
SO% or $1,000,000 will be generated by physicians, dentists,
lawyers and other businessmen having a multiple of .4 (1).
This is an actual amount of $400, 000 that will remain in
Aspen.
From $2,000,000 of neW business created by Aspen Center,
$700,000 will remain in the commttnity.
(1). See letter dated January 16, 1974 from Mr. Phil Mahoney,
Aspen City Manager.
Economic L.-npact Study
Page eleven
Dollars Generated bv Sales Tax - Aspen Center
1975 Estimated Sales Volume:
New Dollar Volume.Created by Aspen Center (1)
(50% of tQtai gross or $3,000,000)
1. 250/0 increase created from taking business
from the following:
a) Airport Business Center
b) City of Basalt
c) City of Carbondale
el) Glenwood Springs
e) Denver
f) Other
2. 25% of total gross sales from new
businesses created:
Total New Business Created:
TaX Distribution of $6, 000, 000 Gross Sales Volume
State Sales Tax
County Sale s Tax
City Sales Tax
3%
2%
2.%
Actual
$180,000
$120,000
$120,000
1974 estimated gross City of Aspen sales .tax
to be collected: $1,001,884
500/0 or $500,942 to Transportation
50% or $500, 942 to regular city budget
Aspen Center will provide 12% of the total, or:
1974 estimated gross Pitkin County sales tax
to be collected: $1,000,000
Aspen Center will provide 12% of the total which
is $120,000, 53% of which goes to .the City of Aspen:
~ ',.., ',:' ,
Total taxes to be distributed to the City of Aspen
from Aspen Center:
(1) . Marginal increase.
(1.) Portion of actual sales taXes which are new taxes
cl'eatedby increase of busifless.
I
$6,000, yo
$1,500,1
. \
\
I
$1:500:0t
$3 000 00
Now T=, c,t". (21
$ 90, OO~
$ 60, OO~
$ 60, DOl
I
I
$ 120,000
.$ 63,600
$ 183,600
Economic Inlpage Study
Page twelve
Multiplying Effect (1)
Assuming gross sales of $6, 000, 000 and assuming a marginal
increase of 50%, then Aspen Center and Aspen Center
Apartments will provide Over $3,000,000 in new business.
35% or $1,050,000 will be generated by stores and markets
having a multiple in this area of .1 (1). This means an actual
amount of $105,000 that will remain in Aspen.
15% or $450,000 will be generated by stores and markets
having a multiple of .2 (1). This means an actual amount
of $90, 000 that will remain in Aspen.
(1) See letter dates January 16, 1974 from Mr. Phil Mahoney,
Aspen City Manager.
Economic .I:mpact Study
Page thirteen
Surplus Dollar Volume Generated bV Aspen Center
and Aspen Center Apar1:m.ents During Construction
Construction Budget
Percentage of labor provided at site:
Pitkin County multiple effect is .4 times (1) or:
(1) See letter dates January 16, 1974, from Mr. Phil Mahoney,
Aspen City Manager.
$2,300,000
$
920,00
368, ooJ
I
I
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
$
400
or
I
I
c
Economic Iinpact Study
Page fourteen
State Sales Taxes
According to Mr. Stan Swartz and Mr. Bill Russell of the
Statistical Department of the State of Colorado in Denver,
15% of the State Sales TaXeS Collected go to a General Fund
where they are distributed by legislation to the various counties.
Total State Sales Taxes projected from Aspen Center:
$ 120,00
150;0 of total to state general fund:
$
18,00
\
I
,
Economic Impact Study .
Page fifteen
SUmmary
It is our opinion that thl'J. construction of Aspen Center and Aspen
Center Apartments is a most beneficial project to be constructed
in Aspen.
The economy will be given a $1. 38 million boost just from the
construction. This. is in addition to a possible total of more than
$480,000 (1) that will be generated in taxes each year, or looking
at it in a pure sense, more than a possible $270,000 (2).
Aspen Center and Aspen Center .Apartments will not create any
additional burden to the taxpayers or to any of the various
departmental budgets, due to the fact that our users costs will
pay more services provided. We recognize that at s01+le .time in
the future some departments must be increased in size and scope.
In addition, the whole project is being designed and built as an
aesthetic extension of Aspen. We feel that because of the foregoing
economic benefits, Aspen Center and Aspen Center Apartments will
be a significant contribution to the community.
Peter A. Cunningham
(1) Actual Taxes
Property tax on $6, 000, 000 gross
Sales tax
$ 62,127
$420,000
$482,127
Total
(2) New Taxes
Property tax
Sales tax on $6,000,000 gross
$ 62,127
$210, 000
$272,127
Total
\
1""'.
.,.-."
- aspen -
cenTer
RICHARD SCHOTTLAND
Donna Baer
Planning Office
City of Aspen
Aspen, Colorado 81611
January 25, 1974
Dear Donna,
The following is in response to your request for a narrative
description of Aspen Center.
Aspen Center is a service oriented center and commercial
complex located on the former railroa.d property north of
downtown Aspen. The overall intended use and function of
the project is to give Aspen a "garage door" or service
entrance, complementing the pedestrian oriented mall area
in the center of town. The uses will be restricted accord-
ingly to insure this complimentary relationship and to avoid
any dilution or competition with.the mall area businesses.
The architectural design of the complex is mostly of stone
and wood construction, utilizing heavy bolted rough timber
trusses and weathered shake siding. The buildings have
been broken down into sizes that relate directly to the scale
and proportions of old Aspen, incon.trast to some of the
larger block structures built Over the last few years. The
intention has been. to create an inviting human scaled envir-
onment within the complex as well. One half of the 52,800
square feet total is on a lower level screened from Mill
Street by a landscaped berm, with the remaining half con-
tained in two story structures on the heavily landscaped
plaza level.
P.O. BOX 4795
.
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
.
(303) 92S~1939
.... ~,..r,,<,..
~--
,....,
,-.
Page 2 of letter to Donna Baer of January 25, 1974
An important feature of the center, is a market bazaar area
on the lower level. The ma.rket is an open space overlooked
by shops and offices above, and features a greenhouse-like
glass roof with full grown trees within the structure, all
surrournded by the bazaar-like d",partments of the market.
HOUSING
Thirteen units are planned. Schottland will enter into an
agreement with the City of Aspen,.(j,Vhereby the City has a
three day rightol first refusal to rent the units to city
employees provided that ernployee has been a resident of
Aspen lor a.least one year. The One Bedrooms will rent
for $150.00, the Two Bedrooms for $225.00 and the Three
Bedroom.',for $260.00.
This rental structure will remain at the same level and only
be increased when the taxes and expenses increase.
There .will be a total of 7,500 square feet of housing.
SHOPS AND OFFICES
The total here is 52,800 square feet ofa fully sprinkelered
structure.
