The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLand Use Case.413E Main St.45-81.Epicurean Partnership Special Review -D 64W ✓lam- o1 9 ) IN e ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 LAND USE APPLICATION FEES County 00100 — 63711 09009 — 00000 Subdivision/PUD 63712 Special Review 63713 P&Z Review Only 63714 Detailed Review 63715 Final Plat 63716 Special Approval 63717 Specially Assigned City 00100— 63721 09009 — 00000 Conceptual Application 63722 Preliminary Application 63723 Final Application 63724 Exemption 63725 Rezoning 63726 Conditional Use PLANNING OFFICE SALES 00100 — 63061 09009 — 00000 County Land Use Sales 63062 GMP Sales 63063 Almanac Sales Copy Fees Other -1 %t kl j+ , , � PI w resin Name: Project: � Address, Phone: � Check No. Date: Receipt No. CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET City of Aspen 1. DATE SUBMITTED:_&/a d 2. APPLICANT: e r- / earl,/' No. IS -?I STAFF: a �,k 0 �A ns 0 Yo OFe.rk;jd 3. REPRESENTATIVE: S 4. Sri rh K i e vt a 0 I 0 r 4. PROJECT NAME:��1&UY1an arAyer ihiaSpecial Ae'-&&L 5. LOCATION: jalf ,) Cv, &Oe&n , Asir ') t1'IS Q PIS Ca�;Ovt, o G0. P C4vyIP01110pt 6. TYPE OF APPLICATION: (04'euree'vi SXeelf, Rezoning Subdivision Stream Margin P.U.D. Exception 8040 Greenline >{ Special Review Exemption View Plane Growth Management 70:30 Conditional Use HPC Residential Bonus Other,OA AA 1'01'YI r o 7u 7. REFERRALS: Attorney Sanitation District School District Engineering Dept. Mountain Bell Rocky Mtn. Nat. Gas Housing Parks State Highway Dept. Water Holy Cross Electric Other City Electric Fire Marshal/Building Dept. 8. REVIEW REQUIREMENTS: 9. DISPOSITION: P & Z. X Approved X Denied Date June 9, 1981 City P & Z recommended approval of the exception from the GMP for the 3 employee housing units and recommended no parking requirements be imposed on these 3 units subject to the following: 1. Employee units restricted at middle income guidelines with 6 month minimum leases and no more than two shorter tenancies Council X Approved X Denied Date June 22, 1981 City Council approved as per P & Z above 10. ROUTING: Attorney _ Building Engineering Other MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen City Council FROM: Jack Johnson, Planning Office RE: Epicure Plaza - Special Review of Parking and Exception of Employee Housing DATE: June 22, 1981 Approved as to form: Location: The open patio space between the Whale of a 41ash and the Epicure Restaurant in the 400 block of east Main Street (Lots B and C, Block 87, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado). Zoning: CC - Commercial Core (H.P. Overlay) Background: The Epicure Plaza was granted a commercial GMP allot- ment for 10,041 square feet by City Council on November 26, 1979. Associated with the application was a com- ponent of employee housing consisting of 1959 square feet of residential space. The applicant received a recommendation of approval from the P & Z on May 5, 1981 for condominiumization of the Epicure Plaza into 21 com- mercial, office and residential spaces. City Council has postponed action on the condominiumization request until this application has received P & Z review and recommendation. Applicant's Request: This is an application by the Epicurean Partnership requesting an exception from the GMP pursuant to Section 24-11.2(h) of the Municipal Code to permit the con- struction of three employee housing units in the proposed Epicure Plaza Building. A second request is being made for special review pur- suant to Section 24-4.1(c) to determine the need for parking associated with the three employee housing units. Engineering Department: While the application succeeds admirably in the dissec- tion of the city code, and rightfully locates typographical errors and non-existent cross references, there are some problems with the basic concepts of the application. Granted, the CC zone does not require parking for commer- cial uses both to promote the best utilization of the valuable downtown core properties and to discourage auto- mobile use. This provision is appropriate to encourage shoppers and other short term users to park in one loca- tion and walk or use public transit between the various core area businesses. Introduction of residential uses, however, creates an extremely new situation. While it is reasonable to ex- pect that a resident of the downtown core will not need a vehicle for most purposes, it is unreasonable to expect these residents not to own cars. The problem of long-term storage is significant since neither the adjacent streets nor the Rio Grande lot offer full 24-hour parking. As a result, employees in these units will be forced to park in twenty-four hour zones on the streets in residential areas some blocks away. 0 0 Memo: Epicure Plaza - Special Review of Parking and Exception of Employee Housing June 22, 1981 Page Two Approval of this application is recommended in an effort to encourage the employee housing without penalizing the applicant. It should be noted, however, that the further creation of employee housing in the CC core