Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutagenda.apz.19910416 /...."'t-..,., r \ AGENDA ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING April 16, 1991, Tuesday 4:30 P.,'{. 2nd Floor Meeting Room city Hall t'") ')" , >.. II. III. COMMENTS Commissioners Planning Staff Public MINUTES RESOLUTIONS A. Rio Grande IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS d'l-.-.------7l{). West Francis 620 West. Hallam and. 214 West -=~~er Historic D~signation B. Gordon Stream Margin Review and conditional Use for an Accessory Dwelling Unit '-' C. The Aspen Meadows Residential GMQS, Final SPA and Rezoning (continued) V. NEW BUSINESS A. Lily Reid Special Review and Request for GMQS Exemption VI.. ADJOURN 7' d.COV MFMORANDUM To: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission # to From: Roxanne Ef lin, Historic Preservation Officer Re: Landmark Designations: 716 W. Francis, 620 W. Hallam, 214 W. Bleeker, Public Hearing Date: April 16, 1991 SUMMARY: The Planning Office is currently processing three applications involving rear additions to three historic West End cottages. We will be combining these three landmark applications in one ordinance for Council adoption. Each of the three resources and subsequent projects are similar in nature, and each meets two of the six standards for landmark designation as discussed below. LOCATIONS: 1) 716 W. Francis St., Lots N and O and the West 15 feet of Lot P, Block 15, City and Townsite of Aspen 2) 620 W. Hallam St., East 1/2 of Lot N, all of Lot O, and the West 7.5 feet of Lot P, Block 22, City and Townsite of Aspen 3) 214 W. Bleeker St., East 101 of Lot N, and the West 20' of Lot P. Block 50, City and Townsite of Aspen APPLICANTS: 1) Joseph and Delia Bellina 2) David and Marie Zimman 3) Lynda MacCarthy APPLICANTS REQUEST: Landmark Designation for each parcel as Noted. In addition, each applicant is requesting a $2,000 designation grant from Council. HISTORIC EVALUATION RATING: Each one is in the "notable" category PROCEDURE FOR REVIEW: Landmark designation is a three -step process, requiring recommendations from both HPC and P&Z (public hearing at P&Z level), then first and second reading (public hearing at Final reading) of a landmark designation ordinance by Council. The designation grants in the amount of $2,000 each are expected to be approved by Council at Final reading as well. OTHER BOARD ACTION: The HPC has unanimously recommended Landmark Designation on all three parcels during previous public hearings. HISTORIC LANDI-MRK DESIGIWTION STANDARDS.* The Standards for Landmark Designation are found in Section 7-702(A) of the Land Use Code. Any structure or site that meets one (1) or more of the standards may be designated as a Historic Landmark. The Planning Office finds that all three applications meet the criteria in both Standards E (Neighborhood Character) and F (Community Character). Standard 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. Standard 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, ize, location and architectural similarity to other structures or sites of historical or architectural importance. The significance of each of these residential structures is not of those who owned it or lived in it, but rather their representation of Aspen's mining era and cottage architecture which characterized this community near the turn of the century. These modest, vernacular structures are of historic importance by illustrating the family/home environment and life styles of the average citizen in Aspen which was dominated by the silver mining industry. DISCUSSION: Conceptual development applications have been approved with conditions by the HPC for all three parcels. Each L one of the proposals is taking advantage of some of the incentives created for historic landmarks. - It -should also be noted that all three are providing deed restricted accessory dwelling units within 1--he development as well. RE,COMMODATION., The Planning office recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend Landmark Designation for 716 W. Francis, 620 W. Hallam, 214 W. Bleeker, finding that Standards E and F have been met. memo.pz.716wf'.620wh.214wb K 531 West Gillespie Aspen, Colorado Aopril 16, 1991 Honorable Members of the City of Aspen City Council. and Planning and Zoning Commission 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Aspen Meadows Final SPA Development Plan Dear Honorable Council and Commission Members: I am writing to bring to your attention what I feel are certain deficiences of the Aspen Meadows Final SPA Development Plan. Subsequent to the submission six weeks ago, it became increasingly evident that the Plan was significantly incomplete and it has become necessary to continuously alter it during the Planning Commission review. Because of the many non-compliance. aspects, a meaningful evaluation and review of the contents as provided f -in-Chapter 24, Land Use Regulations, of the municipal code has' been precluded. The content requirements are precisely called out in Sec-ti-on 7-804(D) and Sections 7-1004(D)(1) and (D)(2). The City Council in Resolut-ion 21 Series 1991, also was explicit in Condition-4.. which states "A Subdivision Plat in full c9m p,liance with Section. 