Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSigned and Consented NOA w_All ExhibitsFOR AN INSUBSTANTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT AND AN INSUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO AN APPROVED COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW OF THE CHART HOUSE LODGE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS: MOUNTAIN SIDE BUILDING, DANCING BEAR RESIDENCES ASPEN, ACCORDING TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED CONDOMINIUM MAP RECORDED SEPTEMBER 19, 2016 IN PLAT BOOK 115 AT PAGE 64 AND AS DEFINED AND DESCRIBED IN THE AMENDED AND RESTATED CONDOMINIUM DECLARATION RECORDED SEPTEMBER 19, 2016 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 632277, TOGETHER WITH THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO POSSESSION AND OCCUPANCY OF A COMPARABLE RESIDENCE DURING THE RESIDENCE WEEKS RESERVED BY THE OWNER PURSUANT TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED RULES, REGULATIONS AND RESERVATION PROCEDURES RECORDED SEPTEMBER 21, 2016 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 632372 AND AGREEMENT RECORDED OCTOBER 26, 2016 AS RECEPTION NO. 633316, CITY OF ASPEN, COUNTY OF PITKIN, STATE OF COLORADO; COMMONLY DESCRIBED AS 219 E. DURANT AVENUE Parcel ID: 2735-131-06-800 APPLICANT: Dancing Bear Residences Condo Association and Chart House Project Owner, LLC 411 S. Monarch Street Aspen, CO 81611 REPRESENTATIVE: Sara Adams, BendonAdams, LLC 300 S. Spring St., Suite 202 Aspen, CO 81611 SUBJECT & SITE OF APPROVAL: Chart House Lodge Planned Development (PD) — Dancing Bear Residences Mountain Side Building Zoning: Lodge (L) with a Planned Development (PD) Overlay BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY: The Chart House Lodge PD was approved by City Council on August 8, 2005 pursuant to Ordinance No. 32, Series of 2005. Approvals granted the development of eleven (11) timeshare lodge units with twenty-one (21) rentable keys, two (2) affordable housing units, and 27 parking spaces. The Applicant is requesting an Insubstantial Planned Development Amendment for the Chart House Lodge to clarify the use of an outdoor patio/deck space that is identified in the 2006 Chart House Lodge Final Plat (Bk 77 P 51). The Applicant states that the purpose of this amendment is to "utilize the currently unused outdoor space for dining and seating which aligns with the intent and representation of the Chart House Lodge PD." The proposed space will include an outdoor deck area for such dining and seating. The plaza area, as mentioned on the 2006 Final Plat, extends into the Durant Street public Right of Way; however, the applicant wishes to only utilize the area on the subj ect private property. The deck measures roughly 10' wide by 31' 6" long and is proposed as a synthetic wood deck with metal railing. Per Land Use Code section 26.575.020.D.4.c decks of a mixed use, commercial, or lodge building located in the Lodge (L) Zone District shall be exempt from Floor Area Calculations. STAFF EVALUATION: Land Use Code Section 26.445.110(A) regulates Insubstantial Amendments to an approved Planned Development as authorized by the Community Development Director. The Director finds that the proposed activation of the outdoor deck to clarify the use of the ground floor area on the north fagade of the Chart House Building will not change the use or character of the development, is consistent with the representations made in the project's original approval, does not require the granting of any variation from the project's allowed uses, and does not increase height or floor area. While the initial 2006 plat shows the deck area with a retaining wall, there were unforeseen Parks Requirements that came to light because of the request. Land Use Code Section 26.412.090 regulates Insubstantial Amendments to a Commercial Design Approval. Staff finds that the addition of the patio section at 219 East Durant Avenue, is consistent with the representations made during the original review. The patio area was contemplated in the original 2006 Chart House PD approval. The change from a retaining wall to the elevated platform design was due to unforeseen issues with the Cottonwood tree located adjacent to the patio. Additionally, staff finds that the request does not require any other land use action(s) by the Planning and Zoning Commission or other decision -making body. Staff finds that the request meets the representations made in the 2006 plat while taking into account the additional requirements from the Parks Department. REFERRAL AGENCIES: The Land Use Case was referred out to the Engineering and Parks Departments. The Engineering Department had no comments for the proposed amendment. This is because the disturbance is entirely with the property line and does not extend into the Right -of -Way. The area is also below the threshold to require any stormwater runoff treatment and makes no impact to pedestrian accessibility. The Parks Department made four comments that will be conditions of approval. Normally, any deck within the setback must be 6" or lower in height from finished grade. However, the request considers unforeseen parks requirements from the original creation of the plat in 2006. The original plat contemplated the change in grade and utilized a retaining wall to even out that grade. With the additional Parks requirements that would not have been possible. Specifically, that no changes of grade would be allowed within the dripline of the Cottonwood tree, and that no excavation occur within 6' of the trunk of the tree. DECISION: The Community Development Director finds the administrative application for an Insubstantial PD Amendment, as noted above, to be consistent with the applicable review criteria and thereby, APPROVES the request with the following Conditions of Approval. 1. A tree permit will be required for work/excavation within the dripline of the large right-of-way Cottonwood. Standard tree protection and care/ watering required during construction. See attached. 