could create a significant problem of vehicle storage for the residents and that any amending of the code should strengthen the parking requirements in the zone for residential uses. Planning Office: The Epicure Plaza Building, as proposed, has a footprint covering roughly 2/3 of the lot. The balance of the ground level has been designed as patio and an outdoor dining terrace to compliment the proposed restaurant. The entire site has been designed for uses exclusive of parking. The Planning Office does recognize and support the auto - disincentive policies in the commercial core. The pro- posed Epicure Plaza Building is located within convenient walking distance of employment, shopping and public trans- portation. The Planning Office has taken a position of recommending in favor of parking waivers in the CC zone for both commercial and residential uses. It should be noted that as more and more residential uses (employee housing) occupy the CC zone as complimentary components of commercial projects, which is strongly encouraged, the need for on -site and community parking will continually compound. It is suggested that as commercial GMP applica- tions are submitted and reviewed in future years, that the on -site parking needs associated with any residential component of the commercial project be evaluated carefully at the time of the initial GMP review. An exception from the GMP for the three employee housing units is appropriate. The two studio units and one bed- room unit are proposed to be deed restricted at the middle income guidelines. The middle income guidelines were re- commended by the P & Z when the Eqicure Plaza condominiumi- zation application was reviewed. City Council has not made a determination as to which income guideline should apply to these employee units, as the application for condominiumi- zation was tabled until this application could be reviewed by P & Z and forwarded to Council. Similar commercial GMP projects including employee housing components have been recommended at the moderate income guidelines by P & Z. Planning Office Recommendation: Planning Office recommends approval of the exception from GMP for the three deed restricted employee housing units and approval of the request that no parking be required for these units. P & Z Action: At a special meeting on June 9, 1931, the Planning and Zoning Commission recommended approval of both requests in this appli- cation subject to the following condition: 1. Employee units restricted at the middle income guidelines with six (6) month minimum leases and no more than two (2) shorter tenancies. City Council Action: Should City Council concur with the recommendations of the P & Z the appropriate motion would be as follows: "I move to approve the Epicure Plaza request for exception from GMP for the three employee housing units and approve the request that no parking be P Memo: Epicure Plaza - Special Review of Parking and Exception of Employee Housing June 22, 1981 Page Three required for these units subject to the following condition: 1. Employee units restricted at the middle income guidelines with six (6) month minimum leases and no more than two (2) shorter tenancies. MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Jack Johnson, Planning Office RE: Epicure Plaza - Special Review of Parking and Exception of Employee Housing DATE: June 9, 1981 Location: The open patio space between the Whale of a Wash and the Epicure Restaurant in the 400 block of east Main Street (Lots B and C, Block 87, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado). Zoning: CC - Commercial Core (H.P. Overlay) Background: The Epicure Plaza was granted a commercial GMP allot- ment for 10,041 square feet by City Council on November 26, 1979. Associated with the application was a com- ponent of employee housing consisting of 1959 square feet of residential space. The applicant received a recommendation of approval from the P & Z on May 5, 1981 for condominiumization of the Epicure Plaza into 21 com- mercial, office and residential spaces. City -Council has postponed action on the condominiumization request until this application has received P & Z review and recommendation. Applicant's Request: This is an application by the Epicurean Partnership requesting an exception from the GMP pursuant to Section 24-11.2(h) of the Municipal Code to permit the con- struction of three employee housing units in the proposed Epicure Plaza Building. A second request is being made for special review pur- suant to Section 24-4.1(c) to determine the need for parking associated with the three employee housing units. Engineering Department: While the application succeeds admirably in the dissec- tion of the city code, and rightfully locates typographical errors and non-existent cross references, there are some problems with the basic concepts of the application. Granted, the CC zone does not require parking for commer- cial uses both to promote the best utilization of the valuable downtown core properties and to discourage auto- mobile use. This provision