The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutcoa.lu.pu.Aspen Community arts and rec.ACARC.A1193 I~ . i. , , , / CASELOAD SUMMARY SHEET city of Aspen :;;'-. DATE RECEIVED: 03~01/93 PARCEL ID AND CASE NO. DATE COMPLETE: ~/ (~I/--:::h: 2735-124-20-001 All-93 A<::.-a. (l(.,L """7 STAFF MEMBER: KJ PROJECT NAME: . Aspen Arts and Recreation Center (Red BrickSchooll Rezonino. '!l<f..;4'I_ Text Amendment. -a-~P~ GI<<Q,$ €>(a......r.>1-t'Zlll -R,r e5~1\\"- ( Project Address: 110 E. Hallam . I. . .f'",lot,,- Legal Address: . '. ~<>ed(f1l1.$ APPLICANT: city of Aspen Applicant Address: 130 S. Galena. Aspen. CO REPRESENTATIVE: Davis Horn. Inc. Representative Address/Phone: 300 E. Hvman. suite B Aspen. CO 81611 5-6587 -------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------- FEES: .;1 "\;)' ,_ "\"I'..jJ~j )t;J, , ","' Q".-l",.,Cfi ,,'" \\''0'' "h q "h '7' < ,. ... t"'~..,. ...w.... .tj\" tr" PLANNING ENGINEER HOUSING ENV. HEALTH TOTAL $2669.00 $ 93.00 $ $ $2762.00 # APPS RECEIVED # PLATS RECEIVED 6 6 Z Meeting Date APPROVAL: 1 STEP: 2 STEP:~ PUBLIC HEARING:~ NO VESTED RIGHTS: ~~ NO TYPE ekek f'fZ~ t'lotlC.G - DRC Meet:mg Date HEARING: (iiS) RIGHTS: YES NO NO --------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- REFERRALS: ~ city Attorney Parks Dept. School District ~ city Engineer Bldg Inspector Rocky Mtn NatGas ~ Housing Dir. Fire Marshal CDOT ~ Aspen Water Holy Cross Clean Air Board City Electric Mtn. Bell Open Space Board Envir.Hlth. ACSD Other Zoning Energy Center Other DATE REFERRED: :Ii INITIALS: ((1 DUE: =============================================F.===============~~F FINAL ROUTING: DATE ROUTED: 11-17 b INITIAL: ~ city Atty ~ city Engineer ___Zoning ___Env. Health ~ Housing ___ Open Space Other: FILE STATUS AND LOCATION: .~ / r1 MEMORANDUM ~- 1r;!o d ~ ~ FROM: Mayor and city council Amy Margerum, city Manager Diane Moore, City Planning Directo~ Kim Johnson, Planner - TO: THRU: THRU: DATE: May 10, 1993 RE: Aspen Arts and Recreation Center (f.k.a. Red Brick School) Rezoning from R-6 Medium Density Residential to Public (PUB), Final (Consolidated) PUD Development Plan, and GMQSExelnption for Essential Public Facilities - Second Reading of Ordinance 22, Series 1993 ~---~~---~---~~~---~-~-~-----------------~~----------~------- --------------------~----------------------~------------------ . '.' . . .- . -. '. ..-.. . .'... ..-. -.-.... . ... -. .- .' - ..-. . -. -'. -. ....-. SUMMARY: The Planning Commission recommends approval of rezoning the former school site fro:mR-6 to I>u!.?lic (PUB). This request is being made to allow the rehabilitation . of the building into a public arts and recreation facility. Any development in a Public zone requires PUD (Planned Unit Development) review to establish the site plan I dimensional requirements. The Planning staff and. commission support a consolidated (two-step) pUD Plan adoption for this project. In addition, the commission recommends approval of GMQS Exemption of this proposal as an Essential Public Facility. The rezoning, PUD Plan and GMQS Exemption package is accompanied by a code amendment for the Public (PUB) :(lone which is being considered under a separate Council memo and ordinance. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: First reading was approved by Council on April 26, 1993 by a 5-0 vote. At first reading, Mayor Bennett offered for discussion the possibility that a new type of public zone district cou~d be formulated specifically for arts and recreation type lises. Staff stated that this action would add yet another zone to the City'S lengthy list of zone districts and would be very limited in its use. Council agreed with staff that this suggestion would not be a desirable alternative to the proposed amendment for the existing Public zone. . On February 22, 1993, city Council reviewed the program package and building plan recommendations from the citizens' advisory group which was appointed in late 1992. Council decided to send out architectural Requests.for Proposals for all three building options presented by the advisory group. BACKGROUND: The City wishes to lease office and studio space to arts and cultural related non-profit groups and operate recreational activities in the eastern portion of the former school building including the gymnasium. In 5% of the structure, studio ." n n space may be rented to "for-profit" working artists, either as individual or shared studio space. This arts/recreation concept requires an amendment the Official Zone District map from R-6 to Public (PUB) and to add "arts, cultural and recreational activities, buildings and uses" to the Public zone permitted use list. As required by the Public zone, the Applicant must receive approval of a site plan pursuant to the Planned unit Development (PUD) review process. The Applicant requests, and the Planning Director has agreed, to process this application as a two-step review (P&Z and Council), finding that a full four step review would be redundant and would serve no public benefit. Special Review for parking is required for uses in a Public zone. The Commission approved the parking plan at its April 13, 1993 meeting. Also being requested is GMQS Exemption as an essential public facility for the building's revised use. ' Please refer to the attached application package from Davis Horn, Inc., Exhibit "A". STAFF DISCUSSION: The current zoning of the parcel is R-6 Medium Density Residential. Concurrently requested via a separate memo and ordinance is a text amendment t() . adg.. "A.J:"ts, cultural and recreational activities, buildings and uses" to the Public zone district. Referral Comments: complete memos are attached as Exhibit "B". Summaries are follows: City Engineer Chuck Roth stated that the proposed rezoning and arts/recreational use will have improved impacts on traffic generation and road safety. The proposed parking should exceed minimum requirements for similar office uses. Housing Office Director Tom Baker commented that the employee generation for the proposed uses will not exceed the employment figures for the previous school use. Rezoning From R-6 Medium Density Residential to Public (PUB): The Planning Office and the Planning and Zoning commission believe that rezoning the former school site is the best mechanism to allow the proposed arts/recreation uses. The Aspen Area Community Plan specifically recommended rezoning the parcel to Public. The other option would be to amend the R-6 zone with an SPA overlay on the parcel and approve a use variation. Neiqhborhood Input: The Planning commission was presented with four letters from three neighbors who oppose the rezoning to Public. Please refer to Exhibit "C". The letters and personal presentations at the April 13 public hearing voice concern that the rezoning to Public will allow other uses of the property which are not compatible with the residential neighborhood, ie. public transportation stop; terminal building, public parking areas, and 2 . n n government offices. An alternative offered by Mr. Segall is to retain the R-6 zone and create a new conditional use in the zone district for arts and recreation use. Another concern is that the former school parcel could be used as a site for affordable housing. On April 27, Mr. Bill Light phoned staff to reiterate his objection to the rezoning which he originally expressed in the letter sent prior to first reading. His principal concerns are increased traffic and noise. In response to the neighbor's concerns about other us.es being incorporated onto the site, staff wishes to emphasize that the site plan (approved via PUD dimensional requirement review) cannot change without appropriate City review. Any other major changes to the proposed arts/recreation related uses will represent a change to the application and wi~l require additional community consideration. Affordable Housing would likely be easier to accomplish if the site retained its R-6 zoning and was not rezoned to Public (PUB). Additionally, staff believes that it would be inappropriate to amend the R-6 zone to include a conditional use for arts, cultural and recreational activities a~ t~is. type of use is not consistent with the medium density residential uses of the R-6 zone district. section 24-7-1102 of the Municipal Code establishes the review criteria for a rezoning. These criteria and staff comment are attached as Exhibit "D'~, In summary, staff and the Planning and Zoning commission find that the criteria have been met by the proposal, and recommend approval of the rezoning to Public (PUB). Final PUD (Planned unit Development) Plan: The proposed rezoning to Public (PUB) requires that the dimensional requirements of a development be set by the adoption ofa conceptual development plan and final development plan pursuant to Article 7, Division 9, Planned unit Development. Consolidation of Conceptual and Final reviews is allowed if the Planning Director determines that "the full four step review would be redundant and not serve any public purpose" . If, during review, Council believes that a consolidated two step review is not adequate, the full four step process must take place. The Planning Commission and staff believe that since the structure/site plan is not changing as a result of this application, four step review is excessive and will serve no useful public purpose. The proposed dimensional requirements shall be those of the underlying zone district. Because of the surrounding residential uses and proposed arts/office/recreational use, the following dimensional requirements are a combination of those required in both the R-6 and the Office zone districts. The existing structure's footprint is used to establish the proposed setbacks: 3 r'\ , r1 a. Minimum distance between buildings - 10' b. Maximum height (including viewplanes) - 25' c. Minimum front yard - 10' (except 4' at southeast entry) d. Minimum rear yard - 15' e. Minimum side yard - 5' f. Minimum lot width - 60' g. Minimum lot area - 6,000 square feet h. Trash access area - see provided survey I. External and internal floor area ratio - .75:1 j. Minimum percent open space - no requirement staff believes that these dimensions are appropriate for this structure and future development. If other dimensions are needed to accommodate future growth, additional PUD review is required. GMQS Exemption for Esselltial Public Facilities: . !,ursuant to section 8-104 C.l.b. the Council may exempt construction of essential public facilities. The cOmmiss;on reviewed the project and recommends approval of GMQS Exemption to Council. section 24- 8-104.C.l.b. reads: (i) Except for housing, development shall be considered an essential public facility if it serves an .essential public purpose, provides facilities in response to the demands of growth, is not itself a growth generator, is available for use by the general public, and serves the needs of the ci ty . It shall also be taken into consideration whether the development is not-for-profit venture. .This exemption shall not be applied to commercial or lodge development. (E) A development application shall demonstrate that the impacts of the essential public facility will be mitigated, included those associated with the generation of additional employees, the demand for parking, road and transit services, the need for basic services including but not limited to water, sewage, drainage, fire and police protection, and solid waste disposal. It shall also be demonstrated th~t.the proposed development has negligible adverse impacts on the city's air, water, land, and energy resources, and is visually compatible with the surrounding areas. (iii) Notwithstanding the criteria as set forth in paragraphs (i) and (ii) above, the city council may determine upon application that development associated with a nonprofit entity qualifies as an essential public facility and may exempt such development from GMQS and from some or all such mitigation requirements as it deems appropriate and warranted. Response: The Planning Office acknowledges that the structure 4 o n .~-!..- .,~ ,>. "'~'. proposed as the Arts and Recreation Center is not new construction, but is in effect a new use or development on the site. For this reason, staff believes that GMQS Exemption as an essential public facility is warranted so that any increased impacts may be addressed. Official recognition that the structure and its non- ,profit uses qualify as essential to the community will solidify the Center's important role in the community. The Center complies with paragraph (i) above in that it will serve the pUblic in many ways, from active recreation to art support and education; offers space to recreation and arts users who must accommodate their increased growth based on community growth; is not a growth generator itseif (the proposed occupants are currently scattered elsewhere throughout the city); is available to the public as any other pUblic facility; and serves the citizens and guests of Aspen. Aspen's long-standing reputation as an arts and recreation foclis will be enhanced by the adaptive re-use of this building. The groups who will occupy the building must qualify as bona fide nonprofit entities except for those artists occupying the 5% of the building set aside for working "fine artists". The City's bond requirements specify that no less than 95% of the structure may be occupied by non"'profit users to retain the bond's status. The artist studio spaces are intended for educational use where visitors may observe working artists and works in progress. The Center also meets the requirements of paragraph (ii) regarding impacts to the vicinity and larger community. Employee generation will be less for the proposed uses (approximately 21-28) than the previous school use (25-30). According to the Housing Office's employee generation guidelines for "utilities / quasi-governmental" rate, 1.5 to 2.5 persons per 1,000 s.f. are generated. The belief of the Housing Office is that the non-profit offices proposed for this building will have limited hours of business and run on "shoestring" staff, thus employee generation will be less than for typical office users. According to Rousing Director Tom Baker, the recreational uses will generate less than one full time equivalent employee (FTE). The internal layout of the structure is shown in Attachment 2 of the application information. The net leasable area of the post- 1941 portion of the school (the eastern half of the building) is approximately 14,093 s.f. At the quasi-governmental generation of 1. 5 persons per 1,000 s. f., ,the employee generation would be 21 persons. 'If the entire building is renovated, the same number of users will spread out to occupy more space rather than increase the number of tenants. The studio space cannot exceed 5% of the building because of limitations set by the financial bonding requirements. This represents approximately 1,000 s.f. based on the 21,800 s.f. post- 5 n {j - "" ^ , j '~"""l- 1941 building, or 1,750 s.f. of the entire 35,000 s.f. building. The studio spaces will probably be 200-300 s.f. each, according to information from Julia Marshall, who has worked on the lease agreements for the arts representatives. Parking has been reviewed by the planning commission and Special Review was approved as being a neutral impact. utility needs will probably decrease from the previous school use. No negative environmental impacts will occur, nor will visual incompatibility. The City should find that the nonprofit use of this structure as an arts and recreation center qualifies as essential public facility per paragraph (iii). After its 4-3 vote to approve the GMQS Exemption, the Commission passed a motion recommending that the city act in accordance with the intentions of housing production plans/quotas and consider creating housing opportunities to help mitigate housing made necessary by the change in use of the building from educational to arts/recreational use. This is due to the deficit created by the School District when it did not provide liousing for its new elementary school. ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning commission recommends approval of the rezoning request by a vote of 7-0 at a public hearing on April 13, 1993. Minutes of this meeting are attached as Exhibit "E". The GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility was approved by a 4-3 vote. The Commission also voted 7-0 to approve Special Review for Parking in a Public (PUB) zone via the proposed Final PUD Development Plan with conditions requiring landscaping, striping, signage, and drop- off parking along East Hallam st., After an adjunct discussion on affordable housing, the Commission voted 4-2 to forward a recommendation 'that council "consider creating housing opportunities to help mitigate housing required or made necessary directly or indirectly by the change in use from educational to arts and recreational even though both are within the public use" ALTERNATIVES: The land area could remain zoned as R-6 Medium Density Residential with an SPA (Specially Planned Area) overlay map amendment and use variation 'to allow "arts, cultural and recreational activities, buildings and uses". PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to adopt Ordinance 22, Series 1993 at second reading, approving with conditions the rezoning of the former Red Brick School site from R-6 Medium Density Residential to Public (PUB), the Final PUD Development Plan, and a GMQS 6 r) n ,/"'" " ,':::J(" ....-" y:"l ""~ ""It Exemption ~ Essential Public Facilities." C~TY MANAGER COMMENTS: Attachments: Ordinance 22, Series 1993 Exhibits "A" - Application Information "B"- Referral Memos "c" - Letters from citizens "D" - Rezoning Review Standard,s "E" - P&Z minutes of April 13, 1993 "F" - Affidavit of Public Notice Mailing ~{i~ lte- ~~ 7 MESSAGE DISPLAY TOCris Caruso BC Kim Johnson CC George Robinson From: Kim Johnson Postmark: Dec 29,93 10:35 AM Subject: Red Brick landscaping plan -------------------------------------------------~---------------------------- Message: I closed out this Planning file and got the recorded PUD Statement to keep therein and noticed that the Landscape Plan (referenced as Exhibit liD" in the Statement) was not included in the document. I have a CEO from August refencing this plan and its inclusion in the PUD Statement. Please follow up on how this should be attached - I don't know how to do it since the County Clerk already has numbered the pages. Also, please get me a copy of the land. plan for the Planning file. Thanks! -------========x========------- MESSAGE DISPLAY TO BC George Robinson Kim Johnson CC cris Caruso From: Kim Johnson Postmark: Aug 31,93 3:15 PM Status: Previously read Subject: Red Brick Landscaping Message: George, I like the lilac buffer you are proposing between the parking area and the trail. Cris, I believe that the landscaping plan is a specific attachment to the PUD Agreement that we discussed last week - please double check this. The landscape plan must be recorded with the final documents, so that means either 8xll as an attachment or a mylar with the other full size drawings. I'm bringing the blueline and cost breakdown to you cris so you can finish up on the details for recordation. Sounds like you guys are almost there. -------========x========------- MESSAGE DISPLAY TO CC -George Robinson Bill Efting CC BC cris Caruso Kim Johnson From: Kim Johnson Postmark: Jul 28,93 3:51 PM Status: Previously read Subject: Red Brick landscaping ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Message: I spoke w/ Mr. Efting today about a landscaping plan for this site as required by the PUD approval. Bill said that he'd consult y'all to get a simple 8xll" sketch showing plantings along the rear between the parking area and the trail to Clarks. I wanted to let you know that this was coming to you for some timely attention, and also that I'm aware of a sewer line back in that vicinity which will likely limit certain tree plantings. I have a plat showing line if you need to see it. I recommend that someone chat to ACSD to find out any restraints they might have. Call if you have questions - x5100. -------========x========------- DavisHorn~c;. PLANNING' APPRAISING' REAL ESTATE CONSUI11NG Amy Margerum City Manager 130 S. Galena street Aspen, CO. 81611 rw-@,wf1ilJ?"'5) .... ti.~ ,f!1il.rJ '~jI,llq 1;., ~ ~'t~"""" . "..' '-" J?!U' -tit. ~ l ._~' &;' I ie'; .'", ",. .J . ,.], " J' ,r."'s """"';..., t.. 1:::J:;J "'-Itf 'y JL.. ....-.;, ~~\la;:; t'.~ OFFICE RE: Red Brick: PUD Agreement, PUD Plan and Landscaping Plan Dear Amy: As we discussed previously, Davis Horn Inc. is at the end of the budget for the Red Brick Rezoning and PUD plan. I completed a draft of the PUD agreement as we agreed and delivered it to Kim Johnson about two weeks ago. Kim has reviewed it and sent it on to Jed early this week so he could review and finalize the document. I am attaching a copy of the Rezoning Map and PUD Plan which incorporate the conditions of approval and the changes requested by the Planning Office. ~im will also be given a copy of these today. When Jed has finalized the PUD agreement and the Map and Plan are okayed by Planning Office and the attorney, I will deliver the originals to the Planning Office for recording. There is a condition of approval regarding the landscape plan which essentially involves screening the parking to the rear of the building from the trail and the street. Kim is coordinating with the Parks Department and Bill Efting to make sure this condition is met. -, J '--) j Thank you for the opportunity to work on this project with you. Please let me know if we can be of further service. Call if you have any questions or need further information. I will follow up to make sure the originals are recorded and to make sure the appropriate people have final, signed copies. Sincerely, DAVIS HORN, INCORPORATED ~Q~ ALICE DAVIS CC: Jed Caswell Kim Johnson AUCE DAVIS, SRA \ GLENN HORN, A1CP 2lS SOUTH MONARCH . SUITE 104. ASPI'N, =LORADO &1611 . 303~7 . FAX: 303/925-5180 II I / / / ./ ~ :0 J15~ A "h ~ ";'pP~ r') .~ ..J:" , - -- c~-b,~ *,362483 10/27/9:3 09:35 Pee $70. (l() BI< 728 F'G 271 Silvia Davis~ Pi'J:.kin Cnty CleF-!'::? Doc $~(~"~~~._".-.______./ STATEMENT OF PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE RED BRICK SCHOOL 110 EAST HALLAM STREET LOTS A THROUGH I, L THROUGH S, BLOCK 64 AND LOTS E, F, G AND PART OF LOTS A, B, AND C BLOCK 71, CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN THIS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STATEMENT (hereinafter "state- ment") is made and declared by the city of Aspen, Colorado, a municipal corporation and home rule charter city (hereinafter referred to as the "City"), as the owner of that property described above and commonly referred to as the Red Brick School, on the date as indicated below. WIT N E SSE T H WHEREAS, the city has prepared for execution and recording a Final Planned Unit Development Plan (hereinafter referred to as the "Plan") pertaining to the redevelopment of the Red Brick Elementary School into the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center (hereinafter collectively known as the "Project") on real property owned by the c~ty which is more 'particularly described on Exhibit "A", as attached and incorporated herein. A reduced copy of the Plan is attached as Exhibit "B" and is incorporated herein; and WHEREAS, the Project received approvals pursuant to the following sections in the Aspen Municipal Code: PUD approval for the dimensional requirements of the Project as' required by the PUB - Public zone district; Special Review for parking; rezoning from R-6 residential to PUB - Public Zone District and GMQS exemption for an Essential Public Facility; and WHEREAS, the City has imposed upon itself conditions and requirements in connection with the approvals described above, such conditions and requirements being necessary to protect, promote and enhance the public health, safety and welfare. Such conditions are set forth in Ordinance No. 22 (Series of 1993), attached as Exhibit "C" and incorporated herein; and WHEREAS, the dimensional requirements of the Project have been established through the PUD process; and WHEREAS, under section 7-904 of Chapter 24 of ,the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen the City has prepared this Statement setting forth and binding the city to those conditions of approval under which the Project was approved; and WHEREAS, this statement, the Plan and Ordinance No. 22 (Series of 1993), shall constitute the final development plan and develop- r) rI -.-" ,J -'''y .1("Ir')''''/C:;~~ C,c:}~'":~s::~, t:(~C $70..ClO Bl< 728 F'E:S 272 #36248~~~ ~. ...:.. ( "'~\ _, ~ ~""M 1-' _. _ M ~- Silvie.":1. D~'~i~.5, F'itkir, Cnty Cler-k, Doc $~5~~_~_ ment regulations for the Project pursuant to Section 7-906 of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants contained herein and the execution and acqeptance of the Plan for recorda- tion, it is declared as follows: 1. Dimensional Requirements. The Project site is zoned PUB - Public. According to Section 5-220 (D) of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code, dimensional requirements in the PUB _ Public Zone are established by the adoption of a PUD plan. Such adopted dimensional requirements for the Project are set forth as follows: d. e. f. g. h. i. j. a. b. c. Minimum distance between buildings: 10 feet Maximum height (includi.ng-viewpl-anes-)-:--..2..5,ft. :~~~~rm front yard: (10 feet (except.. 4 ft. M. . d 5 f""'""=''' ..--=~ ~n~mum rear yar : 1 ee-~"~oC:;"'z;,,..=2'.,,,,',,~~--- Minimum side yard: 5 feet Minimum lot width: 60 feet Minimum lot area: 6,000 square feet Trash access area: See attached survey Internal floor area ratio: 0.75:1 Minimum percent open space: no requirement at 2. parking. Off-street Parking Requirements for the PUB _ Public Zone are established through the Special Review provisions in Article 7, Division 4 of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code. The parking established for the Project is as follows: a. 35 off-street spaces to the northwest section of the property as designated on the Plan; b. the on-street parking to the south of the property adjacent to the Project along East Hallam Street will be signed for short-term for drop-offs and pick-ups. c. Employee Auto Disincentives/Traffic Mitigation Plan. Through the leasing of space in the Aspen Arts & Recreation Center an auto disincentive program to discourage employees of the building from using the automobile and to reduce parking demand and congestion in the immediate neighborhood will be initiated and carried out. ;: 2 / f) \ '1 () ( ,,", '; :!-1:3624f33 1.0/:;r?/9~3 09::2~5 Rec $'?O.OO Bi< 728 PG 273 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $~OO d. The auto disincentive program/traffic mitigation plan shall be reviewed by the Parking and Transpor- tation office and City Council after the first and third years of operation of the Project. 3. The Plat. Reduced size copies of the following docu- ments, representing plans that have been approved as part of this PUD statement, are attached as the following Exhibits: a. Legal Description, Exhibit "A"; b. Reduced copy of the PUD Plan, and Rezoning Map, Exhibit "B"; c. Ordinance No. 22 (Series of 1993), Exhibit "C"; and d. Final Landscape Plan, Exhibit "D". 4. Landscaping Plan. The City agrees to landscape the Project in accordance with the Final Landscape Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "D", which plan shows the extent and location of plants to be installed to buffer the visual impacts of the parking. 5. Applicable Law. This statement shall be subject to and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Colorado and the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado. 6. Severability. If any of the provisions of this statement are determined to be invalid, it shall not effect the remaining provisions hereof. 7. Binding Effect. The provisions of this statement shall run with and constitute a burden on the land on which the Project is located and shall be binding on and enure to the benefit of th~ city, its successors and assigns. 8. Recording. This statement shall be recorded in the records of the pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. 9. Effective Date. This Statement shall be effective from the latest date of signature as illustrated below. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City has executed this statement on the day and year indicated. 3 t""'\ t, 1 *!::3621H3~5 10/:;i~7 19:) 09:: ~35 F~ec ~.7'O. 00 B~::: 728' P'(~" '274- Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $.00 CITY OF ASPEN, a municipal corporation (LL I~~ John ~ennett, Mayor /0/" "1/'1'3 , Dat'e ATTEST: Jik City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM ~ vV) ,G~-lL-, ., /1~\0\'::S Edward M. Caswall, City Attorney Date 4 ,~ EXHIBIT "A" 'W':3624K, 10/27'/93 09: 35 Rec: $70.00 B!< 7'2tl PG 275 . F" r1 r:r1't\j Cl er' k ~ Doc $. u 00 Silvi~\ D.:..".V1S~ 'i\7.l<i - 1 , .-------_..-~~-_.... .,._-~-- LEGAL DESCRIPTION LOTS A THROUGH I AND LOTS K THROUGH S. TOGETHER WITH AND INCLUDING A CERTAIN STRIP OF LAND AS AN ALLEY EXTENDING THROUGH OR BETWEEN' SAID LOTS. BLOCK 6-4. CITY AND TOWNsiTE OF ASPEN LOTS E. F.,G AND FRACTIONAL LOTS A. B. AND C. BLOCK 71. CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN TOGETHER WITH THE VACATED PORTIONS OF~THASPEN STREET AND THE: ALLEY OF BLOCK 71 LYING ADJACENT TO 'rHE.ABOYE DESCRIBED PARCELS OF LAND. CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN COUNTY OF PITKIN. StATE OF COLORADO AREA. 93.322 SO.FT. MORE OR LESS 4 i"~'~ ' L ,j I' , !!i ;;\ II~ 1~1 I; ~ -I' 'I!! :,if;" -..,c..... "."~ , <>! '" .... Z I '" w U ~ . . ~'I o . ':"-1 g r- . ~..-... ~ ~~:.~ ~ t5:~ @ t{~ .~ q . - 2:, ~ ~ <<: 0. " .h, ~ :J); ci ,; >: " <<: ~ . 2: <L_ 1.. J) '" ~ :1 ;J ii 13 jl IS ;1 ~.. ,2 I; I'll IS i!d : f ~ ~, : j iH I!ln . ..,1, ~ :! ~! ' i; ... .!f ;h hs ~ i~~ ! ~ h:' d ~ ~l! i ~ ~~ 'Ii i 9l ", 0" I N ~., ~ ~h, <( i~ l~ ~ ;!~ I 2: .~I: ::i ~ ~::: ~ i ~~n , ~ ~ :'i 'i ..J ~; ~ gt ~ ;~'[ . .. 5 ~i! ~ ~~21 - ,- ffi ;!~ -'. I ~ !~; 3 '-' ! ~ i <:1'" '" ~ ::; "- " " ! ;, i ~ " ~ f ~ I A... , " <;; i;J "- ," ;;f , . I i_ , , , , ; ~. s I .' 1 ~ i ~I ~ z::: ~ II < - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! !I ~ 31 . ! ~~;~ l;a~. ~~~u.. _:;~. ~'~~- ;:1 j, ,;~!j i . .....~"-Giln ",,' !m- . ..,elli ."'j';_ ~ is .=. !~El lj-:: ,,<., ,M J 8 i ~ 2~ ~~I ~~;i~ i,~,; ;',; "~f ;i; ~,~ l; I ,!l "I :~;i; I"' l', ,\. '.;,;.!i.:. ! 8 ~~!la ;I~!i .' 'l~' '~!'<CI)-'" i ~! ii~ Iii!. . l' "'t.~. ."';\ :or; I ~\ ,~~ !dq I r~':!l ~ ; ~z ~i; ;!i~! I: ~ il i ~ E " .., ';;e. I " . : :!:lO i~: ~):!!: ~ ! i I : 1~ 1!~ !~1~~ ; ; t. -""....- ..~ I i' - . ; i ~ i , . i , , " z < t..J j-I' ~ !ll ....; (..j ~ o ,I !, " !t 1-" < " " l,fl t..) ~,.l "- ij ...0 1-" !j1 r. ~ " ;-", ::0 "" ~ (.,j n 01 ;:1-:.0 -< m fl [) l-' -!:& m -..I :; I' 1\ III ", III 'I' Iii " 11' ~B W .'1 II, I) i'J -,J _' 0", ..,,"~ ':;":'~?f.';;,;!gJ,~~w.~ . """:,'J:'''' .~ . ,~".. ~. ..,.,. I.,. "'," Ii '~.....~ 'Af' ~ o ~ -.j I -.j '<: I -.-- '>:i f!.... '. .- J ~~;. . mi. "" w I~ ,j.! flU 0 -' :i::i:i fJ = 11!!!!i!.ii <0 ~ w ii1ii!llfb 11_ ~ !'I' => ..lll';1 t 'i , . c HiIllbll. WI i z <0 -' ~..;....";"'oI':...'; , ~ J~ ~ ------- - z I :; J33/iJS lJ:Js Ilf~ EXHIBIT "B" f'"1 *t3b248:::-5 10/ 27' /9'~'09:: 3~) l~E'C $"('0. OOBi< Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk~ Doc 728 PF'177 , &xhlkllD i( ~,.oo ( , ORDINANCE NO.22 (SERIES OF 1993) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING REZONING FROM R-6 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO PUBLIC (PUB), GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM EXEMPTION FOR ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES, AND APPROVAL OF A FINAL PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT) DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE ASPEN ARTS AND RECREATIONAL CENTER (F.K.A. THE RED BRICK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL) LOCATED AT 110 E. HALLAM (LOTS A-I AND K-S, INCLUDING THE ALLEY IN BLOCK 64, AND LOTS E,F,G AND PART OF LOTS A,B AND C, BLOCK 71), IN THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO,. WHEREAS, on January 14, 1993, the city of Aspen purchased the former Red Brick Elementary school for'the purpose of creating a community-oriented arts and recreation facility; and WHEREAS ,the city Council appointed a citizen I s advisory group known as the Red Brick Committee to recommend appropriate uses and ( development scenarios for the struct~~e; and WHEREAS, the City intends to lease portions of the building for non-profit arts related organizations for offices and studio spaces, for-prOfit studio spaces, and for use by the city Recreation 'Department for office space and the gymnasium; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan established a goal to rezone the former school site to Public; and WHEREAS, the city of Aspen (Applicant) submi tted an application (the "Plan") to the Planning Office for rezoning of the former school site from R-6 (medium Density Residential) to Public (PUB), GMQS Exemption for Essential pUblic Facilities, Special Review for Parking, and Final (Consolidated) PUD review, in conjunction with a code amendment to the Public (PUB) zone district to allow "arts, cultural and recreational activities, buildings and uses"; and 1 n 'A /- ':/, 1'-"-'48'~ lor'7/o:,\ 09':'\5 F(ee: $70.00 BI< 728 F'~) 278 :1:...'(::'.::' ... 'MO M ..~. ' '-. ~ N MO ~... M .... Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, uoe $.Uu ~_._-~_.__._._.,,---' ".---...---,.----..-- ( WHEREAS, the Planning Office received referral comments from the city Engineer, Housing Office, and Water Department; and WHEREAS, upon review of the application, referral comments, and the applicable code standards, the Planning Director forwarded a recommendation for approval of the Plan with conditions to the Planning and zoning commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning and zoning commission reviewed the development proposal in accordance with those procedures set forth at section 24-6-205 (A) (5) (b) of the Municipal Code and did conduct a public hearing thereon on April 13, 1993; and WHEREAS, upon review and consideration of the plan, agency and public comment thereon, and those applicable standards as contained in Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code, to wit, Division 9 of Article i \ 7 (Planned unit Development), Division 4 of Article 7 (Special Review), Division 11 of Article 7 (zoning Map and Text Amendment), section 8-104 (C) (1) (b) of Article 8 (Growth Management Quota system Exemptions by City Council for Essential Public Facilities) , the Planning and Zoning commission has recommended final approval of the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center subject to conditions, to the City council; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning commission further granted Special Review approval for parking in a Public (PUB) zone district; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the Plan under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered those \. 2 1"1 f""' i*3624E33 1.0/27/9~3 09~35" _.~c:: $70..00 BI< 728 F'G 279 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $~OO ( recommendations and approvals as granted by the Planning and Zoning commission, and has taken and considered public comment at pUblic hearing; and WHEREAS, the city council finds that the Plan meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the Plan, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the City council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows: section 1: Pursuant to section 24-7-903 B.4. of the Municipal Code, and subject to those conditions of approval as specified ( \ hereinafter, the City council finds as follows in regard to the Plan's planned unit development dimensional requirements component: 1. The Developer's final plan submission is complete and sufficient to afford review and evaluation for approval. 2. The Plan is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. 3. The Plan is consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. ' 4. The Plan will not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. 5. The Plan approval is being granted only to the extent to which GMQS exemptions are obtained by the applicant. section 2: Pursuant to the findings set forth in section 1 above, the City council grants consolidated Final PUD development plan approval for the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center subject to the following conditions: 3 ", ( '-, ~,Q' /' \ i \, r1 1~"'\6"AO:') l' CJ/"-"9"'" )9 - r'J ";.":' "::'~:'w,~, . ..::. (' I <) (. : 3~ h,,,,,<:: $70 ~()O BK 728 F'G 280 olIvIa Davls, Pitkin Cnty Clerk~ Doc $uOO 1. Prior to issuance of the certificate of Occupancy the 35 on-site parking spaces shall be striped and signed for use by users of the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center. 2. Prior to or within 6 months of the issuance of the certificate of occupancy, a landscaped buffer shall be ,~ installed between the parking area, and the trail on the north side of the subject property. 3. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, a drop-off parking area shall be dedicated in front of the building along East Hallam street pursuant to recommendations of the Parking and Transportation Director. 4. Any improvement to of-way must be Department. the parking in the Garmisch st. right- coordinated with the Engineering 5. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, an easement must be established for a 14' wide trail, electric switchgear, and other utility or pedestal needs. 6. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of occupancy the two water service lines to the building must be properly metered. 7. The applicants shall agree to join any future improvement districts which may be, formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in the public right-of-way. 8. The actual dimensions shall be the dimensional requirements of this PUD development plan: a. Minimum distance between buildings - 10' b. Maximum height (including viewplanes) - 25' c. Minimum front yard - 10' '(except 4' at southeast e~tD0- -- d. Mlnlmum rear yard - 15' e. Minimum side yard - 5' f. Minimum lot width - 60' g. Minimum lot area - 6,000 square feet h. Trash access area - see provided survey i. External and internal floor area ratio - .75:1 j. Minimum percent open space - no requirement 9. The Final PUD Development Plan and PUD Agreement shall be recorded in the office of the pitkin county Clerk and Recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the documents within a period of one hundred and eighty (180) days following approval by the City Council shall render the approvals invalid, unless reconsideration and approval of both the Commission and City Council is 4 ( 10. 11. section 3: ~8~ 1 ( I~-'I ',", . 9 ""~ C', ' $7 ,.1""\, pv 728 F,e_", 281 :!:!:3(':w .. "_, ,,) ..:~ ( '7 '.~' () ~ ...~;;;; l,ec: ~ j . -. h'r~. )", Silvia Davis~ Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $.00 ...--- obtained before their acceptance and recording. The city shall require that annual tenant leases and/or sub-leases include stipluations for auto-disincentives and measures to reduce parking demand an~ congestion in the immediate neighborhood. The traffic mitigation portion of the PUD plan shall be reviewed by city council after the first and third years of operation. Pursuant to section 24-8-,104 C. 1. b. of the Municipal Code, the city Council finds as follows in regard to the Applicant's request for Growth Management Quota System development exemption for essential public facilities: 1. , i Arts and recreation have historically provided cultural enrichment to the citizens of the city of Aspen without which the city would not have attained its present character and standing in the national and international community. The city's proposal for use of the former school building as a center for non-profit arts related studios and offices, limited area for for-profit studios, and recreation offices and activities will enhance the art and recreation experiences for the citizens of the city of Aspen and the general public. 2. The use of ,the building for for-profit artist studio space is limited to 5% of the structure pursuant to the financial bonding requirements for the building. Furthermore, the artist studio,space is intended to be educationally oriented to allow citizens of Aspen and the general public the opportunity to observe artists practicing their skills. Section 4: Pursuant to section 24-7-1102 of the Municipal Code, the city council finds as follows in regard to the zoning map amendment component of the Plan: i \ 1. The proposed zoning amendment as set forth in the Plan are not in conflict with the provisions of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code or the Aspen Area Community Plan. 2. The proposed zoning amendment is compatible with the surrounding zone districts and land uses. 3. The proposed zoning amendment will not adversely impact 5 ( ( ~ ,A ;[*3624.8:) 10/27 /93 09~ :.35 F~eL, 1;70.. 00 Bl< 728 PG 282 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $..00 traffic generation or road safety when taken into consideration with the other aspects of the Plan. 4. The proposed zoning amendment will promote the public interest and character of the city of Aspen. section 5 : Pursuant to section 24-7-1102 and 24-7-1103, and Division 2 of Article 5 of Chapter 24 of the Municipal code, and findings set forth in section 5 above, the city Council does grant the following amendment to the Official Zone District Map and does designate the following zone district for the development subject to the conditions as specified below: ~, 1. The Public (PUB) zone district shall be applied to Lots A-I and K-S, including the alley in Block 64, and Lots E,F,G and part of Lots A,B,and C in Block 71, in the city and Townsite of Aspen. Section 6: All material representations and commitments made by . the developer pursuant to the Plan approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning commission and or city council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions. section 7: The Official Zone District Map for the City of Aspen, Colorado, shall be and is hereby amended to reflect the rezoning action as set forth in section 6 above and such amendment shall be promptly entered on the Official Map in accordance with Section 24-5-103 B. of the Municipal Code. section 8: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and ( shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now '. 6 ("';, () #36248~~~ 10/27'/9~.:. 09: :35 r(ec:: %:.70.. 00 B~::: 728 F"L., 283 Silvia Davis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, Doc $"00 ( pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. section 9: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. section 10: The city Clerk shall cause notice of this Ordinance to be published in a newspaper of general circulations within the ( city of Aspen no later than fourteen (14) days following final adoption hereof. Such notice shall be given in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following- described property: The property shall be described in the notice and appendeq to said notice shall be the ordinance granting such approval. section 11: That the city Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. section 12: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the /c? day of ~, 1993 at 5:00 in the City Council Chambers, Aspen city " Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a \ 7 l'-\ . ~~ F' cl'-"', "'('J^,- ~*::)62"'lf...<10/27/93 o9:.~;""J '\ec ,,!~{'... ~ ~ ..... ,,; Silvia"bavis, Pitkin Cnty Clerk, ~ut 728 PG 284 $.00 ----" ( public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of \ (' \ general circulation within the city of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the city Council ~ 1993. of the City of Aspen on the J!L(p day of (jL I~- John Bennett, Mayor Kathryn . Koch, city Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this /~~day of 7717 ' 1993. ~ '()F.--'::;;bo' John ennett, Mayor Atte,st: ~"1'L).>d'4~ Kathryn ~ Koch, city Clerk 8 " 1""\ i ~ MESSAGE DISPLAY TO BC cris Caruso Kim Johnson cc George Robinson From: Kim Johnson Postmark: Dec 29,93 10:35 AM Subject: Red Brick landscaping plan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Message: I closed out this Planning file and got the recorded PUD Statement to keep therein and noticed that the Landscape Plan (referenced as Exhibit "D" in the statement) was not included in the document. I have a CEO from August refencing this plan and its inclusion in the PUD Statement. Please follow up on how this should be attached - I don't know how to do it since the County Clerk already has numbered the pages. Also, please get me a copy of the land. plan for the Planning file. Thanks! ---~---========x========------- -.- - " r-, f) ~,,'.m';'" MESSAGE DISPLAY TO Be George Robinson Kim Johnson cc cris Caruso From: Kim Johnson Postmark: Aug 31;93 3:15 PM Status: Previously read Subject: Red Brick Landscaping ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Message: George, I like the lilac buffer you are proposing between the parking area and the trail. Cris, I believe that the landscaping plan is a specific attachment to the PUD Agreement that we discussed last week - please double check this. The landscape plan must be recorded with the final documents, so that means either 8xll as an attachment or a mylar with the other full size drawings. I'm bringing the blueline and cost breakdown to you Cris so you can finish up on the details for recordation. Sounds like you guys are almost there. -------========x========------- I I j t"""l f""'1 \.] MESSAGE DISPLAY TO CC 'George Robinson Bill Efting CC BC cris Caruso Kim Johnson From: Kim Johnson Postmark: Jul 28,93 3:51 PM Status: Previously read Subject: Red Brick landscaping ----------------------------._---------~----~-------~---------~---~----------- Message: I spoke w/ Mr. Efting today about a landscaping plan for this site as required by the PUD approval. Bill said that he'd consult y'all to get a simple 8xll" sketch showing plalltings along the rear between the parking area and the trail to Clarks. I wanted to let you know that this was coming to you for some timely attention, and also that I'm aware of a sewer line back in that vicinity which will likely limit certain tree plantings. I have a plat showing line if you need to see it. I recommend that someone chat to ACSD to find out any restraints they might have. Call if you have questions - x5100. -------========x========------- . r1 Davis Horn~c;. PlANNING. APPRAISING. REAL ESTATE CONSUIJING ~ , j Amy Margerum City Manager 130 S. Galena street Aspen, CO. 81611 r9)j@, ~i~lf J!f~,,~' :.~~ ~ JV JUL 2 1993 "-:..krv j:.:O OFFICE -<; Y'~ RE: ~'edgr:Ccj{':W1tl'D~~g;~~~;~ , PUD P ^ ~. ' ",""' , ii;':"~';-N'''i''''''"''~ L'"lrn~s'6aprn'g'-Plan Dear Amy: As we discussed previously, Davis Horn Inc. is at the end of the budget for the Red Brick Rezoning and PUD plan. I completed a draft of the PUD agreement as we agreed and delivered it to Kim Johnson about two weeks ago. Kim has reviewed it and sent it on to Jed early this week so he could review and finalize the document. ~~~% ~ Tltiii<im",;i:lttachJng ,a,copy'Of,.the"'ReZoning M<ipand P{JP,.R}ClI,l,~l:1ASll:L ~ incorporate the conditions of approval and the changes requested by the Planning Office. Kim will also be given a copy of these today. When Jed has finalized the PUD agreement and the Map and Plan are okayed by Planning Office and the attorney, I will deliver the originals to the Planning Office for recording. There is a condition of approval regarding the landscape plan Which! essentially involves screening the parking to the rear of the J building from the trail and the street. Kim is coordinating with the Parks Department and Bill Efting to make sure this condition is met. Thank you for the opportunity to work on this project with you. Please let me know if we can be of further service. Call if you have any questions or need further information. I will follow up to make sure the originals are recorded and to make sure the appropriate people have final, signed copies. sincerely, DAVIS HORN, INCORPORATED ~ QavWJ ALICE DAVIS CC: Jed Caswell Kim Johnson AUCE DAVIS, SRA \ GLENN HORN, A1CP 21S SOUTH MONARCH. SUITE 104. ASPEN. COLORADO 81611 .303f925.6587 . FAX: 3031925-5180 n (1 , ~ ';f> ...., :~' ':~ '!,:'-"J",,: ",' ~, ASPEN. PITKIN James Sbarbaro, M.D, 459 West 17th Pueblo, Co. 810p3 PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT June 1, 1993 RE:Red Srick School (Aspen Arts and Recreation Center) Dear Jim, I received your thoughtful letter ~nd wanted you to know that I appreciate your comments. I have forwarded ~opies to Assistant city Manager Bill Efting and Special project Manager Cris Caruso. From this point forward, these two gentlemen will be in charge of the actual design and construction for the arts and recreation facility. I have placed myself at their service as :Ear as suggestions for the landscaping, but up tQ now we have not met to formulate a plan. If I can at 920-5100; be of further assistance to you, please Thanks again for your valuable input.. contact me 130 SOUT':' GALENA STRim . ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 . PHONE 303.920;5090 . ~AX 303.920.5197 Prin!ed on 'eeyd<<l paper ~ } n n PUEBLO CARDIOLOGY ASSOCIATES, P.C. CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASES Iqbal S. Khan. M.D.. F.A.C.C. Christian Stjernholm. M.D.. F.A.C.C. Jack A. Boerner. M.D.. FAC.C. James A. Sbarbaro. M.D.. F.A.C.C. John M. Stachler. M.D.. F.A.C.C. Stephen D. MacKerrow. M.D. 459 West 17th 1925 E. Orman, Suite A640 Pueblo, CO B1oo3 Pueblo. CO 81004 (719) 544-3553 (719) 564-1544 May 25, 1993 Kim Johnson Department of Planning and Zoning 130 South Galena Street j Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Kim, Thanks so much for being such a great help to Bonnie and myself in our discussions regarding the red brick school house. Again I want to convey to you and to the city council that Bonnie and I hope to be constructive forces in the development of this property. We have been coming to Aspen since 1974, and owned a condominium and restaurant in Snowmass for five years in the 1980s. We are very familiar with the community and while our primary residence will continue to be in Pueblo, we spend 40-60 days in Aspen on a yearly basis. Ultimately we hope to retire there, So as you can see our desire to be an active and constructive member of the community is a real one. ' We think Aspen's greatest strength is in the balance between it's sports and recreation opportunities, it's restaurants and shops, it's cultural activities, and it's neighborhoods. We would not have bought a home in the west end if the area was not dear to us. We have no problem with the red brick school house becoming a community cultural resource, but it must do so in some harmony with its neighbors. The building in our opinion is an eye sore at present and we would hope that all of you in government plan to use the money allotted to the project not only to clean up the interior of the building, but to do some work on its exterior and surroundings. With some appropriate measures we think that the visual impact of the site can be mitigated, and hopefully with some sensible traffic planning that problem can be alleviated. Our home is on the corner of Francis and Garmisch, and gazing out at a thirty-five car parking lot obviously gives us some cause for concern. Also, as you know the cars will be very visible to people using the trail down to the post office area as well. Hopefully you will give some consideration to these visual impacts on the north and west face of the building. :,,:.'" Ill~'"'-~,~;~r::::.-! \ .J~ j L_ . c ., ("'"'-I , A " Kim Johnson Department of Planning and Zoning May 25, 1993 Page 2 We would like very much to work with you and the council in these matters but we really do not know how to access the system at this point. Please let us know how we can help. Sincerely, ,."", ,-'- C \,-,,""'~:::':::;, ., , JameSA':'s~arbaro, M.D., F.A.C.C. /bkb \,_j m c o as m c .- .c u. c .- en .- ... cu ... c cu Q l! as ~ Q .- ?- m -a... cu a: '+';~ii<:V', :~~",<:;\i;:'t'f;':;{t~;:':!,':~"'i~::.::': "~M, ,. ,~,'M' ".;1 :,) f:'",:,~"":~,,,,',,,,,^;,',.;\'r!,"',: ',;, -, '/". ~ "~J"':~] "...'/"~',,~'~o>"'l:':,~"-;g'~""":s"i:'i-"'~':~,'" ,.:~ 'g".;:;.. ... .. ;; 2;!;l" .r;-..::: ~~ "a<~.:,8 !l e.f!:l '" &1 . ~ Og'';:;.g.;:;] a:g.il o "'6'a !'!.g R r.l.g g~;,g ..~ '" <'i. o. '. go. "'. 11Q~"S~ ~:E.~ e ~ il.~ '" 8. .~'6.,.9:0 · El',~, ,~4.)'o.SEo ~""'N ~,,.o~]:a (.)tJd Q.)=~ .;:;8 '0, . -';~'68" ~..;:. .S ",oj:; s r: e. '01l.g::l.g"'Ol C C ' '" ._ ",.s C '" 12 '" .~"" 1';. c'" "''''23 .;:; g'15 8.g .;:;.tj i-7 g "'if",o'g~:a .' <t:; .:;';1 "',s 0,,21'~ 11(Cg Y,g 4:: g'1l< ~ bO~!3 f!:lll]] "'~. i "':.~ @' g'n O~;[ ~ ";' F . ~B goo 4:: l.J ~ t!J~ ,8e@ 11 ~.1iI 'a~$~ ~a 0.; .@~ _'J8......~.?"..~...~ '.g'...5i]ig~'e "~.'~.8'~;!l ;cu..lle-:s.. .:.o.I'i~ e~~...~~~.. ~o"3 '" ~'II 'o,g. t;, _0 o,.c 'O'~" ~,:E" oS tI:l',g '"d '",' I-<.c ,tI), ,', eel ~ ~ sg!, 8-.;;';" ~'" ;g e ~~"S '" S ~~'O u ~ " Itlo ii ii:'~~. ~~;S<7.~'Us.~:8-5~'~ ~~'~B~'8 ~.~~.i~.j ~c.~c .~C~"~d~d ~~~."'~.ll. e.",iiil~ ~.~.:a ..-5u..8'.......a .la1;i ;c""'-&,..m(........... . '" '!;j 0 e ",,,;c is bO '." 0 ",,, > .g 0 __ '" -, .;:; . A" A U e fJ 1;l g.., -::> 1'1 c;;...'o .;;;' ~.'" d "5 0 .m" . .. 11. . ... ... 8!l 8., &l< Jil$i$ 9 'B~ j,l .g f# ~ ~ e l;f.l.O~ "0"::;:="0 ::~'o"'!- O~~~. "0= '''Ov''d>,~Q} ~ ~-_g i~g,~ .u~ ~a~ .~vivo-~~~ 0 - .s'~ l:I.la = 0 :;a.- e s 0 .,J;:J Cot rt.l..... g <.":f ~ U - i.a~ ~b08~ .6.~ ",-5;g~ E<8~g~~.~;g. ~ ~ ~-;=:-'E ~_-~-~_--_.8 "",4)... '3 ~.ef'g .5.8 = ~ ~ ::1"0:; ~ "C;~ ~_:'8a,ca 43.5.8 ~t;gOl) I-l~.gg<d g'~.J;>> ~ l:S' .. '6 oS ..,,6f "15..g. "t ~..: '" ~ " ,,"'0 Ii '" 2. "'0"'; 5'-b ~~.s>co::s. a -~---lU,5 Q.) ;:i e -.Q "0 ~o ~ rJ!:! C U ~' ". G) '""...... "O;..c:: '(1) G).Q "C tI.l -=; 0 = - lool U 0 ~ p g ~ a c~, c; o'a 0 : 8 bOe .~ ~bO.2 ~ ~ & s: ~ fa.s 0 g::r ~ ~a .;: ~ ~ ; 0"08 rt.l~I:I.l= :~ _ ~o-~ / g~; ~.Q ii:; ,8,l:S~:~ j,l' '$<10;'; s8 ~ ~ ~~8'E~~ ~ .]'" ~1~~ " 5i 0. ~.s ~~ ..~~tI.l CO::S~__lU __ .....t/Jvt,) Io;.oIl ~,l'IJ -~,~JLe~'" .0". c"el5:'" ..~~"1';;;'" ~ ='''0'''=2'''''' - S Zl It).s 8 8 ~ ,- >,'; _~'.o _.4>-. .:..''..- Z i.'e' ;;.t: ;:;i)., '" a I'i " C u. ,,'1'l ..u ",,s a.. "C.; III " bO 2.-<:1tl ;~'~.g-= O,O'..t:l.C5.'l:; ~'_Jitd -~= " '.C c'~'c c ~'6l>- a'J:l u ",- '. '0 ] l:S ., q "C.' =.... 51! e .:: ~ f1..~.'. .~. 8. .... s"'e ""~ g"S.l'l~:Z;.,li'~-<: ..q> _. (,) ....;;; <"'>-.; < ~] iil.~' '.. ~..~.~..t:; "~'i) 8, J:I:: .~...' QJ~ ,,' .~ !::l.. ~__b:.-~ -~ '-'. ~ 'Ig]] ~ g ~.~ ~~1 .\\s. ......6......~......~...i$ ~ ~ U < ~ ~ .g g S.c I!i" '0 ~ t:: '" d ~ ='a Q. "C '" g,o '" '': '" g ~ ~ .~ "8 ~I::: ~ QJ'S ~ ~ :s '" iJ g;l ~!.g ~ a::~.. ~ ~]. 8:~~ ~ ~ "C :; e jf ~41sl . - oO Ii .~ -.. '" <Il .... "" ~ ,oQ CJ ..,; po ~ ~lS.<;I .S ~]i3I'li~~ ::.... ~ .,"~;c.. 6f2@'~ ~~ iflob-'O'ii'!i1S ~t:h il ;c.S .g" ';l~z",e~",bO'2" d '''' '''''llg. ,8~< ~~~~ U Pl:a~j~~E.g~ga ~~~.~'U~8 '~.813 ",~",g l5'e 4l..6, e'g~~j,l!illae :;;i<':l~bO~"'''''' r;~ 9 l~l .!j '" ~~I!? g~~~ ~.S ;~].8~~'; t~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~.