HomeMy WebLinkAboutLand Use Case.535 E Dean St.0047.2007.ASLU
THE CITY OF ASPEN
City of Aspen Community Development Department
CASE NUMBER
PARCEL ID NUMBER
PROJECTS ADDRESS
PLANNER
CASE DESCRIPTION
REPRESENTATIVE
DATE OF FINAL ACTION
0047.2007.ASLU
2737 -18 -2 96 -033
535 E. DEAN STREET
JASONLASSER
INSTUBSTANTIAL PUD AMENDMENT
STEVEN SPEARS
9/25/07
CLOSED BY Angela Scorey on 05/06/2009
213~-l$ -2-06- X33 ~"
.. ~ ~~~
Elp Ede @~ OWt'~~ Fym Report Farpgat jab Help
n i~ ie~ i~ ip~~ i~ i~ iii-ice 4
Pernd Type aslu ~ Aspen Land Use Permit ~ 0047.2007.AAU
Address 535 E DEAN ST J Aptf Suite
Gty ASPEN State CO ~ 2ip 81611 J
-Permit lrfarmation.:.:.. --:-- __ _::- __ __
e~ Master Permit ~~~ Routhq Queue aslu07 Appied 8/23/2007
Project J Status pending Approved ~J
~~ Dewiption INSUBSTANSTIAL PUD AMENDMENT Issued ~- J
_' Final ~~
SubmRted STEVEN SPEARS 925-8354 Cbd; Running Days 622 Expves 08/17/2008 J ~;
.,, .__-___-___-.- __. _. ..._-_.-. -.. _- - __........ ___.__-._- i
Last Name ASPEN SKI COMPANY J F'vst Name ~ PO BO% 1248
Phone (970) 379-1371 ASPEN CO 81611 ~,
(~ Owner Is Applicant?
Applicant _._... _.-- - ____. ... ....___ __-__ .-_
#A Last Name ASPEN SKI COMPANY J First Name ~ PO BO% 1248 I.
}s ASPEN CO 81611 j
phone (970)379-1371 Cus[Y 26671 J j
:„
r der. _.. _ _... _.__.. __ _ __
~-J ~
Last Name c First Name
I
Phone
i
r.`
n,
r,;
___ _- ___
Penrot Im~ders Ftd address ~ ~- '~'~ AsperiGold(61 -~!- Record: 1 of 1__ -
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chris Bendon
FROM: Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Planning Director
RE: The Residences at Little Nell -Insubstantial PUD Amendment
DATE: October 3, 2007
SUMMARY:
In early 2007, an administrative Insubstantial Planned Unit Development (PUD)
Amendment to the Residences at the Little Nell Subdivision/PUD (Ordinance No. 30,
Series 2004) was approved with regard to improvements to Dean Street (staff memo
dated 3/28/07).
The Residences at Little Nell, LLC, represented by Steven Spears of Design Workshop,
had applied for and was granted an insubstantial PUD amendment to the Residences at
Little Nell Subdivision/PUD allowing for modification of the Dean Street improvement
plan so that additional pedestrian stair and ramp access on the north side of Dean Street
could be developed.
A condition of the Insubstantial PUD Amendment approval stated, "Demolition of Dean
Street shall proceed with the approved re-designed improvements, however, if the North
of Nell substantial PUD amendment is not approved, the design will revert back to the
approved Dean Street plan of the Residences at Little Nell PUD."
In reviewing the former approval staff has determined that the scope of the improvements
should be allowed to be installed and maintained, as the original amendment should not
have been conditioned on the granting of a PUD designation for the North of Nell
application (Eden Case:0008.2007.ASLU). The purpose of this amendment is to repeal
the condition associated with the approval of the insubstantial amendment as outlined in
the memo dated March 28, 2007.
APPLICANT:
The Residences at Little Nell, LLC, Represented by Steven Speazs from Design Workshop
and Brooke Peterson.
LOCATION:
.~ 535 E. Dean Street
~1
ZONING: ~
.k` ` 1
Lodge with a PUD overlay !
