Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.20170221 AGENDA Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission REGULAR MEETING February 21, 2017 4:30 PM Sister Cities Meeting Room 130 S Galena Street, Aspen I. SITE VISIT II. ROLL CALL III. COMMENTS A. Commissioners B. Planning Staff C. Public IV. MINUTES A. February 2nd Draft Meeting Minutes V. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS VII. OTHER BUSINESS A. Code Amendment Check-In: Double Basements B. Code Amendment Check-In: Formula Business Regulations VIII. ADJOURN Next Resolution Number: 8, Series 2017 Typical Proceeding Format for All Public Hearings 1) Conflicts of Interest (handled at beginning of agenda) 2) Provide proof of legaJ notice (affi d avit of notice for PH) 3) Staff presentation 4) Board questions and clarifications of staff 5) Applicant presentation 6) Board questions and clari fications of applicant 7) Public comments 8) Board questions and clarifications relating to public comments 9) Close public comment portion of bearing 10) Staff rebuttal /clarification of evidence presented by applicant and public comment 1 1 ) Applicant rebuttal/clarification End of fact finding. Deliberation by the commission commences. No further interaction between commission and staff, applicant or public 12) Chairperson identified the issues to be discussed among commissioners. 13) Discussion between commissioners* 14) Motion* *Make sure the discussion and motion includes what criteria are met o r not met. Revised April 2, 2014 Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission February 2, 2017 1 Mr. Skippy Mesirow, Chair, called the Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) meeting to order for February 2, 2017 at 4:30 PM with members Skippy Mesirow, Ryan Walterscheid, Brian McNellis, Jasmine Tygre, Keith Goode, Spencer McKnight and Jesse Morris. Kelly McNicholas Kury arrived late to the meeting. Rally Dupps was not present for the meeting. Also present from City staff; Andrea Bryan, Jennifer Phelan, Hillary Seminick, and Ben Anderson. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Ms. Tygre noted she agrees with the term “mobility enhancements” and would like it to include better snow removal and dealing with the slush lakes at the bulb-out corners. She feels businesses and residences need to clear the snow and would like to see something added to address these concerns. Mr. Goode noted “Lake Aspen” that develops near Wagner Park. Mr. Mesirow noted Ms. McNicholas Kury arrived at the meeting. Mr. Mesirow feels these concerns speak to a broader infrastructure where it has rained in January. STAFF COMMENTS: There were no comments. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments. MINUTES There were no draft minutes. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST There were no declarations. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearing – 1419 Crystal Lake Rd – Stream Margin and Special Review Mr. Mesirow opened the hearing and turned the floor over to staff. Ms. Hillary Seminick, Planner, introduced Mr. Mitch Haas at the applicant’s representative. P1 IV.A. Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission February 2, 2017 2 She then stated property is located in the Moderate-Density Residential R15 zone district and within the stream margin review area on the Roaring Fork River. It also has an existing single family home. The applicant is proposing new top of slope designation which requires a special review. The top of slope establishes a protected area where no development beyond native vegetation is permitted. The existing top of slope cuts through the home on the property and the applicant is proposing to shift it towards the river. The proposed top of slope was confirmed on-site by City Engineering Staff in the fall of last year. Based on Engineering’s support of the proposed new designation, Planning Staff then used the proposed top of slope to review the proposed improvements as a part of this project. She then pointed out the location of the proposed top of slope on a site map of the property. Ms. Seminick noted there are a few existing nonconformities on the property including a staircase and a putting green within the 15 ft setback. In addition, a portion of the roof and second story of the home project into the 45-degree progressive height limit as measured from the top of slope extending away from the river. She continued stating in addition to the top of slope designation, the applicant is proposing a few improvements to the existing residence. They would like to change the fenestration, replace the existing siding with more modern materials, relocate the existing deck area, install a patio and spa, remove the nonconforming putting green and stairs. The nonconforming 2nd story portion of structure will not be removed. They also plan to revegetate the area below the 15 ft top of slope boundary in addition to some stormwater improvements. She added the nonconforming portion of the 2nd floor will not be increasing. She finished stating the project is pretty straight forward and Engineering is supportive with relocating the top of slope designation. Staff is recommending approval with conditions as outlined in the draft resolution which are typical for a project like this. Mr. Mesirow asked for questions of staff. Mr. Mesirow asked Staff to confirm if the original setting of the top of slope was done on a larger scope and not specific to this property and Ms. Seminick replied it was originally set by viewing a map as part of a project in 2004. Mr. Mesirow then turned the floor over to the applicant. Mr. Mitch Haas, Haas Land Planning, introduced Mr. Matthew Smith, CCY Architects, as the architect and Gyles Thornely, Connect One Design, as the landscape architect for the project. Mr. Haas stated the mapping was done while the house was already there and it seemed clearly the mapping was off. He stated Mr. Smith went on the property with the City Engineering Department and staked out the adjusted top of slope which they used going forward with the proposal. They have also worked with Planning, Parks and Engineering to revise the plans to respond accordingly to their comments. At this time, they have no issues with Staff’s recommendation. Mr. Mesirow asked for questions of the applicant. There were none, so he closed this portion of the hearing. Mr. Mesirow then opened for public comment. There were none, so he closed this portion of the hearing. P2 IV.A. Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission February 2, 2017 3 Mr. Mesirow then opened for commissioner’s discussion. Mr. Goode feels it is pretty clear cut. His only concern is if he owned property and in 5-10 years from now he wanted to redefine his top of slope. What is to prevent him from getting a few dump trucks and making it what he wants it to be. Mr. Morris stated he hoped Staff would catch this. Mr. Goode noted P&Z is seeing three similar applications within the past couple of weeks. Mr. Morris moved to approve Resolution 6, Series 2017 and was seconded by Ms. Tygre. Mr. Mesirow then requested the roll call vote. Mr. McNellis, yes; Ms. McNicholas Kury, yes; Mr. Goode, yes; Mr. Morris, yes; Mr. Mesirow, yes; Ms. Tygre, yes; and Mr. Walterscheid, yes for a total of seven Yes votes to zero No votes (7-0), motion carried. Mr. Mesirow then closed the hearing. Public Hearing – 1470 Red Butte Dr – Stream Margin and Special Review Mr. Mesirow opened the hearing and turned the floor over to staff. Mr. Ben Anderson, Planner, introduced the applicant’s representatives including Ms. Christine Shine, Connect One Design, and John Galambos, Galambos Architects. Mr. Anderson described the location of the property as well as the location of the house, river, stream margin review area and the existing top of slope. The existing top of slope cuts through the middle of the house. He stated this property went through a stream margin review in 2001 and a top of slope was determined at that time. A new map established top of slope, but did not reflect site conditions. He stated the applicant is requesting a reconsideration of the top of slope. The City Engineering Department has reviewed the proposed change and adjustments were made based on Engineering’s comments. He identified the nonconforming patio, raised beds and an earthen platform proposed for demolition because they are located in the top of slope setback. Staff is requesting the applicant exercise care for the demolition to protect the quality of the water and vegetation going down to the river. Mr. Anderson reviewed the proposed changes including a new patio and in-ground hot tub. He noted there is also a fair amount of remodel planned for the rear façade of home including reconfiguring the staircase; pushing out a portion of the building; reconfiguring the fenestration, a chimney and gable. He added no additional height is proposed. The height of the chimney is proposed to be reduced and pushed back into the building. He then clarified only the deck form is being pushed forward, not the gable itself. Mr. Anderson closed stating Staff recommends approval. The Engineering Parks Departments also support the application with conditions. Mr. Mesirow asked for questions of Staff. Mr. Goode asked if the Parks Department recommended the deck to not wrap around the NE corner. Mr. Anderson stated since the application was received, drawings have been resubmitted showing the patio ending at the deck edge. This has been included as a condition and acknowledged by the applicant. P3 IV.A. Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission February 2, 2017 4 Mr. Anderson wanted to note he received a phone call from Ms. Margo Pendleton, representing a neighbor to the west at 1500 Red Butte Dr. She stated the owner was concerned of the possibility of trees being removed and screening being undermined. Mr. Anderson responded stating there would be a landscape plan and there are no trees planned for removal. Mr. Mesirow turned the floor over to the applicant. Mr. John Galambos, architect for the applicant, stated he designed original home in 2000 and it went through stream margin review at that time. Mr. Gyles Thornely then introduced himself and Ms. Christine Shine from Connect One Design. He stated the process started a year ago and it has been a lengthy and frustrating process. He is grateful to be at this stage and would love to have a reduction in fees or an expedited permit process. Mr. Mesirow asked for questions of the applicant. Mr. Mesirow then opened for public comment. There were none, so he closed this portion of the hearing. Mr. Mesirow then opened for commissioner’s discussion. Ms. Tygre motioned to approve Resolution 7, Series 2017. Ms. McNicholas Kury seconded the motion. Mr. Mesirow requested a roll call. Roll Call: Mr. Goode, yes; Ms. Tygre, yes; Mr. McNellis, yes; Mr. Walterscheid, yes; Mr. Mesirow, yes; Ms. McNicholas Kury, yes; and Mr. Morris, yes; for a total seven Yes votes and zero No votes (7-0). The motion passed. Mr. Mesirow then closed the hearing. OTHER BUSINESS None. Mr. Mesirow then closed the meeting. Cindy Klob City Clerk’s Office, Records Manager P4 IV.A. P&Z Check-In 2.21.2017 Double basements Page 1 of 2 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission FROM: Justin Barker, Senior Planner THRU: Jessica Garrow, Community Development Director MEETING DATE: February 21, 2017 RE: Double Basements SUMMARY: The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to provide feedback on a request to amend the language in the Land Use Code related to double basements. DISCUSSION: The Community Development Department has received an application to amend the Land Use Code language related to double basements. Currently, the Code language reads: Single-family and duplex structures shall contain no more than one floor level below finished grade. A basement with a stepped floor is allowed. The finished floor level shall be no more than 15 feet below finished grade. A crawl space below the basement, compliant with the limitations of Section 26.575.020.D.3, shall be exempt from this depth limitation. The current Code language was adopted near the end of 2014 by Ordinance 46, Series of 2014 to address recent projects that were excavating extra deep basements to obtain additional development with little to no impact on floor area, but significant impacts to the community. The original discussion was to change the calculation of floor area for these basements. Council preferred to simply prohibit basements over a certain depth, with a one-story limit and an exception for crawl spaces. Council also discussed ways to accommodate properties with steep slopes, but ultimately wanted to keep it simple and amend the Code quickly. The discussion at the time was that the language would likely return to Council within a year or two for further refinement. After about two years of putting this policy into practice, the adopted language has been generally successful and easy to implement. However, the clause ‘shall contain no more than one floor level below finished grade’ has proven more challenging to understand and administer, particularly for properties with steep slopes. As seen in Figure 1 on the next page, if any portion of a second floor level is below finished grade the project does not comply with the adopted Code language. The result has been the creation of trenches on the uphill side of a sloped site to essentially drop finished grade below the upper floor level to comply. The graphic on the left illustrates what was allowed prior to Ordinance 46 and what is now considered a ‘double basement’ even though no fully subgrade level exists. The graphic on the P5 VII.A. P&Z Check-In 2.21.2017 Double basements Page 2 of 2 right illustrates how designers have been forced to excavate around the building to meet the Code language of not having two floor levels subgrade. This has the impact of creating additional excavation, construction truck trips, and hauling of dirt, which is contrary to the original goals of Ordinance 46. Figure 1 The application proposes to change the language as follows: For single-family and duplex structures, the interior finished floor level shall be no more than 15 feet below the exterior finished grade. A basement with a stepped floor is allowed. A crawl space below the basement, compliant with the limitations of Section 26.575.020.D.3, shall be exempt from this depth limitation. The only change to the language is removing the clause ‘shall contain no more than one floor level below finished grade’. This is the “simple fix” that eliminates the need to create trenches and does not affect the overall maximum depth for basements. In terms of the exterior impacts of development and original intent of the Code language to limit excavation depth, this is a desirable solution. However, staff is concerned about the potential interior impacts, such as compressed floor heights and the additional square footage that may be pushed subgrade to reduce or eliminate affordable housing mitigation requirements. Staff is requesting P&Z input on these concerns. QUESTION FOR P&Z: 1. Is P&Z supportive of the proposed double basement code language amendment? ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A – Code Amendment Application P6 VII.A. December 16, 2016 Ms. Jessica Garrow, AICP Community Development Director City of Aspen 130 So. Galena St. Aspen, Colorado 81611 RE: Code Amendment: Double Basement Dear Ms. Garrow: Please accept this application for an amendment to the City’s Land Use Code. This application is being submitted on behalf of Bob Bowden Properties but addresses an issue currently affecting the entire design/development community in Aspen. This application is submitted pursuant to Sections 26.304 and 26.310 of the Aspen Land Use Code. The City’s Land Use Code was amended in 2014 (ordinance 31) in response to ultra-deep excavations. The residential project on the corner of South Aspen Street and East Hyman Avenue was the tipping point for the community. The excavation for the new home’s basement extended over 45 feet deep and accommodated two full basements including an indoor basketball court. At the time, double basements were a new phenomenon and there was a desire to amend the City’s code quickly. Other communities had not experienced such development and no other municipal zoning code examples existed on which to base new legislation. Staff focused on two elements of the Aspen/Hyman project – two full basements and the overall excavation depth. The code was amended to insert the following language: Single-family and duplex structures shall contain no more than one floor level below finished grade. A basement with a stepped floor is allowed. The finished floor level shall be no more than 15 feet below finished grade. A crawl space below the basement, compliant with the limitations of Section 26.575.020.D.3, shall be exempt from this depth limitation. Planning staff cautioned City Council at the time that the tool may not exactly fit the problem and that amendments were likely going to be needed after some experience by staff and P7 VII.A. Page 2 of 3 Double Basement Code Amendment the local design community. After roughly two years of this revised code, we believe the experience has been the following: •Ultra-deep excavations are clearly no-longer allowed. The 15-foot maximum depth limitation has been clear, unambiguous, and reasonably easy to explain and administer. Local architects understand the requirement. •The no-more-than-one-floor-below-grade requirement has been confusing and impactful. The administration started with multiple staff interpretations and various impressions of compliance in the design community. The result requires the entire extent of a floor be exposed along the entire building perimeter, even along the “back” or uphill side of a property. This has