HomeMy WebLinkAboutresolution.apz.005-97I IIIIII III!1 III!11 IIIII IIIIII IIIII IIIII III IIII IIII IIII
4;)4342 ;)5/:12/~997 02: 32P RESOLUTION
~ ~ 2 R :1:~.00 D 0.00 N 0.00 PITKIN COUNTY CLERK
RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A GMQS EXEMPTION FOR A CHANGE IN
USE AND A SPECIAL REVIEW TO ELIMINATE ONE ON-SITE EMPLOYEE
PARKING SPACE FOR THE BRASSBED LODGE LOCATED AT 926 E.
DURANT AVE.
·
CITY OF ASPEN
Resolution 97-__~.
WHEREAS, The Community. Development Department received an application
from Silverstream LLP, for a GMQS exemption for a change in use and Special Review
to eliminate one on-site employee Parking space for the Brassbed Lodge; and
WHEREAS, Pursuant to Section 26.100.050 C. 2. a. of the Aspen Municipal
COde, a GMQS exemption for a change in use may be approved by the Planning and
Zoning Commission and pursuant to Section 26.64.040 of the Aspen Municipal Code,
parking requirements may be approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission through ·
Special Review; and
WHEREAS, the Housing Office, City Engineering, Parks Department, Aspen
Consolidated Sanitation District, Environmental Health Department and Community
Development Department reviewed the'proposal and recommended approval with
conditions; and
WHEREAS, the above referenced application was legally noticed for a public
hearing; and
WHEREAS, during the public hearing on February 18, 1997, the Planning and
Zoning Commission approved by a 6 to 0 vote the GMQS exemption for a change in use
and the Special Review with conditions.
NOW, THEREFOI~E'BE'IT~RESOI~ D by the Commission that the GMQS
exemption for a(~~~ ih.ihge and a¢*SP~l .!Review to eliminate one on-site employee
parking space i~ h~'r~b'~':aPprov~d; 'Si~bji~';~' ~olthe following conditions'
1. That the applicant P~ovide a deed restricted studio unit (approximmely 738 s.f.) rmher
than the t~ee-bedroom do~itory as originally proposed;
2. That the proposed deed restricted unit be a Catego~ 3, ~lly deed restricted unit, and
that if approved, a deed restriction be recorded prior to any building~pe~it approval;
3. That any impact fees allocated to this prQect for the improvements in the Galena
Street sewer line be paid in accordance with the District's roles prior to building
pe~it;
4. That the applic~t be required to meet the runoff design standards of Section
26.88.040 C. 4. f. and that the building pe~it application include a drainage
mitigation plan and a report signed and stamped by an engineer registered in the State
of Colorado, submitted as part of the building and site plan;
5. That any utility pedestals be placed in easements or have easements provided on the
site improvement survey..
6. That the building permit drawings indicate all utility meter locations, and that such
meter locations be accessible for reading and not be obstructed by trash storage;
7. That the Environmental Health Dept. receive and approve a fireplace/woodstove
application before approval be given for a building permit;
8. That the 10" Cottonwood located on the property be accommodated and that the
planned sidewalk either curve around the tree or be moved further east or west and
that any sidewalks be at least 5' wide;
9. That any sections of curb and gutter that are in disrepair be replaced prior to issuance
of a certificate of occupancy;
10. That the cottonwood trees proposed to be planted in the right-of-way be reduced from
nine (9) trees to six (6) trees, approximately 20-25' apart and that the landscape plan
be revised accordingly;
11. That the applicant'provide an adequate site improvement survey per Section
26.52.030.B.5. This should be submitted prior to the issuance of any building
permits;
12. That the applicant agrees to join any'improVement districts that are formed for the
purpose of constructing improvements in adjacent public rights-of-way; and
13. That all material representations made by the applicant in this application and dur!.ng
public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and
shall be considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by a
Board/Commission having authority to do so.
APPROVED by the Commission at its meeting on February 18, 1997.
Appr~to Form: '~ ~ .... ~ ! '`'~ ~' :~ q'? ?'':~ ~''* ~'
Attest': ' ·
(ckie Lothian,~ DepUty City clerk
Planning and Zoning Commission:
Sara Carton, Chairperson
I IIIIII IIIII IIIIII IIIII IIIIII IIIII IIIII III IIIII IIII IIII
484342 85/12/1997 82.. 32P RESOLUTION
2 or' 2 R 11.00. D 0.00 N 0.05 PITI(IN COUNTY CLERK
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 18, 1997
Sara Garton opened the Regular Aspen Planning & Zoning meeting with Bob
Blaich, Jasmine Tygre, Tim Mooney, Dave Johnston and Steve Buettow present.
Marta Chaikovska and Roger Hunt were excused.
Other staff members 'present were Stan Clauson, Julie Ann Woods, Chris Bendon,
David Hoefer, John Krueger and George Robinson.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Sara Garton asked Community Development about the Board Of Adjustment
variance approval for Valerio setback at 30', because P & Z did not grant the 100'
setback. Garton noted the commission's concern for that parcel. Julie Ann
Woods responded that she was not at that meeting. Garton questioned the'
hardship of the setback. Hoefer commented the hardship seemed questionable and
the presentation showed if all the roles were complied with, the building would be
a very small triangle down .at one comer of the property. Garton asked if the trail
will be right next to the deck. She asked for that report and minutes from the
Board of Adjustment Meeting for P & Z's next meeting.
Bob Blaich raised the tree question again, and for the record the owners had to
apply first for the tree removal permit. He told all the concerned neighbors about
the mitigation from Parks.
No public comments.
PUBLIC HEARING.
