HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.gm.210 W main - King Louise Apts.A79-95 CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET
City of Aspen
DATE RECEIVED: 6 1 5 f ., PARCEL ID AND CASE NO.
DATE COMPLETE: 2735- 124 -40 -009 A79 -95
STAFF MEMBER: L
PROJECT NAME: KING LOUISE APTS. GMOS EXEMPTION/ Kn be. 0C (1
Project Address: 210 W. MAIN STREET ASPEN S ��J
Legal Address: BLOCK 5 LOTS P & 0
APPLICANT: TED AND SUSANN GUY
Applicant Address: P.O. BOX 1467 BASALT 81621
REPRESENTATIVE: SAME
Representative Address /Phone: 927 -3167
Aspen, CO 81611
FEES: PLANNING 4 1040 r # APPS RECEIVED 1
ENGINEER $ � .e # PLATS RECEIVED 7
HOUSING $
ENV. HEALTH $
TOTAL $ 1040
TYPE OF APPLICATION: STAFF APPROVAL: 1 STEP: XX 2 STEP:
P &Z Meeting DatefOr ' PUBLIC HEARING: YES
V VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO
CC Meeting Date PUBLIC HEARING: YES NO
VESTED RIGHTS: YES NO
DRC Meeting Date
REFERRALS:
City Attorney Parks Dept. School District
City Engineer Bldg Inspector Rocky Mtn NatGas
Housing Dir. Fire Marshal CDOT
Aspen Water Holy Cross Clean Air Board
City Electric Mtn. Bell Open Space Board
Envir.Hlth. ACSD Other
Zoning Energy Center Other
DATE REFERRED: 10_12% INITIALS: 51,1) DUE: 4/
FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: l ° ;, INITIAL:
City Atty City Engineer _Zoning Env. Health
S' Housing Open Space Other:
FILE STATUS AND LOCATION:
A RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
APPROVING GROWTH MANAGEMENT EXEMPTION FOR A CHANGE IN USE FOR UNIT
7 OF THE RING LOUISE APARTMENTS LOCATED AT 210 W. MAIN STREET (LOTS
P AND 0, BLOCK 5) CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, COLORADO.
Resolution No. 95 -a
WHEREAS, the Ted and Susan Guy submitted an application to the
Planning Office to change the use of Unit 7 from residential use
to commercial use in order to operate a hair salon; and
WHEREAS, the applicant proposed to deed restrict for
affordable housing Unit 8 within the same apartment building as
part of the change in use request; and
WHEREAS, the proposal was reviewed by the Engineering
Department and the Housing Office and referral comments were
forwarded to the Planning Office; and
WHEREAS, Planning staff reviewed the request and referral
comments and recommended approval with conditions of the GMQS
Exemption for change in use pursuant to Section 24 -8 -104 B(b); and
WHEREAS, on August 8, 1995, the Planning and Zoning Commission
reviewed the proposal and staff recommendations and voted
unanimously to approve the request with conditions.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Commission that it does hereby
approve GMQS Exemption for change in use for Unit 7 of the King
Louise Apartments from a primarily residential use to a mixed
commercial /residential use with the following conditions:
1. This change in use only applies to one 457 square foot
residential dwelling unit (unit 7) at 210 W. Main Street.
2. In order to mitigate the increased employees for the change in
use, prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant
shall file a deed restriction with the Aspen Pitkin County Housing
Office for unit 18, restricting the unit to category 1 sales and
rental guidelines.
3. The applicant shall adhere to all representations made in the
application and at the public hearing.
4.The parking spaces in the alley shall be renumbered or
reorganized to allow the commercial apartment parking in what is
now spaces 1 and 8.
APPROVED by the Commission at their regular meeting on August 8,
1995.