encouraged “benches” or “trenches” as a means of gaining compliance. This development practice increases excavation needs, increases soil retention needs, and creates awkward aesthetics. We have discussed this issue with several local architects, all of whom agree with the above synopsis. Our request is to amend the language to focus solely on excavation depth. The one-floor-below limitation is creating significant aesthetic, cost, and construction duration impacts. And, it is unnecessary. Proposed Language - For single-family and duplex structures, the interior finished floor level shall be no more than 15 feet below the exterior finished grade. A basement with a stepped floor is allowed. A crawl space below the basement, compliant with the limitations of Section 26.575.020.D.3, shall be exempt from this depth limitation. We have asked local architects to “test” this proposed language on current projects under design. We specifically asked that the new language be applied to projects currently utilizing a trench or bench as a design solution. Feedback has been that the language we are proposing will remove what some designers call the “moat requirement” and vastly reduce unnecessary excavation. We believe the proposed language will maintain the policy intent of the original code amendment while avoiding the undesirable trench/bench scenarios. This is the type of code “tweak” typical of any new code provision after realizing unintended consequences. P8 VII.A. Page 3 of 3 Double Basement Code Amendment We appreciate your accepting this proposed amendment and will readily provide additional examples, seek additional commentary from the local design community, or test other potential language as needed. Sincerely, Chris Bendon, AICP BendonAdams LLC 300 So. Spring St. #202 Aspen, CO chris@bendonadams.com 970.925.2855 Exhibits are provided as follows: Exhibit 1: Diagrams of current and proposed effects Exhibit 2: Land Use Application Exhibit 3: Fee Agreement Exhibit 4: Authorization to Represent Exhibit 5: Pre-Application Conference Summary P9 VII.A. Exhibit 1 P10 VII.A. P11 VII.A. P12 VII.A. P13 VII.A. CITY OF ASPEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT March, 2016 City of Apen|130 S. Galena St.|(970) 920 5050 ATTACHMENT 2 – LAND USE APPLICATION PROJECT: Name: _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Location:_______________________________________________________________________________________________ Parcel ID # (REQUIRED) APPLICANT: Name: _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Address: _______________________________________________________________________________________________ Phone #: REPRESENTIVATIVE: Name: _________________________________________________________________________________________________ Address:________________________________________________________________________________________________ Phone#: TYPE OF APPLICATION: (Please check all that apply): EXISTING CONDITIONS: (description of existing buildings, uses, previous approvals, etc.) PROPOSAL: (Description of proposed buildings, uses, modifications, etc.) Have you attached the following? FEES DUE: $ ______________ Pre-Application Conference Summary Attachment #1, Signed Fee Agreement Response to Attachment #3, Dimensional Requirements Form Response to Attachment #4, Submittal Requirements – including Written Responses to Review Standards 3-D Model for large project All plans that are larger than 8.5” X 11” must be folded. A disk with an electric copy of all written text (Microsoft Word Format) must be submitted as part of the application. Large scale projects should include an electronic 3-D model. Your pre-application conference summary will indicate if you must submit a 3-D model. GMQS Exemption Conceptual PUD Temporary Use GMQS Allotment Final PUD (& PUD Amendment) Special Review Subdivision Conceptual SPA ESA – 8040 Greenline, Stream Subdivision Exemption (includes Margin, Hallam Lake Bluff, Condominiumization) Mountain View Plane Final SPA (&SPA Commercial Design Review Lot Split Amendment) Residential Design Variance Lot Line Adjustment Small Lodge Conversion/ Expansion Conditional Use Other: Code Amendment - Double Basement N/A (code amendment) Bowden Properties, Bob Bowden 625 East Main Street #104A; Aspen, CO 81611 970.544.2000 BendonAdams 300 So. Spring St. #202; Aspen, CO 81611 970.925.2855 Code Amendment See cover letter An amendment to the City of Aspen Land Use Code regarding limitations on residential basement development $3,250 Exhibit 2 P14 VII.A. Exhibit 3P15VII.A. Exhibit 4P16VII.A. ASLU Code Amendment – double basements = City C970 1 CITY OF ASPEN PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE SUMMARY PLANNER: Jessica Garrow, 429-2780 DATE: December 1, 2016 PROJECT: Code Amendment, double basement REPRESENTATIVE: BendonAdams TYPE OF APPLICATION: Text Amendment (of the land use code) DESCRIPTION: The Applicant is interested in sponsoring a code amendment to amend the limitations on “double basements” to address site grading and aesthetic issues occurring on sloped properties. Relevant Land Use Code Section(s): 26.304 Common Development Review procedures (as applicable) 26.310 Amendments to the Land Use Code and Official Zone District Map Land Use App: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Portals/0/docs/City/Comdev/Apps%20and%20Fees/2013%20land%20use%20app%20f orm.pdf Land Use Code: http://www.aspenpitkin.com/Departments/Community-Development/Planning-and-Zoning/Title-26-Land-Use-Code/ Review by: •Staff for complete application •City Council Public Hearing: Yes (policy resolution and 2nd reading by City Council) Planning Fees: Planning Deposit – $3,250 for 10 hours (additional time is billed at $325 per hour) Referral Fees: City Attorney’s Office – no deposit, but time is billed at $325 per hour Total Deposit: $3,250 To apply, submit the following information: Completed Land Use Application and signed fee agreement. Pre-application Conference Summary (this document). Total deposit for review of the application. Applicant’s name, address and telephone number in a letter signed by the applicant that states the name, address and telephone number of the representative authorized to act on behalf of the applicant. A written description of the proposed amendment, including suggested language. Exhibit 5 P17 VII.A. 2 1 Complete Copy. If the copy is deemed complete by staff, the following items will then need to be submitted: 2 Copies of the complete application packet. Total deposit for review of the application. A digital copy of the application provided in pdf file format. Disclaimer: The foregoing summary is advisory in nature only and is not binding on the City. The summary is based on current zoning, which is subject to change in the future, and upon factual representations that may or may not be accurate. The summary does not create a legal or vested right. P18 VII.A. Code Amendment – Formula Business Regulations P&Z Check-in – 2/21/2017 Page 1 of 3 MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Jessica Garrow, Community Development Director RE: Formula Business Regulations DATE: February 21, 2017 REQUEST OF P&Z: The Planning and Zoning Commission is asked to provide input on a proposed Formula Business Regulation. BACKGROUND: In December, a group led by Jerry Murdock approached City Council with a request to consider such regulations. After extensive public feedback at the November 28th public hearing on AACP code amendments, City Council requested the group continue to work with other in the community, including business owners, brokers, and land owners. The culmination of this work was a January 19th forum at the Aspen Institute. The group presented the findings and a draft resolution (attached as Exhibit B) at the February 6, 2017 work session with City Council. At that work session a majority of City Council directed staff to return with a policy resolution to amend the land use code. Attached as Exhibit C is a listing of formula businesses as identified by Bill Stirling, a member of the group, which was presented at the forum. On February 13th, City Council approved a Policy Resolution directing staff to move forward with a code amendment to create a Conditional Use Review for Formula Businesses in certain zone districts (See Exhibit A). They also requested additional community outreach, including a check-in with the Planning and Zoning Commission. OVERVIEW: The proposed regulations would require a Conditional Use review for any new formula restaurant, bar, entertainment, or retail use in the following zone districts: • Commercial Core (CC), • Commercial (C-1), • Main Street Historic Mixed-Use (MU), • Lodge (L)1, and • Commercial Lodge (CL)2. Attached as Exhibit E is a map illustrating these areas. 1 Under the land use code, all retail uses are a conditional use in the Lodge zone district. 