,r1..r ~ i
REVIEW PROCEDURE: ~ /
The Community Development Director may approve, approve with conditions, or deny
an insubstantial amendment to an approved PUD pursuant to Land Use Code Section
26~P45.100, Planned Unit Developments.
..~.
STAFF COMMENTS:
In reviewing the original request, Staff believes that the improvements to Dean St. are
consistent with the approvals granted in Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2004, approving the
Residences at Little Nell Subdivision/PUD. Staff finds that the improvements to Dean
Street will enhance the character and pedestrian experience the newly developed portion
of Dean Street between the Residences at Little Nell and the North of Nell (555 E.
Durant) building.
The approval should have been based on the proposed improvements and not contingent
on the North of Nell receiving a PUD designation. Although the Dean Street
improvements will provide additional exposed wall area on the North of Nell building,
overall Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and Commercial FAR for the parcel containing the North
of Nell Building will not be exceeded.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff believes that this application meets the review standards for granting an
insubstantial PUD amendment and recommends that the Community Development
Director approve this insubstantial PUD to allow for changes to be made to the landscape
and Dean Street improvement plan with increased pedestrian access to the North of Nell
regardless of whether the PUD is granted for the North of Nell building..
APPROVAL:
I hereby approve this insubstantial amendment to the Residences at Little Nell
Subdivision/PUD to allow modifications to the design of Dean Street to include
additional pedestrian access to the North of Nell retail pedestrian corridor as provided in
Exhibit A and not be contingent on approval of the North of Nell PUD application
currently under review.
Chris Bendon Date
Community Development Director
ACCEPTANCE:
I, as a person being or representing the applicant, do hereby agree to the condition of this
approval and certify the information provided in this application is correct to the best of
my knowledge.
Development, LLC
/O IO 0'~'
Date
Exhibit A -- Dean Street Improvement Plan
/l~/ \
YS£8'SZ6'OLG aleog oa ~oN ~I~~
IT9T800`uadsy ^^ro 7~11 TT ~ 7 ~ 7
]calls mey~i 7seH OZI H1210N ® dJ l.~~Id+ul Ital\ I ~o T~~~ol\ I ~anuan~ uEaQ
dOHS?RIOAINJIS34 ~L ~L \1
~....
3f1N3AV Nb901Stl3 ONtltlZtlld
v'10aNO~J W021d SS300tl ONIOIAONd
~301M .LS) S211tl1S HlIM Nl'dM301S
,~ I091 SltlR131tlW) AtlMHltld 301M .,0-,9
3StlOHItl1S 301M,S'96
t~8'~bE ~ 3:
JNId~If181~3N ~O H121C
3Stl02JItl1S 301M ,5~9L
~dAl) 1d30N00113N
d0 HITJON aid S30Ntl211N311tl132f M3N
('O'fl'd Nl?J aid) 3f1N3Atl
~ ~t/30 ONIlSIX3 W021d 30NVH0 dO 11W11
3Stl0211tl1S 301M.S'9l
~d,LL) lltlM 2131NH'ld
3Stl0211tl1S 03SOd021d
S13lNl NItl210
HlIM 3NIl MOId 2l31tlMW~JOlS M3N
+., f `
.L~~2i_LS dN~'I~11J
EXHIBIT B
REVIEW CRITERIA
1. A change in the use or character of the development
Staff Finding:
Staff does not believe that the proposed amendment will change the character of
the development and will further compliance with the communities pedestrian
goals. Stafffnds this criterion to be met.
2. An increase by greater than three (3) percent in the overall coverage of structures.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
Staff Finding.•
The amendment does not increase the overall coverage of structures. Staff finds
this criterion to be met.
3. Any amendment that substantially increases trip generation rates of the proposed
development, or the demand for public facilities.
Staff Finding:
Trip generation and demand for public infrastructure are not impacted by this
change. Stafffnds this criterion to be met.