7-1004 D.1 and D.2.shall be submitted ..... The Subdivision Plat is one of the most important documents in an application for review. The plat submitted ' has been called "preliminary" and "a draft". It shows an incomplete boundary survey, a few subdivided lots, North Street extending from 7th Street to Sth Street, an inaccurate layout of lots.along Meadows Road'and not much more. The plat shows few of the features outlined in Section 7-1004(D)(1)(a)(3) and Section 7-1004(D)(2) such as sufficient detail to determine whether the proposed subdivision will meet design standards, current survey, existing and proposed contours, location and dimensions of existing streets, easements, drainage areas, utilities, surface improvements, location, size and type of existing vegetation and indication of trees proposed to be removed as well as other items. Additional application contents to be submitted prior to review by City Council are six items not on the final Plat as well as 11 others that should be furnished. Members of the City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 1991 Page 2 The applicant has requested an amendment to the text to include Design Standards, 7-1004(C)(4), as a permitted variation. It is difficult to tell from the application what specific variations are requested, however caution must be exercised regarding any exceptions to street standards adopted over many years to ensure road safety and public health. A number of plans in the application utilize old maps and therefore are incomplete and do not reflect present improvements, including L-6, L-8 and the Vicinity Map. It appears the SPA applicaton gives little attention to the adjacent neighborhood areas, specifically along unopened North Street and Meadows Road. Letters of agreement from the property owners regarding proposed changes are necessary before proceeding. Over the past years, the City has been requested by the adjacent property owners on North Street to vacate North Street between 7th and 8th Streets and the north end of Sth Street. This action was deferred until a plan for the Meadows was developed. Now is the time to address North Street so that property owners who only can reach their homes from the alley, have better access. Serious consideration should be given to open North Street at this time. Sheet L-8 of the application shows a proposed spur road to these residences, but it is not clearly defined. On the west side of Meadows Road there are presently six driveways to private homes. Sheet L-6 of the Final Plan shows only four cul-de-sacs and little detail on accessing the six residences and a recently subdivided lot. Other omissions in the Final Plan exist, but the above are sufficient to compromise the project for lack of information. Unless all of the required information is submitted in a Final Plan prior to review as intended in -the code, the applicant, adjacent property owners and citizens face difficulties, delays and unnecessary costs. Because of the magnitude and importance of the Aspen Meadows proposal to the community, all documents must be in compliance with the SPA regulations to avoid problems experienced with other city projects. Enclosed for your information are copies of my letters to Planning Director Amy Margerum requesting clarification specific Land Use Regulations relative to this project. Members of the City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 1991 Page 3 I request the Planning and Zoning Commission require a complete Final SPA submission be presented before any formal action is taken on the Aspen Meadows Final Spa application and that any conditions for approval be carefully reviewed given the lack of satisfactory response to conditions previously set forth in Conceptual Plan approval. Thank you for your consideration of this request. Sincerely. Charles T. Collins 531 W. Gillesnie Aspen, Colorado January 25, 1991 Ms. Amy Margerul-n Planning Director City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re; Land Use Regulations Municipal Code of the City of Aspen Dear Amy: I am writing to you to request interpretations of Chapter Z4, Land Use Regulations, as provided in Article 11, Ar.tic.le NONCONFORMITIES Does -this article allow the transfer, conveyance or subdivision of interest in a nonconforming lot that would create a new nonconforming lo-t,? If such a -transfer, conveyance or subdivision can be considered, please cite the enabling section(s) and authorizing procedure(s). Articlo_..7, Division 10: SUBDIVISION Does this division allow exemptions or exceptions from the terms of this divisio;. other than the ex emptions listed in Sec. 7-1003? If other exemptions or exceptions can be considered, please cite -what they are and the enabling section(s) and authorizing procedure(s). Please let me know if you need additional information to - complete this request. Thank you very much for your help. Very trulyir ours, r r ,fir iF` „-..• gar Charles T . Collins Ms. Amy L. Margerum Planning Director City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Land Use Regulations Aspen Meadows SPA Submittal Dear Amy: 531 West Gillespie, Aspen, Colorado March 21, 1991 HAND DELIVERED Thank you for your letter dated February 8, 1991 in response to my earlier request for certain interpretations of Chapter 24. Specifically, my request is directed to several items in the Aspen Meadows proposal which appear to be in conflict with the conditions set forth in Chapter 24. Article 9: NONCONFORMITIES The proposed new access road from 7th Street and the access to existing residences are shown cutting across Lots D, E, F, G, H and I, Block 7 of the original Aspen Townsite. This is presently a nonconforming lot of 6755 square feet in the R-15 zone. A reduction in its size would create a new nonconforming lot which is clearly prohibited. Please confirm that a variance request following -the standards applicable under Article 10 is the one way to create such a new nonconforming lot. Article 7, Division 10: SUBDIVISION The proposed new access road from 7th Street and related improvements do not appear to conform to a number of the design standards required for subdiv- isions in -Sec. 7-1004(C)(4)(a), including but not limited to paragraphs (1), (2), (3), (6), (9), (10), (12), (13) and (14). Because these standards relate directly to road safety and public health, I request an an interpretation as to their immutability to exemp- tions or exceptions from the subdivision regulations. I hope this additional information will help you to answer these questions on code interpretation. Thank you for your continued assistance. Very truly yours, Charles T. Collins v 0 531 W. Gillespie Street Aspen, Colorado March 25, 1991 Ms. Amy L. Margerum Planning Director City of Aspen HAND DELIVERED __.. _._.._._....