Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutExhibit A.3_Planned Development-Project Review_Mini StorageExhibit A.2 Planned Development Review Criteria | Staff Findings Page | 1 Land Use Code Section 26.445.050, Planned Development 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 Response: While the subject property is currently located within Pitkin County and outside City limits, it is located within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). Pursuant to the City of Aspen Annexation Plan, land located within the UGB is generally appropriate for urban development and is expected to eventually become part of the City’s urbanized area. Pending annexation, staff anticipates rezoning the property to the Service/Commercial/Industrial (S/C/I) zone district to maintain the existing use of a mini-storage facility. Adding a Planned Development (PD) overlay will help to further memorialize the existing use and provide a guarantee that it complies with all zoning requirements of the City. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 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, rockslides, mining activity including mine waste deposit, avalanche or snow slide areas, slopes in excess of 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 Response: No development is proposed as part of this application. The purpose of this request is to memorialize the existing use as a mini-storage facility. Any request to redevelop the property in the future will require analysis of potential Exhibit A.2 Planned Development Review Criteria | Staff Findings Page | 2 impacts to man-made or natural hazards. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 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. Staff Response: No development is proposed as part of this application. Any development proposed in the future, including affordable housing will require a site plan and analysis of how the project responds to natural characteristics and physical constraints. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 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. Staff Response: No development is proposed as part of this application. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 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 Response: No development is proposed as part of this application. The property is currently improved with several buildings that provide storage services to the public. No changes are anticipated to the existing improvements on the property. Any development that is proposed in the future will be subject to subsequent review procedures, including those associated with an amendment to a planned development. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 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. 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. Exhibit A.2 Planned Development Review Criteria | Staff Findings Page | 3 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 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 Response: The subject property is already improved with a storage facility. No changes to the existing use or improvements are requested. The purpose of this application is to memorialize existing conditions. Any dimensional variances, changes to height, bulk or mass will be subject to a subsequent review. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 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 Response: No development is proposed as part of this application. No changes to design, materials or other aesthetic characteristics are proposed. Staff finds this criterion to be 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 implementation timelines be defined as part of the Detailed Review and documented within a Development Agreement. Staff Response: No changes to the site plan or layout of the property are proposed as part of the request to annex and rezone the site. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. Exhibit A.2 Planned Development Review Criteria | Staff Findings Page | 4 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 Response: No changes to the property are proposed Any future changes to the property may trigger Engineering Design Standards. A subsequent land use application will be required at that time, at which point, the Engineering Department will have an opportunity to ensure that all standards of Title 29 are met. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. 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 Response: The property is currently served by City municipal water and Aspen Sanitation District wastewater services. Pending annexation and rezoning, the services provided by these entities will not change. If future development occurs, the level of utility service provided to the property will be reevaluated. The cost of those services will be analyzed in conjunction with the master plan for the area. Staff finds this criterion to be 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 Response: No development is proposed as part of this application. Access and circulation will not change subsequent to annexation and rezoning. Staff finds this criterion to be not applicable. Land Use Code Section 26.445.070, Planned Development Detailed Review Standards Detailed Review shall focus on the comprehensive evaluation of the specific aspects of the development, including utility placement, and architectural materials. In the review of a development application for Detailed Review, the Planning and Zoning Exhibit A.2 Planned Development Review Criteria | Staff Findings Page | 5 Commission, or the Historic Preservation Commission as applicable, shall consider the following: a) Compliance with Project Review Approval. The proposed development, including all dimensions and uses, is consistent with the Project Review approval and adequately addresses conditions on the approval and direction received during the Project Review. b) Growth Management. The proposed development has received all required GMQS allotments, or is concurrently seeking allotments. c) Site Planning and Landscape Architecture. 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 landscape plan exhibits a well-designed 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. Vegetation removal, protection, and restoration plans shall be acceptable to the Director of Parks and Open Space. 2. Buildings and site grading provide simple, at-grade entrances and minimize extensive grade changes along building exteriors. The project meets or exceeds the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and applicable requirements for emergency, maintenance, and service vehicle access. Adequate snow storage is accommodated. 3. Energy efficiency or production features are integrated into the landscape in a manner that enhances the site. 4. All site lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. All exterior lighting shall comply with the City's outdoor lighting standards. 5. Site drainage is accommodated for the proposed development in compliance with Title 29—Engineering Design Standards and shall not negatively impact surrounding properties. d) Design Standards and Architecture. The proposed architectural details emphasize quality construction and design characteristics. In meeting this standard, the following criteria shall be used: 1. The project architecture provides for visual interest and incorporates present-day details and use of materials respectful of the community's past without attempting to mimic history. 2. Exterior materials are of a high quality, durability, and comply 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. 3. Building entrances are sited or designed to minimize icing and snow shedding effects. 4. Energy efficiency or production features are integrated into structures in a manner that enhances the architecture. 5. All structure lighting is proposed so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or lands. All exterior lighting shall comply with the City's outdoor lighting standards. Exhibit A.2 Planned Development Review Criteria | Staff Findings Page | 6 e) Common Parks, Open Space, Recreation Areas, or Facilities. If the proposed development includes common parks, open space, recreation areas, or common facilities, a proportionate, undivided interest is deeded in perpetuity to each lot or dwelling unit owner within the Planned Development. An adequate assurance through a Development Agreement for the permanent care and maintenance of open spaces, recreation areas, and shared facilities together with a prohibition against future development is required. 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 new vehicular access points minimize impacts on existing pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities. Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of the Project Review and as otherwise required in the Land Use Code. These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements and to determine any required cost estimating for surety requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents. g) Engineering Design Standards. There has been accurate identification of engineering design and mitigation techniques necessary for development of the proposed subdivision to comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29—Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29—Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents. 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. Any specific designs, mitigation techniques, and implementation timelines as required during Project Review comply with the applicable requirements of Municipal Code Title 29—Engineering Design Standards and the City of Aspen Urban Runoff Management Plan (URMP). These plans shall provide sufficient detail to determine if the design or mitigation concept complies with the intent of the requirements, but do not need to be detailed construction documents. i) Phasing of development plan. If phasing of the development plan is proposed, each phase shall be designed to function as a complete development and shall not be reliant on subsequent phases. Phasing shall insulate, to the extent practical, occupants of initial phases from the construction of later phases. All necessary or proportionate improvements to public facilities, payment of impact fees and fees-in-lieu, construction of any facilities to be used jointly by residents of the Planned Development, construction of any required affordable housing, Exhibit A.2 Planned Development Review Criteria | Staff Findings Page | 7 and any mitigation measures shall be completed concurrent or prior to the respective impacts associated with the phase. Staff response: No development is proposed as part of this application. The purpose of this request is to establish a Planned Development overlay on the annexed land. Doing so effectively “freezes” the current condition. When the City is ready to move forward with a development plan, a land use application will be submitted, resulting in a comprehensive land use review. Although most of the criteria associated with Detailed Review are not currently applicable because no development is proposed, it’s important to note that any new development that is proposed at this property in the future shall be subject to the appropriate Planned Development review procedures.