HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.19920707A G E N D A
ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
July 7, 1992, Tuesday
4:30 P.M.
2nd Floor Meeting Room'
City Hall
I. COMMENTS
Commissioners
Planning Staff
Public
II. MINUTES
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Garrish Rezoning to R-15, Kim Johnson (To be tabled
to 7/21)
B. Antique Brokers Office Zone District Text Amendment,,
Leslie Lamont
IV. OLD BUSINESS
A. ACES Rezoning to Park (SPA), Kim Johnson
V. NEW BUSINESS
A. Park Place Condominiums GMQS Exemption, Kim Johnson
.4 eck LAS e b k ldl,ny-5 C� ajz
Perm I4,--2 ar ase-5 ez11&Wa 1"A -I-kC-
'pro IA'dece dtA .56(cl,
atAA
CERTIFICATE OF POSTING
I hereby certify that I posted the Notice in the manner
required by Section 6-205Eb of the Aspen Land Use pertaining to the
Garrish rezoning public hearing to be held on July 7, 1992. Said
Notice was posted on June 201 1992.
Paul J:' Taddune
STATE OF COLORADO )
)ss.
COUNTY OF PITKIN )
The foregoing Certificate of Posting was subscribed and sworn to before
me this 7th day of July, 1992, by Paul J. Taddune.
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
N ary Public
PUBLIC i
T IIV '-
PLACE
PURPOSE
♦
,_
i,
I hereb
Notice in the
the attached
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
y
certify that I have placed
U.S. mail, po,ptage pre -paid
sheet this ,/, ` day o
STATE OF COLORADO )
)ss.
COUNTY OF PITKIN )
a copy of the attached
to the people listed on
The foregoing Certificate of Mailing was subscribed and sworn to before
me this 7th day of July, 1992, by Kimberly Madison.
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission expires:
No ry Public
EXHIBIT "A"
Allen, Douglas P.
530 E. Main Street
Aspen, Co 81611
Beckwith, David E.
Foley and Lardner - C/O
777 E. Wisconsin Ave #R
Milwaukee, Wi 53202
Candreia, Joe L.
930 King Street
Aspen, Co 81611
Coates, Neligh C. Jr.
720 E. Hyman Ave
Aspen, Co 81611
Goldstein, Gerald 11.
Goldstein, Christine S.
21'- King William
'ntonio, Tx 78204
Gross, Gail M.
2700 Post Oak Blvd #1670
Houston, Tx 77056
Hamilton, Ruth B.
Hamilton, Paul K.
420 N. Spring Street
Aspen, Co. 81611
Kal 1 enberg , Jeffery D. J .
Kal lenberg, Sandra L.
9245 Red Oak Drive
Parish of Caddo, La,: 71103
Lancaster, John L. III
Lancaster, Robert P!
901 Main St. Suite 6000
Dallas, Tx 75202
Lauriski, Stanley E.
Lauriski, Rose M.
P.O. Box 803
1n, Co 81612
Imap i e, Charles A. and Bryce M.
927 Gibson Avenue
Aspen, Co 81611
Marshall, Ann
P.O. Box 10894
Aspen, Co 81612
Metcalf, Joan L.Trust
P.O. Box 8542
Aspen, Co 81612
Owen, Kenneth and Jane
P.O. Box 88
Chapman Ranch, Tx 78347
Peterson, Anne
C/O Anne Peterson Richards Byard
35 Locust
Mill Valley, Ca 94941
Shoaf, Jeffrey S.
113 Neale Ave
Aspen,,Co 81612
Shoaf, Jeffrey S.
P.O. Box 3123
Aspen, Co 81612
Sunnybrook Colorado, Inc.
Krabacher, Hill and Edwards
Drawer 6250
Laredo, Tx 78042
Vare, Edwin C.