The ground level is planned for uses such as a food market
9,000 sq. ft., a hardware store 3,200 sq. ft., a liquor store
1,500 sq. ft., a drug store 4,000 sq. ft., a cleaner-laundromat
2,000 sq. ft., and a carpet-furniture store 1,000 sq. ft.
The levels above the pedestrial mall will house offices to include:
physicians, dentists, and businessmen;
PARKING
Subterranean Level 48
Covered Parking 17
Open Parking 40
Total Spaces 105
Shop and office space will be owned and occupied primarily by
individuals and small companies Ona condominium basis.
Sincerely,
~
Richard Schottland
- aspen-
CenTer
.'"".
~
RONALD ,c., McLAUGHLIN
KEfI,INETH,'R. WRIGHT
WALFORD E. ERICKSON
DOUGLAS'T. SOVERN
KENNETH ASH. MANAGER
......EN OP'II'ICE
".O",IIOX 2810
ASPI!:N, COLO. 811"1
WRIGHT-McLAUGHLIN ENGINEERS
January 24, 1974
COMPLETE ENGINEERING 51!: VICES
IN THE SPECIALTY FIELDS 0
WATEM SUPPLY AND DI TRIBUTION
WATER AND SEWAGl!:T EATMENT
SEWAGE COLLECTION NO REUSE
INDUSTRIAL WASTES
STOR", D'RAINAGE
"'Looe CONTROL. AND
OTHER WATER.ORIENT I) PRO.J':CTS
ENGINEeRING CONSULTANTS
24;1.0 ALCOTT STREET
DENVER, COLORAOO 8021l
'303' 4&9.6201
Mr. Richard Schott land
P.O. Box 4795
Aspen, Coiorado 81611
Dear Mr. Schottland:
Jack Perlmutter requested that we notify you by letter as
to the urban drainage aspects of the Aspen Center. We have
reviewed the first phase of the project, a 4 level complex of
parking and shopping/retail areas that cover about the southern
2 areas of the acre site along Mill Street.
The local drainage aspects would appear to pose no serious
problems and can be handled by a system of swales, a roof top
and plaza detention system, and possible detention ponds. There
Is a small area south of the site that is tributary,and will
have to be passed through the structure. We would anticipate
that this can be handled by a below grade, grate covered, lined
channel that would traverse through the lower parking ievel.
A small heating system may have to be installed to prevent free-
zing and blockage of flow from the south during the winter, but
should not prove l1Verly expens.ive.
Another important consideration is the Aspen Urban Runoff
Management Plan. As part of this plan, several collection
swales are used to transport storm drainage from Central and
East Aspen to a collection/regulation pond to be constructed
near the Aspen Sewage Plant. The location and alignment of
these swales are best oriented towards and across this site as
it provides the best topographical and physlcai situations.
We would anticipate that these swales would not be overly large
and could generally be located near the periphery or near roads
as to ~tntmize any inconvience in site usage~
The details of our work will be forthcoming, but should you
need any assistance, please feel free to call.
Very truly yours,
WRIGHT-McLAUGHLIN ENGINEERS
WCT:ml
cc: Ken Ash
Jack Perlmutter
Dave Ell is
Donna Baer
/./
'.r.-"'').I -'
f.. /, ... ~r
By vt<tL:t~ '-,( . .
Wi 11 iam C. Taggart'
.~
.'"""
TO: City Clerk
FROM: Planning Office
SUBJECT: Rio Grande Property Subdivision
DATE: January 21, 1974
Please schedule and advertise a public hearing for the
above subdivision forP & Zls meeting on Tuesday, February
5, 1974.
The description is as follows:
Former Rio Grande Railroad property. both
sides of Mill Street, including 19 + Ac.
List of adjacent land owners is attached.
~ ~.~~~~-A\of-Z
yJ~ ~ 07-S-7~O -
" (/ SUBDIVISIG~~ PLAT CEECK FO:lii .
Dat~ /-OZI- /~
--. -
Gentlemen:
AccorcHng to the proccch.1TC Bet forth in the City of Aspen
Subdivision R88ulations, any trG.ct of land divided into
tt'lO or mOl.~8 lots Inust be "divid(;d in 2.ccordc:nce \'lith s&.id
$'libdivisj_on llegulation ,foJ: the City of Aspen.
. .
This form, uith attached copy of the plat is provided so
that Gach utility comp2ny mc,y irlspect ths plat and the
site, lTiaking cOT[s:.~nts, conc01:.-ning the plClGerr~2nt of ease-
nlents, etc., end 't'Jhere neCCSf:ary sl~ctchil1g j,:"ecbIrl7r:ended
alterations on a cop~ of the plat,
This fOl~ and the accom9anying copy of the plat must be
returned to the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Com-
mission no la.ter than seven (7) d2Ys from the above date,
Remarks: This area is wi thin ,.the boundries of the Aspen
Metropolitan Sanitation District. The Trunk line
and Plant capacity is adequate to properly service
_. -------'---.---
any development. The devemoper will however be:
L~q~LL~d Lu ~nsL~ll any co~~ect~)? ~~nes.
&/W~~ i
Cl~nt. Sampson Exe. utive secretary!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~~.Lf#~.
lj~ z.f3/0 .1,
~
'c
-.
~~if~'.'
f~ ~DIV;s70;~~
f<<-.d
/'1
FORrl
Dat~ .1-,;2(-7';-
Gentlemen:
According to the proccduJ:'e Det forth in the City of Aspen
Subdivision Rsgul<:,tions, any tre.ct of land divided into
tt'lO or more lots IDUSt b2 'divid2d in C!.cco~-c1&nce t'lith ss.id
Subdivision Regulation for the City of ASp2U.
. .
This form, ~d.th attechcd copy of the plat j.s provided so
that each utility compeny mny inspect th3 plat and the
site, lnaking co~snts) ccncei:'""J.1:.i.ng the plc.l.cerr~2nt of cEtse~
1l10nts, etc.) End \'lhere ne.CGSf:nry st:ctching recOIrUl:ended
alterations on a cop~ of the plat.
This form and the accoicllnmyinr; copy of the plat must be
returned to the City of Aspen Planning and Zoning Com-
mis~ion no later than seven (7) days from the above date.
Remarks: -a;:~ ~/ IA)-e.-: (.uj/~~ \
cd-&----i4~~d.-f'~~>.~-/~ I
--4J~k;'~'~'~~~&A'~~
())~~?n~~ --o/k' .
tddv/~
. rJ!lJ/'Ji~ . I
4 :H/74~G-q ~'l
.~
"
,.
&/,;lbS7
~ ~. - - ..frJ~
.'.vyJ~ ~,' 02-S-7/f
. ' '. G%UBDIVISICm PL!.{i' CEECK FORll
/-1 X.
