Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.19941206 AGENDA -----------======================== ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING December 6, 1994, Tuesday 4:30 P.M. '. 2nd Floor Meeting Room Ci ty Hall ==--=========== I. COMMENTS commissioners Planning Staff Public II.- MINUTES III. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Ajax Tavern/Little Nell SPA Amendment, Kim Johnson B. Langley SUbdivision, Rezoning, Special Review, GMQS Exemption and Landmark Designation, Leslie Lamont & Amy Amidon IV. NEW BUSINESS A. Kraut Property Special Review, Leslie Lamont B. Su Casa Elevator View Plane Review, Leslie Lamont V. DISCUSSION A. Design Symposium, Stan Clauson VI. ADJOURN A G E N D A ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING December 6, 1994, Tuesday 4:30 P.M. E 2nd Floor Meeting Room City Hall i i I. COMMENTS Commissioners Planning Staff Public II., MINUTES - III. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Ajax Tavern/Little Nell SPA Amendment, Kim Johnson B. Langley Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review, GMQS Exemption and Landmark Designation, Leslie Lamont & Any Amidon IV. NEW BUSINESS A. Kraut Property Special Review, Leslie Lamont B. Su Casa Elevator View Plane Review, Leslie Lamont V. DISCUSSION A. Design Symposium, Stan Clauson VI. ADJOURN TO: Aspen Planning and zoning Commission FROM: Suzanne Wolff, Administrative Assistant RE: Upcoming Agendas DATE: December 6, 1994 Regular Meeting - December 20 303 E. Main St GMQS Exemption, Special Review, View Plane (KJ) Regular Meeting - January 3 Aorksession with Council & HPC - January 10, 2:30 PM Ordinance 35 a.nex MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Kim Johnson, Planning DATE: December 6, 1994 RE: Ajax Tavern - Little Nell Specially Planned Area Amendment, Public Hearing (Continued from November 22, 1994) SUMMARY: Because of a postage problem with the mailed public notice, this item had to be continued to this date. Staff recommends approval with conditions for an amendment to the Little Nell SPA to allow the Ajax Tavern to install an espresso cart and sandwich/pizza grill on the outdoor patio adjacent to the Tavern at the base of the gondola. Since the November 22 meeting, Planning and Zoning staff visited the site to view the rooftop mechanicals which Roger Hunt complained about. We agreed that the vent devices do not exactly match the drawing from the Little Nell SPA documents provided by Roger. However, we believe that the vents are similar in design and are in the same location shown on the elevation sketch. They are painted to match the building and seem to be a bit shorter than the sketch. An apparent effort was made to lessen the equipment's visual impact on the building. As for the perceived noise problem, staff does not believe the noise to be at a level which is bothersome to the public in the Ajax Tavern area or courtyard below the gondola, which are already noisy urban places. If the noise level does not interfere with the Little Nell operations, staff does not believe a change is warranted. We desire that each Commissioner take the opportunity to visit the Ajax Tavern area and view the rooftop equipment so that any particular comments can be made to staff at the December 6 meeting. APPLICANT: Colorado Culinary Capers, Inc. LOCATION: Lot 1 of the Little Nell Subdivision ZONING: CC Commercial Core with a Specially Planned Area (SPA) Overlay APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The Ajax Tavern requests to amend the Little Nell final SPA plan that was approved for the development of the gondola and base area. The request specifically includes the installation of a walk-up sandwich/pizza grill of 91 s.f. and the placement of a mobile espresso cart of 30 s.f. within the boundaries of the Tavern's outdoor dining area. Please see attached application, Exhibit A. REFERRAL COMMENTS: There are no issues presented from referral agencies. Please see attached referral memos from the Zoning Official and Environmental Health Department, Exhibit B. STAFF COMMENTS: Pursuant to Section 24-7-804 E.2. - modifications to the final development plan shall be approved pursuant to the terms and procedures of the final development plan, provided that the proposed change is consistent with or an enhancement of the approved final development plan. If the proposed change is not consistent with the approved final development plan, the amendment shall be subject to both conceptual and final development plan review and approval. A. Background - When Schlomo's Restaurant occupied this location Planning and Zoning staff discussed with Schlomo the need to amend the 1987 Little Nell SPA to allow the augmented use of the deck area for food preparation/service. In 1993, an insubstantial SPA amendment was approved by the Planning Office to allow Schlomo's a 220 s.f. expansion by filling in an area below a deck. Employee housing was mitigated by cash -in -lieu and parking was provided by -spaces-already existing in the Little Nell parking garage. Be Amendment - Ajax Tavern requests to amend the Little Nell SPA approval to permit the espresso cart and sandwich/grill uses. The areas involved total 121 s.f. The new restaurant seeks to legitimize these outdoor uses for operation during ski seasons, December 15 through April 15. According to the application, the proposed changes will help relieve congestion and traffic inside the restaurant and to expedite the service to outdoor customers. Also, the application states that no additional employees are needed because one existing cook and one existing bartender from indoors will move to the patio area. C. Staff Response - Staff finds that the proposed outdoor food preparation is consistent with the general restaurant use of the Tavern site. However, the Little Nell SPA did not anticipate the outdoor food preparation by the adoption of the Final SPA Plan. Therefore, the Little Nell SPA Plan must be officially amended for the new food service areas. The area taken by the two service bars is considered net leasable area, but not floor area by the definitions in the code. Net leasable space requires mitigation for employees and parking based on the generation rates established for the zone. For several years, staff has interpreted that mobile, temporary carts and vending situations are net leasable space. This is the first instance where an applicant is willing to proceed with 'an application because the mitigation costs are `typically high and the process is time .consuming. 2 Employee generation: The employee generation rate for the CC zone is a range from 3.25-5.25 employees per 1,000 s.f. of net leasable,. with a minimum mitigation rate of 60%. Because Ajax Tavern is a restaurant, it is expected to generate employees at the high end of the scale. It is assumed that the bartender and cook positions would be in the Category 2 range. The following formula illustrates the housing requirements for the new 121 s.f. of net leasable area: .' 121 s.f. at 5.25 empl./ thousand s.f.= .63 gross employee generation 60% (minimum mitigation) X .63 employee = .38 employee to be mitigated .38 X $51,000 (Cat. 2 employee cash -out) _ $19,380 cash -in -lieu Seasonal fraction: (4 months) .33 year X $19,380=.