ATTEST: ASPEN PLANNING AND
ZONING COMMISSION
ca t
,a(•6744..-
Jan Ca ey, Deputy City Clerk Bruce Kerr, Chairman
•
2
ATr 1
J� / LAND USE APPLICATIO] FORM
�
1)' ' Project Napa I , 1L & OU 11 A + p -+ , efigAn
2) Project Location 210 0 1e (t� P . A J
(. LoTcn 'k - , Eck-- �\J
(indicate street address, lot & block number, legal description where
appropriate)
3) Present Zoning DACE 4) lot Size (POSC
5) Applicant's Name, Address & Phone # ll 1 -1I , ( ..
fix. t401 8 2 1 C ,' � `` 81`i 6) Representative's Name, Address & thane # ` [e at
n ` )•-1N COY
toc 401 P ICT Co fq)21 9:221- 31col
7) Type of Application (please check all that apply):
Conditional Use Conceptual SPA _ . Conceptual Historic Dev.
Special Review _ Final SPA _ Final Historic Dev.
_ 8040 Greesli*e Conceptual P _ Minor Historic Dev.
Stream Margin _ Final HID _ Historic D®olition
Maintain View Plante' _ Subdivision _ Historic r_ Desicgnation
Corclominiumization _ Text/Map Amendment QS Allotment
lot Split/Iot Line GCS Exemption
Adjustmont
8) Description of Existing Uses (number and type of existing structures;
approximate sq. ft; number of bedroom: any previous approvals granted to the
p-).
GIC �tT STLIo(n ES t.Do STUCL1 ES
9) Description of Devi nt Application a
T U l 1 l i& t!.t S I ✓aC C
vx kneic, rrEo izIC( (L0T E3 6 tEM T
1 MO k*ojSI o
10) Have you attached the foliating?
>C Response to Attachment 2, Minimum Subaissicn Contents
Response to Attachae nt 3, Specific Submission Contents
X Ruse to Attachment 4, Review Standards for Your Application
00!04!1995 14:00 9709. THEODORE K GUY ASSOC PAGE 02
r• -
+� 1
MAR 1 4 1995
2 March 1995 THECID3RE KowA56OCiAih$,e'4
Mr. Theodore IC Guy, Manna -
King Iaain Aprbnasts
224 W. Main Street ASPEN • PITKIN
•
Aspen, CO 81611 hnlnlwc & ZONINm DEPARTMENT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Re: Haircutting Occupation in the Office Zone
Derr Mr. Guy
I am respondwg W your letter with respect to the establishment of an haircutting occupation in the
Office Zone: You mention several appraad.es to permitting this activity. First of a0, you ask if it can
be established order the provisions for "home otamatian." The definition for "home occupation"
specifically' occludes barber shop and beauty parlor as hare: ace spsbw+s (Section 3 -101, lime
Pwatiralsb "L ")• -
' However, included within the list of permitted uses for He Office Zone is "Professional Business
Offices." Professional and business offices ere defined in the Land Use Code as uses where "services are
made available W the public." The distinction behveni a business and • professional office seems W
hinge on licensing and the provision of products incidental to the provision of services. While haircutting
or barbering are not specifically mentioned in these definitions, .there would appear W be no reason W
exclude than as pasiitted activities. I would therefore conclude tkat, subject W a lard use application
and any other rapdrmaes'of the Land Use Code, Susaam's Haircutting could be established as a
permitted use at 220 W. Main Street.
Yon also mention in your letter the concept of an "accessory use." I believe the establislanent of a
haircutting use is satisfied as a permitted use. The concept of an accessory use is not applicable in this
contest.
•
Please let me knew if I may provide any further information or assistance.
Very Indy yams,
. Stem Clarion, AICP
Community Devdopmnt Director
City, of Aspen
cc: Leslie Lament, Deputy Hamling Director
William Druedheg, Zoning Enforcement Officer
•
IX SOUTH GALENA SMUT • ASPEN, COLORA"" 61611 • PHONE 393920.5090 - FAx 303. -
"lI1MmHHMIT"E DIRECT Fax LINE'. 303.9205439
ASPEN /PITKIN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(970) 920 -5090 FAX# (970) 920 -5439
June 29, 1995
Ted & Susann Guy
Box 1467
Basalt, CO 81621
Re: King Louise Apartments GMQS Exemption for Change in Use
Case A79 -95
Dear Ted & Susann,
I mistakenly informed you in my letter of June 28, 1995, that the Planning Commission would
review this application on Tuesday, August 1, 1995. The correct date of the meeting is
Tuesday, August 8, 1995. Please note this correction, and contact me at 920 -5093 if you have
any questions.