Vare, Darlene De Sedule
628 Winthrop Ave
New Haven, Ct 06511
PUBLIC NOTICE
RE: AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL ZONE DISTRICT MAP OF THE CITY OF
ASPEN
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a public hearing will be held on
Tuesday, July 7, 1992 at a meeting to begin at 4 : 3 0 p : m. before
the Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission, 2nd floor Meeting Room, 130
South Galena Street, Aspen, Colorado to consider an application
submitted by Michael Garrish requesting approval of an Amendment
to the Official Zone District Map of the City of Aspen. The
property located at 855 Gibson Street is currently bisected by the
R-30 and R-15 zone Districts. The applicant is requesting that
the portion of his property which is zoned R-30 be rezoned to.R-
15. For further information, contact Kim Johnson at the
Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen, CO 920-
5090.
s/Jasmine Tygre, Chairman
Planning and Zoning Commission
Published in The Aspen Times on June 19, 1992.
City of Aspen Account.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planning
RE: Text Amendment for Sections 24-5-213 and 24-8-104
Affecting Permitted Uses in the Office Zone Di rict and
GMQS Exemptions for a Historic Landmark
DATE: July 7, 1992
---------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The proposed text amendments will allow mixed -use
development as a Permitted Use in the Office zone district., The
amendments will also enable the expansion of an Historic Landmark
for mixed -use purposes exempt from GMQS.
STAFF COMMENTS: Joe and Susan Krabacher propose to add a
residential dwelling unit onto the Aspen Antique Brokers Ltd. In
1989 the Krabachers received a conditional use approval for an
antique retail business in a Historic -Landmark. A GMQS Exemption
from the Planning Director was also granted for the change in use
from a 3 bedroom residential dwelling unit to a commercial use.
At the time of approval the Krabachers envisioned expanding the
building to add a residential unit on the back of the building.
Currently, the Office zone district does not allow a mixed -use
proposal that includes a free market dwelling unit and a commercial
or lodge use that is.not "accessory" to the primary use or is not
considered a "home occupation". The. antique store is approximately
1700 square feet, 400 of which is the Krabacher's residence. Staff
cannot make the. finding that the expansion of the building for a
free market dwelling unit (of- approximately 1600 square feet)
represents either an accessory use to the retail business or that
the retail business could be considered a home occupation.
In addition, it is staff's interpretation.that the conversion of
the dwelling unit to the Antique Store pursuant to Section 8-104
A.b.(4), "the change in use of ari historic landmark which does not
increase the building's existing floor area ratio," is a one time
exemption from the GMQS process. In other words, the parcel had
one development right for a free market dwelling unit but it was
eliminated with the change in use thus requiring competition for
any new free market residential development right'.
Because of the incentive nature of the Historic Preservation
program, staff is reluctant to require a GMQS competition process
for an additional unit. However, potential employee generation
impacts associated with free market development should be
addressed. Additionally, mixed -use proposals should be encouraged
in the Office zone districts and most Historic Landmarks in the
Main Street Office zone district lend themselves to adaptive mixed -
use projects.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Zoning Commission
FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner
DATE: July 7, 1992
RE: Garrish Rezoning to.._R-15 - Continue Public Hearing to
July 21, 1992
The Applicant. requests that this public hearing be continued to
July 21, 1992 because he is unable to attend tonight's meeting.
Staff agrees to the continuation.
Therefore, as a result of working with the Krabachers on the
expansion of their Historic Landmark, staff recommends the
following text amendments to encourage mixed -use projects in the
Office zone district (of which most could occur in Historic
Landmarks) and to allow an expansion of an Historic Landmark for
mixed -use purposes exempt from the GMQS process while providing
mitigation for employee generation impacts.
Following are the proposed text changes (bold indicates proposed
language) :
I. - That Article 5, ' Division 2, Section 24-5-213 .B of the Municipal
Code shall be amended to read as follows:
Section 5-213 Office (0)
B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of
right in -the office (0) zone district.
8. Attached residential dwellings and mixed -use
buildings comprised of (i) a residential use; and
(ii) a conditional use permitted in the Office (0)
zone district; provided any such conditional use
shall be permitted subject to the standards and
procedures established in Article 7, Division 3.