__._.............. . 130 Scuth Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611. Re: Aspen Meadows Final SPA Development Plan Dear Amy: In response to questions during the Conceptual SPA Plan review, the applicant repeatedly stated that additional information and details would be forthcoming in the Final SPA Development Plan. An inspection of the plan reveals that most of the questions were not answered and, in fact, it appears the submission plainly does not meet the requirements established for reviews by the commission and the city council in Sections 7--804(D) and 7- 1004(D) of the code, as well as other criteria. Maps included in the presentation are incomplete, in error and/or out of date with little or no correlation to adjacent public and private properties. In view of these deficiencies and the apparent lack of coordination with surrounding areas, I request that before proceeding with the application, that full and sufficient details of the subdivision be provided for review and evaluation as pointed out in the code. Please call me at 925-2089 if you have any questions regarding this request. Sincerely, Charles T. Collins to 531 West Gillespie Street Aspen, Colorado April 16, 1991 Ms. Amy Margerum Planning Director City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Aspen Meadows Final SPA Development Plan Dear Amy: This is a request for an additional interpretation of Chapter 24, Land Use Regulations, as provided for in Article 11 of the code. These items were brought forth only recently after the Final SPA Development Plan had been submitted by the applicant. A-rt.-A-q-le 9: NONCONFORMITIES (Marqusee) Clarification regarding the conveyance of a property right and construction thereon leaving a nonconforming lot in violation of the dimensional requirements of the code. Article 7: SUBDIVISION The code requires R.O.W. dedication for all streets. Clarification is requested for the authority or source which permits retaining the new road in private ownership with a public access easement, as this is not an existing road nor one planned for the future. Article 7: SUBDIVISION An interpretation is asked for 'local' vs. 'collector' streets and the qualified party who will evaluate road safety and public health concerns when proposed street designs do not meet the city's design standards. In the West End, streets running north and south to Main and Hallam Streets would generally be considered 'collector' streets feeding into an arterial route, that is, Highway 82. Thanks for your assistance. Please call me at 925-2089 if you have questions. Sincerely Charles T. Collins AFFIDAVIT I, Joseph Wells, being first duly sworn on oath, depose and state that: 1. I am the agent of Savanah Ltd. Partnership and Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies, the applicant in connection with the Development Application for Final SPA Plan Review scheduled for public hearing on April 2, 1991. 2. I complied with the notice requirements of §6-205(E)(3)(b) of the Aspen Land Use Regulations of the Aspen Municipal Code by posting of notice, a photo of which is attached hereto, on the subject property on March 23, 1991. 3. I complied with the notice requirements of §6-205(E)(3)(c) of the Aspen Land Use Regulations of the Aspen Municipal Code by mailing of notice, a copy of which is attached hereto, by first class, postage prepaid, U.S. Mail to all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the subject property as identified by Pitkin County Title, Inc. on March 23, 1991. 4. The foregoing stat ' knowledge. STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF PITKIN ) The foregoing Affidavit of Joseph Wells was acknowledged before me this 2nd day of April, 1991. WITNESS my hand and official seal. My Commission expires: 5/30/92. ROTARY PUBETV Address: 100 S. S�prinq Street Suite 3 Aspen CO 81611 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Ms. Amy Margerum and Planning and Zoning Commission Members FROM: Aspen Meadows Consortium RE: Planning and Zoning Resolution on Aspen Meadows SPA DATE: April 16, 1991 In reviewing the resolution prepared for Planning and Zoning we offer the following written comments and suggestions. We request -- that these comments, in conjunction with the April 9, 1991 Consortium memorandum, be entered into the public record at tonights' P and Z meeting and forwarded to City Council at the time of their consideration of the final SPA and appurtenant issues. 