Dat~.-.-t.;2 / - ;:: ij'
Gentlemen:
, I
According to the procedure set forth in the City of Aspen \
Subdivision R8gulations, any trc.ct of land divided into
t-V10 or m-ore lots 1TIUSt h2 "divided in ftCCOrU2nce \'lith Bsid
Subdivision Regulation for the City of Asp2n.
. '
This form, with attached copy of the plat is provided so
that each utility compe.ny l11GY inspect the plat and the
site, rnaking CO?rrrT!.2nts, concej::11ing the placere2nt of ease-
ments, etc., and l-ihere nec8s~~ary sketching reco'iJIi1:ended
alt~rations on a cop~ of the plat.
ThIs form and the aCCo;:l})[myine copy of the plat must he
retun1ec1 to the City of Aspen PlalTDing and Zoning Com-
mispion no later than seven (7) d2YS from the above date.
Remarks: ~P'~~ -r-'..P..L ~,~e.<<~a~
/
4I~;A;,:,:,.; tl I~A/ A'3h r ;5, ,/,!fr'~
af}-{jF r'J!I4A. ~J ,~'~..rJ-";'J._~~_
;:/ . ,. ..., . .' . :
~~'/;ciU,r~ -"1?/-4~<-- -'d.-....-/..~.
... ,. v ..
~.A'-e' ';/Pt _"",.:;3.44'-/ 71~~'?J~"'f /~4.......#t.,
!; :L~ 7 Y
~~
/'
0o.~
-.
/~, J~~~. ~- &~~
((}?:t:uw .~~. c:/'-$- 77(f
YSU".D\"7C7rV~' I'T 1.'1' CT-"'('I' IIC..)')}j
t::I.. l,.i _ v _OJ......i J.t.,.'l. ....~v \. ~~
~..{
\
Date /-021- 7
Gcntlcn:2n:
Acco~~c1:Lng to t1"l,~ P:L."OCOC11.1TC !;ct forth in the City of AS1,-2n
Subdivisio:1 r..~~;t11~ltio~1s) any trG.ct of land divided int
t,..TO 0;: m-~l"e ;'0'-0 l':"'1UC'''' b'CI 'c1;v' -l0.''''C' J~.rl r..."cO}_~d.0'i1C~' ....7i...}1 ~..".,'td
v ._ l.u ...,;..It. ..... .... _. ..... l _ ..... ......~ l"... ~/ l.. OL.......1.
Subdivis:i.on l~egulHt::tOl1. [OJ: thz City of Aspzn. i
"'hi co r.o'r~l ,.,{t-h' "t-" ~('h.<:(.', co,"v OI" tl'<' p.] ~<- ). co pJ'O"~ "M~ 10
,J. _.... ).. .l-n:> ~.,.l... l.. .l.c.._ ".- 1:"'./ ...... ' . t.... 1_ .'""' _ V_\..h_","," ~
that each u~ility co:n;,n'ny mcy insp3ct th," pl<lt [md the
Si~e 1"""""l'''}-.-'''' co~~n~s co.........r.-.......,.j-.f;'r "....\,~ pl.lc"~"'n~ of: C" ~
_l.. -, dGLh. .do ,:~:.lJ..-.. 1..., 1..'-~I_J..l..._J.LO,;) ....L...... __c. 1.:11,......... l- .!... "ct...; -
n1C::nts, etc., and"l:here ne.ccs!:cry sl:ctching recoLTI.o.:..:ended I"
alterations on a cop~ of the plat. . I
'This fOlln and the accoE',})anying copy of th2 plat must bo.~
retuD1ed to th3 City of Aspon PlcU'i12.ng end Zoning C02-. \
miscion no lo.ter than SeV8TI (7) d:::ys fro:n the above datlo.
Remarks: It appears that our~lines might be involved in ihis
subdivision, we would appreciate working with the!
city if need be to locate some of_~~es~~in~~~_
I
. . i
1-
,
I
I
I
~,~.
Yky 6/0
,
~
'.
~ ~~-"-7~ ~.
. .? SUBDIVISIO::; PL!.,T CHECK FOTUi
~ - /?I/.
,
Date /~;;21- 7
Gent l"u'.";:J.'
," '- ~-... .
Acco2:ding to the proccum:e cet forth in the City of Aspen
Subdivisio:1 R8gul~ltions, any trect of Im:J.cl divided into
tv70 or rnO:C2 lots luustbe divided in e.ccordznce ~'lith sa.id
Subdivision Regulation fo~ the City of Asp2n.
. .
This form, Hith attccchecl copy of the plat is provided so
that each utility comp2ny !l1GY insp8ct the plat and the
site, maki.ng cO~?:,nt:s) concci::--J.1ingthe plGtcement of ease...
!llentS,. etc., and 't"here, neC8sr:ary sl:ctching reco!Sl:enc1ed
alterations on a cop~ of the plat.
This fOl~ and the accomranying copy of the plat must be
returned to the City of Aspen Plenning end Zoning Com-
mission no later than seven (7) days from the above date.
Remarks: .~ d<J ~~ ~. r~J
~~ ~..rJr'/~'.~-L..
~~~, tAs"~~-~~
~ AI F IY+ ~a-->,::P~
/jr)~/~
~~fr<~
r~
I
\
I
~~
~~~~.
-.
/1iJp
.,-..,
,-..,
.-. .
(4165) 2 IS.I.
'BUI.lDINCINSPECTION DEPARTMENT
Q CITY OF ASPEN - COUNTY OF. PITKINO, COLORADO
.
. .
ADDR.ESS
OF JOB
GENERAL
CONSTRUCTION
201 N. Mill (Aspen Centet') PERMIT
WHEN SIGNEO AND VALIDATED BY 8UILDING INSPECTION DEPARTMENT THIS PERMIT AUTHORIZES THE WORK DESCRIBED BELOW.
1
CLASS OF WORK:
OWNER
. NAME.
NEW:6l
ADDITION 0
ALTERA rION.O
REPAIR 0
MOVE 0
'VRECK 0
NAME (AS LICENSED)
ADDRESS
_ Pr"\'V !..l79.~
LICENSE
CLASS
92660 .
Campus Dr. Suite 216, Newport Beach,Ca. Pi-lONE 714/979/4850
.
Dave Millet' & Assoc.
~
n.
PHONE ^^" "'M
LICENSE
NUMBER
c
.<1
l-
V
<
c::
I-
Z
o
u
ADDRESS 3822
SUPERVISOR
FOR THIS JOB
NAME
Dave Miller
I'N5U~NCE
.
DATE ( ERTIFIED
LEGAL
DESCRIPTION LOT NO. 2 BLOCK NO.
