Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.19941122 . - ._",-., ) )</ - AGENDA ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING " ~, November 22, 1994, Tuesday 4:30 P.M. 2nd Floor Meeting Room City Hall I. COMMENTS Commissioners Planning Staff Public II. MINUTES III. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Ajax Tavern/Little Nell SPA Amendment, Kim Johnson B. 204 E. Durant POD Review and Rezoning, Leslie Lamont C. Allen Conditional Use Review for an Accessory Dwelling Unit, Leslie Lamont D. Langley SUbdivision, Rezoning, Special Review, GMQS Exemption and Landmark Designation, Leslie Lamont & Amy Amidon IV. NEW BUSINESS A. 303 E. Main St. GMQS Exemption, Special Review & Viewplane Review, Kim Johnson " V. ADJOURN Iwt ~~ ~ ~ -aP<J;jL,~ - ~ MJM KOW - ~ ~ . fr I ft c - ~ / f~iJw, io 1twe1 h1~~ L.--16-WT ~ ~ ~~- REGULAR MEETING �) November 22, 1994, Tuesday 4:30 P.M. 2nd Floor Meeting Room City Hall I. COMMENTS Commissioners Planning Staff Public II. MINUTES `xp III. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Ajax Tavern/Little Nell SPA Amendment, Kim Johnson B. 204 E. Durant PUD Review and Rezoning, Leslie Lamont C. Allen Conditional Use Review for an Accessory Dwelling Unit, Leslie Lamont D. Langley Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review, GMQS Exemption and Landmark Designation, Leslie Lamont & Amy Amidon IV. NEW BUSINESS A. 303 E. Main St. GMQS Exemption, Special Review & Viewplane Review, Kim Johnson V. ADJOURN WOW 4�d -6 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner RE: 303 East Main Street: GMQS Exemptions for Enlargement of an Historic Landmark and a New Affordable Housing Unit, Special Review for Trash/Utility Reduction, and Development within the Main Street Mountain View Plane DATE: November 22, 1994 SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends denial of GMQS Exemptions for the proposed expansion of the Historic Landmark and the employee housing unit, denial of the proposed intrusion into the Mountain View Plane, and denial of the trash area reduction. APPLICANT: Niklaus Kuhn, represented by Roget Kuhn .and Jake Vickery. LOCATION: 303 E . Main Street ( Lot A and 1/2 of Lot B , Block 80, City and Townsite of Aspen) ZONING: CC Commercial Core APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The project consists of a 2,680 s.f. FAR expansion of an Historic Landmark. The total expansion includes a 1,315 s.f. two -bedroom free market residence, 2,857 s.f. of net leasable commercial space, a 874 s.f. two -bedroom Category 1 deed restricted unit in the basement, and a storage/trash area of approximately 400 s.f. One on -site parking space is proposed. The HPC granted a waiver of any additional parking (.3 space) during conceptual review. Please refer to Exhibit "A" for the application drawings and text. REFERRAL COMMENTS: Complete referral memos are attached as Exhibit "B". Summaries are as follows: Fire Marshal: The trash area must meet the Uniform Fire Code which prohibits dumpsters of 1.5 yards or larger from being stored in a building or within 5 feet of combustible walls, openings or eaves. Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District: Connection charges will be assessed for the two new dwellings. A new service line will likely be needed. Housing Office: The Housing Board prefers on -site housing for mitigation of new commercial or residential growth. However, the Board recommends denial of this proposed two bedroom unit because 1 of its lack of 'reasonable outside entry (the occupants have to walk down the stairs, through a long corridor past the commercial bathrooms and mechanical area). Also there is a lack of adequate natural light or air to this unit. Engineering: 1) Any increase in storm run-off must be contained on.the property. 2) The new development on the alley creates a snow shed impact on the alley and the relocated commercial outbuilding will shed snow onto the Monarch Street sidewalk. 3) A handicap ramp shall be constructed at the Main Street crosswalk prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. 4) An easement for the Monarch Street sidewalk shall be signed by the applicant prior to the issuance of any building permits. 5) The interior of the proposed alley building should be revised so that the mountain view plane will not be violated. 6) The applicant shall agree to join any future improvement districts which may be formed for construction of right-of-way improvements. 