4. A reduction by greater than three (3) percent of the approved open space
Staff Finding:
The amount of open space will not be reduced as a result of this amendment.
Stafffrnds this criterion to be met.
5. A reduction by greater than one (1) percent of the off-street parking and loading space.
StaffFindin~
The Applicant is not requesting an amendment to the existing or required number
of pazking spaces. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
6. A reduction in required pavement widths or right-of--way for streets and easements.
Staff Finding:
The applicant is not proposing changes to right-of--way widths. Emergency access
width will remain the same as approved due to safety requirements. Staff finds this
criterion to be met.
7. An increase of greater than two (2) percent in the approved gross leasable floor area of
commercial buildings.
~;
Staff Finding
The Applicant is not proposing changes to a commercial building. Staff finds this
criterion to be met.
8. An increase of greater than one (1) percent in the approved residential density of the
development.
Staff Finding
The Applicant is not proposing an increase in residential density. Stafffinds this
criterion to be met.
9. Any change which is consistent with a condition or representation of the project's
original approval or which requires granting a further variation from the project's
approved use or dimensional requirements.
Staff Finding
The proposed amendment is consistent with the project's original approval. Staff
finds this criterion to be met.
0 O <-/ ? . a o ~ 7~1s Lcc
x737.18.9(P •033
MEMORANDUM
TO: Chris Bendon
FROM: Jason Lasser, Planner
RE: The Residences at Little Nell -Insubstantial PUD Amendment
DATE: March 28, 2007
SUMMARY:
The Residences at Little Nell, LLC, Represented by Steven Spears of Design Workshop,
has applied for an insubstantial amendment to the approved Residences at Little Nell
Subdivision/PUD to amend the approved PUD to allow for modification to the Dean
Street improvement plan to include additional pedestrian stair and ramp access to the
North of Nell side of Dean Street. Ordinance No.30, Series of 2004, which approved the
Residences at Little Nell Subdivision/PUDwhkh contains language in Section 10:
Subdivision & Final PUD Plans and in Section 11: Subdivision &PUD Agreement.
The applicant is able to submit this application in spite of the Land Use
Moratorium created by Ordinance No. 19, 2006, because insubstantial PUD amendments
that do not increase floor area or density were exempted by Section 1 of Ord. No. 23,
Series 2006. Review criteria and Staff Findings have been included as Exhibit A.
APPLICANT:
The Residences at Little Nell; LLC, Represented by Steven Speazs from Design
Workshop and Brooke Peterson
LOCATION:
535 E. Dean St.
ZONING:
Lodge with a PUD overlay
REVIEW PROCEDURE:
The Community Development Director may approve, approve with conditions, or
deny an insubstantial amendment to an approved PUD pursuant to Land Use Code
Section 26.445.100, Planned Unit Developments.
STAFF COMMENTS:
In reviewing the Applicants request, Staff believes that the improvements to Dean
St. are consistent with the approvals granted in Ordinance No. 30, Series of 2004,
approving the Residences at Little Nell Subdivision/PUD. Staff finds that the
improvements to Dean Street will enhance the character and pedestrian experience
essential to the vitality and exposure along the newly developed portion of Dean Street
between the Residences at Little Nell and the Nor[h of Nell. As stated in Section 11 (3) of
Ord. No. 30, Series of 2004; The design , installation, maintenance and operational costs
r.,
~..,
.a
for new surface and sub-surface improvements to Dean Street shall be borne by the
owner of the residences at little nellproject and it's successors and assigns.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff believes that this application meets the review standards for granting an
insubstantial PUD amendment and recommends that the Community Development
Director approve this insubstantial PUD to allow for changes to be made to the
landscape and Dean Street improvement plan with increased pedestrian access to the
North of Nell.
APPROVAL:
I hereby approve this insubstantial amendment to the Residences at Little Nell
Subdivision/PUD to allow modifications to the design of Dean Street to include
additional pedestrian access to the North of Nell retail pedestrian corridor with the
following condition:
Demolition of Dean Street shall proceed with the approved re-designed
improvements, however, if the North of Nell substantial PUD amendment is
not approved, the design will revert back to the approved Dean Street plan of
the Residences at Little Nell PUD.