is appropriate to encourage shoppers and other short term users to park in one loca- tion and walk or use public transit between the various core area businesses. Introduction of residential uses, however, creates an extremely new situation. While it is reasonable to ex- pect that a resident of the downtown core will not need a vehicle for most purposes, it is unreasonable to expect these residents not to own cars. The problem of long-term storage is significant since neither the adjacent streets nor the Rio Grande lot offer full 24-hour parking. As a result, employees in these units will be forced to park in twenty-four hour zones on t:-.a streets in residential arS-ds some blocks away. Memo: Epicure Plaza - Special Review of Parking and Exception of Employee Housing June 9, 1981 Page Two Approval of this application is recommended in an effort to encourage the employee housing without penalizing the applicant. It should be noted, however, that the further creation of employee housing in the CC core could create a significant problem of vehicle storage for the residents and that any amending of the code should strengthen the parking requirements in the zone for residential uses. Planning Office: The Epicure Plaza Building, as proposed, has a footprint covering roughly 2/3 of the lot. The balance of" the ground level has been designed as patio and an outdoor dining terrace to compliment the proposed restaurant. The entire site has been designed for uses exclusive of parking. The Planning Office does recognize and support the auto - disincentive policies in the commercial core. The pro- posed Epicure Plaza Building is located within convenient walking distance of employment, shopping and public trans- portation. The Planning Office has taken a position of recommending in favor of parking waivers in the CC zone for both commercial and residential uses. It should be noted that as more and mare residential uses (employee housing) occupy the CC zone as complimentary components of commercial projects, which is strongly encouraged, the need for on -site and community parking will continually compound. It is suggested that as commercial GMP applica- tions are submitted and reviewed in future years, that the on -site parking needs associated with any residential component of the commercial project be evaluated carefully at the time of the initial GMP review. An exception from the GMP for the three employee housing units is appropriate. The two studio units and one bed- room unit are proposed to be deed restricted at the middle income guidelines. The middle income guidelines were re- commended by the P &.Z when the Egicure Plaza condominiumi- zation application was reviewed. City Council has not made a determination as to which income guideline should apply to these employee units, as the application for condominiumi- zation was tabled until this application could be reviewed by P & Z and forwarded to Council. Similar commercial GMP projects including employee housing components have been recommended at the moderate income guidelines by P & Z. Planning Office Recommendation: Planning Office recommends approval of the exception from GMP for the three deed restricted employee housing units and approval of the request that no parking be required for these units. • MF.mnRAmnTTM TO: Jack Johnson, Planning Office FROM: Jay Hammond, Engineering Department DATE: June 4, 1981 0A t JUN �;�FENWt�tC� O�r� RE: Epicurean Special Review, Lots B & C, Block 87, O.A.T. Having reviewed the above application and made a site inspection, the Engineering Department has the following comments: While the applicant succeeds admirably in his dissection of the city code, and rightfully locates typographical errors and non-existent cross references, I have some problems with the basic concepts of the application. I would grant that the C.C. zone does not require parking for commercial uses both to promote the best utilization of the valuable downtown core properties and to discourage automobile use. This provision is appropriate to encourage shoppers and other short term users to park in one location and walk or use public transit between the various core area businesses. Introduction of residential uses, however, creates an extremely new situation. While it is reasonable to expect that a resident of the downtown core will not need a vehicle for most purposes, it is unreasonable to expect these residents not to own cars. The problem of long-term storage is significant since neither the adjacent streets nor the Rio Grande lot offer full 24-hour parking. As a result, employees in these units will be forced to park in twenty-four hour zones on the streets in residential areas some blocks away. I am inclined to recommend approval of this application in an effort to encourage the employee housing without penalizing the applicant. I think it should be noted, however, that the further creation of employee housing in the C.C. core could create a significant problem of vehicle storage for the residents and that any amending of the code should