~ 8,,;] gj~~' l~lil ~lll ~ ~ I ~~bO~t~ U ." 118. ~'6~.!:l~b'<~ r' BI'li.<'l~~~~o!l"i3:.s.Q.g "'gj,l~~p:.u !iJ6fls 8 . ~~.S&l<'~.!.j l.J~]~~~'O~ ~i '.,.......... ........ .... ' 05. . ..~e. ~ ~i~... J~.....~~~.~..~l.J~.. '.8 .~...~... ..;,~ ..... !S 8 ..!3.:l]! !l"'. j3. '" - '" . ~!l .., @.~.. '~..~ ~.~.~i...~.l~l..~.lj.~li !.] ~ 1.8. ~ 'cny<~,(St= ~"i-r: eat-l'~~..;i ~:'~ (1)~ ~ 'C':lJ!{ g:s '" ~. ...e?....~.e ;~,gl..~~~8.i!l~~.s~'" ~g.......tX\..~.1 (Ij-O~$ [@.51bO"~zO"'l~.....stf51 ~...~~ j [€ ffi .~~~,! j tl ~~ ~~~ ia 0~.j~~g ~~E '" ;('~ J = ~.. '0$ ~.!I 8. fl .,".,g ii ~.,s:e ~.'.@' 'll~" .Ell.bO'>;;! ~ $.1 u.!l , () ""'ZIl:'l:l"f~ is.~. '" .. ]:::;-01)" Ell g~.8 'I'li-[ ~ !;jPl'S_ -u - " .iii. g'.. ~~i~. r.:n.=1...~.~;l~.g.~. ~,~~l~i...~.~ ~l!ii.!.~..~.;. -o:E .liiffl.", Pl fEb.S ~~.~ j,l (l ~< g'l'i ;>..~ -5 0 ~8~ 8 .:!;g.a!;j ~ (1).0 j ~;Ul'i'll ;'~'1l',,1&"~, $S-iltj ~..., bltlo)1 il.... ~ O:.t:; ..,~Pl~f~t~~~~;/;j.~r~~.~].~~.[~g~€.!j@~ ~ ..!:Q iB'fi. ';;:'a .5..21tl.", ~ ~ a 'Olla", ;; a'!! !! ~ fl ~" ~~ciiiljs<-scrrmbtm~~ lOrnew1iifonRed's"ricI1 ~~~":c'~~ti;~~~;\t~~b~~t'h'~": '"'~~:b~~~;';~'~;~; :~::;orasc.:II?~ ganren. .'r.. ~~~~~~jlJ:X~ii '~Oflr""~~.Sl'.@n{b~'~~~'tl!eI:lext,. dar~~~~ the .re~Q"at.iQn sC/Jeme .adQPtedb(th~. ~ ,....COlfple <Jf.weeks tQ figure out how tQ get a new'roof. '-Council, the building will get a facelift .on the outsIde, . ':~~~"~~~!~~~:~n:~7 ~ and Rec~aii9n .~~~~ d:1!I:~~zhi:~~~~dtts~t~~ ~ '" The ~n CIty CQuncil agreed MQnday. mght, tQ panel ceiJ!ng and i\lI ~bestQS .al?a!eme~1l treatment.. , ~ a bUIli! ,Qf applause from a roQmful .of people repre- The cIty recreall()n department IS tQ talce Qv.er': .' sel\ting arts and nQnprofit groups, tQ gQ ahead with a ne~y 11,000 square feet .of the1:>uilding, cousisting . . plan that WQuld renQvate the .en~ .schlJPl biiUi/iiig;" or the gxriin3Sium are~ at:K\ an. adjacent .office space. . as'oWos&rtQ'''iiio't1ioalIing'''theQI2e~! 1!'l!f.s>f!lIe ., .The Aspen SnQwmass .Arts C.ouricil is tQ be . building fQrp?ssib~e renQ~ation at a rater~t:.. responsible fQr ~anaging the remaini'1g'are; 'nearly ., .;I',~ 1;1!$.SJ~s.Us ,esllmated tQ be. $1.13l\1llIiQn., Just W,OOO square. .feet, MQre!h.ap.7 ,209 square feet .of ':tllnder the $1.145 milIiQn thatJhe city planl\ed tQ that is tQ be fQ~ "cQmmunity use," sl!ch as :meeting '. spend .on the building after buying it a year agQ for rooms'lIl)dstoragespace, and the rest will'gQ either W" ....$2..6miIlklOwiili,v<?ter-approved!'<>ru!I!I!>'l.ey.. . .' .aft.s'grouPQrfice spacebfllctual studiQ space fof~ .",,~. AspartQfthepl'"".'edren()~..n.on,!~.~~~JiPI!!~~"",'~_"',r.,. .. ..... ..'. '{. .1.'"sllctiQn .of the building, built 10 the 1950s, IS tQ be AccQrding tQ Aspen City Manage.( Am~ .'i6~ dpW lind :the spa<:e used as. ~ sCl:llpture garden N'!f~erom, the ASA<;: ~ll pay the 5O!ty. $~5,(j90 ~ · andJ;\l~,~~1)1lj1O en!r~~..o' ',_, _,... year 10 rent fQr. the building, 12lus}Il}!t;i!ll1e~, m~l<l ~ ~But, warned the architects whQ have spent the last nance and replUr CQs\i,. and will cQUect rent and utili-.. .' '. ~ Iponti)s analyzing the building; nQ matte~ wha! ties from the t~nants. ;.;. ';::k'i~~~;~~rtfwi'a;i~~~~~f~~~~~'~rgt~ ~~I:t~t~~:~~ti~~~~$~:~fm:~1 i.ture. The !'?2f}~ !e'Lkj~g, and anQther winter. .of space is rented .out aJ..$12 per square fQQt ,as pro-1iIli "~~glectwQuld.ca9S!t CQnsI~rabl~,damage, the deslgn:grannne~, t~ere. shQl!lq be $?,8,O00 Per yel\f for all . ')~~tiffirx4~~~bie ~~hditiQh:;' s.aid ~hi~e~ral' pl~ r:al:e~:d,~o~l:J4be fQranyfma}Q-;'-repai!S!!\! . . consultant SUzannah Reid .of Pember & Reid Archi-' .or maintenance needs and the arts CQuncil is tQ make~ ~; tecfs!n{, oftlle "bi!iTdlOi(as 11Wh~'Burthei'~~t", re!iOmm~ndati8nst'?the?ty befQre sPending any Qfi!. :. .;questionable:' part .of the StroClure IS the palt 1;luiltlO . Sl)e ji!sQpomtei!.Qut tha;.f,!,r the.~t y~ pf Qper';;,;; 'the 1950s. '. .'. ._.; :<;;;i;,.,.,;:..;,,~l1.()I1,b!\siga)ly lessthan.l)!l!(9! f:9~, the CIty has set{' ;';'; The poor state .of replUr Qflhat seCllon,miifulY tlie aSIde $30,000 as a "cusl:iiQn" m case lQW start-up ..,: \tQpf, Wall the biggest single factQr itl' 4eciOing tQ occupancy leaves a gap in the center's finances. '. . ~ ~.~:,:,,-...:::...::~.,~ :;~- - . ---.. -~''''-'' " -, ;'::0::'",",- ") ,:,.;;~-~,-~",. ";'--~~>:~~- "~" ,.'"~~'J:i::i;:;;r;,;.;4i~,~~.tii$~<6B5B@}::':!2:t;!0'li~;~:*~,;:y:~:::';"':~""~1J; ~. 'IJ ~ \.. &~ '& ~ ~ ~ \ ~ 0-- ~ ~<~ ,~ ~ ( ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ f] .-:'-.1S. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~., .~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \ .~ ~ 0 ~ "" ~ ~ C ~ ~ ~ e \:S "- .~ .~ ~ . ~ z ~~ IJ' ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ .~. f>>'; ~ v) ~ ~ ,~ ,'" ~~( , ~ ~ ~ < 0 ' 0 '-- '-' " '. '~ ,'" ,~ ~ ~ iS8\- ~------- o . ~ '" u \-- '-- a 1ri:,,; ",. > /,~ " ~ w VJ o !;;c;:::::: ~ ' "- ~~}::: '-J ~ .(; (~ " ~ ~ '--C ~ ~ > ~ ~d ~ "{: ~ 1 ~ ~.~ ~ ~ <~- ~ \"-.... 'C: 0 --. r-\ c;<. ~ .( 's;:::: '- .-.... 1 ~ < Q '-\- \ V\ ":S ~ '--::S ,~ '~ ' . ~ ~ ~ V) ~ ~ V) / ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z '" 11,,1); , .....~.......... ". ~ ~ ,. ,~ , 0 . ,~ .' u ~ '......"''' ~ E-< r-" ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ .'S ~ ~~ "v ~ . ~ ( . I' '--.) ~9. '\ .~~f' ~ 0 ~ ~F<0~ jv '" ~tt~ " ~ ~ (::) ~ e t::j;:: ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ : ~ ;;2 J ~ 1:~ o . . z ~ ~ - ~ ;3'" r'l """,, ")"~- ~,~ 3'" ORDINANCE NO.22 (SERIES OF 1993) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ,A,SP~ CITY' COUNC,:i:L" G,~'f:I:N(;litt:~9N'IN(; }!'litO}( R-6 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO PUDLIC(PUB5~GROWTH'MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM EXEMPTION FOR ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITIES, AND APPROVAL OF A,FINAL PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT)'DEVELOPMENT'PLAN FOR THE ASPEN ARTS AND RECREATIONAL CENTER (F.K.A. THE RED BRICK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL) LOCATED AT 110 E. HALLAM (LOTS A-I AND K-S, INCLUDING THE ALLEY IN BLOCK 64, AND LOTS E,F,G AND PART OF LOTS A,D AND C, BLOCK 71), IN THE CITY AND TOWNSITE OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, on January 14, 1993, the city of Aspen purchased the former Red Brick Elementary school for the purpose of creating a community-oriented arts and recreation facility; and WHEREAS, the City Council appointed a citizen's advisory group known as the Red Brick Committee to recommend appropriate uses and development scenarios for the structure; and WHEREAS, the City intends to lease portions of the building for non-prOfit arts related organizations for offices and studio spaces, for-prOfit studio spaces, and for use by the city Recreation Department for office space and the gymnasium; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan established a goal to rezone the former school site to Public; and WHEREAS, the city of Aspen (Applicant) submitted an application (the "Plan") to the Planning Office for rezoning of the former school site from R-6 (medium Density Residential) to Public (PUB), GMQS Exemption for Essential Public Facilities, Special Review for! Parking, and Final (Consolidated) PUD review, in conjunction with a code amendment to the Public (PUB) zone district to allow "arts, cultural and recreational activities, buildings and uses"; and 1 ,. n tj l WHEREAS, the Planning Office received referral comments from the city Engineer, Housing Office, and Water Department; and WHEREAS, upon review of the application, referral comments, and the applicable code standards, the Planning Director forwarded a recommendation for approval of the Plan with conditions to the Planning and Zoning commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the development proposal in accordance with those procedures set forth at Section 24-6-205 (A) (5) (b) of the Municipal Code and did conduct a public he~ring thereon on April 13, 1993; and WHEREAS, upon review and consideration of the plan, agenc:yand public comme~t thereon, and those applicable standards as contained in Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code, to wit, Division 9 of Article 7 (Planned Unit Development), Division 4 of Article 7 (special Review), Division 11 of Article 7 (Zoning Map and Text Amendment), section 8-104 (C) (1) (b) of Article 8 (Growth Management Quota System Exemptions by City Council for Essential Public Facilities), the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended final approval of the Aspen Arts and R~creation Center subject to conditions, to the City council; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission further granted Special Review approval for parking in a Public (PUB) zone district; and WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the Plan under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified reviewed considered those herein, has and 2 r'! o 'l' 1 recommendations and approvals as granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, and has taken and considered public comment at public hearing; and WHEREAS, the city Council finds that the Plan meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that ,the approval of the Plan, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THl!lREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows: Section 1 : Pursuant to Section 24-7-903 B.4. of the Municipal Code, and subject to those conditions of approval as specified hereinafter, the City council finds as follows in regard to the Plan's planned unit development dimensional requirements component: 1. The Developer's final plan submission is complete and sufficient to afford review and evaluation for approval. 2. The Plan is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. 3. The Plan is consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. 4. The Plan will not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. 5. The Plan approval is being granted only to the extent to which GMQS exemptions are obtained by the applicant. Section 2: Pursuant to the findings set forth in Section 1 above, the City Council grants consolidated Final PUD development plan approval for the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center subject to the" following conditions: 3 () # , """-1'1 I~"V'~ ;1 ~ , "'l t {i \ \j *\() " t ~ ~ " 1. Prior to issuance of the certificate of Occupancy the 35 on-site parking spaces shall be striped and signed for use by users of the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center. 2. Prior to or within 6 months of the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy, a landscaped buffer shall be installed between the parking area and the trail on the north side of the subject property. 3. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, a drop-off parking area shall be dedicated in front of the building along East Hallam street pursuant to recommendations of the Parking and Transportation Director. 4. Any improvement to the parking in the Garmisch st. right... of-way must be coordinated with the Engineering Department. 5. pr ior to the issuance of a Certif icate of Occupancy, ,an easement must be establish.ed, for a 14'" ~ide trail, electric switchgear, and other utility or pedestal needs. 6. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy the two water service lines to the building must be properly metered. 7. The applicants shall agree to join any future improvement districts which may be formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in the public right-of-way. 8. The actual dimensions shall be the dimensional requirements of this PUDdevelopment plan: a. Minimum distance between buildings - 10' b. Maximum height (including viewplanes) - 25' c. Minimum front yard - 10' (except 4' at southeast entry) d. Minimum rear yard - 15' e. Minimum side yard - 5' f. Minimum lot width - ~.' g. Minimum lot area - ',000 square feet h. Trash access area - see provided survey i. External and internal floor area ratio - .75:1 j. Minimum percent open space - no requirement 9. The Final pua aevelepment Plan an. pua A~reement shall .e recer.ed in the office of the Pitkin county Clerk and Recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the documents within a period of one hundred and eighty (180) days following approval by the City Council shall render the ,approvals invalid, unless reconsideration and approval of both the Commission and City council is , I"; f) " > , t obtained before their acceptartce and recording. section 3: Pursuant to section 24-8-104 C.l.b. of the Municipal Code, the City Council finds as follows in regard to the Applicant's request for Growth Management Quota System development exemption for essential public facilities: 1. Arts and recreation have historically provided cultural enrichment to the citizens of the City of Aspen without which the city would not have attained its present character and standing in the national and international community. The City's proposal for use of the former school building as a center for non-profit arts related studios and offices, limited area for for-profit studios, and recreation offices and activities will enhance the art and recreation experiences for the citizens of the city of Aspen and the general pUblic. 2. The use of the building for for-profit artist studio space is limited to 5% of tne structure pursuant to the financial bonding requirements for the building. Furthermore, the artist studio space is intended to be educationally oriented to allow citizens of Aspen and the general public the opportunity to observe artists practicing their skills. section 4: Pursuant to section 24-7-1102 of the Municipal Code, the city Council finds as follows in regard to the zoning map amendment component of the Plan: 1. The proposed zoning amendment as set forth in the Plan are not in conflict with the provisions of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code or the Aspen Area Community Plan. 2. The proposed zoning amendment is compatible with the surrounding zone districts and land uses. 3. The proposed zoning amendment will not adversely impact traffic generation or road safety when taken into consideration with the other aspects of the Plan. 4. The proposed zoning amendment will promote the public interest and character of the City of Aspen. section 5: Pursuant to Section 24-7-1102 and 24-7-1103, and 5 , < ~ .G , , Division 2 of Article 5 of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code, and findings set forth in section 5 above, the City'Council does grant the following amendment to the Official Zone District Map and does designate the following zone district for the development subject to the conditions as specified below: 1. The Public (PUB) zone district shall be applied to Lots A-I and K-S, including the alley in Block 64, and Lots E,F,G and part of Lots A,B,and C in Block 71, in the city and Townsite of Aspen. section 6: All material, representations and commitments made by the developer pursuant to the Plan approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or ,documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning commission and or city Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions. Section 7: The Official Zone District Map for the City of Aspen, Colorado, shall be and is hereby amended to reflect the rezoning action as set forth in Section 6 above and such amendment shall be promptly entered on the Official Map in accordance with Section 24-5-103 B. of the Municipal Code. Section 8: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Section 9: 6 r', () , , , ( If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion , shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. section 10: The City Clerk shall cause notice of this Ordinance to be published in a newspaper of general circulations within the City of Aspen no later than fourteen (14) days following final adoption hereof. Such notice shall be given in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised statutes, pertaining to the following- described property: The property shall be described in the notice and appended to said notice shall be the ordinance granting such approval. Section 11: " That the ci ty Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Section 12: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the day of , 1993 at 5:00 in the city Council Chambers, Aspen city Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the city of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the city Council of the city ~f Aspen on the day of 7 t"'\ Fj () , , 1993. John Bennett, Mayor Attest: Kathryn s. Koch, city Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this , 1993. day of John Bennett, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, city Clerk 8 , ("""'\, ~C1t;y CouDCU .....4h\t A- ~ ,1'_ Davis Horn~c;VY Orcl1naDC4t PlANNING. APPRAISING. REAL ESTATE CONSUmNG__.----;:::::;,::',::'., : '~~~_ n~rj ~~~:1.)." I .. '\993 March 8, 1993 Kim Johnson Aspen Pitkin Planning 130 S. Galena street Aspen, CO. 81611 RE: Amendment to the Land Use Application for the Red Brick School '--_.~,- Office Dear Kim: As we discussed, this letter is an amendment to the application for the rezoning of the Red Brick School facility to Public for the reuse of the structure as the A~pen ,Arts and Recreation Center. The change in use of the Red Brick property from an elementary school to a public arts and recreation facility is not technically a change in use according to the Aspen Land Use Regulations as the change is not between categori~s of growth management competition. still, the applicant fully intends to mitigate all impacts of the change in use to the public arts and recreation center. As we agreed, the applicant is therefore requesting approval for a GMQS Exemption pursuant to section 8-104 (C) Exemption by city oounoil (1) (b) Construotion of essential public faoilites. Although the change in use is not new construction, the creation of the new public arts and recreation center is a new use and the applicant intends to mitigate any impacts generated by the new use. Therefore, our amendment to the application is to request approval for a growth management exemption for the oreation of an essential public facility. The city of Aspen is also requesting a rezoning of the site ~rom R- 6 to Public as the Public zone is more appropriate for the proposed use of the site. The public facility proposed serves an essential purpose, provided facilities in response to the demands of growth and in itself is not a growth generator. The facility will be available for use by the public and serves the needs of the city. As discussed in the original application, the proposed use of the Red Brick School will not generate the need for new employees, parking, road or transit services, or the need for basic services such as water, sewage treatment, drainage control, fire and police protection, and solid waste disposal. As the proposed use is less intensive than the previous school use, there will be not adverse impact on the city's air, water, land and energy resources. The structure, under the new use, will be visually compatible with the neighborhood. AUCe DAI/lS, SRA I GLENN HORN, HCP 300 IfASI HYMAN. SUITE 8. ASPEN, COLORADO 81611. 303/925.6587. FAX: 303J925.5t80 ~ f) . with these critieria of the Land Use Regulations in mind, please consider this letter a request for approval from city council for a GMQS exemption for an essential public facility for the creation of the proposed Aspen Arts and Recreation Center. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, DAVIS HORN INCORPORATED ~ {]0M4 ~ GLENN HO~~ '. (", , r-l " . I DavisHom~c;. PlANNING. APPRAISING. REAl ESTATE CONSUI1ING March 1, 1993 Ms. Kim Johnson Aspen Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO. 81611 RE: Land Use Application for the Red Brick School to be used as the new Aspen Arts and Recreation Center Dear Kim: Attached is the application for our client, the City of Aspen, requesting : 1) Rezoning approval for the Red Brick School site from R-6 Residential to PUB, Public; 2) Approval of a PUD development plan which establishes the dimensional requirements for the site as is required by the Public zone district regulations; 3) Approval of a minor text amendment to the Public zone district. We have done our best to satisfy the applicable requirements of the Aspen Land Use Regulations and to address items identified in our pre-application conferences. Please let us know if we have failed to address any issues of concern to you. Thank you for your consideration. Please call if you have any questions or if you need further information. Thank you, DAVIS HORN INCORPORATED OJ-W- ~ AIJa CAllIS, SRA I GLENN HORN. NCP 300 EASr HYMAN. sum; B. ASPEN. COLORADO 81611. ~7. FAX: 303/92S.5l80 ,. , , r'\ n Davis Horn~<;. PlANNING. APPRAISING. REAL ESTATE CONSUlJlNG :,miIcr 'i:"'-il~flTnlr:i.:;~,' " " ~ j . ! ! '! '\\ .16_ '. '.,' ""Ii Iii.' Wii IU ....._....J,/j ! March 16, 1993 Kim Johnson Aspen Pitkin planning Office 130 S. Galena street Aspen, CO. 81611 RE: Employee Impacts Dear Kim: This information should help you evaluate the employee impacts for the review for the ~ea.Brick Sch()pl,R~zoning. As stated in the submitted Land Use Application for the Red Brick School, the City of Aspen is interested in mitigating all employee impacts generated from the new use of the Red Brick School.:WI;!.believe that the employee impacts from the proposed Arts and Recreation Center use are substantially less than they were for the original school use and that no mitigation is required. As stated in the original application, approximately 250 people used the elementary schooL After reviewing and finalizing employee generation numhersfor the proposed Arts and Recreation Center, we estimate the total employee population of the new use to be from 21 to 28 employees for the smaller design scheme (not using the 1941 portion of the building) and from 55 to 90 employees if the entire building is utilized. As the number of employees/people on site \'Till be substantially less than for the school use, no employee mitigation should be required. It is very important to note that the all employees to be using the Arts and Recreation Center are currently .housed in existing facilities; their housing and their office space exists somewhere else in town. No ~w spaCA fa ~eing created, only the reuse of an existing space wi h a l~S int~ive use. Therefore, it is the applicant's opinion tha no employee housing mitigation is required. In estimating the employee population for the Arts and Recreation Center, it was very difficult to find employee generation standards for arts and recreation \1se~. .A.fteJ:"J:"eviewing numerous guides and text books, the most applicable standard is for either office space or quasi-governmental uses. The Housing Office and other experts in the field agreed, the pUblic/arts/recreation use would generate employees at the very low end or even below the typical office use. Therefore we estimated employee population from the quasi- governmental standard, which falls below the office standard. AUCE DAVIS, SRA I GLENN HORN. NCP 3OO!;AST HYMAN. SUITE 8. ASPEN, COLORADO 81611. 303192S-6587. FAX: 303/925-5180 t) n )" . , The ci ty' s Affordable Housing Guidelines' employee generation standards show that 1.5 to 2.5 employees are generated per 1000 square feet of net leasable area for "utilities/Quasi-Governmental uses". Generation by other uses not listed are by special review by the Aspen Pitkin Housing Authority. Considering the proposed use in the "other" category and subject to review by the APHA, we feel the low end of the quasi-governmental use is most appropriate. We have estimated employees first by determining the actual number of employees to be located on-site. Although we have no actual employee counts for the office related uses, the recreation activities and the artist studios should generate approximately 20 actual employees. Adding in another 21 employees for the remaining arts and recreation office space using the standard for quasi- governmental uses, 41 total employees is indicated for the entire building. If the quasi-governmental standard is applied to the entire building, 34 employees are generated, Applying the quasi-<;Jovernmental use standard onlY' to the portion of the building proposed to be used (14,093 square feet of net leasable area), 21 employees are indicated. Using the actual employees for recreation and studios uses and adding in employees qenerated from the remaining space, 20 to 28 employees are indicated for this portion of the building. Considering these and other methods of employee generation, the best estimate shows from 20 to 28 employees generated for the portion of the facility proposed for use and from 34 to 41 employees for the entire building. These numbers are substantially less than that generated by the former school use. Again, this information should help you evaluate the employee impacts for the review of the Red Brick School Rezoning. We hope you will agree that no new space is being created and therefore no employee mitigation should be required. Also, no new employees are being generated (and substantially less will be needed) by the arts and recreation center use when compared to the former school use. sincerely, DAVIS HORN INCORPORATED ~.~ Alice Davis r-) n . , , INTRODUCTION Davis Horn Incorporated, represents the city of Aspen who is the applicant and the owner of the Red Brick School Building at 110 East Hallam Street. (See Attachment 1, Vicini ty Map.) The applicant is requesting approval for a rezoning of the Red Brick School from R-6 Residential to PUB Public. Simul taneously, a minor text amendment to the City ,of Aspen Municipal Land Use Regulations is requested. As the Public zone is intended for a wide variety of public and public related uses, dimensional requirements are not given ,in the Regulations, but rather are established on a case by case basis through the POD process. Therefore, the applicant is also requesting approval for a POD plan which establishes the basic dimensional requirements for the property. This application addresses the standards and requirements for the following approvals being requested: 1. Rezoning of the Red Brick School property (to be used as the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center) from the R-6 Residential zone to the PUB, Public zone district; 2. A minor text amendment to the Land Use Regulations regarding the Public zone district; and 3. Approval of a POD development plan establishing the dimensional and off street parking requirements for the property as is required by the Public zone district. The planning director has determined, according to Section 7- 903 (C)(3), Consolidation of conceptual and final development review, that it is appropriate for this POD review to be consolidated from a four step into a two step process. This application briefly discusses the existing conditions and history of the subject property, describes the proposed use of the building and addresses the applicable Aspen Land Use Regulation review standards and requirements of each of the three approvals requested. EXISTING CONDITtO~S AND A BRIEFRISTORY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY The Red Brick School is located in the heart of Aspen's West End neighborhood at 110 East Hallam Street. The school was originally built in 1941 and sits on a estimated 90,700 square foot parcel of land. The existing structure consists of three sections containing approximately 35,800.total square feet of gross floor area. The first section is the original school building and a receiving/storage addition which contains 14,000 square feet. 2 n r\ I;>;} >' The second section is 11,240 square feet including a major classroom and mechanical room addition built to the east of the original building in the 1970's. This ,area is in better condition than the original structure and is in less need of hazardous material abatement. The third section of the existing building contains 10,560 square feet, was also built in the early 1970's and is to the east of the classroom addition. It consists of a 6080 square foot gymnasium and vestibule, a 2240 square foot stage area with a small office and storage area and stairs which lead to a 2240 square foot basement area locker room. (See Attachment 1, Red Brick school Building, Existing First Floor Plan.) The surrounding neighborhood is the well established West End residential neighborhood. To the east, south and west of the subject are single family homes which have predominated the West End Neighborhood for over one hundred years. There is a bike path along the northern property line which leads from the residential neighborhood to a commercial area below. The site is generally level, though to the north and northeast, beyond the bike path, steep slopes drop away from the property to adjacent commercial uses to the north. The slope provides a barrier between the commercial uses adjacent to the north, the subject property and adjacent residential uses. There are sidewalks on the south and west sides of the property and on-street paved parking to the west. The site is modestly landscaped on the south, between the building and the street with a lawn, shrubs and trees. The Red Brick School was purchased by the City of Aspen from the Aspen School District No.1 with the closing on January 14, 1993. The City purchased the school with bond money which requires that the building continue with public uses and that only five percent of the floor area be occupied by uses other than non-profit or governmental/public entities. (See Attachment 2, a letter to the City of Aspen Finance Director regarding the General Obligations Bonds used for the purchase of the school building.) Various citizen and pUblic groups including the more recently formed Red Brick Committee have supported the purchase of the building for public, arts and recreation related purposes and the issuing of bonds to fund the purchase and the cost of building improvement and renovation. As the school, particularly t,he original 1940's portion, has a hazardous material problem which needs to be abated, costs for renovation and improvement are higher than they would otherwise be. Since the City is now the owner of the property, The Red Brick Committee, city staff and the City Council are working to make the best use of the property for public and arts related purposes. 3 ,.-" r) " , , The building is proposed to house the City Recreation Department offices; City recreational programs and activities; art and cultural activities and uses; and art, dance and writers' studios. This application seeks approvals required for the City to operate the structure in the manner approved by the voters in the public election on the purchase. PROPOSED PROJECT As mentioned previously, The Red Brick School is to be used for public, art, cultural and recreational uses. As required by the, bond documents, public and non-profit uses are to always be the predominant uses in the building. As currently proposed, the gymnasium will be used by the city Recreation Department, the basement will continue to be used as a locker room for recreational activities and the remainder of the building will be used for a variety of pUblic, arts, cultural and recreational office and studio uses. Although the proposed tenants will certainly change with time and possibly before the building is actually ready for occupancy, an administrative office for each of the following tenants is currently anticipated for the building: city Recreation Pepartment Dance Aspen Aspen Art Museum Aspen Filmfest KAJX Aspen Ballet Company Aspen Theater The Writer's Conference Arts Council Aspen Ridiculous Theater Aspen Yoga Center Aspen Interactive All of the above uses except Aspen Yoga Center and possibly Aspen Interactive, are non-profit organizations. Aspen Interactive is now seeking non-profit status. In addition to the above tenants, the building is proposed to include the fOllowing: A 651 square foot common lecture hall A 150 square foot common secretarial area Four to five spaces to be used as artists' studios. The currently proposed uses have been reviewed and evaluated by the Red Brick Committee. The Red Brick Committee came up with four potential options for the City Council for renovating the school building; these options are found in the memorandum in Attachment 3. 4 " o n , At this time, the Red Brick Committee is proposing use of the gymnasium and the classroom addition completed in the 1970's. Using only these two sections of the building, the building is expected to be fully occupied. The Committee has proposed that the remainder of the building, the original 1940s school, will either be renovated at a later date, demolished or locked off and not used until further plans are finalized and money obtained for the reuse or reconstruction of this section of the building. Regardless of the option chosen, the entire property as it currently exists is the subject of this rezoning application. REZONING TO PUBLIC The applicant is requesting a rezoning of the subject property from R-6 Residential to PUB, Public. The structure has been used and will continue to be used for pUblic purposes since it was built in 1941. Although a school is a conditional use in the R-6 Residential zone, the Public zone district is more appropriate for the property given the sale of the building from the Aspen School District to the City of Aspen for arts, cultural and recreational purposes. A rezoning is an amendment to the official zoning map. This rezoning is therefore requested pursuant to Division 11 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations, AMENDMENTS TO THE TEXT OP THIS CHAPTER AND THE OFFICIAL ZONE DISTRICT MAP. This section of the regulations require an applicant to address and the City Council and the commission to consider the nine standards of review. These standards are identified and addressed below. A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this chapter. The proposed amendment to the official zone district map to change the subject property's zoning designation from R-6 to PUB is not in conflict with any portion of the Land Use Regulations. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area comprehensive Plan~ The Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan calls for the Red Brick School to be used for public purposes. This amendMent to the map is not only consistent with the Plan, but is a step toward insuring that the structure is preserved for public and related appropriate uses in the future. The purchase of the Red Brick School was approved by the voters of the city of Aspen in a public election in August of 1992. 5 r"t ~ . Jl The Red Brick School Committee consists of a wide variety of community volunteers, both opponents and proponents of the purchase, was formed soon after the election to address the use and redevelopment of the building into an art and recreational center. This committee appears to agree that the proposed reuse of the building is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan and with the electorate's intent of the use of the school as approved in the public election on the issue. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. The proposed use is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses. It has been an even more intensive school use in the past and was a permitted conditional use in the R-6 :(lone district where it is now located. Therefore, it is considered compatible with the surrounding R-6 zone district. Down the steep slopes to the north of the subject property is a commercial area zoned (NC - Neighborhood Commercial and SCI Service Commercial Industrial) with an SPA overlay. Although they are adjacent to the subject, the uses found here are much more intensive and are not really physically a part of the immediate neighborhood. The subject property is somewhat of a buffer between,the residential neighborhood on three sides and the commercial uses to the north. The neighborhood has been actively involved in the purchase and reuse of the school building through various citizen committees and public meetings. The Red Brick Committee was established after the election in August of 1991 when the purchase of the school was approved by the voters. This committee is made up of a wide variety of people with different concerns. The arts community, real estate community, neighbors and opponents of the school purchase were all represented. This committee has worked hard since its conception in December of 1992 to come to agreement on the use and management and redevelopment of the Red Brick School. This rezoning is a first step to accomplish the redevelopment of the building for use as an arts and recreational center. The less intensive proposed use of the building as a recreational, arts, cultural and public facility brings less impacts than the elementary school did when it was operating in the building. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. 6 f"'""J . " (""\ ! , " The proposed Aspen Arts and Recreation Center will at a minimum be "impact neutral" in that it will have no more impacts than the school use which has impacted the neighborhood since its construction in 1941. In reality, the proposed use will have substantially less impacts on traffic generation and road safety. The last year of operation, the school was used for kindergarten and first grade classes and the school business office. There was a total population of 250 including 230 students, ten full-time teachers, five special teachers, three business office employees and two janitorial staff. Approximately twelve buses dropped students off at the school in the morning and picked up students in the afternoon. In addition, it is estimated that fifty students were dropped off and picked up by car each day. A large majority of the faculty, staff and school board members traveled to and from the campus by car, parking in the area behind the gym, in the area behind the business office, along- the front of the building on Hallam street and on Garmisch street. Regular trash pick up as well as occasional deliveries and field trips by bus generated some additional trips. The total number of round trips to and from the school each day is estimated to have been 160 vehicles trips per day. A similar level of activity was going on at the yellow brick school diagonally across from the site. In addition, extracurricular activities occurred in the school gymnasium, which was utilized both by students and members of the community. Barricades were set up daily on Garmisch and Hallam to interrupt traffic in the vicinity of the two schools. The proposed use will generate from 23 to 48 employees under the smaller design scheme (not using the original 1941 portion of the building) and 55 to 90 employees if the entire building is utilized. This range has been established first by estimating the actual number of employees anticipated given the proposed tenants and second by use of a national standard for an office use which was applied to the entire building. The actual estimated population is considered to be the most accurate in determining the number of employees, therefore the lower end of the range, 23 to 48 is the best estimate of employees in the proposed arts and recreation center. As the property is centrally located and easily accessed by foot and by public transportation, vehicular trip generation will be less than for a property with an inferior location. We found no trip generation standard for artist studios or recreational uses and therefore have used the low end of the trip generation standard for office use: four trips per 1000 square feet of space. 7 (""'\. () This shows 142 vehicle trips per day, less than for the school use, even without considering the previous extracurricular activities and the trips generated by the yellow brick diagonally across the street. There does not appear to have been any officially designated parking on the school site in the past. Ken Smith of Smith Associates Architects completed a study on the various redevelopment alternative for the Red Brick School. He has access to an original improvement survey of the school property and no parking is shown. Historically the area to the north and west of the structure has been used as a parking lot. Approximately 35 spaces have been accommodated in this area. Therefore, the applicant proposes to provide these 35 spaces for the 23 to 48 employees. The 20 to 25 on-street parking spaces will be utilized for guests. At approximately one space p~r employee, we feel this is sufficient, especially since the proposed tenants, except for the recreational programs, will not generate many visitors. Artist studios do not tend to generate the need for additional parking. still, the standard does consider client and visitor traffic. The tenants of the building will be encouraged at the time of signing a lease, not to use their cars, but to ride share, walk and use the public parking garage two blocks (700 feet) east. The proposed arts and recreation center will generate less impacts with regard to traffic generation, road safety, parking and employee generation than the previous school use. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such pliblic facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, sChools, and emergency medical facilities. The rezoning to public will not result in increased demand on pUblic facilities. The existing structure has been in existence and the impacts are already accommodated within current services. The change from school to public uses should decrease impacts given the reduction in the on-site population and the public facilities required to accommodate them. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. The rezoning to pUblic and the new arts and recreation uses to be allowed will not adversely impact the natural environment. 8 ,;1 () > G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the city of Aspen. The proposed rezoning is consistent and compatible with the community character in the city of Aspen and in the neighborhood. The proposed Aspen Art and'Recreation Center use encompasses two of the stronger elements of the community's character - arts and recreational activities. The rezoning and new use of the building should actually enhance community character. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neiqhl:lorhood which support the proposed amendment. The Red Brick School was sold by the Aspen School District after the District planned and built a new elementary school on the Maroon Creek campus. The purchase of the property by the City of Aspen involved substantial public input. The change in ownership from a school district to the governmental entity is a changed condition which supports the rezoning from R-6, which is more appropriate for a neighborhood schOOl, to PUblic, a more appropriate zone for the proposed public, arts and recreational use. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. The text amendment to rezone the Red Brick School to Public and the redevelopment of the school into the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center is not in conflict with the public interest, but rather is strongly in the public interest. The rezoning of a public building to Public is also within the purpose and intent of this chapter of the Land Use Regulations. TEXT AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE PTmLIC ZONE DISTRIC::T The applicant proposes a minor amendment to the text of ..the Aspen Land Use Regulations regarding the permitted uses in the Public zone district. Therefore, in addition to the above discussed rezoning, a second text amendment is therefore requested pursuant to Division 11 of the Aspen Land Use RegUlations, AMENDHEN'rS '1'0 TEE TEXT OF THIS CHAPTER AND THE OFFICIAL ZONE DISTRICT MAP. The applicant is requesting the addition of a permitted use in the Public zone district under Section 5-220 (B) permitted Uses. The recommended language' is to add the following as permitted use number 15 under this section of the Regulations: "15. Arts, cultural and recreational activities." 9 (\ f) Although the arts related uses proposed for the Red Brick building such as the non-profit organizations and the artist and writers studios could be allowed in the Public zone without this amendment, the applicant feels the amendment clarifies the arts and recreational uses and removes any gray area in allowing different, but related and appropriate uses in the future. The artists and/or writers studios are the only proposed uses which are "for profit". The bond documents for the City's purchase and renovation of the Red Brick building are very clear in that they require no more than five percent of the net leasable floor area of the building to be occupied by such "for profit" organizations. Ninety-five percent of the building has to be for public, non- profit or governmental uses. Therefore this bond requirement provides protection against the expansion of "for prOfit" uses which may have brought greater impacts on the neighborhood at some point in the future if not, strictly regulated. The Public zone district itself provides another level of protection against a wide array of uses which might bring more impacts. The purpose of the Public zone district as stated in the Aspen Land Use Regulations is: "The purpose of the Publ,ic (PUB) zone district is to provide for the development of governmental and quasi-governmental facilities for cUltural, educational, civic and other governmental purposes." The above purpose of the Public zone mentions cultural, educational and civic uses and the proposed amendment actually specifies similar appropriate uses and activities. The applicant feels that the proposed uses (arts, cultural and recreational uses) are within the intent of the Public zone, and the amendment is to clarify the applicable section of the Regulations by actually delineating these uses in the list of permitted uses. These arts, cultural and recreational uses are within the intent of the zone district, but the proposed text amendment will also allow the Public zone district to better accommodate the proposed uses at the new Aspen Art and Recreation Center, the uses for which the building was purchased. Again, the bond documents will always restrict the number of organizations which are not non-profit and will help govern the uses allowed in the building. Along with the requirements of the PUblic zone itself, the bond documents will help keep the allowed uses within the intent of the Public zone and consistent with the intent of the electorate when they approved the purchase of the Red Brick School for publ~c, arts and recreational uses. 10 ~ t) .' AJ.though it may be somewhat repetitive, the same nine review standards for the text amend~ent (rezoning) discussed above, are applicable to this text amendment, the addition of an allowed use to the Public zone district. These nine standards of review are briefly discussed' below as they relate to this proposed text amendment. A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this chapter. This amendment is not in conflict with any portion of this chapter. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area comprehensive Plan. This amendment is consistent with all elements of the AACP. C. Whether the proposed amendment is cOmpatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. The proposed allowed uses, "arts, cultural and recreational activities", will allow uses which are compatible with surrounding zone districts (R-6 Residential, NC - Neighborhood Commercial and SCI - Service, Commercial Industrial with an SPA Overlay) and with surrounding land uses (residential, the yellow brick school and commercial uses at the Post Office and Truman Center). D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. As permitted use in thE! Ipublic zone, the proposed arts, cultural and recreational uses will generate less impacts than the more traditional pUblic uses allowed in the Public zone district. No standards were found for determining impacts from artist studios or recreational uses. Several experts surveyed indicate that the low end of impact standards for office uses best reflects the high end of impacts from such arts and recreational uses. ' On the Red Brick site, at a minimum, the new uses will be "impact neutral" in that they will have no more impacts than the school use which has impacted the neighborhood since its construction in 1941. In reality, the site will generate less traffic and result in safer roads than the school. 11" ~ () ,J; E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. The addition of the proposed uses does not change, but rather clarifies the allowed uses within the Public zone. Therefore these uses will not result in increased d.emand on 'public facilities. The existing structure has been in existence and the impacts are already accommodated within current services. The proposed permitted uses will probably generate less demand on public facilities than traditional public uses. The change from school to the proposed public uses should decrease impacts on the Red Brick site as well given the reduction in the on-site population and the pUblic facilities required to accommodate them. - F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. The addition of the proposed permitted uses in the Public zone district will not adversely impact the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the city of Aspen. The proposed text amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the city of Aspen and in the neighborhood. The proposed permitted uses and the new Aspen Art and Recreation Center use encompasses two of the stronger elements of the community's character the arts and recreational activities. The new use of the building should actually enhance community character. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subj ect parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. The ,Red Brick School building was sold by the Aspen School District after the District planned and built a new elementary school on the Maroon Creek campus. The purchase of the property by the City of Aspen involved substantial public input. The change in ownership from a school district to the governmental entity is a changed condition which instigated this text amendment. The amendment is appropriate for the entire Public zone district, but is most appropriate in its application to the Red Brick site. 12 t""., f) -~ of. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. The proposed text amendment to add arts, cultural and recreational activities as permitted uses in the Public zone district is not in conflict with the public interest, but rather is strongly in the public interest. POD DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE PUBLIC ZONE DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Section 5-220 CD) of the Aspen Land Use Regulations (Public Zone District, Dimensional Requirements) states that "The dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted conditional uses in the Public (PUB) zone district be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and final development plan pursuant Article 7, Division 9, Planned Unit Development." Although this indicates that the only permitted conditional uses are subject to the POD review, no dimensional requirements are established for permitted uses in the Public Zone. Therefore, as suggested in our pre-application conference, we have addressed the POD section of the Code as a means of establishing the dimensional requirements and parking requirements for the property. As there is no new development proposed, but rather the Red Brick School is proposed' for reuse as a public arts and recreation center, the footprint of the structure is not changing at this time and the dimensional requirements proposed will be consistent with what has been in place since the building was constructed. As the Public zone district uses a POD plan review only as a means of establishing appropriate dimensional and parking requirements, many sections of the PUD review are not applicable. We have addressed only the standards which apply to the specifics of this site and the proposed reuse of the building. All general requirements are considered not applicable, though the subject property complies with the general requirements of the PUD review. The following addresses the applicable concerns. Section 7-903 (B) (4) Dimensional Reauirements. The dimensional requirements shall be those of the underlying Zone District, provided that variations may be permitted in the following: a. MinimUm distance between buildings; b' Maximum height (including viewplanes); c. Minimum front yard; d. Minimum rear yard; 13 (", n . e. Minimum side yard; f. Minimum lot width; q. Minimum lot area; h. Trash access area; i. Internal floor area ratio; and j. Minimum percent open space. If a variation is permitted in minimum lot area, the area of any lot may be greater or less than the minimum requirement of the underlying Zone District, provided the total area of all lots, when averaqed, at least equals the permitted minimum for the Zone District. Any variation permitted shall be clearly indicated on the final development plan. Again, the Public zone district does not establish dimensional requirements, so the applicant is proposing the following for the Red Brick School site and the Aspen Arts and Recreational Center: a. Minimum distance between buildings: 10 feet b. Maximum height (including viewplanes): 25 ft c. Minimum front yard: 10 feet (except 4 ft at entry) d. Minimum rear yard: 15 feet e. Minimum side yard: 5 feet f. Minimum lot width: 60 feet g. Minimum lot area: 6,000 square feet h. Trash access area: See att'd survey i. Internal floor area ratio: 0.75:1 j. Minimum percent open space: No requirement These requirements have been developed from the dimensional requirements in the city of Aspen's 0- Office zone district and the adjacent R-6 Residential zone district, whichever was most appropriate. Section 7-903 (B) (5) Off-street parkinq. The number of off- street parking spaces may be varied from that required in the underlying Zone District based on the following considerations. k. The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development. l. The parking needs of any non-residential uses. m. The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. n. The availability of public transit and other ~ransportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. 