$6,395.40 The Planning Office acknowledges that the seasonal use of the new spaces should constitute a fractional share of the full -time - equivalent (FTE) employee cash amount. As the four months of operation represents one third of the year, the cash amount is calculated at $6,395.40. The application states that the new espresso bar and sandwich/pizza area will be staffed by employees which would otherwise be located inside at the bar and kitchen. As there is no feasible way to verify this, staff believes that the employees must be considered to be new staff for the operation. If the spaces are in use for any period other than December 15 through April 15, the applicant must apply for a revision to the SPA Amendment and pay additional employee mitigation calculated at the time of review. In addition to the SPA Amendment, the project must receive GMQS Exemption by the Planning Director for the net leasable expansion of 121 s.f. Staff will draft a memo for the Director's signature upon approval of the SPA amendment by Council. Parking: The underground parking garage for the Little Nell contains 148 spaces, of which 118 spaces are considered legal spaces by the Zoning Official (the 30 non -conforming spaces are taken up by storage or may not be fully sized spaces). The proposed net leasable area of 121 s.f. will generate .24 parking space by the generation rate of 2 spaces per thousand square feet as established by the code. The restaurant has two options to mitigate for this fractional space. It may elect to pay cash -in - lieu of $3,600.00 or legitimize one of the spaces in the Little Nell parking garage. If the later is chosen, the garage and specific parking space must be inspected by Planning and Zoning staff prior to the issuance of any building permits. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the amendment to the Little Nell SPA with the following conditions: 3 3 1) If either or both the espresso bar or the sandwich/pizza area are in use for any period other than December 15 through April 15, the applicant must apply for a revision to the SPA Amendment and pay additional employee mitigation in effect at the time of review. 2 ) Prior . to the issuance of any building permits for the new net ' leasable spaces, the project must receive GMQS Exemption by the Planning Director. 3) Prior to the issuance of any building permits, Planning and Zoning staff shall conduct an inspection of the Little Nell parking garage to verify the addition of one parking space, for a total of 119 spaces within the garage. In lieu of providing the .24 space, the applicant may elect to pay $3,600.00. 4) All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to recommend approval of the Ajax Tavern amendment of the Little Nell SPA to allow 121 s.f. of new net leasable area for an espresso cart and sandwich/pizza grill on the patio adjacent to the restaurant with the four conditions listed in the Planning Office memo dated December 6, 1994." EXHIBITS A. Application information B. Referral Comments 4 IV Z ANItiING i ZONING COMMISSION ZXHIBIT __., APPROVED , 19 BY RESOLUTION �. 75 10 49 &dwl V .0 dF Md vmmu�m or Little Nell Hot4- fl�Ilhx h�N►��► 0 Review Standards: Development in a Specially Planned Area (Attachment 4) /Into oposed development is consistent with the existing use of the space. pment specified to be placed on the patio area is portable or finished to blend djacent planter walls. 2. The demand on existing public facilities will not be increased by this development ' since the overall seating capacity will be reduced from 16 tables to 14. 3. N/A 4. N/A 5. The proposed use is consistent with the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. 6. No public funds will be required as a result of this development. 7. N/A 8. We are requesting a GMQS exemption based on Section 24-8-104(A) (1) (d) of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado. The proposed development (expansion of an existing commercial building) is less than 250 net leasable square feet. Walk -Up Beverage Station - 30 sq. ft. Walk -Up Sandwich/Grill Area - 91 sq. ft. The facility is designed to operate during the peak ski season (December 15 through April 15), which is calculated at 4 months. The purpose of these two outside facilities is to relieve congestion and traffic inside the existing restaurant and to expedite service to the customers on the patio. It is not expected to increase the number of customers served. The staff required to operate the Beverage Station will be the existing, 2nd bartender from the inside bar. The employee operating the Sandwich/Grill Area will be the 2nd grill cook from the inside kitchen. No additional employees will be hired as a result of this development. Specific Submission For FINAL SPA DEVELOPMENT PLAN (Attachment 3b) 1. Pion of the proposed development is attached. 2. Zone District: C/SPA 3. Development Schedule: The beverage/espresso cart is a self-contained, portable unit (NSF and UL approved) that will be placed as shown on the attached plan. • - It requires electrical service which is readily available from the existing restaurant panel. Construction work for this item can be completed within one week and is limited to pro- viding appropriate electrical service. The sandwich/grill area will utilize equipment that is NSF and UL approved and is free- standing. The proposed pizza oven will be clad in a stucco finish to match the adjacent structure. Gas, water, waste and electrical service is required for this equipment and is available at or below the immediate area. Construction for this area will take approxi- mately two weeks and will require the installation of plumbing and electrical service and the placement and final utilities connections of the purchased equipment. The equipment required for this project requires 4-6 weeks lead time. It is the intent of the Ajax Tavern to operate this facility during the 1994-1995 ski season. 4. No public facilities will be required for the development of this project. 5. The proposed use of this patio is consistent with the existing/approved use of this area. 6. Platt attached. 0 +�V_' Job C'TORY V- L=NE� hem * Pizza/Salad/Sandwich Refrigerators One, Two and Three Section Models with PT-40-S Doors — Case Front, Doors and Top of Stainless PT-6 -S Steel. Aluminum Ends and Interior. PT-88-S Standard Features • Interior Thermometer • Self -Closing Doors with Magnetic Gaskets • One Piece Heavy Duty Chrome Handles • Refrigerated "Cold Wall" Pan Rail and Forced Air Storage Compartment • Heavy Duty Vinyl Coated Steel Shelves are Available in 72" Increments • Energy Saving High Density Foamed -in -Place Polyurethane Insulation • Plasticized Fin Coil Protects Against Corrosion • Automatic Condensate Evaporator • Energy Efficient Refrigeration System • Cord and Plug Attached • 6" Adjustable Legs • Completely Enclosed Cabinet Back • Large 19" Work Surface Optional Features and Accessories • 5" Diameter Heavy. Duty Swivel Casters with Brakes • Additional Vinyl Coated Wire Shelves • Adjustable Stainless Steel Legs • 20" Plastic Cutting Board P.O. Box 507 Chevy Hip; NJ 08003 USA (609) 428-4200 47 FAX: (609) 428-7299 c a; G.nCP[.