1) Page 1, 4th Whereas: We request a clarification that the Residential GMQS application was submitted by Savanah with the approval of the non -profits. This clarification will prevent any confusion that the non -profits were co -applicants for the residential GMQS. 2) Page 3, top of page: The location of the rehearsal facility will be north east of the tent and will be reduced in height. Please clarify that the berm is being reduced in size. The rehearsal facility itself is not being reduced in size. 3) Page 4, number 1: The new Meadows Road will not be ready before any other building permits. There will be construction traffic on the existing Meadows Road during construction of the new road. The time period will be minimized. Further, the construction timetable must reflect the lack of assurance because of the fund raising efforts by the non -profits. 4) Page 5, number 3: We question the usefulness of traffic reviews during construction because of the difficulty and inaccuracy of evaluating the traffic separate from construction related traffic. The resolution calls for every other year traffic analysis with no end. Ms. Amy Margerum and Planning and Zoning Commission April 16, 1991 Page Four 17) Page 16, Conditional Use for Affordable Housing, number 1: We would like to add a sentence at the end of condition 1 to wit; "Such deed restriction shall accommodate the right of the owner of the residence to interview and to disapprove any prospective tenant, provided that no such disapproval shall be unreasonably arrived at or unreasonably interfere with the obligation of the owner to keep the unit involved occupied to the maximum feasible with qualified tenants. 18 ) Design Standards, page 18, letter A: We suggest that all road designs and street rights of way shall be as acceptable to the City Engineer. We hope these suggestions are helpful and will expedite the approval process. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Leslie Lamont, Planning RE: Lily Reid House — Special Review for the Reduction in Trash/Utility Service Area and Open Space, and Request for GMQS Exemption for Enlargement of an Historic Landmark, Review of GMQS Exemption for Affordable Housing DATE: April 16, 1991 SUMMARY: The Lily Reid Cottage and the entire site, Lots A, B, and C received final Landmark Designation from City Council July 91 1991. The application purposes to refurbish the cottage and completely redevelop the site requiring Special Review for the reduction in trash/utility service area and open space, and a GMQS Exemption for the enlargement of an Historic Landmark. The applicant is also seeking a GMQS Exemption for the provision of on -site affordable housing. Although Council approves the affordable housing package, the Commission shall review and make a recommendation to Council regarding the housing proposal. Staff recommends approval, pending Council clarification, of the enlargement of an historic landmark. Staff recommends the Commission recommend denial of the affordable housing mitigation proposal. Staff recommends approval of the reduction in open space and trash/utility service area. APPLICANT: Larry Brooks, Aspen Arcade, LTD. as represented by Joe Wells, Gidion Kaufmann, and Larry Yaw. LOCATION: 200 South Monarch Street, Lots A, B, & C of Block 81, Aspen, Colorado ZONING: Commercial -Core (CC) APPLICANT'S REQUEST: A reduction in open space and trash/utility service area through Special Review by the Commission and a GMQS Exemption for the enlargement of a Historic Landmark. The Commission is also required to review the affordable housing proposal and make a recommendation to Council. PROPOSED PROJECT: The applicant purposes to completely redevelop a 9,000 square foot lot that has received Landmark designation. The Lily Reid Cottage will be relocated to the northwestern corner of the parcel and the existing one-story structure will be demolished and replaced with a three story brick building along the eastern and southern portions of the site. The parcel is located on the corner of Monarch and Hopkins and.was Landmark designated by Council last year. The -'Lily' Reid' cottage' is` the last,. r�e'maj `-gabled airing bric, cross -gabled _11_11 10 'dot'tage' in the Cbminerci o e'' His -to ic" � District'* r 16 t'* Apcording ai C 'r to the application, Lily Reid was the first owner of the" p'r'-operty. Franz Berko, noted Aspen photographer of tho post,-war/parly ski era also owned this property for a number of 'years an-dma�i'-htained his studio. at. -this location. .,_Thi5 important, i ,piece,-, of Aspen I s 'history is now wedged. between -two' contemporary dn-d' dominating Presently the Cottage' and' 'th e, Uri- Adep s/tleaners building (Lots A &.B� total 6,200 square feet of, floor area on - For, this pa , r I cel' a FP KO 1, -5 a 1 ('_L j, s h 11 0, sq allowed: AR , ` I �.,, � " .1 1 i we The''F proposed on t e site is 1.47: 1­(iJ' " �de r,ail, of f icand , �'00 sq housing,TUsesrasecwe 1asinstrar­eetfor,,the.seeusesaffordable and other a Cc�S sory s pace. The new structure in c1udes -au , grond level of 31433 6q.`ft' of, r, e t'a i'space, l 'b _ 21451 s q p f Q-,retail and office 1­�fs �� on the second floor and 1,506 sq. ft. of affordable housing, and the, third 1p ,vel inQ,ludes3,15,6,, sq, f t of. of f ice.,.. spa-ce. The basement level, wii 1 k- 'Inciude app8ximatdly�, �7,550 sq.' ft 6 of retail to'' be, used or-, a restaurant 5bdary,'d' ,-, 1, f S ed taura�f an iqpl�ay,,,space of pace d1_ secc some 're'tail -uses on the ground ..float., - �A r sub'.basemen't 'level will 1 d i a nd.,,. iephanical be used as storage f or-,-' tenants`_ ''in' the-b4i d: space Three parking' spaces are, propQs I ed on-sit4- o I ff , of the alley. REFERRAL. CONMENT.S.: 'Pleas-e see the . atta4edmm , coents f rom the P referral --agencies ' -The following is a' sum'mary-` of -'those comments: sp-en' Q'Onsdlic i A latead Sanitation,. Distttct t 'DJ.strict r h t ict currently' has enough' capacity to serye..