14 f'1 n o. The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core or public recreational facilities in the city. Whenever the number of off-street parking spaces is reduced~ the city shall oDtain assurance that the nature of the occupancy will not change. The Public zone district does not address parking requirements so the applicant has addressed the parking section of the PUD review. As discussed previously, it is estimated that 23 to 48 employees will use the proposed arts and recreational center. Assuming each employee has one car, the historical parking on-site should be adequate for the new use and will be maintained for use by the facility. There has been no officially designated parking on the school site in the past. Historically the area to the north and west of the structure has been used as a parking area. Approximately 35 spaces have been accommodated, including circulation, in this area. Therefore, the applicant proposes to provide these 35 spaces for the 23 to 48 employee cars. The 20 to 25 on-street parking space will be utilized for guest parking or any overflow parking needs. At approximat;ely one space per employee, we feel this is sufficient, especially since most of the proposed tenants will not generate many visitors. The artist studios will not generate the need for additional parking. still, the standard does consider client and visitor traffic. Most cars will be arriving and' departing at the beginning and end of typical work hours. The artist studios may have more flexible hours which would decrease peak demand for traffic and parking. As the building is centrally located and within a few blocks of the public parking garage, the commercial core and neighborhood shopping, many employees and visitors will be traveling by foot. The city of Aspen's public parking garage is two blocks (700 feet) east and is convenient for use by users,of the Red Brick Facility. The use of the parking garage, pedestrian travel and other auto- disincentives will be strongly encouraged through the management and leasing operations. The proposed Arts and Recreation Center will always be for public, arts, cultural and recreational uses and the nature of the occupancy will not change. In addition to the requirements of the Public zone district, this is further guaranteed by the bond documents for the financing of the building's purchase as only five percent of the net leasable floor area can be rented to tenants who are not non-profits. (See Attachment 3.) 15 t""'1 n , LANDOWNERS CONSENT Attachment 5 is a letter from the applicant authorizing Davis Horn Incorporated to prepare this land use application and represent them in the land use review process. Attachment 6 is a city of Aspen land use application form agreement. ATTACHMENT INDEX The following is a list of attachments: Attachment 1: Vicinity Map - Aspen Arts and Recreation Center Rezoning and POD plan; Attachment 2: Red Brick School Building - Existing First Floor Plan; Attachment 3: Letter to Dallas Everhardt, Director, from bond council bonds used for the purchase of city Finance regarding ,the the Red :arick; Attachment 4: Red Brick Committee memorandum regarding recommendations for the Red Brick Renovation and Management; Attachment 5: Landowner's authorization for Davis Horn Inc. to submit a land use application on their behalf and to represent them in the land use review process; Attachment 6: Land use application forms; Attachment 7: Pre-application conference summary sheet; Attachment 8: Legal description and proof of ownership. SUMMARY This application has described the subject property, the proposed use and requested approvals and has demonstrated compliance with pertinent sections of the Aspen Land Use Regulations which were identified by the staff in a pre-application conference. Please notify us if we have mistakenly neglected to address any of your concerns. Thank you for your consideration and please call if you have any questions or need further information. 16 ~I ffi I 5 , "- -<<: ::s ~ z - z o N l.<J 0:: 0:: l.<J .... Z ~ l.<J U .. ~ Z ~ 0 0 ~ - ~ .... .. -<<: , l.<J 0 . 0:: ~ U 0 z l.<J Z 0:: 0 N l:l il! Z -<<: CI) .... 0:: -<<: Z l.<J "- CI) -<<: , Ill'" i: ~ !f -, ' !! '::I! i! h' ., ~ ..Ii*!.. II :=Illj ','I!! 5 _:'1 i' f. 5 ;!:" hii ~ ~ I-~I '11.:1.. i ~ :~~. I!~ ~ B ..l ..~! ",l! \'! . Ii ill II i, Ii ~ , ,"'1 .I.j~ ~ ;~ il~u i~ia ii~I.I'i~ Ih'''' .. i..ill.I!I; '-"'Ii" ' IU lit!' 'I" "111':1" ill v '1111" ' ~ ,,'! ,I.;!., ~ ~ ,nh;;:-l ... J . ,~'.IO.! ." i~J!!I:,,1 , , :: !t1'I~.~-I=;!: i ~q'! . "I" I !l<li I!,": II 0 ~ "I'llii' i I/O r i ~ ,hd! n ; ... ..- I .,.. ~ -::v ~ 1 j ,on !Ji:: Ii :" I;, Iii' .,;; : ij !_~ i!,!. ; I ~!~ !ii, I!~; ".,j I/O : :., !~ Iii; II;ij ~ I'" !J I; ;i,.: .i~!,i z '" 1 ", Sl: !:!!,,!l!s I!:!- .,' 'i! lll, 'Iill ~ i I!: 111i~ trl!i ~ ,J ';i ~ =. '!ilj ~ 'I E 9. !,'l; "0" ,_...,.... lIt.1 <) h ~ If ,~~S I~!i; , . ! j i , , i i , II i ! ~ : Iii i i 1,1 ~ . . . . , w ii, l..> i.~ ~ iH,1 w l' ~ II!, ~ !!i~ ~ nil u lOa"ll ~ h:j ~ Ii I "'l ~n! i ....d. ~ 1"li · v d:;1 ! wi I: -<Jz Elg~ fl ....! = ~ z . ~ ;;; it .;j ~ =g "" ~1:l :;"'0 ffi .. 38 i ~ . . : ~:~ ; ;:;:Z~ ~ o . ~ t ~ ~ J :; 1 ~ , :<t ' i~ ; it; ~ t;: " G ~ ... f:J ~ "; 'l!' '" ...; ...; ;J ... "; ;;j .[33." ".[s ' H:JS/ IVY,,:; 'N . .; ~ ~ w w ==j = u; i ~t . _I ! ~; ~- . . . . < :1 I, " I'll I' Ill' 1111 I!il' i~: f..1 ':11 W! ,'11 II.. III I~~I '" J~ ~ .id "-1-. ~ .. " >- ~ z u > " 1 m ! ~ ~ Ii: ;;1 "'W !:I lu. l'il "II t ~;ii!! ~I'!'I :: ~.:: ..bil .Ji..-:1I v"II' ~'! . 85 !j >j!II=:. ~ i'l' V' '11i n ;; 0:: "-l .... ;;: "-l U ;;: o - .... '" W"" 0::'" u-l we.. 0:: Cl ;;:=> "'e.. (f) .... 0:: "" ;;: W Cl. (f) "" , 'I I" ~lf ~ !~ llll :: it I; I-~ i!-" ji ,ll. I 'j" ' Z .; l!! . I,. ;qij: hi ; ..;. I; !I~ tl ~ sig;; !,:'1 Q !;:i! isl ~ :J j:; Ii !~,; ~ I!: :; ~ol~ ~ 4~= .W 1'1 . .. s~a ii d! i '" 1.~ ;!j~ "h: ...J ;t~i ~ iHi .0.0:-: :~ ti:: ~: ~~e;.; ! i Ii Itl, . Ia!t:: =," ~ II-iI, . II' ~ ""1 i 1;1- ~.d!ii !~ :'1;;: J 1 Hit! ! <I'" " ! ~ I ~ . ~ ; I:! i ! :::; o o " <:J ~ --.j" , ' r . ~i:i:::il.: ~g i;~..i ,';ia .;"i-~' i '. 1:~;;'.;:ill~i ,Il'll'jll "'1"1'''' lol !i;,:!i ~!!: . ~ 5h~=II;I;; " v PI'" ," ~ h: gl.,.~o:~1 . ;:!! .1!:er: ~ilq:":;11 u =" -:-1" '" !liHI~~i!il~ ~ e "i'I.;l:!~" .- "!,h""I'! I :> 1;1 1;;111.. n ~mHI!I'I;li .. ~ 'II I;; .. ., " !l, . q, j;1'"""\ . ~ n~. l! ~ .. ill!' ) ~ "'1 : ~ .. J. i I.o-!! f ~ ~ )~- !I'" -!, ' v"1 n =: ~! jl: i!hj , ~ I! :: t t. l!! ~::..1 ~ " Ii;'; lil'i i ~ hi . , . I ~ i:l~ ~ . i 1'1'1"'" " 'I !.: ,;o:i" . ' t ~~!! ~ ~ !! I~ ~1I 1'1 ,1~ ,";i! i ,.: :.: i'P ~ : J tI l!i!J'r'l ldl i :Iiii i~! :i! hU " ~ -- I ~ 1 i ; !! j l 1<1 .; ~ ~ ; i li1 ~ !.!: bi !!!~i " ~!"~i : i!l! I ~ I i 6 1- !S~ l~il.. I Ii' ~ ii:' ::i li"~ ..... :1 :.Iii!;!i!t i:i I ~ % , ~ d!1 a Ii::: < w , 1I ." I' ' , i ~ , .. 2!. i!..it , ill . . . . . . ~ ~ ..,- ill " ,! ;! j ,. ;: .S ~ ~;i ~ i(I' :" I~ "" Sj'l ~ !ji - ,-I ~ .... ..... ;.1 ; gli i ...._s, I .}t~__ ! - i . :~ 5:1 w! I: j' E! (5' II "'! ! ~ % < ~ ;;; i ..:00 ~ .0 <( Z": Q - i: 0 . . o )-...Z >- ~o:t' :;: u!:!~ ~ o " ~ ~ :,; ~ '-. f:J ~ o ~ .., .., ~ ; j s!= :" i '-. .,. '" " Co l.IJ iR -Ii liS; ~ a: I;: ~ fl:! .~~ I <v .. II:iSE::II;i~ :;::1 = I- .1~~:i.Ji:i~i ~ i:!U~.;..;ir; ii! " "i ' ,"" , I' ....nss,:.;:!! hi ~ 1111111 'Ii ;i i j Ui:::!~i!: :di ~ ....;..:..;.:~:: g~;1 ~ .i33" q.iS II:)S i-" IYIiV:y 'N ;1 ~5 ,'1, ill Hl' IJII Iii! i;~! Jill- !a'~ III! .'Ii II., III It!i! ~~: I~;j "-h ~ .. " > ~ z u > " ' ATTACHMENT 2 f (""\ ,. }' n SECTION VI! EXISTING FLOOR PLAN " ..I ~I it ~ liii l ,j I i I V, ~~l"~ I , \ f! : , ! I - l. i,. , , I '%, U~\ { .... -.. 1 ; il I ~~ 11 II ~ ~ II . wi - i l ~ i. .. iI . . I . I i . . I to' I ~ ; 10' t c I ~ t II ~ .\ n- , I ' I l,.I.~ t<o;loOl~""; ~~ 15 II n n (j) , MEMORANDUM AlTACH:!.ENT ~ TO: FROM: Mayor and council Red Brick Committee DATE: February 9, 1993 RE: Recommendations Regarding Red Brick Renovation and Management The Red Brick Committee has met approximately eight times to discuss and recommend to City Council a long-range program for the Red Brick Building. The Committee is made up of the following members: Julia Marshall Lee Ambrose Jill Uris Don Fleischer Janet Garwood Bill Martin Joanne Lyon Mary Martin Janet Roberts Katherine Lee Bob Camp_ Staff support has been provided by: Bill Efting Ken Collins Rob Thomson Cindy Wilson Amy Margerum The Committee reached a consensus on the following key points: * The Red Brick site should be used for arts, recreation and compatible community uses; * The parcel s.hould not be split or sold off for other purposes or uses such as housing; 1 r'\ n * Management of both tenant relations and day to day maintenance of the building should be by one entity; * The City council should appoint an review both the operational aspects recommend capi tal improvements. The provide feedback on programmatic and would have no management authority. advisory committee to of the building and advisory group would operatiI:lg issues but . Renovation The Committee received a report from Smith Associates Architects which presents four alternatives for renovation. The report is attached as Appendix A. The four alternatives are summarized below: Alternative 1: requirements. Minimum upgrade to meet code and maintenance Paved on-site parking lot with 35 spaces. Alternative 2: Demolish the 1941 portion of the structure. Upgrade and remodel the classroom and gym areas,' construct a new addition of 6,000 square feet designed for an arts center, paved parking lot on-site with 60 spaces, new landscaping. Alternative 2B: Demolish the 1941 structure, upgrade the remaining portion of the building to meet code and maintenance requirements, reconfigure and renovate the floorplan to meet Art Council needs, paved parking lot on-site with 35 spaces. Alternative 3: Demolish the entire building and build a new 23,000 square foot arts and recreation center, create a paved parking lot on-site with 60 spaces, new landscaping. Cost estimates of the alternatives are: Alternative 1: $1,425,106 Alternative 2 : $2,172,331 Alternative 2B: $1,287,138 Alternative 3 : $3,146,235 The Committee reached consensus not to support any of the first three alternatives primarily because of the costs involved. The Committee recommends the proposed renovation costs stay within the $1,000,000 budget which the City has earmarked and should not be dependent on fund,ing from outside sources. However, any savings or interest earnings experienced by the City due to the delays in 2 r\ , tl '," " . , , this project would be appropriate to use for the renovation and could increase the $1,000,000 budget. Recommendation: After reviewing all four alternatives, committee with the cooperation of the Arts Council recommend city Council consider Alternative 4. Several factors support reCommendation: , \_" -' the that this 1. Cost - The committee 'feels that we were challenged to recommend an option which would most benefit the artistic community for a $1,000,000 project. 2. Arts Council Needs - with the new configuration of rooms in the newer section, most of the Arts Council current needs will be satisfied. 3. Energy Efficiency - This alternative will provide the community with a much more energy efficient building. . 4. Expansion - This alternative leaves room for expansion of the art center at a future date. 5. Occupancy - The committee projects that this option would allow the building to be functional approximately 1 year' after the design team selection. Manaqement The Committee reached consensus that, property management and tenant relations should not be segregated from building management. Whatever group is responsible for managing the building should be responsible for both the tenant relations (negotiating leases, collecting rents, etc) and day to day building maintenance. The Committee also agreed that regardless of who manages the building there should be an advisory group appointed which consists of city Council representation, citizen/business representation and Arts COlincil representatives. The advisory group would be used for feedback on programmatic and operating issues but would have no management responsibility. The Committee considered several management, options. The committee evaluated management alternatives based on the following criteria~ Financial viability: financial reports standards; will the management entity prepare timely and' have clear financial goals and Support of the Arts: encourage the arts; will the management entity support and Who is the best organization to determine uses of building? 3 ,~ f"""", () , Does the entity have property management experience? The Committee narrowed the options to either management by the City or by an outside board such as the Arts Council. The Committee agreed that any management option chosen should be re-evaluated after a year or sooner if problems arise. The committee was split on which management entity they preferred, however all except one member felt they could "live with" Arts Council management for one year with a review. All agreed that they could "live with" City management of the building with oversight by an advisory board. In considering the alternatives the following assumption was made: * The direct cost of managing the building was assumed to be the same regardless of whether the City or the Arts Council managed the building. , . C1tV Manaqement: * If the City managed the building the City would hire staff or contract for property management services including negotiating leases and maintenance services. There would be an office in the recreation area for staff or property management contractors. An existing city manager(s) would oversee staff or contractors. Advantages: * The City has existing infrastructure (i.e. attorney support, 1nsurance, management experience, personnel system, financial system, etc) * Financial reporting and accountability is already in place. * More direct and timely accountability to the public. * city Council would set goals for the building. Staff reports to Council. Disadvantages: * City staff not as aware of arts groups' needs. * City doesn't have a great deal of experience in renting space and being a landlord. Arts Council Manaqement: * Arts Council would hire a director which would oversee the leasing and building- maintenance aspects of the building (in addition to other Arts Council duties).' Leasing and tenant relations issues would be handled by the director. Building 4 ,~ t"1 i ~. ~ maintenance functions would be either contracted out or done by , other hired staff. Staff reports to the Arts Council. Advantages: * Arts Council has good understanding of tenant needs and has a mission to support and encourage the arts. * May be the best organization to determine uses of the building, however there is a concern that property management will conflict with the mission of the Arts Council. Disadvantages: * Financial viability: the Arts Council will need to develop a system for financial reporting. Reporting would be made to the Arts Council. The community as a whole and the City Council may have delayed access to financial information. * The Arts Council as an entity does not have a strong background in property management. RECOMMENDATION: The Committee would like to discuss the above options with City Council and get feedback. 5 " (""'\, t"""\ Cit:y ...unci! Approved By Ordinance thrhfMt: 15 , 1. - " MEMORANDUM To: Kim Johnson, Planning Office From: Chuck Roth, City Engineer e'fC- Date: March 18, 1993 Re: Aspen Arts and Recreation Center (Red Brick School) - Rezoning, PUD Development Plan, and Text Amendment Having reviewed the above referenced application, and having made a site inspection, the engineering department has the following comments: 1. Rezoning a. Traffic generation and road safety - The Engineering Department agrees with the applicant's statements on pages 6-8 that the proposed use should result in improved traffic generation and road safety conditions. b. Demands on public facilities - As per the application, rezoning should not result in increased demands on public facilities. 2. Text Amendment - The application satisfactorily address the review standards, and the Engineering Department has no comment on the proposed text amendment. 3. PUD' a. Off-street Parking - It appears that the area proposed to be used at this time totals 21,800 square feet. Perusal of the Code requirements for off-street parking for similar use zone designations shows a range of from 1.5 to 4 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet. The proposed 35 parking spaces would slightly exceed the minimum similar requirement which would be 33 spaces. It is recommended that a condition of approval be to paint the stripes delineating the parking spaces in order to ensure optimum space utilization. It appears that if striping is at the standard 8 1/2' space width required by Code, there could actually be 24 spaces on the north side for a total 36 spaces on site. It is quite possible that the 36 spaces may, in the future, prove to be insufficient, and provision should be made at this time to anticipate that possibility. r'\, (") J ! Future increased development on the site would probably require additional on- site parking, and any apparent deficiencies in the current on-site parking proposal should be remedied at that time. (Should the Transportation and Parking Director be commenting?) b. On-street Parking - The parking on the Garmisch Street frontage has historically been unclear due to the lack of curb and gutter and signage. Any future development in the public right-of-way at this location must be coordinated with the Engineering Department. The Garmisch Street right-of-way is 100' wide. It is recommended that the applicant consider installing curb and gutter on Garmisch Street located to provide head-in parking similar to other Gaf111isch Street parking such as at Paepke Park, Molly Gibson Lodge, the Medical Associates, etc., as well as constructing a sidewalk for pedestrian circulation. Street drainage should be addressed at that time. A storm runoff inlet and extension to the stof111 sewer may need to be installed. The on-street parking is available to the entire public and may not be restricted to adjacent businesses or uses. ,4. Plat Comments a. Establish and indicate easements for trail (14'), electric switchgear, and any other utility pedestal or utility needs. 5. The applicant shall agree to join any future improvement districts which may be formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in the public right-of-way. 6. Given the continuous problems of unapproved work and development in public rights- of-way, we would advise the applicant as follows: The applicant shall consult city engineering (920-5080) for design considerations of development within public rights-of-way, parks department (920-5120) for vegetation species, and shall obtain permits for any work or development, including landscaping, within public rights-of-way from city streets department (920-5130). ' cc: Bob Gish, Public Works Director Rob Thomson, Special Projects M93.74 rl ("\ '/ " .J. ( . , MEMORANDUM FROM: Ki~ Johnson, planning Office Tom Baker, ~~ffice April 9, 1993 TO: DATE: RE: Red Brick School Referral SUMMARY OF REFERRAL COMMENTS: The Housing Office finds that the proposed plan tor the "Red'l3rick School will have feweJ:" impacts in terms of affordable housing than the historic elell\entary school use. Employee Generation - Based upon staff review, the Housing Office finds that there are generally three uses being proposed for the Red Brick: office, studio, and recreation. In terms of office uses, we find that 3 employeesjl,OOO sf (net leasable) is an appropriate generation figure. This is consistent with the generation figures in the city's office zone. In terms of studio use, we find insufficientinfo;m?tipn to dete~ine a generation figure. Additional information about how and when a studio will be used is needed. In te;msofrecreat;onaluses,we find that the gymnasium and locker room ",ill generate less than 1 FTE. This figure is derived from Recreation Department experience with the operation of similar facilities. According to the applicant and under the alternative which does not utilize the 1941 section ,of the building, the applicant expects to generate between 23 48 employees (p. 7 of the Land Use Application) or between 21 - 28 employees (March 16, 1993 letter from Alice Davis to Kim Johnson). ,Given that the gymnasium and locker room portion of the building (8320 sf) will generate less than one employee, then the remaining 13,480 sf will generate a figure less than 30. This assumes that the studio us,€! generates less than 3 employeesjl,OOO sf (netleasabie) and the 13,480 sf figure must be revised to depict net leasable square footage. The Housing Office concludes ~hat the applicant's ,21 - 48 employee generation range is adequate and the actual generation will likely be at the lower end of that range once additional information is provided about net leasable space and how and when the studio space will be used (based upon the option to leave the 1941 portion of the school vacant). Employee Credits - In terms of employee credits, the Red Brick School has historically employed 24 - 30 employees, see attachment 1 ATTACH. 1 n t'""'I , I ,J... J. .. ., MEMORANDUM TO: Kim Johnson, Planning Office , I cindy Wilson, Assistant city Manager ~JJ)J FROM: DATE: Apri:i'6" 199~ Red Bri.ck School Historical Number of E~ployees RE: I spoke to both Joe Tarbet, Aspen School District controller and Barb Tarbet, Elementary S9hool principal to obtain information regarding the number of employees in the Red Brick School building in the past. They both confirmed that the number of employees in the building for libout the past ten years have been about as follows: 5 'administrative personnel 2 janitors 4-5 special teachers, --12-teachers 24 - 25 total employees Barb also noted that in 1969 there were 30 employees in the Red Brick building. If I can help you with this in any other way, please call me. KIM JOHNSON, PLANNING DEPARTMENT LARRY BALLENGER, WATER SUP I""', . 1 " , ,'. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: MARCH 8, 1993 r'i , ;J SUBJECT: ASPEN ARTS AND RECREATION CENTER The Water Department would request that the water service line into the Red Brick School be properly metered. Our Department inspected the Red Brick School building's water system this winter. We found two water service connections that were not metered. LB:rl 1ab9/redschool.mem. nert L~ Segall 'Box 8642 A~pen, Co. 81612 {\ '. .....ty CO\UlCll ApprOVed By Ordinance .....thlt C- , U_ ,..' 4 April 1993 Dav is Horn Inc. 215 South Monarch Su i te 104 Aspen, Co. 81611 Attn: AI ice Davis Re: Red Brick Rezoning Dear Ms. Davis: I am in receipt of your March 29 letter regarding the rezoning of the Red Brick School. I must tell you that there is no support from the residents for several bl()cks, The reason for thi,s is that the school can be turned into an arts & rec center without the rezoning process. If it is rezoned, it can be turned into affordable housing, have a bus stop put in, etc. This is not in the interest of the ne i ghborhood. nor wou I d it contr i bute to keeping this a neighborhood. I can envision a future of excessive vehicular traffic. followed by RFTA buses belching noxious deisel fumes. Then when the whole project fails to support itself, the city will turn it into affordable housing a la West Hopkins. thereby de-valuing all the years I sacrificed to be able to afford to live here and the same for all my neighbors. With all due respect, I suggest that instead of accepting city money for this rezoning project. you counsel the cl ty that they can do what the voters want with the zoning just the way it is. I can assure you that if this passes, the full financial resources of this neighborhood wi 11 throw this into the courts and tie up the whole project inawaythatwill make last fall's lawsuit lool< like ch lid's play. If you wish to discuss this before the meeting. feel free to contact me at work, 920-1500 x209, lOll l,.GO 1 ... ., ....~ ... - -~ -, ~~ .. ,_. . f'"".. l{' U~ vlJ-t' Robert L. segall BOX 8642 Aspen, Co. 81612 1.3 Aprii 1993 city Planninq And zoning Galena street Aspen, Co. 81611 Attn: Jan Carney Jan: I unfortunately have a prior committ.mentart~ cannot attend the meet.inq until about 5:45 pm. In case the lIIeetinq is adjourned before then, please be aware ,that the neighbors, are very much against the re-zoninq attempt.' The desired result" can be accomplished by simply making a conditional use under the R-6 category. There is already a provision for, lit sa,tellite dish which is needed byKAJX and one can interpret the designation of pUblic school or private academic school to encompass the arts center portion of the project. Recreation is obviously ok, since there is an existinq gym from when it was a school. The problem with the proposed PUB zoning is the leeway the city has if the project fails and the resulting de"'stabilisation of the neiqhborhood while waiting for the project: to succeed or fail. At least under the R-6 zoninq, we knOw that it is either an art & rec center or single family housinq. We do not want the possibility of affordable housing, a bus stop, a maintenance shop, public parkinq faCilities, essential government facilities, essentially anythinq under sec. 5-221 B. Furthermore, havinq this meetinq at 4:30 when mOr;t of ,the neighbors who live here full time, are still at work may render the entire meeting invalid. It certa;nly does not serve the democratic process by not allowinq for full paritcipation on the part of those most af ected. Hopefully, I will see you at 5:45. Please try to hol e q then. re4aoa-.OO1 TOTFt.. P,01 t'i n ,FERENC BERKO ~. ,~. PHOTOGRAPHY ASP E N COLORADO e P.O. Box 360 Tel. (303) 925-3398 5 April 9~ ~.i--"'r;.; .r;::-... r? :-: ':"'\ f7 r;::::-! .. ;1 r.,,'\ 02; \::~ : ,~, 1; . "t ,:-;." \1 \ \, \r.-,""m. '" " i Planning & Zoning COffilll.@on, Aspen City Council, l~o S.G~lena, Asp en. IIDP - 6 !993 Ladies ,and Gentlemen: Since I shall be out of town to attend the Meeting on Re-zoning Part of the Residential District to PlJD-6, I would Hke. to put in writing my often expressed opinion that I am against any Change of Zoning of the Residential Dist:rict i.n tp\,W\,st)llnd. Although there are many good reasons - Financial, Parking etc. against such a change, my main objection has always been,~s, is, and shall always be purely one of principle; i.e. the Preservation of the West End as a Reside~ntial Area. Yours sincerely, ~ '\ " ?4/13/93 07:31 ~303 ~3967 . . ...._i__.._. . ....... . CAPLAN & EARNEST () raJ002 "~""'."""".'';'"'''''' .' , r' ( '~f !",.- - ' , 733 13th Street Boulder, Colorado 80302 Apdll2, 1993 8m/: Via Te1ecopier. 910-5197 Ms. Jasmine'l'ygre. Chainnan Planning and Zoning Commission clo KimIolmsan AspcnIPitkin. Planning Office 130 S. Galena Street Aspen. Colorado Re: Aspen Arts and Recreation Center (Red Brick School) Dear Ms. Tygre and M~ oftb,e Board: Please co~ider this letter which is respectfully submitted in ~ltion to the proposed Map Amendment, GMQS Exemption and TeJtt Amendment to the Aspen Land Use Regulations with respect to 1he Red Brick School. My husband and I are the oWIlers of the. resldeI1ce .at.219 North M()IlaI'rh, whidl is located two doors away and across the street from the Red Brick School. Durins the more than 2Sycars that we have owned our residenc:e. of course. we have seen manY changes in Aspen. Howevec, one thing that has endured for WI is the preservation ot the residential character of our neishborhood. We fear that is endangered and would be lost jf the proposed rezonini to Pllblic Zone District were to be approved. . It is ironic, but a little over a year ago. we wrote to express concerns about a proposal to allow f"11ming activities at the school. :In that l~er, we stated our worries about the fact that these kind of COIDDJC!'Cial activities would alter thCl rCl8idc:D.tial clnu'actc2' of our neighborhood. We mentioned the fact that the traffic \V()'\1.ldiA~is1 ~e,~ even beyond the increased level we have noticed in rOC:;.ent years. W edescribcd the fact that our neighborhood bas already become overcrowded with parked cars, many owned by employees who wort at Clark's Market or theothe: stores jUst down the hill or businesses on Main Street. And, peIhaps most significantly, we predicted that the use would open the door to future, similar activities. The following prophetic quote is from our letter of Ianuary 9, 1992; l)4/13/93 07:32 , '.','" u, ..I " "", ", '5'303 ~ 3967 CAPLAN & EARNEST A ~. '. .w 141003 -, ;,....,.'-.;...,..--....."""--.--.. '. )." Ms. Jasmine Tygre. Chairman Planning and Znnlng Commission Apr1l12, 1993 'Page2 The precedent in permitting a couunercial use, even on a temporal1 basis, poses a dangerous tbreat ot authorizing future simillJr uses. We see tbis as opening the door to the potential permanent rezoning of the school property to allow commercial activities to be carried on there. Bver since the Scltool tiistIicfl:'i1-stamiouncedltsl1'lientionsf:() vacate the property, we have been concerned &bollt.t'he possibility that some use other than residential would be sought. It the filming activities were allowed, even on a temporary rczoWng basis, the precedent tor that zoning will be set. ' A copy of our January 1992 letter is enclosed. It now apPears that the fictional Aspen , "extreme" we feared then Is being proposed to become reality now. It is our understanding that the narrowly-approved referendum authorizing the acquisition of the school by the City was for "arts-related" activities. Although this is not a term otprecise definition. it seems clear enough that It would not Include the broad ranee qf permitted uses currently allowed in the Public Zone District, nor ''recreational'' actIvities as contemplated by the proposed text amendment. It seems fair to conclude that "w-related" also did not contemplate the conversion of the school into effectively an office building within our historic residential neighborhood, much less envision the attendant daily traffic, parking, busineSf! invitees and other activities normally associated with an office, which is really a c:ommercial-not residential-use. Schools are compatible with residential ncighborlloods. Office buildings are not., Thus, the reason tor the proposed re7.nn1ng. This contradiction in conventional wisdom and ,existing permitted uses alone undermines the arguments for even considering such a change. Some would say that rc::roning should be automatic, givc:nthe approval to purchase the school. However, as mentioned, the'margin of the vote could hardly be considered a mandate, nor can it fairly be deemed to be any approval by those who would have standing to dictate what kinds of uses should be imposed upon those of UB who reside in the vicinity . We would suggest that rather than expanding the teJtt of permitted uses within the Public Zone District and attempting to completely rezone the School property to fit the new defmition, that the City consider allowing for use by special review or conditional UBe review, so that some precision as to the actual proposed U$e8 would be 04/13/93 07:33 .. ". _L__,.,... 'a'303 ~3967 ! CAPLAN & EARNEST n ~004 - .... .- J Ms. lasltline Tygre. Chairman ~ and Zoning Commil<lllon April 12, 1993 Page 3 required to be committed to up front, and those of us most afCectcd.coul4 be collSidcrcd and the impacts mitigated through the \lBC of conditions and other regulatory tools. Under the proposed rezoning, no such detailed commitments or restrictions as to use will be made. For eltllrnplc, we have heard that the classrooms may be partitioned into offi~ tor various "arts-related" 1U)D-profit organizations. But docs this mean that the City will have no offlc.e6 there? WUI City recreation leagues use the gym tor all types ot indoor recreation activities?, Will the hOHJ'S()f use be, restrlc:tt4? 'Yill parking be added, or simply allowed to tare for the already limited spaces on the street? Will traffic to and from the building be controlled? Will M\iSic 'festival patrons continue to be encouraged to take leisurely walks to and from the tent aloni Hallam by continuing to close off the street in the SUl11rnet? ~ "ar~ bl1t,.~, !~wof ~,questlons and concerns that need to be addressed and which c:ou1d I1ll)lc property be addressed by some type of conditional, preciae review, rather than by a sweeping rezoning as proposed. We respectfully urge you to disapprove of this proposed rezoning and preserve the residential character of our neighborhood. Thank you for your consideration. y, ~ ~ . H- Bill Light.' , ? 04/13/93 07,33 I ._ _ ..... '5'303 ~,3967 CAPLAN & EARNEST _..,~ ~005 I ):.. 133 - 13th Street Boulder, Colo~ado 8030~ January 9, 1992 Sant Via ~elecoDierl 920-1890 To Whom It May Concern 0(0 Ms. KAthy Lee Aspen. Colorado Dear )fs. Lee: We are the owne~s of tbe residence 10~tedat 219 No~~h Monaroh, Aspen, which we have had formore.thaJl 25. years. Our house 115 located two doors away and aorosllthe st~eet f~OIII. tb.~rlld.br,iok (former) elemelltary sohool. Our neighbor, Hr. Berko, has brought to our daughter's attention the faot that a temporary rezonillg of the sohool property is being oontemplated that would allow commercial film operations to be oonduoted there ,for a period of at least six months. Even though we are presently out of the country for a t1me, are oonoerns about 'this potential use of the neighboring property are so signifioant that we have authorized our daughter to forward this: letFeJ:on o\lr j:ahAlf to you with the understanding that you will,in turn, submit it to the relevant City board. It is our understand1ng that a oompany plans to rent and use the ent1re school And property for the filming. We assume that, among other things, this will mean that the traffiq 1,n. 8,ndaroti.nd the s(:'hoql will 1noreue. dramatically, not to mention the large number of tr~oks and other vehicles that will be associat;ed .,.1th thl?filming aotivities. Our nei<]hborhoodis already overorowded with pa.t'ked cars. On any given day, one has difficulty finding a parking plaoe anywhere along Monaroh or Halla~ in our neiqhborhood. A8 you know, our neighborhood is entirely residential. Many of the residents occupy their homes year-round. In our oase, S1noe our retirement, we have spent more time eaoh year in our home. OUr oocupan.cy, toqether with that of our children and grandohildren oomprises a signifioant portion of eaoh year, espeoially the ski season. We are oonoerned that o~eroial fil~ing aotivities will enti.t'ely alter the residential oharaoter of our neighborhood. Filming will likely not be confined to the daytime hours inside the building. Even if it. were, signifioant addit10nal noise 1s likely to be generated. If nighttime filming oocurs, then it most surely will result in noise during that; period. but also in tbe use of briqht, disturbing lights. We appreoiate that the filming ie apparently planned for a six-month period. However, the preoedent in permitting a oommeroial use, even on II temporary basis, poses a dan<;lerous threat of authorizin<;l fUture similar uses. We see this use as open1ng the door to the potential permanent 04/13/93 07:34 I f"-.""j" " '6'303 ~3967 CAPLAN & EARNEST W ~006 - , . " " > , \ rezoning of the sohool property to allow commeroial aotivities to be oarried on there. Ever sinoe the Sohoo1 Distriot first announoed its intentions to vaoate the property, we ~ve been concerned about the poeeibi1ty that some use other than residenti;ll would be sought,. If the filming aotivities were allowed. even on a temporary rezoning basis. the precedent for that zoning will be set. We oannot imagine that there are not some other bui~dings that would be equally if not better suited to the type of filming being contemplated. It _at be a8sullled that the building Was ohoean, in large if not full measure. because of its looation and the attraotion Aspen has to so m/my, including those whose careers involve the tilmindustry. This type of oonvenienoe to a few, however, should not override the substantial, domestio interests of those of us who are the impaoted homeowners ,and residents. Please preserve the residential character of our historic West End neighborhood. and turn down this ill-advised request. Thank you fcr your oonsideration of our continued peaceful and quiet enjoyment of our home. Sincerely, Joan and Bill Light -2- r) ~ D \ 21ty Council:Sxh1.bit ApprOved , 19 By Ordinance .' Aspen Arts and Recreation Center Map Amendment for Rezoninq from R-' to PUblic (PUB): Pursuant to section 7-1102 the standards of review for an amendment to the Official Zone District Map are as follows: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this chapter. Response: There are no conflicts with the zoning code. B. Whether the propqsed amendment is consistent with all elements of the~spen Area Comprehensive Plan. Response: The ~spen Area Community Plan set forth goals to maintain and enhance the balanpe between ,res()rt fU,ncti()ns a,nd community oriented functions. This slteprovides an opportunity to serve the local,community as well as,our~()urist populations by supporting arts and recreation functions, which are central to Aspen's 20th century heritage. As mentioned earlier, .the AACP also specifically addresses the purchase of the school building and its rezoning to Public. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding Zone Districts arid land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Response: currently the zoning on the parcel is R-6, Medium Density Residential. As a public school, the use was considered a grandfathered conditional use. Activities associated with schools include intense daytime use, two peak traffic periods per day, and occasional night functions. The proposed Center use will lessen peak traffic impacts and lessen daytime noise significantly. Recreation-oriented night functions will probably remain at the same level. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. ' Response: city Engineer Chuck Roth comments that the proposed use should result in improved traffic generation and road safety conditions. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment' would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Response: No increased demands will result from the rezoning. In fact, the community's public facilities will be augmented by the new recreation facilities. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environmel1.t. t""'i () . Response: The site and the neighborhood are already developed. No new square footage is proposed with this application, so this condition does not readily apply. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Response: The proposed rezoning to Public is consistent with the historic public use of the site as a school and is considered "impact neutral" to the surrounding area. Any changes to an approved PUD Plan must receive approval through appropriate land use reviews. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Response: The most important change voters approved the purchase of the recreation purposes. This mandate current R-6 residential designation. for this site for requires parcel is community rezoning that arts from the and the' I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. Response: The Red Brick School Building will be a valuable asset to the community by providing a hub for the arts community, which is a large part of the cultural fabric of Aspen. 2 c ( \ c f\ , RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION .0 '.....:1:.y COGDeil ApprOVed By Ordinance ~t"\t fZ , 1'_ APRIL 13. 1993 Chairlady Jasmine Tygre called meeting to order at 4:30 PM. Answering roll call were Tim Mooney, David Brown, Sara Garton, Richard Compton, Bruce Kerr, Roger Hunt and Jasmine Tygre. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS There were none. STAFP COMMENTS Diane informed Commission ,<?!1, l4'o,J:"kse~si<?!1 ,with, loc:~l planning & Zoning members on May 2nd from 9:00 to 3:00 in Glenwood. Memo is forthcoming on this. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were none. ASPEN ARTS AND RECREATION CENTER (R.ED BR.:J:C:KIR.EZd1tt'NG TEXT AMENDMENT Jasmine opened the public hearing. Kim made presentation as attached in record. Alice Davis, Representative for applicant: What the committee has recommended and Council has not accepted is to use everything but the 1941 portion of the building which is effectively 22,000 to 35,000sqft. Council is trying to decide whether they want .to mothball it, tear it down or re-use it. Right now they are ~ooking at 3 bids to look at all three options. They really haven't decided what they want to do with the older section of the building. Kim: The Engineering Dept comments that he feels the rezoning will have improved impacts on traffic generation and road safety based on the previous use of the school and the necessity to block off streets and manipulate the traffic pattern because of the small children involved,dyring the daytime. He also feels that the 35 parking spaces should exceed the minimum requirements for similar office uses. Tom Baker from the Housing Office commented that the information that we got from the school district indicated that 24 to 30 full time equivalent employees have been stationed at the school building when it was a school and that the application information depending on the different ~ypes of generation calculation process ( ( \ ( \ r, r'l , PZM4.13.93 indicates that 21 to 48 employees full time equivalent could be at the school. He believes the employee generation will not exceed that of the former school use. Jasmine: One of the things I am having trouble coming to grips with in this application is what exactly requires the rezoning to Public as opposed to the text amendment for the arts, cultural and recreational activities? Why do we need to zone this to Public and then why do we need the text amendment and why do those have to be 2 separate things. Kim: The AACP set a goal to rezone the building to PUblic. Public funds purchased the building for public use. The contemplated uses being arts, recreational and cultural are typically public oriented uses that a lot of other communities already have listed under their Public Zone District. The Aspen Public Zone District specifies recreational facilities and performing art center--neither of which we, felt on their own or in combination really encompassed the proposed non~profit users and art support. Aside from performing arts ~spen wanted to provide something slightly different when it was put to the vote. Planning staff looked at those uses that are currently in the Public zone district and said "Could we realistically and honestly be able to make interpretation that non-profit arts related office uses accessory to the recreation uses which are fairly straight forward--we would be able to make an interpretation that those uses fall under the categories already listed in the Public zone?" We feel that that was not possible and that we would apply a new permitted use which is a little more broad--arts, cultural and recreational activities. Jasmine: The parcel should be zoned Public because it is a pUblic use and was acquired by pUblic funds. But the Public zoning itself would not allow some of the specific uses that are contemplated for this building. So you need the text amendment. Kim: Right. Jasmine: That would affect other public zones too. Kim: True. There are 12 .other Public zone parcels including City Hall, Fire Station, Courthouse Building, Ice Garden. Potentially someone could propose to put a roller rink in the basement of city Hall. ..,.,.' Diane: I think what we are proposing is appropriate and certainly fits within the purpose of that Public Zone District. We just wanted to make it a cleaner fit. 2 , . ( \, ( ( \ f1 n ;jl ., PZM4.13.93 Jasmine: I am just questioning what effect it might have on other Public Zone Districts if you make this a permitted use. Diane: I don't see it being radically different from what is already on that list. I don't see it as a potential problem. Bruce: The answer to Jasmine's concern is that it is something that is reviewed and it is not as of right. Kim: structural changes to an existing facility have to be reviewed by pun plan criteria. Davis:. 'Nationally arts related arid recreation related uses are extremely common in the Public Zone. Roger: I look at arts, cultural and recreational activities as being more generic than performing arts center recreation center. Should we not remove performing arts center and recreation center };>ecause they are covered by arts, cultural and recreational activities. I am looking at simplifying this thing. Bruce: If you look at that section of our code the dimensional requirements--it says the dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted conditional uses etc etc--those are both terms of art and'they should be mutually exclusive but yet they are used together there. So I don't know whether that is talking about permitted uses or conditional uses. Kim: I think it is a typo that there is the word "and" was not in there. Bruce: If the word "and" is in there then I understand it. Davis: It is not in the code. It was codified without the "and". Diane: The "and" should be there. Bruce: We should do this as part of this process. Kim: So we will be deleting #6 and #10. We have talked about the lease discussions includ~ ho~ individual arts are being reviewed or qualified to be on here. '. ' Cindy Wilson: It is vague at.this point because what will happen is the City is working on management agreement with the arts council. And the arts council will then with the City set the specific criteria. There will be general criteria ~hat will be in the lease between the City and the Arts Council that would have to be met. There will be criteria set as to who the building will be leased to. 3 ( ( i , , \ r'\ ~ PZM4.13.93 REZONING FROM R-6 TO PUBLIC Bruce: What would your response be as to the down side of doing some of the things that are proposed by the neighbors ie leaving it R-6 but creating the use that we want the building as a conditional use in that zone. Kim: staff considers that an interesting alternative. But one thing that is of concern to us is the scheduling of the process. We have gotten underway with the process of proposing to rezone it to Public in accordance with the Aspen Area Community Plan recommendation. We were discussing the option with Jed and he says that it is not uncoIlUflon to have the Public Zone encompass these types of uses. . Diane: I think that this location and it's use and where it is situated is appropriate for Public. Bruce: The rea,son the school has always been there is that schools are conditional uses in the R-6 zone. Davis: The whole community plan said "Buy it with pUblic money and use it for public uses and rezone it to Public". One of the complaints from opponents to' the rezoning in the neighborhood is that they are worried that it is going to change to affordable housing. Public Zone is definitely much more of a safeguard against that than leaving it residential because that is a much more likely scenario to go from R-6 to affordable housing than from Public to affordable housing. We have absolutely no intention of using it for affordable housing. Bruce: This property is encumbered by things other than the zoning that we put on it--whatever that zoning is. It is encumbered by the conditions of the vote that the pUblic took and the conditions that that placed in this property. So I don't think we need to worry unnecessarily about some potential uses that are out there just by virtue of the fact that there is Public Zone because the property is encumbered legally by the conditions of that vote. MOTION Roger: I move to recommend to City Council the map amendment to rezone the former school site known as the red brick school site from R-6 to Public. I further move to amend the text to include arts, cultural, recreational activities buildings and' uses asa permitted use in the Public Zone District and deleting Performing Arts Center and Community Recreation Facilities from that same 4 f""'! ~ , j / C PZM4.13.93 list. Bruce seconded the motion with all in favor. PARKING AND GMOS EXEMPTION AN ESSENTIAL PUBLIC FACILITY Kim: In regard to not using that paved area behind the school for parking--recently the City adopted a code amendment to allow unused parking spaces in the LTR Zone for public parking uses on conditional use review by the Commission. I think that consistent with that concept is if you have space available for parking to alleviate overflow parking or parking pressures in the surrounding neighborhood that staff feels that using that ,area for parking is not contrary to the City's recently adopted code amendment for a different zone district to try and utilize those spaces that are available. Roger: This area is included. in the ,area for residential parking permits. I think iti$ essential to have parking for this facility that is outside of that permit zone because of the nature of what will be going on in this building. ( It is not that the people will not be able to use the on street parking but it is going to be considerably restricted for them. So I think this parking plan is really essential for the success of the Arts Center concept here. And I think it probably should be signed for people using the arts center building. It could well become a free parking lot if it wasn't ,indicated that it was restricted for users of that building. Julie?: Regarding drop off parking-~because of the residential permit Hallam Street near the gym could be a 20 minute dropoff parking for people taking their kids to the center because I think if you don't provide that they are going to double park or do whatever it takes to drop their kids. ' All Commissioners were in favor of this suggestion for dropoff parking. Roger: I would recommend it to the Transportation Director. David: When we make a motion I would like to encourage required landscaping around the parking'lot. It is almost a green belt back there and I think it would go a long way to soften the impact of parking. As far as GMQS goes I tend to disagree with the application saying that there is no need for housing mitigation on this site. The schools both when they were here ~nd then located out to the school 5 ("'\, n ( PZM4.13.93 campus did not mitigate their housing requirement for educational employment stating that those were jobs that were already in the community. That probably is so. The schools had employees in the community. This, in essence, is creation in use and for them to say they are not creating new jobs and then to say "Well now the space is here and we are not creating new jObs"-- Jasmine: Sort of like double dipping. David: Something like that. But I don't buy it. I agree with what Julie has said. I think the arts are a huge part of this community. The arts are probably as much a reason this community exists as sports and recreation. But I think people who are in the arts whether it is for profit or non profit are as much in need of finding a place to live as anyone else. And I think that this will' be creating new opportunities if only indirectly. So I can see a real, need to, if not go through the whole GMQS process, at least provide some housing mitigation. ( Davis: This GMQS exemption is actually not required. The only time you need a GMQS allotment is if you are expanding new area, making new space, which would create the impact for employee or parking. The reason that the school didn't provide the housing when they expanded the new space is because they' were exempt from local review. This is technically ,md legally by the code. We don't have to provide anything because it is not an expansion. There is no new square footage. Jasmine: But it is new usage. Davis: But they usually don't have to go through GMP and get an allotment for change in use. Technically there could be an argument that we should have to go through the change in, use process to deal with the impacts. And that is why we figured the best avenue to accomplish it is this GMQS exemption. Another way to look at it is the employee impact moved from the school to the school. The existing uses that are around the community now are also existing. It is not like new arts people. David: I know when we did the day care center in the yellow brick school that came up. with the change in use, how are you going to mitigate your employee housing because there are new jobs and indirectly if somebody is coming from another office space of some kind, some other tenant will occupy that office space. There won't be any mitigation for that. 6 ( ( '\, f'1 I") , PZM4 .,13.93 Davis: Also--change in use--this has been a public use for 100 years. So it is not technically a change in use either. I don't think that we need to address employee mitigation technically through the code. We want to do what we need to do but we also think that we have proven that there are no new employee impacts. Jasmine: I think what David is saying is that there are new employee impacts and that it ill-behooves the city to try to worm out of mitigating for that. Davis: Except that the cOde--even Tom Baker in his memo says there is really not an avenue to ask for it. David: What would be the down side if we did not approve GMQS exemption? Kim: We would have to compete for square footage under Growth Management. That is what GMQS exemption means is that you do not have to co~pete. Richard: There is no square footage to compete for-- MPT Kim: That Grow~h Management Exemption for. essential public facilities criteria provides for Council to determine that no mitigation may be required--a part or all mitigation. So exempting from the competition is one thing which I agree I think that without creating new square footage competition doesn't serve any use or purpose. Mitigation factor is another issue and whether you want to forward a recommendation to Council one way or the other about mitigation--what we tried to establish in the memo is that it is a neutral impact as far as employees from the school use to the proposed use. Tim: I think you could quantify it because 5% of the building is going to be for profit. I think it behooves the management of the Center to rent for a limited period of time so that there always is a turnover of young artists and there always is a new generational-type artist movement that has opportunity to have space in town. I think that generates new activity--new groWth. I think that there is going to be impacts especially with housing. ,We are creating a new venue for people to become prominent artists and we want to turn over these prominent artists as they get better and better seeded in the community and they are selling more works. They should move out and someone else who is young and new should move in. 7 c -..,. ( i I \. f1 ~ 1 " PZM4.13.93 Richard: I consider arts activities as essential as our 3-R public education in this community so that it is as essential to the community as anything else. And that there wouldn't be the demand for the space if it were new e~ansion space for the arts groups. It is essentially replacement space that the old community center served as a major center for arts and recreation. They had a room for lectures, meetings, aerobics, the big meeting room over there so that r see this facility as being replacement for that. Groups used to have their office in the Wheeler before it was remodeled ,which included Grass Roots and I don't know who all else. At one time at the end of the 70's when there were fewer kids in the school system, the Writer's Foundation actually had it's office right in the red brick building. So I don't see this as anything but consolidating groups that have been scattered and are being driven out of existence by the market prices. I favor GMQS exemption. Jasmine: I think Pavid's concern which I share to a great extent does not really affect whether or not the exemption is granted. I think what you might want to do is if you feel as I QO that somewhere along the line there are more people that have been accounted for in terms of mitigation of impact., , That might be a separate motion as a recommendation to Council that you might want to make but it doesn't really affect the exemption. We might want to recommend that despite the fact that this is an exemption that in some people's opinion on the Commission that there are in fact employee generations that are not taken into account and that we would like to see the Council mitigate. Sara: If GMQS exemption is passed here tonight-- Jasmine: They don't have to compete. Sara: But the only reason they are asking for it is so that they don't have to mitigate. Jasmine: They don't have to compete. Sara: No. They don't have to compete because they are not asking for any additional footage. They are alilkingfor exemptions so they don't have to mitigate. Right? Davis: If we are denied the GMQS exemption we still don't have to compete because we are not expanding FAR. David: I heard Kim say something dIfferent than what Alice was saying. 