II. That Article 8, Section 24-8-104.B.1.c of the Municipal Code
shall be amended to read as follows:
C. Historic landmark. The enlargement of an historic
landmark intended to be used as a commercial or
office development which increase the building's
existing floor area ratio and its net leasable
square footage. The enlargement of an historic
landmark which develops more than one (1)
residential dwelling or three (3) hotel, motel,
lodge, bed and breakfast, boardinghouse,
roominghouse or dormitory units. The enlargement
of an historic landmark intended for mixed -use as
a commercial, office or lodge development and
attached residential dwelling unit, which increases
the building's or parcel's existing floor area
ratio, its net leasable square footage and adds an
attached residential dwelling unit.
APPLICABLE REVIEW CRITERIA: . Pursuant to Section 7-1102 the
following standards of review apply for a text amendment:
a. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any
applicable portions of this chapter.
PA
RESPONSE: The proposed amendment permitting mixed -uses in the
Office zone district is intended to address the lack of provisions
for mixed -use proposals in the zone district. The Office zone
district allows detached residential dwellings and multi -family
dwellings. The district also allows accessory residential
dwellings restricted to affordable housing guidelines, home
occupations and accessory building and uses. But the district does
not allow attached free market residential units in concert with
other Land uses such as a retail business that would not be
considered a home occupation. This amendment is consistent with
the Code and would correct an oversight in the Office zone district
where detached -residential units are allowed but attached units are
not allowed.
The proposed amendment to the GMQS Exemption provision compliments
other Historic Preservation techniques. The Historic Preservation
program is well supported by incentives that promote adaptive reuse
of historic structures. The proposed amendment does not eliminate
an applicant's obligation to provide employee generation mitigation
but enables an exemption from the lengthy GMQS competition process.
b. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all
elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan.
RESPONSE: Recent Draft Aspen Area Community Plan goals have been
focused toward preservation of the fabric and scale of the
community of Aspen. Area wide efforts that support and encourage
residents to remain within the metro area have been strongly
recommended by several sub -committees of the. Plan. The proposed
amendments encourage adaptive reuse of historic structures and
promote mixed -uses for owners and residents to remain in the
com7riun;ty while operating a business.
.c. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with
surrounding Zone Districts and land uses, considering existing
`'land use and neighborhood characteristics.
RESPONSE: The primary intent of the proposed amendments are to
encourage the adaptive reuse of historic. structures thereby
preserving the scale and context of neighborhoods. The amendments
do not recommend land uses which are not otherwise permitted or
coedit-. n.a1 'Uses Within the Office zone district.
d .. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation
antic road safety .
RESPONSE: The amendment will not have a greater impact on traffic
generation and road safety. The Commission will continue to review
the expansion: I of a Historic Landmark and proposals that are
conditional uses within the zone district. Both the conditional
use review and GMQS Exemption sections of the Code require that the
0-1
I
Commission consider parking impacts, traffic generation and road
safety.
e. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment
would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and
the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the
capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited
to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply,,
parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilit-es":
RESPONSE: Currently, the GMQS Exemption review requires an
applicant to satisfy the Commission that potential demand_^u;poft
public facilities are mitigated. The proposed text amendment does` '
not alter this review.
f. Whether and the extent -to which the proposed amendment
would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural:`;:`
environment.
RESPONSE: The intent of the proposed amendments is adaptive reuse''
of existing historic structures and would not have negative impacts
upon the environment because. New, mixed -use development..ytould
require either a full GMQS review or subdivision review"`9and
environmental impacts would be evaluated on a site -by -site basis..,,,...
g. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent.;, and
compatible with the community character in the City of, Aspen'.,.