�­�46_`_ proJ11 ept 1R, grease interceptor will be needed if 'a�'- r'&stauran't__'_i's_` "' lo"icate''d-in the -building,, and, -.a City storm water, system, or-. dry, well connection shall be used f or site,- gt6, _Urface.run -7off , enera d s' 2. Engineering,,- the a I onstrate that the dry ppl'c4nt shall', dem we Js are suf f icient to, accomm6dat &raii� age, on site, the i. D epartment wi 1. 11 support a t,*' ded a,,, trash red uc ion -provi d , other.'. util. -`'pctoi r s ihsta , me ters_ an #y appurtenances coin c-i shall all be '8'n'' '�th; 6' applicant Is property, 'should -61 ectri i cal needs exceed those of the transformer _,across the alley an easement allbe ranted f _J t or a -new transformer..04 10, the t , 0 cated on ap I p 11 1 cant.ts a proper,. y preferable' that, J alley not be -,pre er all , `:closed U'r 1"n g c6nstruction " the applica'nt shall' agree to join any I I_ I future improvement district which may be formed, and the applicant shall, obtain permits for any. -within work, deve".ppment, p Y 7wAy''-, e Cit streets,,deiDartment., 3 S. 7 snow melt J ed_ to.be, installed for all is recommend i'dew''a, lks. t' and, t t L z7 6's shall: r. e size ree gra p,.,.s J -be,,.,ppecif ied, and u'd s"It'ib-As" how tre' et­tre , es will be irrigated. Parks q--' t� e - K 4. Aspen Water Department - The applicant must abandon the old water lines at the main,, T abandon old_ .well at the.:- Fleaners and wp}i�.l`ems^at " }line.. onj"`MonarcY , "off � ''� liheJ o� j _Hopkins tV� D O f 1 m�fe G' J .:A w .L_ J.' i. i..x ,.... 1 �, } •_ .,�iJ ���-:.t.t.Vs7 ,:•.,-3Ir'aj'�� .. .i.i. � "_. t« ... 1..2 t?I i..... t;t �` i.. .i. _• lF... .. .�-✓•.j _... J,. ;.,5 .".mot f r D : �PMENT'�E_ WS ' _: -, :' :� r. c ' ;• ? ••• l . ! F t ate, ? , • ~ '' r -• of _ . ' fir. ;.e . .. - '"• � A t ! i. = f .,..., ;. •.yr .. _. [. _. '; , _ '� ., sv o ... . , . , .% A. e�i`al `k6vi , _ IItility%TrIshi' ea `Redu!A16n :pursuant to Secti®ri ` 5-2'0'9`" D''("6')a �"2'00 square feet " off' a uti'li-ty/trash service area must be provided for every 6,000 square feet " of `net'"leasable unless reduced pursuant fto Specialt Review,, k-tA_j _. _� b. _.1.. . �.pya i l f•y.•Y... 8cs6n=4Q4 ire �, ' :�eabi�is'es Jthe cr{iteriaQ., revewt for a : ed gtion`� 'Eh"'r he u`tTlltyAr' , :"* vice ' areSa,:' as follows. ri.t� ... ',1:, e n_-•'�-` .r - r�` There is � '`cTemon����'�ion � that' g :ven� the' nature 'of the ' iotentidl'' sof he' b i}ldiri Inc ;1�its total 'squire':' f Qotage the ut'ilJtL j �-6h e.ok ce ryarea tpr`.oposec ` �bs r`o ided will be adequAt4. _ .�31...t�.l.y_,�•'.~.� ..�� �'ct ��ti,.� .' -rtiC�..i. •_r•_`.. ...!.,1 ri RE�i®NSE: i `iAc�6rdin to t i j App 'icatiQn •a" 1,0 sc ft. ! trash se'rvi' e area 'faith a' tr�s� 'compa -tor _on tie partce`1�� will be ko�f e ` I' �f �. s:•r a.,w► y r m d and to se :> hero e _ "t rash w.l` be` cone they Puss ec� into a standa'r dui��ster to s�xi�l"icy.; �ol�:eetion. A"itough 'die` a'�Slition r 'ere`` : t'o' `dscuss'ion:, witi, the "applicant 'shall" si:ip y' doc mentation tCT hat the system i adequate to handle the needs of the proposed project. �.. C t .•-�` r_. �... �L . d.' C7 x r. ';"f:• z of *� _" f-7 rr -g y.. p . Y6ei:i `to• the utility/t as service area is . Alec uate RESPONSE: Access to the s�ervicet. area }is ( airectly, off of the .A6-c ed'l g'' `--t•d tjiib` r"'6f. rral 86' 1 nos from" the Engineering Deartn�ei:h;aoe'ss "i `ad»re uate 1 :} :. . ,. , { ; -✓ tit '-w i. .1 : t. �,: :l..t.+ �.J .i - ..: 1 _ f .., t. _`a +.`, ... .« . i ._ ...:. W : ..ea'sue'z_ r c s . �i3 tra _. p Vided `fbt Seri to inch sh b"ins and making�ti�e ' ca5i lYeidv 'bld �"byr tr gh'Pdl=sonne RESP6N* SL: ` h.� s'ervi ` ar'eg­ `Is ` 3 oc��ed ' w hen a seine enclosed great, `protLRHed.� 'froiti '' i r0`''Y' cements ' n; ` e evat'ed "`filly to 'mi`��" z z� d `�C` d o t' ,dl c�i lions w U E the pi o used r 0,t>. ' p sy`s trash collection. }.7'\ - W , ..._. •:i k:.i ., r•: ' l t : 5 .J .:.� �.•, .� r _.. :-1 �.. .�..�_ v ,r.; 1 ,* °y1 4 t 'Wrjji,,�77ri `'pprt55ate„,' provisions f'or `trash ompact on are p L b t e� bpb'sed 'c e e:l:opmei3t ' ;and measures d taken .. _ r -� �` xf = to G our • r h` - ai got ,t:, . [�y{ a ccac`t orb b�VVy �Yie� y e_Q } on the ;, -•- r:� i`_>.SJ. C..,' .41'..."�.. +_ t_` `s... � .i. `+ i,�-y:•_�.. w _ �° a,s a♦ •Lt". r _•i�!'' •; r. IZ3 LY co�pac_t•or wil b� �_i�ristaol.led to iacf];:L ate the reduct r` 'Yoh �� p2i`ce I rec1u±r�d �f o;` =-tra's�i` stei�'a e � `" s t� .� ' ' ` t - " C ....�^' �„e � 6,� i�T, } t - � y .• ,.i i .i i" .. �.?f �..�i:.l • rsirea or ub�ite ili�ty' pI " cemedht and' �- ntenance is ' adegt14 e,i ! aii-e or the - iaCOiient uf:'%Zities _ ..� j s� 3 3_ �i ..1. _.. :.�` _ .. ,t ..T rdV V .',4 • 3 :.r RESPONSE: According to the' application.::, me'L:er , W111 bey; located at, , _;the, :: southeast-, corner-, ofthe, -bul'f ding, .'.: Are ;area of approximately 70 s ® ft. is provided a.le�g ,: the::r�east .; ��a.,l �- of the project. The majority of the mechanical and electrical equipment - mlll:v> be, located is the ba me,ht ® � 'The, E rigia� erin9. pep rtment requires that a1:1 meters and, other,'utility pp a urtena�haesl be on .. , the app<l'i..cant,' s: property and cannot protrud , into �" t om' alley ,raght-of.°-way. There is an existin g transformer across the; ' a11e } from tie proposed project® Whether these facilities are adequate for the ry :.._; proposed. pr,ojp,ct cannot r be r determined " -unt 1 1=� aetua ld� ids are :;_;calculated. , Should the; ,.;, . project , s el�ctr'��.