Sincerely,
Suzarfne L. Wolff
Administrative Assistant
apa.ph
ASPEN /PITKIN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Phone (970) 920 -5090 FAX (970) 920 -5439
MEMORANDUM
TO: City Engineer
Housing Director
FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planner
RE: King Louise Apartments GMQS Exemption for Change in Use
Parcel ID No. 2735 - 124 -40 -009
DATE: June 28, 1995
Attached for your review and comments is an application submitted by Ted and Susann Guy.
Please return your comments to me no later than July 17.
Thank you.
ASPEN /PITKIN
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
130 S. Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(970) 920 -5090 FAX# (970) 920 -5439
June 28, 1995
Ted & Susann Guy
Box 1467
Rasalt, CO 81621
Re: King Louise Apartments GMQS Exemption for Change in Use
Case A79 -95
Dear Ted & Susann,
The Community Development Department has completed its preliminary review of the captioned
application. We have determined that this application is complete.
We have scheduled this application for review by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
at a Public Hearing to be held on Tuesday, August 1, 1995 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 p.m.
Should this date be inconvenient for you please contact me within 3 working days of the date
of this letter. After that the agenda date will be considered final and changes to the schedule
or tabling of the application will only be allowed for unavoidable technical problems. The
Friday before the meeting date, we will call to inform you that a copy of the memo pertaining
to the application is available at the Community Development Department.
Please note that it is your responsibility to mail notice to property owners within 300' and to
post the subject property with a sign at least ten (10) days prior to the public hearing. Please
submit a photograph of the posted sign as proof of posting and an affidavit as proof of mailing
prior to the public hearing.
If you have any questions, please call Leslie Lamont, the planner assigned to your case, at 920-
5101.
Sincerely,
Suzanne L. Wolff
Administrative Assistant
sw.ph
TRW
SCHEDULE A- OWNER'S POLICY
CASE NUMBER DATE OF .POLICY AMOUNT OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER
PCT- 8342C2 02/07/94 @ 12:33 P.M. $ 606,250.0
0112- 222153
1. NAME OF INSURED:
KING LOUISE, LLC., A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
2. THE ESTATE OR INTEREST IN THE LAND HEREIN AND WHICH IS COVERED BY THIS POLICY IS:
IN FEE SIMPLE
3. THE ESTATE OR INTEREST REFERRED TO HEREIN IS AT DATE OF POLICY VESTED IN:
KING LOUISE, LLC., A COLORADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
4. THE LAND REFERRED TO IN THIS POLICY IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
LOTS P AND Q, BLOCK 51, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN. COUNTY OF
PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO.
PITKIN COUNTY TITLE, INC.
601 E. HOPKINS AVE.
ASPEN, COLORADO 81611
(303) 925 -1766
THE POLICY NUMBER SHOWN ON THIS SCHEDULE MUST AGREE WITH THE PREPRINTED NUMBER ON THE
COVER SHEET.
SCHEDULE B- OWNERS
CASE NUMBER DATE OF POLICY POLICY NUMBER
PCT- 8342C2 02/07/94 @ 12:33 P.M. 0112- 222153
THIS POLICY DOES NOT INSURE AGAINST LOSS OR DAMAGE BY REASON OF THE FOLLOWING:
1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records.
2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records.
•3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, enchroachments,
any facts which a correct survey and inspection of the premises would disclose
and which are not shown by the public records.
4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor, or material heretofore or
hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records.
5. Water rights, claims or title to water.
6. Taxes for the year 1994 not yet due or payable.
7. Reservations and exceptions as set forth in the Deed from the City
of Aspen recorded in Book 59 at Page 12 providing as follows:
"That no title shall be hereby acquired to any mine of gold,
silver, cinnabar or copper or to any valid mining claim or
possession held under existing laws ".
8. Terms, conditions, provisions, obligations and all matters as set
forth in Ordinance No. 60, Series of 1976 by City of Aspen
recorded in Book 321 at Page 51.