2 Under the land use code, all retail uses on upper levels is a conditional use in the Commercial Lodge zone district. P19 VII.B. Code Amendment – Formula Business Regulations P&Z Check-in – 2/21/2017 Page 2 of 3 The draft ordinance is based off of similar ordinances in communities such as Sonoma, CA, Fredericksburg, TX, and Sausalito, CA, and defines formula businesses as an establishment with eleven (11) or more locations and includes at least 2 of the following features: • a standardized array of merchandise, • standardized array of services, • a standardized facade3, • a standardized decor and color scheme, • uniform apparel, • standardized sign, • a trademark, or • a service mark. Exemptions: The draft ordinance provides exemptions for buildings and businesses that currently exist. Specifically, buildings that are already constructed, have approvals to be constructed, or have applied for a development order (i.e. are in the development pipeline) are exempted from the conditional use review. This means any chain store could operate in one of these buildings by right. In addition, the draft ordinance contemplates activities that would result in the loss of an exemption. This would include demolition, renovation or development that results in an increase of 35% of the net leasable area, or a remodel of more than 50% of the net leasable area in a building. Staff is continuing to work with the citizen group to refine some of the triggers. For instance, the relocation of a building is a common historic preservation technique that is used for Victorian-era buildings, particularly on Main Street. Additionally, the Growth Management Chapter includes specific triggers that staff believes should be coordinated. City Council supported these refinements as well. The proposed exemptions mean that an existing business can be relocated within any existing or proposed building without a review. It also means that an existing space that currently houses a non-formula business can be converted to a formula business by right. The result is that the ordinance attempts to adopt a “no additional harm” philosophy by exempting existing and proposed buildings and requiring all new buildings and major remodels to be subject to a Conditional Use review. Conditional Use Standards: The draft ordinance includes four new Conditional Use Standards that attempt to determine if the proposed formula business will promote diversity and a balanced mix of commercial uses, the design is consistent with the historic character of the zone district, the business will be compatible with the existing uses and permitted uses in the zone district, and the use will not result in an overconcentration of formula uses in the zone district. A previous draft was reviewed by the City’s moratorium and AACP Code consultants, Mark White and Alan Richman, which included standards tied directly to AACP statements, which has not been included in the draft Ordinance. These standards are attached as Exhibit D. 3 It should be noted that a standardized façade is not permitted under the city’s Commercial Design Guidelines. P20 VII.B. Code Amendment – Formula Business Regulations P&Z Check-in – 2/21/2017 Page 3 of 3 REFERRALS & OUTREACH: In addition to various meetings with City Council, at the Aspen Institute, the citizens group is sponsoring an open house at the Limelight on February 23rd from 5-6:50pm. CCLC has had an initial discussion about the proposal, and their draft minutes are attached as Exhibit F. Finally, the Aspen Community Voice webpage includes a survey and open ended questions about the topic (www.AspenCommunityVoice.com). The website will be open at least through February 27, 2017. QUESTIONS FOR P&Z: 1. Is P&Z supportive of the proposed formula business amendment? 2. Does P&Z have a preference regarding the specific Conditional Review Criteria for formula businesses? ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A – City Council Policy Resolution 23, Series 2017 Exhibit B – Draft Ordinance with initial Staff redlines Exhibit C – Formula Business Map/List Exhibit D – Potential additional Conditional Use Review Criteria Exhibit E – Map of Potential Conditional Use Review Areas Exhibit F – CCLC draft minutes P21 VII.B. Formula Business Regulation Policy Resolution Resolution 23, Series 2017 Page 1 of 3 RESOLUTION NO. 23, (SERIES OF 2017) A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN CITY COUNCIL REQUESTING CODE AMENDMENTS TO ESTABLISH FORMULA BUSINESS REGULATIONS. WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(A), the Community Development Department received direction from City Council to explore code amendments related to the creation of regulations for formula, or chain businesses; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(1), Public Outreach to gain feedback from the community on potential code changes was conducted through a series of individual meetings with business owners, property owners, and interested community members, as well as through a January 19, 2017 forum at the Aspen Institute; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director recommended changes to the land use code related to formula businesses; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen is a unique, international community with historic roots and attentive civic mindset; and, WHEREAS, the City serves as a home to a diverse group of people that provide the underpinnings of the community’s unique character and the City’s status as a destination resort; and, WHEREAS, over time, the Aspen downtown commercial core has undergone a transition that has altered the City’s community character, in particular, through the proliferation of high-end “formula” retail establishments; and, WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan identifies this concern, stating: There is a concern that businesses providing basic necessities will be replaced with businesses providing non-essential goods and services. High-profile locations in the downtown have steadily converted from restaurants to retail spaces, some retail spaces have transformed to offices, and high rents have resulted in a continuing shift towards exclusivity. The character of our community is bolstered by a diverse commercial mix. While we have taken some steps to increase retail diversity, we must pursue more aggressive measures to ensure the needs of the community are met, and to preserve our unique community character. See Aspen Area Community Plan, p. 20; and, WHEREAS, to address this concern, the Aspen Area Community Plan adopts the following policies as they relate to the Commercial Sector (emphasis added): P22 VII.B. Formula Business Regulation Policy Resolution Resolution 23, Series 2017 Page 2 of 3 V.1. Encourage a commercial mix that is balanced, diverse and vital and meets the needs of year-round residents and visitors. V.2. Facilitate the sustainability of essential businesses that provide basic community needs. V.3. Ensure that the City Land Use Code results in development that reflects our architectural heritage in terms of site coverage, mass, scale, density and a diversity of heights, in order to: …. • Protect our small town community character and historical heritage. …. See Aspen Area Community Plan, p. 26; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proliferation of high-end “formula” retail establishments in the downtown core undermines the goals and policies of the City of Aspen by: (i) eliminating commercial diversity meeting the needs of year-round residents; (ii) driving out locally serving and essential business; and (iii) threatening the City’s small town community character; and, WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to: (i) maintain the unique character of the community and the appeal of its downtown core; (ii) protect the community’s economic vitality by ensuring a diversity of businesses with sufficient opportunities for independent entrepreneurs; and (iii) foster businesses that serve a variety of needs, including those of year-round residents; and, WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to further the goals and policies of the Aspen Area Community Plan and those stated herein by regulating “formula” retail and restaurant establishments; and, WHEREAS, many communities in the United States with unique character have similarly regulated “formula” retail and restaurant establishments; and, WHEREAS, by requiring formula retail and restaurant establishments undergo a conditional use review process, the City will have a better opportunity to examine the impacts of such establishments; and WHEREAS, this Resolution does not amend the Land Use Code, but provides direction to staff for amending the Land Use Code; and, WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Resolution furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health, safety, and welfare. P23 VII.B. Formula Business Regulation Policy Resolution Resolution 23, Series 2017 Page 3 of 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Code Amendment Objective