� 1 � �h�eds �eas��ed the current. capacity, , -.or ,-the potential,,,*, u-PgrLr1e -.'cif the b'- isting transformer, the Engineering Department requires-ah'easement for a new transformer to be located on the applicant's property. The ::ap{pl oant : should �_.ind-icat , an -liare ` for a' potdht'ia1 tx i'sformer _ ._e s ement . ;pr or to. -o�a1 by :the City �6uncil.evdew and app 6 ;; �dequatet:,pr.ovisio.ns ,,:,a ,por°ated =to e nure the construction of;: the_-f ace s :area Y i Prior to ` the issuance of. any. buli1di"ng per-- its the applicant shall: include, , the utility/trash ferv'- ce,- urea--- `in the construction documents. in addition, prior to the ish'e of a Certificate of occupancy a final site inspection shall determine t, e ;adequacy of the i utility/trash services ..area ;arid`+ that t ` e area c®nnforms with, the-_::repr:esentation " of o di i1'0` nb. � stiod"I' ted in th i-s revJ:'ew. a , . pecia ,. eVi.ew :- :gip '� -ace edueti0nh. Pux s�.ar t tc S4Section 71 4:04 �A(�3) , -,the...reduct :dn oif requi ed,: op6,n � pLcL i .the , zone trlct:,may.:b -reduced} .by'_r.eview o'f the Co, i sier The open space requirement for a parcel in the CC zone district _ is -25-% -of, tie- lot, .area. _.. Eor ,-t'hi,s pa oel:_ they requ ad opr4ir space is 2,;20 sq�,£ _,ft=., _According' -to-r -the application appro'imately ft f;: public open -urea, .is ,prca ided in:'._,, ._plaza area, however only 1,650 sq. ft. of this area meets the definition of .., "PP -n cp,4ce Pau uar t t:o : the cr"i:teria: _of << Special Review 'VLa'eh Historic -Pr' e�-v- t' fin- Co a�ttee JHPC) ,,,approVi_ns thc- 0, ri-site .. � ti-H-'etoric _,La.hdmark ° into 'required-. 'open space - space ; -on, ­site_ i reduced' b�e��o�'�'°�. ®�. "-Lred by a, t bode,, t re ' - rements t of ,this ' section sl all ` be: waived. At their March 27, 1991 meeting, the HPC approved the relocation of the Lily Reid Cottage to the corner of the parcel with the _ capen::pl,a,z,a ; surrounding-: the' Cottage on two' i s TLie r.�d cation reduces in effect the required open space because the definition 4 for open space requires a minimum depth of 10 feet for at least 50 percent of the lot frontage and the lot frontage is reduced by fn:tbeoCott (agea. ThA H4VC ap ovia reloc&-tibii-" of the -cettage thin:: ° - ing. w°alver°� �of�,- the }o e � pace :ash -'in -lieu - , req�ir�m;ents> -�or�::th.�i� .�r'o�j..ectr� .. �: . • - . �'. ; ; �:_ .��._ .��,; _ :<< ! —FJ,_ .. y Gm s �� -.ion. , or the Enl•arrgeimen -.:a : •isto l dmark Pura nt to..-c Sec, 1..(c) tzhe enlai-.-gemsrit of ari'. H' storic 4AndmarX i tende-dl, toy-, r. 3 :e used : as s, . a com ate c-i:a;l' = ors � - office development which increases the building's exligting-'-'floor area ratio and it's net leasable square footage is subject to review b ; the Fommi lion ;,for a ;psi Exempt ionj'� t .Thq applicgnt.', y�prap.osing,-`t6) m" tzigtLt- ' ethe e-mpl�oy.ees `g-enei�ated by ,net -J--ahove x rade i,ivf loot 6Ltei& -'that i -is -add=bd= to the parcel- ootage, ti a :s` propdbsdd: to be deipo1ished ..-tip. .i.. �.e1ix•..�:_:.�{` �,.f... '-,l ��ia..;'J`.)ii_. .... +. t�...c .: ._ i.,� - af x c t;�-�agxee .i with the.- app:�tit:c.aihti 'thsatA.>tthis --Sscti--on of the c©de. t 3 eagly�t,rj e_ t the., domcF1-a-- : and ecori tiudtion of existing square footage. In other words, staff is unclear whether;-tithet,i:ir r;6:, 2A square f eet off-tt: "3 esabl� (minus the Lily Reid cottage) when ,--�de-ma--,L shed!:,ah-d rec-6n8tkud-ted as the, detached, new, three story brick building is exempt from mi 4*.gation Tc3 r ernploy�e hQus,ing r:' It i-s-r .' n6t iricreas ing the existing.,, f�,loYo c.re `,. ;ratio r or:_- net ., leasablee : of an existing b.ding.:h_. C IC Bps end =� t r v+ f r Commission' }%rant 't`he GMQS ti®n> cry,> rthp-. ethis sic application is reviewed by Council, staff will seek'cl"ar'fication of the intent of this Section of the Code. If Council determines that dg4pil!ia ripn sand:..'` orist;ruc ion i a buy ding on site that .ems. be, az :tar a;11y c esignat:ed .is no't:.exeript, :the -.=Coffin 'ission -will hev .atq„evi�et�t� �'thi�s- �ppliat>:ol: based upon Coincil's interpretation. 17,er r a AQ-5 :: n pt o Yf_ an' ,HistDtic Landmark the applic-arit' shall dqx prt:rattre p - t; _:e a �{ esult of the . level pment, j itiga� on of the 1p Fps$�jt s Porry:Impactszxwll be: a�ddssec a -fc�llws la. For. an enlargement at the maximum floor=- ar-e=a =p4ti'nitted under the external floor area ratio for the applicable zone ,. w�tr--.tr he=app..- c.an s11all�-).provide affordable hb—uls`ing at _,of;7the le)rel.,�whic•�,_.woud. i eet4`t~ e �tY:ireshold eg fired in rT.'below ther�dctona;in, .io 0u , w �rati�o...:f'er the ► t..�ap :ic1 �?'*w.x stxjot _fit�he::tafferda e of si=i eq -ement shall be reduced by 1%. . ;dj ' to the.;-appll ticoh _ .1 3:� .00 Sc�;u are Jf.eet of 5 loot area will be, developed on. the side ; f c�� a1aa. only appliesa.b®ve grade space)'. fide. raximum 'i:rm, ed...for,.:this space is 5 0 square , ti, . develop ant a.s 2��2 �� below the` ma,,x u.n , e1,lo 1 aye � above. the .the®r la 4mu cu �, r _. ..:.,, : .. ., - , , , , ,. � � ,erefore the .m, w� pp.l. :cant. shall: m tigate,_ roughly 5'8%_. '® the generated. ate g � d. Using a generation factor`` of 3,7 emp�o�ee�/1g,00Q squire feet, the new space generates 12.81 employees, 58 of which is 7.52. The dgrm�tery,, faclpit on .th house: eight, e1.mployees ors -site- in a applicant proposes to y e second floor oT ,the jiew bu./il 44KC , The applicant shall place a restriction On the property, to ; the sati.sfacti�on..Qf toe. City attorney requir ghat if, in jthee future, additional floor area. �z,.,.reques,ted, ...,,the owner shall prove de affordable housing a.znpat itiga t the than current stanclads . r � ffo dAble . Busing ov hal e. ed p , .. � g Y i e�; s •l � ate incopp, price,- anc��..