7) The applicant shall consult City Engineering for design considerations of development within public rights -of -way, Parks Department for vegetation species, and shall obtain permits for any work or development, including landscaping, within public rights - of -way from City Streets Department. Parks: No digging shall occur within the driplines of the existing right-of-way trees. Water: No concerns. Electric: If a new transformer is required, the applicant must pay for the improvements and provide a site on the premises for the transformer. Historic Preservation: This property is a local historic landmark and is on the National Register of Historic Places. HPC reviewed the redevelopment at the conceptual level during four meetings, eventually granting conceptual approval in July of 1994. Concerns of HPC were the light wells, attachment of the addition to the victorian building, open space on site, the outbuilding and tower elements, and objection to any relocation of the victorian building. HPC believed that concentrating square footage into the tower would have the least impact to the street frontage. Since conceptual approval, the plan indicates that the basement will be expanded to encompass nearly the entire lot. The HPC will not likely approve more lightwells to the basement area. The expanded basement will also clash with HPC's mandate that the building not be relocated (moved) to protect the pristine sandstone foundation on which the building sits. 2 applicant. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Office recommends: 1) denial of the 303 E. Main GMQS Exemption for the expansion of an historic landmark for lack of compatibility with surrounding properties, failure to provide amenities for users and residents, and failure to provide an efficient, effective service delivery area; and 2) recommendation for denial of the proposed affordable housing unit because of inadequate access, light and air; and 3) denial of the intrusion into the Main Street mountain viewplane. The applicant should accommodate the floor area elsewhere on the property; and 4) denial of the special review for reduction of trash/utility area. ALTERNATIVES: 1) The Commission can table the item to December 20, 1994 to allow the applicant to restudy the concerns of the P&Z and staff. A new information packet would have to be presented to staff no later than December 7 in order for staff to review any changes and prepare comments for the Commission. If the project successfully addresses staff and P&Z concerns, staff will be able to prepare a list of approval conditions warranted for the project. 2) The Commission could deny the aspects of the project under its purview (GMQS Exemption for expansion, special review of trash/utility area, and viewplane intrusion) and forward a recommendation on the affordable housing unit to Council. If Council approves the unit, the applicant would have to resubmit to the Commission a new application for the reviews previously denied. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to recommend denial of the 303 E. Main GMQS Exemption for the expansion of the historic landmark, special review for the trash/utility service area, and intrusion into the Main Street Mountain Viewplane." "I move to recommend to City Council denial of the proposed affordable housing unit finding that is does not provide adequate access and natural light and air for the future occupants." Exhibits: "A" Application information "B" Referral memos 'CASH 'T. 9118.60 .00 ----- -__--_---_. U.S. POSTAL SERVICE ASPEN CO" UNIT FIN 070432 ZIP CODE 81611 JOHN 11-10-94 15:22:52 VERSION 22.00 CUSTOMER RECEIPT -------'.... .... ........ ............ ........ --........... -------~--~- 090 POSTAGE STAMPS 98.60 -------~ ~ TOTAL 98.60 CASH T 98"60 CHANGE .00 \ --~_---------............... ... --------~-~~_-�- 1 THANK YOU �---------_...... ............ ........ ................................ ... -... ... ... ............ ` \ \ / CHANGE .00 ------------.... .... -... ------------------ U.S. P8STAL SERVICE ASPEN CO UNIT FIN 070432 ZIP CODE 81611 B.P. MAIN # 26 11-17-94 16:19:39 VERSION 22.00 ---------------------------------- \ CUSTOMER RECEIPT | ---------------------------------- / 090 POSTAGE STAMPS 1.05 090 POSTAGE STAMPS 2.00 090 POSTAGE STAMPS .80 -------- TOTAL 3.85 CASH T 3.85 -------~ CHANGE .00 ---------------------------------- \ THANK YOU PUBLIC NOTICE RE: LITTLE NELL SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA AMENDMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, November 22, 1994 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 pm before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, 2nd Floor Meeting Room, City Hall,, 130 S. Galena,, Aspen, CO to consider an application submitted by the Colorado Culinary Capers, Inc., 685 E. Durant Ave., Aspen, CO requesting approval to amend the Litt -le -Nell SPA Development Plan to allow a mobile __espresso cart and - -a se arate., p walk-up sandwich/grill area on the Ajax Tavern patio from December --- papa p 15 to April 15. For further information, contact Kim Johnson at the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office, 130 S. Galena, Aspen, CO 920- 5100 8/John Bennett, Mayor Aspen City Council Published in the Aspen Times on November 4, 1994 City of Aspen Account 411 ice'' j. NOVI November 14, 1994 Ms Kim Johnson ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Kim, We support a mobile express cart and walk up sandwich grill on the patio at Little Nell, located in Aspen, CO. Sincerely, BEAR PROPERTIES LTD. Brad Perrin General Partner BP/sjm btc.1.aspin.pitkin.little.nell.111494 17662 IRVINE BOULEVARD, SUITE 4, TUSTIN, CALIF. 92680 . (714) 730-7717 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL (Pursuant to Section 6-205.E. of the Land Use Regulations) STATE OF COLORADO ) ) Ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The undersigned, being first duly sworn, deposes and says as follows : I, SUNNY VANN, being or representing an Applicant before the City of Aspen, personally certify that Public Notice of the application for a PUD variance for the S.G.A Townhouse project, which are to be constructed at 204 East Durant Street was given by 1) posting of notice containing the information required in Section 6-205.E.2., which posting occurred on November 11, 1994, in a con- spicuous place on the subject property and that the said sign was posted and visible continuously from that date, and 2) mailing Notice of said development application to all property owners within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property, which mailing also occurred on November 11, 1994. Applicant: S.G.A. ASPEN LIMITED LIABILITY CO MN The foregoing Affidavit of Public Notice was acknowledged w and signed before me this = = day of ._.Z 1 -1994, by Sunny Vann on behalf of S.G.A. ASPEN LIMITES LIABILITY COMPANY. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My commission expires: My Commission expires 9/27/96 N tary Public ✓ 4 �y PUBLIC NOTICE RE: 204 EAST DURANT STREET PUD VARIANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on Tuesday, November 22, 1994 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 P.M. before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission, 2nd Floor Meeting Room, City Hall, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, to consider an application submitted by S.G.A. Aspen Limited Liability Company, c/o Douglas P. Allen, 225 N. Mill St., Suite 210, Aspen, CO, requesting a PUD variance to reduce the west side yard to zero feet and to reduce the required parking by one space, to preserve a 65 foot spruce tree on the site. The property is located at 204 E. Durant Avenue; Lots R, L, M, N and O, Block 77, City and Townsite of Aspen. For further information, contact Mary Lackner at the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO 920- 5106 s/Bruce Kerr, Chairman Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Published in the Aspen Times on November 4, 1994 City of Aspen Account i 1 /I 1/9 4 To lVilhom it may concr rn at P & Z, T unrler_stancl r.h,'t the owiner of the lot on the "outh�,,)st rornor of D---mr'.t' ry L='n'? -).n(.i fllount;-?i_n View Dr iN7^ )s.T;^rl for w?ri-nce to nut a 350 sf ADU on, the lot. T futhnr undp st<^nd that this would be, in iddi. Lion to the a.1 l.o�,1,able sf hu l ding for the lot. Tf the, unit is to he s?nar.=ate frog. the mein hui.l_d{inq, T ,-am ;�)cvJ ns t --i l owi nq i t to h--, built- the l ot ?. s much too sm,� 1_ l to cunpert _�,7o structures. Tf the unit is to hp cont:� ned wi thin t;hp -m, ! i..n bui.l-dincr, T fool It shou.l. r_l be i ncl.ue,:,r1 ,;ii t-h .n t-h•� orri n- ! building 7-il.1a n-c for this lot ind therefore there i.s no for 'IN- trend in this nei<Yhhorhood has herin to r�c the 1 r st hui.-!0,-r one betier �n(l this has rc-sul.ted in higg<-,r -ind b-igger stru.ct.ures 117i th. w1h,:)t sc-ems to be no rcqu,-�r,' to th- impact of i_he new huil.cli.no, upon the oxisti.nq homos and f mil.i,^s in the This is pr?_m;� -r_ ily 7, c a .un.i_ty of hard �orki_nq nlicl ale%.