�[.1�C.�GP[.l�GPCPG.nMrrm C.PrJG.iC_f'GPc.P GPG.�CJ�G.nGPCPC.I�C.nGPGPC.�C�G.(CJ�C1�[�[�GT L FORNO CLASSICO from potent Pending Interior, showing 16" high vaulted baking chamber. Unique gas - fired burner at rear of deck adds old - fashioned oven flavor and crispness. - too. 4 t s ARK"F The unit is complete, ready to be installed and "bricked - in" according to your design with materials that you supply. FEATURES: • Interior burner speeds baking, enhances pizza taste and appearance. • Gas flame in baking chamber simulates visual appeal of burning wood or coals. • Proven Bakers Pride heavy duty burners below baking m heat. • Heat control dampers assure balance of top and bolt • No ash or mess to clean up. • Unit is complete with legs, casters, baking deck, and flue diverter. • Designed and engineered to be enclosed in brick, stone, masonry or ceramic tile. Contact factory for details. • Two models to choose from; each with extra large interiors. • Ceramic baking hearths, 1 1/2" thick. installation Requirements: • Clearance of 20" on left and rear for maintenance access, or adequate access panels. • Installation must be under a collection hood. • Contact factory for detailed installation requirements. Specifications: Mode 1 FC-616 FC-816 Deck Size 60" W x 36" D 66" W x 44" D External Size 78" W x 43" D x 33" H 84" W x 51 ". D x 33" H 1450 Lbs. 1700 Lbs. Weight (21) 10" Pizzas Capacity (15)10" Pizzas Bot h ovens have: 24" wide door openings, 16" deck height,130,000 BTU rating, require Natural Gas and a 115 volt power supply for the ignition system. BAKERS PRIDE OVEN CO. INC. EF�1-I� 30 Pine Street, New Rochelle, New York 10801 4W (914) 576-0200 FAX: (914) 576-0605 _______....,.-,..,r,r-,r,r,r_,nnnrnr7rr7fr]r7f7tr7t7rr�17[l7[h y ta'r i�J� �t y ; �.'.•.. .. spn3sso.end gourmet coffee are the explosive, 4,.M9h-growth "rage products of the 90's. Carts cf.Colorado makes itteasy for you to take advantage of this opportu* Our espresso cart ' - allows jrou offs,: a full menu . products Including - coffee and p str�es Standard JeaWres of this cart include` nefrigerat'double basin NSF sink, tubular ` steet frame, arui stain1esisi teal irt6arior construction. Take `a'tiutute`o- z #t='gh the following specifica- trans e tl iieade3�oryourself how well model CC2 ESP can i jou needs. you 'have any .questions, piease cavil onebfi our trained consultants n. :. � ,1},t ti ~ \ �� �•, -tom.` ����'-�,�,,!�,.,y�'� ` � � i{ y i ..Zyl.._ny.A �•may. ~i� � tivNING ZONING COMMISSION EXHIBIT_, APPROVED 19 BY RESOLUTION MEMORANDUM To: Kim Johnson Planning Office From: Nancy MacKenzie, Environmental Health Department Through: Lee Cassin, Senior Environmental Health Officer Date: November 15, 1994 Re: Ajax Tavern Final SPA Amendment Parcel ID # 2737-182-50-102 The Aspen/Pitkin Environmental Health Department has reviewed the Ajax Tavern land use submittal under authority of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, and has the following comments. SEWAGE TREATMENT AND COLLECTION: Section 11-1.7 flit shalt be unlawful for the owner or occupant of any building used for residence or business purposes within the city to construct or reconstruct an on -site sewage disposal device." Present plans call for waste water from the handsinks to be held in retention tanks in the espresso cart and at the pizza area. This waste will be discharged into existing interior sewerage lines. If wastewater disposal for this project changes to a direct connect through the central collection lines of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District (ACSD), the ability of the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District to handle the increased flow for the project should be.determined by the ACSD. The applicant would then have to provided documentation that the applicant and the service agency are mutually bound to the proposal and that the service agency is capable of serving the development. ADEQUATE PROVISIONS FOR WATER NEEDS: Section 23-55 "Att buitdings, structures, facilities, parks, or the like within the city Limits which use water shall be corrected to the municipal water utility system." The provision of potable water from the City of Aspen system is consistent with Environmental Health policies ensuring the supply of safe water. The City of Aspen Water Department shall determine if adequate water is available for the project. The City of Aspen water supply meets all standards of the Colorado Department of Health for drinking water quality. 1 WATER QUALITY IMPACTS: Section 11-1.3 "For the purpose of maintaining and protecting its municipal water supply from injury and pollution, the city shall exercise regulatory and supervisory jurisdiction within the incorporated limits of the City of Aspen and over all streams and sources contributing to municipal water suppties for a distance of five (5) mites above the points from which municipal water supplies are diverted.,, This application is not expected to impact down stream water quality. AIR QUALITY: Sections 11-2.1 "It is the purpose of the air quality section of the Municipal Code to achieve the maximum practical degree of air purity possible by requiring the use of all available practical methods and techniques to control, prevent and reduce air pollution throughout the city..." The Land Use Regulations seek to "lessen congestion" and "avoid transportation demands that cannot be met" as well as to "provide clean air by protecting the natural air sheds and reducing pollutants". This application is not expected to impact air quality. The pizza oven will be gas -fired ( it will not burn wood) and is in compliance with the air quality section of the Municipal Code. CONFORMANCE WITH OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH LAWS: NOISE ABATEMENT: Section 16-1 "The city council finds and declares that noise is a significant source of environmental pollution that represents a present and increasing threat to the public peace and to the health, safety and welfare of the residents of the City of Aspen and it its visitors. .....Accordingly, it is the policy of council to provide standards for permissible noise levels in various areas and manners and at various times and to prohibit noise in excess of those levels." During construction, noise can not exceed maximum permissible sound level standards, and construction cannot be done except between the hours of 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. It is very likely that noise generated during the construction phase of this project will have some negative impact on the neighborhood. The applicant should be aware of this and take measures to minimize the predicted high noise levels. Food Service A formal review of the detailed plans and specifications by this department will be required prior to construction. The applicant is aware that a "Food Establishment Plans nd Specifications Review" form and $75 fee is required by section 10-401 of the Rules and Regulations Governing the Sanitation of Food Service Establishments in the State of Colorado. The applicant Is 'representative has contacted our department and is familiar with these rules and regulations and realizes that the fixed food service