8 r'! (') , ( PZM4.13.93 Kim: Alice hit it on the head in that if we were creating new space it wouldn't be a doubt whether or not this is a required action. But staff wanted to cover the issues of whether or not this was "new space". I think Richard equated that it is' not really new space especially for this set of users. But I think the city would be hard-pressed if they were required to be paying mitigation requirements if P&Z and council agrees that there are X number of new employees generated above and beyond previous use encompassing the other users as they are about the community now. So it is going to have to be an issue that Council is going to have to make it a financial issue. Davis: You do not have a legal avenue in the code to require these mitigations. The only way you get the GMQS is if you expand. And we are not expanding. If we were a private user going in and we were using existing space we do not have to go through Growth Manaqement. The second is a change in use. This is technically not a change in use. ' ( \ So I think the bottom line that you need to think about is that given the fact that you don't have a legal avenue to request this do you believe that the impacts are neutral? We are going to have around 30 employees and they had around 30 employees in the past. So we think it is impact neutral. And it certainly is less impacting from other perspectives too--trip generation from when it was a school. David: If we deny GMQS Exemption what is the down side? Kim: If you found that there were additional employee impact and you wish to deny this, this project would be required to-- Davis: Mitigate employee housing which probably means they would take West Hopkins or some project and say "OK these 3 units are for this project"~ I don't know what they would ,do. Sara: Staff recommended that GMQS be part of this application simply because they knew mitigation might come up. Kim: We wanted to be able to provide an avenue to look at the mitigation because we knew that someone was going to bring up all the employees that will be occupying that structure. We wanted this discussion to forward on to Council. Jasmine: What I am uncomfortable with is we don't know exactly which uses are going to be in this building. We don't know whether this is going to be use neutral. I don't feel comfortable signing off on it. With the Ritz and other, hotels we have provisionary period where 9 c ( , i ) \ '" (") 0- ~"'.:,' PZM4.13.93 we review them after a year or two of actual uses. It is well and good to have an of these statistics from other parts of the country but if they don't really apply to this particular building and the way it is being used I don't thin~ we are fulfilling our responsibility to the community. Davis: I don't think you have the avenue to require it even if you did find that it was an impact. ' MOTION Roger: I move to recommend to' Council GMQS Exemption for the facility as an essential pUblic facility. However the Commission has identified an area of affordable housing which it believes should be identified for mitigation. It is the Commission's recommendation to Council that this be satisfied by providing housing created to mitigate as if this were a new project and meets affordable housing guidelines. David: I would add provide landscape screening of the parking area. Roger: Would you recommend to city council that they take this out of existing housing stock? David: I recommend that they not take it out of existing housing stock b~t that they create new housing stock. Roger: Then this is a motion that I can't support. I withdraw my motion. MOTION Bruce: I move to recommend to city Council GMQS exemption for the facility known as the Red Brick School Building as essential pUblic facility subject to the conditions of the J:'la.rining Office memo dated April 13, 1993.' Roger seconded the motion. Roll call vote: Tim, no, David, no, Sara, yes, RiChard, yes, Bruce, yes, Roger, yes, Jasmine, no. Motion carried 4 to 3. MOTION Roger: I move to approve the special review of parking for the Red 10 ( ( I \. n f) , ) PZM4.13.93 Brick School site in the Public Zone District with the conditions on the Planning Office memo dated April 13, 1993 and with an additional condition that the parking shall be screened along the north face and recommend to the Tr~nsportation/Parking Director to consider a drop-off zone along the front of the gymnasium area. And that at the entrance of the striped parking area that it be signed for users of the facility. Bruce seconded the motion with all in favor. MOTION David: I would like to make an additional to recommend to Council to consider providing housing opportunities created directly or indirectly by changing the use of this facility from educational facility to an ~rts and recreational center. Richard asked for clarification. Is that specifically for the use of the tenants or just in general? David: In general. To consider creating housing opportunities to help mitigate housing required or made necessary directly or indirectly by the change ,in use from educational to arts and recreational even though both are within the public use. Tim seconded the motion. Jasmine: You would like to have them do this regardless of any body count? David: Regardless. It is a philosophical thing. Technically there may be no need for it. However I think that film fests, even though it is a short term thing, every year it creates activity. And I think a lot of people come to town that don't necessarily stay in hotels. KAJ}{ may only have a couple of employees. I think a lot of these other entities--this is the roster this week. Next week it may be something completely different. I can envision where there might be more people working per thousand in this building full time--potentially 100 people working full time in this building at some point in time. And I think that directly or indirectly there is housing needs created by the change in use that we have done today. And I would like to encourage the pUblic sector to put the money where their actions are. Roger: I don't see any great creation of bodies because of the change in use of this building. I do see an indirect community wide deficit created by possibly the school justifying not creating sufficient housing for it's new facility on the basis that it provided here. And! think if you could identify that in your motion that there is nothing new here but there was a deficit 11 . ' ( ( , --- .../ ~ , , (1 y .> PZM4.13.93 created by the move of the school and it's-- David: That's what I said--"by the change in use of this facility from educational to arts ami recreation". Roger: But I would like to get a more specific that the school district didn't provide sufficient housing for it's new facilities. David: What he said. Davis: Even though I don't agree with the motion I think that legitimizes it because change in use by definition in the code. Jasmine: I think that one of the things that concerns us is the lack of accounting of these things. Because it has been exempted- -because you don't have to specifically mitigate this particular project somehow the question of the need for certain amounts, of units seems to disappear. And I think this is part of the reason we seem to have much more of a housing question than anyone wants to admit. And it is a combination of things. It is partly the fact that the school did not in fact mitigate for their movement. I think David',s point as well is true. These people may not be for profit employees but they are competitors for housing and for commercial space. That has to be taken into account. This is Why I think it is important for us to have some kind of account of bodies. We really have to know how many people we have to provide for at certain times of the year. And what should we be doing about it. Davis: This would not be treating the City as you would a private applicant. And maybe that is justified too. But one example is what if a private school came in and bought the school, converted it to a private school, created 100 employees. They wouldn't have to mitigate because if they didn't expand and it is not a change in use. So a private user would not have to mitigate so why put it on the City? Jasmine: That is another loophole that we have to be considering. I think more than anything else what David is trying to accomplish with this is to say to the city "These are things that we re<;llly have to consider that we don't have,mechanisms for coIlsidering now but we know that they are affecting some of the problems that we are having and we want you to take a look at them". David: Another thing that comes to mind is one of the reasons I was hoping it would be a condition of all of our approvals is the proposals for the Kraut property included artists studio, loft, housing opportunities above a work space. Having gone through this and seeing the amounts of asbestos that this building has and the state of the structural facility being as decrepit as it is that 12 ( l \ t""'\ (') , ,t PZM4.13.93 to do that sort of a use of this site, would that make this a better project? Would it make it more appropriate for non- profits? Would it make it better for the artists and the non- profits that are there to have some ,sort of housing incorporated in the project? I think it would. So I am just encouraging council to move in that direction either on this site or elsewhere. Tim: Is this 5% or 1,700sqft going to be new commercial space or isn't it? ' Davis: No. Tim:' Why not? Davis: It is using existing space. Existing square footage. And it wasn't commercial space before. Tim: Right. It has never been rented out for studio space. Davis: I still see it as an arts and, r~creation center. And any use that goes in there is public related arts and recreational related. By definition of the co~e new space is new square footage. Kim: It is more of a change in use than new commercial square footage. Tim: But it was never on t~e market before. Davis: Maybe that component of the project is a change in use. But still we are not technically a change in use by the code. So we would be doing it because the City is the applicant and they are being good guys, not because it is anywhere, found in the code. David: We are all good guys and we are all the city. We all have a philosophy that says there should be mitigation. Davis: The Council is not only the reviewing body but is deciding as the owners. Jasmine: That is what the motion is all about. David wants them to consider that mitigation. Tim: I think it'is wise because there is a catch 22 to this. Richard: I consider it superfluous, I think we need to find some bigger tools to deal with this. David: One--we don't need new source of funds because there is a million one in transfer tax that is not being spent ev.ery year now. 13 (' \ ( f'\ () -; o. .IJ ,. PZM4.13.93 The city hasn't created more than 11 units in the last year. With any luck they will create about 6 units this year. It is just not living up to production plan, the Community Plan or any previous housing production plan--the Housing Authority or,the city. So I am just encouraging them to act in a direction that is consistent with previous intent programs that are required of private sector developers and entities. And because of a loophole in definitions they are not required to do it but I think in good faith it would be a nice thing for them to do. Jasmine then called the question. Motion passed with a vote of 4 to 2. Jasmine then adjourned the meeting. Time was 7:05 PM. l4 ~ cC). Council Jl!...Mnit ApprOVed , By Ordinance F 11 - ... f). c. .1> ,AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL (Pursuant to section 6-205 E. of the Aspen Land Use Regulations) State of ColQrado) ) SSe City of Aspen ) follows: The undersigned, being duly sworn, deposes and says as I~ Alice Davis being or representing an applicant before city of Aspen, personally, certify that Public Notice of the application for the Red Brick School was given by mailing notice of the public hearing before the Aspen City Council to all property owners within 300 feet, of the Red Brick School. Also, notice was posted via a sign containing the information,required in Section 6-205 E with such posting in a conspicuous place (as could be seen frOlll the nearest public way). Posting and mailing occurred on April 22, 1993. Applicant: city of Aspen, owner Red Brick By Qil~ ~ Alice Davis - The foregoing Affidavit of Public Notice was acknowledged and signed before me this 30 day of April, 1992, by Alice Davis on behalf of the city of Aspen. WITNESS my hand and official seal. , . My Oommi.si~ expire.';/.f.~ "~ " J c!. ) ('j n ~ q/ro / MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council Amy Margerum, city Manager Diane Moore, City Planning Direct~ THRU: THRU: FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner DATE: May 10, 1993 Text Amendment for the, pU})l,ic: Zone" District to allow "Arts, Cultural and Recreational Activities, Buildings and Uses" - Second Reading of Ordinance 21, Series 1993 RE: SUMMARY: The Planning and zoning commission recommends approval of the proposed code amendment which expands the permitted use list in the Public (PUB) zone to include "arts, cultural and recreational activities, buildings and uses". The Commission also recommends deleting two uses currently listed, "performing arts center" and "community recreation facilities", as the proposed new use will encompass these in a broader fashion. As a house-keeping measure the Commission ~an1:.s 1:.() ~<ii1:. the "Di:m~nsionalrequirements" section to correct a typographic error. ' " , The text amendment was submitted as part of an application package to rezone the former school to Public (PUB), approve a PUD Development Plan (as required in the Public zone district), and approve GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: First reading of Ordinance 21 was passed by, a 5-0 vote on April 26, 1993. Since first reading, the ordinance has been amended ,to de~ete unrec:essary sections (format corrections) as suqgested by the city Attorney. At first reading, Mayor Bennett offered for discussion the possibility that a new type of public zone district could be formulated specifically for arts and recreation type uses. staff stated that this action would add yet another zone to the City's lengthy list of zone districts and would be very limited in its use. Council aqreed with staff that this suggestion would not be a desirable alternative to the proposed amendment for the existing Public zone. BACKGROUND: The Red Brick School was purchased by the City upon the direction of a citizen' s vot~, in May 1992. A City Council appointed task force composed of interested citizens and neighbors of the property met weekly in November and December, 1992 and developed a program for the structure, including recommendations for the physical plant and a list of appropriate arts, culture, and 1 t""'\ "<j ri recreation users to occupy the various spaces of the building. The City Council reviewed this report in February, 1993 and decided that they would send out a request for proposal from various architects on the different alternatives proposed by the citizen group. The City would like to commence construction in June or July of this year, with tenant move-ins in the summer of, 1994. In an effort to initiate renovations quickly, the City needs to process the requested text amendment, rezoning, and GMQS Exemption as soon as possible. CURRENT ISSUES: The Public (PUB) zone district currently allows 14 permitted and 3 conditional uses (refer to Exhibit "A"). Two of these uses, "performing arts center" and "community recreation facility" come close to the proposed uses for the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center. However, the City Planning Director has made the determination that the incorporation of arts related non- profit offices and individual art studio spaces does not fit with these already permitted uses. By adopting a broader arts and recreation-related permitted use, the Planning Commission recommends that the above two uses be deleted from the use list to reduce redundancy. The proposed text will read: B. Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Public (PUB) zone district. 1. Library; 2. Museum; 3. Post Office; 4. Hospital; 5. Essential governmental and public utility uses, facilities, services and buildings (excluding maintenance shops); 6. rCrfe19aiR~ art ecntcri 7. -Public transportation stop; 8. Terminal building, and transportation related facilities; 9. Public surface and underground parking areas; 10. Fire station; 11. Cemmunity rcercatien faeilitYi 12. Public school; 13. Public Park; and 14. Accessory buildings and uses. 15. Arts, cultural and recreational activities, buildings and uses; and (the list will be renumbered for cOdification) staff discussed the option of overlaying the property as an SPA (Specially Planned Area) and applying for a use variance for non- profit arts related offices and individual artist studios. This option was discounted because of: 1) the length of time to process an SPA map amendment and Development Plan (four steps); and 2) the concern that an SPA overlay might allow future use,variances, thus 2 f'\ f) lessening protection of the neighborhood charadter. The Planning Commission and the Planning staff reviewed the proposed amendment pursuant to Section 24-7-1l02 of the Municipal Code and find that the review criteria are satisfactorily met. The review standards for text amendments and staff responses are contained in Exhibit "a". FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: No impacts are anticipated because of this text amendment. R~COMMENDATION: On April 13, the Planning and Zoning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of this text amendment. ALTERNATIVES: The Council could elect to pursue an SPA overlay for the parcel, retaining the underlying R-6 residential zone designation. A use variation would then have to be granted via the SPA process, and an SPA Development Plan would have to be approved and recorded. ------------------------ PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve second reading of Ordinance 21, Series 1993 to amend the Aspen Municipal Code deleting number 6 (Performing art center) and number 10 (Community recreation facility) from the permitted use list in the Public (PUB) zone district (Section 24-5-220.B.), to add the following permitted use: "Arts, cultural and recreational activities, buildings and uses.", and to correct a typoqraphic error in the "dimensional requirements" section to read: D. Dimensional requirements. The dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Public (PUB) zone district shall be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and final development plan, pursuant to Article 7, Division 9, Planned Unit Development. CITY MANAGER COMMEl'l'I'S: . Exhibits: Ordinance 21, Series 1993 "A" - List of Current Permitted Uses in the Public (PUB) Zone liB" - Review Standards for Code Amendments / Staff Responses 3 n n ,.. ;/ ORDINANCE NO. '2-\ (SERIES OF 1993) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, AMENDING CHAPTER 24 OF TilE MUNICIP"AL CO])~; IJOO:)ti'SEREGULAoffONS; 'ByclUlEWINGSECTION 24:" 5-220 (B) PERMITTED USES AND (D) DIMENSIONAl:' REQUIREMENTS .INTHE:. PUBLIC (PUB) ZONE DISTRICT. WHEREAS, Section 24-7-1103 of the Municipal Code provides that amendments to Chapter 24 of the COde, to wit, "Land Use Regulations", shall be reviewed and recommended for approval by the Planning Director and then by the Planning and Zoning Commission at public hearing, and then approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved by the city Council at pUblic hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Director did receive from the city of Aspen ("Applicant") and has reviewed and recommended for approval certain text amendments to Chapter 24 associated with the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center rezoning, POD and GMQS exemption submission; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the proposal and did conduct a pUblic hearing thereon on April 13, 1993; and WHEREAS, upon review and consideration of the text amendments, agency and pUblic comment thereon, and those applicable standards as contained in Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code, to wit, Division 11 of Article 7 (Text Amendments), the Planning and Zoning commission has recommended approval of the text amendments recommended by the Planning Director and associated with the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center submission pursuant to procedure as authorized by Section 24-6-205 (A) 8 of the Municipal Code; and 1 r-, o WHEREAS, the Aspen City Council has reviewed and considered the text amendments under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered those recommendations and approvals as granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, and has taken and considered public comment at public hearing; and WHEREAS, the city council finds that the text amendments meet or exceed all applicable development standards and is co~sistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, the city Council finds that the proposed text amendments will allow and promote compatibility of zone districts and land uses with existing land uses and neighborhood characteristics and will be consistent with the public welfare and the purposes and intent of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code~ NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN COLORADO: Section 1: Pursuant.to Section 24-7-1102 of the Municipal Code, the city Council finds as follows in regard to the text amendment: l. The proposed text amendment as set forth in the Plan are not in conflict with the provisions of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code or the Aspen Area Community Plan. 2. The proposed text amendment will promote the public interest and character of the City of Aspen. Section 2: Section 5-220 (B.) of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code of the city of Aspen, Colorado, is hereby amended, which new text shall read as follows: B. Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Public (PUB) zone district. 1. Library; 2 ~ n y 2. Museum; 3. Post ,Office; 4. aospital; 5. Essential governmental and public utility uses, facilities, services and buildings (excluding maintenance shops); 6. Public transportation stop; 7. Terminal building, and transportation related facilities; 8. Public surface and underground parking areas; 9. Fire station; 10. Public school; 1.1. Public Park; 1.2. Arts, cultural and recreational activities, buildings and uses; and 13. Accessory buildings and uses. section 3: section 5-220 (D) "Dimensional requirements" of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, is hereby amended, which new text shall read as follows: D., Dimensional requirements. The dim,ensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Public (PUB) zone district shall be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and final development plan, pursuant to Article 7, Division 9, Planned Unit Development. section 4: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded unger such prior ordinances. section 5: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. section 6: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the 3 f'\ n day of ,:1-993 at 5:00 in the city Council Chambers, Aspen city Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a pUblic notice of the same shall' be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City council of the city of Aspen on the day of , 1993. John Bennett, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this , 1993. day of John Bennett, Mayor Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, city Clerk 4 t') C1t;ycf""\n """'init--1L- . Approved , 19 _ By Ordinance -' Se~. 5-220. Public (PUB). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Public (PUB) zone district is to provide for the develop. ment of governmental and quasi.governmental facilities for cultural, educational, civic and other governmental purposes. B. Permitted uses, The following uses are permitted as of right in the Public (PUB) zone district. 1. Library; 2. Museum; 3. Post office; 4. Hospital; 5. Essential governmental and public utility uses, facilities, services and buildings (excluding maintenance shops); . 6. Performing art center; 7. Public transportation stop; 8. Termhull building, and transportation related facilities; 9. Public surface and underground parking areaS; 10. Community recreation facility; 11. Fire station; 12. Public school; , 13. Public park; and 14. Accessory buildings and uses. C. Conditional uses, The following uses are permitted as conditional uses in the Public (PUB) zone district, subject to the standards and procedures established in Article 7, Division 3. } 1. Maintenance shop; 2. Affordable housing; and 3. Satellite dish antennae. D. Dimensional requirements. The dimensional requirements which shal1 apply toal1 ptlrmitted conditionsJ uses in the Public (PUB) zone district shal1 be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and final develop~ent plan, pursuant to Article 7, Division 9, Planned Unit Developmellt. . E. Off-street parking requirement The following off's~n,et parking spaces shall be prO: vided for each use in the Public (PUB) zone district, subject to the provisions of Article 5, Division 3. 1. Wge uses: N/A 2. Residential uses: Requj~e~ special review pursuant to Article 7: Division 4. 3., All other uses: Requires special review pursuant to Article 7, Division 4. (Ord. No, 6-1989, 9 4). ' .--- (""'\ nity Council Exhibit 15 Approved , 19 By Ordinance Text Amendment to the Public (PUB) Zone District to delete from the list of oermitted uses "Performinq Art Center" and "Community Recreation Facility". to add "Arts. Cultural and Recreational Activities. Buildinqs and Uses". and to correct a tyooqraohic error in the "Dimensional Requirements" section. ' Section 24-7-1102 of the Municipal Code establishes the review standards for amendments to the code: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this chapter. Response: No land use code conflicts are evident for the proposed text amendments. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent, with all elements of the Aspen Area. Comprehensive Plan. Response: The proposed amendments are consistent with the short- term goal number 5 of the "Design Quality and Historic Preservation" se6tionof the Aspen Area commUnity Plan. This goal reads: "Retain the red brick school building for public use and preserve its open space; a. Purchase for public use; b. Rezone to Public." c. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding Zone Districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Response: Neighborhood compatibility issues will specifically be addressed pursuant to the rezoning standards. However, Public zoning in most communities provides for a wide variety of uses and activities for citizens and guests. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Response: Per se, this proposed amendment has no effect.. Specific impacts will be considered during individual reviews. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on pUblic facilities, and whether and the extent to' which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Response: These items will be addressed during the rezoning ]. "~ , . f'\ r) review. However, the proposed use is consistent with the other uses identified in the Public zone district. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Response: Impacts are evaluated on a site-by-site basis. No adverse impacts are anticipated on the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Response: The amendments will apply to the approximately twelve other sites in the City zoned Public (PUB). Any development in a Public zone must be reviewed pursuant to PUD dimensional standards. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrol.l,nding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Response: The amendments affect all parcels ~oned Public (PUB). Specific to the former sCh~ol site, this requested text addition allows those uses developed by the Red Brick citizen's group to occupy the structure. Without "arts, cultural and recreational activities, buildings and uses" as a permitted use, the Planning Director would have to make use determinations for the proposed users based on the existing permitted use list. This task would be awkward and might not put to rest any potential non-conformity issues. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. Response: One of the goals of the AACP is to better utilize community facilities. These amendments allow for enhanced public- oriented uses at a public site. ~ . __ n13:J ~t0~ ~-~pt5jioCV~~. '~/MujU~ ld"f'r~~o((f~U (:) u. '\'./. -JII //-d'.:J /',,/-'7-/-7- /" /J),'.' .'-7-: ~~-t........c.::...1 C)..;.-?-i(.~ (".-1....... ... C-,{;.,L- 1---/1 <:""\""'-I L..-'\.-', //I.....""'--_/~......-. __t./.:..-t.'..' fc./.h1 ;/c /e-hdplr,>l/J ~ 7d4, ~w-:- ;(-ed WJ -7A,J~ dkJc/CtwpL4nJ~/~:~ i.. AA. -P1 - '/ ~ -1 .,~.,;" p dr-r, U i/t<,-T C/7,// ,.--i -L- C < < ,f- "V, WUV ii' ""? '. . . j/ . ~ fJrl1J /{)x.- (1f~ ffJ:(c~ c~ .7 /) ...;;:;. / ./!. c:~ .'v/tlitJ u~~I.~/.cL~d;~"~~~fc~oCn ~4 (lti.~cA, . 7~ ~ iy~/d- /~~( c/,-v ~ f;x44 ~,fI&a/l, &:d 1;f~~/~~ i~~ i-ed ~ yUI ~;j~ ~{;/t~d :~J tV;/v~ v~ y~: ~H\j?A1-wc!~/7ZX:-7~~~4 --Io,'d;~.u ~ -h,JcJL,;/ ~ ~cht~~ "'- ;j" . cL/lc!~?~l'''; cstY4r'~7C ..4 ~;,.pa.r", f! :wf do ~~. t:f!?;~L~~ .~ ~ -/0 I~ .a-~~~4' 0~ &d/~4' tl J /..' ...._"'" . ~,. ',', 'IV''-''-' . I,,'A', 'c~'~' ' '. ." ~" '" " " Vfi ~- ~I "l'" '''.-, ~ ,iJ 4!{.r {{ Au:te-A' ~-e 06 W ~j{. .e47 -16 ~ (~ c:f 1e1~Ht{..~ (/d~~~. - u//-zZ:- ~~' ," /) -I- V:7i j'':ea u..d:/t~nd~ '~"~.' ifv .( <(~ (/U/I I. /I . ~4:' t'A . I ' .,./) /). /.. . ,~{;;'{/iC 4.t~.u.~..,-7a ,",/) ~. ~~f<~' 0,/,.7: .~. ~ ~../;t~. f . -#: . (".., /' " / r (" 0--?;- &1\.iL ,. "-1' J -p /7 " /. /.' , .. , ' / ." , . . ~/""'A c{:. ~I ' . .' I / . . . ( . ~:.-J.; . .' (/ va;;;/ "~JYu~~~'~~~ ;~. . M. uit d/~~d>~ n) fi<<jff ~fal ~;j~ vi; ~ ~#h? -f/XL' ~J r ~/~ / J7qf:-P/uj:6+ de MJJ,-r 4. ~u/LA c-~ ~~ .awe- t,./;fk4/ (J7~' !J~ ,v.L:'" / . . J ' '1J _ L / /1/1 /- , ,/J /i1 ' //1/ ~;:~~7~::;J';(' :::;;)~ ;r;d;::- ~ p~ ~ - ~ <U f-&J~ u e.;d~ ( ,^ . (/{ ~ ,p?(~.a&.4 .-kt ;/d./K0 - cll' (/~ (-d-tA , 7Zz- r ,! t' I 0t4J' -:7)~' . / /' / 7" '" / /J :;J-' " J C"//-A" r ;'?u:.. ~c''--1 (' d, t-c/ ,7/, " ~" {" ',/. /, y/-' , , ' ( - V ttd .f<<~uY w ,4tt41 tJ-U~ cJ?L, ,3 ~-l0 <J) I r 'I /"tt,,, h /T -t .:;'~ihf{)c/a/4 C~ ,.~ 7-.'Xd~ P ~M'~ ~5' L) /:, ,0,-,-" . . ~:: .." ~a~t ) <:~~:;:~i~7>" ~~~:: /' I, ' ;/ ", I, ,U ' , ' "., ....,j " /./ 4la1!(~ /lA a-, /1-y~' /Jft "//7,11.., 6L/ / /-k- 'j'~ j!!-'" i tZc< (jY'tr:::-1J. ~. &~~ .~, p~ Y/WW~~Jl'{IL~~ f~~ ?t4?C C~ eM~ cuvI ~ ako 4t'v<ur:lt;;: ,~?f~~ <<~~ /;) " '" '-J7 /./' . ,{ , II ,vt~ ' ,. ""', G, ~7?Z-/dd <~ .-C~~, CJ ~ ;C;:Ltf;:t _~ /o/~ 3 roaTtf/~ ~jt( 6. ~StT~ cfJH/~d ~)'cJ-66 -6:~/0~.1 / ~/ (4Jd.vw/4-VJC:~/~~. ek. . lLt~0tud (01 &d7-?1 /. v.,.Jk ~~- cI~5f7 O. 7UhulyJ/AJJclc/ ~ f) . "f'\ 6 . avI~~~a7'~~ddWd~ - 9 .0 //, r ;J -., / /l:Jt:&L; . V~~ ~ aAd', J!/~Y-/l-'~~z.c; tMtM /, ~, ~~tt:~ 1/ :T~ dd~ /c). -:drtf~ ~~ 13 ~ wuI /"1 ~d ~~~ (; dY c/ '///1.,;,' p '7~}::i~=5,4 v~ '~>;J;~~~~ /2 ~-J.~dtd ~ -4 tee v ~,dM( ~~4~, 7/~ ~F ~L44!-;}C/?-{J~C/.-q C7J- d~;;/'41:~ U G~ (~ ~'-in &;uu ~: ~q?~ ~ ?'oO. -0t../{, //~ C;k,~ 'Jc4'., '~ h,~,~' 0,''''', . ,.C~~1 /'J~ df-cd /ft~?U7 ~ ~hn;JA/X/d ~ ~ 'l/cdP?N/1 ~ ntf t~l>~~-V, c:J/ cIr I /~~ ud-iu/~ cL ~a/;&/2f- ?f !}[:J/ ./f?!-.f tc-)-{~~..4a, N~ ~ tr ~~ f?~ ' .,tkJt/LVl -?fir()-0~i[~"rUT -C4 ' (f )~"~,r ~1L y..z-;r-t>lJ-c~U~ ~ ~ r/U0v ()1L tiL, r~~," 74t'ff~.",~ z:a; <V~ 'W.e ui/~ j;r~ a/-~-e4, /J~ &1)..{j~ . & v~, ~?7~/~?h > /~" :A,U?~~ ~ -$ cy__ f'd-u. 'At a-d ~4/Uey- .:r: o::~,'~ ?11 0-'"- (ji0~ / a~ Rf&4,f}uJA'd ~ ad/~~ ' d~, 14~ cliIfJ~/;J! ~XTu~<-j'-- u j e " -/-' Il t1 '. C) 'fw~d ~~~ ~~ " ~~~ J!drU/d;;'o ~), c;ye ~ , 4J~ ~ Z5i1J~ C1/g1i q&~ 1r441,uv0 A ,~-~. C7/~ b'-/l~ I V.e. Rau~, ~!7 aLu~ JtJ- ~~~ ~t4\ ;t(:~~;~aJ Cvl~ S~~ 7-ftJ3 ?~S;~/ 11i:(~ I:~~~ ~~d~~.dLd/~ ~ <ijau-f .~ ~d . ..ij ~ aq 7av~0/l- ~ ~ #~ /?~t7'&~ "_V7~/'C~ ", ,. aiuJ7, ~~ ~~~ ~ ,~7/1V7U'~j?ad en ~~~ ,:/~u,-. 4:~1 ~l c~ -cJ-€.- ~ ,;Z-t.~;I'~ ~, ", . .', '. . '/1' .' / '/ c/~~ Vr-,;Ud -u U/2Z;" &./ J:tJ:/ :G.... [>t!:/~/-4'F<--. - o ;;1 / / ~ rj/~uj;2- .{-{)I,nd!?( ~~(,L.' d. . - L/~ - j-€-?',-, /7 . /' /' -~ / 'iv:- ;:A.~~'~ , .~ I~'-J' i/ ,_ ,Y..... . _ _._.__.~ '" " _,' , . /'1 '-' ~'~". - , /~ e-L If':' . . .", "'~;:5}" /: /', ' A-YJ-ie/~-! dM /' (:~/e~1 rI~-{-r:~'--0t~ ~~'- -dr-/~ T6 ft1~ (/t~4:f f~.lcJr~ crt ;rd?'~ ~ ~~ tud /lbllt/!-/-;d ~ d/::z1 ' c-1 ~~ '~id. AA''::J.. /'11.': 7d';J..~ ,.;' ~.c/ :Z~44 de-t/~ /~/~~1 U~-r %U; ~--e~tJ, t2 ~~ &~e~ (~ fivd~ U4u1-y~~, 0~~ ~~(J~~ .:f~ ':t4 no -J0 c.-J /7"...<.A-<..-""" ?l..~M.e<l rf""\ , .' () ~ i> ~~~ tfii~ (!rM~4'~ fJdx /1uL. ,Won:mJ~ 7'f; d-<-4b auf<=7~ d~~.~MJ.e7Jd ~& -u:v ~ U;~"~ ~d~~ a( ~ /~ 1f~-ItL r4v /l.;:I- ;../;/C{4M b~~ ~ ~ ~ 7k 'if ~~, (/k~~~J1~/'~~~'~(J ~ ~~~o/f~l1~v~ .w~, d1f(r#j(H~f$lv7:5 ~;?~~ (til ~' 7~ tV:;/n( ~rf ~c f~~ ./vt1fl- ' v/"4- _ /<<.ff7;(# V~(~d:0C;U{i;. c;)~'6-1. / (\ 7["". / /;' /J-#/-:. . /J < / /J CA-tuJ; J: ' 5Uv(t-f,~ {UJf~' ~~C-0 ..)/J<-ft~ -A-,. ~zJ1 l/r?,.' rf djJ~4L~, cL ac ~'MP~ /Ilj/~, /efdlkA ,peru- -au, (.c. ?It,,''/AcL a/ /;tf~ ~jl!"leqI;.~ &1 tJ;d~, , ~ ~(7 . v_., /t-tJ/ cI/?4{!/d~ ~ /~~r 'lo/?-;1C-#~ ;;; rt ;=--- II I ." ./,' , lj,,,, /p?!~Ja~ iJ1 f' /J~~ ~,,#C 7d C1;J.'!:fJ7',jr/t!ie ~ 'ad; ~ z;Jd!' del 10 ~ c;or:1/~ a;1/~ ~ ~ ~ cvkb1~ ':Ir~' ,"~~ -U., / MV,,/:fG /1 Cf'-W (d 7f;" , {'"ita! ~ {!nA/vJ/t~T~6;;dd/<,:;tP'b /~~ (tJlb, i{c<&/~i?~ c:(P-;/~L4a.A (fd~J~ -ITt/fl atb I~ /ddu~ [7Jk 'J M";) dtU ~ ;f~ Fvrul (?~~ , ~ 1"""'\. ~ . '/ ,:-.L/ 'i, " \ Y /J;~ .x1a/~ ~g + I , ~Y: / I f/ (j ~ ':C-C'-' , ":<-''''-V,;{''~~ <Mf d~ cr ~ ~ ~ /a4~{T7r'/>fj /) . Me/. / wJ (lUr~-6 a0~r~ . ... ."' t?d~aA/4-fW crIrgt'ed: l-aL ;;;r~~ '1~"Jr cZi ~i;A~ j<~:r~4 c<J~/,a:d ~uJ~. J#; 0~:le1Ld- {~;t;ll bf~ c(.~ ~~; /'_ J .:;(i A U d )JF 'i, :~L:;:~'~ pZ'~ ,7",,/77 '"'4. _ I, / . .' ," . (j .~. /J //; /j .//[~///f ./{~ c?I~~:n. ~. .-Z/~, va IJ:" ~ . '. '4;_' MeMo ,t{r;j~ #t4'.:uyff Ci. I j' ff'ah4- Itr#'iJ:/' ~;; .4?I/J,)j'!K1--L TZ; / \\d~"-7' ~.1 ." ~,-:..:-;>/'UL . . . . ~. . q~!J of /Uti;Y~ cuJ /? '/ ,~/C::d /1?:z {~jj 1I:1-k./0t'/.~;;L~'1 ?ftlY t2-tL {lb;)Po1./:c./~ :-#I (/~ /J, ~ '._rJ// tutU- 4u 1-1w d CP-f2- a?6V /Zd:/~./ , , 7;{,f <;., /t v.T iJ.P/uru~~./'rqU tL / '4;ivc 1 /' ;Je7~ ~ a- CUm/a7~ ~1-t-0 ~jtZ../lfJ.. ~1~~;; -gtffU?- ~.zfzd t~ tW4/ tfJ/-M~ ?~~i~ tJ ?7J'AJ ~' ~ -U-J..e f?fUJ~ w----, '\ (7/-1'~_( (A~--<'L-- ed~ . / . /j' ~ , / " . . ~ . ~ ';7)~ dt5~ / 7k J i~ ~~ 0tT<dcl ~?{/-t.. ~1 /JtlC/:~1;;} ~ .~ 0--- (I~'-!I-d ,V -d @ . fd~ /1}:; $ ~ a!( J<<4~ We&JM4,' V_~ ~,I(712W(/<Ul;6'-i ! Ik/ ht=flcl ~ eMV<4L cz. r7~j--1 _ ~Ja/tLL- hv~4' ~ ~/7.G-d4'h cy4 ~!!M{~~4f71fr?~ t!Pn~ It ~4 t1: ; ~/ W",:$ 4a4~ aJr~ '} & 7C<- ,,<&/ ,,7"; . ,0' ',.L Ir,/'<<.M,<> 7iY'7~~~- (rr.<cd/f":,7;;t(d;l-$ ~//h .~r/~ / -hl-:t i " ,-.? 7~ n ,f1~~ ~ ~ 5 NuL ~<'-:.uT. 7t~ -?{~K/kJ PJ-IL t/~ ?L ~iU a~::J ~1'd / / 1?{,~d t;{~(r~ .,(1~ wdd,-k ~ 'Wuf;.~ ~1\- /~v?wTo---(/J~ j~7U- , /) A / _~';Il a ,2 ~ /1/1 I -y~'h /. --r- vV/ U/Uf ~vt!M }1cYCC ~/L :~'--I-(U;1' :.rW~ibt~ (Ii ?f1I {Mf'djl~~, u:d.:1":" aA.€./~ (!Ar1JI-1r.;ift/ :;u:rJ/'cyf:( um $cd" -!t-rJ J/1M Ie ft, J;,;;.:1;-i?~ 4J h #'~ ~LA1, au! (!/~ .(/ i! #~ ~a/i.~~~~ , 7 /' -' ' 'A -{/' / _~( i;S:/;~ -4 ~ a/~W: fPve;'&t (J'~ 4e~$ W(JG7cSL.' ..~ w-J f-.... ~" '<:.. G.1 \...) % -, (> ....... E-.. --:c: GJ 7-'; Q~ "'" U ..j G.l Q. Ct~ q C:) :::> Z ~ Q. 0) t-.... ~ ~ % LrJ Cl.... v) p,<::t. ~ ...% .0 W <=.I III :II: ~ oil 3~ -q I. w' ~t;j ~ ~:i -0) ~<l: V "~ "'~ '''ut rr.'" " - ~~ v z "' ....'\1.1 o ~ ~ <~ ~ ~ n~ zo ....:r r: H' ", ~ ~~ g z ~ !XI-%: '" W ~,J ~~~ .j ~~"/ E'.,~v /' , , /' ~z ~~'^ ~~ ~zo Q:::e;I.Ll :z: ~ ~. 5Q;)~ffi ~~ % r-o..o.: 2:;58 0') 0', .05 -" "" I .:..... ~ ~ ~ I-..:'.. C/j Gj ! (:; 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ b' ~ ~ ;:: 'R i '" .:: Gj " ~ Z0 o ~ (J ~. ~ ~ v '0 z ~ < ~ ,W ~ ~ ~x ~o "~ ~~ ------ / -- ~ ~) -- /11 J..J( V:r 7 J / / / / L --. ~ / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~4 ~ . . ~~l ~ co/ ~ '" , ,~ 0\-- ""1 \J. \::i~ '-yOI 't:J c) /::-- ~Jj ~;! '-y -; :y L / -- j (~~-'t" . 1-., __ ... . f>>t1~1J7 ff. --~- J,- ,:':, I ~--"""--- A ~ ..1 <; -7/"'--~ -- / z o N -- "', -, c: ~ (j 6/0 , MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor and City Council THRU: Amy Margerum, city Manager THRU: Diane Moore, city Planning Direct~ FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner DATE: April 26, 1993 RE: Text Amendment for the Public Zone Distric,t to allow "Arts, Cultural and Recreational Activities, Buildings and Uses" - First Reading of ordinance~, series 1993 SUMMARY: The Planning and zoning commission recommends approval of the proposed code amendment which expands the permitted use list in the Public (PUB) zone to include "arts, cultural and recreational activities, buildings and uses". . The Commission also recoll\1llends deleting two uses currently listed, "performing arts center" and "community recreation facil:ities", as the proposed new use will encompass these in a brClader faslJ.ion, As a house-keeping measure the Commission wants to edit the "Dimensional requirements" section to correct a typographic error. The text amendment was submitted as part of an application package to rezone the former school to Public (PUB), approve a PUD Development Plan (as required in the Public zone district), and approve GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility. BACKGROUND': The Red Brick School was purchased by the City upon the direction of a citizen's vote in May 1992. A city Council appointed task force composed of interested citizens an~ neighbors of the property met weekly in November and December, 1992 and developed a program for the structure, including recommendations for the physical plant and a list of appropriate arts, culture, and recreation users to occupy the various spaces of the building . The City Council reviewed this report in February, 1993 and decided that they would send out a request for proposal from various architects on the different alternatives proposed by the citizen group. The City would like to comme~ce construction in June or July of this year, with tenant move-ins in tlJ.e summer of 1994. In an effort to initiate renovations quickly, the city needs to process the requested text amendment, rezoning, and GMQS Exemption as soon as possible. CURRENT ISSUES: The Public (PUB) zone district currently allows 14 permitted and 3 conditional uses (refer to Exhibit "A"). Two 1 {, fJ f'l ,. i of these uses, "performing arts center" and "community recreation facility" come close to the proposed uses for the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center. However, the city Planning Director has made the determination that the incorporation of arts related non- profit offices and individual art studio spaces does not fit with these already permitted uses. By adopting a broader arts and recreation-related permitted use, the Planning commission recommends that the above two uses be deleted from the use list to reduce redundancy. The proposed text will read: B. Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Public (PUB) zone district. 1. Library; 2. Museum; 3. Post Office; 4. Hospital; 5. Essential governmental and public utility uses, facilities, services and buildings (excluding maintenance shops); 6. rerforming art eenter; 7. Public transportation stop; 8. Terminal building, and transportation related facilities; 9. Public surface .and underground parking areas; 10. Fire station; 11. Community recreation facility; 12. Public school; 13. Public Park; and 14. Accessory buildings and uses. 15. Arts, cultural and recreational activities, buildings and uses; and (the list will be renumbered for codification) staff discussed the option of overlaying the property as an SPA (Specially Planned Area) and applying for a use variance for non- profit arts related offices and individual artist studios. This option was discounted because of: l) the length of time to process an SPA map amendment and Development Plan (four steps); and 2) the concern that an SPA overlay might allow future use variances, thus lessening protection of. the neighborhood character. The Planning commission and the Planning staff reviewed the proposed amendment pursuant to Section 24-7-1102 of the Municipal Code and find that the review criteria are satisfactorily met. The review standards for text amendments and staff responses are contained in Exhibit "B". FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: No impacts are anticipated because of this text amendment. RECOMMENDATION: On April 13, the Planning and Zoning commission voted 7-0 to recommend approval of this text amendment. 2 ~ f"""'\ . ; ALTERNATIVES: The Council could elect to pursue an SPA overlay for the parcel, retaining the underlying R-6 residential zone designation. A use variation would then have to be granted via the SPA process, and an SPA Development Plan would have to be approved and recorded. PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to approve on first reading Ordinance , Series 1993 for an amendment to the Aspen Municipal Code to delete number 6 (Performing art center) and number 10 (Community recreation facility) from the permitted use list in the Public (PUB) zone district (Section 24-5-220.B.), to add the following permitted use: "Arts, cultural and recreational activities, buildings and uses.", and to correct a typographic error in the "dimensional requirements" section to read: D. Dimensional requirements, The dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Public (PUB) zone district shall be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and final development plan, pursuant to Article 7, Division 9, Planned unit Development. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Exhibits: Ordinance , Series 1993 "A" - List of Current Permitted Uses in the Public (PUB) Zone "B" - Review standards for Code Amendments / Staff Responses 3 c f"", (") ORDINANCE NO. (SERIES OF'1993) AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE, CI'l'Y" OF. ASPlilN, AMENDING CHAPTER 24 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, LAND USE REGULATIONS, BY AMENDING SECTION 24- 5-220 (B) PERMITTED USES AND (D) DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS IN THE PUBLIC (PUB) ZONE DISTRICT. WHEREAS, Section 24-7-1103 of the Municipal Code provides that amendments to Chapter 24 of the Code, to wit, "Land Use Regulations", shall be reviewed and recommended for approval by the Planning Director and then by the Planning and Zoning commission at public hearing, and then approved, approved with conditions, or disapproved by the city Council at public hearing; an~ WHEREAS, the Planning Director did receive from the City of Aspen ("Applicant") and has reviewed and reco:m:mended for approval certain text amendments to Chapter 24 associated with the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center rezoning, PUD and GMQS exemption submission; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning commission reviewed the proposal and did conduct a public hearing thereon on April 13, 1993; and WHEREAS, upon review and consideration of the text amendments, agency and public comment thereon, and those applicable standards as contained in Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code, to wit, Division 11 of Article 7 (Text Amendments), the Planning and Zoning Commission has recommended approval of the text amendments recommended by the Planning Director and associated with the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center submission pursuant to procedure as authorized by section 24-6-205 (A) 8 of the Municipal Code; and " 1 , ~ n WHEREAS, the Aspen city Council has reviewed and considered the text amendments under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewed and considered those recommendations and approvals as granted by the Planning and Zoning Commission, and has taken and considered public comment at public hearing; and WHEREAS, the City council finds that the text amendments meet or exceed all applicable development standards and is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, the City council finds that the proposed text amendments will allow and promote compatibility of zone districts and land uses with existing land uses and neighborhood characteristics and will be consistent with the public welfare and the purposes and intent of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN COLORADO: Section 1: Section 5-220 (B.) of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code of the city of Aspen, Colorado, is hereby amended, which new text shall read as follows: B. Permitted Uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Public (PUB) zone district. 1. Library; 2. Museum; 3. Post Office; ~. Hospital; 5. Essential governmental and public utility uses, facilities, services and buildings (excluding maintenance 'shops); 6. Public transportation stop; 2 ("""'I; fl "I 7. Terminal building, and transportation related facilities; 8. Public surface and underground parking areas; 9. Fire station; 10. Public school; 11. Public Park; 12. Arts, cultural and recreational activities, buildings and uses; and 13. Accessory buildings and uses. section 2: section 5-220 (D) "Dimensional requirements" of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code of the City of Aspen, Colorado, is hereby amended, which new text. shall read as follows: D. Dimensional requirements. The dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted and conditional uses in the Public (PUB) zone district shall be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and final development plan, pursuant to Article 7, Division 9, Planned unit Development. section 3: Pursuant to section 24-7-1102 of the Municipal Code, the city council finds as follows in regard to the text amendment: 1. The proposed text amendment as set forth in the Plan are not in conflict with the provisions of Chapter 240f the Municipal Code or the Aspen Area Community Plan. 2. The proposed text amendment is compatible with the surrounding zone districts and land uses. 3. The proposed text amendment will not adversely impact traffic generation or road safety when taken into consideration with the other aspects of the Plan. 4. The proposed text amendment will Promote the public interest and character of the city of Aspen. section 4: All material representations and commitments made by the Applicant pursuant to the approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning commission and or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals ,and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unle~s amended by other specific . conditions. 3 1""\ t) . seotion 5: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. Seotion 6: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. section 7: The City Clerk shall cause notice of this ordinance to be published in a newspaper of general circulations within the City of Aspen no later than fourteen (14) days following final adoption hereof. Such notice shall be given in the following form: Notice is hereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property right pursuant to Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised Statutes, pertaining to the following- described property: The property shall be described in the notice and appended to said notice shall be the ordinance,. granting such approval. seotion 8: That the City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin county Clerk and Recorder. section 9: A publ~c hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the day of , 1993 at 5:00 in the City Council Chambers, Aspen City Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a 4 ("'\ n newspaper of general circulation within the City of Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City Council of the City of Aspen on the day of , 1993. John Bennett, Mayor Attest: Kathryn s. Koch, city Clerk FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this , 1993. day of John Bennett, Mayor Attest: Kathryn s. Koch, city Clerk 5 f"1 C1ty ~Cil ~iht.t--1i:- ApprOVed " 19 _ By Ordinance -' Se~. 5-220. Public (PUB). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Public (PUB) zone district is to provide for the develop- ment of governmental and quasi.governmental facilities for cultural, educational, civic and other governmental purposes. B. Permitted uses. The following uses are permitted as of right in the Public (PUB) zone district. 1. Library: 2. Museum: 3. Post office; 4. Hospital; 5. ESS/lntial governmental and public utility uses, facilities, services and buildings (excluding maintenance shops); 6. Performing art center; 7. Public transportation stop; 8. Terminal building, and transportation related facilities; 9. Public surface and underground parking areas: 10. Community recreation facility: 11. Fire station; 12. Public school: 13. Public park; and 14. Accessory buildings and uses. C. Conditional uses, The following uses are permitted as conditional Uses in the Public (PUB) zone district, subject to the standards and procedures established in Article 7, Division 3. ',-- 1. Maintenance shop; 2. Affordable housing; and 3. Satellite dish antennae. D. Dimensional requirements, The dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted conditional uses in the Public (PUB) zone district shall be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and final develop~ent plan, pursuant to Article 7, Division 9, Planned Unit Developmeqt. 'E. Off-street parking requirement The following off.st,reet parking splices shall be pro- vided for each use in the Public (PUB) zone district, subject to the provisions of Article 5, . . . . Division 3. 1. LQdge uses: NJA 2, ReSIdential uses: Requires special review I'ursuant to Article 7, Division 4. 3., All other uses: Requires special review pursuant to Article 7, Division 4. (Ord, N0, 6-1989, S 4). ..........- r--, ~ty Council Approved By Ordinance ::j2, Exhibit V , 19 Text Amendment to the Public (PUB) Zone District to delete from the list of permitted uses "Performinq Art Center" and "c()mmunity Recreation Facilitv". to add "Arts. Cultural and Recreational Activities. Buildinqs and Uses". and to correct a tvpoqraphic error in the "Dimensional Reduiremel1ts" section. section 24-7-1102 of the Municipal Code establishes the review standards for amendments to the code: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this chapter. Response: No land use code conflicts are evident for the proposed text amendments. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding Zone Districts and land uses, . considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Response: Neighborhood compatibility issues will specifically be addressed pursuant to the rezoning standards. However, Public zoning in most communities provides for a wide variety of uses and activities for citizens and guests. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Response: Per se, this proposed amendment has no effect. Specific impacts will be considered during individual reviews. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to 'which the proposed amendment would e~ceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency mediCal facilities. Response: These items will be addressed during the rezoning 1. e n (""l J review. However, the proposed use is consistent with the other uses identified in the Public zone district. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Response: Impacts are evaluated on a site-by-site basis. No adverse impacts are anticipated on the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Response: The amendments will apply to the approximately twelve other sites in the City zoned Public (PUB). Any development in a Public zone must be reviewed pursuant to PUD dimensional standards. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Response: The amendments affect all parcels zoned Public (PUB). Specific to the former school site, this requested text addition allows those uses developed by the Red Brick citizen's group to occupy the structure. Without "arts, cultural and recreational activities, buildings and uses" as a permitted use, the Planning Director would have to make use determinations for the proposed users based on the existing permitted use list. This task wouid be awkward and might not put to rest any potential non~conformity issues. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. Response: One of the goals of the AACP is to better utilize community facilities. These amendments allow for enhanced public- oriented uses at a public site. ~ ~__::...e'!ltt'i>J0.'i'"" f'\ () MEMORANDUM oJH~ - II I{'rO FROM: Mayor and City Council Amy Margerum, city Manager Diane Moore, City Planning Direct~ Kim Johnson, Planner TO: THRU: THRU: RE: April 26, 1993 Aspen. Arts and Recreation Center, (f. k. a. Red Brick School) Rezoning from R-6 Medium Density Residential to Public (PUB), Final (Consolidated) POO Development Plan, and GMQS Exemption for Essential Public Facilities - First Reading of Ordinance ~~, Series 1993 ,DATE: ==========================================================~~=== v',' .. .,'.. .....' ........ ," ,_, _...... ,.>.,..:..,.:,.... .,.... ',_:. .....,. .0.':.,"..........:',.'