Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19860930 Reqular Meetinq Planninq Commission September 30. 1986 " Chairman Welton Anderson called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. with members Al Blomquist, Jim Colombo, Roger Hunt, Jasmine Tygre and David White present. COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS 1. Jasmine Tygre noted that employee housing in growth management applications is scored by percentage of employees housed, rather than on-site and off-site proposals. Ms Tygre said she is concerned about the adequacy of the cash-in-lieu payment for employee housing, considering the cost of available employee housing. One applicant is paying $70,000 to house 3.68 employees. The cheapest one-bedroom Centennial unit is $79,500 which is $40,000 per employee and the cash-in-lieu amounts may not be adequate. Ms. Tygre said in growth management applications, the applicants are relying on the city to build the employee housing and occupancy of the building cannot be made contingent upon housing provided by the city. Sunny Vann pointed out the reason cash-in-lieu was adopted was not necessarily to build new units. There are other programs available, like mortgage subsidy. The housing authority reviews proposals to see if they are appropriate for the current circumstances. The housing authority adjusts the payment per employee on an annual basis. 2. Anderson said he received a letter from Gideon Kaufman concerning rezoning a parcel up by the Aspen Alps zoned C, conservation. Kaufman said he would like the Commission to sponsor this rezoning request. Anderson said the Commission will consider this at the end of the meeting. HUNTER PLAZA CC/C-l COMMERCIAL GMP SCORING AND PUBLIC HEARING Steve Burstein, planning office, told the P & Z this proposed retail project is located on the northeast corner of Hunter and Cooper to replace the Palazzi service station. This will contain 12,875 square feet of commercial space, of which 4,740 square feet is reconstructed space. The applicants are proposing a cash-in-lieu payment to house 9.2 employees. Burstein told the Commission staff has calculated the 1986 commercial quota, which exceeds the total requested square footage of these three applications. There is 14,813 in the quota and 14,269 square feet are being requested. Burstein said staff scored this project in architectural design 2.5 points, which exceeds the acceptable design. The bay window store fronts are attractive to the street scape. The recessed second floor and low height at 28 feet, instead of the allowable 40 feet, are positive aspects and will reduce the perception of the bulk of the project. This building compliments the Aspen 1 Reqular Meetinq Planninq Commission September 30. 1986 Square and Aspen Chateau buildings. The materials are also compatible. In site design the project scored 2 points. They are providing the required 25 percent open space with a courtyard and with 10 feet setbacks from Cooper avenue. These are usable spaces and will provide pedestrian movement. Burstein said staff feels the service area is usable; however, nothing special has been done to design it to operate more efficiently. In the energy category, the Roaring Fork Energy Center reviewed and gave a fairly high evaluation for insulation, solar energy and high efficiency gas boiler. Some aspects of energy could not be could not be evaluated. This scored a 2.5 The amenities are good but standard and staff recommended 2 points for the snowmelt courtyard, benches and bike racks. Burstein recommended 3 points in the visual impact category as the building is stepped back from Hunter street and provides a good view of Aspen mountain. Burstein noted most of the other areas are standard. The storm drainage category received 1 point because they are decreasing but not entirely eliminating the historic water runoff. The parking category also received 1 point. 8 on-street parking spaces will be gained by eliminating the existing curb cuts. However, this plan does not provide on- site parking that may be in excess of the demands of this project and is not improving the service in this area. The employee housing category is a formula, which works out to 10 points. Hunt said he feels this building is not adequately designed to accommodate a restaurant with the service access. Hunt said if a restaurant comes in for conditional use hearing, he would be hesitant to approve that type of use. Larry Yaw, representing the applicant, said they feel they have a good project and do feel some categories merit upgraded scoring by the Commission. Yaw told the Commission he feels relative to the stated criteria in the growth management plan, this project has exceeded the average in architectural design and requested the commission score this 3 points. The criteria in this section is compatibility of the project with the existing neighborhood in size, height, location of building, and materials. Yaw said the building has been carefully and specifically designed to maximize the site. Yaw said the allowable FAR with bonus is 1.5:1. this building is 1:1 in order to reduce the bulk and mass. Yaw pointed out the FAR has been distributed so that at all street perimeters this is a one-story building with the mass concentrated on the back of the site and a setback 20 feet off Cooper street. Yaw demonstrated how they designed around Ozzie's shoes and the potential future development of that site. Yaw noted the open space has been designed to define the streetscape and to encourage pedestrian movements. Yaw pointed 2 Reqular Meetinq Planning Commission September 30. 