BRASS BED LODGE SMALL GMOS EXEMPTION-CHANGE IN USE
& SPECIAL REVIEW FOR EMPLOYEE PARKING 926 E. DURANT
(Parcel ID# 2737-181-58-005)
Steve Buettow stepped down from the Brass Bed public hearing..Hoefer stated
there was still a quorum at four members, but the applicant must have 3 out of 4
vote in faVor.
Sara Garton asked for proof of notification. Tom Stevens and Gideon Kaufman,
·
representative of the applicant, presented proof of notice. David Hoefer said for
the record the affidavit reflected that notice was mailed to the property owners
within 300' 'and the list was attached. The board had jurisdiction to proceed.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 18, 1997
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS · I
BRASS BED LODGE - SMALL GMQS EXEMPTION-CHANGE IN USE & SPECIAL REVIEW FOR
EMPLOYEE PARKING 926 E. DURANT .(PARCEL ID# 2737-181-$8-005) ...................................................... 1
FRENZEL STREAM MARGIN REVIEW- 329 PARK AVENUE - PARCEL 1. BIBBIG SUBDIVISION
.(PARCEL H)g1737-1 $1-58-001) ......... '. ....................................................................................................................... 4
1230 EAST COOPER- GMQS EXEMPTION. ZONING CHANGE & SUBDMSION (CONTINUED FROM
01/21/97) NOTICE NEVER RECEIVED- CASE WITHDRAWN...;. .................................................................... 6
STAFF COMMENTS .................................... ; ............................................................................................................. 7
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 18, 1997
Julie Ann Woods explained the applicant, S ilverstream LLP c/o Swift Property
Fund located at 926 East Durant was recently' rezoned to RMF by City Council as
part of the Lodge Preservation. She noted .the property was currently a vacanct
existing lodge at approximately 13,038 sf in size. Woods stated the GMQS is a
one-step process for the Planning and Zoning Commission as well as special
review for the parking. The Brass Bed was originally approved for 20 lodge, units
with 1 employee unit, and in 1988 a request for an expansion to 29 units and 3
employee units were started but not completed. Woods commented the applicant
was now before P & Z with a request for 6 residential units (which does not
require any employee units). She said the applicant was providing a voluntary
studio employee unit.
Woods stated the applicant was approved from the Board of Adjustment on
1/13/97 for the building setback requirements for the carport at the rear of the site
for 12 vehicles. The GMQS expansion can be exempt, provided that 6 conditions
can be met. She stated Housing requested a deed restriction of category 1 or 2 for
the employee unit. Parking for the project would be 12 on site space and the
special review could determine the voluntary unit not be required an additional
parking space. She noted the project is compatible with the neighborhood.
Woods said the applicant would maintain design quality and compatibility.
Environmental Health requested approval of wood stove application prior to
issuance of a building permit. Parks requested that a tree be preserved on the
property with a sidewalk around the tree and 3 of the 9 cottonwood trees be
removed from the right-of-way.
Garton commented the memo stated the applicant would provide 12 parking
spaces and the drawing shows 11 spaces. She asked the applicant if there were
any problems with the conditions. Gideon Kaufman stated this was the
culmination an eight year process. He said the Category 2 or 3 requirement from
Housing was something that they hope the commission would look at Category 3
instead, since the unit is almost 700 sf which would actually put it into Category 4
by size. He stated the employee unit was voluntary. Kaufman commented this
building was already hooked up to the sewer district and was not sure there was a
need for any improvements. He requested the language regarding the sewer
include resolved prior to building permit.
Garton asked staff why the Engineering request for as much on site parking as
possible was not agreed upon. Woods said that zoning requirements for the 6
units require 12 spaces. She said that for the voluntary unit there was not a
parking space on site, therefore the special review was requested. Garton stated
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 18. 1997
the dead end streets were heavily used for parking and snow removal was a big
problem.
Kaufman explained that was why the project went from a three unit dorm room to
a studio, to address the parking issue. Clauson noted that the applicant has
provided as much parking as possible on site, and the only way to add more
parking would 'be with a curb cut and park in the front yard. Staff did not feel that
was advm~tageous to the neighborhood. Mooney asked the size of the parking
Spaces and if a space could be added by decreasing the sizes of the spaces.
Kaufman stated the code was very specific on the size of a parking space. He
continued that with the proximity to town, he hoped that a car would not be
necessary.
Garton asked if the deed restricted unit would be used by a property manager.
Kaufman said the person would help with the maintenance as a part-time job.
Garton noted the commission wanted to see more category 1 and 2 units, but
understood why they wanted this large voluntary unit to be a category 3 or 4.
Kaufman said the income cap on Category 1 or 2 might be a problem with a
couple's income.
Curt Hostert, public, resided at' Mountain Oaks in Aspen. He supported the
project. Kaufman summarized and submitted letters of support from Aspen
S ilverGlo Condominium (Jack O'Neill) and Swift prOperties (Mark Kwiecienski
& Paul Anderson).
Blaich said the commission should decide on the category for the deed restricted
unit. Woods noted the original application asked for a category 3. Garton stated
that conditions #2 and #3 be amended to reflect category 3. Kaufman stated
condition #3 be amended to any impact fees allocated to this project for the
improvements on the Galena Street sewer line be paid in accordance with the
District rules to be resolved prior to building permit.
MOTION: Bob Blaich moved to approve the GMQS exemption for a
change' in use and Special Review to eliminate one on-site employee
parking space for the Brass Bed, 926 East Durant Avenue, subject to
the conditions outlined in the Community Development Department
Memo dated February 12, 1997 with the amendments made in this
meeting. Dave Johnston seconded. ALL IN FAVOR, MOTION
APPROVED.