SURVEY ATTACHED 0 DESIGN
BY Tri-co Mahagement BY Thomas Wells & Assoc.
.......(....) 42,865 JHElGHT NO. 3 with TOTAL OCCUPANCY
~r GRAO' !l2. (FEET) 35' -40 I . STO'~~, ~o JlNlTS, 0 ,.' . GROU P
laASEMENT FIN 0 I GARAGE SINGLE 0 ATTACHEDO TOT"c'lndeter- TYPE
_L. UNFIN.O basement DOUBLE D. DETACHwOI ROOMSmin,::mL.- CONSTR.
I ,*'PTH :::,. SIZE SPACING SPAN
," BELOW var~es FIRST AGENCY
Z GRADE min. 30" '" feDOR cone. Tites 24" @S' oc. 32' lUll DING
o . l~ . tEVIEW
i= ~6~\%'bR . ;perret t~ ~alt,NG I
-c SIZE var~es walls 0 Trusses & Wood Deck ZONING
a ~ l
Z ExrERIORl2" rein:fQNc.U ...
::3 FDN. WAn ROOF f1 "" . PARKING
o rHlCKNESS MAS'V 0 .
II.
A.DDITION
Mill St.
Subdivisio'l
A L1C. C 811
PE NO
DIV
I FIRE'
Z HE 3
AUTH~~IZEO I OA TE
I
--
,
I
I
!
I
I
I
,
I
THICK n CAISSONS 0 ROOF!NG
SLAB -,r & GR. BEAMS MA TER1,A,l Buil t un
MASONRY ABOVE ABOVE
EXTERIOll THICKNESS 1ST FLR. 12" 2ND FLR. _
WAll STUO SIZE ABOVE. ABOVE'_
& SPACE 1ST FLR. 2ND FLR.2.x4 In 16
REMARKS ", ;~., ",...._ .. _. .._,_ ..
Areas, Offices and 13 Apartments.
PUEUCHEAlTH
ABOVE
3R[l FLR.
ENG'NEEIUNG
ABOVE .-
'RO FL'llx41rl16
" .
',,~,
.
.
.
"OTESTOAPPUCANT :
FOR INSPEcnONS O'R INFORMATION CALL 915 ~ 733:6
FOR AU WORK DONE UNDER THI$PERMIT THE PERMITTEE ACCEPTS FULL RESPONSIBILITY FOR
COMPLIANCE WITH THE UNIFORM BUILDING CODE. THE COUNTY ZONING RESOLUTION. OR CITY
ZONING ORDINANCE. AND ALL QTHERCOUNTYRESOlUTIONS OR CITYOR01NANCES WHICHEVER
APPliES.
SEPARATE PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED FOR EUCTlJCAL, PlUMSINGAND HEATING, SIGNS,
SWIMMING POOLS. AN 0 FEN CES.
PERMIT EXPIRES 60 DAYS FROM DATE ISSUED llNLESS WORK IS STARTED.
RfQUtAED IHSnCTJONS SHALL BE RllZQUESTED ONE 'WORKING DAY IN' ADVANCE.
ALtFlNAL INSPECTIONS 'HALL BE MADE: (lH AU. ITEMS (SF WORK BEFORE OCCUPANCY:l:5 ~ERMITTED.
THI5BUILDlNG SHALL Nq BE OCCUPiED UNTIL A CERT1FICATE 'OF OCCUPANCY HAS BEEN ISS"!ED.O
PERMIT SUBJECT TO REVCCATION OR SU~SIOl1. FO lpLATlON Of ANY LAWS GOV!:RNING SAME.
SIGNATU""'., .
APPL?JANT; ~M.J~... ~
VALUATIONs
OF WORK i~~OO ,000 I
PlAN . TOTAL FEE
FILED T P -Q 202.50
DOll,CE .1 CHECK 0.101 .25plck;
m QLASH r;Jl~___}o:}~
BUILDING DEPARTMENT e_
-
THIS FORM IS A PERMIT ONLY
WHEN VALIDATED HERE
OATE
PERMrr NO.
APPROVAL BY
L1CfKSE II RECEIPTS CLASS
DATE
AMOUNT
>-
1-17-74
33-74
i
"
r--
^
-
aspen
cenTer
RICHARD SCHOTTLAND
A
Herb Bartel
Planning Office
City of Aspen
Aspen, Colorado 81611
January 10, 1974
Dear Herb,
Tom Wells discussed with me your recommendation of having
the six liquor store owners form a partnership to jointly own
our proposed liquor store.
We both feel tha.t it is an excellent idea. Upon arrival of our
scale model, the first week in February, I will contact each
of the owners, set up ameetirig in my office, explain Aspen
Center to them and ask them to bring an offer to me.
Thanks for the suggestion.
Sincerely,
~
Richard Schottland
P.O. BOX 4795
.
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
.
(303) 92S~1939
't.,....~_. -..
i""""
,.-.
TRI-CO Management, Inc.
Planning' Design' Surveying' Engineering' Construction
and Management of Land
January 9, 1974
Herb Bartel
City-County Planner
City of Aspen
Box V
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear Herb:
Enclosed is a list of all property owners adjacent
to the Denver Rio Grande Railroad property that the
City and Dick Schotland wish to subdivide. Also,
there is a general property description for pub-
lishing purposes before the scheduled February 5,
1974 meeting.
If you need any further information at this time
please feel free to call.
(/~~:y,~
Reece Harper
dQb
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
Box 1730
j Aspen
Color do 81611
303.925.2688
I
'-
- .
(""\
(""\
ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS
John M. Bennett, Jr.
Box 1364
Aspen, Colorado
Charles A. Capper
Box 701
Aspen
William Shaw
Box 510
Aspen
Clinton Sampson
334 E. Bleeker
Aspen
Aspen One Company
Box 3557
Aspen
Robert G. Marsh
Box 378
Aspen
G.E. Buchanan
Box 5168
Terminal Annex
Denver, Colorado 98027
Fred D. Glidden
Box 356
Aspen
Arthur W. Mikkelsen
c/o Dorothy Mikkelsen
Box 1132
Aspen
Charles B. Everst
551 W. Broadway
Council Bluffs, Iowa
Klaus Obermeyer
Box 13 0
Aspen
Mona Frost
First National Bank,Trustee
Box 60-x
Grand Junction, Colorado
Stanford Bealmear
Box 498
Aspen
Elizabeth Paepcke
Box 1032
Aspen
Carol Craig
Box 1283
Aspen
Aspen Construction Co.
John Huebinger, President
Box ZZ
Aspen
Pitkin County
c/o County Commissioners
Box 4096
Aspen, Colorado
Ida Maddalone
c/o Jesse Maddalone
Box 506
Aspen
Robert R. Oden
100 E. Main St. (Box 660)
Aspen
f""".