1986 out an additional usable, pedestrian open space of 2200 square feet on the second level. Yaw illustrated on the model what the design has done to reduce the perceived mass along Cooper street. The design has used bay windows and columns to break up the facade. Yaw told the Commission the allowable height level is 40 feet; this building's height is between 17 and 28 feet high. Yaw pointed out the service access and how the materials and trash will circulate. Yaw told the Commission 80 percent of the building is south and southwest facing. Yaw said the roof will be landscaped, as an amenity to the neighbors. Yaw requested the Commission consider scoring the architecture design 3 points. Hunt asked about a restaurant use in this building. Sunny Vann, representing the applicant, answered this building is anticipated for uses permitted in the C-l zone. Vann said there are no plans for a restaurant. In the event a restaurant were to go in this building, a conditional use application would have to be filed and heard by the P & Z. Hunt said he feels the building is not designed to have adequate service to a restaurant. Hunt said his GMP scoring of this project will be as if a restaurant use were moot. Hunt said if a restaurant does come up for a conditional use hearing, he will require the service be upgraded. Yaw told the Commission in site design, the planning office scored this a 2.0 and the applicants believe it merits a score of 3.0. Yaw said the criteria of landscape and open space, undergrounding of utilities and efficiency of circulation and increase of safety and pr ivacy are reasons for this score. Yaw said they feel the election to use one story is an important site design factor, and the second story has been placed to create usable open space. There will be direct alley access to alley part s of the bu ild ing. Yaw poi nted out all the ground floor surfaces are snowmelted, which is an important safety feature and an above average feature. Yaw said the enriched paving feature is also above average. The project has a great deal of landscaping, including benches, a water feature which creates an acoustic envelope in the courtyard. Yaw said the energy category was scored 2.5 pointed by the staff and the applicant feels it merits 3 points. Yaw pointed out the daylighting feature which is a detail above the bay window to let in natural light and reduce the need for electric lighting. Yaw told P & Z they are using a 96 percent efficient boiler. Yaw noted in amenities category, the staff scored the project 2 points, and the applicant believes the project to be in excess of an average project. There is an excess of usability and distribution of open space, the umbrella concept of the landscaping, the water feature, the decorative hard surfaces, the 7 location of benches and the bike racks. 3 ReQular Meetina Plannina Commission September 30. 1986 Vann told the Commission the trash and utility access area is approved under a separate special review for reduction of that area. Vann presented a blowup of the trash and utilities area, which is 25 feet. The code requirement is 20 feet per 6,000 square feet of building and 5 additional feet for each additional 6,000 square feet. The building totals 12,835 square feet and technically needs an additional 5 feet of trash and utility area for the additional 800 square feet, which represents less than 15 percent of that requirement. Vann pointed out there is ample room for 3 two-cubic yard dumpsters. Vann told P & z their calculations indicate the need for 2-1/2 dumpsters. Vann said the applicants operate a similar building of 27,000 square feet and never use more than 3 dumpsters. The applicant believes that 2 dumpsters will be adequate; however, they do have room for 3 plus the required meter storage as well as an unobstructed 5 foot access off the rear of the alley. Vann said they do not feel there are conflicts in the design of the service area, and the score is probably inappropriate. Vann noted the staff suggested the need for a compactor in this area. Vann said the CCLC would like to see the community in general use trash compactors to reduce the mess in the alleys. This was not intended to be a condition of approval of this application, and they would like not to be scored down on this condition. Vann said in the availability of public facilities and services, there are 3 areas they would request a higher score. Vann said the criteria for scoring is a 0 if the project requires provision of new services; 1 if the project may be handled by existing services, and 2 points if the project itself improves the quality of service. Water and sewer there are no improvements, and a score of 1 is appropriate. In