- to-�-l.s �vho r_esi. e in ��orrnsponding "micicll.,--class" st-ru^t:urrs fat l.o,zst for 7-\-Pen) Thov ,ar,n hf�r.e, hecauso Asp:^:.n. i- where tbp-.v h C hQs�'n to r�?7.s? -1hCi_r fcT�l1l 1.:�S `anC� this is the type of ncighhorhood th,.y fee?. hest suits their needs. T f-,nl th,!t t'ni. s a a.r. n � ' is not necessary nd will only help in �.11g,rinri structur^ to be hili.l t that is incom��t �b1.e with the nedghhorhoocl �nmd l hat vlyi ?.?. -),ttr_�,Ut the t vToe cf huSrt r t,h t i s n1so inoorrn, t .qhle With i-he community. in ^rely, ry locpl betty Ci .r?. nsc Nov. 18, 1994 David. & peggi Amory 1370 :`fit. View Dr. Aspen, CO. 91611 Aspen Planning & Zoning Commision, Aspen City Hall 130 S. Ga;ena Aspen, CO. 81611 Dear P&Z, We are opposed to a 350 sq. f t. Accessory Dwelling Unit at 1357 Pit. View Dr. for the following reasons: 1. No housing was demolished or lost because it is simply new construction on a vacant lot. 2. The lot is tiny, and the house oversized already. An ADU is inappropriate on such a small footprint. 3. An ADU will contribute to problems of parking and access. 4. A developer of a $ 1 million "spec house" should not be able to enhance his sale price by advertising " with an attached caretaker unit". From past actions, it is clear Mr. Allen will only be a resident until this house sells. Also there is no reason for a tenant to provide "off- setting" revenue while the house is on the market. 5. Our subdivision convenants prohibit duplexes. If more ADU's are granted it may lead to more duplexes in the future, higher density, and more traffic. 6. ADU approval could lead to destruction of one of the few single- family neighborhoods left in this part of Aspen. 7. We are concerned the Ordinance will create a "caretaker" community, rather than employee housing. 8. We feel the "cash -in -lieu" payment should go to already existing plans for employee housing' 8. Your Planning �staff has recommended denial . Thank you for your c nsiderati Da v` & Peggi Amory t DRAPER FERRYTEL NO.809-776 6364 Nov 18,94 1 November 13, 1994 Shelia Draper William Ferry P.O. Sm 1298 St. John, VI 00831 Bruce Kerr, Chairman Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission Aspen City Mail 130 S. Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Mr. Kerr, This letter is in reference to the application submitted by Douglas P. Allen requesting approval of a Conditional Use Review for an approximately 350 square foot Accessory swelling Unit attached to the proposed single family residence a1337 Mountain View thrive; Lot 1, Block 2, Weat Meadow Subdivision. We own the house directly across the street from this proposed residence and are concerned for the changing density In this family neighborhood should an Accessory Dwelling Unit be approved for this site. it is my understanding that the Homeowner's Association Covenants restricts the neighborhood to single family homes. This neighborhood is one of the last low density, family neighborhood$ in Aspen and we would like to keep It as such. By approving any accessory dwelling units to be built In on Mountain View Drive, it Is our opinion that the next step will be requests for duplex approvals, thus eventually changing the nature of the neighborhood Into a hodgepodge of multiple density bglidings such as exists in surrounding areas. There will be twko as many cars on the street If every house on Mountain View Drive has an acoassory dwelling unit. This makes it unsafe for the chiidren td ride their bikes and otherwise enjoy their own neighborhood, especially since this is a dead and street with no other aocess or egress. Thank you for your time and consideration. �Sincerely, Shelia Drape William Ferry tJIJdltaAAk 1 NOVEMBER 20, 1994 TO: CITY OF ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING FROM: BOB AND DARNELL LANGLEY RE: PUBLIC NOTICE EAST COOPER COURT TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN; I DARNELL LANGLEY DO HEREBY ATTEST THAT THE PUBLIC NOTICE TO THE ADJACENT LANDOWNERS FOR THE PROPOSED EAST COOPER COURT PROJECT FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION, SUBDIVISION ,REZONING, GMS EXEMPTION AND SPECIAL REVIEW FOR PARKING AND OPEN SPACE WERE MAILED BY ME FROM THE UNITED STATES POST OFFICE IN ASPEN, COLORADO ON NOVEMBER 12, 1994 DARNELL LANGLEY State of Colorado ) SS County of Pitkin This signature was acknowledged before me, the undersigned Notary Public this 22 day of November , 1994 by Darnell Langley. 1 W%%V K. Ra neiey/notary Public F.O.Box 154 Aspen, CO 81912' My Commission expiPcw,,,`31-24-97