~
TRI-CO Management, Inc.
Planning' Design' Surveying' Engineering' Construction
and Management of Land
January 9, 1974
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
A PARCEL OF LAND SITUATED IN THE SOUTHWEST ONE-
QUARTER OF SECTION 7, TOWNS.HIP 10 SOUTH, RANGE
85 WEST OF THE 6TH P.M., CITY OF ASPEN, PITKIN
COUNTY, COLORADO.
A Subsidiary of Trico Corporation . Offices throughout the West
ox 1730
Aspen
Color do 81611
303 925' 2688
?
;;'i
,.......
r-.
<i-::"
-
aspen
cenTer
RICHARD SCHOTTL.AND
-
Herb Bartel
City Planner
City of Aspen
Aspen, Colorado 81611
January 9, 1973
Dear Herb,
Attached is a letter to Sta,cy regarding o:ne approach to housing
that we discussed. If you have any additional approaches,
please let us know.
Sincerely,
o!}icfJz
Richard Schottland
Encl.
P.O. BOX 4795
.
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
.
(303) 925-1939
~
,
\~
,
,
,
CITY
aspen ,coil
.."'......,~
SPEN
~
is box v
January 8, 1974
Richard Schottland
Post Office Box 4795
Aspen, Colo. 81611
Dear.Dick:
In discussions last week with both Tom Wells and Jim Reser,
we agreed that the target date for completion of the pre- I
liminary subdivision plat would be Feb. 5. This would mearl
that the material would be available for publication and
scheduling on the P&Z agenda for Feb. 19. If Feb. 5 is
desired as the hearing date, then the target date for
completion and submittal to the planning office should be
moved up to Jan. 18. The major constraint will be whether
Tri-Co Management can complete everything in that time per'od.
Ken Wright of Wright-McLaughlin has contacted me and is se d-
ing a proposal for doing the drainage study on Phase I. A
soon as I receive the proposal I will let you review it. Illf
it is satisfactory, then the city will need a letter of .
agreement from you guaranteeing payment of the study. The1
final report will not be necessary for the preliminary pIa .
Tri-Co has been given instructions regarding the location f
the Mill Street right-of-way and they are showing the easel
ments, utilities, topo, existing drainage, and technical
requirements for the plat based on.available aerial photos!
and record documents. They will require from you as soon 1s
possible a site plan for Phase I showing the location of PJo-
posed dwelling structures, parking areas, structures for
common use, principal landscape features, on-site circulat on,
and areas reserved for public use. They will also need a I
legal description for the perimeter of Phase I. ,
Jim and I agreed that to make the plat into three sheets, line
cover and one each for you and us, would be the logical
approach. Jim has agreed to keep time records and use his
best judgement in determining what work will be split on a
50/50 basis and what work will be charged wholly to you or
us. The portion of the common work that the city has alrefdy
paid for will not be split. I
Very truly yours, I
/)~ {o(l, I
IDave EI:fiS'"<J..o
City Engineer
.
I"'.
,-..
__~'.' ::,;;;;j;":;;:;/i.;';;:;:,'/~"::::'-- .":~~~_",
iZ2',n""e.: :C'~~
aspen
cenTer
RICHARD SCHOTTL.AND
Stacy Standley
Mayor
City of Aspen
Aspen, Colorado 81611
January 4, 1973
Dear Stacy,
As per your request regarding housing for city employees,
there are several methods to approach this need.
The following is one such approach. We provide rentals at:
8 One Bedrooms
4 Two Bedrooms
..L Three Bedrooms
13 Units
@ $150.00 per month
@ $225,00 per month
@ $260.00 per month
1. The City of Aspen shall have a 3 day right of first refusal.
to rent to one of its employees, provided such employee
has. been a resident of Aspen for .at least one year.
2. The rentals will not be increased,. except for an increase
in property taxes, insurance or other costs of operation.
3. Aspen Center Company shall enter into this agreement
with the City of Aspen for a. five year period.
4. This housing is specifically intended for permanent Aspen
residents and not for tourist rentals.
Sincerely,
~
Richard Schottland
cc: ~:~u;a:~e~~Y' Esq.
~
P.O. BOX 4795
"
ASP!::N. COL.ORADO 81611
II
(303) 925..1939
,,-.,
,-"
aspen
cenTer
RICHARO.SCHOTTL.AN 0
-
Herb Bartel
Planning Office
City of Aspen
Aspen, Colorado 81611
January 4, 1973
Dear Herb,
We are interested to ascertain the gross and net rentable
squ.are footages for each blockbetween Monarch to Original
to the sOu.th side of Durant to the north side of Main.
Rich Wilde will commence the physical measuring of these
structures for us and when completed we will be able to give
you an aerial photo of that area with an overlay showing the
square feet in each block.
Any assistance you can give him would be most appreciated.
Sincerely,
.
~
Richard Schottland
cc: Rich Wilde
P.O. BOX 4795
.
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
.
(303) 925.1939
""""",;""..,,,;~,,
.........
~
,..-,.
t
MEMO
TO: P & Z COMMISSION
FROM: DAVE ELLIS ~,
CITY ENGINEER"\.) L
RE: MUL STREET (RIO GRANDE PROPERTY)
PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT
DATE: 1/4/74
The Engineering Department has made comments on
at least two preliminary plats that were sub-
mitted after publication for the hearing. The
latest submittal had some major changes in
boundaries and numerous deficiencies. The
current situation is one of confusion or exactly
which plat various utilities and agencies are
reviewing. The plat sent out for review did not
show the correct location of sewer,water, electri
or telephone. Nor did the plat show any fire
protection system. Because of these circumstances
t:he engineering department's recommendation is
.~hat Ord. 19 conceptual review proceed, but that
the preliminary subdivision plat hearing be tabled
to a future date and that the plats be reissued
for review. An approval on the conceptual stage
will also provide more specifics on which to base
the subdivision review particularly as relates to
pedestrian and vehicular circul~tion, railroad
right-of-way location, utility relocations and
fire protection.
Attached as a separate list are items which at
this point are deficiencies of the plat. These
are included for information only and hopefully
they can be corrected prior to the future hearing
date.
.
cc: Mick Mahoney
Herb Bartel
Donna Baer
Richard Shottland
,
Lots 2 & 3
Item 1)
t..'
.1"""'\
1"""-.
1/4/74
DEFICIENCIES 0 MILL STREET(RIO GRANDE PROPERTY)
PRELl INARY SUBDIVISION PLAT
2)
'I ~
An absolutJ minimum 'of 40 feet will be required for
dedicated oad right-of-way. The railroad right~of-
way will b a 20 foot minimum. Minimum radius on the
railroad r ght-of-way is 319 feet for current stan-
dard gage assenger equipment. This railroad right-
of-way ali nment should be shown for the entire pro-
perty. ,
Circulatio I within the sight should provide for a
minimum tu ning radius of 45 feet where access is
required bdeliverYi trash and maintenance trucks.