RESPONSE: A'mixed-use proposal within the Office zone distt,ict!
specifically in�a Historic Landmark, will reinforce the ch'r cter.;_,.
of the surrounding neighborhood and preserve an element, of tUP,
community that is endangered without these incentives.
h. Whether there have been changed conditions affectin: the
subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support
the proposed amendment.
RESPONSE: Historic buildings are under increasing redevelopment,
pressure. Incentives for preservation and encouragement for mixed -
.use development will encourage residents to remain wi'thin.,the:.
Office zone districts which is, ,an important character..st qt��
Main Street Office zone district. `
i . Whether the proposed amendment would be 'iri ' .a. . �,
p p coif.�.ct.� 'with
the public interest, and is in harmony with" the purpose and
intent of this chapter.,
RESPONSE: The amendments arenotin conflict with, the public
interest as they invite adaptive multiple. , use. of ,.h.1st6r.ic, -,
structures thus discouraging demolitions.
4
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning and Zoning
Commission recommend to Council approval of this Code Amendment to
Section 24-5-213 . B and 8-104 . B. 1 of the Municipal Code finding that
the proposed Code Amendments are not in conflict with the Land Use
Code or public interest and that the amendments are consistent with
the Draft 1992 Community Plan and will not cause negative effects
upon the Office zone district.
5
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and zoning Commission
j�
FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner
RE: Park Place Condominium - GMQS Exemption for Commercial
Expansion Less than 500 s.f.
DATE: July 7, 1992
SUMMARY: The Planning Office recommends approval with conditions
for GMQS Exemption for commercial expansion of 51 s.f. at the
location of McDonough Is clothing store. The expansion results from
the redesign of the entry doors and windows of the Park Place
Condominium building.
APPLICANT: Continental Divide Company, represented by Don Fleisher
LOCATION: 413 E. Cooper Ave.
ZONING: CC (Commercial Core)
APPLICANT'S REQUEST: GMQS Exemption for expansion of commercial
square footage not to exceed 500 cumulative square feet. The
entire project entails reduction of net leasable area by pulling
the corner doorway at Pitkin County Dry Goods and eliminating
.,bay window. Net leasable area is increased by extending out the
door at McDonough's. The end result is an increase of 51 s.f. See
floor plan, Attachment "A".
STAFF COMMENTS: Section 8-104 B.l.a. gives the Commission
authority to grant GMQS Exemption for expansion of commercial or
office net leasable area not to exceed 500 cumulative square feet.
It must be demonstrated that minimal impact will occur upon the
City. Impacts of additional employees, parking required, visual
impact on the neighborhood, and demand on City'-s public facilities
shall be considered in the review process.
Employee Generation: The Land Use Code states that employee
generation is based on square footage of net leasable. The
calculation for employee generation based on the 51 s.f. expansion
is 0.11 employee based on the following formula: .051 (% of 1,000
s.f.) X 3.5 (employees per 1,000 s.f.) X .6 (minimum GMP
threshold). Based on the Category 2/3 payment per employee from
the Housing Guidelines, cash -in -lieu payment for housing mitigation
for 0.11 employee is $2,750.00.
Parking: Based on CC zone parking requirements of 2 spaces per
1,000 s.f. of net leasable, parking generated by the increased
1
xc`��
IM- • 'tt'ttt rifil
1►�111 L HIT T1111-01
ll
►�!111 Ill�l�lil �III11111 111�
�1!!!1 IIIIIIII I Iltiiiiil Ilt
i PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
EHSBIT , APPROVED `
•I RESOLUTION
M N
.i. _. ..... .l.:
t: �.
V
j
�.J_ t.
t.�.
�
�, .L �,I �4�r—I
_ .;r i.: :K..�, 4 c I •''�'
:/
=
_
..i
i
_
` $
Il
1
square . footage is 0.1 space. This represents a slight impact to
the City which shall be mitigated by a cash -in -lieu payment for the
0.1 fraction cost of a $15,000.00 parking space, or $1,500.