the areas of public transportation, storm drainage and parking, the applicant believes the projects improves the quality of service in the site area. The current operation of a gas station is non-conforming use in the zone and creates traffic congestion and pedestrian conflicts. Vann stated this project removes the curb cuts and enhances the circulation, and therefore improves the quality of service and 2 points would be appropriate. Vann told the Commission the requirement in storm drainage is that a project cannot discharge more than its existing historic runoff. Vann stated all the runoff originating from the building and open space area will be retained on site. The only runoff that leaves is that between the property line and the street. Vann said they feel a portion of that runoff will be intercepted by the tree wells and landscaping; however, the quantity of that will be less than the current runoff. The quality of that runoff will be enhanced due to the elimination of the gas station use. Vann said the upgrading of the runoff system should deserve 2 points. 4 Reaular Meetina Plannina Commission September 30. 1986 Vann reminded the Commission there is no requirement for parking in the CC zone district, and it seems inappropriate to penal ize an applicant for not providing parking. This project eliminates curb cuts and traffic congestion and adds 8 on-street parking places, which benefits the entire downtown community. Vann said this situation should warrant 2 points. Vann told the P & Z he feels this project does warrants bonus points because it has eliminated a non-conforming use, has increased on-street parking, enhanced the storm drainage system, increased pedestrian circulation, building set back on Cooper street, proposed less than the allowable FAR, has reduced the bulk of the second floor, provided extensive landscaping and open space, resulting in an excellent project. Alan Richman, planning director, told the Commission 2 points in the parking category would be improvements to the neighborhood. Anderson opened the public hearing. Bob Zupancis, Ozzie's Shoes, told P & Z the applicants have worked hard to have the least amount of impact on this adjacent building. Jim Palazzi, Texaco owner, said Texaco is selling all their gas stations in rural areas. Palazzi acquired the property; it is too expensive to operate as a gas station, so it was sold. Anderson closed the public hearing. Burstein pointed out the trash design did get 2 points. Hunt pointed out essentially all service access on the ground floor is through the passage way, which is not a good design. Hunt said he does not want to see a restaurant on a second floor being serviced from the street. Hunt said he feels unless a restaurant has direct alley access, it should not be given conditional use. NATURE STOREHOUSE CC/C-l COMMERCIAL GMP SCORING AND PUBLIC HEARING Steve Burstein, planning office, told the Commission this is located on Galena street in the building presently occupied by Little Cliff's bakery. The project will be mixed uses with a bakery, restaurant, and office space for a total of 4,497 square feet FAR of 1.5:1. The height will be 33 feet. Burstein told the P & Z, staff recommends 2.5 score in the architectural design. The Victor ian elements echo and compl iment the neighborhood and the streetscape. The applicant is committing to brick the east facade on the Thrift shop. In site design, staff is recommending 2.5 points, looking at the quality of the diagonal open space for restaurant use and the proposed open space use outside the bakery. The service entrance off the alley is well designed. 5 Reaular Meetina Plannina Commission September 30. 1986 The energy referral is that this is a standard energy design and received 2 points. Burstein said the amenities are fairly standard. The visual impact is reasonable and no maj or publ ic views are being impacted. Both those areas received 2 points. The applicants are reqeusting to reduce the trash and utility area. Staff agreed what the applicants propose seems adequate, and suggested 2 points. Burstein told P & z in the area of water, the applicant proposed to install a fire hydrant on the corner; the fire marshal has reviewed this, feels it is a good commitment and would service the area. Burstein recommended this be scored 2 points rather than 1. The sewer and road categories are fairly standard. The storm drainage commitment is that virtually all runoff will be retained on site. The applicants have stated 100 percent will be retained; if so, the scoring should be 2 points. Perry Harvey, representing the applicant, presented a model which has received final approval from HPC. Harvey told the Commission this building will be the permanent home for Nature Storehouse, a 14 year old local business providing a needed service. Harvey presented petitions with 425 signatures in support of this business. Harvey told the Commission the applicants designed the building trying to incorporate Little Cl iff's bakery as tenants however, this did not work out. Harvey said it is important to have a long term, local natural food store at the entrance to Galena street. Harvey said