Chris Bendon
Community Development Director
ACCEPTANCE:
~t~t~'
Date
I, as a person being or representing the applicant, do hereby agree to the condition of this
approval and certify the information provided in this application is correct to the best of
my knowledge.
Applicant: The Residences at Little Nell Development, LLC
By:
A. Peterson, Attorney-in-Fact Date
ATTACHMENTS:
Exhibit A -- Review Criteria and Staff Findings
Exhibit B -Application
ExtttatTC-Revised Dean Street Improvement Plan
EXHIBIT A
REVIEW CRITERIA
1. A change in the use or character of the development.
Staff Finding:
Staff does not believe that the proposed amendment will change the character of
the development and will further compliance with the communities pedestrian
goals. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
2. An increase by greater than three (3) percent in the overall coverage of structures.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
Staff Finding:
The amendment does not increase the overall coverage of structures. Staff finds
this criterion to be met.
3. Any amendment that substantially increases trip generation rates of the proposed
development, or the demand for public facilities.
Staff Finding.•
Trip generation and demand for public infrastructure are not impacted by this
change. Stafffrnds this criterion to be met.
4. A reduction by greater than three (3) percent of the approved open space
Staff Finding
The amount of open space will not be reduced as a result of this amendment.
Staff finds this criterion to be met.
5. A reduction by greater than one (1) percent of the off-street parking and loading space.
Staff Finding:
The Applicant is not requesting an amendment to the existing or required number
of parking spaces. Staff finds this criterion to be met.
6. A reduction in required pavement widths orright-of--way for streets and easements.
Staff Finding:
-*~ ,.-1
,,~
The applicant is not proposing changes to right-of--way widths. Emergency access
width will remain the same as approved due to safety requirements. Staff finds this
criterion to be met.
7. An increase of greater than two (2) percent in the approved gross leasable floor area of
commercial buildings.
Staff Finding
The Applicant is not proposing changes to a commercial building. Staff finds this
criterion to be met.
8. An increase of greater than one (1) percent in the approved residential density of the
development.
Staff Finding
The Applicant is not proposing an increase in residential density. Staff finds this
criterion to be met.
9. Any change which is consistent with a condition or representation of the project's
original approval or which requires granting a further variation from the project's
approved use or dimensional requirements.
Staff Finding
The proposed amendment is consistent with the project's original approval. Staff
,finds this criterion to be met.
~iS~B'SZ6'OL6
[ T9T8 O~ `uadst/
~aanS uieW ~seg OZ[
dOHS~I0~k11VJIS3a
ale~g o~ loN ~ ~'q~ l
H12iON ~ a~~~~a~uI Ija~ ~o ~~.~o~~anua~~ u~aQ
3f1N3At/Nb'341S`d3 aNd`dZV~d
b'IOdNOJ W02i3 SS300H JNIdln02id
~301M,LS) S2iId1S H11M ~ilb'M3aIS
X481 SlV12~31b'W) Ab'MHlb'd 341M ..0-.9
3Sd02il`d1S 301M S 96
~i' vE ~ ~_
`JNla~lfl8 ~~~N .~O H12JC
3SVObIV1S 301M ,S 9l
~dJ~l) 1d30N00 ~~3N
30 H1210N bad S30Nb211N3 ~I`d132i M3N
~~O~fl~d Nl2i 2i3d) 3f1N3/1b'
1V34 JNIISIX3 WOb3 3JNb'HO 3011WI1
3Sd02i IV1S 301M .S'9 L
~d.ll) ~~b'M 2i31Ntfld
3SHObib'1S 03SOd02ld
S13lNl NIVZI~
H11M 3NIl M0~3 2f31b'MW2iO1S M3N
.L~~ Q ~.S ~l~l~~~ ~.J