The objective of the proposed code amendments is to ensure new businesses contribute to the unique, on-of-a-kind commercial mix Aspen has historically been known for, and well as encourage continued vitality of the commercial uses, through the regulation of formula businesses. Section 2: Proposed Code Changes City Council provides the following direction regarding regulation of formula businesses: A. A Conditional Use Review should be required for new formula businesses located in the Commercial Core (CC), Commercial (C-1), and Main Street Historic District (MU) zone districts. B. Formula businesses should continue to be permitted by right in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC), Service/Commercial/Industrial (SCI), and non-historic portions of the mixed-use (MU) zone districts. C. Zone districts that currently require a conditional use review for retail or restaurant uses, including the Lodge (L) and Commercial Lodge (CL) should also require a conditional use review. D. Certain exemptions for existing buildings, buildings that have a valid development order, buildings that have applied for a land use review that will result in a development order, and minor remodels should be incorporated. Section 3: 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 resolutions or ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior resolutions or ordinances. Section 5: 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. FINALLY, adopted this 13th day of February, 2017. _______________________________ Steven Skadron, Mayor ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________________ ______________________________ Linda Manning, City Clerk James R True, City Attorney P24 VII.B. ORDINANCE NO. __ (SERIES OF 201_) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO, AMENDING CHAPTERS 26.110, 26.710, AND 26.425 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE TO REGULATE FORMULA USES WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(A), the Community Development Department received direction from City Council to explore code amendments related to the creation of regulations for formula, or chain businesses; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(1), Public Outreach to gain feedback from the community on potential code changes was conducted through a series of individual meetings with business owners, property owners, and interested community members, as well as through a January 19, 2017 forum at the Aspen Institute, a January 23, 2017 Open House, and through the Aspen Community Voice webpage; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 26.310.020(B)(2), during a duly noticed public hearing on February 13, 2017, the City Council approved Resolution No. 23, Series of 2017, by a five to zero (5 – 0) vote, requesting code amendments to the Land Use Code to implement a formula business conditional use review in certain zone districts with certain exemptions; and, WHEREAS, the City of Aspen is a unique, international community with historic roots and attentive civic mindset; WHEREAS, the City serves as a home to a diverse group of residents people that provide the underpinnings of the community’s unique character and the City’s status as a destination resort; WHEREAS, over time, the Aspen downtown commercial core has undergone a transition that has altered the City’s community character, in particular, through the proliferation of “formula” use; WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan identifies this concern, stating: There is a concern that businesses providing basic necessities will be replaced with businesses providing non-essential goods and services. High-profile locations in the downtown have steadily converted from restaurants to retail spaces, some retail spaces have transformed to offices, and high rents have resulted in a continuing shift towards exclusivity. The character of our community is bolstered by a diverse commercial mix. While we have taken some steps to increase retail diversity, we must pursue more aggressive measures to ensure the needs of the community are met, and to preserve our unique community character. See Aspen Area Community Plan, p. 20; P25 VII.B. City of Aspen, Colorado Ordinance No. ___ Series 20__ Page 2 of 11 WHEREAS, to address this concern, the Aspen Area Community Plan adopts the following policies as they relate to the Commercial Sector (emphasis added): V.1. Encourage a commercial mix that is balanced, diverse and vital and meets the needs of year-round residents and visitors. V.2. Facilitate the sustainability of essential businesses that provide basic community needs. V.3. Ensure that the City Land Use Code results in development that reflects our architectural heritage in terms of site coverage, mass, scale, density and a diversity of heights, in order to: • Create certainty in land development. …. • Protect our small town community character and historical heritage. …. See Aspen Area Community Plan, p. 26. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the proliferation of formula retail and restaurant uses in the downtown core undermines the goals and policies of the City of Aspen by: (i) eliminating commercial diversity meeting the needs of year-round residents; (ii) driving out locally serving and essential business; and (iii) threatening the City’s small town community character; WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to: (i) maintain the unique character of the community and the appeal of its downtown core; (ii) protect the community’s economic vitality by ensuring a diversity of businesses; and (iii) foster businesses that serve a variety of needs, including those of year-round residents; WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to further the goals and policies of the Aspen Area Community Plan and those stated herein by regulating new formula retail and restaurant uses as conditional uses in certain zone districts, as set forth in this Ordinance; WHEREAS, recognizing the investment backed expectations of building owners and developers, the City Council wishes to exempt existing buildings and structures, development approvals, and development applications from this Ordinance; WHEREAS, by requiring new formula retail and restaurant uses to undergo a conditional use review process, the City will have a better opportunity to examine the impacts of such uses; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission discussed the proposed formula business regulations at their February 21, 2017 meeting and recommended ___; and P26 VII.B. City of Aspen, Colorado Ordinance No. ___ Series 20__ Page 3 of 11 WHEREAS, the Commercial Core and Lodging Commission discussed the proposed formula business regulations at their February 15, 2017 meeting and recommended the city not move forward with the proposed regulations; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that the amendments meet or exceed all applicable standards pursuant to Chapter 26.310 and that the approval of the amendments is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for the promotion of public health safety and welfare. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers the City’s planning goals and policies. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO THAT: Section 1. Section 26.104.110 - “Use Categories” of the Aspen Municipal Code is hereby amended to include the defined term “formula use” in subsection C, as follows: 26.104.110. Use Categories. *** C. Definitions. *** Formula Use Characteristics Any “restaurant, bar and entertainment uses” and “retail uses”, as defined in this Chapter, that has eleven (11) or more other establishments in operation, or with local land use or permit entitlements already approved and effective, located anywhere in the United States. In addition to the eleven (11) establishments either in operation or with local land use or permit entitlements approved for operation, the business maintains two (2) or more of the following features: a standardized array of merchandise, standardized array of services, a standardized facade, a standardized decor and color scheme, uniform apparel, standardized sign, a trademark, or a service mark. 1. “Standardized array of merchandise” means 50% or more of in-stock merchandise from a single distributor bearing uniform markings. P27 VII.B. City of Aspen, Colorado Ordinance No. ___ Series 20__ Page 4 of 11 2. “Standardized array of services” means as a common menu or set of services priced and performed in a consistent manner. 3. “Trademark” means a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a combination of words, phrases, symbols or designs that identifies and distinguishes the source of the goods from one party from those of others. 4. “Service mark” means a word, phrase, symbol or design, or a combination of words, phrases, symbols or designs that identifies and distinguishes the source of a service from one party from those of others. 