Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20101005 AGENDA ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY, October 5, 2010 4:30 p.m. regular meeting— Sister Cities Room CITY HALL I. ROLL CALL II. COMMENTS A. Commissioners B. Planning Staff C. Public III. MINUTES IV. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. 700 Ute Avenue — PUD Amendment VI. OTHER BUSINESS VII. BOARD REPORTS VIII. ADJOURN Next Resolution Number: 18 P1 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission � Q FROM: Jennifer Phelan, Community Development Deputy Directory Y THRU: Chris Bendon, Community Development Director RE: 700 Ute Avenue (Aspen Alps) Planned Unit Development Amendment — Resolution No. , Series 2010 — Public Hearing MEETING DATE: October 5, 2010 (continued from 9/21/10) ** This memo and resolution contain minor changes from 9/21/10, Please bring your application from the previous memo or contact Jennifer if you need another one. ** APPLICANT /OWNER: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: • Dov Seidman Living Trust Staff recommends that the Commission make a • Aspen Alps South Condominium determination of denial. Association In the alternative, if the commission supports the • Ms. Mariann Martin amendment, staff recommends the applicant extinguish TDRs to exceed the unit size cap. REPRESENTATIVE: SUMMARY: Services ry Richman, Alan Richman Planning The owner of unit 701 would like to merge a unit Se with his unit to increase the overall size of unit 701. A PUD Amendment is necessary to increase Aspen Alps South, Unit 701 and Space LOCATION: the size of the unit as it currently exceeds the Aspen A. Commonly known as 700 Ute Ave., maximum unit size dimensional standard. Units 701 and 711 CURRENT ZONING & USE Located in the Lodge (L) zone district with a Planned Unit development (PUD) overlay. PROPOSED LAND USE: The Applicant is requesting to merge Space A and Unit 701 into one residential unit. Page 1 of 4 P2 LAND USE REQUESTS AND REVIEW PROCEDURES: The Applicant is requesting the following land use approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission to expand unit 701: • Other Amendment. An amendment to a final development plan, found to be consistent with the approved final development plan by the Community Development Director shall be subject to final development plan review and approval pursuant to Land Use Code section 26.445.030 (C) steps 3. (The Planning and Zoning Commission is the final review authority). The recorded condominium plat of the Aspen Alps is considered the final development plan as the project is circa 1960s — 1970s and little documentation is available on the project. After further consideration, staff has come to the conclusion that the variations requested through this PUD application can be reviewed via a one step process. PROJECT SUMMARY: The Aspen Alps consists of a number of free - standing buildings that contain multi - family residential units and are a condominium form of ownership. The Aspen Alps provides front desk services and amenities on site. The development is located in the Lodge (L) zone district with a PUD overlay on the property. The units are considered multi - family units; however, since they are located in the L zone district they are permitted but not required to be short term rented. The use of the property: multi- family residential is important to note as there are certain zone district standards that affect the proposal. Specifically, there is a cap on unit size for multi - family residential units of 1,500 sq.ft. of net livable area with the potential of adding 500 sq. ft (for a cap of 2,000 sq. ft.) with the landing of a Transferable Development Right (TDR). Within Building 700, the owner of unit 701 (a three bedroom unit) would like to purchase space A/unit 711 (a one bedroom unit) and merge the two units into one larger unit. Unit 701 contains approximately 2,250 sq. ft. which exceeds the maximum size cap permitted. Space A/unit 711 is approximately 612 sq. ft. If the units are merged, the total square footage will equal approximately 2,862 sq. ft. To permit a unit of this size, a variation through the PUD to the maximum multi - family residential dwelling unit size needs to be approved. Aspen Alps is considered multi- family residential. As such the merging of two units is subject to Section 26.470.070 (5), Demolition or redevelopment of multi - family housing, which requires The status of space A/unit 711 is rather unique. Condominiums are generally divided into Units, Limited Common Elements (LCE), and General Common Elements (GCE). Units tend to be the physical unit that an individual purchaser owns, while a LCE is a common element that limits the use of the subject element to an individual unit owner (for example a back yard), whereas a GCE is a common element that is general in nature and used by the homeowners association (HOA). Typically, a residential dwelling is identified on a plat as a unit. Although space A/unit 711 is configured as a one bedroom dwelling unit, it is shown on the condominium plat as a GCE on the condominium plat and owned by the HOA; however, space A/unit 711 is also encumbered with a "perpetual exclusive easement" for use of the space by the original condominium declarant (as well as heirs). So, although owned by the HOA, space A/unit 711 is exclusively used by the heirs of the original developer of the Aspen Alps. Information confirming that the dwelling unit was built as part of the original development of the building in the 1970s has been submitted and staff believes this arrangement might have been created as part of the condominiumization of the building to