3)
A fire pro ection plan is needed including access
routes for fire equipment. The city standard for
spacing a ire hydrant in commerical areas is 350 ft.
Site plan ~hOUld show all parking locations including
those unde ground, common pedistrian areas and
circulatio routes, and principal landscaping features.
Metro sani~ation District should be consu.lted about
main sewer Iline which passes through property, and
whether or Inot relocation will be.required or con-
struction o~er it will be allowed.
4)
5)
6) Telephone a d electric utilities should be revised
to show act al line routes and those portions within
the develop ent which will be placed underground.
7)
Determinati n as to extent of building site encroach-
ment upon c'ty water lines. This may necessitate new
easements a d relocation by Shottland. The city is
currently d termining whether the old pump-house. and
line may be removed. Plans and specifications for
all new wat r mains within the development will be
subject to pproval before construction.begins and
will be sub'ect to all city standards for acceptance
before serv'ce is initiated.
I
The sewer a~d water easements in the northern panhandle
should be srown. .
Easements wlll be. required for all existing and/or
relocated utilities. More study will be necessary
to determinr those areas wher.e 20 ft. rear and side
lot line uttlity easements will be required.
I
Determinati n of all property owners and mortgage
holders for purposes of sUbmitting and signing plat
dedications and committments.
8)
9)
10)
11) Determinati n as to whether open space will be land
dedication r cash.
12) Present trall locations are subject to relocation
pending pur hase of additional land and/or outcome
of quiet ti Ie suit.
I
I
I
.'.""~"-",-;,/,~,~..-.., "~',,,,",-"'-'-~".._..,.,~.-..~.,- "
"....,
1""'-.
1/4/74
page 2 of 2
>,
.
13)
Terms for th
curb and gut
in subdivisi
construction of sidewalks, berms,
er, and streets should be included
n agreement and reference made on plat.
Item
~
1)3ShOW additioJal apparent fence and building encroach-
ments. I
2) Show overall ICirculation and street layout.
3) Clarificatio of orginial monuments and remonu-
mentation ne ded and corrections needed in .metes
and bounds c lls.
Lots 1,2,&
4) Adjacent own omitted from some lots.
5) Showexistin primary drainage channels and improve-
ments.
6) Naming of st eets within subdivision so as not to
conflict wit existing streets.
I
"I
I
^
/
.I
j
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Dick Schottland
Planning Office
January 4. 1974
We are scheduling your Aspen CenU:!:' project for Ordinance 19
conceputal presentation before Planning and Zoning on
February i. 1974.
If we received the necessary information in time. we
can also schedule subdiVision preliminary plat hearing
for the same date.
~o--
~~
l
("""\. ,~
r.2'";'::'>~":~i:;:;,;;:"~""~~'-:':'::::-""'-""'::~"'~""~~7":-"~'~:""C1?':':~
aspen
cenTer
RICHARD SCHOTTI-ANO
Dave Ellis
City Engineer
City of Aspen
Aspen, Colorado 81611
January 3, 1973
Dear Dave,
As per our discussion in reference to any subdivision work performed
by Tri-Co, Jim Reser has agreed to bill us separately.
I also understand from Wells that Ken Wright of Wright~McLaughlin
is preparing a drainage study and that he will bill you. If this is the
case, please forward any such bills to us.
r
Sincerely,
.~
Richard Schottland
cc:
Herb Bartel /
Jim Reser
Kenneth R. Wright
Tom Wells
,
P.O. BOX 4195
'"
'"
(303) 925.1939
ASPEN, COL-ORADO S16l1
I""".
^
- aspen -
cenTer
RICHARo SCHOTTL.AND
Herb Bartel
Planning Office
City of Aspen
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear Herb,
January 3, 1973
Enclosed are two sets of our preliminary plans with additional
studies indicating the variation in the roof levels.
Also enclosed are two sets of the 50th scale site plan on a topo
map. There are planned 52,800 sq. ft. of commercial and office
space with parking as follows:
Open
Sheltered
Garage
Total Spaces
40
17
48
105
There are additional spaces on the open yard to the south of the
building not shown on these plans.
The apartments are:
8 One Bedrooms @ 520 sq. ft.
4 Two Bedrooms @ 640 sq. ft.
......LThre,eBedro~m. @ 780 sq. ft.
13 Apartments
= 4,160 sq. ft.
= 2,560
= 78.0
7,500 sq. ft.
Within the net few days, I will have a written proposal to you
and Stacy as to the various costs and possible city control of
these apartmen.ts.
We will apply for a building permit on Friday, February 1, 1974.
We will plan to appear before P&Z on the followitlg dates:
Tuesday, February 5 Conceptual & Subdivision
Tuesday, February 19 Final
Sincerely,
~
Richard Scho.ttland
cc: ArthurC. Daily, Esq.., Thomas Wells
P.O. BOX 4795 . ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
.
(303)925-1939
-'
RONAL.D C. McLAUGHLIN
KENNETH R_ WRIGHT
HAL-FORD E. ERICKSON
DOUGL.AS T. SeVERN
JOHN T. MCLANE
KENNETH ASH, MANAGER
ASPEN OFFICE
P.O. BOX 2810
ASPEN, COLO. 81611
WRIGHT-McL.AUGHL.IN ENGINEERS
2420 A1.COTT STREET
DENVER, COLORADO 80211
(303) 4158.6201
COMPLETE ENQINEERING SERVICES
IN THE SPECIALTY .1"11:1.0& OF
WATER SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION
WATER AND SEWAGE TREATMENT
SEWAGE COLLECTION AND REUS":
INDUSTRIAL WAsTES
STORM DRAINAGE
FLOOD CONTROL AND
OTHER WATEFl:.ORII:NTED PROJECTS
ENGINEERING CONSUL.TANTS
Jeauery J. 1.,3
,.,. o.v. IIIJ.
City ht'...r
,... .. y
Alpen. toloredo 81" I
...r Mr. IH'"
We ..... .... con'Hted by ..... T_ ..... Arch'tec,. and Mr. .Jectc,
'...I_n.... toAI,....tlOft __,.TUltCOlllulunt. ...llt'" to a .t..,., and
revIew of the .".Nft 4r.I....alId .nlt_1t rurroft.,..... of the AI,..
Cent... whh. .. ,repoII' fo, COMt....UClt lw ....lohltrllS.tU.....