5. “Façade” means the face or front of a building, including awnings, looking onto a street or an open space. 6. “Décor” means the style of interior furnishings, which may include but is not limited to, style of furniture, wall coverings or permanent fixtures. 7. “Color Scheme” means a selection of colors used throughout the establishments, such as on the furnishings, permanent fixtures, and wall coverings, or as used on the facade. 8. “Uniform Apparel” means standardized items of clothing including but not limited to standardized aprons, pants, shirts, smocks or dresses, hats, and pins (other than name tags), and standardized colors of clothing. Examples Those examples set forth in the definitions of “restaurants, bars and entertainment uses” and “retail uses” (general and specialty) that have the characteristics set forth in this definition. Accessory Uses Accessory uses may include those accessory uses set forth in the definitions of “restaurants, bars and entertainment uses” and “retail uses” (general and specialty). Exceptions Exceptions include those exceptions set forth in the definitions of “restaurants, bars and entertainment uses” and “retail uses” (general and specialty). Section 2. Section 26.710.140.C of the Aspen Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows, with bold, underlined text added and strike through language deleted: 26.710.140. Commercial Core (CC). *** P28 VII.B. City of Aspen, Colorado Ordinance No. ___ Series 20__ Page 5 of 11 C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Commercial Core (CC) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425: 1. Gasoline service station. 2. Commercial parking facility, pursuant to Chapter 26.515. 3. Automobile showroom and dealership. 4. Formula uses, which shall also be subject to the provisions contained in Section 26.425.045. Section 3. Section 26.710.150.C of the Aspen Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows, with bold, underlined text added and strike through language deleted. 26.710.150 Commercial (C-1). *** C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Commercial (C-1) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425: 1. Affordable multi-family housing or home occupations on the ground floor. 2. Commercial parking facility, pursuant to Section 26.515. 3. Automobile showroom and dealership. 4. Formula uses, which shall also be subject to the provisions contained in Section 26.425.045. Section 4. Section 26.710.170.B.1 of the Aspen Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows, with bold, underlined text added and strike through language deleted. 26.710.160 Service/Commercial/Industrial (S/C/I). *** B. Permitted and Conditional Uses. 1. The following uses may have, in combination, a limited percent of the floor area, devoted to retail sales, showroom, or customer reception, and such uses shall be ancillary to the primary commercial use. This floor area percentage may be increased through Special Review by the Planning and Zoning Commission, pursuant to Section 26.430.050, and according to the standards of Section 26.710.160(E)1. Where retail sales are allowed, this shall be limited to General Retail uses and may include formula uses that fall in the General Retail category. *** P29 VII.B. City of Aspen, Colorado Ordinance No. ___ Series 20__ Page 6 of 11 Section 5. Section 26.710.170.C of the Aspen Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows, with bold, underlined text added and strike through language deleted. 26.710.160 Service/Commercial/Industrial (S/C/I). *** C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Service/Commercial/ Industrial (SCI) zone district, subject to the procedures established in Chapter 26.425.050 Procedures for Review, and the standards established in Section 26.710.160(F). The following Conditional uses shall not be subject to Section 26.425.045, Standards applicable to formula uses; exemptions; determination of formula uses. *** Section 64. Section 26.710.170.B.1 of the Aspen Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows, with bold, underlined text added and strike through language deleted. 26.710.170 Neighborhood Commercial (NC). *** B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Zone District: 1. Uses allowed on all building levels: General retail, restaurant, bar and entertainment uses, formula uses (except specialty retail), service uses, office uses, arts, cultural, civic and community uses, public uses, recreational uses, academic uses, accessory uses and structures, uses and building elements necessary and incidental to uses on other floors, including parking accessory to a permitted use, storage accessory to a permitted use. Section 57. Sections 26.710.180.B and C of the Aspen Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows, with bold, underlined text added and strike through language deleted. 26.710.180 Mixed-Use (MU). *** B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Mixed-Use (MU) Zone District: *** 20. Formula uses, except in the Main Street Historic District. P30 VII.B. City of Aspen, Colorado Ordinance No. ___ Series 20__ Page 7 of 11 C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Mixed-Use (MU) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425: 1. Commercial parking facility, pursuant to Chapter 26.515. 2. Automobile showroom and dealership. 3. Formula uses in the Main Street Historic District, subject to the provisions contained in Section 26.425.045. Section 86. Section 26.710.190.C of the Aspen Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows, with bold, underlined text added and strike through language deleted. 26.710.190 Lodge (L). *** C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Lodge (L) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425: *** 10. Formula uses, which shall also be subject to the provisions contained in Section 26.425.045. Section 79. Sections 26.710.200.B and C of the Aspen Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows, with bold, underlined text added and strike through language deleted. 26.710.200 Commercial Lodge (CL). *** B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Commercial Lodge (CL) Zone District: 1. Uses allowed in basement and ground floors: Lodging uses, conference facilities, retail and restaurant uses, formula uses, office uses, neighborhood commercial uses, service uses, arts, cultural and civic uses, public uses, recreational uses, academic uses, and child care center. Uses and facilities necessary and incidental to uses on Upper Floors. Parking shall not be allowed as *** C. Conditional uses. The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Commercial Lodge (CL) Zone District, subject to the standards and procedures established in Chapter 26.425: P31 VII.B. City of Aspen, Colorado Ordinance No. ___ Series 20__ Page 8 of 11 1. Retail and restaurant uses, formula uses (which shall also be subject the provisions contained in Section 26.425.045), neighborhood commercial uses, service uses, office uses, arts, cultural and civic uses, public uses, academic uses or child care centers not located on basement and ground floorslocated on upper floors. 2. Commercial parking facility, pursuant to Chapter 26.515 Section 98 . Chapter 26.425 of the Aspen Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows with bold, underlined text added: Chapter 26.425 CONDITIONAL USES Sections: Sec. 26.425.010. Purpose. Sec. 26.425.020. Authority. Sec. 26.425.030. Authorized conditional uses. Sec. 26.425.040. Standards applicable to all conditional uses. Sec. 26.425.045. Standards applicable to formula uses; exemptions; determination of formula uses. Sec. 26.425.050. Procedure for review. Sec. 26.425.060. Application. Sec. 26.425.080. Amendment of development order. Section 9. Chapter 26.425 of the Aspen Municipal Code is hereby amended with the addition of a new Section 26.425.045 – “Standards applicable to formula uses” to read as follows: 26.425.045. Standards applicable to formula uses; exemptions; determination of formula uses. A. Purpose. This section provides for the case-by-case review of formula uses, as defined in Section 26.104.110.C, in order to encourage a commercial mix that is balanced, diverse and vital, and meets the needs of year-round residents and visitors, maintain the unique character of Aspen’s downtown, and to provide regulatory flexibility that meets the City’s evolving and unique market demands. B. Applicability. 1. Generally a. No business license shall be issued pursuant to Chapter 14.08 for any formula use subject to this section unless and until the Planning and Zoning Commission approves a conditional use permit authorizing that use. Formatted: Not Strikethrough P32 VII.B. City of Aspen, Colorado Ordinance No. ___ Series 20__ Page 9 of 11 b. The Community Development Director may establish forms to document exemptions, current uses, and other material information reasonably necessary for the effective administration of this section. 