areas and the mobile food units shall be constructed and operated in compliance with the requirements of these rules and regulations. Hand washing sinks with hot and cold water will be required at the pizza oven area. There shall be a location provided for the flushing and drainage of liquid wastes that is separate from the location provided for potable water .servicing. The surface outside shall be constructed of a smooth, P. \1) nonabsorbent material such as concrete and shall be maintained in good repair, kept clean, and be graded to drain. ENV:WP:LAND USE:ajaxtavemspa.amend 3 MEMORANDUM TO: Kim Johnson FROM: Bill DruediwLo RE: Ajax Tavern SPA Special Review DATE: ' October 26, 1994 My only question is the "host" stand. Will this area continue to be open to everyone on a first come, first seat or stand basis, or is the area now to be limited to admittance by the "host"? Do we consider any of the covered areas as FAR, which would require a Park Dedication fee? MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planing and Zoning Commission FROM: Leslie Lamont, Deputy Director RE: East Cooper Court Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review, GMQS Exemption, and Historic Designation DATE: December 6, 1994 SUMMARY: The Commission first reviewed this application at the November 22, 1994 meeting. The Commission continued review of the proposal in order for the applicants and staff to meet with the Housing Board to discuss the proposed mix of units on the AH zoned parcel. In addition, the applicants have also revised the site plan in response to comments made at the November 22, meeting. This memo is an update for the Commission, please bring the memo that staff prepared for the November 22, meeting. STAFF COMMENTS: A. GMQS Exemption - Pursuant to Section 24-8-104 C.l.c.& e., the construction of deed restricted units and free market units in the affordable housing zone district must be reviewed by the Planning and Zoning Commission with a recommendation to City Council. The applicants propose to create a 4,500 square foot parcel and rezone the parcel to the affordable housing zone district and develop 3 detached single-family homes; 1 free market, 1 RO, and 1 fully deed restricted. The Housing Board reviewed the application and recommended approval of the proposal with the condition that the category 4 dwelling unit become a category 3 dwelling unit with a net liveable square footage of 1,200 square feet. However, the applicant is to review the proposal with the Executive Director of the Housing Office and determine whether the project can survive a reduction from category 4 to category 3. Please see the Housing Office recommendation, exhibit A. The primary concern of the Board was the Housing Inventory is short on category 3 sale units. There is not a need for small category 4 dwelling units. B. Landmark Designation: Currently there barn on the parcel. The applicants propose parcel a Historic Landmark. The HPC has is a historic house and to designate the entire recommended approval of landmark status. The Commission must review and make a recommendation to Council. Amy Amidon has prepared a memo for the Commission's review. Please see memo, exhibit B. C. Other Issues: During review of the proposal at the November meeting, the Commission and staff identified several elements of the project that needed more work. They are: * Setback Variations; * Elimination of one more parking space behind the historic barn; * Mix of units on the AH parcel; and * Relocation of the tree in the northwest corner. The applicants have revised the site plan to reduce the number of side yard setback variations that were originally proposed. A new site plan will be presented at the meeting. However, the proposed changes are: Sideyard Setback Reguired Original Amended Historic Cottage A - 5 feet 3' 1st fl. 4' 1st fl. 5' 2nd fl. 4' lat fl. Cottage B - 5 feet 2' w/ADU stairs 5 feet Historic Barn - 5 feet 3 feet 3 feet New Barn - 5 feet 3' 1st fl. 5' both fl. 5' 2nd fl. In addition, Cottage B, in the northwest corner of Parcel 1, will be moved at least three feet forward to create more space between the cottage and the historic barn in back. The second parking space for the historic barn on Parcel 2 has not been eliminated. However, some Commission members encouraged the elimination of the parking space to gain more open space. The applicants are continuing to work with the Housing Office to confirm if the project is still viable with a reduction from category 4 to a category 3 unit. The Commission indicated the intent to follow the direction from the Housing Office. The tree is still proposed to be relocated to the center of the parcel. The Commission believed that the courtyard and the project 2 should not be jeopardized by the location of the tree in the northwest corner of the parcel. The applicants will be required to post a bond for the survival of the tree for at least 5 years. However, staff still does not support relocation of the tree. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the subdivision, rezoning, special review for open space and parking on the AH zoned parcel, Historic Landmark Designation and the GMQS Exemption for the development of housing in the AH zone with the following conditions: 1. Any costs for new public services that must be installed or upgraded shall be borne by the applicant on a partial or full basis depending upon the specific agency's requirements. 2. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall submit a subdivision plat and Subdivision Improvement .Agreement in accordance with Section -24-7-1004. C and D of the municipal code for review by the Engineering and Planning Departments and the City Attorney. The final subdivision plat and agreement must be filed within 180 days of final approval or subdivision approval is void. 3. The Subdivision agreement shall include the following: a. language to the effect that preserves and maintains the central courtyard on Parcel 1 as required open space for the entire East Cooper Court subdivision; b. letters from all of the utilities that they have inspected and approved the final development plan; c. restrictions against future installation of fireplaces and woodstoves; d. a fugitive dust control plan, to be reviewed and approved by the Environmental Health Department; and e. a bond for the value of the tree in the northwest corner that is to be relocated and language to the effect that the bond shall be in place for five years to confirm the tree's survival. 4. The final Subdivision plat and plan shall include the following: a. all transformer and utility easements; b. a detailed drawing of the area for all service/trash and recycling areas; 3 \a ° c. a 5 foot wide sidewalk shall be located adjacent to the property line with a 5 foot buffer space between the sidewalk and the future curb and gutter; and d. a detailed landscape plan approved by the Parks Department. 5. All existing water service lines and all new water service connections to this property shall be connected to the 16- inch water main located in East Cooper. 