this is a critical site, and the design was governed by 3 elements, the use, the site and the street. There is an atmosphere of a general store, a lot of interaction, and a proposed outdoor dining site. Harvey pointed out the building is 33 feet high, in a zone that allows 40 feet. There are 3 separate masses to break up the building because of the size of the site. There is a 45 degree angle entrance on the south corner. Harvey pointed out the elements on the proposed building that echo other buildings up Galena street. Harvey told the Commission the applicants have committed to installing a fire hydrant at the intersection of Galena and Hopkins and should receive 2 points in the water and fire category because they are upgrading the system. Harvey said the proposed project will retain 100 percent of the storm runoff on the property and should receive 2 points in this category. Harvey showed in the model where the Thrift Shop will protrude on the south part of the site. The applicant is committed to fixing this part of the site but is not sure that bricking it is the answer and is still working on the solution. Harvey presented a letter about the R factors of this building, showing they are all above the Uniform Building Code requirements. Harvey told the 6 Reaular Meetina Plannina Commission September 30. 1986 Commission there are no overhangs to effect the solar gain of the building. Harvey said he feels this is a sensitive design to house a valuable local business. Anderson opened the public hearing. Bill Little, Little Cliff's Bakery, told the Commission, the applicant has been very supportive, gave the bakery time to move, and he is in support of this application. Terry Badger, appl icant, told the Commission the design of the building goes along with natural foods, which is a service to this town and the town people patronize the business more and more. Anderson closed the public hearing. Colombo said he is concerned about the north side of the building as viewed from the corner. Hunt said the applicant might consider reversing the trash area and the stairway. Bruce Sutherland, representing the applicant, reiterated that the site plan and architectural design should warrant 3 points each. Burstein told the Commission employee housing is a formula and received 9.75 points. Harvey said the applicants would like a special review for use of open space as dining area. PITKIN CENTER CC/C-l COMMERCIAL GMP SCORING AND PUBLIC HEARING Steve Burstein, planning office, said this is located at 520 East Hyman and is a three-story commercial building with commercial, office and residential uses. Two free market accessory units and 4 on-site employee studios are proposed for this project. Burstein said the FAR of the proposed structure is 2:1 using the bonus available for on-site employee housing, with a total square footage of 12,800. The planning office recommends a score of 2.5 in architectural design. The structure is stepped back on Hyman street to create a reduced bulk. The materials to be used are good design features and should compliment the neighborhood. Burstein recommended 2 points in the site design category. The 25 percent open space is met by the south facing court yard. Burstein told the Commission the staff is concerned about the quality of the space and the quality of the landscaping. There is a problem with service access in the alley currently, and the applicant has not proposed any special provision for getting trucks into the area. Burstein pointed out staff recommends 3 points in the energy category on referral from the Roaring Fork Energy Center. The trash and utilities area meets the standards of the code and received 2 points. Visual impacts category received 2 points; the structure is not out of character nor are any public views obstructed. Water and sewer provisions are standard and 1 point is recommended. Burstein told the 7 Reaular Meetina Planning Commission September 30. 1986 Commission staff recommends 2 points in storm drainage because they have proposed to retain all storm drainage on-site. Burstein said there is a problem with the parking proposal; both engineering and planning feel the parking is inadequate and will put additional burden on surrounding streets. In the employee housing category, staff recommends 10.4 points for 4 studio employee units housing 45 percent of the employees. Bill poss, representing the applicant, told the Commission a lot of planning has gone into the orientation of the building. It has been stepped back to create a usable open space. The building has been oriented to be sympathetic to the Pitkin County bank building as well as the Elk's and Mason and Morse building. Poss pointed out another reason for the building's orientation is to take advantage of a 10 foot planting strip existing next to the bank, which will add visually to the open space. Poss showed the proposed landscape canopy of aspen trees which will create an urban seating area as well as create a barrier to pedestrian and vehicular traffic. Bike racks will be provided on the property for residents and public. poss noted in the amenities category the design of the courtyard