Section, Bl-,-all�ows the Commission to approve an in -lieu
pay-mentwhen. -it i determines that ' parking spaces cannot physically
,
be provided -
On' site.Sta, rec
ommends r4comends'that the Commission accept
:"� ' , '
..the in-d`a
.;-;liemoufit.
Visual and Public Facilities Impacts: There will be no negative
visible impact resulting from this..51 s.f. expansion. The HPC
reviewed thbproposal and approved it. No added impacts are
anticipated on public fa'cilities as a result of this expansion.
TheA_e,ha__Ve been no. previous. expansions of net leasable within this
struetur4.'i'If. this'r,6quest i's approved, there will be 449 square
feet remaining for 'future GMQS Exemptions.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Planning*4;taf.im-- recommends approval of*.'GMQS Exemption for 51 s . f .
ekpa'hsion�'Iat, -the Park Place" Condominium with the following
coAd'i L- i-,6ns'-.
Prior to issuance of any Building Permits., receipts for the
following must be forwarded by. the Applicant to the Planning
Office:
1. The applicant shall pay to the City" Finance Department an
affordable housing impact fee of $2',750.00..- This figure is based
on employee generation of .11 person.
shall ,pay $1,501ja-00 as cash equivalent for .1
.-.parking space. This fee is payable to the Finance Director and
:d,edioiited to the Pa'rking Fund.
Attachments: "All - Proposed Plan
0
Attachment "B"
Aspen Land Use Recrulations
Sec. 5-220. Park (P)
A. Purpose. The purpose of the Parke (P) Zone District is
to ensure that ;land intended for recreation
odisruptive
a oas to serve its intended use, . while ,. not
P
exerting influence on surrounding" land
uses.
B. Permitted uses., The,following uses are permit;.t as.- -of
right in the .Park, (P). Zone District.
1. Open -use recreational .facility,.,,.,. park,, play.-�1�1d,
playground, golf 'course, ridingt;;_stable,
nursery, botanical. garden; and
2. Accessory buildings and uses.
C. Conditional uses., The. following , uses, are .permit�;ed gas
conditional uses ._in the _.Park (P) , Zone District; i ,su4j,,ect
to the standards and procedures established i.n r Art;e ; :.,7 ,
Div. 3. -
1. Recreation building;
2. Sport shop;
3. Restaurant -facility;
4. Park maintenance building;' .and
5. Satellite dish antennae. ;..,
D-. Dimensional requirements. ;The dimensional ,pequi rement's
which shall apply to . gill permitted and cond tiopal: -I .s
.in the Park (P) Zone District shall
adoption of a Conceptual Development ,Plan and Final
Development Plan, pursuant to Art.. 7, Division 9,
Planned Unit Development.
E. off -Street parking requirement. The following off-
street parking spaces shall be provided -for each use in
the Park (P) Zone District subject to the provisions -of
Art. 5, Div. 3.
14* Lodge use: 1 space/bedroom
2. Residential use: N/A
3. All other uses: Requires Special Review pursuant
to Art. 7, Div. 4.
'Attachment "C''
:i
,M-tTON 8: _SPECIALLY PAD AREA (SPA)
" S��C'i .► 7j �,8 �-�. . `.' ,•�,�-:4•' �• ose,. ''y r. i. ,
' T u ode of a ,
Ap rp pc�.ally`';Planned. Area (SPA) is to:
A .' Provide aes.ign _. 1 it ity for land which requires
iniiovati�ve.. . o-niiaer Lion in those circumstances where
' —
:'R' traditidnal 46nIn, :techniques do net adequately address
rs its h�istoriCi g l€icance, natural features, unique
h s c Y cha'i76cter -.or
location and where
p Y potential
,exists` for co�amunrity benefit from comprehensive
.< wa X'e(` �y�✓di,.s."`r-,Ro0.+P ..';7 I 3.�w^aIX ;'-Lv+ A•' _ . ,:.,,, ai.-. . ,.