9. Deed of Trust from : King Louise LLC
To the Public Trustee of the County of Pitkin
For the use of : Pitkin County Bank & Trust Company
To secure : $454,000.00
Dated : February 2, 1994
Recorded : February 7, 1994 in Book 741 at Page 027
Reception No. 366622
Assignment of Rents and Leases given in connection with the above
Deed of Trust recorded February 7, 1994 in Book 741 at Page 029.
EXCEPTIONS NUMBERED NONE ARE HEREBY OMITTED.
City of Aspen
Pre- Application Conference Su nmary
f 42
U e
Project 9 `^`„L t " tr ecvT S7i, 1 M `r �` ,
Applicant's Representative ��/
Representative's Phone
Owner's Name
T of Application
. ' /Description of the project /dove opment mg requ ;tt � a ��I esle " 6
Wed ��}
�� e
cic,.
X "� Thelapplicant has been requested to respond to the following items and provide the lotto mg
nv A ? reports: 114.414. l/S f f�vwN " 1p Q,imU // V 7n.iz
Land Use Code Section Comments
//A • GQ
• I , 1 I OM + 4 I
3( p . .Y
I The review is: (P & Z only) ( C C only) (P&Z and CC)
Public Hearing: (yes) (no)
W `g Si . ` 0 0i ENV
N Will MIS I t
I r �Il EM 1 Stj
!• 1 1 troll
1s M3d5V IN r --- 'L'----- --F -} —
ems m� miss 1 1 � 1
ma IS ow.� 1 C .
'e 'rM Q ter,
MINI ;was i -cc I maim
1 I I �v i �1 W
g NOOZ Nr01 1 'S 0� . Q� 8 010 Z 4
A8 �HOSWWHVO••N-.• Jb1 .. ��aII
' � Z
..1 p
vJ ' I ; a , 1 n. ligil ._..
= rill
15 15211 N i 15 11.814 I -S
-- 1 1 3� -- —
— ��w1 0 I —
\ \ \� =
-. GI - it El 1E I si E to -- ___,1_,
I - �1mi __ - - -- --
1
is ONOOIfS N .1S ON0O
I
- I -- z
- - -
a
e --- — o cc 0
_ .../ _ W (r) 1 1-1
15 WA N m 1
15 O IHl 5 r - - - -L.
1 I
•
MIS a
`' = °
a IS HlrllOd N r_____L__15 •a HIHf*J S
— ;
• Alley
1 2 5 4 5 6 7
reglaze with
5/8 insul gi.
:5069 new airlock [
8 entry ° relocate exist
bath fixtures
9 6:❑
Eli X l
\ c io It L
.. new hair
chair , . wall' r -
emovc .x is g . • bat
.tor'ag. c GO
ea ' ' < L1—� ' A E31 w s pt 7relocate exis :frig 4
s hower ❑toil ;t studio
\ aA 9ir I I
k.
Onew d 1in
Y, uen ` I l l
\� / chair bed un ry exist rig f \ \1
to re rain
� ' replace door w/
` store door
• existing sidewalk to retrain
/
/ existing stairs
Exisiina Apartment
Build with Six
Studio Apts to
Remain
Existing Sidewalk to Remain
main street
v..
5 ite '9 Ian / Hoor Ian ,,,,,,1
iiiIII @ 1/8" =1' - 0" flan North
Issued Sheet
The Pig Farm Susann'S Haircutting
printed Shop and Residence
Architectural Salvage and Pe5i0r1
Vertical Board I
and Rattan Siding
Match Existing Roof
proposed studio apt
with haircutting shop
n e W tog Cabin siding to
gkass match exist
\y1
\orth - levation - roposec
@10 " =1' -
Existing Vertical Board
and Batten Siding
Existing Log Cabin
Siding
new
oo store
door \
West -levation - ° roposec
@1/8 " =1' -
I l
Existing Vertical Board
and Batten Siding
l Existing Log Cabin
Siding
I I
E st - levation - Existing
@ 1/8 " =1' -
issued Sheet
The Pi Farm Susann's Haircutting
printed Shop and Residence
checked Architectural Salvage and Design
.. __ Kinn 1 noise. Martments
... .