�occupancy., guideline r.".. r t SI®NSE:' The applicant proposes to deed restrict 1 the. -on-site housing to the Category 1 price and income guidelines.'__' . Parking, shall , be • ,:. provid,ed ; ac,corditng , to. the standards of Article 5, Division 2 and 3q if� HPC - date ruin-eq. .hat it can be provided on the site's surface and be consistent with the , standards of Article; 7 , ; D; vi R Y� ark review st .. � n ng hi w ch cannot.,,be� ,l,ca f® -��- which ,. hey fore be ,cated n, �e and w ch � _ .. ,_ .,,.. , _sae i; �.1 �hd t rec uire to . be ,prov,xc�ed via .a cash-.� �,a,eu wu r _ 11 be waived. _ - � ,s a R_ESP.ONS9:, .....The par1Cl g,:-req uir_ement for the, CC, zo-rie,di -striqtt is 2 00+ s uare feet of net,,-.� __.: > ,>.ps. spades,/ 10 qleasable . his .. pro ec.. proposes r a rox�rnatel 11 0oo s uare,..feet of. net I bl� (exclu, ing the :. q, below reds net leasable ,,which exempt, see_.,�belw) wh :equals parking -spaces. ` HPC. -=at` :y::the.i March- 21 1991 ,meetin approved the provision of three parking spaces on site and waived the cash -in -lieu. -for, 19 spa;ces. 3 .• The, .deve,l,opmept Iz ,water.: -supply.,,•-, sewage .,tre,atm(�.nt - solid aS.e di .al drainage control r w rt.. .. p� tat fin; and fire . � I� .,.. ,.protect�.�n actsy sh�l.l -be 'init.igatec� to ,the s.at_i;s.f1ac;ion of the .Commisei.on. zi RESCit ccrdi r i a� ng to the ref e ral c_ omments. a ' t. storm water stem . cr, dry', well connection shall be use f r st erated surf ace run. -off and the Epp nt,- mus d ca a nue the- q-s-e of the old water "' ..1 nes _ __ _ „ rLL :..+�. and,ov�c e hew. l,.Ine€� w T e gn Department recommends the approval of a trash ut•iv it ; service area with the provision of a trash compactor. Bus and fire services are within close proximity of the site. C.1 4. The compatibility of the project's site design with surrounding, ,p gj,ects and ,,its .appropriateness r for the site -deri�onstrated including but` not limited to r.. b, `consi,drt'in of ' `tYie "quality and chaf`acter 1 `of proposed �And'�6pen` lspce, 'the amount 'Ofai'te cover`�age by buildi is s, any .' am6nn, ies "provided fir 'users a4 residents of a' try- tfie`y 'site, '''a'ncY `the efficient ^ and e'fectiv`eness �df- the Y. ; `N service' celiver' area . R7 SP0 $ ?: e vi to the site' 'is off ofL the _ alley�-�- 'Service r ab'oess ` 'for` ' ah''restaurant 'on - the site shall ` be' directly off of the alley. rl HpC :CcSmmisSiori and • ,o�cil havevieti,ied ` the' :site design and develrop�i e'nt``'V'pr' ec nor °this � 't?'j echo 7 I.1 .: `_three have `�co p inefit - "d tie` `appl oar�'t '' f o �"a,-°'stel Yar` S. ran. site: design that is sensitive to the unique ch�rac`ter�i�sti'cs " `oi `tile Lily Reid building. The HPC worked: closely with the :.applicant to ti v. .. corporate the deveidpment� ihte the "6ontex't' of tie Historic District a sltje' ` `pl`an - th'at. ' i`s compatible with surrounding parcels namely the jHistoric c9,ttage._Ya rQss the i The Lily Reid will be surrounded by, an -open, at --grade ,,plaza that wig i~ ent'iee ~ peop'le ' to' ' epl-or'e, i spend `same time and' admire the lhev'on-site �vA 1!6i &`able' riousing i's3 abode' Fade on"'the second lc or A b :_ :wi .`1` e:. dis-ou s'ed' "be w, the' gaff-0 "dal le housing s c}a�j'e o9mwprogrammatic prableis that the- applicant will have to resolve. }1 .'• .'A S` 1 e i r. Affordab1te� Ild' q to" -section r y `fhe Ourio'il''shail �exemp deed `re 's'trioted 'housing - ` Ada ce t - e ,n ac'co n with he� hous�' nq ' gu-J�d'el fines ie�''6oii ssie�'n _3 sha - i % Vr' ew= ar�-a 'make a rec'ommend4tion to 06unc regdirg wi the 'ong `µpackage . r Please see attached Housing referral coents';` Accord rigf toa w t fie Coaei' the r]eVk6w, 0f any request for exemption Qf h rs inel ce "a determinationg 1 ,` Ci y ' s ne°ed ' ;for' sucY lido s-lni ,� do�isid'erin the proposed development's compliance with an adopted-h6u:ging plan, the number of dwelling units proposed and ,their location,.,.,.the..-.,hype of un1ts_ --- , . . r,, .. 'c�'rcro�tis' n0. �ach•` o the c Size- 1 oy ��r��el w., t`i�e� �i�imber of 1 .:. llih unit, the `re gal f sai'ej� `nr ' of the ' pr®po-sed1'`��developmen, and `the-t5.rbposed p`r day€egoriegt= = �td whloh ` h`e - To wellliig uK, s a e' to be deed restiet,....e RESPONSE: The/ applicant is proposing tc provide ara on dorm- -, 1,3 `J .1-. . �- \ . _ . -l.�1 ...� ^. - �,. .R •r ,-�- C-� a ... ?� .. _ . 7 styli ren_tal ity or_- ;employees 5ThtC, in9 is proposed 6 be, 0,ca;�edon,.pa new'1th -story 4r�q 5_ oor eC The 4ppl� cant,.-al-,houqh Ab dee'd'Yr6t�I units to C t -units to a, eqor,1es.,,, 2 3_,,..;ihas­of f en�,d ito, 'de�dd res-tri&t, the' category 1. The applicant, has ..aLIso,,.-r6qu&6t6d­,�th ht" applicant, - e rig , - Ito house employees of the project at those low rates even if the employees exceed the eggry income, �C,4 t .) t�tidel:es:. According to the Housing Authority Guidelines, dormitory housing must_ be deed-res.tricte, t C 4 t ag o -r. y. u i d 0- 1 ribs arid`' d", i t i- 9 s not a ti - ts h p rQga y�,,.Qf t,4e AqthogXtyt,, if y, r-e s !d6rit t,'Cit-L i�k�eed the guidelines for r tha�t dJ 0 The dimensional _.rpqu,:qeTq have not been m e, t with this housing propo '. ­.