A �
; � ^ B ' � evelof mixed land uses through the
inndvoLtive . resign practices which
a:r t .phd from standard Zone District land uses
requix�emen ts
stabl�:sh a procedOre Thi^h Land' upon which multiple
• . , � , .uses sexist;, , or. aree- ccst si_.deir9ed appropriate, can be
j,: a�nne ,and �redevelo ' ed p in - a ; .Ira that provides for the
/ Y
d' -greatest -public bendf t 'i
W_f
.1:..
jj
e ,
IVO
Li
,
,
.�
i r
�� it y�., ,f• ! id�l `I�_ ,
7 i ,
i Y r ..��
1
to
TL
•}::.}.Y .'vim _ .. ' t • ' ' t _ - .. •,2_ .r• ?Si���:y', `�` �'•�'':','. :}4:.:%
yr ram. t•J ' }T; .S'. J.•%
'� <l•_` --.,� �''r - Cam. �If't, - •�Y;': �J /. - . j %�'•'r•.-? •i:i =,�
.. � .. •.,!"• /r� •\ � .�� ''\f ;..ice .{ _'J UA•at ..j .1',.'
- � :.ti.`.' ..�; . r - j � r . _ t 1 � � M'i•t►r Y ri - .. {�. � ! r its „S t€ a =':!, y � zz
VIA
A#-i 6-o,.4
�� - •rye: va; .. .. _'a.: P'i:= •:.•��'::•` �:...
• +. ! '\ � , � ^i1'i° :,^�: i :�:i r-'•�i �.�� sae• � - t ^ 4 .• •_ "�
at�lrrE �` , s .!':. . �"t::;+r :�• } ,;•,• ' .`fit- .• `•,;' ' • a>� �"�"
J
- L
• ., ... a: ..
< 1. • t 1� •y� `�Y'nnGQ �.}, V"- 7`;.j,%e-??ygjp F�
SO
ou
66
i!: t 3! k 1 1 i i ' t :e;;`• �`•. '� ! y,.,�o 7,
z w. w
46
ko
NQ
•�cs1 ss « w. PJWA Mn ter• z ` QE. K*A.L"�A
if
� ay ac, r C.'•
W-.gp
_ M"tit STREETTr
1R1 lT1r,-1.1-�t ,1m111r�11 �� � ",'"' ;�-�,_= �- -- •:�,;;
fAc
(A Uld
fA CC
W N Ca/" b$AP bCf T11�a ItiCfFbi _ -- - - -
i r1 Xob r
I U iR I <4
v
- - - - -- - -
1 J.-
.•,
MAY
61
J /
t
Second, any changes to the Final Development Plan must be
processed according to the requirements of the SPA section. This
amendment process requires Staff review for "insubstantial"
changes, or a two-step Public Hearing process for other changes.
If a proposal is inconsistent with the Final Development Plan,
the plan must fulfill a four -step Conceptual/Final process. With
these SPA requirements, the neighbors will be notified of
proposed changes or additions to the ACES parcel. Commission and
Council will also have input on any new proposals.
Thirdly, an SPA overlay allows flexibility within the parcel.
Attachment "C" is the Purpose statement from the SPA section of
the Code. As ACES is a unique facility, so are its needs
regarding land use mix, physical layout, and protection of its
natural resources. Staff feels that the SPA overlay will allow
ACES the flexibility it needs to maintain its community goals.
If the Council approves this zoning for the ACES property, ACES
must apply for Final Development Plan approval as required in
Section 7-804 D. As mentioned above, this shall be a description
of existing conditions as of the date of the designation as PARK
(SPA) .
It should be noted -that ACES's deed restriction limits its use to
nature preserve and sanctuary. Mr. Cardamone can address this in
more detail at the.meeting.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission
approve the PARK (SPA) zoning designation for ACES and forward
their recommendation to City Council for their final
determination.
Attachments:
"A" --Map of ACES
"B" - PARK Section of the
"C" - SPA Purpose Section
jtkvj/hallam.zone
Land Use Code (abr.)
�J