. ,:...,....."".._.,. ./......,.".,'_.::,.,:..,.......,. ',. ',::. ".0_ ............... SUMMARY: The Planning commission reco:m:me~d~, approval of rezoning the former school site from R-6,t() pUblic (PUB). This request is being made to allow the rehabilitatio,n of ,the bllilding into a public arts and recreationf~cility. Any development in a Public zone requires PUD (Planned Unit Development) review to establish the site plan / dimensional requirements. The planning staff and commission support a consolidated (two-step)POO Plan adoption for this project. In addition, the Commission recommends approval of GMQS Exemption of this proposal as an Essential Public Facility. The rezoning, PUD Plan and ~MQS Exemption package is accompanied by . a code amendment for the Public (PUB) zone which is being considered under a separate Council memo and ordinance. PREVIOUS COUNCIL ACTION: On February 22, 1993, city Council reviewed the program package and building plan recommendations from the citizens;' advisory qroup which was appointed in late 1992. Council decided to send out archit~ctllr~lR~quests for proposals for all three building options presented by the advisory group. BACKGROUND: ~he City wishes to lease office and studio space to arts and cultural related non-profit groups and operate recreational activities in the easter~portion of the former scho()l building including the gymnasium. In 5% of the structure, studio space may be. rented to "for-profit" working artists, either as individual orshal:"ed studio space. ,This arts/recreation concept requires an amendment the Official Zone Distric:1:. map from R-6 to Public (PUB) and to add "arts, cultural and recreational activities, buildings and uses" to the Public zone permitted use list. As required by the Public zone, the Applicant must receive approval of a site plan pursuant to the Planned Unit Development (POO) review process. The Applicant requests, and the Planning Director has agreed, to process this application as a two-step review (P&Z and Council), finding that a full four step review f'\ () would be redundant and would serve no public benefit. Special Review for parking is required for uses in a Public zone. The commission approved the parking plan at its April 13, 1993 meeting. Also being requested is GMQS Exemption as an essential public facility for the building's revised use. Please refer to the attached application package from. Davis Horn, Inc., Exhibit "A". STAFF DISCUSSION: The current zoning of the parcel is R-6 Medium Density Residential. concurrently requested via a separate memo and ordinance is a text amendment to add "Arts, cultural and recreational activities, buildings and uses" to the Public zone district. Referral Comments: Complete memos ar~ attached as Exhibit "B". sUmmaries are follows: city Engineer Chuck Roth stated that thE! proposed rezoning and ,arts/recreational use will have improved impacts on traffic generation and road safety. The proposed parking should exceed minimum requirements for similar office uses. Housing Office Director Tom Baker commented tl:1at ,the employee generation for the proposed uses will not exceed the employment figures for the previous school use. 2 o ('") ,/' 11 ....'0, to the proposed arts/recreation related uses will represent a change to the application and will require additional community consideration. Affordable Housing would likely be easier to accomplish if the site retained its R-6 zoning and was not rezoned to Public (PUB). Additionally, staff believes that it would be inappropriate to amend the R-6 zone to include a conditional use. for arts, cultural and recreational activities as this type of use is not consistent with the medium density residential uses of the R-6 zone district. section 24-7-1102 of the Municipal Code establishes the review criteria for a rezoning. These criteria and staff comment are attached as Exhibit "D". In summary, staff and the Planning and Zoning commission find that the criteria have been met by the proposal, and recommend approval of the rezoning to Public (PUB). Final PUD (Planned Unit Development) Plan: The proposed rezoning to Public (PUB) requires that the dimensional requirements of a development be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and final development plan pursuant to Article 7, Division 9, Planned unit Development. Consolidation of Conceptual and Final reviews is allowed if the Planning Director determines that "the full four step review would be redundant and not serve any public purpose". If, during r'eview, Council believes that a consolidated two step review is not adequate, the full four step process must take place. The Planning Commission and staff believe that since the structure/site plan is not changing as a result of this application, four step review is excessive and will serve no useful public purpose. The proposed dimensional requirements shall be those of the underlying zone district. Because of the surrounding residential uses and proposed arts/office/recreational use, the following dimensional requirements are a combination of those required in both the R-6 and the Office zone districts. The existing structure's footprint is used to establish the proposed setbacks: a. Minimum distance between buildings - lO' b. Maximum height (including vie~lanes) - 25' c. Minimum front yard - 10' (except 4' at southeast entry) d. Minimum rear yard - 15' e. Minimum side yard - 5' f. Minimum lot width - 60' g. Minimum lot area - 6,000 square feet h. Trash access area - see provided survey I. External and internal floor area ratio - .75:1 j. Minimum percent open space - no requirement Staff believes that these dimensions are appropriate for this structure and future development. If other dimensions are needed to accommodate future growth, additional PUD review is required. 3 ,J .. ~ n " GMQS Exemption for Essential Public Facilities: Pursuant to section 8-104 C.1.b. the Council may exempt construction of essential public facilities. The Commission reviewed the project and recommends approval of GMQS Exemption to Council. section 24- 8-104.C.1.b. reads: (i) (H) (iH) Except for housing, development shall be considered an essential public facility. if it serves an essential public purpose, provides facilities in response to the demands of growth, is not itself a growth generator, is available for use by the general public, and serves the needs of the city. It shall also be taken into consideration whether the development is not-for-profit venture~ This exemption shall not be applied to commercial or lodge development. A development application shall demonstrate that the impacts of the ~ssential public facility will be mitigated, included those associated with the generation of additional employees, the demand for parking, road and transit services, the need for basic services including but not limited to water, sewage, drainage, fire and police protection, and solid waste disposal. It shall also be demonstrated that the proposed development has negligible adverse impacts on the city's air, water, land, and energy resources, and is visually compatible with the surrounding areas. Notwithstanding the criteria as set forth in paragraphs (i) and (ii) above, the city council may determine upon application that development associated with a nonprofit entity qualifies as an essential public facility and may exempt such development from GMQS and from some or all such mitigation requirements as it deems appropriate and warranted. Response: The Planning Office acknowledges that the structure proposed as the Arts and Recreation Center is not new construction, but is in effect a new use or development on the site. For this reason, staff believes that GNQS Exemption as an essential public facility is warranted so that any increased impacts may be addressed. Official recognition that the structure and its non- profit uses qualify as essential to the community will solidify the Center's important role in the community. The Center complies with paragraph (i) above in that it will serve the public in many ways, from active recreation to art support and education; offers space to recreation and arts. users who must accommodate their increased growth based on community growth; is not a growth generator itself (the proposed occupants are currently scattered elsewhere throughout the city); is available to the public as any other public facility; and serves the citizens and 4 ~ () J l ,~'r guests of Aspen. recreation focus building. The groups who, will occupy the building must qualify as bona fide nonprofit entities except for those artists occupying the 5% of the building set aside for working "fine artists". The city's bond requirements specify that no less than 95% of the structure may be occupied by non-prof it users to retain the bond's status. The artist studio spaces are intended for educational use where visitors may observe working artists and works in progress. Aspen's long-standing reputation as an arts and will be enhanced by the adaptive re-use of this The Center also meets the requirements of paragraph (ii) regarding impacts to the vicinity and larger community. Employee generation will be less for the proposed uses (approximately 21-28) than the previous school use (25-30). According to the Housing Office's employee generation guidelines for "utilities / quasi-governmental" rate, 1.5 to 2.5 persons per 1,000 s.f. are generated. The belief of the Housing Office is that the non-profit offices proposed for this building will have limited hours of business and run on "shoestring" staff, thus employee generation will be less than for typical off ice Users. According to HousiI'lg Director Tom Baker, the recreational uses will generate less than one full time equivalent employee (FTE). The internal layout of the structure is shown in Attachment 2 of the application information. The net leasable area of the post- 1941 portion of the school (the eastern half of the building) is approximately 14,093 s.f. At the quasi-governmental generation of l.5 persons per l,OOO s.f., the employee generation would be 21 persons. If the entire building is renovated, the same number of users will spread o~t to occupy more space rather than increase the number of tenants. The studio space cannot exceed 5% of the building because of limitations set by the, financial bonding requirements. This represents approximately 1,000 s.f. based on the 21,800 s.f. post- 1941 building, or 1,750 s.f. of the entire 35,000 s.f. building. The studio spaces will probably be 200-300 s.f. each, according to information from Julia Marshall, who has worked on the lease agreements for the arts representatives. Parking has been reviewed by the Planning commission and special Review was approved as being a neutral impact. utility needs will probably decrease from the previous school use. No negative environmental impacts will occur, nor will visual incompatibility. The city should find that the nonprofit use an arts and recreation center qualifies facility per paragraph (iii). of this structure as as essential public After its 4-3 vote to approve the GMQS Exemption, the Commission passed a motion recommending that the City act in accordance with 5 (') , o 1 ~ ~ '1 the intentions of housing production plans/quotas and consider creating housing opportunities to help mitigate housing made necessary by the change in use of the building from educational to arts/recreational use. This is due to the deficit created by the School District when it did not provide housing for its new elementary school. ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Commission recommends approval of the rezoning request by a vote of 7-0 at a public hearing on April 13, 1993. The GMQS Exemption for an Essential Public Facility was approved by a 4-3 vote. The Commission also voted 7-0 to approve Special Review for Parking in a Public (PUB) zone via the proposed Final PUD Development Plan with conditions requiring landscaping, striping, signage, and drop- off parking along East Hallam st. ALTERNATIVES: The land area could remain zoned as R-6 Medium Density Residential with an $PA (Specially l?larlrled Area) overlay map amendment and use variation to allow "arts, cultural and recreational activities, buildings and uses". PROPOSED MOTION: "I move to have First Reading of Ordinance , Series 1993, approving with conditions the rezoning of the former Red Brick School site from R-6 Medium Density Residential to Public (PUB), the Final PUD Development Plan, and a GMQS Exemption for Essential Public Facilities." CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: Attachments: Ordinance , Series 1993 Exhibits "A" - Application Information "B" - Referral Memos "c" - Letters from ,citizens liD" - Rezoning Review Standards 6 C"\ A " l' :J"" ORDINANCE NO. (SERIES OF 1993) AN ORDINANCE OF THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL GRANTING REZONING FROM R-6 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO PUBLIC (PUB), GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUOTA SYSTEM EXEMPTION FOR ESSENTIAL PtJl:l~IqFAC:rL:rTIES, AND APPROV~L OF A FINAL PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELO~MENT) DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE ASPEN ARTS AND RECREATION~, CENTER, (F.K.A. THE RED BRICK ELEMENTARY SCHOOL) LOCATED AT 110 E. HALLAM (LOTS A-I AND K-S, INCLUDING THE ALLEY IN BLOCK 64, AND LOTS E,F,G AND PART OF LOTS A,B AND C, BLOCK 71), IN THE CITY AND TOWNSITE, OF ASPEN, PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO. WHEREAS, on January 14, 1993, the City of Aspen purchased the former Red Brick Elementary school for the purpose of creating a community-oriented arts and recreation facility; and WHEREAS, the City Council appointed a citizen's advisory group known as the Red Brick Committee to recommend appropriate uses and development scenarios for the structure; and WHEREAS, the city intends to lease portions of the building for non-profit arts related organizations for offices and studio spaces, for-profit studio spaces, and for use by the city ReQreation Department for office space and the gymnasium; and WHEREAS, the Aspen Area Community Plan established a goal to rezone the former school site to Public; and WHEREAS, the City of Aspen (Applicant) submi tted an application (the "Plan") to the Planning Office for rezoning of the former school site from R-6 (medium Density Residential) to Public (PUB), GMQS Exemption for Essential Public Facilities, Special Review for Parking, and Final (Consolidated) PUD review, in conjunction with a code amendment to the Public (PUB) zone district to allow "arts, cultural and recreational activities, buildings and uses"; and 1 n n '""" i1 :>11' WHEREAS, the Planning Office received referral comments from the City Engineer, Housing Office, and Water Department; and WHEREAS, upon review of the application, referral comments, and the applicable code standards, the Planning Director forwarded a recommendation for approval of the Plan with conditions to the Planning and zoning commission; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning Commission reviewed the development proposal in accordance with those procedures set forth at Section 24-6-205 (A) (5) (b) of the Municipal Code and did conduct a pUblic hearing thereon on April 13, 1993; and WHEREAS, upon review and consideration of the plan, agency and public comment thereon, and those applicable standards as contained in Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code, to wit, Division 9 of Article 7 (Planned unit Development), Division 4 of Article 7 (Special Review), Division 11 of Article 7 (zoning Map and Text Amendment), section 8-104 (C) (1) (b) of Article 8 (Growth Management Quota System Exemptions by city Council.for Essential Public Facilities), the Planning and Zoning commission has recommended final approval of the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center subject to conditions, to the city Council; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Zoning commission further granted Special Review approval for parking in a Public (PUB) zone district; and WHEREAS, the Aspen city council has reviewed and considered the Plan under the applicable provisions of the Municipal Code as identified herein, has reviewe!l and considered those 2 (""\, t-., 1\ 1\ recommendations and approvals as granted by the Planning and Zoning commission, and has taken and considered public comment at public hearing; and WHEREAS, the city council finds that the Plan meets or exceeds all applicable development standards and that the approval of the Plan, with conditions, is consistent with the goals and elements of the Aspen Area Community Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that this Ordinance furthers and is necessary for public health, safety, and welfare. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE C,ITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO as follows: Section 1: Pursuant to Section 24-7-903 B.4. of the Municipal Code, and subject to those conditions of approval as specified hereinafter, the City Council finds as follows in regard to the Plan's planned unit development dimensional requirements component: 1. The Developer's final plan submission is, complete and sufficient to afford review and evaluation for approval. 2. The Plan is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan. 3. The Plan is consistent with the character of existing land uses in the surrounding area. 4. The Plan will not adversely affect the future development of the surrounding area. 5. The. Plan approval is being granted only to the extent to which GMQS exemptions are obtained by ,the applicant. Section 2: Pursuant to the findings set forth in Section 1 above, the City Council grants consolidated Final PUD development plan approval for the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center subject to the following conditions: 3 t""'\ n " l' ,.." 1. Prior to issuance of the certificate of 09cupancy the 35 on-site parking spaces shall be striped and signed for use by users of the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center. 2. Prior to or within 6 months of the iss\:lanceof the Certificate of Occupancy, a landscaped buffer shall be installed between the parking area and the trail on the north side of the subject property. 3. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of occupancy, a drop-off parking area shall be dedicated in front of the building along East Hallam street pursuant to recommendations of the Parking and Transportation Director. 4. Any improvement to the parking in the Garmisch st, right- of-way must be coordinated with the Engineering Department. 5. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of occupancy, an easement ,must be established ,for a 14 ' wide trail, electric switchgear, and other utility or pedestal needs. 6. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate ofOcc~pancy the two water service lines to the building must be properly metered. 7. The applicants shall agree to join any future improvement districts which may be formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in the public right-of-way. 8. The actual dimensions shall be the dimensional requirements of this PUD development plan: a. Minimum distance between buildings - 10' b. Maximum height (including viewplanes) - 25' c. Minimum front yard - 10' (except 4' at southeast entry) d. Minimum rear yard - 15' e. Minimum side yard 5' f. Minimum lot width - 60' g. Minimum lot area - 6,000 square feet h. Trash access area - see provided survey i. External and internal floor area ratio - .75:1 j. Minimum percent open space - no requirement 9. The ~inalPUD Development Plan and PUD Agreement shall be recorded in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the documents within a period of one hundred and eighty (180) days following approval by the city Council shall render the approvals invalid, unless reconsideration and approval of both the commission and city council is 4 n n " .~ '" " obtained before their acceptance and recording. section 3: Pursuant to section 24-8-104 C.1.b. of the Municipal Code, the City Council finds as follows in regard to the Applicant's request for Growth Management Quota System development exemption for essential public facilities: 1. Arts and recreation have historically provided cultural enrichment to the citizens of the city of Aspen without which the City would not have attained its present character and standing in the national and international community. The City's proposal for use of the former school building as a center for non-profit arts related studios and offices, limited area for for-profit studios, and recreation offices and activities will enhance the art and recreation experiences for the citizens of the City of Aspen and the general public. 2. The use of the building for for-profit artist studio space is limited to 5% of the structure pursuant to the financial bonding requirements for the building. Furthermore, the artist studio space is intended to be educationally oriented to allow citizens of Aspen and the general public the opportunity to observe artists practicing their skills. section 4: Pursuant to Section 24-7-1102 of the Municipal Code, the City Council finds as follows in regard to the zoning map amendment component of the Plan: 1. The proposed zoning amendment as set 'forth in the Plan are not in conflict with the provisions of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code or the Aspen Area Community Plan. 2. The proposed zoning amendment is compatible with the surrounding zone districts and land uses. 3. The proposed zoning amendment will not adversely impact traffic generation or road safety when taken into consideration with the other aspects of the Plan. 4. The proposed zoning amendment will promote the public interest and character of the City of Aspen. section 5: Pursuant to section 24-7-1102 and 24-7-1103, and 5 I'} n ,.... ~ , Division 2 of Article 5 of Chapter 24 of the Municipal Code, and findings set forth in Section 5 above, the city Council does grant the following amendment to the Official Zone District Map and does designate the following zone district for the development subject to the conditions as specified below: l. The Public (PUB) zone district shall be applied to Lots A-I and K-S, including the alley in Block 64, and Lots E,F,G and part of Lots A,B,and C in Block 71, in the City and Townsite of Aspen. section 6: All material representations and commitments made by the developer pursuant to the plan approvals as herein awarded, whether in public hearing or documentation presented before the Planning and Zoning commission and or City Council, are hereby incorporated in such plan development approvals and the same shall be complied with as if fully set forth herein, unless amended by other specific conditions. section 7: The Official Zone District Map for the city of Aspen, Colorado, shall be and is hereby amended to reflect the rezoning action as set forth in section 6 above and such amendment shall be promptly entered on the Official Map in accordance with section 24-5-103 B. of the Municipal Code. section 8: This Ordinance shall not effect any existing litigation and shall not operate as an abatement of any action or proceeding now pending under or by virtue of the ordinances repealed or amended as herein provided, and the same shall be conducted and concluded under such prior ordinances. section 9: 6 t""'\ I"J 1'1 ):'1' If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid. or unconstitutional in a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. section 10: The city Clerk shall cause notice of this Ordinance to be published in a newspaper of general circulations within the City of Aspen no later than fourteen (14) days following final adoption hereof. Such notice shall be given 'in the following form: Notice is nereby given to the general public of the approval of a site specific development plan, and the creation of a vested property. right pursuant to Title 24, Article 68, Colorado Revised statutes, ,pertaining to the following- described property: The property shall be described in the notice and appended to said notice shall be the ordinance granting such approval. section 11: That the City Clerk is directed, upon the adoption of this ordinance, to record a copy of this ordinance in the office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder. section 12: A public hearing on the Ordinance shall be held on the day , 1993 at 5:00 in the city Council Chambers, Aspen city of Hall, Aspen Colorado, fifteen (15) days prior to which hearing a public notice of the same shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation within the city of,Aspen. INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED PUBLISHED as provided by law, by the City council of the city of Aspen on the day of 7 f""".. ,) ~ 'l l 1 , 1993. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk () John Bennett, Mayor FINALLY, adopted, passed and approved this , 1993. Attest: Kathryn S. Koch, City Clerk day of John Bennett, Mayor 8 , , f'\ ("\C1tY Co\mCll _Chit A- ~ ,1'_ DavisHom~<;~Y Ordinance PLANNING. APPRAISING. REAL ESTATE CONSUDlNG "1:Dr~;:;:" i ,11 \, 1::'1 \ -': ) MIl '1993 March 8, 1993 Kim Johnson Aspen Pitkin Planning 130 S. Galena street Aspen, CO. 81611 RE: Amendment to the Land Use Application for the Red Brick School :..;.-_.-- Office Dear Kim: As we discussed, this letter is an amendment to the application for the rezoning of the Red Brick School facility to Public for the reuse of the structure as the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center. . The change in use of the Red Brick property from an elementary school to a public arts and recreation facility is not technically a change in use according to the Aspen Land Use Regulations as the change is not between categories of growth management competition. still, the applicant fully intends to mitigate all impacts of the change in use to the public arts and recreation center. As we agreed, the applicant is therefore requesting approval for a GMQS Exemption pursuant to section 8-104 (C) Exemption by city council (1) (b) Construction of essential public facilites. Although the change in use is not new construction, the creation of the new public arts and recreation center is a new us~ and, the applicant intends to mitigate any impacts generated by the new use. Therefore, our amendment to the application is to request approval for a growth management exemption for the creation of an essential public facility. The City of Aspen is also requesting a rezoning of the site from R- 6 to Public as the Public zone is m()re appropriate for the proposed use of the site. The pUblic facility proposed serves an essential purpose, provided facilities in response to the demands of growth and in itself is not a growth generator. The facility will be available for use by the public and serves the needs of the city. As discussed in the original application, the proposed use of the Red Brick School will not generate the/need for new employees, parking, road or transit services, or the need for basic services such as water, sewage treatment, drainage control, fire and police protection, and solid waste disposal. As the proposed use is less intensive than the previous school use, there will be not adverse impact on the city'S air, water, land and energy resources. The structure, under the new use, will be visually compatible with the neighborhood. AUa DAVIS, SRA I GlENN HORN. AICP 300 fAST H'/MAN. SUITE B. ASPEN. COlORADO B16t1. 3031925-6587. FAX: 303J92S-5I80 f'J , ~ , ~. n with these critieria of the Land Use Regulations in mind, please consider this letter a request for approval from City Council for a GMQS exemption for an essential public facility for the creation of the proposed Aspen Arts and Recreation Center. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, DAVIS HORN INCORPORATED ~IJ~ ;:;. ..--.. ('"'j C) DavisHom~C;. PLANNING. APPRAISING. REAL ESTATE CONSUlJING " J' March 1, 1993 Ms. Kim Johnson Aspen Pitkin Planning Office l30 South Galena Street Aspen, CO. 81611 RE: Land Use Application for the Red Brick School to be used as the new Aspen Arts and Recreation Center Dear Kim: Attached is the application for our client, the City of Aspen, requesting : 1) Rezoning approval for the Red Brick School site from R-6 Residential to PUB, Public; 2) Approval of a PUD development plan which establishes the dimensional requirements for the site as is required by the Public zone district regulations; 3) Approval of a minor text amendment to the Public zone district. We have done our best to satisfy the applicable requirements of the Aspen Land Use Regulations and to address items identified in our pre-application conferences. Please let us know if we have failed to address any issues of concern to you. Thank you' for your consideration. Please call if you have any questions or if you need further information. Thank you, DAVIS HORN INCORPORATED 0lW~ AUCE DAVIS, SRA I GlENN HORN, AICP 300 IiASl"HYMAN. SUITE B. ASPliN, COLORADO B16t1. ~7' FAX: 303J925.5IBO , , n " J " Davis Horn~c;. PlANNING' APPRAISING' REAL ESTATE CONSUIJING -'---'--"-'- .,..__.__..__._.,.-._---_._._~ .. ,-::." r,,-:--'" r;."::1 ~ 0. n ;";:'.) r~... ; ,'/ l;~;S-'.'" -' ;~,!r';: '; .,6.:; 111\ \ , m)1 !IJ .. ,_. ,..__----I,;Y March 16, 1993 Kim Johnson Aspen Pitkin Planning Office 130 S. Galena street Aspen, CO. 81611 RE: Employee Impacts Dear Kim: This information should help you evaluate the employee impacts for the review for the Red Brick Schoo], Rezoning. As stated in the submitted Land Use Application fol:' ,the Red Elrick Sc:ll,()()l, the city of Aspen is interested in mitigating all employee impacts generated from the new use of the Red Brick School. We believe that the employee impacts from the proposed Arts and Recreation Center use are substantially less than they were for the original school use and that no mitigation is required. As stated in the original application, approximately 250 people used the elementary school. After reviewing and finalizing employee generation numbers, for the proposed Arts and Recreation Center, we estimate the total employee population of the new use to be from 2l to 28 employees for the smaller design scheme (not using the 1941 portion of the building) and from 55 to 90 employees if the entire building is utilized. As the number of employees/people on site will be substantially less than for the school use, no employee mitigation should be required. It is very important to note that the all employees to be using the Arts and Recreation Center ,ar~ currently housed in existing facilities; their housing and their office space exists somewhere else in town. No new space is being created, only the reuse of an existing space with a less intensive use. Therefore, it is the applicant's opinion that no employee housing mitigation is required. In estimating the employee population for the Arts and Recreation Center, it was very difficult to find employee generation standards for arts and recreation uses. Aft(i!r reviewing numerous guides and text books, the most applicable standard is for either office space or quasi-governmental uses. The Housing Office and other experts in the field agreed, the pUblic/arts/recreation use would generate employees at the very low end or even below the typical office use. Therefore we estimated employee population from the quasi- governmental standard, which falls below the office standard. AUCE DAVIS, S1lA I GLENN HORN. AICP 300 EAST HYMAN. SUITE B. ASPEN, COLORADO 81611. 303i92S-6587 . FAX: 303i92~80 r-. f) '.' l,\- The City I s Affordable Housing Guidelines' employee generation standards show that 1.5 to 2.5 employees are generated per lOOO square feet of net leasable area for "utilities/Quasi-Governmental uses". Generation by other uses not listed are by special review by the Aspen Pitkin Housing Authority. Considering the proposed use in the "other" category and subject to review by the APHA, we feel the low end of the quasi-governmental use is most appropriate. We have estimated employees first by determining the actual number of employees to be located on-site. Although we have no actual employee counts for the office related uses, the recreation activities and the artist studios should generate approximately 20 actual employees. Adding in another 21 employees for the remaining arts and recreation office space using the standard for quasi- governmental uses, 41 total employees is indicated for the entire building. If the quasi-governmental standard is applied to the entire building, 34 employees are generated. Applying the quasi-governmental use standard only to the portion of the building proposed to be used (l4, 093 square feet of net leasable area), 21 employees are indicated. Using the actual employees for recreation and studios uses and adding in employees generated from the remaining space, 20 to 28 employees are indicated for this portion of the building. Considering these and other methods of employee generation, the best estimate shows from 20 to 28 employees generated for the portion of the facility proposed for use and from 34 to 41 employees for the ,entire building. These numbers are substantially less than that generated by the former school use. Again, this information should help you evaluate the employee impacts for the review of the Red Brick School Rezoning. Wehope you will agree that no new space is being created and therefore no employee mitigation should be required. Also, no new employees are being generated (and substantially less will be needed) by the arts and recreation center use when compared to the former school use.. Sincerely, DAVIS HORN INCORPORATED ~~ Alice Davis f'\ n ;r ,.' ,) INTRODUCTION Davis Horn Incorporated, represents the city of Aspen who is the applicant and the owner of the Red Brick School Building at 110 East Hallam Street. (See Attachment 1, Vicinity Map.) The applicant is requesting approval for a rezoning of the Red Brick School from R-6 Residential to PUB Public. Simultaneously, a minor text amendment to the city ,of Aspen Municipal Land Use Regulations is requested. As the Public zone is intended for a wide variety of pUblic and pUblic related uses, dimensional requirements are not given in the Regulations, but rather are established on a case by case basis through the PUD process. Therefore, the applicant is also requesting approval for a PUD plan which establishes the basic dimensional requirements for the property. This application addresses the standards and requirements for the following approvals being requested: 1. Rezoning of the Red Brick School property (to be used as the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center) from the R-6 Residential zone to the PUB, Public zone district; 2. A minor text amendment to the Land Use Regulations regarding the Public zone district; and 3 . Approval of a PUD development plan establishing the dimensional and off street Parking requirements for the property as is required by the Public zone district. The planning director has determined, according to Section 7- 903 (C)(3), Consolidation of conceptual and final development review, that it is appropriate for this PUD review to be consolidated from a four step into a two step process. ' This application briefly discusses the existing conditions and history of the subject property, describes the proposed use of the building and addresses the applicable Aspen Land Use Regulation review standards and requirements of each of the three approvals requested. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY The Red Brick School is located in the heart of Aspen's West End neighborhood at 110 East Hallam Street. The school was originally built in 1941 and sits on a estimated 90,700 square foot parcel of land. The existing structure consists of three sections containing approximately 35,800.total square feet of gross floor area. The first section is the original school building and a receiving/storage addition which contains 14,000 square feet. 2 n n tT . Y The second section is 11,240 square feet including a major classroom and mechanical room addition built to the east of the original building in the 1970's. This area is in better condition than the original structure and is in less need of hazardous material abatement. The third section of the existing building contains 10,560 square feet, was also built in the early 1970's and is to the east of the classroom addition. It consists of a 6080 square foot gymnasium and vestibule, a 2240 square foot stage area with a small office and storage area and stairs which lead to a 2240 square foot basement area locker room. (See Attachment 1, Red Brick School Building, Existing First Floor Plan.) The surrounding, neighborhood is, the well established West End residential neighborhood. To the east, south and west of the subject are single family homes which have predominated the West End Neighborhood for over One hundred years. There is a bike path along the northern property line which leads from the residential neighborhood to a commercial area below. The site is generally level, though to the north and northeast, beyond the bike path, steep slopes drop away from the property to adjacent commercial uses to the north. The slope provides a barrier between the commercial Uses adjacent to the north, the subject property and adjacent residential uses. There are sidewalks on the south and west sides of the property and on-street paved parking to the west. The site is modestly landscaped on the south, between the building and the street with a lawn, shrubs and trees. The Red Brick School was purchased by the city of Aspen from the Aspen School District No. 1 with the closing on January l4, 1993. The City purchased the school with bond money which requires that the building continue with public uses and that only five percent of the floor area be occupied by uses other than non-profit or governmental/public entities. (See Attachment 2, a letter to the City of Aspen Finance Director regarding the General Obligations Bonds used for the purchase of the school building.) Various citizen and public groups including the. more recently formed Red Brick Committee have supported the purchase of the building for public, arts and recreation related purposes and the issuing of bonds to fund the purchase and the cost of building improvement and renovation. As the school, particularly the original 1940's portion, has a hazardous material problem which needs to be abated, costs for renovation and improvement are higher than they would otherwise be. _ , Since the City is now the owner of the property, The Red Brick Committee, City staff and the City Council are working to make the best use of the property for public and arts related purposes. 3 n n ,1 1.1 The building is proposed to house the City Recreation Department offices; City recreational programs and activities; art and cultural activities and uses; and art, dance and writers' studios. This application seeks approvals required for the City to operate the structure in the manner approved by the voters in the public election on the purchase. paOPOSED PROJECT As mentioned previously, The Red Brick School is to be used for public, art, cultural and recreational uses. As required by the bond documents, public and non-profit uses are to always be the predominant uses in the building. As currently proposed, the gymnasium will be used by the city Recreation Department, the basement will continue to be used as a locker room for recreational activities and the remainder of the building will be used for a variety of public, arts, cultural and reereation,a.l office and studio uses. Although the proposed tenants will certainly change with time and possibly before the building is actually ready for occupancy, an administrative office for each of the following tenants is currently anticipated for the building: city Recreation Department Dance Aspen Aspen Art Museum Aspen li'ilmfest KAJX Aspen Ballet Company Aspen Theater The Writer's Conference Arts Council Aspen Ridiculous Theater Aspen Yoga Center Aspen Interactive All of the above uses except Aspen Yoga Center and possibly Aspen Interactive, are non-profit organizations. Aspen Interactive is now seeking non-profit status. In addition to the above tenants, the building is proposed to include the following: A 651 square foot common lecture hall A 150 square foot common secretarial area Four to five spaces to be used as artists' studios. The currently proposed uses have been reviewed and evaluated by the Red Brick Committee. The Red Brick Committee came up with four potential options for the City Council for renovating the school building; these options are found in the memorandum in Attachment 3. 4 ~ , n ,..,- ,> At this time, the Red Brick Committee is proposing use of the gymnasium and the classroom additi()n completed in the 1970' s. Using only these two sections of the building, the building is expected to be fully occupied. The Committee has proposed that the remainder of the building, the original 1940s school, will either be renovated at a later date, demolished or locked off and not used until further plans are finalized and money obtained for the reuse or reconstruction of this section of the building. Regardless of the option chosen, the entire property as it currently exists is the subject of this rezoning application. REZONING TO PUBLIC The applicant is requesting a rezoning of the subject property from R-6 Residential to PUB, Public. The structure has been used and will continue to be used for public purposes since it was built in 1941. Although a school is a conditional use in the R-6 Residential zone, the Public zone district is more appropriate for the property given the sale of the building from the Aspen School District to the city of Aspen for arts, cultural and recreational purposes. A rezoning is an amendment to the official zoning map. This rezoning is therefore requested pursuant to Division 11 of the Aspen Land Use RegUlations, AMENDMENTS TO TB:E, TEXT OF THIS CHAPTER AND THE OFFICIAL ZONE DISTRICT MAP. This section of the regulations require an applicant to address and the city Council and the commission to consider the nine standards of review. These standards are identified and addressed below. A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this chapter. The proposed amendment to the official zone district map to. change the subject property's zoning designation from R-6 to PUB is not in conflict with any portion of the Land Use Regulations. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan~ The Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan calls for the Red Brick School to be used for pUblic purposes. This amendment to the map is not only consistent with the Plan, but is a step toward insuring that the structure is preserved for public and related appropriate uses in the future. The purchase of the Red Brick School was approved by the voters of the city of Aspen in a public election in August of 1992. 5 n n The Red Brick School Committee consists of a wide variety of communi ty volunteers, both opponents and proponents of the purchase, was formed soon after the election to address the use and redevelopment of the building into an art and recreational center. This ,committee appears to agree that the proposed reuse of the building is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan and with the electorate's intent of the use of the school as approved in the public election on the issue. c. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. The proposed use is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses. It has been an even more intensive school use in the past and was a permitted conditional use in the R-6 zone district where it is now located. Therefore, it is considered compatible with the surrounding R-6 zone district. Down the steep slopes to the north of the subject property is a commercial area zoned (NC - Neighborhood Commercial and SCI Service Commercial Industrial) with an SPA overlay. Although they are adjacent to the subject, the uses found here are much more intensive and are not really physically a part of the immediate neighborhQod. The subject property is somewhat of a buffer between the residential neighborhood on three sides and the commercial uses to the north. The neighborhood has been actively involved in the purchase and reuse of the school building through various citizen committees and public meetings. The Red Brick Committee was established after the election in August of 1991 when the purchase of the school was approved by the voters. This committee is made up of a wide variety of people with different concerns. The arts community, real estate community, neighbors and opponents of the school purchase were all represented. This committee has worked hard since its conception in December of 1992 to come to agreement on the use and management and redevelopment of the Red Iirick School. This rezoning is a first step to accomplish the redevelopment of the building for use as an arts and recreational center. The less intensive proposed use of the building as a recreational, arts, cultural and public facility brings less impacts than the elementary school did when it was operating in the building. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. 6 (""'"\ ,.. .;1 ,) () . I .,. The proposed Aspen Arts and Recreation Center will at a minimum be "impact neutral" in that it will have no more impacts than the school use which has impacted the neighborhood since its construction in 1941. In reality, the proposed use will have substantially less impacts on traffic generation and road safety. The last year of operation, the school was used for kindergarten and first grade classes and the school business office. There was a total population of 250 including 230 students, ten full-time teachers, five special teachers, three business office employees and two janitorial staff. Approximately twelve buses dropped students off at the school in the morning and picked up students in the afternoon. In addition, it is estimated that fifty students were dropped off and picked. up by car each day. A, large majority of the faculty, staff and school board memQers traveled to and from the campus by car, parking in the area behind the gym, in the area behind the business office, along the front of the building on Hallam street and on Garmisch street. Regular trash pick up as well as occasional deliveries and field trips by bus generated some additional trips. The total number of round trips to and from the school each day is estimated to have been 160 vehicles trips per day. A similar level of activity was going on at the yellow brick school diagonally across from the site. In addition, extracurricular activities occurred in the school gymnasium, which was utilized both by students and members of the community. Barricades were set up daily on Garmisch and Hallam to interrupt traffic in the vicinity of the two schools. The proposed use will generate from 23 to 48 employees under the smaller design scheme (not using the original 1941 portion of the building) and 55 to 90 employees if the entire building is utilized. This range has been established first by estimating the actual number of employees anticipated given the proposed tenants and second by use of a national standard for an office use which was applied to the entire building. The actual estimated population is considered to be the most accurate in determining the number of employees, therefore the lower end of the range, 23 to 48 is the best estimate of employees in the proposed arts and recreation center. As the property is centrally located and easily accessed by foot and by public transportation, vehicular trip generation will be less than for a property with an inferior location. We found no trip generation standard for artist studios or recreational uses and therefore have used the low end of the trip generation standard for office use: four trips per 1000 square feet of space. 7 t""'! r) " l.l This shows 142 vehicle trips per day, less than for the school use, even without considering the previous extracurricular activities and the trips generated by the yellow brick diagonally across the street. There does not appear to have been any officially designated parking on the school site in the past. Ken Smith of Smith Associates Architects completed a study on the various redevelopment alternative for the Red Brick SChool. He has access to an original improvement survey of the school property and no parking is shown. Historically the area to the north and west of the structure has been used as a parking lot. Approximately 3S spaces have been accommodated in this area. Therefore, the applicant proposes to provide these 35 spaces for the 23 to 48 employees. The 20 to 25 on-street parking spaces will be utilized for guests. At approximately one space per employee, we feel this is sufficj,ent, especially since the proposed tenants, except for the recreational programs, will not generate many visitors. Artist studios do not tend to generate the need for additional parking. still, the standard does consider client and visitor traffic. The tenants of the building will be encouraged at the time of signing a lease, not to use their cars, but to ride share, walk and use the public parking garage two blocks (700 feet) east. . The proposed arts and recreation center will generate less impacts with regard to traffic;: generation, road safety, parking and employee generation than the previous school use. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, includinq but not limited to transportation facilities, sewaqe facilities, water supply, parks, drainaqe, schools, and emerqency medical facilities. The rezoning to public will not result in increased demand on public facilities. The existing structure has been in existence and the impacts are already accommodated within current services. The change from school to public uses should decrease impacts given the reduction in the on-site population and the public facilities required toac;:commodate them. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in sigllificantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. The reZOning to public and the new arts and recreation uses to be allowed will not adversely impact the natural environment. 8 (""'I (""'I , 1 ill .J G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the city of Aspen. The proposed rezoning is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen and in the neighborhood. The proposed Aspen Art and Recreation Center use encompasses two of the stronger elements of the cOmmuni ty' s character - arts and recreational acti vi ties. The rezoning and new use of the building should actually enhance community character. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the suJ)ject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. The Red Brick School was sold by the Aspen School District after the District planned and built a new elementary school on the Maroon Creek campus. The purchase of the property by the City of Aspen involved substantial public input. The change in ownership from a school district to the governmental entity is a changed condition which supports the rezoning from R-6, which is more appropriate for a neighborhood school, to PUblic, a more appropriate zone for the proposed public, arts and recreational use. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. The text amendment to rezone the Red Brick School to Public and the redevelopment of the school into the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center is not in conflict with the public interest, but rather is strongly in the public interest. The rezoning of a public building to Public is also within the purpose and intent of this chapter of the Land Use Regulations. TEXT AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC ZONE DISTRICT The applicant proposes a minor amendment to the text of the Aspen Land Use Regulations regarding the permitted uses in the Public zone district. Therefore, in addition to the above discussed rezoning, a second text amendment is therefore requested pursuant to Division 11 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations, AMENDMENTS TO TIlE TEXT OF THIS CHAPTER AND THE ()FFICIAL ZONE DIST1tICTKAP. The applicant is requesting the addition of a permitted use in the Public zone district under Section 5-220 (B) Permitted Uses. The recommended language' is to add the following as permitted use number 15 under this section of the Regulations: "15. Arts, cultural and recreational activities." 9 t""'\ ,~ I,' f' Although the arts related uses proposed for the Red Brick building such as the non-profit organizations and the artist and writers studios could be allowed in the Public zone without this amendment, the applicant feels the amendment clarifies the arts and. recreational uses and removes any gray area in allowing different, but related and appropriate uses in the future. The artists and/or writers studios are the only proposed uses which are "for profit". The bond documents for the city's purchase and renovation of the Red Brick building are very clear in that they require no more than five percent of the net leasable floor area of the building to be occupied by such "for profit" organizations. Ninety-five percent of the building has to be for public, non- prof it or governmental uses. Therefore this bond requirement provides protection against the expansion of "for profit" uses which may have brought greater impacts on the neighborhood at some point in the future if not strictly regulated. The Public zone district itself provides another level of protection against a wide array of uses which might bring more impacts. The purpose of the PUblic zone district as stated in the Aspen Land Use Regulations is: "The purpose of the Public (PUB) zone district is to provide for the development of governmental and quasi-governmental facilities for cultural, educational, civic and other governmental purposes." The above purpose of the Public zone mentions cultural, educational and civic uses and the proposed amendment actually specifies similar appropriate uses and activities. The applicant feels that the proposed uses (arts, cultural and recreational uses) are within the intent of the Public zone, and the amendment is to clarify the applicable section of the Regulations by actually delineating these uses in the list of permitted uses. These arts, cultural and recreational uses are within the intent of the zone district, but the proposed text amendment will also allow the Public zone district to better accommodate the proposed uses at the new Aspen Art and Recreation center, the uses for which the building was purchased. Aqain, the bond documents will always restrict the number of organizations which are not non-prOfit and will help govern the uses allowed in the building. Along with the requirements of the Public zone itself, the bOnd,documents will help keep the allowed uses within the intent of the Public zone and consistent with the intent of the electorate when they approved the purchase of the Red Brick School for publ~c, arts and recreational uses. 10 f'1 () 1..1 , > Although it may be somewhat repetitive, the same nine review standards for the text amendment (rezoning) discussed above, are applicable to this text amendment, the addition of an allowed use to the Public zone district. These nine standards of review are briefly discussed below as they relate to this proposed text amendment. A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this chapter. This amendment is not in conflict with any portion of this chapter. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. This amendment is consistent with all elements of the AACP. c. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. The proposed allowed uses, "arts, cultural and recreational activities", will allow uses which are compatible with surrounding zone districts (R-6 Residential, NC - Neighborhood Commercial and SCI - Service, Commercial Industrial with an SPA Overlay) and with surrounding land uses (residential, the yellow brick school and commercial uses at the Post Office and Truman Center). D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. As permitted use in the Public zone, the proposed arts, cultural and recreational uses will generate less impacts than the more traditional public uses allowed in the Public zone district. No standards were found for determining impacts from artist studios or recreational uses. Several experts surveyed indicate that the low end of impact standards for office uses best reflects the high end of impacts from such arts and recreational uses. On the Red Brick site, at a minimum, the new uses will be "impact neutral" in that they will have no more impacts than the school use which has' impacted the neighborhood since its construction in 1941. In reality, the site will generate less traffic and result in safer roads than the school. 11' n () .' E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent, to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, includinq but not limited to transportation facilities, sewaqe facilities, water supply, parks, drainaqe, schools, and emerqency medical facilities. The addition of the proposed uses does not change, but rather clarifies the allowed uses within the Public zone. Therefore these uses will not result in increased demand on public facilities. The existing structure has been in existence and the impacts are already accommodated within current services. , The proposed permitted uses will probably generate less demand on public facilities than traditional public uses. The change from school to the proposed public uses should decrease impacts on the Red Brick site as well given the reduction in the on-site population and the public facilities required to accommodate them. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in siqnificantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. The addition of the proposed permitted uses in the Public zone district will not adversely impact the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the city of Aspen. . The proposed text amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the. City of Aspen and in the neighborhood. The proposed permitted uses and the new Aspen Art and Recreation Center use encompasses two of the stronger elements of the community's character the arts and recreational activities. The new use of the building should actually enhance community character. H. Whether there have been chanqed conditions affectinq the subject parcel or the surroundinq neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. The.Red Brick School building was sold by the Aspen School District after the District planned and built a new elementary school., on the Maroon Creek campus. The purChase of the property by the city of Aspen involved substantial public input. The change in ownership from a school district to the governmental entity is a changed condition which instigated this text amendment. The amendment is appropriate for the entire Public zone district, but is most appropriate in its application to the Red Brick site. 12 I"') , n J.i ,f I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. The proposed text amendment to add arts, cultural and recreational activities as permitted uses in the Public zone district is not in conflict with the public interest, but rather is strongly in the public interest. POD DEVELOPHENT PLAN FOR THE PUBLIC ZONEDIKSNSIONAL REQUIREMENTS Section 5-220 (D) of the Aspen Land Use Regulations (Public Zone District, Dimensional Requirements) states that "The dimensional requiremen~s which shall apply to all permitted conditional uses in the Public (PUB) zone district be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and final development plan pursuant Article 7, Division 9, Planned Unit Development." Although this indicates that the only permitted conditional uses are SUbj ect to the PUD review, no dimensional requirements are established for permitted uses in the Public Zone. Therefore, as suggested in our pre-application conference, we have addressed the PUD section of the Code as a means of establishi~g the dimensional requirements and parking requirements for the property. As there is no new development proposed, but rather the Red Brick School is proposed for reuse as a public arts and recreation center, the footprint of the structure is not Changing at this time and the dimensional requirements proposed will be consistent with what has been in place since the building was constructed. As the Public zone district uses a PUD plan review only as a means of establishing appropriate dimensional and parking requirements, many sections of the PUD review are, not applicable. We have addressed only the standards which apply to the specifics of this site and the proposed reuse of the building. All general requirements are considered not applicable, though the subject property complies with the general requirements of the PUD review. The following addresses the applicable concerns. Section 7-903 (B) (4) Dimensional Reauirements. The dimensional requirements shall be those of, the underlying Zone District, provided that variations may be permitted in the following: a. MinimUm distance between buildings; b. Maximum height (including viewplanes); c. Minimum front yard; d. Minimum rear yard; 13 t""'\ riI " e. Minimum side yard; f. Minimum lot width; g. Minimum lot area; h. Trash access area; i. Internal floor area ratio; and j. Minimum percent open space. If a variation is permitted in minimum lot area, the area of any lot may be greater or less than the minimum requirement of the underlying Zone District, provided the total area of all lots, when averaged, at least equals the permitted minimum for the Zone District. Any variation permitted shall be clearly indicated on the final development plan. Again, the Public zone district does not establish dimensional requirements, so the applicant is proposing the following for the Red Brick School site and the Aspen Arts and Recreational Center: a. Minimum distance between buildings: 10 feet b. Maximum height (inClUding vie~lanes): 25 ft c. Minimum front yard: lO feet (except 4 ft at entry) d. Minimum rear yard: l5 feet e. Minimum side yard: 5 feet f. Minimum lot width: 60 feet g. Minimum lot area: 6,000 square feet h. Trash access area: See att'd survey i. Internal floor area ratio: 0.75:l j. Minimum percent open space: No requirement These requirements have been developed from the dimensional requirements in the city of Aspen's 0- Office zone district and the adjacent R-6 Residential zone district, whichever was most appropriate. Section 7-903 (B) (5) Off-street Darkina. The number of off- street parking spaces may be varied from that required in the underlying Zone District based on the following considerations. k. The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development. l. The parking needs of any non-residential uses. m. The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. n. The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. l4 (""', n '." o. The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core or public recreational facilities in the city. Whenever the number of off-street parking spaces is reduced, the city shall obtain assurance that the nature of the occupancy will not change. The Public zone district does not address parking requirements so the applicant has addressed the parking section of the POD review. As discussed previously, it is estimated that 23'to 48 employees will use the proposed arts and recreational center. Assuming each employee has one car, the historical parking on-site should be adequate for the new use and will be maintained for use by the facility. There has been no officially designated parking on the school site in the past. Historically the area to the north and west of the structure has been used as a parking area. Approximately 35 spaces have been accommodated, including circulation, in this area. Therefore, the applicant proposes to provide these 35 spaces for the 23 to 48 employee cars. The 20 to 25 on-street parking space will be utilized for guest parking or any overflow parking needs. At approximately one space per employee, we feel this is sufficient, especially since most of the proposed tenants will not generate many visitors. The artist studios will not generate the need for additional parking. Still, the standard does consider client and visitor traffic. Most cars will be arriving and departing at the beginning and end of typical work hours. The artist studios may have more flexible hours which would decrease peak demand for traffic and parking. As the building is centrally located and within a few blocks of the public parking garage, the commercial core and neighborhood shopping, many employees and visitors will be traveling by foot. The City of Aspen's public parking garage is two blocks (700 feet) east and is convenient for use by users of the Red Brick Facility. The use of the parking garage, pedestrian travel and other auto- disincentives will be strongly encouraged through the management and leasing operations. The proposed Arts and Recreation Center will always be for public, arts, cul tural and recreational uses and the nature of the occupancy will not change. In addition to the requirements of the Public zone district, this is further guaranteed by the bond documents for the f-inancing of the building's purchase as only five percent of the net leasable floor area can be rented to tenants who are not non-profits. (See Attachment 3.) 15 f'*1 ~ .' LANDOWNERS CONSENT Attachment 5 is a letter from the applicant authorizing Davis Horn Incorporated to prepare this land use application and represent them in the land use review process. Attachment 6 is a City of Aspen land use application form agreement. ATTACHMENT INDEX The fOllowing is a list of attachments: Attachment 1: Vicinity Map - Aspen Arts and Recreation Center Rezoning and PUDplan; Attachment 2: Red Brick School Building - Existing First Floor Plan; Attachment 3: Letter to Dallas Everhardt, Director, from bond council bonds used for the purchase of City Finance regarding the the Red Brick; Attachment 4: Red Brick Committee memorandum regarding recommendations for the Red Brick Renovation and Management; Attachment 5: Landowner's authorization for Davis Horn Inc. to submit a land use application on their behalf and to represent them in the land use review process; Attachment 6: Land use application forms; Attachment 7: Pre-application conference summary sheet; Attachment 8: Legal description and proof of ownership. SUHMARY This application has described the subject property, the proposed use and requested approvals and has demonstrated compliance with pertinent sections of the Aspen Land Use Regulations which were identified by the staff in a pre":application conference. Please notify us if we have mistakenly neglected to address any of your concerns. Thank you for your consideration and please call if you have any questions or need further information. 16 .... ~I ffi ~ ~ il( " /i " '. .'",,,,,,. ~~.".." .4""~ ~....~+ ,t~" ,," / o , ii, IIi! 'hi . i; XW ~I If I' ii ~I I w~ :J~.c ,I. I!~ oJ <r 'I" " ~ ':e= ol ,I ~ 1,/; 'I'll . ;;:.II"S i'.!! u c:t I .,' ~ i!: I hi! ~ .I-~I If 1=1 ,; ~ ~ ~:~, n~ ~ !i ... .~~ ~~ ,.'! ' ; s~i!1 ~,j i c... "<: ::; ~ Z -. Z o N UJ ~ wi I: '<Iz .E{ ~ ~ t '" ~ ~ ~ UJ .... :z: UJ '-' :z: o -. ~ " G ~ L o ~ ~ . .... "<: ~ UJ :l' ~ '-' UJ ~ Q Z "<: CI) .... ~ "<: o z Z o N ~ t;; ~ ~ "> !~ !~ ; r:: ,i" 1 " <:; ~ " (r ~ z UJ c... CI) "<: .1.33" Cf.[S 'I" ,,' ~I i~i= w. I :;'u di; :;d!pt!lt~ ill!il'~:( -,'- i,.j, ,,-.ill!I': ..,e 11" !I" a i~ii~l::~j! ~ ~ 'I'ill!;,!! I 1-., Ub,:'j e JM../h~l"' "I'I:'i " . ." ' " ',> " ~ 1.,'1'; :~I; a ~ .il!I"illh~ 1 di'I'IJi'I' i ... ria ; I'~l ' I ".. ,.;J,:,: ~ .... ..1: , "" l: j=! ~ I i Ill! f I. I. ;i,:. Hi I; :!i !.J ii!. . i .. PI. lIw,i t~'!l 1 l: 101M" _1'::" ._11: "'il,"!!1 . ., ,j 1'1' I ,'> ~':i I Ix - r=j.c ~ II I i- :!=,:; ';~i~ o' ,,, iii" hhw Z "I ,,' ,',. ''''I . 1 " ,f ,I"; -gl! !i! ! J Ii i !.c Irl~~ till' 5' .ci.i ifp!j w r:: -.. Iii " ll;!~ ii!' l~ifr I" 'jll -JIG ,II: ; h .. ,~ i!,~ '!'jZ , ,ii, - ".1. ~i;'1 :!-i;;: ::; i. ~ ~ .1/ ; ~;J "':'1' l!:1I;I' ~ It ,- ~ i'i,'1 .....11. i tiOI ...:u! ~ 1!!l":; ;I!jl u d:;1 a i . , i i , I . II " " i I ~ . . . w ~ , , , .! ., j;; . . ~ z ~ ;; ... .;; L . ~ z:~ 04 ~iS~ ei =~8 ~ ~ . . Q )o""ffi ~ s~~ ~ W L o . L '-. f:j ~ I/; ~ -.; ..., ..., ~ '-. I/; ;J I/::Js/ Ifyv:; ON . ~ :i w w zo t;u5 i ~1 > ,I , w. , . ~::. ~. z ~ ,I I, " ,Ill ,f:, II" IPI ll!l I j ~; hL '"I' ,II' " I 'Iq h!l ,;-1 ,-" ;;: I~!: "id "-h L ~ " >- ~ z u > 1 Iii !i! u ~ icf " IE: ..:1 f;~ i~ Is: ~!l'! '. " ~ li11. ~ ;J:!~-I :: I:l;~;; ... ~!!! ..J g~ .iII ~';II~ :.ti; 8p II >l!a=- ~ ,-I' vi ill c:: '" .... z '" u Z <:> - .... '" "''''' c:: "" U -J ","- c:: '" z=> "'''- ~ c:: '" z '" "- (I) '" . U : I," " ~ !~ 'I ' II ;f~ ~ ji Ii; i ! ~ .El!.. II -1'1 ' . ... # .. .:.-, ;;)i s =1" u";. !" ",:Or= f il!l!' ~ i;;! i!13 <11-;1 dl=t; ~ J; ~: !:~ ~ ;ii;;j-,!;!1: ~..; j -~. i !:;:i ..!i~ hi: ..J ~!~! . ~ :'ii 1~ 111,t , ~ I' I' ~ ~ '.~ !j '" .::.... . "-"I ~ Ilia" ~ ,'III - i!i!!l ! Ii!'i ,..J "~:I" J'" hit! ",!' , - ~':::ii::l:::~~ , j;!'iHi'" ,=..:::;11.:: lImmii, i,=liJ!jlU! ~ =_i:s!~..!i!!: .....!:I.;=I".wj!i ~ I.'!'I"'" - II. .... a hi=,1 ' - 'I' ,Jl" . I E i d::!~:: v"I,,","j,1 <n:e.:!- ;. e "j;j.~,;;.!!:;;; i ~ h!~I;i!ld I ~ j!~I~I'I!!"'~ ; Xl;::;;: iIIi i~! , i . ~!! "' iii ~ ;i; ~ lJ;. ~ 1"1 "- .! ~ :iil ...!!:: ~ hi :ii!;! ~ :ilj ~ f-P . " I ~ 1~1 -<in! : lie; d iI!J , I . . ~ ~ ,; a~ " - , , w - , i i I ~ ; i @ I i i W"' g ~ i:, ! li- , " , . .... ..: ~i I":: J;~ I J' i -#. :!J ! f:: :, i:!:/Y , ",M!:!: !!h~ a l: . I~ ~~..f ; i~ i; ifi;i .2 : ~~ r!!' ;.~!. ~ 13 ~'t;~ ~r~i"! : ij,:!-;'::i; I; il'" ~ 2! ;:;~~ ,.!!- ;:1: .i ! .::i !~~ 2::~! - ~ e .. I :, ,Ii r%!~! i ! i '. '" !. bi !!!~; ,- ~::! ~ , ,~~ ~a:l "!it~ I ! -; 0 .. ! ~'i heM l: ..:!I : : ;,_ ;:I: :~h! i i i:l .3 : :. ;g: !!!,E:.. : ~ " n~':: 1f i! .. .. ~ ~l ;- i! " c:.:e ~ ~~~ : i,1 ;"5;. ~ ii-=' - "I ~ i!: ., , ~ U~ " V _~1 .)~!-- ~ ~ wil: 2 ..Jll .a ~. II '" ~ :: ~ % ~ ~. t. ..,:" . _0 : ffi ~~ a: ~~3 ~... ~8 ;l:: <:> . . <:> ~:ffi > _.,0- E <,J-~ ~ o . . '" , ::: i~ , )i ;~ f , "- , " c:J o "- (j ~ ~ ~ ~: .i ~slq lol!il" )o.l. ! ~,;:H f "I ~ ' ~ ' II II Ii:' 'II f IIi' ii:l Ij"! hP ll'! ,'Ii ,liB ,;..1 I"" ;;: J~~:: ...di "-h ;;;i .~~ I :::c "' << ::; >- ~ z u > .[3311 .[s /{~ -.. JS/....,"' fYl1VO 'N t:; ~ ::; '-- f:j f:: o ~ '" ..., ..., ~ , ; =~~ t; w ,il! . ,Ii """ -l i;~:; 1:1::1 '" ~ !1:::..::I--= I- ;:::::::) :~; t.J .gj:;a..!:~; 3 ji~n!ii'~! ~! ' ;i!lI!U:h! .~ I ~ JiJuiiijri ;i1i <l ;iiiU;;~l:~; i~IJ !! -l ,;.~~~~::~:: I:~i i . ("") f) III III II II 'I " SECTION VII EXISTING FLOOR PLAN AlTACHMENT 2 ..I l ~l ,I SI ~ I ii liii I , Vi .i:an\I'; ~ I"~ I, l ! .~ : I ! I 1 I"~ , I I ',t, n@\ I ~ i I ~ ~ . i , ! i I o , Ii ~ ; h , K ' I t q . I I . . f . . 1 = ~ . lr' I ~. t c I < , t\ I! cr- , I . I \.l~ I<"""....~ ~~ f I r-. 15 f":) " (J) !~ . MEMORANDUM AlTACH.'!.ENT ---1- TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Red Brick Committee DATE: February 9, 1993 RE: Recommendations Regarding Red Brick Renovation and Management The Red Brick Committee has met approximately eight times to discuss and recommend to City Council a long-range program for the Red Brick Building. The Committee is made up of the following members: Julia Marshall Lee Ambrose Jill Uris Don Fleischer Janet Garwood Bill Martin Joanne Lyon Mary Martin Janet Roberts Katherine Lee Bob Camp_ Staff support has been provided by: Bill Efting Ken Collins Rob Thomson Cindy Wilson Amy Margerum The Committee reached a consensus on the following key points: * The Red Brick site should be used for arts, recreation and compatible community uses; * The parcel s.hould not be split or sold off for other purposes or uses such as housing; 1 f'1 f) '. * Management of both tenant relations and day to day maintenance of the building should be by one entity; * The City council should appoint an review both the operational aspects recommend ,capital improvements. The provide feedback on programmatic and would have no management authority. advisory committee to of the building and advisory group would operating issues but Renovation The Committee received a report from Smith Associates Architects which presents four alternatives for renovation. The report is attached as Appendix A. The four alternatives are summarized below: Alternative 1: requirements. Minimum upgrade to meet code and maintenance Paved on-site parking lot with 35 spaces. Alternative 2: Demolish the 1941 portion of the structure. Upgrade and remodel the classroom and gym areas, construct a new addition of 6,000 square feet designed for an arts center, paved parking lot on-site with 60 spaces, new landscaping. Alternative 2B: Demolish the 1941 structure, upgrade the remaining portion of the building to meet code and maintenance requirements, reconfigure and renovate the floorplan to meet Art Council needs, paved parking lot on-site with 35 spaces. Alternative 3: Demolish the entire building and build a new 23,000 square foot arts and recreation center, create a paved parking lot on-site with 60 spaces, new landscaping. ' Cost estimates of the alternatives are: Alternative 1: $1,425,106 Alternative 2 : $2,172,331 Alternative 2B: $1,287,138 Alternative 3 : $3,146,235 The Committee reached consensus not to support any of the first three alternatives primarily because of the costs involved. The Committee recommends the proposed renovation costs stay within the $1,000,000 budget which the City has earmarked and should not be dependent on funding from outside sources. However, any savings or interest earnings experienced by the City due to the delays in 2 f1 i) '. ( ~. r this project would be appropriate to use for the renovation and could increase the $1,000,000 budget. Recommendation: After reviewing all four alternatives, committee with the cooperation of the Arts Council recommend City Council consider Alternative 4. Several factors support recommendation: the that this , -' . ,', ' 1. Cost - The committee feels that we were challenged to recommend an option which would most benefit the artistic community for a $1,000,000 project. 2. Arts Council Needs - With the new configuration of rooms in the newer section, most of the Arts Council current needs will be satisfied. 3. Energy Efficiency - This alternative will provide the community with a much more energy efficient building. . 4. Expansion - This alternative leaves room for expansion of the art center at a future date. 5. Occupancy - The committee projects that this option would allow the'building to be functional approximately 1 year after the design team selection. ' Manaqement The Committee reached consensus that property management and tenant relations should not be segregated from building management. Whatever group is responsible for managing the building should be responsible for both the tenant relations (negotiating leases, collecting rents, etc) and day to day building maintenance. The Committee also agreed that regardless of who manages the building there should be an advisory group appointed which consists of City Council representation, citizen/business representation and Arts Council representatives. The advisory group would be used for feedback on programmatic and operating issues but would have no management responsibility. The Committee considered several management, options. The Committee evaluated management alternatives based on the following criteria: Financial viability: financial reports standards; will the management entity prepare timely and' have clear financial goals and Support of the Arts: encourage the arts; will the management entity support and Who is the best organization to determine uses of building? 3 t") t{' I2J \) fJ-r " Robert.L. segall Box 8642 Aspen, Co. 81612 13 April 1993 city Planning And zoning Galena street Aspen, Co. 816ll Attn: Jan Carney Jan: I unfortunatelY have a prior committment and, cannot attend the meeting until about 5:45 pm. In case the meetinq is adjourned before then, please be aware that the neighbors, are very much against the re-zoning attempt.' The desired result can be accomplished by simply making a conditional use under the R-6 category. There is already a provision for a satellite dish which is needed by KAJX and one can interpret the'desiqnation of pUblic school or private academic Schooltoencompas$ the arts center portion of the project. Recreation is obviously ok, since there is an existing gym from when it was a school. The problem with the proposed PUB zoning is the leeway the city has if the project fails and the resulting de-stabilization of the neighborhood while waiting for the project to succeed or fail. At least under the R-6 zoning, we know that it is either an art & reo center or single family housing. We do not want the possibility of affordable housing, a bus stop, a maintenance shop, Public parking facilities, essential government facilities, essentially anything under sec. 5-221 S. Furthermore, having this meeting at 4: 30 when most of the neighbors who live here full time are still at work may render the entire llleeting invalid. It certainly does not serve the democratic process by not allowing for full paritcipation on the part of those most af ected. Hopefully, I will see you at 5:45. Please try to hol e q then. r6d.aObA.OO1 TOTAL P.01 ('} N1ty Council ExlUbit D ApprOved , U By Ordinance Aspen Arts and Recreation Center Map Amendment for Rezoninq from R-6 to Public (PUB): Pursuant to section 7-1102 the standards of review for an amendment to the Official Zone District Map are as follows: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this chapter. Response: There are no conflicts with the zoning code. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Response: The Aspen Area Community plan set forth goals to maintain and enhance the balance bet~eel} resort funi::tions and community oriented functions. This site provides an opportunity to serve the local community as well as our tourist populations by supporting arts and recreation functions, which are central to Aspen's 20th century heritage. As mentioned earlier, the AACP also specifically addresses the purchase of the school building and its rezoning to Public. . C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding Zone Districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Response: Currently the zoning on the parcel is R-6, Medium Density Residential. As a public school, the use was considered a grandfathered conditional use. Activities associated with schools include intense daytime use, two peak traffic periods per day, and occasional night functions. The proposed Center use will lessen peak traffic impacts and lessen daytime noise significantly. Recreation-oriented night functions will probably remain at the same level. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Response: city Engineer Chuck Roth comments that the proposed use should result in improved traffic generation and road safety conditions. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment. would result in demands on pUblic facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewagefapilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Response: No increased demands will result from the rezoning. In fact, the community's public facilities will be augmented by the new recreation facilities. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. r"'\ , n Response: The site and the neighborhood are already developed. No new square footage is proposed with this application, so this condition does not readily apply. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Response: The proposed rezoning to Public is consistent with the historic public use of the site as a school and is considered, "impact neutral" to the surrounding area. Any changes to an approved PUD Plan must receive approval through appropriate land use reviews. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Response: The most important change voters approved the purchase of the recreation purposes. This mandate current R-6 residential designation. for this site for req'uires parcel is community rezoning that arts from the and the I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. Response: The Red Brick School Building will be a valuable asset to the community by providing a hub for the arts community, which is a large part of the cultural fabric of Aspen. 2 t""'\ r) .1 " Does the entity have property management experience? I The Committee narrowed the options to either management by the City or by an outside board such as the Arts Council. The Committee agreed that any management option chosen should be re-evaluated after a year or sooner if problems arise. The Committee was split on which management entity they preferred, however all except one member felt they could "live with" Arts Council management for one year with a review. All agreed that they could "live with" City management of the building with oversight by an advisory board. In considering the alternatives the following assumption was made: * The direct cost of managing the building was assumed to be the same regardless of whether the City or the Arts Council managed the building. Citv Manaqement: * If the city managed the building the City would hire staff or contract for property management services including negotiating leases and maintenance services. There would be an office in the recreation area for staff or property management contractors. An existing City manager(s) would oversee staff or contractors. Advantages: * The City has existing infrastructure (i.e. attorney support, ~nsurance, management experience, personnel system, financial system, etc) * Financial reporting and accountability is already in place. * More direct and timely accountability to the public. * city Council would set goals for the building. Staff reports to Council. Disadvantages: * City staff not as aware of arts groups' needs. * city doesn't have a great deal of experience in renting space and being a landlord. Arts Council Manaqement: * Arts Council would hire a director which would oversee the leasing and building' maintenance aspects of the building (in addition to other Arts Council duties). Leasing and tenant relations issues would be handled by the director. Building 4 f'\ r) " ,. maintenance functions would be either contracted out or done by other hired staff. staff reports to the Arts Council. Advantages: * Arts Council has good understanding of tenant needs and has a mission to support and encourage the arts. * May be the best organization to determine uses of the building, however there is a concern that property management will conflict with the mission of the Arts Council. Disadvantages: * Financial viability: the Arts Council will need to develop a system for financial reporting. Reporting would be made to the Arts Council. The community as a whole and the City Council may have delayed access to financial information. * The Arts Council as an entity does not have a strong background in property management. RECOMMENDATION: The Committee would like to discuss the above options with City Council and get feedback. 5 , I " ,\ I, r' f'\ City"-'ncil Approved By Ordinance 1hrhfftft ~ ,It - / MEMORANDUM To: Kim Johnson, Planning Office From: Chuck Roth, City Engineer ei<- Date: March 18, 1993 Re: Aspen Arts and Recreation Center (Red Brick School) - Rezoning, PUD Development Plan, and Text Amendment Having reviewed the above referenced applicatibn,and having made a site inspection, the engineering department has the following comments: 1. Rezoning a. Traffic generation and road safety - The Engineering Department agrees with the applicant's statements on pages 6-8 that the proposed use should result in improved traffic generation and road safety conditions. b. Demands on public facilities - As per the application, rezoning should not result in increased demands on public facilities. 2. Text Amendment - The application satisfactorily address the review standards, and the Engineering Department has no comment on the proposed text amendment. 3. PUD. a. Off-street Parking - It appears that the area proposed to be used at this time totals 21,800 square feet. Perusal of the Code requirements for off-street parking for similar use zone designations shows a range of from 1.5 to 4 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet. The proposed 35 parking spaces would slightly exceed the minimum similar requirement which would be 33 spaces. It is recommended that a condition of approval be to paint the stripes delineating the parking spaces in order to ensure optimum space utilization. It appears that if striping is at the standard 8 1/2' space width required by Code, there could actually be 24 spaces on the north side for a total 36 spaces on site. It is quite possible that the 36 spaces may, in the future, prove to be insufficient, and provision should be made at this time to anticipate that possibility. ; , f'\ n .,.. r Future increased development on the site would probably require additional on- site parking, and any apparent deficiencies in the current on-site parking proposal should be remedied at that time. (Should the Transportation and Parking Director be commenting?) b. On-street Parking - The parking on the Garmisch Street frontage has historically been unclear due to the lack of curb and gutter and signage. Any future development in the public right-of-way at this location must be coordinated with the Engineering Department. The Garmisch Street right-of-way is 100' wide. It is recommended that the applicant consider installing curb and gutter on Garmisch Street located to provide head-in parking similar to other Garmisch Street parking such as at Paepke Park, Molly Gibson Lodge, the Medical Associates, etc., as well as constructing a sidewalk for pedestrian circulation. Street drainage should be addressed at that time. A storm runoff inlet and extension to the storm sewer may need to be installed. The on-street parking is available to the entire public and may not be restricted to adjacent businesses or uses. 4. Plat Comments a. Establish and indicate easements for trail (14'), electric switchgear, and any other utility pedestal or utility needs. 5. The applicant shall agree to join any future improvement districts which may be formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in the public right-of-way. 6. Given the continuous problems of unapproved work and development in public rights- of-way, we would advise the applicant as follows: The applicant shall consult city engineering (920-5080) for design considerations of development within public rights-of-way, parks department (920-5120) for vegetation species, and shall obtain permits for any work or development, including landscaping, within public rights-of-way from city streets department (920-5130). . cc: Bob Gish, Public Works Director Rob Thomson, Special Projects M93.74 . , n n ,~ . MEMORANDUM TO: Kim Johnson, Planning Office Baker, ~~ffice FROM: Tom DATE: April 9, 1993 RE: Red Brick School Referral SUMMARY OF REFERRAL COMMENTS: The Housing Office finds that the proposed plah.for thei!l.eid Brick School willhi3.ve fewer impacts in terms of affordable housing than the historic elementary schooL use. Employee Generation - Based upon staff review, the Housing Office finds that there are generally three uses being proposed for the Red Brick: office, studio, and recreation. In terms of office uses, we find that 3 employeesj1,000 sf (net leasable) is an appropriate generation figure. This is consistent with the generation figures in the city's office zone. In terms of studio use, we find insufficient information to determine a generation figure. Additional information about how ,and wh~11 a studio will be used is needed. In terms of recreational uses, we find that the gymnasium and locker room will generate less than 1 FTE. This figure is derived from Recreation Department experience with the operation of similar facilities. According to the applicant and under the alternative which does not utilize the 1941 section of the building, the applicant expects to generate between 23 48 employees (p. 70f the Land Use Application) or between 21 - 28 employees (March l6, 1993 letter from Alice Davis to Kim ~ohnson). ,Given that the gymnasium and locker room portion of the building (8320 sf) will generate less than one employee, then the remaining 13,480 sf will generate a figure less than 30. This assumes that the studio use generates less than 3 employeesj1,000 sf (net leasable) and the 13,480 sf figure must be revised to depict net leasable square footage. The Housing Office concludes that.the applicant's 21 - 48 employee generation range is adequate and the actual generation will likely be at the lower end of that range. once additional information is provided about ,net leasable space and how and when the studio space will be used (based upon the option to leave the 1941 portion of the school vacant). Employee Credits - In terms of employee credits, the Red Brick School has historically employed 24 - 30 employees, see attachment 1 f""'1 ATTACH. 1 'L , - 'MBMoRANDUM ., TO: Kim Johnson, Planning Office , Cindy Wilson, Assistant city Manager ~JJJJ FROM: DATE: April. 6, 199~ Red Bri~k School Historical Number of E~ployees RE: I spoke to both Joe Tarbet, Aspen School District controller and Barb Tarbet, Elementary S9hool principal to obtain information regarding the number of employees in the Red Brick School building in the past. They both confirmed that the number of employees in the building for {3.bout the past ten years have been about as follows: 5 .administrative personnel 2 janitors 4-5 special teachers -li..teachers 24 - 25 total employees Barb also noted that in 1969 there were 30 employees in the Red Brick building. If I can help you with this in any other way, please call me. t""'\ n . , .., , , ": MEMORANDUM TO: KIM: JOHNSON, PLANNING DEPARTMENT LARRY BALLENGER, WATER SUP MARCH 8, 1993 ASPEN ARTS AND RECREATION CENTER ENT FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: The Water Department would request that the water service line into the Red Brick School be properly metered. Our Department inspected the Red Brick School building's water system this winter. We found two water service conllections that were not metered. LB:rl Iab9/redschool.mem Robert L. Segal I r-Box 8642 Aspen, Co. 81612 ,'-",y Council ApprOVed By Ordinance )!Yhthlt G- , 11_ . . 4 Apri I 1993 Davis Horn Inc. 215 South Monarch Sui te 104 Aspen, Co. 81611 Attn: Al ice Davis Re: Red Brick Rezoning Dear Ms. Davis: I am in receipt of your March 29 letter regarding the rezoning of the Red Brick School. I must tell you that there is no support from the residents for several blocks. The reason for this is that the school can be turned into an arts & rec center without the rezoning process. If it is rezoned, it can be turned into affordable housing. have a bus stop put in. etc. This is not in the interest of the neighborhood. nor would it contribute to keeping this a neighborhood. I can envision a future ot excessive vehioular traffic. followed by RFTA buses belching noxious deisel fumes. Then when the whole project fails to support itself. the city will turn it into affordable housing a la West Hopkins, thereby de-valuing all the years I sacrificed to be able to afford to live here and the same for all my' neighbors. With al I due respect. I suggest that instead of accepting city money for thi s rezoning project. you counsel the ci ty that they can do what the voters want with the zoning just the way it is. I can assure you that if this passes, the full financial resources of this neighborhood wi 11 throw this into the courts and tie up the whole project inawaythatwill make last fall's lawsuit look like child's play. If you wish to discuss this before the meeting, feel free to contact me a t work. 920-1500 x209. lUlll.OU " ^.- ~ ~ ',:~ FER E N C B E R K 0 ~'-, ,;.. ...1:- PHOTOGRAPHY ASP E N COLORADO e P.O. Box 360 Tel. (303) 925-3398 5 April 93 i'~"--r;-{ c:: 0:' ~j, ~\ i~:':~:'~'--' . 'j: ",' Planning & Zoning COm11l1'llion, Aspen City Council, 130 S.Galena, Asp en. 6.,-.,r-,r, n DO - 1;:1::1.:\ Ladies and Gentlemen: Since I shall be out of town to attend the Meeting on Re-zoning Part of the Residential District to PUll-6, I would like to put in writing my often expressed opinion that I am against any Change of Zoning of the Residential District in the West End. Although there are many good reasons - Financial, Parking etc. against such a change, my main objection has always beeri, WLS, is, and shall always be purely one of principle; i.e. the Preservation of the West End as a Residey'ntial Area. ~rs ~inCerelY, i~ ~4/13/93 07:31 ,,",,,_i ",...,,_, , "5'303 440 3967 f'\ CAPLAN & EARNEST Q ~002 , . .....' '. ~ ~ ';';;',.' " ~\ i'i .I .0, f r.: ~ ! ft' 4 "'" ""'" 733 13th Street Boulder, Colorado 80302 April 12, 1993 Sent Via Telecqpier: 920-5197 Ms. JlISmlne 1)gre. Chainnan Planning and Zoning Commission c/o KimJohnwn Aspcn/Pit1dn Planning Office 130 S. Galena Street Aspen. Colorado Re: Aspen Arts and Recreation Center (Red Brick School) Dear Ms. Tygre and Members of the Board: Please c:onsider thls letter which is respectfully submitted in qpposition to the proposed Map Amendment, GMQS Exemption and T~ Amendment to the Aspen Land Use Regulations with respect to the Red Brick School. My husband and I are the owners of the residence at 219 North Monarch, which is located two doors ,away and across the street from the Red Brick School. During the more than 2S Ycarll that we have owned our residence, of c:ourse, we have seen many changes in Aspen. However, one thing that bl\S endured for, WI is the preservation of the residential character of our neiihborhood. We fear that is endangered and would be lost if the proposed rezoning to Public Zone District were to be approved. , It is ironic, but a little over a year ago, we wrote to express concerns about a proposal to allowfllming activities at the school. In that letter, we stated our worries about the fact that these kind of C:OIllIDC1'cial activities would alter the residential character of our neighborhood. We mentioned the fact that the traffic would increase in the area, even beyond the increased leVel we have noticed in recent years. We described the fact that our neighborhood has already become overcrowded with parked cars, many owned by etq)loyees who work at Clark's Market or the other storesJust down the hill or businesses on Main Street. And. perhaps most significantly, we predicted that the use would open the door to future, similar activities. The following prophetic quote is from our letter of January 9, 1992: ~4/13/93 07:32 __,__. u, __I ' '8'303 440 3967 t""'\ CAPLAN & EARNEST ~ee3 -, n ....--... ~_.._-'''''''~'' ~'l I~; ~ Ms. Jasmine Tygre, Chairman Planning and ZtInlng Commission AprJ112, 1993 Pase2 The precedent in permitting a commercial use, even on a temporary' basis, poses a dangerous threat of authorizing future similar uses. We see this as opening the door, to the potential permanent rezoning of the school property to allow commer~ial a,ctivities to be carri~ on there. Ever since the School District tirst announced its interitions to vacate the property, we have been concerned about the possibility that some use other than residential would be . sougbt. It the filming activities were allowed, even on a temporary rezoning hasis., the precedent for that zoning will be set. . A copy of our January 1992 letter is enclosed.. It now apPears that the fictional Aspen "extreme" we feared then is being proposed to become reality now. It is our understanding that the narrowly-approved referendum authorizing the acquisition of the school by the City was for "arts-related" activities. Although this is not a term ot prec:ise definition, it seems clear enough that It would not Include the broad ranie of pennitted uses cUl'1'elltly allowed in the Public Zone District, nor "recreational" actJvit1es as contemplated by the proposed text amendment. It seems fair to conclude that "am-related" also did not contemplate the conversion of the school into effectively an office building within our historic residential neighborhood, much less ,envision the attendant daily traffic, parking, btl";r'..~a invitees and other activities normally associated with an office, which is. really a commercial-not residential-use. Schools are compatible with residential neighborhoods. Office buildings are not. Thus, the reason for the proposed te7l'1ning. This contradiction in conventional wisdom and ~istlng permitted uses alone undermines the arguments for even considering such a change. Some would say that rezoning should be automatic, given the approval to purchase the scl1ool. However, as mentioned, the 'margin of the vote could hardly be considered a mandate, nor can it fairly be deemed to be any approval by those who would have standing to dictate what kinds of uses should be imposed upon those of us who reside in the vicinity. We would suggest that rather than eJtpanding the tel>t of permitted uses within the Public Zone District and attempting to completely rezone the Scllool property to fit the new defmition, that the City consider allowing for use by special review or conditional use review, so that some precision as to the actual proposed uses would be 04/13/93 07:33 ,,_. "" _L__-.,,,. ti'303 440 3967 A , il CAPLAN & EARNEST A 141004 .. " 'l~ . ~ I ~ ,.. Ms. Jasmine Tygre, Chainnan Planning and Zoning COmmi....ton April 12., 1993 Page 3 required to be committed to up front, and those of us most affected could be considered and the impacts mitigated through the use of conditions and other regulatory tools. Under the proposed rezoning. no such detailed commitments or restrictions as to use will be made. For example, we have heard that the classrooms may be partitioned into offi<:e$ for various "w-relatCli"IJ{)1l-profit organizations. But does this mean that the City will have no officea there? Will CIty recreation leagues use the gym for all types of indoor recreation activities? Will th,e hours of Use be restricte<l? Will parking be added, or simply allowed to Care for the already limited spaces on the street? ' Will traffic to and fromthe building be controlled? WlllMliSic festival patrODS continue to be encouraged to take leisurely walks to and from the tent along Hallam by continuing to close off the street in the S11lIl1DCl? These are but a few of the questions and concerns that need to be addressed and which could mof'!:: property be addressed by some type of conditional, precise review, rather than by a sweeping rezoning as proposed. We respectfully urge you to disapprove of this proposed rezoning and preserve the residential c:haraeter of our neighbodlood. Thank: you for your consideration. y. ~' ~ . H- Bill ilght . f? CAPLAN & EARNEST --{\ " 1aJ00S 04/13/93 07:33 I _ __,,_ '5'303 440 3967 ~-,- l ':,' .. 733 - 13th Street Boulder. Colorado 80302 January 9, 1992 Sant Via ~eleaoniers 920-1890 To Whom It May Concern clo Ms. Kathy Lee Aspen, Colora.do Dear Ms. Lee: We are the owners of the resideAce located at 219 North Monarch, Aspen. which we have had for IDOre than 2S years. Our house is located two doors away and aoross the street from the red brick (former) elementary school, Our neighbor. Mr. Berko, has brought to our daughter'S attention the faot that a temporary rezoning of the sohool property is being contemplated that would alloy commeroialfilm operations to be oonduoted there for a period of at least six months. Even though we are presently out of the country for a t1me. are concerns about this potential use of the neighboring property are 80 significant that we have authorized our daughter to forward this letter on our o.half to you with the understanding that you will, in turn, submit it to the relevant City board. It is our understand1ng that a company plans to rent and use the ent1re school and property fOl' the filming. We assume that, among other tbings, this will mean that the traff.io in and a,l=ound, the, sClh~~l, ",ill inorease dramatically, not to mention the large number of trucks and other,vehicles that will be associated ~1th the filming activities. Our neighborhood is already overcrowded with parked oars. On any given day, one has difficulty finding a parking place anywhere along Monaroh or Halla~ in our neiqhborhood. As you know, our neighborhood is entirely residential. Many of the residents oocupy their homes year-round. In our case. s1noe our retirement, we bave spent more time eaoh year in our home. OUr oacupancy, together with tbat of ourcbildren and grandohildren comprises a siqnificant portion of each year, especially the ski season. We are concerned that oommeroial filming aotivities will entirely alter the residential charaoter of our neighborhOOd. Filming will likely not he oonfined to the daytime hours inside the building. Even if it were, siqnificant additional noise is likely to be generated. If nighttime filming occurs, then it most surely will result in noise during that period. but also in the use of bright. disturbing lights. We appreciate that the filming is apparently planned for a six-month period. However, the precedent in permitting a c01lllDercial UlSe, even on a temporary balSis, poses a dangerous threat of authorizing fUture similar uses. We see this use as open1ng the door to the potential permanent 0'(:34 '0"303 440 3!;5'( n , ~ 04/13/!:l3 I '-,.t.... T ; ~,; l CAPLAN & tARNcSI !t&luuo A rezoning of the sohool property to allow commercial activitiee to be carried on there. Ever sinoe the School Distriot first announoed its intentions to vaoate the property, we ~ve been ooncerned about the poesihilty that some use other than residential would be sought. If the filming activities were allowed. even on a temporary rezoning basis, the precedent for that zoning will be set, We cannot imagine that there are not some other buildings that would be equally if not better suited to the type of filming being contemplated. It must be ass~ed that the building Was ohosen, in large if not full measure. because of its location and the attraction Aspen has to so many, inoluding those whose careers involve the tilmindustry. This type of oonvenienoe to a few, however, should not override the substantial, domestio interests of those of us who are the impaoted homeowners ,and residents. Please preeerve the residential oharaoter of our historio West End neighborhood. and turn down this ill-advised request. Thank you for your oonsideration of our oontinued peaoeful and quiet enjoyment of our home, Sincerely, Joan and Bill Light -2- r"j n PUBLIC NOTICE RE: ASPEN ARTS AND RECREATION CENTER (RED BRICK SCHOOL) MAP AMENDMENT, GMQS EXEMPTION AND TEXT AMENDMENT. TO' THE ASPEN LAND USE REGULATIONS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a special public hearing will be held on Monday, May 10, 1993 at a meeting to begin at 5:00 pm before the Aspen City Council, City County Chambers, City Hall, 130 South Galena st., Aspen to consider an application submitted by the City of Aspen, 130 South Galena street requesting approval of a Map Amendment for Rezoning from R-6 Residential to PUB (Public Zone District); and Growth Management Quota System Exemption for an Essential Public Facility for the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center. The property is the former Red Brick School located at 110 East Hallam Street; Lots A-I and Lots K-S, Block 64 and Lots E, F, G and Fracti~nal Lots A, B, and c., Block 71, city and Townsite of Aspen. The applicant further requests approval of a Text Amendment to the Aspen Land Use Regulations to add a new number 15 to Section 5- 220B. Public Zone District Permitted uses to ]:"ead as follows: 15. Arts, cultural and recreational activities. The Permitted Uses in the Public Zone District currently include: Library, Museum, Post office, Hospital, Essential governmental and public utility uses, Performing art center, Public transportation stop, Te]:"minal building, and transportation related facilities, Public surface and underground parking areas, Community recreation facility, Fire station, Public school, Public park, and Accessory buildings and uses. For further information, contact Kim Johnson at the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office, 130 S. Galena st., Aspen, co 920- 5100. s/John Bennett. Mavor Aspen City Council -~~~~ 1-/ ;2{) /<13 .9)> ("') n , if ~"" .. , ~ 1 '#:I y.:, MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner RE: Aspen Arts and Recreation Center (f.k.a. the Red Brick Elementary School) - Rezoning from R-6(Medium Density Re~idential to Public (PUB), Text Amendment to the Allowed Uses in the Public (P~B) Zone District, Final PUD Development Plan (Consolidated Review), Special Review for Parking, and Growth Management Exemption for Essential Public Facilities DATE: April 13, 1993 (special meeting/public hearing) SUMMARY: Staff recommends approval of the following as proposed:' ~ ~1) the map amendment to rezone the former school site from ~O R-6 to Public; and ' e ~the proposed text amen' "arts, cultural and j. ~~/'\ ecreational activities" f p,~rm~trPrd use in the Public 7" ~; ~(PUB) zone district; and l ~ ~ ~ ~' 3) Special Review for parking in a Public zone district; and 4) GMQS, Exemption for the facility as an essential public facility. ===============:============~~======~~~=============;=========== APPLICANT: The City of Aspen, represented by Davis Horn, Inc. LOCATION: 110 E. Hallam Street. The parcel contains approximately 92,600 s. f. ZONING: R-6 (Medium Density Residential) APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The City wishes to lease office space to arts and cultural related non-profit groups and operate recreational activities in the eastern portion of the former school building including the gymnasium. In 5% of the structure, studio space will be rented to working artists, either as individual or shared studio space. This requires an amendment the Official Zone District map from R-6 to Public (PUB) and to add "arts, cultural ,and recreational activities" to the Public zone permitted use list. As required by the Public zone, the Applicant must receive approval of a site plan pursuant to the Planned Unit Development. (PUD) review process. The Applicant requests, and the Planning Director has agreed, to process this application as a two-step review (P&Z and Council). Special Review for parking is required for uses in a Public zone. Also being, requested is GMQS Exemption as an ,1 (') n , ..., co-,,', !.. ,. essential ,public facility for the building revised use. Please refer to the attached application package from Davis, Horn, I!lc. REFERRAL COMMENTS: Complete referral, comments are atta'ched as Exhibit "A". Enqineerinq: Chuck Roth comments that: 1. The, proposed li..~,g;,211i.n5! will hiwe li;)!lpt~QYeci.imt>aaeS:"':5ii'.~~'f]jd; generat10n and road safety, and will not result in an increase of public service needs. 2. The proposed :}.!i....patking:s):jcf(j~!;:.willexc.efed.nrintmttn;"':f'€cii1'fj?emEintsA for stimila:r:.o;(JiC;;!,!...'lls!i!iil{~ The spaces should be striped to optimize their utilizati6ri:"-d ' " . 3. Any improvement to the parking in the Garmisch st. right-of- way must be coordinated with the Engineering Department. Curb and gutter is recommended to facilitate head-in parking like that found at Paepke Park. Sidewalks are recommended also. 4. Easement must be established for a 14' wide trail, electric' switchgear, and other utility or pedestal needs. Water Department: The Waster Department requests that the two water service lines to the building be properly metered. Housinq Office: Tom Baker respODd~d1::.ha1: the"",mpl,.QYmel11:g'~l1e:r:C!ction of 1::~~;. P.J:"()J?9.s;e<l .'ll~es ~,51T/;iioe'E!)i~efefa'fl1~~t~yilitl1r"f'r-gti'r~'Bf""t~ iil'6y'liier'scho'o'l'.{fs'e'Jl.l This comment was based on the assumption that the 1941 section (western half) of the building will not be used. The application states that a range of i~J,,:,;i&':;;employees will be generated. Mr. Baker believes that the low end of this range is the more likely generation scenario. Informatign from.the scho04 confirms that employee population ~ii9'ea"'rr'bffi~'2iF't:'o"'3'6''''pers'C)ffs:,;;t The summary of Mr. Baker's memo is that the proposed Center will have fewer housing impacts than did the historic elementary school. -------------------------------~ STAFF COMMENTS: The Red Brick School was purchased by the City upon the direction of a citizen's vote in May 1992. A City Council appointed task force composed of interested citizens and neighbors of the property met weekly in November and December, 1992 and developed a program for the structure, including recommendations for the physical plant and a list of appropriate arts, culture, and recreation users to occupy the various spaces of the building. The City Council reviewed this report in February, 1993 and decided that they would send out a request for proposal from various 2 f) () " 'Grchitects on the different alternatives proposed by the citizen group. The city would like to commence construction in June or July of this year, with ,'tenant move-ins in the summer of 1994.. In an effort to ini~iate renovations quickly, the City must process the requested text amendment, rezoning, and GM~S Exemption under the current Council's authority. Amendment to the Public zone list of Dermitted uses: The 'Public (PUB) zone district currently allows 14 permitted and 3 conditional uses (refer to Exhibit "B"). Two of these uses, "performing arts center" and "community recreation facility" come close to the proposed uses for the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center. However, the city Planning Director has made the determination that the incorporation of arts related non-profit offices and individual art studio spaces does not fit with these ,already pe~itted uses. The proposed text change is the addition of ,a new use which will read: , . b ,,~' ~E t t._,~fJJ1"-I_.j. 1__ 15. Arts, cultural and recreational activ'ties. ~~~ staff discussed the option of overlaying the property as an SPA (Specially Planned Area) and applying for a use variance for non- profit arts related offices and individual artist studios. This option was discounted because of: 1) the length of time to process an SPA map amendment and Development Plan (four steps); and 2) the concern that an SPA overlay might allow future use variances, thus lessening protection of the neighborhood character. Section 24-7-1102 of the Municipal Code establishes the review standards for amendments to the code: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this chapter. Response: No land use code conflicts are evident for this proposed text amendment. ' B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Response: The proposed amendment is consistent with the short- term goal number 5 of the "Design', Quality and Historic Preservation" section of the Aspen Area Community Plan. This goal reads: "Retain the red brick school building for pUblic use and preserve its open space; a. Purchase for public use; b. Rezone to Public." C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding Zone Districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Response: Neighborhood compatibility issues will specifically be addressed pursuant to the rezoning standards. However, PUblic 3 r'l, fl y' zoning in most communities provides for a wide variety of uses and activities f~r citizens and guests. D. The effect 9f the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Response: Per se, this proposed amendment has no effect. 