strengthen the parking requirements in the zone for residential uses. APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL REVIEW Request is hereby made on behalf of The Epicurian Partnership (hereinafter referred to as "Applicant"), under Section 24-4.6 of the Aspen, Colorado subdivision regulations, for special review of the off-street parking relating to the real property to be known as the Epicure Plaza and which is more particularly described as: Lots B and C, Block 87, City and Townsite of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado Plans and details of the proposed development project for Epicure Plaza were submitted by the applicant in 1979 for review under the Aspen Growth Management Plan, and the project was approved by resolution of the Aspen City Council on November 26, 1979. The Project is to be built upon property which is zoned CC as Commercial Core property, and pursuant to Section 24-4.1(a), no off-street parking is required in the CC zone district. In the application submitted for this project under the Aspen Growth Management Plan, it was specifically stated at page 2 of such application: "In accordance with current CC zone requirements, no on -site parking will be provided (the zone itself is an automobile disincentive). Main and Mill Streets have one hour limited parking with the Rio Grande free parking lot only one-half block away. Contract parking is also located one block away on Hopkins Street. Any increase in traffic on adjacent streets as a result of this building will be minimal due to the community oriented nature of the proposed tenants." It should also be pointed out that the proposed Epicure Plaza Building is to be located in the very heart of the city. Virtually every city facility is within convenient walking distance, and the public bus service stops right in front of the building on Main Street. Thus, there is very little incentive for employees residing at the building to require personal automobile transportation from their residence to any of the facilities within the city. Accordingly, to require off-street parking for the three employee units to be located within the building would be unnecessary and would be entirely contrary to the automobile disincentive in the CC zone. Attached hereto is a copy of Page A3 from the Growth Management Plan application submitted for this project, which indicates the project location in relation to public and private parking facilities and the various public bus routes. For the above -stated reasons, it is respectfully requested that the Epicure Plaza development project be granted approval for construction without any off-street parking in accordance with the plan for the project submitted and previously approved under the Growth Management Plan. Any additional documentation or information with respect to this application, if necessary, will be promptly submitted upon request. Notwithstanding the submission of this application for special review, we wish to point out an ambiguity in the Aspen Code concerning requirements for off-street parking in the CC zone. Section 24-4.1(a) appears to provide a blanket exception pertaining to off-street parking in the CC zone. However, Section 24-4.1(c) indicates requirement for special review of off-street parking where employee housing is provided pursuant to Section 24-10.4(b)(3). The latter section of the Code pertains to employee housing included in applications for residential allotments under the Growth Management Plan (assuming that the reference to Section 24-10.4(b)(3) was a typographical error which was intended to refer to Section 24-11.4(b)(3) of the Code). However, in either case, this special review requirement would not seem to be applicable to projects such as the Epicure Plaza which are submitted for an allotment under Section 24-11.5 pertaining to commercial development applications. The foregoing ambiguity is further complicated by the indication in Section 24-4.5 that residential uses in the CC zone are subject to review for off-street parking requirements. -2- By submission of this application for special review, the applicant does not waive its legal position that the unfortunately ambiguous provisions of the existing Aspen Code do not require special review for off-street parking pertaining to employee housing requirements in the CC zone. However, this matter is being specifically brought to your attention in connection with this application so that the ambiguities in the Code can be addressed and appropriately corrected to eliminate any problems which may arise in connection with future applications for special review pertaining to off-street parking in the CC zone. Applicant also requests the granting of an exception from the Growth Management Plan pursuant to Section 24-11.2(h) of the Aspen Code to permit construction of three employee housing units in the proposed Epicure Plaza Building. The application for this project as submitted and previously approved in 1979 included the proposed construction of three employee housing units on the