6. Prior to the issuance of any building permits: a. tree removal permits from the Parks Department shall be required for the removal of any trees 6" in caliper or greater and any trees proposed to be saved shall be protected during construction, including no digging or over digging within the drip line; b. the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the Engineering Department to construct curb and gutter in the future; C. the applicant shall pay all application water and sewer tap fees; and d. the applicant shall file the appropriate deed restrictions with the Housing Off ice for the deed restricted dwelling units on Parcel 2. 7. Any irrigation system that is installed shall be in compliance with the Water Conservation Code. 8. As required in Section 24-7-1004 C.4.f, the applicant shall maintain the historic runoff patterns that are found on the site and shall correct any runoff or erosion problems that currently exist on the site. 9. The applicant shall agree to join any future improvements districts which may be formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in the public right-of-way. 10. At the completion of each phase of the work, the applicant shall submit a statement by a registered professional land surveyor that all required survey and property monuments remain in place or have been re-established as required by Colorado Revised Statutes. 11. Prior to issuance of Certificates of Occupancy for the various phases of the project, the applicant,shall submit reproducible mylar as -built drawings of sidewalk, utility improvements, and 4 \A all other work located within the public rights -of -way, showing horizontal and vertical locations within 1 foot accuracy of all utilities, including their size and identification, together with any other features encountered during excavation within the rights -of -way. The as -built shall be signed and stamped by a registered professional engineer. The as -built shall also be provided to the City on , a disk in a dfx file compatible with the City GIS ArcInfo software system. 12. All lighting fixtures will face downward and be shielded to eliminate the potential for glare or nuisance to neighboring properties. Lighting along the walkways will be low to the ground (approximately 3' in height) and shielded. 13. All work in the alley and public right-of-way shall require a permit from the Streets Department. 14. During construction, noise cannot exceed maximum permissible sound level standards, and construction cannot be done except between the hours of 7 am. and 10 p.m. 15. All material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered, to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. 16. The subdivision and rezoning of 939 East Cooper is contingent upon the applicant successfully receiving historic landmark designation for the entire property, both Parcels 1 & 2. C. Staff recommends the Special Review for the provision of 5 on - site parking spaces and 15% or 675 square feet of open area for Parcel 2 with the following conditions: a. the applicant shall verify with the Zoning Officer the amount of open space as defined in the Land Use Code and the amount of open land on Parcel 2; b. the applicant shall provide only 1 parking space for the historic barn in order to move the barn closer to the alley creating more open space between the barn and the new cottage on Parcel 1. RECOMMENDED MOTIONS: "I move to recommend to Council approval of the subdivision and rezoning of 939 East Cooper Avenue with .the conditions outlined in staff's memo dated December 6, 1994." 'Lo "I move to approve the special review for parking and open space on Parcel 2 of East Cooper Court with the conditions outlined in staff's memo dated December 6, 1994." "I move to recommend to Council approval of the GMQS Exemption for the development of 3 dwelling units on Parcel 2; one free market, one Resident Occupied, and one category 3 with the conditions outlined in staff's memo dated December 6, 1994." "I move to recpmme 4 /-to Council approval of the Historic Desictnation of 939 East Cooper Avenue." EXHIBITS: A. Housing Office Recommendation B. HPC Memo 6 �,\ MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Amy Amidon, Historic Preservation Officer RE: 939 E. Cooper Avenue, Landmark designation DATE: December 6, 1994 SUMMARY: The applicant requests landmark designation of the property at 939 E. Cooper Avenue. There are two structures on the site, a victorian house, built in the 1880's and an outbuilding built.within this century. This site is currently under review for a proposed subdivision, rezoning and redevelopment of the property, including construction of three new structures. Special Review to exceed 85% of the allowable F.A.R. was completed by the Historic Preservation Committee. The entire site is to receive Landmark Designation, giving the HPC review over the whole proposal. The applicant will retain and restore both of the existing historic structures; the house and outbuilding. The final approval of Landmark status, by City Council, will not take place until all of the other approvals have been granted. NOTE: Landmark Designation was included in the public hearing notice for this application. This memo was not included in P&Z's packet for November 22nd, as the item was expected to be tabled and there were a number of other issues related to subdivision and rezoning which were to be discussed. APPLICANT: Bob and Darnell Langley. LOCATION: 939 E. Cooper Avenue, Lot A, Block 37 and 75' x 100' of Cleveland Street, East Aspen Addition, City of Aspen. PROCEDURE FOR REVIEW: Landmark Designation is a three -step process, requiring recommendations from both HPC and P&Z (public hearings), and first and second reading of a Landmark Designation Ordinance by City Council. City Council holds a public hearing at second reading. HPC approved landmark designation 6-0 on November 2, 1994. LOCAL DESIGNATION STANDARDS: Section 24-7-702 of the Aspen Land .Use Code defines the six standards for local Landmark Designation, requiring that the resource under consideration meet at least one 1 N of the following standards: A. Historical Importance: The structure or site is a principal or secondary structure or site commonly identified or associated with a person or an event of historical significance to the cultural, social or political history of Aspen, the State of Colorado of the United States. Response: This standard is not met. B. Architectural Importance: The structure or site reflects an architectural style that is unique, distinct or of traditional Aspen character. , Response: The house is a simple Victorian miner's cottage with major alterations. Original windows have been removed, a garage was constructed on the east and the whole structure has been covered with asphalt shingles. The applicants have indicated an intention to restore the structure as part of their redevelopment plans. It does retain the traditional form of a Victorian house. From the 1904 Sanborne Insurance maps, the historic house was a one and one-half story historic structure with a one story lean-to on the back. There are two outbuildings shown on the site in 1904, but neither is in the location of the existing shed. These, along with two other Victorian houses which occupied a portion of the land which is now 939 E. Cooper appear to have been demolished. The existing outbuilding has become historically significant and is not proposed to be demolished in the current redevelopment plan. C. Architectural Importance: The structure or site embodies the distinguishing characteristics of a significant or unique architectural type or specimen. Response: This standard is not met. D. Architectural Importance: The structure is a significant work of an architect whose individual work has influenced the character of Aspen. Response: The architect or builder is unknown. E. Neighborhood Character: The structure or site is a significant component of an historically significant neighborhood and the preservation of the structure or site is important for the maintenance of that neighborhood character. 