avoid the payment of HOA dues. Page 2 of 4 P3 affordable housing mitigation when multi - family units are demolished or combined unless the units meet an exemption from the requirements. Both units meet one of the listed exemptions. STAFF COMMENTS: A Planned Unit Development is a process in which a site specific development plan is created which encourages flexibility and innovation in the development of the land and promotes objectives outlined in the LUC and goals of the AACP by allowing the variation of the underlying zone district's dimensional requirements. The parcel currently exists with a PUD overlay, however, based upon the new development proposal the PUD must be amended and dimensional requirements established to permit the merging of the two units. Maximum Multi - family Residential Dwelling Unit Size. As noted previously, the Applicant seeks to increase the size of unit 701 from 2,250 sq. ft to 2,862 sq. ft. The current maximum cap in unit size for a multifamily residential unit is 2,000 sq. ft. with the landing of a Transferable Development Right. As the existing unit is over the allowable unit size, the only way to permit a residential dwelling that is larger than what is permitted by the underlying zoning is to amend the dimensional standards for the PUD, specifically amending the maximum multi - family residential dwelling unit size. To accommodate the request, a maximum unit size cap of 3,000 sq. ft. of net livable space should be considered. This cap would be subject only to the 700 building of the Aspen Alps so any unit within the building could potentially become a 3,000 sq. ft. unit in the future. Staff Comment: Under section 26.710.190, the Purpose clause of the Lodge zone district states that: "The purpose of the Lodge (L) Zone District is to encourage construction, renovation and operation of lodges, tourist- oriented multi family buildings, high occupancy timeshare facilities and ancillary uses compatible with lodging to support and enhance the City's resort economy. Free - market residential units within this Zone District shall be permitted, but not required, to be used as short -term tourist accommodations. The City encourages high- occupancy lodging development in this zone district. Therefore, certain dimensional incentives are provided in this zone district, as well as other development incentives in Chapter 26.470, Growth Management Quota System (GMQS)." In 2007 City Council capped the size of residential units within the Lodge and other zone districts throughout the city. This was, in part, to encourage higher densities and the potential to have more lights on in the core of the city. Part of the Philosophy under Economic Sustainability of the Aspen Area Community Plan is "Essential to long -term viability is the unique, varied, high quality, and welcoming experience Aspen offers to both residents and a diverse visitor population. They demand a lively, small -scale downtown with diverse and unique shops and varied choices of accommodations, including small lodges" (Philosophy, 31). RECOMMENDATION: Based upon the dimensional standards of the zone district, staff does not recommend approval of the request to merge the two units and further exceed the maximum unit size cap for multi- family residential dwelling units in the Lodge zone district. A larger unit may diversify the city' s offerings with regard to potential accommodations; however, a lodging inventory showed that Page 3 of 4 P4 there are plenty of larger units available in the city's inventory. Staff believes that the goal of the city is to provide smaller units that may potentially be rented and provide a higher density of units within the city's core. If the Commission determines that merging of the two units is appropriate, staff recommends that the Commission require the purchase of Transferable Development Rights to exceed the current cap. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to recommend City Council denial of the request." ALTERNATIVE MOTION: "I move to recommend City Council approve the PUD Amendment with a requirement that the applicant extinguish TDRs to exceed the unit size cap." ATTACHMENTS: EXHIBIT A - Review Criteria EXHIBIT B — Application Page 4 of 4 P5 RESOLUTION NO. (SERIES OF 2010) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING FOR THE ASPEN ALPS SOUTH ISSION APPROVING A PUD AMENDMENT COMMONLY KNOWN IDING OF THE ASPEN ALPS, 700 UTE AVENUE, CITY OF ASPEN, O PARCEL ID: 273718269004 and 273718269010 WHEREAS, the Community Development Department received an application from Alan Richman Planning Services on behalf of the e�e 011avitlnconsent Trust. of Unit grant d 701, Aspen Alps South also known as 700 Ute Avenue, bya 4 the owner of Space A, the Aspen Alps South homeowners association and the owner of the right to use Space A. Ms. Marianne Martin . - - - - ; and, WHEREAS, the requested amendment is to permit the merging of two units within the 700 building of the Aspen Alps; and, WHEREAS, the merging of the two units will allow a unit of up to 3,000 sq. ft. of net livable area for the subject unit and for any unit within the 700 building; and, WHEREAS, during a duly noticed public hearing on September , 2010, upon review and consideration of the recommendation of the Community Development Department, presentation from the applicant, public testimony, and discussion and consideration of the proposal, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved the review, by a to (- -to - -) vote, with the allowances and limitations as outlined in this resolution. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE THAT: PLNNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO Section 1: Approvals Granted The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of the following land use reviews with the following conditions: A. Planned Unit Development — Other Amendment. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends the following variation of a dimensional standard from the Lodge zone district solely for the 700 building. The specific variation is from section 26.710.190 (D)(12), Maximum Multi- Family Residential Dwelling Unit Size: Net Livable Area Max. Unit Size 3,000 sq. ft. P &Z Resolution No. , Series of 2010 Page 1 P6 Section 2: Building Permit A building permit application shall meet all adopted standards of the city. Additionally, a copy of this resolution ..- : - - .. -; - - :. ' _ - - - : shall be submitted with the application. - - . - -. .. _ - _ ' - - ... • . Section 34: Vested Rights This approval shall be valid for a the ;r ater of the three -year period of statutory vested rights, as more precisely defined in the Development Order issued by the Community Development Department. 1 Section 45_ All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the development proposal approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning Commission, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by an authorized entity. 1 Section 56: This Resolution shall not affect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. 1 Section 6;: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Resolution is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. 1 APPROVED BY the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Aspen on this day of September -, 2010. APPROVED AS TO FORM: PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION: • Jim True, Special Counsel Stan Gibbs, Chairman P &Z Resolution No. , Series of 2010 Page 2 P7 ATTEST: Jackie Lothian, Deputy City P &Z Resolution No. , Series of 2010 Page 3 P8 EXHIBIT A Chapter 26.445, PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Sec. 26.445.050. Review Criteria conceptual, final, consolidated and minor PUD. A development application for conceptual, final, consolidated, conceptual and final or minor PUD shall comply with the following standards and requirements. Due to the limited issues associated with conceptual reviews and properties eligible for minor PUD review, certain standards shall not be applied as noted. The burden shall rest upon an applicant to show the reasonableness of the development application and its conformity to the standards and procedures of this Chapter and this Title. A. General requirements. 1. The proposed development shall be consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. 2. The proposed development shall be consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. 3. The proposed development shall not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. 4. The proposed development has either been granted GMQS allotments, is exempt from GMQS, or GMQS allotments are available to accommodate the proposed development and will be considered prior to, or in combination with, final PUD development plan review. Staff Finding: Part of the Philosophy under Economic Sustainability of the Aspen Area Community Plan is "Essential to long -term viability is the unique, varied, high quality, and welcoming experience Aspen offers to both residents and a diverse visitor population. They demand a lively, small -scale downtown with diverse and unique shops and varied choices of accommodations, including small lodges" (Philosophy, pg 31). Staff finds that the AACP does not directly address lodging. B. Establishment of Dimensional Requirements: The final PUD development plans shall establish the dimensional requirements for all properties within the PUD as described in General Provisions, Section 26.445.040, above. The dimensional requirements of the underlying zone district shall be used as a guide in determining the appropriate dimensions for the PUD. During review of the proposed dimensional requirements, compatibility with surrounding land uses and existing development patterns shall be emphasized. 1. The proposed dimensional requirements for the subject property are appropriate and compatible with the following influences on the property: P9 a. The character of, and compatibility with, existing and expected future land uses in the surrounding area. b. Natural or man-made hazards. c. Existing natural characteristics of the property and surrounding area such as steep slopes, waterways, shade, and significant vegetation and landforms. d. Existing and proposed man-made characteristics of the property and the surrounding area such as noise, traffic, transit, pedestrian circulation, parking, and historical resources. Staff Finding.: The dimensional standards are set via the PUD and the request does not affect the overall dimensions: height, floor area etc. of the PUD but would affect density and maximum unit size of the PUD. The above referenced influences do not impact the proposal. Stafflnds this standard not applicable. 2. The proposed dimensional requirements permit a scale, massing, and quantity of open space and site coverage appropriate and favorable to the character of the proposed PUD and of the surrounding area. Staff Finding.: The PUD request does not affect open space and site coverage. Staff finds this standard not applicable. 3. The appropriate number of off - street parking spaces shall be established based on the following considerations: a. The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development including any non - residential land uses. b. The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. c. The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. d. The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core and general activity centers in the city. Staff Finding: The PUD request does not affect parking on -site. Staff finds this standard not applicable. P10 4. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists insufficient infrastructure capabilities. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a. There is not sufficient water pressure, drainage capabilities or other utilities to service the proposed development. b. There are not adequate roads to ensure fire protection, snow removal and road maintenance to the proposed development. Staff Finding: Sufficient infrastructure exists to service the development with its current density. Stafffinds that this standard is not met. 5. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be reduced if there exists natural hazards or critical natural site features. Specifically, the maximum density of a PUD may be reduced if: a. The land is not suitable for the proposed development because of ground instability or the possibility of mudflow, rock falls or avalanche dangers. b. The effects of the proposed development are detrimental to the natural watershed, due to runoff, drainage, soil erosion and consequent water pollution. c. The proposed development will have a pernicious effect on air quality in the surrounding area and the City. d. The design and location of any proposed structure, road, driveway or trail in the proposed development is not compatible with the terrain or causes harmful disturbance to critical natural features of the site. Staff Finding: The density already exists as the project is developed and natural hazards are not present that would provide a basis for a reduction in density. Staff finds that this standard is not met. 6. The maximum allowable density within a PUD may be increased if there exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such increase and the development pattern is compatible with its surrounding development patterns and with the site's physical constraints. a. The increase in density serves one or more goals of the community as expressed in the Aspen Area Community Plan (AACP) or a specific area plan to which the property is subject. b. The site's physical capabilities can accommodate additional density and there exists no negative physical characteristics of the site, as identified in Subparagraphs 4 and 5, above, those areas can be avoided or those characteristics mitigated. c. The increase in maximum density results in a development pattern compatible with and complimentary to, the surrounding existing and expected development pattern, land uses and characteristics. Notes: a. Lot sizes for individual lots within a PUD may be established at a higher or lower rate than specified in the underlying Zone District as long as, on P11 average, the entire PUD conforms to the maximum density provisions of the respective Zone District or as otherwise established as the maximum allowable density pursuant to a final PUD Development Plan. b. The approved dimensional requirements for all lots within the PUD are required to be reflected in the final PUD development plans. Staff Finding: The applicant is proposing reduce the density on the site. Staff finds this standard not applicable. C. Site Design. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the PUD enhances public spaces, is complimentary to the site's natural and man-made features and the adjacent public spaces, and ensures the public's health and safety. The proposed development shall comply with the following: 1. Existing natural or man-made features of the site which are unique, provide visual interest or a specific reference to the past, or contribute to the identity of the town are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 2. Structures have been clustered to appropriately preserve significant open spaces and vistas. 3. Structures are appropriately oriented to public streets, contribute to the urban or rural context where appropriate, and provide visual interest and engagement of vehicular and pedestrian movement. 4. Buildings and access ways are appropriately arranged to allow emergency and service vehicle access. 5. Adequate pedestrian and handicapped access is provided. 6. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in a practical and reasonable manner and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. 7. For non - residential land uses, spaces between buildings are appropriately designed to accommodate any programmatic functions associated with the use. Staff Finding.: As noted earlier, the application request interior changes to a building and does not affect public spaces, manmade and natural features, etc. Staff finds this standard not applicable. D. Landscape Plan. The purpose of this standard is to ensure compatibility of the proposed landscape with the visual character of the city, with surrounding parcels, and with existing and proposed features of the subject property. The proposed development shall comply with the following: P12 1. The landscape plan exhibits a well designated treatment of exterior spaces, preserves existing significant vegetation, and provides an ample quantity and variety of ornamental plant species suitable for the Aspen area climate. 2. Significant existing natural and man-made site features, which provide uniqueness and interest in the landscape, are preserved or enhanced in an appropriate manner. 3. The proposed method of protecting existing vegetation and other landscape features is appropriate. Staff Finding: This standard is not applicable as landscaping is not affected by this application. E. Architectural Character. 