third floor of the building, including a one bedroom unit and two studio units. As submitted in the application in 1979, the employee housing units will be subject to the housing price guidelines for rental or sale established by the City of Aspen for middle income housing. In connection with this application for exception, we are enclosing copies of pages A-8, A-9, A-10 and A-11 of the Growth Management Plan application which indicate the third floor employee housing plan as well as sections of the building as seen from the east, north and south. Pursuant to a condominiumization application which is being concurrently processed the three employee housing units on the third floor of the building will become separate condominium units in connection with the condominiumization of the entire building. Also enclosed are copies of the construction plans pertaining to the third floor employee housing units. Any additional information which you may request will be promptly provided. -3- • • By submission of this application for an exception pertaining to the employee housing units to be constructed in the Epicure Plaza Building, the applicant does not waive its legal position that this application is not required by the provisions of the Aspen Code. There is, unfortunately, another ambiguity in the Aspen Code pertaining to this exception which does not appear to be required for projects which have been approved for commercial development allotments. Section 24-11.10 of the Code allows employee housing units approved under Section 24-11.4(b)(3) which pertains only to residential development allotments) to be exempted from the Growth Management Plan. The review and exception procedure which is provided by Section 24-11.2(h) pertains only to housing units constructed pursuant to Section 24-11.10. It should again be pointed out that commercial development allotments (such as Epicure Plaza) are granted pursuant to the provisions of Section 24-11.5. This dichotomy was probably not intended at the time of enactment of Section 24-11.10, and thus this matter should be given attention to avoid future disputes concerning the review of employee housing units to be constructed in connection with commercial development applications. If broader review of such employee housing is desired, then the provisions of Section 24-11.10 should be amended to indicate that it applies to employee housing whether approved under the provisions of Section 24-11.4(b)(3) pertaining to residential development applications, Section 24-11.5(b)(3) pertaining to commercial development applications or Section 24-11.6(b)(5) pertaining to lodge development applications. Your prompt consideration of this application will be sincerely appreciated. Dated: June 3 1981. SACHS, KLEIN & SEIGLE i By: Jeffrey H. Sachs /Attorney for V h� Epicurian Partnership 201 North Mill Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 925-8700 -4- • MORTM �'RI O R ANDE PARKING BUS STOP U • M PROJ T OCATI N --------------------------�— — — --- K� COtf(TRACT PARKING • --` nnlnulull/� !----- n7nnnunnlnlL 1 CONTRACT PARKIN • • • HIGHLANDS SILVERKIN M • �= • � MALL � •� � I SHUTTLE • COOfE71 " •.' : • a ................................................. .............. ! • - F 6 cc ....................................1.. ...... ............................ 1 llLl 11/1 1/111/11111111 1111 111111111111111 111111111 111111111111 I1 11111111111111111111111111111111.11 1111111111111111111�_ C t RKING CJE I J) N F- O J 0 J ZJ Y Q Q� F- :D 0 c= O Z I — Cc w cnNp �xw mwa • a Z Z J N 0.0 QO O= OW J W U. } 00 J a d.h.w. collector • • 0 Z_ ]e O O J Z O I-' U w N I'R� • • 6 W F S U C�� 3.2341 2-12-�1 RE -?0-81 RE Id - 3o_gp s� _f �8 7-840 3-3I-E3o w L n 12 1 A -------------- 2411- lele 311-1 s�8" '-" n4' G" 42 " M4'•SMA• " I _O. o 5I-4a 4. 9" 11 '- 1" G�-3e� q'-?g/8p 21 �- tm'I - -I IR� �4 9-02"1 •1 I� WALK-IN it CLOSET I �'I� e14a F LINEN BEDROOM -- SPACE FOR f DROP -IN RANGE(H,I,C) SPACE FOR- I REF_ (N.I.C) t - SPACE FOR ap D15HWASNER .. - � �y r�Nic 13 -- u 4 KIT, _ � jai _ w O_ — PANELTN H LL A- - -- - - --- 14'•1' 4'•4" 6� 6" M.o. 3� LIVING ROOM DUCT SHAFT' SEE MECH. -- --- t 2'- � M, O • ----- ! O STAIR N° 5 SEE LIVING ROOM BEDROOM D t7l' 0 I r 2-60 5'-2/Zr 3� fo`-11" I Q N U I SPACE FOR DISHWASHER 4 1 I C14 STAIR +�li'` �' NS 4 1 II SEE 4 ---' 1 uI KI�1 1 N -BATH w T of IT* I is . ! O i SPACE POR -1 REF (N,I,C) j SPACE FOR -- J ^ DROP -IN• ' \p — BAT H RANGE(W,G_) O L SMOKE ul DETECTOR i 7YP LIVING ROOM BEDROOM ( 21's, 21 ev' Gil Iz � ''— q --SPACEI:OR ! � f1— CA0. VINTL N , REF.(N •c.) IZ a I y T7— i; no 10 2•t"I 3'•6 I A I - - i SPACE FOR — SPACE FOR O DISHwASNER I I I (N.1.C.) �_ SIN — DROP -IN FRANGE(w.C.' ACCESS igwN% SELOW - I 1 KIT. I I I 4 a �4 12`•2�" M.O• 5'•2H 4=S"M.O. 2�•8'I _ a - 2 2 PROJF.- T EPICURE PLAZA ASPEN, COLORADO 1-- - -- - ---- THOMAS WELLS & ASSOCIATES / ARCHITECTS' ASPEN LOS AN aELE S REVISIONS TITLE OF SHEET. UNITS A, B 4 C V4 FLOOR PLAN AT THIRD FLOOR N C D I J/�'l ND PROJECT NO. "..E.79 • to A5 DATE yNEFi Of' SFIEET RECEIVED °i,` 2 9 1981 r