and the association with a planting strip creates an usable amenity by the public. Poss said the mid-block link ties in with the adjacent building to the north and is an amenity. Poss told P & z the applicant is providing the required trash and utility area of 250 square feet, which is paved and will be screened by a brick wall. Poss said if compactors are used, the trash size could be reduced and used as a service yard for other uses. Poss told the Commission the housing in this building is accessory to the other uses. The main premise is that housing in the downtown core areas is for employees who do not wish to have cars, and are close to their work and public transportation. poss pointed out there are 17 employee units approved under the GMP process which have not provided any parking. This building is providing two spaces, which does improve the area and does benefits the project. Poss reminded the P & z the Code does not require parking in the CC zone. Poss said he feels this project does benefits the city and does warrant bonus points with the creation of the courtyard and block link, the stepping of the design, and use of materials. Hunt said the drawings indicate a restaurant use on the second floor with the only access a stairway. Poss indicated they would install a dumb waiter or a separate elevator if a restaurant were to go into the building. Hunt said he would like the applicant to insure, if there is to be a restaurant, it will be serviced adequately. Jim Martin told the Commission they would not want the restaurant using the public elevator and will install adequate service of either an elevator and a dump waiter. Poss pointed out there is a development right already existing on the property from a demolition of over 4 years ago. poss pointed 8 Reaular Meetinq Plannina Commission September 30. 1986 out the phase II, the GMP allocation is to the east and the 4 employee units. Anderson opened the public hearing. Anderson closed the public hearing. There were no comments. Whi te sa id there are 3 proj ects competing, 2 have cash-in-lieu for employee housing and one with on-site employee housing. White said it is difficult to balance these two options and to give the same points for different options. Richman said the employee housing scoring category is clear and objective. When Council adopted cash-in-lieu, they gave it equal credit. Richman suggested the Commission raise this concern with Council. Richman said in this instance each applicant should receive an appropriate score; they are making a commitment to house a certain percentage of their employees. Commission members scored the three applications. Burstein announced all three meet the threshold. Hunt moved to accept the scoring and forward to Council; seconded by Colombo. All in favor, motion carried. PITKIN CENTER FAR BONUS: EMPLOYEE HOUSING GMP EXEMPTION: PARKING REDUCTION Steve Burstein, planning office, told the Commission the proposal is to deed restrict 4 units on-site to low and moderate income. Burstein said there may be a need for moderate units to satisfy those with a greater income, thus the recommendation for a greater income span. Hunt moved to recommend approval of an employee housing GMP exemption to deed restrict 4 on-site units to low or moderate income; seconded by Ms. Tygre. All in favor, motion carried. Burstein pointed out the Code gives the P & z the ability to set the parking requirement for free market units in the CC zone, and to send a recommendation on the employee parking. The applicant is committing to two parking space on-site for the free market units. Burstein said one parking space per bedroom is an acceptable parking arrangement. However, there is no on-site parking for the employee studios. Burstein said if the tenants do not have a vehicle, and the proximity to downtown makes these units very convenient. The planning office does feels that most employees have vehicles, and recommends there be 3 employee parking spaces and 2 for free market, for a total of 5 parking spaces. poss noted in the CC zone, there is no parking requirement and there has been none required in the past. The intent of this 9 Reaular Meetina Plannina Commission September 30. 1986 zone is for employees who do not wish to have a car. Poss said they feel the two spaces provided on-site are above the zone requirements. Poss said the two residential units they are building were there previously and did not have any parking spaces. Anderson asked if the rear of the building could be reconf igured to accommodate one additional car. Poss said the building is under construction, and it would be difficult to provide for one more parking space. Hunt moved to set special review at two parking spaces for the free market units and recommend exemption for parking for the employee units; seconded by Ms. Tygre. All in favor with the exception of Colombo and White. Motion carried. Burstein said the last review is FAR bonus and staff recommends, except for the parking issue, there is not a problem with the 2:1 FAR proposed. Burstein had recommended this request be denied based on the deficiency of the parking; however, based on the previous