1
reglaze with
5/8 insul 4. new comb air
i
i .
1 in:.: . : .. ::fl . :.:.::::::: . : . : . :.:.:.:.: . : . .: . : . : . :. .. : . : ,. : : : .0.42: ... :..1.:41.-.::•:..: . :.: . : : , 1
3068
I new bath
‘, new airlock
• •
entry relocate exist
bath fixtures
0
. 13
I -
i GI
7 I I \7
' S11■11■0 1....__, .
.1 1
2462E3 1
- i
1
.i
chair
remove existinT
storage closet
and bookcase 1
reloca c existing F I I 6ath
—
shower, 5irk, and .., x.,i': 1
WWI ter toilet —
1 1 Apt 8
w/ star 1
1 1 studio
new hair
A
new built in wash sink 1 1K I i enT
— 4
Ana 7 . be(' unit _
chair
existing kit
--,--,_ I / 1 r to remain
. 2
existing sidewalk to remain
existing stairs
.... .
issued Sheet
printed The ifiFig Farm Susann's Hai rcuttina
Shop and Residence
checked Architectural Salvage and Design
r inn 1 Mgr. ArlartMentS
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Leslie Lamont, Deputy Director
DATE: August 8, 1995
RE: King Louise Apartments - GMQS Exemption for a Change in
Use
SUMMARY: The applicant seeks a GMQS Exemption for a change in use
from residential to office /commercial space.
The Planning Department recommends approval of the GMQS Exemption.
APPLICANT: Ted and Susann Guy
LOCATION: 210 W. Main Street
ZONING: Office
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The applicants request a change in use from
residential to office /commercial space. The business aspect of the
space will operate during normal working hours, monday- friday and
the residential characteristic of the unit will be maintained for
week -end and evening use. The applicants also propose to deed
restrict an approximately 284 square foot studio unit to category
1 as mitigation for the change in use.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: According to the application, the property
contains eight studio apartments in two structures. Apartment 1-
6 are in the building facing Main Street and were built in the
60's. Units 7 & 8 are located behind on the alley and were built
in the early 60's.
Susann proposes to move her hair salon to unit 7. The unit will
remain a residential unit as the salon will operate only during
business hours. The applicant originally proposed an
interpretation that the salon should be considered an accessory -
use and not a change in use. However, staff believes that the
change of use more accurately reflects the primary use of unit 7.
In addition, the Community Development Director has interpreted
that the hair salon is an allowed use in the office zone district.
STAFF COMMENTS:
A. Change in Use - Pursuant to Section 24 -8 -104 B(b) of the
Municipal Code, the Commission may grant a GMQS Exemption for a
change in use provided that it can be demonstrated that the change
in use will have minimal impact upon the city. A determination of
minimal impact shall require a demonstration that a minimal number
of additional employees will be generated by the change in use and
that employee housing will be provided for the additional employees
generated; that a minimal amount of additional parking space will
be demanded by the change in use and that parking will be provided;
that there will be minimal visual impact on the neighborhood from
the change in use; and that minimal demand will be placed on the
city's public facilities from the change in use.
RESPONSE: The addition of the hair salon, which will be operated
during regular business hours, will have minimal impact to the City
and to the surrounding business. The converted residential unit
is located off of the alley in a seperate building which is behind
the structure on Main Street. The Engineering Department has
determined that existing on -site and off -site parking is sufficient
for the proposed use.
The Housing Office reviewed the change in use. The additional
employees that are generated are less than 1 employee. The
applicants propose to deed restrict an adjacent unit to category
1. Although the square footage of the unit to be deed restricted
is less than the Housing Guidelines requires, the Housing Office
will accept the unit because the mitigation required is less than
1 employee and an existing unit is being restricted and added to
the Housing inventory.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the change in use
from residential to office /commercial in the 457 square foot
residential space at 210 West Main Street with the following
conditions:
1. This change in use only applies to one 457 square foot
residential dwelling unit (unit 7) at 210 W. Main Street.
