Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutExhibit A_Review Criteria_Staff FindingsEXHIBIT A | DETAILED STAFF FINDINGS Sec. 26.445.110. - Amendments. Amendments to an approved Project Review or to an approved Detailed Review shall be reviewed according to the standards and procedures outline below. Amendments to Planned Unit Development and Specially Planned Area approvals (pre-Ordinance 36, 2013, approvals) shall also proceed according to the standards and procedures outline below and the Community Development Director shall determine the type of procedure most-applicable to the requested amendment. (d) Minor Amendment to a Project Review approval. An amendment found by the Community Development Director to be generally consistent with the allowances and limitations of a Project Review approval or which otherwise represents an insubstantial change but which does not meet the established thresholds for an insubstantial amendment, may be approved, approved with conditions or denied by the City Council, pursuant to 26.445.040(b)(2) - Step Two. An applicant may not apply for Detailed Review if an amendment is pending. Staff findings: Staff evaluated the origins of the plat note and the limitations on development of steep slopes going back to the Board of County Commissioners Approval. While the limitation was included in the entitlement documents, staff finds that subsequent amendments to the City of Aspen Municipal Code have addressed concerns related to potential development impacts on steep slopes. Staff finds that removal of the plat note is a technical amendment to the Planned Development and is consistent with the allowances and limitations established by the PD. The amendment is found to be a Minor Amendment to a Project Review. Staff finds the criteria met. Sec. 26.445.050. - Project Review Standards. The Project Review shall focus on the general concept for the development and shall outline any dimensional requirements that vary from those allowed in the underlying zone district. 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. The underlying zone district designation shall be used as a guide, but not an absolute limitation, to the dimensions which may be considered during the development review process. Any dimensional variations allowed shall be specified in the ordinance granting Project Approval. In the review of a development application for a Project Review, the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Historic Preservation Commission, as applicable, and City Council shall consider the following: a) Compliance with Adopted Regulatory Plans. The proposed development complies with applicable adopted regulatory plans. Staff findings: There are no applicable adopted regulatory plans. Staff finds the criteria not applicable. EXHIBIT A | DETAILED STAFF FINDINGS b) Development Suitability. The proposed Planned Development prohibits development on land unsuitable for development because of natural or man-made hazards affecting the property, including flooding, mudflow, debris flow, fault ruptures, landslides, rock or soil creep, rock falls, rock slides, mining activity including mine waste deposit, avalanche or snow slide areas, slopes in excess of thirty percent (30%), and any other natural or man-made hazard or condition that could harm the health, safety, or welfare of the community. Affected areas may be accepted as suitable for development if adequate mitigation techniques acceptable to the City Engineer are proposed in compliance with Title 29—Engineering Design Standards. Conceptual plans for mitigation techniques may be accepted for this standard. The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Staff findings: The application was referred to the Engineering Department for review. Engineering finds the properties suitable for development and does not have concerns regarding removing the plat note. Staff finds the criteria met. c) Site Planning. The site plan is compatible with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: 1. The site plan responds to the site's natural characteristics and physical constraints such as steep slopes, vegetation, waterways, and any natural or man-made hazards and allows development to blend in with or enhance said features. 2. The project preserves important geologic features, mature vegetation, and structures or features of the site that have historic, cultural, visual, or ecological importance or contribute to the identity of the town. 3. Buildings are oriented to public streets and are sited to reflect the neighborhood context. Buildings and access ways are arranged to allow effective emergency, maintenance, and service vehicle access. Staff Findings: The Minor Amendment is to remove the following Plat note: “[d]evelopment of slopes over 30% is prohibited without approval from the Board of County Commissioners”. This request was referred out to the City of Aspen Engineering and Parks Departments. Regulations adopted after the Plat was created in the municipal code manage the impacts of development on steep slopes. Setbacks prevent development near the property lines. Staff finds the criteria met. d) Dimensions. All dimensions, including density, mass, and height shall be established during the Project Review. A development application may request variations to any dimensional requirement of this Title. In meeting this standard, consideration shall be given to the following criteria: 1. There exists a significant community goal to be achieved through such variations. EXHIBIT A | DETAILED STAFF FINDINGS 2. The proposed dimensions represent a character suitable for and indicative of the primary uses of the project. 3. The project is compatible with or enhances the cohesiveness or distinctive identity of the neighborhood and surrounding development patterns, including the scale and massing of nearby historical or cultural resources. 4. The number of off-street parking spaces shall be established based on the probable number of cars to be operated by those using the proposed development and the nature of the proposed uses. 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, and the potential for joint use of common parking may be considered when establishing a parking requirement. 5. The Project Review approval, at City Council's discretion, may include specific allowances for dimensional flexibility between Project Review and Detailed Review. Changes shall be subject to the amendment procedures of Section 26.445.110—Amendments. Staff Findings: The Ferguson Exemption Plat (Book 11, Page 59) did not establish dimensional standards, which means underlying zoning applies. The parcels are located in the Moderate-Density Residential (R-15A) Zone District and subject to the dimensional standards for the zone district. The Minor Amendment does not request a variation to these dimensions. Staff finds the criteria met. e) Design Standards. The design of the proposed development is compatible with the context and visual character of the area. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: 1. The design complies with applicable design standards, including those outlined in Chapter 26.410, Residential Design Standards, Chapter 26.412, Commercial Design Standards, and Chapter 26.415, Historic Preservation. 2. The proposed materials are compatible with those called for in any applicable design standards, as well as those typically seen in the immediate vicinity. Exterior materials are finalized during Detailed Review, but review boards may set forth certain expectations or conditions related to architectural character and exterior materials during Project Review. Staff Findings: A site specific development is not part of this request. Staff finds the criteria not applicable. f) Pedestrian, bicycle & transit facilities. The development improves pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. These facilities and improvements shall be prioritized over vehicular facilities and improvements. Any vehicular access points, or curb cuts, minimize impacts on existing or proposed pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. The City may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and EXHIBIT A | DETAILED STAFF FINDINGS implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Staff Findings: The request does not impact pedestrian, bicycle, transit, or vehicular facilities. Staff finds the criteria not applicable. g) Engineering Design Standards. There has been accurate identification of engineering design and mitigation techniques necessary for development of the project to comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29— Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Staff Findings: The request was referred to the Engineering department. Engineering staff supported request and will review design and mitigation techniques when the properties submit development proposals for building permit. Staff finds the criteria met. h) Public Infrastructure and Facilities. The proposed Planned Development shall upgrade public infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve the project. Improvements shall be at the sole costs of the developer. The City Engineer may require specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Staff Findings: No infrastructure or facility upgrades are necessary for the request. Staff finds the criteria not applicable. i) Access and Circulation. The proposed development shall have perpetual unobstructed legal vehicular access to a public way. A proposed Planned Development shall not eliminate or obstruct legal access from a public way to an adjacent property. All streets in a Planned Development retained under private ownership shall be dedicated to public use to ensure adequate public and emergency access. Security/privacy gates across access points and driveways are prohibited. Staff Findings: Access and circulation will not be impacted by the request. Staff finds the criteria not applicable.