We ,roposl to undertake th.. hWI.tf..,.Oft .ectdrev'".~''' .,,_
crlter',. . clevel. . _nn,lUllI pl..- su'tabl.tor ",,,'ew .... app"'~t
by YOU" off'ce. Thl. IIOf'k woul.be "".,t... oe Jan_ry '. 117' .nd IIIlilVIct .
be ",'ated In ."r_'.taly ...or thr.. ..k. unl.. Mt-.t'", e'ret./Ill'"
........ .... _tered.
We ,ropose to "rtake the foU_'", werlt ltalItI:
I. ....t with tile arch'tect. IltJgeClt the .hl and consult whhyour
off'ce repnt'nt .pec...raq"........" or phlln. wh'ch .,., .'tht
.....
2. .."tew tile conceptua' arch'tectur.1 d....,ngs .. to ur"'" .r.t.....
.... ,_'t rurro" etterecwr'stlcs ..well a. pot..tl.' Mgh ground
wet., '...1....
3. .."Iew tile ,ropos" RUI St....t r_....._IfI..tIOft. and other
fllH", and ClUIt.'" proposed by tM ....Ioper to"'amlne ,.ladoe-
shl, . potent..I'.,.ct Oft edJ__t pubHe .... ,rlvate ,ropertl...
It. lst...t. pOllution 1_ wh... can be ..,..ted to be ,....,..te4 by
tht. ..vel....' to "t.Ntne.., spec'al ponullOft....'.."t Iteps
wh'ch ..th' be ....4e4 to",'''e tile over.11 Ma.ter. '1.. for It....
.r.l..... ...lIlt,.,nt for the ~'ty of As,.. enctenvfrons.
5. 'repa... ...1", Ct'lta,'a. conceptual plen for ell"I"'" 'DOWIIIIlt for
,round weter. . ,....... . .hort letter reportf.r rev'ew. III rnt
. approvel by .,.,.. office.
MI'. Dave EI Jls
January 3, 197"
2.
ThIs particular assignment would be undertaken on an hourly rate
basis In accordance with the attached schedule of hourly rateS with a
_Imum figure of $ISOO~. We would not exceed the $1500 fIgure without
prior approval fl'Ofll your office after clearance by the developer.
Mr. Ken Ash, our office menageI' In Aspen, will be working closely
with you on this assignment. In addition, he wlJl also be handling a
review of weterand sewer utlJltles as It relates to this proposed Aspen
Center.
We are provIding a copy of this proposal to Mr. Jack Perlmutter, who
Is representing the Owner, and we will not start work until he notifies us
of his agreement with the t.rmsofthls~'Sal, at lYp,lch time we antici-
pate that he will provide you with an lnl'tlel copy Indicating his under-
standing and agreement.
If this .grangetllent I, satlsfacto1'Y to your office we would appreciate
your Initialing one copy and returning It to us for our .flles.
Very truly yours,
WRIGHT-McLAUGHI.IN ENGINEERS
KRWekb
Encl.
ACCEPTED BY
tJ c:z.A' rpd:;,
Ifr/?I
I I
.~~~
. nneth R. I' g t
Date
cc: Jack Perlmutter
Ken Ash
l(,~ *'
~
'~"
December 28. 1973
Mr. Dick Schottland
P. O. :Box 4795
Aspen. Colorado
Dear Dick.
It has come to the attention of this office that you are
currently preparing working building plans for your
project on North Mill St. It would be to youraadvantage
to schedule for coneeptual presentation under Ordinance
19 before the Planning and Zoning Commission in advance
of completing your final plans.
Please contact this office when you are ready to schedule
for conceptual review and subdiviSion, preliminary plat
review before P 6 Z.
Yours truly,
Donna Baer
Planning Office
DB/bk
/
~"
'~
"
AN EVALUATION OF THE
ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY
SUBMITTED I'N SUPPORT
OF THE ASPEN CENTER
AND ASPEN CENTER APARTMENTS
Prepared by:
Larry E. Simmons, ABD
Francis A. Mojo Jr., MBA
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction
II. Evaluation of Sale Volume Estimates
III. Evaluation of Fiscal Impact on City
IV. Evaluation of the Multiplier
V. Evaluation of the Construction Impact
Estimate
VI. Estimate of Employment Created
VII. Conclusion
I. Introduction
Below are what we consider to be the salient points
with respect to the economic impact study regarding the
Aspen Center as prepared by Peter Cunningham of Schott land
and Company. Also included is an estimate of the employ-
ment impact that can reasonably be expected from the com-
pletion of the project.
The fact that we do not yet have a good hold on all
the interrelationships of the Aspen economy has forced us
to make more qualitative comments rather than quantitative.
It is, however, our goal to remedy this situation as soon
as possible. It is felt that at this juncture a qualitativ
evaluation is valuable.
There are many points of detail that have been omitted
as a matter of decision that a more skeletal presentation
supplemented by verbal and/or written response to your
questions is preferable to the extremely lengthy and more
technical first draft that was partially prepared.
II. Evaluation of Sales Volume Estimates
The study estimates that during the first full year
of operation, 1975, gross sales of the Center will fall
between $4 and $6 million. No explanation is given as to
the technique used to derive this estimated range of sales.
-2-
It appears as though the technique was to take a gross
sales figure and then allocate sales by type of firm rather
than to try to estimate the type of firm, estimate sales
and then sum. It is recognized that to do the latter is
quite difficult at this stage of the game. Yet from a
validity standpoint, only the latter is acceptable, as it
is an estimating technique as contrasted to the former
which is a guessing technique.
Knowing that a grocery outlet is definitely planned
and that the other retail outlets are to be non-tourist
oriented, we made an estimate of what we consider to be
yearly volumes of similar present establishments and find
no reason to believe that gross sales have been overestimate
The median figure of $5 million seems quite obtainable even
if we ignore the fees of the professionals who will be
located there. The combination of the convenience of
parking, the agglomeration ofa variety of shops, the
provision of currently unobtainable commodities in Aspen
and the "newness" of the Center could attract more business
than even the most optimistic might expect.
The question of whether the sales of the Center represe t
new business or mereLY a reshuffling from current businesses
is important and will be discussed in Section III.
-3-
III. Evaluation of Fiscal Impact on City
Before dealing with detail problems of this part of
the study, we should like to point out that although esti-
mates of tax revenues are made, there is no recognition
that the City will encounter costs as a result of the proje t.
It is not that no attempt was made to determine costs
but rather the overall methodology that comes into question.
It is argued that current "plant capacity" of vital services
is capable of handling the additional burden of the Center
with no additional financial cost. This mayor may not be
true. However, we prefer to argue that even if it is, the
mere act of using up present capacity has a "cost" in the
sense that the next person may cause the need for the
addition of new capacity. Though this next project may be
beneficial to the City, charging it for all the capacity
added might make it appear economically unfeasible. We
must insist that economic cost not be equated with increment 1
financial cost. It should be quite obvious that although
there might not be an increase in cash outflow for pOlice
and fire services, there is a "cost" to the taxpayer in
that he must accept a diminished level of service since the
same number of patrolmen and firemen operating under the
same budgetary constraints now have an additional burden to
monitor.