'specific impacts will be considered during individual reviews. E., Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, wate~ supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. , Response: These items will be addressed during the rezoning, review. ,However, the propoE!ed use is cC/lsistent with t:he other uses identified in the Public zone district. F. Whether and the, extent to which the proposed amendment, would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Response: Impacts are evaluated on' a site-by-site basis. No adverse impacts are anticipated on the natural environment. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Response: This amendment, will apply to the other sites in the City zoned Public, (PUB). Public zone must be reviewed pursuant to PUD G. approximately twelve Any development in a standards. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Response: This amendment affects all parcels zoned Public (PUB). Specific to the former school site, this requested text addition allows those uses developed by the Red Brick citizen's group to occupy the structure. Without "arts, cultural and recreation activit.ies" as a permitted use, the Planning Director would have to make use determinations for the proposed users based on the existing permitted use list. This task would be awkward and might not put to rest any potential non-conformity issues. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the pUblic interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. Response: One of the goals of the AACP is to better utilize community facilities. This amendment allows for enhanced pUblic- oriented uses at a public site. ------------------------------ 4 f'\ . J () , MaD Amendme~t for Rezoninq'from R-6 to Public (PUB): Pursuant to Section 7-1102 the standards of review for an amendment to the Official Zone District Map are as follows: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this chapter. Response: There are no conflicts wi~h the zoning code. B.. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. Response: The Aspen Area Community Plan set forth goals to' maintain and enhance the JJal9I1ce,l:?et)'le~l1-re15(rr'l:fuI18'l:i91'H3' and ~t%mmtlhi tyoriented 'fun,C::1:.,i,el}i.' '" This site provi<i,es' anoppo:r;b:;ni ty to serve the local commun1ty as well as our tour 1st populat10ns by supporting arts, and recreation functions, which are central to Aspen's 20th century heritage. As mentioned earlier, the AACP also specifically addresses the purchase of,the school building and its rezoning to Public. ' ' , C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding Zone Districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. Response: Currently the zoning on the parcel is R-6, Medium Density Residential. As a public school, the use was considered a grand fathered conditional use. Activities associated with schools include intense daytime use, two peak traffic periods per day, and occasional night functions. The proposed Center use will lessen peak traffic impacts and lessen daytime noise significantly. Recreation-oriented night functions will probably remain at the same level. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. Response: city Engineer Chuck Roth comments that the proposed use should result in improved traffic generation and road safety conditions. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. Response: No increased demands will result from the rezoning. 'In fact, the community's pUblic facilities will be augmented by the new recreation facilities. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. Response: The site and the neighborhood are already developed. 5 r"1 ~' f,' "'J; " No new square footage is proposed withthi's applicat{on, so this' condition does not readily apply. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. Response: The proposed rezoning to Public is consistent with the historic public use of the site as a school and is considered "impact neutral" to the surrounding area. Any changes to an approved ?UD Plan must receive approval through appropriate land use reviews. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. Response: The most important change voters approved the purchase of the recreation purpOSeS. This mandate current R-6 residential designation. for this site for requires parcel is community rezoning that arts from' the' and the I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. . Response: The Red Brick School Building will be a valuable asset to the community by providing a hub for the arts community, which is a large part of the cultural fabric of Aspen. ---------~-----~------------------- Final (consolidated) Planned Unit Development (PUD): The proposed rezoning to Public (PUB) requires that the dimensional requirements of a development be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and final development plan pursuant to Article 7, Division 9, Planned Unit Development. Consolidation of Conceptual and Final reviews is allowed if the Planning Director determines that "the full four step review would be redundant and serve to pUblic purpose". If, during review, the Commission or Council believe that a consolidated two step review is not adequate, the full four step process must take place. staff believE's that since the structure/site plan is not changing as a result of this application, four step review is excessive and will serve no useful public purpose. 1. Dimensional Reauirements. The dimensional requirements shall be those of the underlying zone district, provided that variations may be permitted in the following: a. Minimum distance between buildings; b. Maximum height (including viewplanes); c. Minimum front yard; d. Minimum rear yard; e. Minimum side yard; f. Minimum lot width; 6 f'\ t""'\ " ;j , g. Minimum lot areai' h. Trash access area; i. External and internal floor area ratio; and j. Minimum percent open ',space. " Response: The dimensional requirements submitted for the Final (Consolidated) Plan are those of the existing building footprint. Therefore, the following actual dimensions are requested as the' dimensional requirements of ,this development plan: ' a. Minimum distance between buildings - 10' b. Maximum height (including viewplahes) - 25' c. Minimum front yard - 10' (except 4' at southeast entry) d. Minimum rear yard - 15' e. Minimum side yard - 5' f. Minimum lot width - '60' , g. Minimum lot area - 6,000 square feet, h. Trash access area - see provided survey I. External and internal floor area ratio - .75:1 j. Minimum percent open space - no requirement According to the application, these dimensions were ,derived from the requirements of R-6 and 0 (Office) zones. staff believes these dimensions are appropriate for this structure and future development. If other dimensions are needed to accommodate future growth, additional PUD review is required. ---------------------------------- SDecial Review for Off-street parkina. Although not specifically a dimensional issue, parking is an important aspect of this application. The number of required off- street parking spaces for a project in a Public zone is established by Special Review (Section 24-7-404.B.2.): "In all other zone districts where the off-street parking 'requirements are subject to establishment or reduction by Special Review, the applicant shall demonstrate that the parking needs of the residents, guests and employees of the project have been met, taking into account potential uses of the parcel, its proximity to mass transit routes and the downtown area, and any special services, such as vans, provided for residents, guests and employees." The PUD review section also establishes relevant standards for considering on-site parking: a The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development. b The parking needs of any non-residential uses. 7 f) n , c The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. d The availability of public transit and other transpor- tation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or ~he commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. The proximity commercial core City. Please refer to the site plan (attachment l) in the application information attached to this memo. The proposed site plan shows 35 on-site spaces. According to the March 16 letter clarifying the employee generation, 21 to 28 employees will use the Center (based on the use of the post 1941 portions of the building). ,The Housing Office believes that'it is probable that thelQwer end of this range will be the number of employees on site at any given time. The 0 (Office) zone requires 3 spaces per 1,000 s.f. of net leasable area, or 1.5 spaces per 1,000 s.f. if cash payment is made for the difference. This rate anticipates a wide range of office uses, from a one person typing service to a corporate headquarters. According to the Housing Office's employee generation guidelines for "utilities / quasi-governmental" rate, 1.5 to 2.5 persons per 1,000 s.f. are generated. e of the proposed development to the or public recreational facilities in the The internal layout of the structure is shown in attachment 2 of the application information. The net leasable area of the post- 1941 portion of the school (the eastern half of the building) is approximately 14,093 s.f. At the quasi-governmental generation of 1.5 persons per 1,000 s.f., the employee generation would be 21 persons. The feeling of the Housing Office is that the non- profit offices proposed for this building will have limited hours of business and run on "shoestring" staff, thus employee generation will be less than for typical office users. According to Housing Director Tom Baker, the recreational uses will generate less than one full time equivalent employee (FTE). The studio space cannot exceed 5% of the building, or 1,090 s.f. based on the 21,800 s,.f. post-1941 building because of limitations set by the financial bOuding requirements. The studio spaces will probably be 200-300 s.f. each, according to information from Julia Marshall, who has worked on the lease agreements for the arts representatives. If 20-30 persons occupy the building, one parking space is readily provided per employee. Most of the proposed tenants will not generate guest parking requirements. Overflow parking has historically been and will continue to exist at the west end of the building and on the adjacent streets. 8 f""\ () The project is located two biocks from the:, M;:un:'Street RFTA routes and is within walking distance to downtown, approximately four blocks. The Rio Grande Parking Garage is two blocks to the east. Time needs for parkin.;l' among the tenant$; will counterbalance between the' office and studio uses during the' day and the recreation uses during the evenings. ---------------------------------- GMOS ExemDtlon for Essential Public Facilities: Pursuant to Section 8~104 t.1.b. the council may exempt construction of essential public facilities. The Commission shall review and make a recommendation to Council. section 24-8-104.C.l.b. reads: (i) (H) (Hi) Except for housing, development sh~ll be consider~d an essential public facility if it serves an essential public purpose, provides facilities in ,response ,~othe demands of growth, is not itself a growth generator, ,is available for use by the general public, and serves the needs of the city. It' shall also be taken into consideration whether the development is not-for-profit venture. This exemption shall not be applied to commercial or lodge 'development. A development application shall demonstrate that the impacts of the essential public facility will be mitigated, included those associated with the generation of additional employees, the demand for parking, road and transit services, the need for basic services including but not limited to water, sewage, drainage, f ire and police protection, and solid waste disposal. It shall also be demonstrated that the proposed development has negligible adverse impacts on the city I s air, water, land, and energy resources, and is visually compatible with the surrounding areas. Notwithstanding the criteria as set forth in paragraphs (i) and (ii) above, the city council may determine upon application that development associated with a nonprofit entity qualifies as an essential public facility and may exempt such development from GMQS and from some or all such mitigation requirements as it deems appropriate and warranted. Response: The Planning Office acknowledges that the structure proposed as the Arts and Recreation Center is not new construction, but is in effect a new use or development on the site. For this reason, staff believes that GMQS Exemption as an essential public facility is warranted. Official recognition that. the structure and its non-profit uses qualify as essential to the community will solidify the Center's important role in the community. 9 ~fk, ~ ~. .~ h ~. ~};(). ~ fJf;. Jj;jf(;/ , . ~~~. -r;, 1~~i7~""f-()'~ '~#llILN.;j; i/~ . . 2< /IfJ-.<:-. fr? /l =::: . u; ;;:""t- #j( ~ The Center complies with par graph (i) ab e~in that i ill serve ~'a/ the PUbliC. in many ways, from active !ecreation to art support andh\ ~ education; offers space to recreatl.on and arts users who must~"" ~ accommodate their increased growth based on community growth; is ~ not a growth generator itself (all users are currently scattered d~ elsewhere throughout the city); is available to the public as any+.; ~ other public facility; and serves the citizens and guests of Aspen. Df 4.4/rG- The groups listedintheappl ication, and subsequently reduced G.....~. slightly, who will occupy the building must qualify as bona fide 7-0 nonprofit entities. The city's bond requirements.specify that no ~'~~~J/ less than 95% of the structure may be occupied by non-profit users 7'/w,~ to retain the bond I s status. The artist studio spaces are intended . . . . . . . for educational use Whe,;7i~Y.l.l..'71 si tors may observe working artists/. :.~~~ ..1J. . %'ol'l;~~~~C~C/:vA.. ~~ -tt2c~i:tit '~'3~ Of/' The Cen'ter also meets the requl.rements at:' paragraph (i~~rding ~~ impacts. to the Vi.cinity and larger community. Employee generation ~~~~ . . will be less for the proposed uses (approximately 22-26) than. the ~~tt7~ previous school use (25-30). Parking has beer. o.iscussed previously 1M-< ~ . in this memo as being a neutral impact. Utility needs probably ~ decrease from the previous school use. No negative en~~~onmental ~ ~{~, impacts will occur, nor will visual inCQmpatibitp~~h~ ~~ The city shoald find that the nonprofit use of this struct':lre~' qualifies as essential pUl?1ic fa il~ty per ,paragraph, (~ii : (..,iJA"i\2W t'1" ..:---------------------~--------~ /nA JL -.; ~ - """- citizen Cemment: .ecause heceul<< net att~n<<the ~u.lic hearin!, Ferenc .erke su.mi~te<< a letter tethe Plannin! effice ex~ressin! his e~~esitien te the rezenin!. Please refer te Exhi.it "C". 4. Easement must be established for a 14' wide trail, electric switchgear, and other utility or pedestal needs. 5. The two water service lines to the building must be properly metered. 6. The applicants shall agree to join ariy future improvement dis- 10 (l vi /1 fltf:, " I !. 1ew.- ." -. 'fA 7^"-- 1>1f S~ ~ f;cwil~~~~~. ~/ftM/.sr~'~~~s~ ..__.. .. .. tM->-ff~a.-/~ f""l ~ \ 1 i tricts which ~ay be formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in the public right-of-way. 7. All. material representations made by the applicant in :the application and during public meetings with the Planning and zoning Commission and City Council shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by other conditions. 8. The Final PUD Development Plan andPUD. Agreemerit shall be' recorded in the office of the pitkin County Clerk and R~corder. Failure on the part of the applicant to record the documents within a period of one hundred and eighty (180) days following approval by the City Council shall. render the approvals invalid, unless reconsideration and approval of both the Commission and City Council is obtained before tqeir acceptance an<j. recording; Application Packet/Maps EXHIBITS A - Referral Memos B - Permitted Uses, Public (PUB) Zone District C - Letter from Ferenc Berko 11 ("'\ . ,<""'1 ..,.. ..,'1. . .. PLANNING\, ZONING COMMISSION EXHIBITr , APPROVED 19 BY RESOLUTION , . , Se~. 5-220. Public (PUB). A. Purpose. The purpose of the Public (PUB) zone district is to provide forthe develop- ment of governmental and quaai.governmental facilit;es fer cultural, educational, civic and other governmental purposes. B. Permitted useS. The follo,,?ing uses are permitted as of right in the Public (PUB) zone district. 1. Library; 2, Museum; 3. Post office; 4. Hospital; 5. ESS/lntilll governmental and public utility uses, facilities, services and buildings (excluding maintenance shops); . '6':PerfoI'Il1ing artcel!t'eYl' 7. Public traltsportation stop; 8. Terminal building, and transportation related facilities; 9. Public surface and underground parking areas; ...10....".COnununi~tio1ffacility;o 11. Fire station; 12. Public school; 13. Public park; and 14. Accessory buildings and uses. C. Conditwnal uses. The following uses are. permitted as conditional Uses in the Public (PUB) zone distric~. subject to the standards and procedures established in Article 7, Division 3. , 1. Maintenance shop; 2. Affordable housing; and 3. Satellite dish antennae, _.~ t)" D. Dimenswnal requirements. The dimensional requirements which shall apply to all pe~it nditional uses in the Public (PUB) zone district shall be set by the adoption of a' " . . . conceptual de elopment plan and final develop~ent plan, pursuant to Article 7..Division 9, Planned Unit DevelopmEiIlt. E. Off-street parking requirement The following off-street parking spaces Shall be pro: ~ided for each use in the Public (PUB) zone district, subject to the provisions of Article 5, Division 3, 1. LQdge uses: N/A 2. ReSidential uses: Requi~e~ special review pursuant to Article 7, Division 4. 3. All other uses: Requires special review pursuant to Article 7, Division 4. (Ord. N0. 6-1989, S 4). .-~.-. .- ~ ("'\ r1 'c .-) PLANNING'& ZONING COWUSSION , EXHIBITfr. ' APPROVED 19' BY "RESOLUTION MEMORANDUM To: Kim Johnson, Planning Office From: Chuck Roth, City Engineer ei<- Date: March 18, 1993 Re: Aspen Arts and Recreation Center (Red' Brick School) - Rezoning, PUD Development.Plan, and Text Amendment. Having reviewed the above refererced application, and having made a site inspection, the engineering department has the following .comments: 1. Rezoning a. Traffic generation and road safety - The Engineering Department agrees with the. applicant's statements on pages 6-8 that the proposed use should result in improved traffic generation and road safety conditions. b. Demands on public facilities - As per the application, rezoning should not result in increased demands on public facilities. 2. Text Amendment - The application satisfactorily address the review standards, and the Engineering Department has no comment on the proposed text amendment. 3. PUD a. Off-street Parking - It appears that the area proposed to be used at this time totals 21,800 square feet. Perusal of the Code requirements for off-street parking for similar use zone designations shows a range of from 1.5 to 4 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet. The proposed 35 parking spaces would slightly exceed the minimum similar requirement which would be 33 spaces. It is recommended that a condition of approval be to paint the stripes delineating the parking spaces in order to ensure optimum space utilization. It appears that if striping is at the standard 8 1/2' space width required by Code, there could actually be 24 spaces on the north side for a total 36 spaces on site. It is quite possible that the 36 spaces may, in the future, prove to be insufficient, and provision should be made at this time to anticipate that possibility. . f""'1 1""\ , i , Future increased development on the site would. probably require additional on- site parking, and aily apparent deficiencies in the current on-site parking proposal should be remedied at that time, (Should the Transportation and Parking Director be commenting?) b. On-street Parking - The parking on the Garmisch Street frontage has historically been unclear due to. the lack: of curb and gutter and signage. Any futur~ development in the public right-of-way at this location must be coordinated with the Engin~ering Department. The Garmisch Street right-of-way is 100' wide. It is recommended that the applicant consider installing curb and gutter on Garmisch Street located to provide head-in parking similar to other Garmisch Street parking such as at Paepke Park, Molly Gibson Lodge, the Medical As~ociates, etc., as well as constructing a sidewalk for pedestrian circulation, Street drainage should be addressed at that time, A stonn runoff inlet and extension to the storm sewer may need to be installed. The on-street parking is available to the entire public and may not be restricted to adjacent businesses or uses. 4. Plat Comments a. Establish and indicate easements for trail (14'), electric switchgear, and any other utility pedestal or utility needs. 5. The applicant shall agree to join any future improvement districts which may be formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in the public right-of-way. 6. Given the continuous problems of unapproved work and development in public rights- of-way, we would advise the applicant as follows: The applicant shall consult city engineering (920-5080) for design considerations of development within public rights-of-way, parks department (920-5120) for vegetation species, and shall obtain permits for any work or development, including landscaping, within public rights-of-way from city streets department (920-5130). cc: Bob Gish, Public Works Director Rob Thomson, Special Projects ,- M93.74 f""; () ..~ MEMORANDUM DATE: Kim Johnson, Planning Office. Tom B~ker, ~~ffice April 9, 1993 Red Brick School Referral TO: FROM: RE: SUMMARY OF REFERRAL COMMENTS: The Housing Office finds that the proposed plan for the Red Brick School will have fewer impacts in terms of affordable housing than the historic elementary school use. Employee Generation - Based upon staff review, the Housing Office finds that th~re are generally three uses being proposed for the Red Brick: office, studio, and recreation. In terms of office uses, we. find that 3 employeesj1, 000 sf (net leasable) is an appropriate generation figure. This is consistent with the generation figures in the city's office zone. In terms. of studio use, we find insufficient.information to det~rmine a generation figure. Additional information about how and when a studio will be used is needed. In terms of recreational uses, we find that the gymnasium and locker room. will generate less than 1 FTE.. This figure is derived from Recreatio~ Department experience with the operation of similar facilities. According to the applicant and under the alternative which does not utilize the 1941 section of the building, the applicant expects to generate be'tween 23 48 empJoyees (p. 7 of the Land Use Application) or between 21 - 28 employees (March 1.6, 1993 letter from Alice Davis to Kim Johnson). . Given that the gymnasium and locker room portion of the building (8320 sf) will generate less than one employee, then the remaining 13,480 sf will generate', a figure less than 30. This assumes that the studip use generates less than 3 employeesj1,000 sf (net leasable) and the 13,480 sf figure must be revised to depict net leasable square footage. The Housing Office concludes that the applicant's .21 - 48 employee generation range is adequate and the actual generation will likely be at the lower end of that range once additional information is provided about net leasable space and how and when the studio space will be used (based upon the option to leave .the 1941 portion of the school vacant). Employee Credits - In terms of employee "credits, the Red Brick School has historically employed 24 - 30 employees, see attachment 1 ATTACH. I n r-. '1f .. MEMOI<ANDUM .. TO: Kim Johnson, PlanIling Off~ce , ~.,>l)J Cindy Wilson, Assistant City Manager t- FROM:. DATE: April'6,. 199~ Red BriJ:;k School - Historical Number of ElDployees . ." . , RE: I spoke to both Joe Tarbet, Aspen School District controller and Barb Tarbet, Elementary S9hool Principal to obtain information regarding the number of employees in the Red Brick School building in the past. They both confi'rmed that the number of employees in the building for. f'bout the past ten years have. be~n about as follows: '. 5 'administrative personnel 2 janitors 4-5 special teachers ....1Lteachers 24 - 25 total employees Barb also noted that in 1969 there were 30 employees in the Red Brick building. If I can help you with this in any other way, please call me. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: , , .~ MEM'ORANDUM r} KIM JOHNSON, PLANNING DEPARTMENT LARRY BALLENGER, WATER SUP MARCH 8, 1993 ASPEN ARTS AND RECREATION CENTER The Water Department would request that the water service line into the Red Brick School be . properly metered. ' . Our Department inspected the Red Brick School building's water system this winter. We found two water service connections that were not metered. LB:rl lab9/cedschool.mem ("""\, \~'...."...'.......'...'O.._. . ,"C,*,'. ;X., o,",W'. '...."...... i,. ,_' _ ,:,";:',~_~V<'_ " , "#t~~; ; ..., ING&ZONIN . ISSION !,~lnl~j~Jl';, ~.,' PROVEDi~, Waf. '~Y"-SoI.UT:r()N - . .. FERENC . BERKO PHOTOGRAPHY " e ,.i..",--.,.v".w.~',; , 5 April 93 -.----:- (f:, T::.: ;-; ~\~7 {::;""" Planning & Zoning Comlll.@.on, Aspen City Council, 130 S.G~lena, Asp 0' n . liDP - 6. Ladies. and Gentlel}lon:' Since I shall be out of town to attend the Meeting on Re-zoning Part of the Residential District to PUD-6, I would like to put in writing my often expressed opinion that t am against any Change of Zoning of the Residential District .'inthe ;Test End. Although there are many good reasons - Financial, Parking etc. _ against such a ohange, my main objection has always been, ~s, is, and shall-'always be purel~ one.of principle; i.e. the Preservation of the W€'st End as a Resideyontia1 Area. ~urs ~inCere1Y, t~ ......., C'\ ~ ,() Davis Horn~c;. PlANNING. APPRAIsiNG. REAL ESTATE CONSUlJ/NG -. -~ ~~~~' r-~ ':, , . - ' - . , j, ~ ];! ! ' ,.tle. March 16, 1993 '1'1'\ \ I'" iu ! "il 'H '!J! Kim Johnson Aspen Pitkin Planning Office 130 S. Galena street Aspen, CO. 81611 RE: Employee Impacts Dear Kim: This infoLmation should help you evaluate the employee impacts for the review for the Red Brick School Rezoning. As stated in the submitted Land Use Application for the Red Brick School, the city of Aspen is interested in mitigating all employee impacts generat~d from the new use of the Red Brick School. We believe that the employee impacts from the proposed Arts and Recreation Center use are substantially less than they were for the original school use and that no mitigation is required. As stated in the original application, approximately 250 people used the elementary school. After reviewing and finalizing employee generation numbers for the proposed Arts and Recreation Center, we estimate the total employee population of the new use to be from 21 to 28 employees for the smaller design scheme (not using the 1941 portion of the building) and from 55 to 90 employees if the entire building is utilized. As the number of employees/people on site will be substantially less than for the school use, no employee mitigation should be required. It is very important to note that the all employees to be using the Arts and Recreation Center are currently housed in existing facilities; their housing and their office space exists somewhere els~ in town, No new space is being created, only the reuse of an existing space with a less intensive use. Therefore, it is the applicant's opinion that no employee housing mitigation is required. In estimating the employee population for the Arts and Recreation Center, it was very difficult to find employee generation standards for arts and recreation uses. After reviewing numerous guides and text books, the most applicable standard is for either office space or quasi-governmental uses. The Housing Office and other experts in the field agreed, the pUblic/arts/recreation use would generate employees at the very low end or even below the typical office use. Therefore we estimated employee population from the quasi- governmental standard, which falls below the office standard. AUCE DAVIS. SRA I GlENN HORN. AlC1' 300 EAST HI'MAN. SUITE B. ASPEN, COLORADO 816tj . 3O:l/92!H>581. FAX: 303/925-5180 rJ , () DavisHorn~~. PLANNING. APPRAISING. RfAL ESTATE CONSUmNG ......c.~.., . 1 { ".' ~ ;-; "; MIl . \993 March 8, 1993 Kim Johnson Aspen Pitkin Planning Office 130 S. Galena street Aspen, CO. 81611 RE: Amendment to the Land Use Application for the Red Brick School Dear Kim: As we discussed, this letter is an amendment to the application for the rezoning of the Red Brick School facility to Public for the reuse of the structure as the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center. The change in use of the Red Brick property from an elementary school to a public arts and recreation facility is not technically a change in use according to the Aspen Land Use Regulations as the change is not between categories ,of growth management competition. still, the applicant fully intends to mitigate all impacts of the change in use to the public arts and recreation center. As we agreed, the applicant is therefore requesting approval for a GMQS Exemption pursuant to Section 8-104 (C) Exemption by city council (1) (b) Construction of essential public facilites. Although the change in use is not new construction, the creation of the new public arts and recreation center is a new use and the applicant intends to mitigate any impacts generated by the new use. Therefore, our amendment to the application is to request approval for a growth management exemption for the creation of an essential public facility. The city of Aspen is also requesting a rezoning of the site from R- 6 to Public as the Public zone is more appropriate,for the proposed use of the site.' The pUblic facility proposed serves an essential purpose, provided facilities in response to the demands of growth and in itself is not a growth generator. The facility will be available for use by the public and serves the needs of the city. As discussed in the original application, the proposed use of the Red Brick School will not generate the need for new employees, parking, road or transit services, or the need for basic services such as water, sewage treatment, drainage control, fire and police protection, and solid waste disposal. As the proposed use is less intensive than the previous school use, there will be not adverse impact on the city's air, water, land and energy resources. The structure, under the new use, will be visually compatible with the neighborhood." . AUCE DAVIS, SRA I GLENN HORN, AlCP 300 EAST HYMAN. SUITE B. ASPEN, COlORADO 81611 . 3ll3J925.6S87 . FAX: 3031925-5180 ~~7.' r) () ;'0.' DavisHom~~. PlANNING. APPRAISING. REAL ESTATE CONSUDlNG March-1, 1993 . Ms. Kim Johnson Aspen Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO. 81611 RE: Land Use Application for the Red Brick School to be used as the new Aspen Arts and,Recreation Center Dear Kim: Attached is the application for our client, the City of Aspen, requesting : 1) Rezoning approval for the Red Brick School site from R-6 Residential to PUB, Public; 2) Approval of a PUD development plan which establishes the dimensional requirements for the site as is required by the Public zone district regulations; Approval of a minor text amendment to the Public zone district. 3) We have done our best to satisfy the applicable requirements of the Aspen Land Use Regulations and to address items identified in our pre-application conferences. Please let us know if we have failed to address any issues of concern to you. . Thank' you for your consideration. Please call if you have any questions or if you need further information. Thank you, DAVIS HORN INCORPORATED cuw. ~ ALICE DAVIS, SRA I GlENN HORN, AlCl' 300 EAST HYMAN . SUITE B. ASPEN. COI.OllADO B16t1. ~7 . FAX: 3O:ii925-stso r, 11 ~ ' INTRODUCTION Davis Horn Incorporat~d, represents the city of Aspen who is the appf.icant and the owner of. the .Red . Brick School. Building at 110 East Hallam Street. (See' Attachment 1, Vicinity Map.) The applicant is requesting approval for a rezoning of the Red Brick School from R-6 Residential to PUB Public. simul taneously, a minor text amendment to the city of Aspen Municipal Land Use Regulations is requested. As the Public zone is; in~ended. ~?r.a wide variElty of public and public related uses, dimensional requirements are not given in the Regulations, but rather are established on a case by case basis through the PUD process. Therefore, the applicant is also requesting approval for a PUD plan which establishes the basic dimensional requirements for the property. This application addresses the standards and requirements for the following approvals being requested: 1. Rezoning of the Red Brick School property (to be used as the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center) from the R-6 Residential zone to the PUB, public zone district; 2 . A minor text amendment to the Land Use Regulations regarding the Public zone district; and 3. Approval of a PUDdevelopment plan establishing the dimensional and off street parking requirements for the property as is required by the Public zone district. The planning director has determined, according to section 7- 903 (C)(3), consolidation of conceptual and final development review, that it is appropriate for this PUD review to be consolidated from a four step into a two step process. This application briefly discusses the existing conditions and history of the subject property, describes. the proposed use of the building and addresses the applicable Aspen Land Use Regulation review standards and requirements of each of the three approvals requested. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY The Red Brick School is located in the.. hElaJ:'t ..o~ ~spen I s West End neighborhood at 110 East Hallam Street. The scho9l was originally built in 1941 and sits on a estimatp.d 90,700 square foot parcel of land. The existing structure consists of three sections containing approximately 35,800 total square feet of gross floor area. The first section is the original school building and a receiving/storage addition which contains 14,000 square feet. 2 ~ (\ The second section is 11,240 square feet including a major classroom and mechanical room addition built to the east of the original building in the 1970's. This area is in better condition than the original structure and is in less need of hazardous material abatement,. The third section of the existing building ,contains 10,560 square feet, was also built in the early 1970's and' is to the east of the classroom addition. It consists of a 6080 square foot gymnasium and vestibule, a 2240 square foot stage area with a small office and storage area and stairs which lead to a 2240 square foot ~asement area locker room. (See.Attachment'~, Red Brick School Building, Existing First Floor Plan.) The surrounding neighborhood is the well <'!stablished West End residential neighborhood.- To the east, south and west of the subject are single family homes which have predominated the West End Neighborhood for over one. hundred years. There is a bike path along the northern property line which leads from the residential neighborhood to a commercial area below. The site is generally level, though to the north and northeast, beyond the bike path, steep slopes drop away from the property to adjacent commercial uses to the nQrth. The', slope provides a barrier between the commercial uses adjacent to the north, the subject property and adjacent residential uses. There are sidewalks on the south and west sides of the property and on-street paved parking to the west. The site is modestly landscaped on the south, between the building and the street with a lawn, shrubs and trees. The Red Brick School was purchased by the city of Aspen from the Aspen School District No. 1 with the closing on January 14, 1993. The City purchased the school with bond money which requires that the building continue with pUblic uses and that only five percent of the floor area be occupied by uses other than non-profit or governmental/public entities. (See Attachment 2, a letter to the City of Aspen Finance Director regarding the General Obligations Bonds used for the purchase of the school building.) various citizen and public groups including the more recently formed Red Brick Committee have supported the purchase of the building for public, arts and recreation related purposes and the issuing of bonds to fund' the purchase and the cost of building improvement and renovation. As the school, particularly the original 1940's portion, has a hazardous material problem which needs to be abated, costs for renovation and improvement are higher than they would otherwise be. Since the City is now the owner of the property, The Red Brick Committee, city staff and the City Council are working to make the best use of the property for public and arts related purposes. 3 r"', t'l ! , The building is proposed to- house the .city Recreation Department offices; city recreational.progra;us and activities; art and cultural activities and uses; and art, dance and writers' studios. This application seeks approvals required for the City to operate the structure in the manner..approved by the voters in the public election on the purchase. PROPOSED PROJECT As mentioned previously, The Red Brick School is to be used for public, art, cultural and recreational uses.. As required by the bond documents, public and non-profit uses are to always be the predominant uses in the building. As currently proposed, the gymnasium will be used by the city Recreation Department, the basement will continue to be used as a locker room for recreational activities. and theramai..r.cier. Clf.thebuildlI1CJwi.li be.l..1seci for a' variety of public, arts,. cultural and. recreational office and studio uses. Although the proposed tenants will certainly change with time and possibly before the building is actually ready for occupancy, an administrative office for each of the fOllowi,ng tenants is currently anticipated for the building: . city Recreation Department Dance Aspen Aspen Art Museum Aspen Filmfest KAJX Aspen Ballet company Aspen Theater The Writer's Conference Arts Council Aspen Ridiculous Theater Aspen Yoga Center Aspen Interactive All of the above uses except Aspen Yoga Center and possibly Aspen Interactive, are non-profit organizations. Aspen Interactive is now seeking non-profit status. In'addition to the above tenants, the building is proposed to include the following: A 651 square foot common lecture hall A 150 square foot common secretarial area Four to five spaces to be used as,~rtists' studios. The currently proposed uses have been reviewed and.eval~~ted by the Red Brick Committee. .,. ,'... The Red Brick Committee came up with four potential options for the city council for renovating the school building; these options are found in the memorandum in Attachment 3. 4 ,~ ~ At this time, the Red Brick Committee is proposing use of the gymnasium and the'. classroom addition completed in the 1970's. Using only these two sections of t.he building, the building is expected to be fully occupied. The Committee has proposed that the remainder of the building, the original 1940s school, will either be renovated at a later date, demolishea or locked off and not used until further plans are finalized and money obtained for the reuse or reconstruction of this section of the building. Regardless of the option chosen, the entire property as it currently exists is the subject of this rezoning applicat~on. REZONING TO PUBLIC The applicant is requesting a rezoning of the subject property from R-6 Residential to PUB, Public. The structure ,has b~en used and will continue to be used for pUblic,purposes since.it was built in 1941. Although a school is a conditional use in the R-6 Residential zone, the Public zone district is more appropriate for the property given the sale of the building from the Aspen School District to the City of Aspen for arts, cultural and recreational purposes. A rezoning is an amendment to the official zoning map. This rezoning is therefore requested pursuant to Division 11 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations, 1\HENDMEN'l'S TO THE TEXT OF THIS CHAPTER AND THE OFFICIAL ZONE DISTRICT MAP. This section of the regulations require an applicant to address and the City Council and the commission to consider the nine standards. of review. The.se standards are identified and addressed below. A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this chapter. The proposed amendment to the official zone district map to change the subject property's zoning designation from R-6 to PUB is not in conflict with any portion of the Land Use Regulations. ' B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area comprehensive Plan. The Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan calls for the Red Brick School to be used for pUblic purposes. This amendment to the map is not only consistent with the Plan, but is a step toward insuring that the structure is preserved for public and related appropriate uses in the future. The purchase of the Red Brick School was approved by the voters of the city of Aspen in a public election in August of 1992. 5 {'.. (") 'rhe Red Brick School Committee consists of a wide variety of community volunte,?rs, both opponents and proponents of the purchase, was formed soon after the election.to address the usa and redevelopment of the building into an art and recreational center.', This committee appears ,to agree that t-he proposed reuse of the building is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan and with the electorate's intent of the use of the school as approved in the' public ,election on the issue. c. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. The proposed use is compatible with surround~r.g zone districts and ,land .uses. It has been an even more intensive school use in the' past and was a permitted conditionai 1.lse in theR"'6 zone district where it is. now located. Therefore, it is considered compatible with the surrounding R-6 zone district. Down the steep slopes to the north of the subject property is a commercial area zoned (NC - Neighborhood Commercial and SeI . Service commercial Industrial) with an SPA overlay. Although they are adjacent to the subject, the uses found here are much more intensive and a;e ~ot r~ally physically a part of the immediate neighborhood. The subject property is somewhat of a buffer between the resid~n~ia.~neighborhood on three sides and the commercial uses to the north. The neighborhood has been actively involved in the purchase and reuse of the school building through various citizen committees and public meetings. The Red Brick committee was established after the election in August of 1991 when the purchase of the school was approved by the voters. This committee is made up of a wide variety of people with different concerns. The arts community, real estate community, neighbors and opponents of the school purchase were all represented. This committee has worked hard since its conception in December of 1992 to come to agreement on the use and management and redevelopment of the Red Brick. School. This rezoninq is a first step to accomplish the redevelopment of the building for use as an arts and recreational'cen~er. The less intensive proposed use of the building as a recreational, arts, cultural and public facility brings less impacts than the elementary school did when it was operating in the building. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. 6 ,.."\.l ','-"'1 ~ '. .'--, /-., The proposed Aspen Arts and Recreation Center '.1ill at a -m:i:ni:nl1.ull be "impact neutral" in that it will have no more impacts than the school use which has impacted the neighborhood since its construction in 1941. In reality, the propossd use will have substan~i~lly less impacts on.traffic generation,and road safety. The last year of operation, the school was used for kindergarten and first grade classes and the school business office. There was a total population of 250 including 230 students, ten full-time teachers, five special teachers, three business office employees and two janitorial staff. Approximately twelve buses dropped students off at the school in the morning and picked up s~udents in the afternoon. In addition, it is estimated that fifty students were dropped off and picked up by car each day. A large majority of the faculty, staff apd school board members traveled to and from the campus by car, parking in the area behind the gym, in the area behind the business office, along 'the front of the building: on Hallam street and on Garmisch street. Regular trash pick up as well as occasional deliveries and field trips by bus generated some additional trips. The total number of round trips t<;> and from the school each day is estimated to have beeil 160 vehicles trips per day. A similar level of activity was going on at the yellow brick school diagonally across from the site. In addition, extracurricular activities occurred in the school gymnasium, which was utilized both by students and members of the community. Barricades were set up daily: on Garmisch and Hallam to interrupt traffic in the vicinity of the two schools. The proposed use will generate from 23 to 48 employees under the smaller design scheme (not using the original 1941 portion of the building) and 55 to 90 employees if,the entire building is utilized. This range has been established first by estimating the actual number of employees anticipated given the proposed tenants and second by use of a national standard for an office use which was applied to the entire building. The actual estimated population is considered to be the most accurate in determining the number of ~mployees, therefore the lowE!r end of the range, 23 to 48 is the best estimate of employees in the proposed arts and recreation center. As the property is centrally located and easily accessed by foot and by public transportation, vehicular trip generation will be less than for a property with an inferior location. We found no trip generation standard for artist studios or recreational uses and therefore have used the low end of the trip generation standard for office use: four trips per 1000 square feet of space. 7 o n This shows 142 vehicle trips per day , les's than for the school use, even without considering the previous extracurricular activities and'the trips generated by the yellow brick diagonal~y across the street. There does not appear to have been any officially designated " ~ parking on the school site in. the past. Ken smith o~ Smithw{z,' . Associates Architects completed a stUdy on the, various redevelopment alternative .for the Red Brick School.' He has) access to an original improvement survey of the school property and no parkipg is shown. Historically the area to the north and west of the structure has been used as a parking lot. Approximately 35 spaces have been accommodated in this area. Therefore, the applicant proposes to provide these 35 spaces for the 23 to 48 employees. The'20 to 25 on-street parking spaces will be utilized for gUests. At approximately one space per employee, we feel this is suffioient, especially since the proposed. tenants, except for the recreational programs, will not generate many visitors. Artist studios do not tend to generate the need for additional parking. still, the stand,ard does consider. client and visitor traffic. The tenants of the building will be encouraged at. the time of ' " ' signing a lease, not to use their cars, but to ride share, walk and use the public parking garage two blocks (700 feet) east. ,/ / The proposed arts and recreation center will generate less impacts with regard to traffic generation, road safety, parking and employee generation than the previous school use. E. Whether and the extent to ~h~c~ ~h~ proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. The rezoning to public will not result in increased de~and. on public facilities.. Th.e existing structure has beeJ:\. in existence and the impacts arealrliladyaccoIlllJlodated within current services. The change from' school to public uses should decrease impacts given the reduction in the on-site population and the public facilities required to accommodate them. . F. Whether and the extent..to which t!'eproposed amendment would result in siqnificantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. The rezoning to public and then~w arts and recreation uses to be allowed will not adversely impact the natural environment. , 8' " f\ G. Whether the prop~sed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. The proposed rezoning is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen and in the neighborhood. The proposed Aspen Art and Recreation Center use encompasses two of the. stronger elements of the community's character - arts and recreationa,l activities. The. rezoning and'new use of the building should actually enhance community character. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subject parcel or the slU'roundinq neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. , The Red Brick School was sold by the Aspen School Dist~ict after the District planned and built a new elementary school on the Maroon ~reek campus. The purchase of the property by the City of Aspen involved substantial public input. The change in ownership from a school district to the governmental entity is a changed condition which supports the rezoning from R-6, which is more appropriate for a neighborhood school, to Public, a more appropriate zone for the prcposed public, arts and recreational use. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. The text amendment to rezone the Red Brick School to Public and the redevelopment of the school into the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center is not in conflict with the public interest, but rather is strongly in the public interest. The rezoning of a public building to Public is also within the purpose and intent of this chapter of the Land Use Regulations. TEXT AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC ZONE DISTRICT The applicant proposes a minor amendment to the text of the Aspen Land Use Regulations regarding the permitted uses in the PUblic zone district. Therefore, in addition to the above discussed rezoning, a second text amendment is therefore requested pursuant to Division 11 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations, AMENDMENTS TO THE TEXT OF THIS CHAPTER AND THE OFFICIAL ZONE DISTRICT MAP. The applicant is requesting the addition of a permitted use in the Public zone district under Section 5-220 (B) Permitted Uses. The recommended language is to add the following as permitted use ,number 15 under this .section of the Regulations: "15. Arts, cultural and recreational activities." 9 f"""'I o Although the arts related uses proposed for the Red Brick build~ng such as' the non-profit organizations and the artist and writers studios could be allowed in the Public zone without this amendment, the applicant feels the, amendment clarifies the arts and recreational uses and removes any gray area in allowing different, but related and appropriate uses in the future. ' The artists and/or writers studios are the only prOposed uses which are "for profit". The bond documents for the city's purchase and renovation of the Red .Brickbuilding are very clear in that they require no more than five percent of the net leasable floor area of the building to be occupied by such "for profit" organizations. Ninety-five percent of the building has to be for public, non- profit or governmental uses. Therefore. this bond requirement provides protection. against the expansion of "for profit" uses which may have brought greater impacts on the neighborhood at some point in the future if not 'strictly regulated. The public zone district itself provides another level of protection against a wide array of uses which might bring mare impacts. The purpose of the Public zone district as stated in the Aspen Land Use Regulations is: ' "The purpose of the Public (PUB) zone district is to provide for the development of governmental, and quasi-governm~ntal facilities for CUltural,' educational, civic and other governmental purposes." The above purpose of the Public zone mentions cultur~l, educational and civic uses and the proposed amendment actually specifies similar appropriate uses and activities. The applicant feels that the proposed uses (arts, cultural and recreational uses) are within the intent of the Public zone, and the amendment is to clarify the applicable section of the Regulations by actually delineating these uses in the list of permitted uses. These arts, cultural and recreational uses. are within the intent of the zone district, but the proposed text amendment will also allow the Public zone district.to getter a880~8q~~~.tA~ proposed uses at the new Aspen Art and Recreation center, the uses for which the building was purchased. Again, the bond documents will always restrict the number of organizations which. are not non-profit and will help govern the uses allowed in the building. Along with the requirements of the Public zon~ itself, the bond 'documents will help keep the allowed uses within the intent of the Public zone and consistent with the intent of the electorate when they approved the purchase of the Red Brick School for public, arts and recreational uses. .10 r, /'\ Although it may be somewhat repetitive, the same nine review standards for the text amendment ,(rozoning) discussed above, are applicable to this text amendment; the addition of an allowed use to the Public zone district. These nine standards of review are .' briefly discussed below as they relate to this proposed. t,ext amendment. . A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applic~bleportions of this chapter. This amendment is not in conflict with any portion of this chapter. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area comprehensive Plan. This. amendment is consistent with all elements of the AACP'. C. . Whether :the proposed ,amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. The proposec;i, allowed uses, "arts, cultural and reCreational activities", will allow uses which are compatible with surround,ing zone districts (R-6 Residential, NC - Neighborhood Commercial and SCI - Service, Commercial Industrial with an SPA Overlay) and with surrounding lano. uses (residential, the yellow brick school and commercial uses at the Post Office and Truman Center) . D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. As permitted use in the PUblic zone, the proposed arts, cultural and recreational uses will generate less impacts than the more traditional public uses allowed in the Public zone district. No standards were found for determining impacts from artist studios or recreational uses. Several experts surveyed indicate that the low end of impact standards for office uses best reflects the high end of impacts from such arts and recreational uses. On the Red Brick site, at a minimum, the new uses will be "impact neutral" in that they will have no more impacts than the school use which has impacted the neighborhood since its construction in 1941. In reality, the site will generate less traffic and result in safer roads than the school. 