2 Response: There are a number of Victorian structures in the immediate vicinty of 939 E. Cooper. These buildings are mixed in with some very dense multi -family development and are the only remaining evidence of the early character of this neighborhood:. F. Community. Character: The structure or site is critical to the preservation of the character of the Aspen community because of its relationship in terms of size, location and architectural similarity to other structures or sites of historical or architectural importance. Response: This site is representative of the modest scale, style and character of homes constructed during the mining era, the community's primary period of historic significance. Recommendation: Staff and HPC recommend P&Z approve Landmark Designation of Lot A and 751x100' of Cleveland Avenue, East Aspen Addition, City of Aspen, finding that standards B, E and F are met. Recommeded Motion: "I move to recommend to City Council approval of Landmark Designation of 939 E. Cooper Avenue, Lot A and 751x100' of Cleveland Avenue, East Aspen Addition, City of Aspen, finding that standards B,E, and F are met." Additional Comments: 3 ti� DEC 01 054 03:40PM ASPEN HOUSING OFC P.1 TO: Leslie Lamont, City Planner FRCK.- Cindy Christensen, Housing Office DATE: December 1, 1994 RXI LANGLEY SUBDIVISION SPECIAL REVIEW Parcel ID No. 2737-292-34-001 ISSUE: The Planning Office has requested the Housing Board to review this application as to the mix. SACKGRQ-= ,. The Housing Board met on November 30, 1994 to review the proposal. EXCO RATION: The Housing Board supports the project being proposed and would recommend approval of this project. The Housing Board does recommend, though, that the historic barn that is to be designated as Category 4 be designated an a Category 3, unless this would render the project unfeasible for the developer. The Board has requested Dave Tolen to work with the Langleys to see if changing this unit to a Category 3 unit would be economically feasible and still maintain the project being proposed. Once this is accomplished, Dave Tolew s findings will be passed on to the Flaming office. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Leslie Lamont, Deputy Director Community Development f f RE: Kraut Property Affordable Housing - Special Review for On -Site Parking Amendment DATE: December 6, 1994 -------------- SUMMARY: The Housing Office has requested to amend the approved on -site parking plan for the property to add three parking spaces in the garage. As part of the review and approval of the affordable housing development on the Kraut property, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved Special Review for the parking program. Parking is established by Special Review from the Commission in the affordable housing zone district. APPLICANT: Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Office represented by Jim Curtis LOCATION: 715 East Hyman Avenue, Aspen ZONING: Affordable Housing APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The Commission approved the parking plan in November of 1993. The project consists of 27 affordable studio and one bedroom deed restricted housing units. The garage was approved for 55.cars: 27 spaces for residents and 28 spaces to be leased or sold to the public. Through fine tuning the design of the garage, the applicant is now able to add three more spaces to the- garage. The applicant requests to amend the approved parking plan to provide 31 spaces for lease or sale to the public while continuing to provide the 27 residential spaces totalling 58 spaces in the garage. Please see submitted application and garage plan, exhibit A. REFERRAL COMMENTS: Please see Attachment B. STAFF COMMENTS: The applicant has redesigned the garage and has "resized" the compact parking spaces in order to gain three additional spaces in the garage. Although the Code does not provide direction with respect to an acceptable level of compact spaces verses standard spaces, Chuck Roth has provided some comparisons with Boulder. Please see his referral comments, exhibit B. Staff expressed some concern with the high number of compact spaces in the garage. There are not many "true" compact cars in this ti� community. Large, 4-wheel drive, jeep type automobiles appear to be the norm. In response to staffs comments, Jim Curtis prepared an extensive review of the dimensions of automobiles commonly found in the valley and the proposed dimensions of the compact and standard spaces provided in the garage. In addition, compact spaces will only be provided for Kraut residents in an attempt to reduce the turnover rate and the homeowners association will have the flexibility to assign spaces to meet resident needs with respect to the size of their car. Staff supports the amended parking plan for the following reasons: * Three additional spaces will be provided in an area that is losing 50 existing leased spaces. * The addition of the three spaces for lease or sale purposes should not pose a problem for the permanent residences. During the original review, a larger garage for public parking was discouraged because of security concerns and the detrimental mix of land uses for the permanent residences. * Because the compact spaces will be resident parking, the anticipated turnover and use of those spaces should be lower than the public spaces. In addition, the homeowner's association could assign spaces for tenants depending upon the size of their car. * The ability to lease or sell three more spaces in the garage will further reduce the public subsidy for the affordable housing. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the amendment to the approved parking plan for 715 East Hyman Avenue with the following condition: 1. Storage space number 2 must be occupied by the owner of parking space number 1 to ensure convenient access to the storage unit. RECOMMENDED MOTION: "I move to approve the amendment to the on - site parking plan for 715 East Hyman Avenue with condition as outlined in staff's memo dated December 6, 1994." ATTACHMENTS: A. Application and Amended Garage Plan D. Referral Comments 2 1_0 APPLICATION SUMMARY This application is to amend the Special Review Approval for parking for the Kraut Housing and Parking Project. The applicant request to increase the parking in the 1-level garage from 55 to 58 spaces by redesigning 14 "larger than normal" compact parking spaces into the garage as shown on the attached drawing. The 14 compact spaces would represent 24% of the total 58 parking spaces in the garage. As construction on the project proceeds, the applicant is continually looking for ways to increase revenues or decrease costs in order to reduce the public subsidy of the project. By allowing the 3 additional spaces in the garage to be sold or leased to the public, at an estimated price of $25,000 per space, this would generate an additional $75,000 revenue for the project. It is believed the "larger" compact spaces will function effectively and efficiently given an enclosed parking garage without snow problems. The Kraut Project is located at 715 East Hyman Avenue south of the Aspen Athletic Club Building. The project was approved on January 24, 1994 (Ord. NO. 65, 1993) and construction started June 21, 1994. The project consist of 27 affordable housing studio and 1-bedroom units, a 1-level 55 car garage and 1 handicapped parking space in the alley. The 55 car garage was approved with 27 spaces for the residential units (1 space per bedroom) and 28 * spaces for sale or lease to the public as determined by Council at a later date. The request to permit some "larger than normal" compact spaces is supported by the following reasons. 1. The additional 3 sale or leased spaces are estimated to generate up to $75,000 additional revenue for the project, thereby reducing the public subsidy of the project. 2. The compact spaces are "larger than normal" compact spaces and only slightly smaller than the City Code standard. These standards are listed below for easy comparison. Width Len City Code Standard Spaces 8'-6" x 18'-0" Kraut Smallest* Compact Spaces 7'-11" x 16'-6" Rio Grande Garage Compact Spaces 7'-9" x 15'-0" City of Denver Std. Compact Spaces 7'-6" x 15'-0" * The proposed smallest compact spaces are 7%11" x 16'-6" while most of the proposed compact spaces are larger. 1 1� 3. The parking garage is enclosed and not subject to snow stacking and removal problems. 4. The spaces will be assigned and signed, and will have low turnover usage and repetitive users. The low -activity spaces will not function like high -activity municipal garage spaces with high turnover usage and many users. 5. The extra public spaces will help replace some of the 50 leased spaces that previously used the lot. 6. The City has approved compact spaces previously in the Rio Grande Garage. 7. The parking for the project is established by Special Review which allows for variations in the parking standards based on the merits of the proposal. CAR SIZES AND PARKING SPACE COMPARISON To feel comfortable with the request, the applicant measured various "larger, mid and compact" cars and trucks in town. The measurements were from front to back bumpers and side mirror to side mirror. The car sizes are compared below against the smallest space proposed for Kraut. KRAUT SMALLEST SPACE LARGER CARS/TRUCKS WIDTH LENGTH WIDTH LENGTH Isuzu Trooper 6'-0" 14'-7" 7'-11" 16'-6" Ford Blazer 6'-1" 14'-9" Jeep Cherokee 6'-5" 14'-0" Ford Tarus Stationwagon 6'-6" 16'-1" Audi 5000 6'-7" 169-1" Range Rover 6'-8" 15'-3" Volvo 740 Stationwagon 6'-8" 16'-3" Jeep Grand Wagoneer 6'-9" 15 9-3" Toyota Land Cruiser 6'-9" 15'-6" Accura Legend 6'-9" 15'-10" Ford Explorer 4x4 6'-10" 159-5" Volkswagon Vanagon 7'-0" 14 9-9" Ford 150 Truck 7'-2" 18'-6" Suburban Silverado 7'-6" 18'-2" Ford Bronco 7'-8" 14'-5" 2 0ti MID TO COMPACT CARS/TRUCKS Ford Tarus 6'-5" 15'-5" Subaru Legacy 6'-5" 14'-10" 07 Jeep 6'-5" 13'-0" Toyota Camry 6'-4" 15'-0" Honda Prelude 6'-3" 14'-4" Honda Civic 6'-2" 12'-11" Volkswagon Quantum 6'-0" 15'-0" Subaru DL 61-0" 14'-4" Honda Accord 6'-0" 13'-8" Volkswagen Fox 6'-0" 13'-7" Suzuki Sidekick 6'-0" 13'-2" Saab 900 Turbo 5'-1 1" 15 %0" GEO Metro 5'-11" 12'-0" Volkswagen GTI 5 %9" 12'-9" Virtually all of the larger cars can fit the smallest proposed space acknowledging that some of the fits are tight. As expected, the mid to compact cars can fit easily. In reviewing the car measurements, it is important to highlight the following points: 1. All of the 31 leased or sale spaces to the public are proposed to be full size standard spaces (8'-6" x 18'-0") to accommodate the largest cars and trucks.. 2. All of the 14 "larger" compact spaces are proposed to be allocated to the residential units. It is reasonable to believe that the residential units will have a mix of compact, mid and larger cars, and as shown, virtually all of the larger cars can still fit the smallest proposed space. 3. The condominium and Homeowners' Association documents for the residential units will be written to allow for a switch of assigned residential spaces, if necessary, to match larger cars to larger spaces after people move -in and subsequently after units are resold. The decision to switch spaces will be solely at the determination of the Board of Directors of the Homeowners' Association to make the parking operate smoothly. 3 3( (OAOW) 13AUS IVNioido Hinos 3� I"1_ o OITA a_O _ia To: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office From: Chuck Roth, Engineering Department O`p.- Date: November 3, 1994 Re: Kraut Property Subdivision Amendment Having reviewed the above referenced application, the Engineering Department has the following comments: City Code does not provide for allowable percentages of compact car sized spaces. I checked with the City of Boulder. Their code permits 40% compact spaces for lots of 5- 49 spaces, 50% for 50-100 spaces, and 60% for more than 100 spaces. Based on that, the Engineering Department recommends approval of compact car sized spaces. There is some disagreement about how many spaces are compact size. If the number is 14, the percentage is 24%. If the number is 17, the percentage is 29%. If the three spaces that are sold or leased are full sized, the percentages of the remaining spaces are still under the Boulder guidelines. City Code does not regulate other design standards of parking garages. The aisle widths do not meet two-way traffic aisle widths as specified in the '"Traffic Engineering Handbook." The aisles may need to function as one-way aisles. This information is provided for the applicant's benefit. cc: Cris Caruso, Jim Curtis M%-W MEMORANDUM TO: Leslie Lamont, Planning Office FROM: Jim Curtis, Kraut Project Manager DATE: November 15, 1994 RE: V Kraut Property Subdivision Amendment Response to Engineering Department Referral Comments I wish to respond to Chuck Roth's, Engineering Department referral comments which are attached. l . The number of compact spaces proposed. Fourteen (14) compact spaces are proposed based on being less than the 8'-6" width standard of the City Code. Three (3) additional spaces meet the 8 -6"width standard but not the 18 0 length standard of the City Code for a total of 17 spaces. The 14 spaces equal 24% of the total 58 spaces, the 17 spaces equal 29% of the total 58 spaces. The width measurement was felt to be the more critical measurement, but we agree that 17 spaces technically do not meet the 8'-6" x 18'-0" standard of the City Code. 2. The aisle widths proposed. The aisle widths (driving lanes) proposed are 22'-0" typical. The aisle width specified in the "Traffic Engineering Handbook" referenced