2. Exemptions. a. Exemptions. This section shall not apply to commercial and mixed -use buildings and structures within the CC zone district, C-1 zone district, and the Main Street Historic District (MU zone district) that meet any of the following characteristics: i. Buildings or structures : (i) constructed or under construction prior to as of the effective date of this sectionOrdinance **, Series 2017., ii. Buildings or structures (ii) which will be constructed pursuant to any approval for development granted prior to the effective date of Ordinance **, Series 2017as of the effective date of this section.; and (iii) .iii. Buildings or structures which will be constructed pursuant to any development application submitted for approval prior to the effective date of Ordinance **, Series 2017as of the effective date of this section. b. Loss of Exemption. Any building or structure exempted by this section will become subject to this section upon the occurrence of one (1) of the following activities, provided that they were not caused by the occurrence of fire, flood, or acts of nature: i. (i) demolition, as defined in Title 26; ii. (ii) reconstruction of 40% or more of the building or structure; (iii) relocation of the building or structure, iii. (iv) renovation or construction resulting in an increase of greater than 35% of the net leasable area of the an existing building or structure (i.e. addition to an existing building or structure) that results in an increase of no more than five-hundred (500) square feet of net leasable space, and no more than two-hundred-fifty (250) square feet of Floor Area, pursuant to Section 26.470.090.F, Minor expansion of a commercial, lodge, or mixed-use development,; and iv. (v) remodel or construction of greater than 50% of the net leasable area of the existing building or structure (i.e. gut remodel). c. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the following activities shall not cause a loss of exemption: i. (i) rehabilitation and other construction necessary to comply with the law (e.g. ADA compliance); ii. (ii) reconfiguration of leased areas; and or i.iii. (iii) improvements reasonably necessary for tenant to occupy a leased space. Commented [JG1]: We do not currently track this. If we did, it would require a tenant to calculate the net leasable area of the entire building, which is generally beyond the scope of an individual tenant finish. P33 VII.B. City of Aspen, Colorado Ordinance No. ___ Series 20__ Page 10 of 11 C. Standards. When considering a development application for a formula use as part of a conditional use review, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be required to determine that, in addition to the standards set forth in Section 26.425.040, the proposed use complies with the following standards. 1. The formula use will promote diversity and variety to assure a balanced mix of commercial uses available to serve both resident and visitor populations, including general retail, specialty retail, restaurant, bar and entertainment uses, and service uses; 2. The design and improvements are consistent with the unique and historic character of the zone district, and will preserve, and be compatible with, the distinct visual appearance and shopping/dining experience of the zone district for its residents and visitors; 3. The formula use will be compatible with existing uses and permitted uses in the zone district and promote the zone district’s purpose, economic vitality and long-term sustainability as the commercial, cultural, and civic center of the community; and 4. The formula use will not result in an overconcentration of formula uses within the zone district and within the immediate vicinity of the proposed project based on the current inventory of formula uses. D. Determination of Formula Use. Any development application determined by the Community Development Director to be for a formula use, as defined in Section 26.104.110.C, that does not identify the use as a formula use is incomplete and cannot be processed until the omission is corrected. Any development approval or determination that is determined by the Community Development Director to have been, at the time of application, for a formula use that did not identify the use as a formula use is subject to revocation at any time. If the Community Development Director determines that a development application or approval is for a formula use, the applicant or holder of the entitlement bears the burden of proving to the Community Development Director that the proposed or existing use is not a formula use. Section 10. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance 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. Section 11. Effective Date. In accordance with Section 4.9 of the City of Aspen Home Rule Charter, this ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following final passage. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the ___ day of _____________________, 20__. Attest: P34 VII.B. City of Aspen, Colorado Ordinance No. ___ Series 20__ Page 11 of 11 ______________________________ ______________________________ City Clerk Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this ___ day of _____________, 20__. Attest: ______________________________ ______________________________ City Clerk Mayor P35 VII.B. P36VII.B. P37VII.B. P38VII.B. P39VII.B. P40VII.B. P41VII.B. P42VII.B. P43VII.B. P44VII.B. P45VII.B. P46VII.B. Exhibit D: Draft Additional Conditional Use Standards Standards. When considering a development application for a formula retail and restaurant use as part of a conditional use review, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be required to determine that, in addition to the standards set forth in Section 26.425.040, the proposed use complies with at least five (5) of the following thirteen (13) standards, and complies with at least one standard relating to each of the following four (4) objectives, as provided below: Objective Standard Aspen wishes to maintain a balanced and diversified retail experience in its downtown area for both resident and visitor populations. 1. The formula business will not result in an overconcentration of similar uses within the block or along the street frontage of the proposed project. 2. The proposed use will help to diversify the mixture of uses present in the downtown area, and will not result in a duplication or over-abundance of the types of goods and services already sold in the City of Aspen. 3. The formula business will contribute to the adequate availability and diverse existing mix of retail and restaurant businesses providing basic necessities, serving city-wide customers, and providing for residents’ and visitors’ daily needs within the zone district and within the immediate vicinity of the proposed project. 4. The formula business will be mutually beneficial to and enhance the economic health of the surrounding uses in the zone district. The City of Aspen has a long tradition as a community that has welcomed innovation and enabled new ideas to flourish. The City wishes to provide opportunities for its next generation of young entrepreneurs to pursue their own dreams and innovations. 5. The proposed use represents or encourages an innovative or creative business idea. 6. The proposed use provides an opportunity for an entrepreneur to offer new services or explore new products. 7. The proposed use helps to place Aspen in a leadership position as a place of innovation and creativity. The City seeks to ensure that within its limited commercial areas, the daily or frequently needed goods and services of its residents and visitors can be met. 8. The proposed use offers goods and services that meet the daily or frequent needs of Aspen’s resident and visitor populations. 9. The proposed use offers goods and services that are affordable to and needed by a broad range of Aspen’s residents and visitors. 10. The formula business, together with its design and improvements, is consistent with the unique and historic character of the zone district; Aspen has a unique image in the international resort market as a place where residents and visitors can not only enjoy a recreational experience in an unspoiled natural environment, but also can be entertained or be culturally or artistically enriched in a community whose entertainment opportunities compliment the natural beauty of the Upper Roaring Fork Valley. 11. The proposed use provides opportunities for residents and visitors to enjoy one-of-a-kind recreational, cultural or entertainment experiences while they are in the Aspen Area. 12. The proposed use, together with its design and improvements, will preserve, and be compatible with, the distinct visual appearance and shopping/dining experience of the zone district for its residents and visitors. 