2. In order to mitigate the increased employees for the change in
use, prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant
shall file a deed restriction with the Aspen Pitkin County Housing
Office for unit 18, restricting the unit to category 1 sales and
rental guidelines.
3. The applicant shall adhere to all representations made in the
application and at the public hearing. -
RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to grant a GMQS Exemption for the
change in use of one 457 square foot dwelling unit (unit 7) from
a primary residential use to a mixed commercial /residential use."
Exhibits
1. Referral Comments
2. Application - 1 _ s , _/‘ - ?, M: `" tr 2 _. , �r G i
�J �
AUG 03 '95 03 :17PM ASPEN HOUSING OFC P•
EXHIBIT A
NaBRIRANDUM
TO: Leslie Lamont, Community Development
FROM: Cindy Christensen, Housing Office -
DATE: August 3, 1995
RE: King Louise Apartments GMQS Exemption for Change in Use
Parcel ID No- 2735- 124 -40 -009
I The applicant is regle=entalthousing restrict
so t long as the office
foot oot studio studio unit to Category
use would continue in Unit 7.
SACKGROUNII: The unit to be deed restricted is smaller than the
minimum square footage listed in the 1995 Aspen /Pitkin. County
Guidelines. A studio unit is classified as housing 1.25 residents.
The applicant would have to mitigate for leas than 1 employee per
the calculations that you and I came up with. Therefore, the size
of the unit is acceptable.
RECOMMENDATION; The Housing Office recommends approval of Unit 8
being deed restricted to Category 1 rental housing. It is our
understanding that this is a studio unit that contains a bathroom
and kitchen, which kitchen shall contain a minimum of a two - burner
stove with oven, standard sink and a place for a 6 -cubic foot
refrigerator plus freezer.
The applicant must sign and record a deed restriction for this
particular unit upon approval.
MEMORANDUM
To: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office
From: Chuck Roth, Engineering Department Cl?._
Date: July 18, 1995
•
Re: King Louise Apartments GMQS Exemption for Change in Use
(210 West Main Street; Lots P & Q, Block 51, Original Aspen Townsite)
Having reviewed the above referenced application, and having made a site inspection, the
Engineering Department has the following comments:
1. Dumpster - The dumpster is currently located on private property and not in the alley, but it is
not shown on the application plans.
2. Site Drainage - One of the considerations of a development application for conditional use is
that there are adequate public facilities to service the use. One public facility that is inadequate is
the City street storm drainage system. The new development plan must provide for no more than
historic flows to leave the site. Any increase to historic storm run -off must be maintained on site.
3. Parking - The application does not discuss parking although the drawings show parking spaces.
The site visit revealed that the indicated parking spaces are not being used for parking. Some of the
indicated spaces are property that is being used by The Willows of Aspen Flowers. Also, the
dumpster is located on what is shown as a parking space. The change in use would generate more
parking needs, however the on site and on- street parking should be able to handle the needs.
5. Utilities - Any new surface utility needs for pedestals or other equipment must be installed on
an easement provided by the applicant and not in the public right -of -way.
6. Work in the Public Right - of - way - Given the continuous problems of unapproved work and
development in public rights -of -way adjacent to private property, we advise the applicant as
follows:
The applicant shall consult city engineering (920 -5088) for design considerations of
development within public rights -of -way, parks department (920 -5120) for
vegetation species, and shall obtain permits for any work or development, including
landscaping, within public rights -of -way from city streets department (920 - 5130).
cc: Cris Caruso, Ted & Susann Guy M95.168
1
EXHIBIT B
June 1, 1995
Leslie Lamont
Aspen /Pitkin County Community Development
130 South Galena
Aspen, CO 81611
Re: 210 W. Main Street, Change of Use
Dear Leslie,
Enclosed is our Application for Change of Use for Apt. 7 of the King
Louise Apartments from residential to office.
The property is Lots P & Q Block 51 of the original Aspen town site.
The property has eight studio apartments in two structures.