by Chuck Roth is 25'-0". The applicant feels very comfortable with the 22'-0" aisle widths for the following reasons: A. The "Traffic Engineering Handbook" width of 25'-0" is for unprotected open air public parking where weather is a consideration and the standard is a conservative engineering standard to cover all situations nationwide. The Kraut Garage has been designed based on its specific size and operational characteristics, and to be cost efficient. The garage will be well lit, not subject to problem weather conditions and will have relatively low turnover usage compared to open air municipal parking or even municipal garage parking. P-� Memorandum Leslie Lamont November 15, 1994 Page 2 B. The City of Denver "Off -Street Parking Standards" uses between 18 and 23 . feet aisle widths, depending on stall widths, for open air public parking. The "New Metric Handbook" recommends between 20 and 24 aisle widths for open air public parking. Again, both of these standards are for open air public parking and not an enclosed garage which can have a narrower aisle width. C. We field measured the following garages: 1. Rio Grande Garage - 24'-0" aisles typical 2. Ritz Garage - 21 %0" to 21'-11" aisles 3. Little Nell Garage - 18'-9" to 20'-1" aisles The Kraut Garage at 22'-0" aisles is most comparable to the Ritz Garage which functions quite well in speaking to the parking attendants at the Ritz. The Kraut Garage is slightly less than the Rio Grande Garage which is expected because the Rio Grande is a large 350± car municipal garage. The Little Nell at 18' to 20' aisles was felt to be a little tight in speaking with the parking attendants. In summary, the applicant feels very comfortable with the 22'-0" aisle widths given the experience of the Ritz Garage, and the specific size and operating characteristics of the Kraut Garage. cc: Chuck Roth 3`� MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Leslie Lamont, Deputy Director DATE: December 6, 1994 RE: Su Casa Elevator - View Plane Review SUMMARY: As part of a recent renovation to the building at 315 East Hyman, the applicant is required to install an elevator to meet recent Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and UBC code modifications. The required mechanical equipment for the elevator and the required clearance for safety/maintenance requirements of the elevator push the elevator shaft above the roof line and into the Wheeler Opera House view plane. APPLICANT: Eric Casper LOCATION: 315 East Hyman, Aspen ZONING: Commercial Core (CC) STAFF COMMENTS: Pursuant to Section 24-7-501 the Mountain view planes subject development to a heightened review so as to protect mountain views from obstruction, strengthen the environmental and aesthetic character of the city, maintain property values, and enhance the city's tourist industry by maintaining the city's heritage as a mountain community. The proposed elevator shaft encroaches into the Wheeler Opera House view plane. The shaft is located at the back of the open courtyard of the Wheeler Square Office building. The elevator was first proposed to stop on the second floor and would have leveled off with the existing roof of the office building. However, a recent discussion with the building department has confirmed that the law offices on the third floor must also have accessibility for the disabled and must also tie into the proposed elevator. In order to comply with the safety regulations for construction of the elevator, a 42" clearance must exist between the last or highest stop of the elevator cab itself and the top of the shaft. This is a safety precaution for a mechanic to work on top of the cab and have enough room to escape being smashed if the elevator suddenly moves up to the last stop. It is the 4211-clearance and the required venting stack that will protrude above the existing building roof line. In fact, when confirming that the higher elevator shaft is in the Wheeler Opera House view plane, it was discovered that a 3� significant portion of the top floor of the existing building is also in the view plane. Section 24-7-505 B. allows the planning staff to exempt mechanical equipment on existing buildings from view plane review except for a satellite dish and an elevator shaft (and any other significant piece of equipment). Therefore staff is requesting a Commission review of the proposed elevator shaft. According to the criteria for view plane review "no mountain view plane may be infringed upon... " However, the Commission may exempt any developer from the requirements whenever it is determined that the view plane does not so effect the parcel as to require application of PUD or that the effects of the view plane may be otherwise accommodated. RESPONSE: The elevator is a requirement of the recently adopted federal mandate to enable the physically challenged to access businesses and services whether public or private. The proposed intrusion into the view plane, beyond the portion of building that already exists in the view plane, is purely mechanical. The intrusion does not represent additional net leasable area, liveable or useable area. Occupants will not be able to access the roof top for leisure/recreational purposes. The extended elevator shaft will be no higher than the old elevator shaft that exists but is not used in the building. Nor will the extended shaft detract form the existing clutter that is currently found on top of the roof such as swamp coolers, vents, etc. During a site visit, staff viewed the roof top from the second floor of the Wheeler Opera House which is the only significant mountain view from inside the building. The elevator shaft is negligible and the second floor of the Opera House is well above the roof top of the office building. RECOMMENDATION: Finding that the affect on the view plane is negligible and due to the existing mechanical equipment on the roof, the pure mechanical nature of the intrusion, and the federal requirement to bring the building up to accessibility standards the intrusion of the elevator shaft into the view plane does not affect the parcel in a manner that a PUD review would alleviated of the affects otherwise accommodated staff recommends approval with the following conditions: 1. The elevator shaft shall not extend beyond 42" above the existing roof top (which is the higher portion of the building's roof). The vent shall not extend greater than 12" above the roof of the shaft. 2. The applicant shall paint the existing fixtures on top of the roof a color that will blend into the roof ' s surf ace and emoveq the p ion o e o elevator shaft that is on top of the roof .4-. 0 3. All material representations made in the application and in the public hearing shall be adhered to or the approval is void. 4. This approval does not negate necessary HPC review. RECOMMENDED NOTION: "I move to approve the Wheeler Opera House view plan review for the elevator shaft to extend 42" and the vent stack 12" above the existing roof top at 315 East Hyman as represented on the submitted plans with the condition as outlined in Planning Office memo dated December 6, 1994." EXHIBITS: A. Elevator Plans 3 3A A_7 % o -�q Q A' I I I a W 7.1 CIL VIA il'llillillll��' 3A