13. The formula business will be compatible with existing uses in the zone district and promote the zone district’s economic vitality and long-term sustainability as the commercial, cultural, and civic center of the community. P47 VII.B. W HOPKINS AVE E HOPKINS AVE E COOPER AVE W COOOPER AVE E HYMAN AVEW HYMAN AVEN GARMISCH STS ASPEN STE DURANT AVE S MONARCH STN MILL STS HUNTER STS GALENA STN 2ND STW HALLAM ST S 1ST STN 6TH STN 7TH STN 5TH STS SPRING STE MAIN ST W BLEEKER ST W MAIN ST DEAN ST E JUANITA ST E HALLAM ST W FRANCIS ST E BLEEKER ST SMILLSTS GARMISCH STS 2ND STN 1ST ST1 inch = 508.62 feet L Lodge CL Commercial Lodge CC Commercial Core C-1 Commercial Main Street Historic DistrictP48 VII.B. 1 COMMERCIAL CORE & LODGING COMMISSION MINUTES OF February 15, 2017 Kiki Raj called the meeting to order at 8:43 a.m. Commissioners in Attendance: Kiki Raj, Bill Guth, Bill Dinsmoor, Steve Fante, Charles Cunniffe, Terry Butler and absent was Fred Ayarza. Staff in attendance: Linda Manning; City Clerk, Nicole Henning; Deputy City Clerk, Dan Nelson; Downtown Coordinator Ms. Butler started off the meeting by complimenting Mr. Nelson and the Core’s tree lighting saying they are festive and not just for the holidays. Mr. Cunniffe commented that they are a symbol of vitality, happiness and optimism and for celebrating the Core. Ms. Raj started the conversation on the potential retail ban in Aspen and said that chains and retail stores are down nationally. Ms. Butler said that 75% of people that stay in her hotel are shoppers and not skiers. Ms. Manning explained to the board that we had a Council work session regarding the retail shops on the 6th of February and that 40 other cities around the US, have some sort of formula retail ban. A conditional use review is being proposed for Planning & Zoning to review formula retail. Formula retail consists of eleven or more businesses (chains) worldwide. This consists also of businesses which have their employees wearing uniforms, dressing the same, merchandising, logos, etc. Mr. Guth stated that there is a very easy way around this rule and completely disagreed with the idea. He said a trademark can be tweaked just a little bit, for example, J Crew On the Mountain. Ms. Raj commented that the idea is stupid, low quality and not well thought out. Mr. Guth agreed with her and she stated that something like this cannot be policed. Ms. Manning said that Planning & Zoning will decide who is accepted and that certain places will be grandfathered in and if the building already exists, the formula can come in and that this only pertains to new buildings/spaces. Mr. Guth said that all this is, is a gift to existing landlords in the core and Ms. Manning P49 VII.B. 2 said that there could be a possible rush of applications for remodel before this goes into effect. Ms. Butler stated that she was in Odd Molly the other day looking at ski gear and was told that only two of their locations have ski gear; Aspen being one of them, so is that considered a chain? Mr. Guth replied saying that there are so many potential loop holes and that we should not try and regulate- but instead stimulate. He suggested a “shop local” campaign like many other cities are doing. Mr. Cunniffe stated that Aspen never approaches an issue with a carrot, but instead, always with a stick. Ms. Raj asked Ms. Manning if this is really happening, in which, Ms. Manning replied that yes, this is a proposed ordinance initiated by a citizen committee spearheaded by Jerry and Gina Murdoch to have this on the ballot in May and it would have gotten approved in original format, which was much stricter, until the City got involved. Mr. Cunniffe stated that this is yet another abuse of staff’s time and Mr. Dinsmoor agreed saying that staff will once again be burdened by crap. Ms. Manning let everyone know that the Murdoch group will be having a public outreach meeting next week, which Nicole will send an email about. They will be coming back to Council on the 27th for the first reading at 5:00 p.m. She reminded everyone to go to aspencommunityvoice.com to leave comments as well. Ms. Raj asked if this included pop ups as well and Ms. Manning answered no, that this is a separate issue and they are still working on the pop ups. Mr. Guth stated that CCLC should make an official statement to Council regarding the fact that you can’t punish newcomers and that there are so many loop holes. Ms. Raj said she doesn’t think it will matter if that is said. Mr. Cunniffe replied that we have to say it. Mr. Dinsmoor asked if there is a benefit and Mr. Fante responded that it’s a balance of power and an issue of regulating culture. Mr. Guth asked if this is about punishing landlords and Mr. Fante asked how we can regulate it and that it’s a cultural issue. Ms. Raj stated that we need a campaign to change the culture of Aspen. Ms. Butler commented that it’s the internet taking away the local businesses, not retail. Mr. Fante suggested that the local population wants to take the power back. Mr. Guth suggested that a lot of people think that it will affect rental rates, but it won’t and Ms. Manning agreed and said it doesn’t restrict what you can sell. Mr. Guth said it comes down to supply and demand P50 VII.B. 3 and that we need to stimulate local business instead of punishing retail business. It’s just not going to work. “Carrots” said Mr. Cunniffe. Mr. Dinsmoor suggested we have a mission statement to issue to Council. Mr. Cunniffe suggested the following, “This looks to us that it will be very difficult to enforce and instead should have incentives to encourage local business”. Mr. Dinsmoor commented that we should focus on the corollary. Mr. Fante suggested, “we’re concerned that it won’t have much effect and is just going to put more stress on the city staff”. Ms. Butler stated that it is just going to cause legal matter after legal matter with big corporate lawyers. Mr. Guth suggested the terms, “stimulating and encouraging instead of targeting” with something such as, “CCLC understands the concerns of the community and the reasons behind this; however, we find that the current attempt is rife with loopholes and work-arounds and will always be. Encourage, stimulate and incentivize to thrive and be here”. Mr. Dinsmoor suggested that we give special bus passes or better parking arrangements to local business owners and said we need to start talking about opportunities to give incentive. Ms. Raj said that clearly this is a significant issue that is emerging since 40 other cities are also involved and Mr. Fante agreed that there must be some legal basis for it if all these other cities are enforcing it. Ms. Butler brought up the fur ban from the late 80’s, early 90’s with the headlines, “don’t wear your fur in Aspen” and she said that we don’t need a “don’t go to Aspen if you want to shop” headline. We don’t need more negative headlines and need to watch that as it won’t help any of the businesses as a whole. She stated that we survived 9/11, 2008 and the fur ban so we don’t need another negative time brought upon us unnecessarily. Mr. Fante said that winter is the lower season here and summer is the bigger season and asked what is driving this. It’s too expensive to be here in the winter? It’s because Vail is a powerful marketing force? He thinks we are losing people and there are other alternatives taking away our business already. P51 VII.B. 4 Ms. Manning stated that the next item to be dealt with is in reference to the “mall team” working on the changes to the mall plan and there will be a meeting in April that they will want CCLC input. Mr. Cunniffe suggested that the mall team make a presentation to CCLC as a review group. Ms. Manning agreed and said that can be set up. Mr. Cunniffe mentioned that there will be a memorial for Don Sheeley on Thursday at the Jerome from 4-6 pm. Ms. Manning mentioned that we have spots to fill on this board with interviews being in June and that if the board knows of anyone interested to please let her know. There should be seven members with one alternate. There was a discussion amongst the group regarding which business area the next person should come from whether it be lodging, retail, hospitality, realty or marijuana. Mr. Guth asked about mall leases and Ms. Manning responded that it is still being discussed, but hope to have a meeting about it sometime in March. Mr. Guth suggested that we need to discuss the issue ASAP and get the application form done and distributed so business owners have ample time. Ms. Raj motioned to approve the minutes from February 1st, Mr. Fante seconded. All in favor, motion carried. Off the record commentary. Nomination discussion – Mr. Dinsmoor nominated Ms. Raj for Chair. Ms. Raj nominated Mr. Fante for Vice Chair. Ms. Raj asked Mr. Guth if he would be interested. Mr. Dinsmoor nominated Mr. Guth, Ms. Butler seconded. Mr. Guth is Chair and Mr. Fante is Vice Chair. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting adjourned at 10:00 a.m. ____________________________________ Nicole Henning, Deputy City Clerk P52 VII.B. 5 P53 VII.B.