Apartments 1 -6 in the structure facing Main Street were built in the
late 60's. Apartments 7 & 8 were built in the early 60's and are
located near the alley. We propose to use Apt. 7 as a residence during
evenings and weekends and for cutting hair during business hours
Monday thru Friday. This will be for our personal use only.
We will deed restrict Unit 8 as category 1 rental housing, so long as
the office use continues in Unit 7. We wish to condition this deed
restriction so that once the office use stops in Unit 7, the deed
restriction in Unit 8 can be released. Unit 7 contains 457 SF, 93 SF
was added this year, 364 SF has existed since the 60's. Unit 8 contains
284 SF. The interior improvements and airlock addition have been
proposed under separate permits this year. This unit will be used as an
apartment regardless of the outcome of this application. Please
consider whether hair cutting within the office zone can be an
accessory use without the need for a Change of Use Application and
Deed Restriction on an adjacent unit..
The proposed change will have minimal impact on tile city. Susann's
hair cutting business is more than 10 years old, and Susann and I have
lived in the community for more than 20 years, 22 years respectively.
7
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 8, 1995
stated, that needs to be changed to read something else, regarding
the bonus, the bonus allowed would be currently available to the
parent parcel shall be available to the two lots, but not that each
shall be available.
Garton stated, I think I'll call the motion, and then, perhaps,
there has been some direction given, and we'll see this one more
time, maybe within an hour.
Hunt stated, I'll go with that.
KING LOUISE APARTMENTS
GMOS EXEMPTION FOR A CHANGE IN USE
Leslie Lamont of staff presented stating, the proposal is to
convert an existing studio apartment in the office zone district
to a commercial /office use. Change in use in the code allows us
to go from residential category to commercial retail office
category to lodge. Change in use does not look at changes within
the commercial category, that's kind of side - lined, this has
nothing to do with that, but people get confused, and they think
because someone is going to make a restaurant into an office, they
need to do a change in use. But, this is an existing studio
apartment that is being converted to a commercial retail use,
commercial /office retail use. Retail is not allowed in the office
zone district. As part of their mitigation requirements, they are
proposing to deed restrict another existing studio unit on site to
category one. Now, the unit they are proposing to deed restrict
does not meet our current guidelines with the size of the units,
however, when we did the calculation of what and when mitigation
was required, Cindy Christensen and I figured that the requirement
was something like .07 employees. So, we felt that since this was
an existing unit, and we had the opportunity to put an existing
free market unit on our housing enventory, and that the mitigation
itself was less than one person, one employee, that we felt that
it was appropriate and acceptable to accept this unit into our
housing enventory. It is being proposed to be deed restricted to
category one, which is our lowest rental in sales restrictions.
Lamont stated, the applicant, in his application, appealed to
staff's interpretation of the code, thinking that since the
business will only operate Monday through Friday during business
,'hours, and that they will maintain the unit as a unit, they will
not be eliminating the kitchen or the bathroom, and it could be a
unit during the weekend or the evenings for their own personal use.
They, at first, did not think that this was change in use, however,
we wanted to keep this very clean, and because business goes in
27
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 8, 1995
C there and if they needed an eventual change of just full line
business, and it was not used as a residential unit, then we have
achieved our employee migigation requirements.
Garton asked, does the applicant have anything to add?
Ted Guy, the applicant, stated, we agree with the conditions and
restrictions outlined in the memorandum. The deed restriction that
has been presented to us by the Housing Authority does allow us,
if we terminate the commercial use of this Unit #7, to apply to the
Housing Authority to remove the deed restriction on Unit #8, since
it is no longer required. So, we have no problems with staff's
recommendations.
Mooney stated, can't you buy it back from the person?
Guy replied, it is only a rental.
Lamont stated, my understanding is that deed restrictions
ultimately have to be lifted, but they have to be lifted by
Council.
Garton stated, so, we wouldn't see it, then?
Lamont stated, typically, the way we catch people going from
C residential to commercial is through their business licenses or if
they are not pulling a building permit to eliminate a kitchen or
do significant renovation in the building; it's through a business
license which goes through our zoning office that we catch somebody
and say you have to come through our change in use process.
Garton asked, does it go through Stan or something?