- -The, -App.IiFc:!a-4,it`bhalI work with the Housing Authority to develop a housing plan that complies wt1 the uider U The 1' Ocation of the housin'g,� A:- -Qn-T,tha,*i-.s:6�brfdI'' fI a cit"of the new A building. Fortunately the housing is not located below grade J which - is a_ popular, rje qpo n:s:e_,, - t o rhou-s�mq) ift i t 19 a,t i o n However, staff _,serio'uply cruest _bprlaten6ss `7df`-7this location -i_q)ns,,,, the., appr for dorm -style, housing., -_:I, - Th;e�-, housing issurrounded-by retail and o f, -c,e, -;p n s)' separate entrance_ -other 'than off of the second floor balcony which also services, -the, commercial--. sp AnnieleVzttor=,­I�"-ft is`' located in the center.. of the hqqs,_kPg pl t6 patrons of the commercial -space s, ml r. fromothe' size of the q pracje ar-ea,and ,,wnethe r :.it -is intenddd tb:` f, bk�? rd-s-I dents. Staff's primary, concerns regarding the location of the employee 4 . are.., the P o t e nt-i a,l n e�g housing- qat '' Ie:- dm -b-8 and a lack of V e: privacy:The applicant has -indicated 1 An past meetings that he oca will encouraqe� bupip, 1: "'' te housing trim' ehtto n `the In-idd, jgh­-,act_I'vity,! fna"y..,;`beP'-,'a� d. the q�qa ity of. 'end a ide�ntsv. re -f��sl`dering r e-'f 6:i7 m'a' t t i n g of thi'e`.,_?--Ji co I I !� 9 1 _kn additional storage space, housing on the third floor or, providing access f-or,residents--t—o a( urger coriimc�ri r is"only- area on the roof -E( Z" .,-EFPMPtip, n- ,I IOy _ho P_Jan4 dt6fEo a Mp.toric Landman Pursuant to Se,-.,tion 8-104 A. 1. (b) (2) 1 The Dir­66f-d6r may exempt the enlargement of an Historic Landmark intended to be used, 14' as _a . coperci-a f f, j,%e 'Are velr opzEqjt 'I d76"' increase'6ither Using' s rz�t�i cv� ��OI'r i_`tit -9- ble asa square .,00tage, but does not increase both,;7'ka, The., applicant, m,8�1417,y `-7-�., 550 si"q u a f 6 feet b*r'!;taii`space to"be used for a restaurant and secondary display 8 space below grade. This space is exempt,from Mitigation because -1 sable. The---, appl' i,:t a 9n nr -,s th�e, net­� leasable ican y, x re.azi t shall be final e' bir�btor," -r- red-to-xinecoive -a----GMQS',.Exem,'pti6n for'th �' "i qqui upon i approval and prior to the issuance of any building,:P",L'2-ir'ih�'t's"".. RR,­ECO��_. A approval - of -, -the Special TICK-4,, ,Staff'. reco oint e as '. th i2�1 Revipw f Qr-,_tt-Le-- riadubtion,,,in 'open 6 aut'i" Y t r''service area ,with. the f ollowing,.-coindispac ntions:, II V,3 1. exC ' The f loor area of..,,thO_,. -p-r'oj - ett-shall not eeii 4' (131200 7 1 sq. ft.) . Prior_ t, thes8uance4 of ai, -ica, -ee ncy the dx- t i- f, o occupa b-'- di�tditmine'ea -A, t; final t -2,C.Omply_ (combli an 0 e inspection) with the following conditions: - -a a,,'gre.ase,-­!nt'erc,&ptor ehall"'-beij*"'i,hs'tall-"ed it resta urant ant Is Iloca _dj jjn the bu i 1 d b. the applicant shall install dry -we"Iis'`,tbbe 'reVie-wed and approved by the Engineering, Department to be., fpr site 7, qeneratde�;,,Ijs_urf ace-, run-off C-_-a,-trazh coidp-act'or,'�shal.l),,"b'e'i'nst-all''ed�-lori- site to support a­-,tr&sh­, -,area- reduction, -down to 110, square 'feet" and the applicant -shall-_' slu.pply- documentation that ''the... :system is ad ate. ­ds; I:t t(aj­:h-widle the Of the, ed, pro �c -i'6pos"' _Ir)o ,' t ters :.bther�- utl-Ilty- appur all'be on -deeds` -' exceedthes­ 'property" sh�6uld:" elec--tr"i"call my 1 -:hpse. ary,`&�i!80meht' shall .Pf �)tbe,,,,,transf orineiff, across the f''located - ocate ®n the t new Iran i�s-o`r` �m e`-`­to�"A�e d _­ g:;��ap ved r applicant's property; Y' e Snow Melt z-hal:l -be-? Ifi�st lied for a s ew a-lks: -��`hg-`- cons rUd a 11 ey .sha LI, not b.-e_ c 1as6d'duti t'" 'ion unless ,_,approved ;by-, Public - W(orks_, DeP-artmer�t'-­ and` the'- ap"p'll nt "shall 0 :­-Publid,, rights- op� pf_3-X�*i s .;for .;any ..work -,or of7ir'ay frq t City-,­streetsdepartment Ae The t� -shall -agregi -t�to pp), QAD iri any re:.improvement dis+--r-'ict which may be' formed. T 2�.e and.` tree: qrat&'_ sizes gh a 1`1 be-"t c f idd oh'-f inal plaps. 2 f', bu. r­the', appl,icant Pr ­nq­ ­ptriftits, t4;�-_jtbp_ -4s-suaxice,Fot Ildi ,.shall, abandon -.;the,,, �-Qld- water lin6�; &Isandon "the old weil 'ati; - tjj�� -cleaners " .t.jPrior ­ to zeview an Cy,' P�4nt� the 9 applicant shall indicate an . area ` for a potential transformer easement. 8 . Prior to the issuance of any build nq permits the applicant shall includc,,the utility/trash., service area in the construction documents. 9. The-HPC approved relocation. -of the cottage thus requiring a waiver- of ..the open space cash -in -lieu requirements_ f-or this pro j ect . 10. Service access for any restaurant on the site shall be directly, off of the . alley... Staff recommends approval, of th-e GIMI *S:. Exemption of the. expansion of , a Historic Landmark�F pending - an interpretation by City : Council on the intent bf the H�s;torc Landmark section of the Code as it relates to GMQS Exemption ;for a 'site" as opposed to "enlargement of a building's ex ting -.floor area with the. following conditions: 1. The applicant sh all, be :required to, ;receive a GMQS Exemption for the Director for the below grade net leasable upon final approval and prior to the„issuance of any building permits. 2 : The " applicant sell pr - I -e <three , pa*rk a g spaces a - it and has : been waived a cash" -in -lieu fee for" 19 parking spaces,.. 3. The applicant shall provide housingmitigation. for 8 employees Staff recommends, that the Commisi.oh: __reco.ntend to ' Council denial of the affordable hous in.g . m�tigtan propasa� , recommending that the -applicant-,., work with „t2ie., F�ousing A�zth'or ty to develop a housing program 'that Pmp es ! rith the: Guidelines and to work with the `Planning and: Dousing", . sta f f to provide, a. more amenable lo0ation.for the housing. AAA !TS : Referral, -Comments. Site' Plan 1. C}