2. Provide shop drawings of steel deck to City Forester for approval prior to fabrication. Submittal must show proximity of Northern outer beam and posts to large Cottonwood in the right-of-way (COA tree inventory ID# 7460). No excavation will occur within 6' of the trunk of the tree. Post holes will be dug by hand within the top 18" of the soil. Exposed roots 2" in diameter or larger will require inspection by the City Forester or his designee prior to being cut. 3. No changes of grade will be allowed within the dripline of the Cottonwood. 4. Any Concrete demo is to be done by hand and returned to existing top of concrete grade with topsoil. Exhibit A contains representations made while acknowledging that the dimensions were estimations and may vary slightly at time of building permit. APPROVED BY: lip mo, Community Development Director CONSENTED TO Z pIrk- G o'er LLC- 7/Y 1A0 Date 4Zo Date Attachments: Exhibit A Proposed Conceptual Deck Rendering and Plan View (Recorded) Exhibit B - Insubstantial Amendment to a Planned Development Approval - Review Criteria (Not Recorded) Exhibit C - Insubstantial Amendment to a Comumercial Design Approval - Review Criteria (Not Recorded)  Exhibit A     Exhibit A        Exhibit B: Insubstantial Amendment to a Planned Development Approval - Review Criteria 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. A. Insubstantial Amendments. An insubstantial amendment to an approved Project Review or an approved Detailed Review may be authorized by the Community Development Director. An insubstantial amendment shall meet the following criteria: 1. The request does not change the use or character of the development. Staff Finding: The proposed deck area on the north façade of the existing building does not change or reshape the use or character of the Chart House development. At the conclusion of the outdoor deck changes, the use and character of the development will remain the same. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 2. The request is consistent with the conditions and representations in the project's original approval, or otherwise represents an insubstantial change. Staff Finding: The proposed deck area on the north façade of the building is consistent with the conditions and representations in the project’s original approval. The 2006 Plat (Book 77 Page 51) calls out the area as a “public plaza area (to include seating and other public amendments)”. Staff and the applicant believes that “amendments” was an error and was meant to say “public amenities”. The proposed change is requested to memorialize the area as an outdoor seating and dining area. Staff believes that the omission of the retaining wall is due to unforeseen issues with the Cottonwood tree located adjacent to the patio/deck area and find it represents an insubstantial change. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 3. The request does not require granting a variation from the project's allowed use(s) and does not request an increase in the allowed height or floor area. Staff Finding: The proposed outdoor deck and seating area will not grant any variation from the project’s permitted allowed uses and will not increase height or floor area for the project. Staff finds this criterion to be met. 4. Any proposed changes to the approved dimensional requirements are limited to a technical nature, respond to a design parameter that could not have been foreseen during the Project Review approval, are within dimensional tolerances stated in the Project Review, or otherwise represents an insubstantial change. Staff Finding: The Chart House PUD (Ordinance 32 Series of 2005) calls out a 10ft setback on the Durant Ave side. The Land Use Code does not allow for a greater than 6” patio in the setback. However, when the patio was considered in the original 2006 Chart House PD approval it showed a retaining wall next to a tree on the East Durant side of the building. The applicant worked with the Parks Department to reduce the Exhibit B: Insubstantial Amendment to a Planned Development Approval - Review Criteria disturbance to the tree roots, thereby avoiding impact to the tree. The biggest concerns for the Parks Department were that there wouldn’t be allowed any changes in grade within the dripline of the Cottonwood tree and that no excavation would be allowed within 6’ of the trunk of the Cottonwood tree. The revised patio responds to the concerns by the Parks Department and creates a patio that is flush with the exterior door elevation and compliant with ADA accessibility requirements. Staff believes the change from a retaining wall to a design that impacts the tree less to be an insubstantial change. 5. An applicant may not apply for Detailed Review if an amendment is pending Staff Finding: Not applicable. Exhibit C: Insubstantial Amendment to a Commercial Design Approval - Review Criteria 26.412.090. Amendments. A. Insubstantial amendment. 1. Planning and Zoning Commission reviews. An insubstantial amendment to a Commercial Design Review approval originally granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission may be authorized by the Community Development Director if: a. The change is in conformance with the Commercial, Lodging and Historic District Design Standards and Guidelines, the change represents a minimal effect on the aesthetics of the proposed development, or the change is consistent with representations made during the original review concerning potential changes of the development proposal considered appropriate by the decision-making body; and Staff Finding: The addition of the patio section at 219 East Durant Avenue, is consistent with the representations made during the original review. The patio area was contemplated in the original 2006 Chart House PD approval. The change from a retaining wall to the elevated platform design was due to unforeseen issues with the Cottonwood tree located adjacent to the patio. Additionally, a 2015 Insubstantial PD Amendment was approved that changed the materials of the exterior deck railings and similar other minor alterations. Staff finds this criterion to be met. b. The change requires no other land use action requiring review by the Planning and Zoning Commission. Staff Finding: The proposed patio and seating area requires no other land use action(s) by the Planning and Zoning Commission or other decision-making body. Staff finds this criterion to be met.