motion, P & Z may approve this. Ms. Tygre moved to approve special review of the FAR bonus of .5:1; seconded by Hunt. All in favor, motion carried. NATURE'S STOREHOUSE - Cash-in-lieu for employee housing; reduction of trash and utility requirements Steve Burstein, planning office, told the Commission the applicants propose to pay $70,000 for employee housing to provide housing for 3.7 low and moderate employees. The housing office and planning staff recommend approval; however, staff recommends the Commission ought to send a message to get a program together on using the cash-in-lieu in the next six months. Ms. Tygre said, at present, P & Z has no review of the housing authority's plans. Alan Richman, planning director, pointed out the applicant is only required to pay their share, which has been set by formula. Ms. Tygre asked what happens when an applicants' payment does not cover the expense to build the housing for the number of employees he has committed to. Richman said staff feels they have the correct formula to implement the program. Ms. Tygre said she feels this program should be monitored because there may be hidden costs to the city. Richman said if P & Z is uncomfortable with the program or with the cash payment, P & Z may recommend to Council not to accept the cash-in-lieu. Ms. Tygre said her concern is that the employee housing get built and would like a timetable for providing this housing. Richman said it is reasonable for the Commission to expect the housing authority to come up with a plan on how it intends to use the money. 10 Reaular Meetina Plannina Commission September 30. 1986 Perry Harvey, representing the applicant, told the Commission cash-in-lieu is required when a building permit is issued. Harvey noted this is a new program and no one knows how much cash will be generated by this. Harvey agreed the Commission does need a long range program. The housing authority is excited about generating different types of employee housing programs, like mortgage help or deferment. Harvey said he feels the employee housing inventory at present is more than the demands at present, and the housing authority would like to look into other possibilities. White agreed he would like to see proposals from the housing office this year. Blomquist moved to accept the proposal to provide cash-in-lieu to house 3.73 low and moderate income employees; seconded by Hunt. All in favor, with the exception of Ms. Tygre. Motion carried. Hunt moved to approve special review for reduction in trash and utilities area requirements; seconded by Colombo. All in favor, motion carried. Hunt moved to approve special review for restaurant use in open space; seconded by blomquist. All in favor, motion carried. HUNTER PLAZA - Consideration of cash-in-lieu employee housing; reduction of trash utility requirements. Hunt moved to accept the proposal to provide cash-in-lieu to house 9.2 low income employees; seconded by Blomquist. All in favor, with the exception of Ms. Tygre. Motion carried. Hunt moved to approve special review for reduction in trash and utilities area requirement deleting the reference to trash compactors; seconded by Colombo. All in favor, motion carried. Hunt moved that the Commission be updated on the program of cash- in-lieu for employee housing, and that this be scheduled as an agenda item; seconded by White. All in favor, motion carried. Richman said the staff, housing author ity and P & Z will start developing a housing plan element and it is included in the 1987 work program. Hunt said he would like to get the code modified to include service access to restaurants. Richman said if P & Z submits this in written form, he will forward it to the code consultants who are working on simpl ifying the code. Richman told the Commission staff has been directed not to initiate any code amendments until this work is done. II Reaular Meetina Plannina Commission September 30. 1986 Hunt moved to indicate to the planning office to include restaurant access in the code updating process, to be direct access from the alley and if on the second floor to have elevator access; seconded by Ms. Tygre. All in favor, motion carried. REZONING REOUEST - Moses C, Conservation to R-15 Anderson told the Commission the Conservation zone has a 200 foot setback, and this lot is almost entirely in the front or rear setback. Gideon Kaufman, representing the applicant, told the Commission he is requesting their sponsorship because of the rezoning time table. If they wait until spring, they will miss the next building season. Kaufman said they would like an opportunity to get into agenda process. Alan Richman, planning director, pointed out there was a time for rezoning request in August and staff generally encourages applicants to stay within the code guidelines. Kaufman said there were substantial issues raised, to which he wanted time to respond. Hunt moved to sponsor a rezoning request for the Gaard Moses property on Aspen mountain, indicating no elimination of necessary fees; seconded by White. All in favor, motion carried. Ms. Tygre moved to adjourn at 7:35 p.m.; seconded by Blomquist. All in favor, motion carried. I 12