1. Be compatible with or enhance the visual character of the City, appropriately relate to existing and proposed architecture of the property, represent a character suitable for and indicative of the intended use and respect the scale and massing of nearby historical and cultural resources. 2. Incorporate, to the extent practical, natural heating and cooling by taking advantage of the property's solar access, shade and vegetation and by use of non- or less- intensive mechanical systems. 3. Accommodate the storage and shedding of snow, ice and water in a safe and appropriate manner that does not require significant maintenance. Staff Finding: This standard is not applicable as the existing architectural character is not affected by this application. F. Lighting. 1. The purpose of this standard to ensure the exterior of the development will be lighted in an appropriate manner considering both public safety and general aesthetic concerns. 2. All exterior lighting shall in compliance with the outdoor lighting standards unless otherwise approved and noted in the final PUD documents. Up- lighting of site features, buildings, landscape elements and lighting to call inordinate attention to the property is prohibited for residential development. Staff Finding: This standard is not applicable as the existing lighting is not affected by this application. G. Common Park, Open Space, or Recreation Area. P13 If the proposed development includes a common park, open space, or recreation area for the mutual benefit of all development in the proposed PUD, the following criteria shall be met: 1. The proposed amount, location, and design of the common park, open space, or recreation area enhances the character of the proposed development, considering existing and proposed structures and natural landscape features of the property, provides visual relief to the property's built form, and is available to the mutual benefit of the various land uses and property users of the PUD. 2. A proportionate, undivided interest in all common park and recreation areas is deeded in perpetuity (not for a number of years) to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the PUD or ownership is proposed in a similar manner. 3. There is proposed an adequate assurance through a legal instrument for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a deed restriction against future residential, commercial, or industrial development. Staff Finding: This standard is not applicable as the existing undeveloped land is not affected by this application. H. Utilities and Public facilities. The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development does not impose an undue burden on the City's infrastructure capabilities and that the public does not incur an unjustified financial burden. The proposed utilities and public facilities associated with the development shall comply with the following: 1. Adequate public infrastructure facilities exist to accommodate the development. 2. Adverse impacts on public infrastructure by the development will be mitigated by the necessary improvements at the sole cost of the developer. 3. Oversized utilities, public facilities, or site improvements are provided appropriately and where the developer is reimbursed proportionately for the additional improvement. Staff Finding: The Applicant is proposing to enlarge and existing unit; utilities are not affected. I. Access and Circulation. (Only standards 1 &2 apply to Minor PUD applications) The purpose of this standard is to ensure the development is easily accessible, does not unduly burden the surrounding road network, provides adequate pedestrian and recreational trail facilities and minimizes the use of security gates. The proposed access and circulation of the development shall meet the following criteria: P14 1. Each lot, structure, or other land use within the PUD has adequate access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. 2. The proposed development, vehicular access points, and parking arrangement do not create traffic congestion on the roads surrounding the proposed development, or such surrounding roads are proposed to be improved to accommodate the development. 3. Areas of historic pedestrian or recreational trail use, improvements of, or connections to, the bicycle and pedestrian trail system, and adequate access to significant public lands and the rivers are provided through dedicated public trail easements and are proposed for appropriate improvements and maintenance. 4. The recommendations of the Aspen Area Community Plan and adopted specific plans regarding recreational trails, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and transportation are proposed to be implemented in an appropriate manner. 5. Streets in the PUD which are proposed or recommended to be retained under private ownership provide appropriate dedication to public use to ensure appropriate public and emergency access. 6. Security gates, guard posts, or other entryway expressions for the PUD, or for lots within the PUD, are minimized to the extent practical. Staff Finding: As a proposal to merge units, circulation and access are not affected. J. Phasing of Development Plan. (does not apply to Conceptual PUD applications) The purpose of this criteria is to ensure partially completed projects do not create an unnecessary burden on the public or surrounding property owners and impacts of an individual phase are mitigated adequately. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be defined in the adopted final PUD development plan. Staff Finding: This standard is not applicable to the review of the request.