.,.4-
With respect to property taxes, the assumption is made
that there would be no such taxes were the Center not built.
Though we are certain that this oversight is not large, it
does show the incompleteness of the study. Henceforth, it
is suggested that the quality of education not be measured
by per student expenditures. Relative to the point, it is
assumed that because the employee housing to be supplied
will not allow children, taxes going to education are free
of cost. However, we know that 13 units cannot possibly
house all employees and it is a good bet some will have
children who will be added to the Aspen. system at a positive
cost.
With respect to the sales tax estimates, it should
be noted that none of the City's 2% sales tax goes into
the general fund as stated on pages 7,9, and 11. Though
this does not reduce the amount the City receives, it does
affect the budget in that general fund expenditures may be
increased without concurrent revenues to offset them. Howev r,
the City's share of the county tax does go into the general
fund, so that it is not an all cost and no revenue situation.
It has been estimated that 50% of the new business
generated will be professional which is not sUbject to sales
tax. Yet sales tax estimates are based on the assumption
that this 50% is taxable. This reduces the estimated new
sales tax flow by exactly 50% -- very significant.
-5~
We would like to now mention the issue of the generati n
of new business versus the displacement of old business.
The report has been very careful to distinguish between
the two possibly more so than is justifiable. Without
getting too detailed, when a business vacates one space
in favor of another one just built, new business may be
generated if there were a shortage of space preventing
needed expansion by an existing firm or entry of a new firm.
Though some economists would cringe at ,this argument, for
Aspen it seems quite plausible though we have no idea of
magnitudes. Consequently, the study may be underestimating
sales tax revenue generation of the Center. Without further
data on space allocation, a valid estimate of the net impact
of sales tax revenues can not be made.
IV. Evaluation of the Multiplier
We'll not attempt to explain the multiplier effect
here but will be glad to do so if requested to. Without
doubt, the multiplier for Aspen is low relative to other
communities due to the nature of the economy.
Briefly, for the multiplier to be large, a community
must be highly integrated. That is, it must produce much
of what it consumes and also provide services locally.
This is obviously not true of Aspen, so that somemoneMgbroug t
in by tourists and most by construction. makes ,a.quick exit.
-6-
Robert Crouch. has estimated a composite retail sales
multiplier of about 1.1 (Note that in this study where it
reads .1 it should read 1.1, .2 should read 1.2, and so on.
Until we have had more time, it is impossible to know the
study. They are reasonably close to each other and
this j
probabl
I
validity of Crouch's derivation or of that used in
not too far off the actual.
V. Evaluation of the Construction Impact Estimate
Though a substantial dollar income will be generated
by construction, the impact is far less significant than
the impact of the completed Center. This is because the
construction impact is transitory. The income is generated
during construction but ceases upon completion. The Center,
however, is an ongoing thing.
It seems reasonable to assume that about 40% of the
construction cost will be labor. The percentage of this
money that will in turn be spent in Aspen creating more
income for retail stores will depend upon the spending
pattern and living location of the workers. To the extent
that the workers live and/or shop outside the County, this
income immediately goes elsewhere to no benefit to Aspen.
It seems likely that the multiplier effect of 1.4 is a littl
high, though not significantly so. Note that there will be
some secondary sales tax generation from construction and
this is not estimated in the study.
-7-
VI. Estimate of Employment Created
Employment created by any project becomes a concern
only when it presses upon the capacity of Aspen to accom-
modate new workers. Since the construction will mostly
take place during the off season, most employment created
will be for previously unemployed workers at a time when
there is excess business and housing capacity. For this
reason, W~would not be concerned with employment generated
by construction unless this one project is so large that
when combined with other building leads to a strain upon
the City's capacity, a situation unlikely to occur in view
of Ordinance #19.
We have made a rough estimate that with retail sales
of $5,000,000 in the first year that new employment generate
will be about 110. We used the national retail sales volume
per retail worker ratio of $34,900/worker in 1967 dollars,
but recognized that there has been substantial inflation
in the economy as a whole since 1967 and that Aspen prices
are high to begin with, and came up with the figure of
$50,000/worker. Using Crouch's retail sales multiplier of
1.1 which is the best estimate we have, we get a total of
110 workers. Add to this the one non-worker that we can
expect to accompany each worker, and we have a potential
increase in population of 220. It is from this non-worker
group that we expect children to enter the school system,
partially offsetting the positive school tax revenues flow
predicted in the study.
-8-
It should be emphasized that this is a rough estimate
contingent on sales being only $5 million. It should also
be noted that the issue of the extent to which the Center
generates new business versus relocating old comes in. Our
estimate assumes that all the business is effectively new
on the assumption that vacated space will be quickly absorb d
by new businesses that had no place to locate prior to
the creation of this new retail space.
In arriving at the above figures, we have assumed that
the estimated $5 million in sales occurs evenly throughout
the year. The Center will be subject to seasonal variation
as is all of the Aspen economy, so that during peak periods,
the employment level will go above the estimate since the
seasonal rate of sales will exceed the yearly rate of
$5 million. Another consideration is that the Center may
not fill up immediately or that sales may begin slowly, and
that the $5 million sales figure might not be achieved the
first year, though by the end of the year, a yearly rate of
that amount should be achieved and maintained or increased
thereafter.
VII. Conclusion
We do not wish to be derogatory to the effort put in
by Peter Cunningham. The task is extremely difficult even
for one with wider-ranging experience in this field due
to a lack of data. Given this difficulty and the magnitude
-9-
of this project, we feel that the impact statement should
have been written by a professional. As we collect more
data and refine our conceptualization of the Aspen economy,
there will be a far better basis on which the professional
can operate. Overall, we must have better data estimates
and better conceptualization than exists in this study.
We would also like to point out that there were many
points of omission in this study such as effects on traffic,
the need for such a center to increase the shopping oppor-
tunities of residents, the positive impact of greater select'on
and convenience to the people who have done without or
wasted time in getting wanted items. Though some of these
are not quantifiable, they do have an economic impact by
changing resident spending patterns and general consumer
behavior.
One very positive effect of the Aspen Center that was
not noted in the study is the development of resident
oriented consumer outlets. This has the effect of keeping
Aspen income in the Aspen economy and lessening the depen-
dence on tourist spending while making the economy more
viable and more respondent to resident needs. It should be
noted that the impact of this center is consistent with
the objectives of the Aspen Land Use Plan of 1973 in that
it affords an opportunity for greater utilization of
existing services and facilities, while providing for a more
balanced economy as it pertains to the tourist and non-
tourist elements.
,