Lamont answered, no, Bill calls the person on the license and says,
you need to go through a change in use, or with your business you
are not allowed in that zone district, or things like that. That's
why all our business licenses go through Bill Drueding and that is
where we would typically catch a change in use.
Hunt stated, sort of a quick question here, are there any other
units that are deed restricted in this complex?
Guy answered, no.
Hunt stated, my only problem, not a major problem, but I guess it
has to do with the business aspect; how do you figure out that the
hair salon is all the way back around this question mark (referring
to drawings)? It shows the existing walk, but that existing walk
is shaded by a lot of foliage in that little corner.
28
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 8, 1995
Guy answered, we are going to be improving the side yard on the
west. We have several handicapped clients who follow this
location, so they will come in either from the alley and be able
to come in from the street. We will, basically, plant lilac hedges
and turn that into a very nice yard. Now, if we had to put a sign
or something out there, we would have to go through whatever sign
code requirements you have and address them.
Hunt stated, I assume you have one or two parking spaces in the
alley for this unit and are the parking spaces numbered for the
actual apartments?
Guy stated, well, we suggested that what we would do is to double
parking on the side. A condition for the addition was that one of
those spaces be deleted, and I think that Chuck Roth felt that
there was enough on street parking in the area to cover the
occasional use. There are eight legitimate studio apartments at
this time, but there are only seven parking spaces.
Hunt stated, in other words, the seven across the back? Guy
stated, so, we are improving the parking situation and will park
our employee car in the parking right next to the door to #8.
Hunt stated, but that is a double park space, and I don't recall
you have access.
C Guy replied, yes, it is a double park space and we will park there
and our customers will be allowed to park on the alley. The person
who is the deed restricted occupant in Unit #8 does not own a car.
Hunt asked, would you plan on, in affect, re- designating these
spaces, assuming that, let's say, #7 and #8 are on the end here,
and however you want to work them, so that your customer would be
able to use the one closest to the alley?
Guy answered, right now, the lease on the those back units we do
not provide parking on site for.
Garton stated, would you like to make that a condition, Roger, just
because it is better planning?
MOTION
Hunt stated, I move to grant a GMQS Exemption for the change in use
of one 457 sq. ft. dwelling unit, number 7, from a primary
residential use to a mixed commercial /residential use with
Conditions 1 -3 in Planning Office memorandum dated 8 August 1995,
with an addition of a condition to reorganize or renumber the
parking spaces in the alley to allow the minute commercial
apartment parking in what is now spaces 1 and 8. Blaich seconded.
Voting commenced, vote was unanimous in favor, motion carried.
29
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 8, 1995
Discussion of Motion
Mooney stated, I'm wondering, is the person who lives in the unit
that is going to be deed restricted, does he already qualify? Guy
answered, yes. Mooney stated, and do you think that we should say,
that with that qualification, that he won't own a car? Because we
are now eliminating his parking space and making it a kind of
temporary in- and -out parking space.
Guy answered, no, he does not have a parking space at this time,
so, we're not changing anything in regard to his situation because
of the lease.
Hunt stated, I understand. But you do have some spaces across the
back section? Guy answered, but the way people park, they only
have five on some days.
Commissioners Blaich and Buettow had to leave the meeting at this
point.
WORKSESSION
The worksession on the ADU Survey Review was taped and is stored
in the City Clerk's Office for any information needed.
AH /RO CONTINUED DISCUSSION:
TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS TO
NON - CONTIGUOUS PARCELS
Old Business, AH /RO Continued Discussion: Transfer of Development
Rights to Non - Congiguous Parcels was tabled to the August 22, 1995
meeting.
Additional Discussion
Lamont stated, what we need to do is look at commercial growth in
a different way, and I'm wondering if we need to bring our work
program to you and we can discuss with you your priorities for us.
Mooney stated, well, the whole thing is, I don't know how to get
at it. We have big companies coming in and dominating the resort
appetite of a small community, and who are not mitigating. This
community has to in some way be in partnership with these big
businesses that are national and international corporations, and
I think one of the things that we don't have is the ability to pay
30