11 r'1 n E. Whether and the extent to which ,the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment. would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not lill,lited to transportation facilities, sewag:e facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities~ The addition of the propqsed uses does not change, but rather clarifies the allowed uses within the Public zone. Therefore these uses will not result in increased demand on public: facilities. The existing structure has been in'existence and the impacts are already accommodatc.d within .current servic::es. The proposed permitted uses will probably generate less demand on public facilities than traditional public uses. The change from school to the proposed public uses should decrease impacts: on. the Red Brick site ,as well given the reduction in the on-site population and the'public facilities required to accommodate them. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. . The addition of the proposed permitted uses in the Public zone district will not adversely impact the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent IUld compatible with the community character in the city of Aspen. The proposed text amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the city of Aspen and in the neighborhood. The proposed permitted uses and the new Aspen Art and Recreation Center use encompasses two of the stronger elements of the community's character the arts and recreational activities. The new.use of the building should actually enhance community character. H. Whether there have been changed condition~ affecting the subject parcel or t,he surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. The Red Brick School building was sold by the Aspen School District after the District planned and built a new elementary school on the Maroon Creek campus. The purchase of the property by the city of Aspen involved substantial public input. The change in ownership from a school district to the governmental entity is a changed condition which instigated this text amendment. The amendment is appropriate for the . entire Public zone district, but is most appropriate in its application to the Red Brick site. 12 ~ f\ t. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and inte~t of this chapter. The proposed text amendment to add arts, cultural and recreational activities as permitted uses in the Public zone district is not in conflict with the public interest, but rather is strongly in the public interest. POD DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE PUBLIC ZONE DrMENSrONAL REQUrREMENTS Section 5-220 (D) of the Aspen Land Use Regulations (Public Zone District, Dimensional Requirements) states that "The dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted conditional uses in the Public (PUB) zone district be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and final development plan pursuant Article 7, Division 9, Planned Unit Development." Although this indicates that the only permitted conditional uses are subject to the PUD review, no dimensional requirements are established for permitted uses in the Public Zone. Therefore, as suggested in our pre-application conference, we have addressed the PUD section of the Code as a means of establishing the dimensional requirements and parking requirements for the property. As there is no new development proposed, but rather the Red Brick School is proposed for reuse as a public arts and recreation center, the footprint of the structure is not changing at this time and the dimensional requirements proposed will be consistent with what has been in place since the building was constructed. As the Public zone district uses a PUD plan review only as a means of establishing appropriate dimensional and parking requirements, many sections of the PUD review are not applicable. We have addressed only the standards which apply to the specifics of this site and the proposed reuse of the. building. All general requirements are considered not applicable, though the subject property complies with the general requirements of the POD review. The following addresses the applicable concerns. section 7-903 (B) (4) Dimensional Recruirements. The dimensional requirements shall be those of the underlyin'g Zone District, provided that variations may be permitted in the following: a. Minimum distance between buildings; b. Maximum height (including viewplanes); c. Minimum front yard; d. Minimum rear yard; 13 Ii !.. ) e.. f. g. h. i. j. f""l () Minimum sid~ yard; Minimum lot ~idth; Minimum lot area; Trash access area;. Internal floor .arearatio; and Minimum percent open space. If a variation is permitted in minimum lot'area, the area of any lot may be greater or less than the minim11lll requirement of the underlying Zone District, provided the total area of all lots, when avera.9'ed, at least equals the permitted minimum for the zone District. Any variation permitted shall ~e clearly indicated on .the final deyelopment plan. Again, the Public zone district does not establish dim~nsional requirements, so the applicant is proposing the following for the Red Brick School site and the'Aspen Arts and Recreational Center: a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j. Minimum distance between buildings: 10 feet Maximum height (including viewplanes) :"25 ft Minimum front yard: 10 feet (except 4 it at entry) Minimum rear yard: 15 feet Minimum side yard: 5 feet Minimum lot width: 60 feet Minimum lot area: 6,000 square feet Trash access area: See att'd survey Internal floor area ratio: 0.75:1 Minimum percent open space: No requirement These requirements have been developed from the dimensional requirements in the City of Aspen's 0- Office zeme district and the adjacent R-6 Residential zone district, whichever was most appropriate. ' /l: -' section 7-903 (B) (5) Off-street tlarkina... The numl:ler of off- street parking spaces may ~e varied fr9m that required in the underlying Zone District ~ased.. on the following considerations. '7 k. The pro~able numl:ler of cars used ~y those using the proposed development. 1. The parking needs of any non-residential uses. m. The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. n. The availa~ility of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automo~ile disincentive techniques in the ~roposed development. 14 .~ ~ o. The proximity' of the proposed, development to the commercial core or pUblic 'recreational facilities in the city. Whenever the number of off-street parking spaces is reduced, the city shall obtain assurance that the nature of the occupancy will not change. The Public zone district does not address parking requirements so the applicant has addressed the parking section of the PUD review. As discussed previously, it is estimated that 23 to 48 employees will use the proposed arts and recreationdl.center.Assuming each employee has one car, the historical parking on-site should be adequate for the new use and will be maintained for use by the facility. There has been no officially ,designated parking on the school site in the past. Historically the area to the north and west of the structure has been used as a parking area. Approximately 35 spaces have been, accommodated, including circulation, in this area. Therefore, . ,the applicant proposes to. provide these 35 spaces for the 23 to 48 employee cars. The 20 to 25 on-street parking space will be utilized for guest parking or any overflow parking needs. At approximately one space per employee, we feel this is sufficient, especially since most of the proposed tenants will not generate many visitors. The. artist studios will not generate the need for additional parking. still, the standard does consider client and visitor traffic. Most cars will be arriving and departing at the beginning and end of typical work hours. The artist studios may have more flexible hours which would decrease peak demand for traffic and parking. As the building is centrally located and within a few blocks of the public parking garage, the commercial core and neighborhood shopping, many employees and visitors will be traveling by foot. The city of Aspen's public parking garage is two blocks (700 feet) east and is convenient for use by users of the Red Brick Facility. The use of the parking garage, pedestrian travel and other auto- disincentives will be strongly encouraged through the management and leasing operations. The proposed Arts and Recreation Center will always be for public, arts, cultural and recreational uses and the nature of the occupancy will not change. In addition to the requirements of the Public zone district, this is further guaranteed by the bond documents for the financing of the building's purchase as only five percent of the net leasable floor area can be rented to tenants who are not non~profits. (See Attachment 3.) 15 "' ~ I ffi 3 "- x "'- 0 -- ct t: C> z <: - z '" N UJ e:: e:: "-, !- Z UJ ~ t,) " ~ " . z ~ '" - ~ !- . '" , UJ ~ e:: t,) 0 " UJ z e:: 0 N W '" . z '" 'JJ !- e:: '" z UJ "- 'JJ '" . !~ ! Y. !.i ~ iJ I' . ~i d i ';:11 i~i -: i: =!~~ ~ !; ~Iiq !j'll, "."'11 a"; u !~" I! I!!' - ;; #!~_ e ;!i! I ~ I.;': .~.:;. ~'I-~I It !=1 ~ ; :z :~~. I!i ~ :; ... ~:;; "ol!! 1.1 ... : I!i ii i.1i , I: w i ~ <:{z EI~' 1, W> ~ ! :;; i:j " <., <., ! ;:; !;J . ,"i ! '\. i ; '- ! f.-:l ~ ~ " V ~ .133" ".1S r'\ ~;!~/l: ~:; :~a.. 1:~is .,:l.:!1.l hih~!s!; ~~~~Il~~!~.; 'i'lllIllI' ~ "i~~:I.;il~~i ~ -.P. ,~~. . ~ rl'il!!li,~! I l-. ! n!~:"i :! .~:lI!!;'iH ~ ~;:nl~!!itJ; -~ ~ -;If!'~':;:;~~ ;( ~ liI'I','I;" I ~ il!l:dii;;'~ i " r i;! . ...!!~:; i ~ ..h.lf1;: ; ~ z . ~ ~ ;t ..:; ~ z:~ .., ~.3:; """ ~ -4i!8 z' ):_ 0 . . o ). "'~ . ,.. ~:;:; l- .... -... . w . : /i " . ," .i ...-'...,l' ."," ..,... .f,'" ,'.tt' /~'~"'~. 0' ;!. Iii' '. , !~! H:JSI fYYV:J ! ;~ ii ., w ii, di:j. ~ i~! wi- ~ III, VI 'I. <.:E:i! ~ ;;lIE 3 ~~!; ~ h~1 0, tii ~ e!li! "" I ~J:l; ~ ~(II u !I~l ; 1 p; . , . . ;! .' ~ II' z. ~ I' ~ ! w , , ~ I" ... ~I ! 3; , --;:;-r'\ ~ ~ ~"Y !it~ ... j. Ii; i-it ! ~;;: ,.. .~! ; :i :.;.~ i!hl t I~ I!. !:,,~; i j: ;;'1 !i~ii ~ ~: Uri ~E~~~ K h ~!:;;: :;:i~ !!:;!! ;f!'I'!!- : :1 !iii Ij~~! . ,i i:!~ ti'1~~ 'l ;: ~i:~ ili!j ~ Uh:; ~!i~! : ~j ~i:~ ;~Ji; ! , I i , 1 , . , , , , , ,n~ II i ~ t .. ~ .... I ! i i . ;1 , L i' H . . ,;I f-. ",. ~ f-. o ~ " ...., ...., ~ J... Go <S 'N ~ w w ,. ~ ~~! i wit ,1;;., . ~; " z w . " ji;; " ~~~ ~; "I, n<': (;i: :'ii, ,1,,' iii;1 ~~ ,~ Ii IJ'I S: ;_ ~~i I~ j~ I!~ 1 .... z w ~.1 :c (.) ~ ill( '" WJ f- Z L: CJ Z 0 f- "" WJ z '" "' CJ -J WJ "- '" '" '" :0 Z '" "- If; f- '" "" z WJ "- If; "" !, ., " i:i ~; ~i I' 11 :!. " !'i~ ;~ ~i. i~ :E~ , .; H 6: ," i~ ~ ~ ~ :i ~g~ ;;i !;: " !~ f~ "'5 .. H~ ,. ~: " II} ~ ;fH -J.. ;; i;n : ~ ~: ~~ 'atl.. :~H ~~ ~~~a. '0 :'11' ~ i; "I o J. ~ << N "'.,'"' ~ ~~!i 1& '" i~]H ~ i!j~ I i: IIII~; .j ;sg: i 0.. ~d!~ c::]z '" ; I: w , -;J ',<> V ' ~ ~ ~ , g :; -i ,- :it ~~ > ~..; ~ :~'I. ~ ~~ ., si' t: ~ii ~ 1:1 ~ e!~ liJ 'li,,~ :>-.I!.h :: ;~~ u i~~._ /-~~2~ ;~ 1~ . ."1" , ~~~i~:}i~~ ~n;;iie~H ;~i= ~:~~E'I' ~!~~U!i"~; i:' i<!:R:;~~&L~ i <0; - ." o. ..'I'. - ~ ~;~~lg~ig~! "I "!~ .~2!~.. ~: ,;'I'II!.I!.=:! IX ~! -ei!!" ;>" ~ ~~HI~~!~:; ; I g: =i:!:;a:-Sd I ':"'. t; ~~:!~ii:li~ _ '. ~ i~~'lil.~!~iii: ; '" !~E Elag~g " ~l 3::: r--. ,~ ~,:,~~, ~i ! c ~ :,'E: ~~!; ~~h: '.', s=, ~/:'::.~ :rH' ~~ ~~: ;!~~~ ~! ;i: ;~~;! !: ~€~ ':!i~ ~i !~i h;~~ ~i l:;! t !~eS I. hl'.!-Z !!mmil !~ ~s~ 'i ~g;. < i;; I I" ~ II I, ~ ~h! ~ ~:li~ ~ :~ l~ ~ ~~p . "I <:> !~i :i ::~d "" ~~!l= ',' ~ 'i'l.I v i ~;! , . i il i = , , , , . ~ :~ i;; ~ z <5 ;0 0: ..., , .0 <<( :z.. ~ 04 *~3 <>:: ..... 0 w 0 U Z " :;: <:> . . o ;:: ~ :- - '" '" l;; U_....' . ..' ." ,<Ii ~.i'.~..", /;,. :i ~~~ ~i~! ~~~! i3~ ~ :;; :;; '0 , "- l$t , " /0 f~ , '0 . " '<; :;; " G ~ .[331:1.[S "- !:j ~ o "" "' ..., ..., ~ ,! ~;~ ~ ~;:; i:: S~:; ::~ lilml!!! nHH~~ ~~ HHHg H "- w &) ~ 0 ro '" o- w ~ " 0 z '" ~ .-,;~.....:... '. If -.. :JS/.... /Vl:lv:; N , 'I ., 1~ ~n ~ . ~ n: 'iP H " n: 1- !;i: ';j n~ !i, ~ H~ ~ i;:;;~ 1,-, ~:;i ...~~ l!l~= .i,,: "-i--. ! I' ~~ ~ ,l: ~~ i , '" " ~ ~ z u > .1""'. fl " ) SiCTION VII EXISTING FLOOR PLAN III iii II .. , . AlTACHMENT 2 ..I l ~I ,1 1-, l- I ." ::ll *' ~.. I I I IV i ' ! . , I ~~t-'~ ... . I , t t 1 , ~ : i ! I l. i." i I : { ~ H@\ 1 j j f ! ~ : I d ! I o ~ I i h o & , . . I ~ ~ t q . , t t c . I '" 1 C ! i II If = II 1 c I II ~ ~ \ . I - I \ \.I.~t<""""""";~~ f '1 r 15 ./"'-. (""'\ (1), 1 ~. MEMORANDUM ATTACH~ENT~ TO: Mayor and Council FROM: R~d Brick Committee DATE: February 9, 1993 RE: Recommendations Regarding Red Brick Renovation and Management The Red Brick Committee has met approximately eight times' to' discuss and recommend to City Council a long-range program for the Red Brick Building. The Committee is made up of the following members: Julia Marshall Lee Ambrose Jill Uris Don Fleischer Janet Garwood Bill Martin Joanne Lyon Mary Martin Janet Roberts Katherine Lee Bob Camp. Staff support has been provided by: Bill Efting Ken Collins Rob Thomson Cindy wilson Amy. Margerum The Committee reached a consensus on the following key points: * The Red Brick site should be used for arts, recreation and compatible community uses; * The parcel should not be split or sold off for other purposes or uses such as housing; 1 r"i ~ . . ~- ) * Mqnagement of both tenant' relations and day to d~y maintenance of the bu11ding should be by one 'entity; ~ * . The City council should appoint an review both the operational aspects recommend capital improvements. 'The provide feedback on programmatic and woul~ have no mar.agement authority. advisory committ~e to of the building and advisory group. would operating issues but Renovation The committee received a report from Smith Associates Architects which presents four altet:natives for renovation. The report is attached as Appendix A. The four alternatives are summarized below: Alternative 1: requirements, Minimum upgrade to meet ccdeand ,maintenance Paved on-site parking lot with 35 spaces. Alternative 2: Demolish the 1941 portion of the structure. Upgrade and remodel the classroom and gym areas, construct a new addition of 6,000 square feet designed for an arts center, paved parking lot on-site with 60 spaces, new landscaping. Alternative 2B: Demolishthe 1941 structure, upgrade the remaining portion of the building to meet code and maintenance requirements, reconfigure and renovate the floorplan to meet Art Council needs, paved parking lot on-site with 35 spaces. Alternative 3: Demolish the entire building and build a new 23,000 square foot arts and recreation center, create a paved parking lot on-site with 60 spaces, new landscaping. cost estimates of the alternatives are: Alternative 1: $1,425,106 Alternative 2 : $2,172,331 Alternative 2B: $1,287,138 Alternative 3 : $3,146,235 The committee reached consensus not to support any of the first three alternatives primarily because of the costs involved. The Committee recommends the proposed renovation costs stay within the $1,000,000 budget which the City has earmarked and should not be dependent on fund.ing from outside sources. However, any savings or interest earnings experienced by the ci~y due to the delays in 2 ,~ ("'\ this pr,oject would be approp~ia.te .to use for the renovation and could increase the $1,000,000 budget. '" Recommendation: After reviewing all fnur alternatives, committee. with the cooperation of the Arts Council recommend City Council consider Alternative 4. Several factors s~pport recommendation: . .\', '. , 1. Cost - The committee feels that we were challenged to recommend an option which would most benefit the artistic community for a $1,000,000 project. ' the that this 2. Arts Council Needs - With the new configuration of rooms in the newer section, most of the Arts Council current needs will be satisfied. ,.3. Energy 'Efficiency - This al.ternative will provide the community with a much more energy efficient building. ' 4. Expansion - This alternative leaves room for expansion of the art center at a future date. 5. Occupancy - The committee projects that this option would allow the building to be functional approximately 1 year atter the design team selection. Manaqement The Committee reached consensus that property management and tenant relations should not be segregated from building management. Whatever group is responsible for managing the building should be responsible for both the tenant relations (negotiating leases, collecting rents, etc) and day to day building maintenance. The Committee also agreed that regardless of who manages the building there should be an advisory group appointed which consists of City council representation, citizen/business representation and Arts Council representatives. The advisory group would be used for feedback on programmatic and operating issues but would have no management responsibility. The Committee considered several management options. The Committee evaluated management alternatives based on the following criteria: Financial viability: financial reports standards; will the management Entity prepare timely and have clear financial goals and Support of the Arts: encourage the arts; will the management entity support and Who is the best organization to determine uses of building? 3 f\ r} , . '. . .I. .'- !/ Does the entity have property management experience? The Committee 'narrowed the options to either management by the City " or by an outside board such as the Arts Council. The Committee agreed that any management option chosen should be re-evaluated after a year or sooner if problems arise. The committee was split on ,which management entity they preferred, however a~l except one membe:r; felt they could "live with" Arts Council management for one year with a review. All agreed that they could "live with" City management of the building with oversight by an advisory board. In considering the alternatives the followirig assumption was made: * The direct cost of managing the building was assumed to be the same regardless of whether the City or the Arts Council managed the building, city Manaqement: * If the city managed the building the City would hire staff or contrapt for property management services including negotiating leases and maintenance services. There would be an office in the recreation area for staff or property management contractors. An existing City manager(s) would oversee staff or contractors. Advantages: * The ~ity has existing infrastructure (i.e. attorney support, ~nsurance, management experience, personnel system, financial system, etc) * Financial reporting and accountability is already in place. * More direct and timely accountability to the public. * city Council would set goals for the building. staff reports to Council. Disadvantages: * city.. staff not as aware of arts groups I needs'. * city doesn't have a great deal of experience in renting space and being a landlord. Arts Council Manaqement: * Arts Council would hire a director which would oversee the leasing and building maintenance aspects of the building '{ in addition to other Arts Council duties). Leasing and tenant relations issues would be handled by. the director. Building 4 f\. ,~ , . .. ._~ ~ maintenance functions would be either con~racted out or done by other hired staff. staff reports' to.the Arts Council. .0 ,. Advantages: * Arts Council has good understanding of tenant needs and has a mission to support and encourage the arts. * May be the best organization to determine uses of the building, however there is a concern that property management will conflict with ,the mission of the Arts Council. ' Disadvantages: * Financial viability: the Arts Council will need to develop a system for financial reporting. Reporting would be made to the Arts Council. The community as a whole and the City Council may have delayed access to financial information. * The ArtE; Council as an entity does not. have a strong background in property management. RECOMMENDATION: The Committee would like to discuss the above options with City Council and get feedback. 5 I"'] f) MEMORANDUM TO: Kim Johnson, Planning Office FROM: Cindy Wilson, Assistant city Manager a~ DATE: April 6, 1993 Red Brick School - Historical Number of Employees RE: I spoke to both Joe Tarbet, Aspen School District controller and Barb Tarbet, Elementary School Principal to obtain information regarding the number of employees in the Red Brick School building in the past. They both confirmed that the number of employees in the building for about the past ten years have been about as follows: 5 administrative personnel 2 janitors 4-5 special teachers ~teachers 24 - 25 total employees Barb also noted that in 1969 there were 30 employees in the Red Brick building. If I can help you with this in any other way, please call me. f1 (") AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL (Pursuant to section 6-205 E. of the Aspen Land Use Regulations) State of Colorado) ) SS. city of Aspen ) follows: The undersigned, being duly sworn, deposes and says as I, Alice Davis being or representing an applicant before city of Aspen, personally, certify that Public Notice of the application for the Red Brick School was given by mailing notice of the public hearing before the Aspen City council to all property owners within 300 feet of the Red Brick School. Also, notice was posted via a sign containing the information required in section 6-205 E with such posting in a conspicuous place (as could be seen from the nearest public way). Posting and mailing occurred on April 22, 1993. Applicant: city of Aspen, Owner Red Brick By Qu~~ Alice Davis - The foregoing Affidavit of Public Notice was acknowledged and signed before me this 30 day of April, 1992, by Alice Davis on behalf of the City of Aspen. WI~NESS my hand and official seal. '. lory 66ll1mission eXPireS:.;<'/~;;171fj, " ~~().~ - . OT PUBLIC Cl , f) AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLIC NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR DEVELOPMENT APPRO~AL (Pursuant to Section 6-205 E. of the Aspen Land Use Regulations) state of Colorado) ) SS. City of Aspen ) follows: The undersigned, being duly sworn, deposes and says as I, Alice Davis being or representing an applicant before City of Aspen, personally, certify that Public Notice of the application for the Red Brick School was given by mailing notice of the public hearing before the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission to all property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. Also, notice was posted via a sign containing the information required in Section 6-205 E with such posting in a conspicuous place (as it could be seen from the nearest public way). Posting and mailing occurred on March 15, 1993. Applicant: City of Aspen, Owner Red Brick By QiA.' {)~ Ali e Da~s The foregoing Affidavit of Public Notice was acknowledged and signed before me this 30 day of April, 1992, by Alice Davis on behalf of the City of Aspen. WITNES.S my hand and offi9ial seal. ._:. :..!~t Cf~ission expires: c5??/A7/ff /J A , .'~~-- ....'. .~WJ-r,ueAA:ilL{2~ -'- -- : NOTA., PUBLIC ':-> . f""J (") PUBLIC NOTICE RE: ASPEN ARTS AND RECREATION CENTER (RED BRICK SCHOOL) MAP AMENDMENT, GMQS EXEMPTION AND TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE ASPgN LAND USE REGULATIONS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a special public hearing will be held on Tuesday, April 13, 1993 at a meeting to begin at 4:30 pm before the Aspen Planning'& Zoning Commission, 2nd Floor Meeting Room, city Hall, 130 South Galena st., Aspen to consider an application submitted by the city of Aspen, 130 South Galena Street requesting approval of a Map Amendment for Rezoning from R-6 Residential to PUB (Public Zone District) i and Growth Management Quota System Exemption for an Essential Public Facility for the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center. The property is the former Red Brick School located at 110 East Hallam Street; Lots A-I and Lots K-S, Block 64 and Lots E, F, G and Fractional Lots A, B, and C., Block 71, city and Townsite of Aspen. The applicant further requests approval Of a Text Amendment to the Aspen Land Use Regulations to add a new number 15 to section 5-220B. Public Zone District Permitted uses to read as follows: 15. Arts, cultural and recreational activities. The Permitted Uses in the Public Zone District currently include: Library, Museum, Post office, Hospital, Essential governmental and public utility uses, Performing art center, Public transportation stop, Terminal building, and transportation related facilities, Public surface and underground parking areas, Community recr.eation facility, Fire station, Public school, Public park, and Accessory buildings and uses. For further information, contact Kim Johnson at the Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office, 130 S. Galena st., Aspen, CO 920-5100. s/Jasmine Tvqre. Chairman Planning and Zoning commission Published in The Aspen Times on March 26, 1993. ------------------------------------------------------~---------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- City of Aspen Account. ..~. v;tr ~ ~ JP3/~3 71v(J~ , pO Employee Credits The Housing Office finds regarding employee credits is best addressed by The following are our thoughts on the issue. /7~ . 0,(4/1\ [..(.;&) r 'f \t.1A',J~(,iib{ ;;':)P1' ,~ ,-,' I (;(f"~/{fP ,w r .y I.' {,'i~~1r'( .f'lt'.r.r':< 1>> -/{, 0 ~,'1,^,,,,(; )$ ,y,") -r 1/' &1 1};..C't 1 ~,!,v) r Dl"S- e, , 'I ;..S ;f;)--' /""", N'<< I .'lPAj:I') .rl~ . p/t /~., lI1l'~ v' ) ,,~ If'- MEMORANDUM TO: Kim Johnson, ~~ffice FROM: Tom Baker, Hous l.ce DATE: March 16, 1993 RE: Red Brick School Referral REFERRAL COMMENTS: The Housing Office is responding to this proposal because the Planning Office requested our input. However, a Housing Office referral does not appear necessary pursuant to the Land Use Code. Employee Generation - Based upon staff review, the Housing Office finds that there are generally three uses being proposed for the Red Brick: office, studio, and recreational. In terms of office uses, we find that 3 employeesj1, 000 sf (net leasable) is an appropriate generation figure. This is consistent with the generation figures in the city's office zone. In terms of studio use, we find insufficient information to determine a generation figure. Additional information about how and when a studio will be used is needed. In terms of .rec:reational uses, we find that the gymnasium and locker room will generate less than 1 FTE. This figure is derived from Recreation Department experience with the operation of similar facilities. According to the applicant and under the alternative which does not utilize the 1941 section of the building, the applicant expects to generate between 23 48 employees (p. 7 of the Land Use Application). Given that the gymnasium and locker room portion of the building (8320 sf) will generate less than one employee, then the remaining 13,480 sf will generate a figure less than 30. This assumes that the studio use generates less than 3 employeesjl,OOO sf (net leasable) and the 13,480 sf figure must be revised to depict net leasable square footage. ----J::'- ]>'" The Housing Office concludes that the applicant's 23 - 48 employee generation range is adequate and the actual generation will likely be at the lower end of that range once additional information is p:-ovided about net leasable space and how and when th,e stUdi~ space L I. W1.11 be used. f;."ta,:~f'e::'r" 1/))$t,"'1, 7'{€ f!rfCl;J)/i) ~// fAc ~'i"1j;O" SO? that the policy' - .0 the City Council. "'---t,.')// ' 1 ~ ,"'~",,,.i t-',.' " .~ I.;;. , ) / ,;I"r:P/-- 6'\">:'''1'''' if;, ,~,~i1--J."'''~ '/?x?J , , i S''i ~--- "0 0'2, v/ --r,;.." -f ,J'I'.r 1 .Jt.1!.'-' ;' t;~~, D v I. "'.h I' tl'J~-l~F1Wlf! ,it~r t\r"JI,!\,~""i: tb4/c T;:l-f /~., II..., )(\ , ./ ;. Co. ;;> _.' L-' /' -' "" '-/-'"7'"" , -' " ~ . . " ~ -r 'I .".-- \---....-< l-~ hf (!/?>L." t. I l~y€, s:':t;;.tt.' .,.1. ",..' I e , . , ., ,{,"'" c"r"""",,;tb.e... a,~\ tV l:&Gk.licd.tOJJ r'.,/, ~Ag~t (' irl.k'D . ! 0' k f . '" 1"1 k,A...6{~ (>~ Nu'l"\ 'f;JJ:(rt" ^ ,rYi:. .'9 v:; ",v"'-k ,I) r) () t '" In the Housing Offic~'s opinion any theoretical ~J'~dable hOUSing\ credits from the elem~ntary school use of.. the Red Brick were 'transferred to the new e' ementary sChoo,l. -1This employee housing credit tren,fer we. cleer~efectb'>fice the SChool Boerd decided not to go through the counuy g.e.velopment review process. The. \. Housing Office is assuming th.i< defacto transfer because the end . ,A result to the community is/tbe ~e, that is a new building was I constructed (new elemerl't:ary scho'6l.) without. mitigating for / affordable housing; t,.l:tEfrefClre, employee---'!:tousing credits for the existing structure sr(ould be eliminated. A~~esult, any new use going into the Re,cy"Brick School should be required-. to mitigate for 60% of afford~~ housing impact (13.8 - 54 FTE) dep~nding upon the/ plan for the Red Brick. t The above opinion is a very narrow view based solely on Housing Office concerns regarding Community-wide affordable housing impacts. Another view would consider that the School Board's development of the new elementary school did not seek or receive permission to transfer affordable housing credits from one structure to another. Therefore, the affordable housing credits stay with the old structure and the new structure could be considered to be deficient in terms of its affordable housing impact. (The old. library/new library is an example of requesting and receiving permission to transfer affordable housing credits.) It should be noted that the School Board acted legally by electing to disregard the County's development review process, but the fact that it happened is causing confusion on the affordable housing issue for the Red Brick School. red.brick.ref 2 .. " I""'l "....... , ,j Davis Horn~<;. PlANNING. APPRAISING. REAL ESTATE CONSUI1ING I'iarch 1, 1993 Ms. Kim Johnson Aspen Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, CO. 81611 RE: Land Use Application for the Red Brick School to be used as the new Aspen Arts and Recreation Center Dear Kim: Attached is the application for our client, the city of Aspen, requesting : 1) Rezoning approval for the Red.Brick School site from R-6 Residential to PUB, Public; 2) Approval of a PUD development plan which establishes the dimensional requirements for the site as is required by the Public zone district regulations; 3) Approval of a minor text amendment to the Public zone district. We have done our best to satisfy the applicable requirements of the Aspen Land Use Regulations and to address items identified in our pre-application conferences. Please let us know if we have failed to address any issues of concern to you. Thank you for your consideration. Please call if you have any questions or if you need further information. Thank you, DAVIS HORN INCORPORATED ~~ JJii" Glenn Hor~AICP . AUCE DAVIS, SRA I GLENN HORN, A1CP 300 EASr HYMAN . SUITE B. ASPEN, COLORADO 81611. 303/92~7 . FAX: 303/92&61BO {\ f'""\ . .4 INTRODUCTION Davis Horn Incorporated, represents the City of Aspen who is the applicant and the owner of the Red Brick School Building at 110 East Hallam Street. (See Attachment 1, Vicinity Map.) The applicant is requesting approval for a rezoning of the Red Brick School from R-6 Residential to PUB Public. Simultaneously, a minor text amendment to the city of Aspen Municipal Land Use Regulations is requested. As the Public zone is intended for a wide variety of public and public related uses, dimensional requirements are not given in the Regulations, but rather are established on a case by case basis through the PUD process. Therefore, the applicant is also requesting approval for a PUD plan which establishes the basic dimensional requirements for the property. This application addresses the standards and requirements for the following approvals being requested: 1. Rezoning of the Red Brick School property (to be used as the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center) from the R-6 Residential zone to the PUB, Public zone district; 2. A minor text amendment to the Land Use Regulations regarding the Public zone district; and 3. Approval of a PUD development plan establishing the dimensional and off street parking requirements for the property as is required by the Public zone district. The planning director has determined, according to section 7- 903 (C) (3), Consolidation of conceptual and final development review, that it is appropriate for this PUD review to be consolidated from a four step into a two step process. This application briefly discusses the existing conditions and history of the subject property, describes the proposed use of the building and addresses the applicable Aspen Land Use Regulation review standards and requirements of each of the three approvals requested. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY The Red Brick School is located in the heart of Aspen's West End neighborhood at 110 East Hallam Street. The school was originally built in 1941 and sits on a estimated 90,700 square foot parcel of land. The existing structure consists of three sections containing approximately 35,800 total square feet of gross floor area. The first section is the original school building and a receiving/storage addition which contains 14,000 square feet. 2 n (') The second section is 11,240 square feet including a major classroom and mechanical room addition built to the east of the original building in the 1970's. This area is in better condition than the original structure and is in less need of hazardous material abatement. The third section of the existing building contains 10,560 square feet, was also built in the early 1970's and is to the east of the classroom addition. It consists of a 6080 square foot gymnasium and vestibule, a 2240 square foot stage area with a small office and storage area and stairs which lead to a 2240 square foot basement area locker room. (See Attachment 1, Red Brick School Building, Existing First Floor Plan.) The surrounding neighborhood is the well established West End residential neighborhood. To the east, south and west of the subject are single family homes which have predominated the West End Neighborhood for over one hundred years. There is a bike path along the northern property line which leads from the residential neighborhood to a commercial area below. The site is generally level, though to the north and northeast, beyond the bike path, steep slopes drop away from the property to adjacent commercial uses to the north. The slope provides a barrier between the commercial uses adjacent to the north, the subject property and adjacent residential uses. There are sidewalks on the south and west sides of the property and on-street paved parking to the west. The site is modestly landscaped on the south, between the building and the street with a lawn, shrubs and trees. The Red Brick School was purchased by the City of Aspen from the Aspen School District No.1 with the closing on January 14, 1993. The city purchased the school with bond money which requires that the building continue with public uses and that only five percent of the floor area be occupied by uses other than non-profit or governmental/public entities. (See Attachment 2, a letter to the City of Aspen Finance Director regarding the General Obligations Bonds used for the purchase of the school building.) various citizen and public groups including the more recently formed Red Brick Committee have supported the purchase of the building for public, arts and recreation related purposes and the issuing of bonds to fund the purchase and the cost of building improvement and renovation. As the school, particularly the original 1940's portion, has a hazardous material problem which needs to be abated, costs for renovation and improvement are higher than they would otherwise be. since the City is now the owner of the property, The Red Brick Committee, City staff and the City Council are working to make the best use of the property for public and arts related purposes. 3 ~ ~ The building is proposed to house the city Recreation Department offices; City recreational programs and activities; art and cultural activities and uses; and art, dance and writers' studios. This application seeks approvals required for the City to operate the structure in the manner approved by the voters in the public election on the purchase. PROPOSED PROJECT As mentioned previously, The Red Brick School is to be used for public, art, cultural and recreational uses. As required by the bond documents, public and non-prOfit uses are to always be the predominant uses in the building. As currently proposed, the gymnasium will be used by the city Recreation Department, the basement will continue to be used as a locker room for recreational activities and the remainder of the building will be used for a variety of public, arts, cultural and recreational office and studio uses. Although the proposed tenants will certainly change with time and possibly before the building is actually ready for occupancy, an administrative office for each of the following tenants is currently anticipated for the building: city Recreation Department Dance Aspen Aspen Art Museum Aspen Filmfest KAJX Aspen Ballet Company Aspen Theater The Writer's Conference Arts Council Aspen Ridiculous Theater Aspen Yoga Center Aspen Interactive All of the above uses except Aspen Yoga Center and possibly Aspen Interactive, are non-prOfit organizations. Aspen Interactive is now seeking non-prOfit status. In addition to the above tenants, the building is proposed to include the following: A 651 square foot common lecture hall A 150 square foot common secretarial area Four to five spaces to be used as artists' studios. The currently proposed uses have been reviewed and evaluated by the Red Brick Committee. The Red Brick Committee came up with four potential options for the City Council for renovating the school building; these options are found in the memorandum in Attachment 3. 4 n (') At this time, the Red Brick Committee is proposing use of the gymnasium and the classroom addition completed in the 1970' s. Using only these two sections of the building, the building is expected to be fully occupied. The Committee has proposed that the remainder of the building, the original 1940s school, will either be renovated at a later date, demolished or locked off and not used until further plans are finalized and money obtained for the reuse or reconstruction of this section of the building. Regardless of the option chosen, the entire property as it currently exists is the subject of this rezoning application. REZONING TO PUBLIC The applicant is requesting a rezoning of the subject property from R-6 Residential to PUB, Public. The structure has been used and will continue to be used for public purposes since it was built in 1941. Although a school is a conditional use in the R-6 Residential zone, the Public zone district is more appropriate for the property given the sale of the building from the Aspen School District to the city of Aspen for arts, cultural and recreational purposes. A rezoning is an amendment to the official zoning map. This rezoning is therefore requested pursuant to Division 11 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations, AMENDMENTS TO THE TEXT OF THIS CHAPTER AND THE OFFICIAL ZONE DISTRICT MAP. This section of the regulations require an applicant to address and the city council and the commission to consider the nine standards of review. These standards are identified and addressed below. A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this chapter. The proposed amendment to the official zone district map to change the subject property's zoning designation from R-6 to PUB is not in conflict with any portion of the Land Use RegUlations. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area comprehensive Plan. The Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan calls for the Red Brick School to be used for public purposes. This amendment to the map is not only consistent with the Plan, but is a step toward insuring that the structure is preserved for public and related appropriate uses in the future. The purchase of the Red Brick School was approved by the voters of the City of Aspen in a public election in August of 1992. 5 1"""'\ c ! (') The Red Brick School Committee consists of a wide variety of community volunteers, both opponents and proponents of the purchase, was formed soon after the election to address the use and redevelopment of the building into an art and recreational center. This committee appears to agree that the proposed reuse of the building is consistent with the Aspen Area Community Plan and with the electorate's intent of the use of the school as approved in the public election on the issue. C. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. The proposed use is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses. It has been an even more intensive school use in the past and was a permitted conditional use in the R-6 zone district where it is now located. Therefore, it is considered compatible with the surrounding R-6 zone district. Down the steep slopes to the north of the subject property is a commercial area zoned (NC - Neighborhood Commercial and SCI Service Commercial Industrial) with an SPA overlay. Although they are adjacent to the subject, the uses found here are much more intensive and are not really physically a part of the immediate neighborhood. The subject property is somewhat of a buffer between the residential neighborhood on three sides and the commercial uses to the north. The neighborhood has been actively involved in the purchase and reuse of the school building through various citizen committees and public meetings. The Red Brick Committee was established after the election in August of 1991 when the purchase of the school was approved by the voters. This committee is made up of a wide variety of people with different concerns. The arts community, real estate communi ty, neighbors and opponents of the school purchase were all represented. This committee has worked hard since its conception in December of 1992 to come to agreement on the use and management and redevelopment of the Red Brick School. This rezoning is a first step to accomplish the redevelopment of the building for use as an arts and recreational center. The less intensive proposed use of the building as a recreational, arts, cultural and public facility brings less impacts than the elementary school did when it was operating in the building. D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. 6 f""l f""l The proposed Aspen Arts and Recreation Center will at a minimum be II impact neutral" in that it will have no more impacts than the school use which has impacted the neighborhood since its construction in 1941. In reality, the proposed use will have substantially less impacts on traffic generation and road safety. The last year of operation, the school was used for kindergarten and first grade classes and the school business office. There was a total population of 250 including 230 students, ten full-time teachers, five special teachers, three business office employees and two janitorial staff. Approximately twelve buses dropped students off at the school in the morning and picked up students in the afternoon. In addition, it is estimated that fifty students were dropped off and picked up by car each day. A large majority of the faculty, staff and school board members traveled to and from the campus by car, parking in the area behind the gym, in the area behind the business office, along the front of the building on Hallam street and on Garmisch street. Regular trash pick up as well as occasional deliveries and field trips by bus generated some additional trips. The total number of round trips to and from the school each day is estimated to have been 160 vehicles trips per day. A similar level of activity was going on at the yellow brick school diagonally across from the site. In addition, extracurricular activities occurred in the school gymnasium, which was utilized both by students and members of the community. Barricades were set up daily on Garmisch and Hallam to interrupt traffic in the vicinity of the two schools. The proposed use will generate from 23 to 48 employees under the smaller design scheme (not using the original 1941 portion of the building) and 55 to 90 employees if the entire building is utilized. This range has been established first by estimating the actual number of employees anticipated given the proposed tenants and second by use of a national standard for an office use which was applied to the entire building. The actual estimated population is considered to be the most accurate in determining the number of employees, therefore the lower end of the range, 23 to 48 is the best estimate of employees in the proposed arts and recreation center. As the property is centrally located and easily accessed by foot and by public transportation, vehicular trip generation will be less than for a property with an inferior location. We found no trip generation standard for artist studios or recreational uses and therefore have used the low end of the trip generation standard for office use: four trips per 1000 square feet of space. 7 t""'j ("'\ :J This shows 142 vehicle trips per day, less than for the school use, even without considering the previous extracurricular activities and the trips generated by the yellow brick diagonally across the street. There does not appear to have been any officially designated parking on the school site in the past. Ken Smith of Smith Associates Architects completed a study on the various redevelopment alternative for the Red Brick School. He has access to an original improvement survey of the school property and no parking is shown. Historically the area to the north and west of the structure has been used as a parking lot. Approximately 35 spaces have been accommodated in this area. Therefore, the applicant proposes to provide these 35 spaces for the 23 to 48 employees. The 20 to 25 on-street parking spaces will be utilized for guests. At approximately one space per employee, we feel this is sufficient, especially since the proposed tenants, except for the recreational programs, will not generate many visitors. Artist studios do not tend to generate the need for additional parking. still, the standard does consider client and visitor traffic. The tenants of the building will be encouraged at the time of signing a lease, not to use their cars, but to ride share, walk and use the public parking garage two blocks (700 feet) east. The proposed arts and recreation center will generate less impacts with regard to traffic generation, road safety, parking and employee generation than the previous school use. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. The rezoning to public will not result in increased demand on public facilities. The existing structure has been in existence and the impacts are already accommodated within current services. The change from school to public uses should decrease impacts given the reduction in the on-site population and the public facilities required to accommodate them. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. The rezoning to public and the new arts and recreation uses to be allowed will not adversely impact the natural environment. 8 f""l n G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen. The proposed rezoning is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen and in the neighborhood. The proposed Aspen Art and Recreation Center use encompasses two of the stronger elements of the communi ty I s character - arts and recreational acti vi ties. The rezoning and new use of the building should actually enhance community character. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subj ect parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. The Red Brick School was sold by the Aspen School District after the District planned and built a new elementary school on the Maroon Creek campus. The purchase of the property by the City of Aspen involved substantial public input. The change in ownership from a school district to the governmental entity is a changed condition which supports the rezoning from R-6, which is more appropriate for a neighborhood school, to public, a more appropriate zone for the proposed public, arts and recreational use. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. The text amendment to rezone the Red Brick School to Public and the redevelopment of the school into the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center is not in conflict with the public interest, but rather is strongly in the public interest. The rezoning of a public building to Public is also within the purpose and intent of this chapter of the Land Use Regulations. TEXT AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE PUBLIC ZONE DISTRICT The applicant proposes a minor amendment to the text of the Aspen Land Use Regulations regarding the permitted uses in the Public zone district. Therefore, in addition to the above discussed rezoning, a second text amendment is therefore requested pursuant to Division 11 of the Aspen Land Use Regulations, AMENDMENTS TO THE TEXT OF THIS CHAPTER AND THE OFFICIAL ZONE DISTRICT MAP. The applicant is requesting the addition of a permitted use in the Public zone district under section 5-220 (B) Permitted Uses. The recommended language is to add the following as permitted use number 15 under this section of the Regulations: "15. Arts, cultural and recreational activities." 9 r", ~ , ,.; Although the arts related uses proposed for the Red Brick building such as the non-profit organizations and the artist and writers studios could be allowed in the Public zone without this amendment, the applicant feels the amendment clarifies the arts and recreational uses and removes any gray area in allowing different, but related and appropriate uses in the future. The artists and/or writers studios are the only proposed uses which are "for profit". The bond documents for the City's purchase and renovation of the Red Brick building are very clear in that they require no more than five percent of the net leasable floor area of the building to be occupied by such "for profit" organizations. Ninety-five percent of the building has to be for public, non- profit or governmental uses. Therefore this bond requirement provides protection against the expansion of "for profit" uses which may have brought greater impacts on the neighborhood at some point in the future if not strictly regulated. The Public zone district itself provides another level of protection against a wide array of uses which might bring more impacts. The purpose of the Public zone district as stated in the Aspen Land Use Regulations is: "The purpose of the Public (PUB) zone district is to provide for the development of governmental and quasi-governmental facilities for cultural, educational, civic and other governmental purposes." The above purpose of the Public zone mentions cultural, educational and civic uses and the proposed amendment actually specifies similar appropriate uses and activities. The applicant feels that the proposed uses (arts, cultural and recreational uses) are within the intent of the Public zone, and the amendment is to clarify the applicable section of the Regulations by actually delineating these uses in the list of permitted uses. These arts, cultural and recreational uses are within the intent of the zone district, but the proposed text amendment will also allow the Public zone district to better accommodate the proposed uses at the new Aspen Art and Recreation Center, the uses for which the building was purchased. Again, the bond documents will always restrict the number of organizations which are not non-profit and will help govern the uses allowed in the building. Along with the requirements of the Public zone itself, the bond documents will help keep the allowed uses within the intent of the Public zone and consistent with the intent of the electorate when they approved the purchase of the Red Brick School for public, arts and recreational uses. 10 ~ () Although it may be somewhat repetitive, the same nine review standards for the text amendment (rezoning) discussed above, are applicable to this text amendment, the addition of an allowed use to the Public zone district. These nine standards of review are briefly discussed below as they relate to this proposed text amendment. A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of this chapter. This amendment is not in conflict with any portion of this chapter. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan. This amendment is consistent with all elements of the AACP. c. Whether the proposed amendment is compatible with surrounding zone districts and land uses, considering existing land use and neighborhood characteristics. The proposed allowed uses, "arts, cultural and recreational activities", will allow uses which are compatible with surrounding zone districts (R-6 Residential, NC - Neighborhood Commercial and SCI - Service, Commercial Industrial with an SPA Overlay) and with surrounding land uses (residential, the yellow brick school and commercial uses at the Post Office and Truman Center). D. The effect of the proposed amendment on traffic generation and road safety. As permitted use in the Public zone, the proposed arts, cultural and recreational uses will generate less impacts than the more traditional public uses allowed in the Public zone district. No standards were found for determining impacts from artist studios or recreational uses. Several experts surveyed indicate that the low end of impact standards for office uses best reflects the high end of impacts from such arts and recreational uses. On the Red Brick site, at a minimum, the new uses will be "impact neutral" in that they will have no more impacts than the school use which has impacted the neighborhood since its construction in 1941. In reality, the site will generate less traffic and result in safer roads than the school. 11. 11 ("'\ . ....'J E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, and emergency medical facilities. The addition of the proposed uses does not change, but rather clarifies the allowed uses within the Public zone. Therefore these uses will not result in increased demand on public facilities. The existing structure has been in existence and the impacts are already accommodated within current services. The proposed permitted uses will probably generate less demand on public facilities than traditional public uses. The change from school to the proposed public uses should decrease impacts on the Red Brick site as well given the reduction in the on-site population and the public facilities required to accommodate them. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significantly adverse impacts on the natural environment. The addition of the proposed permitted uses in the Public zone district will not adversely impact the natural environment. G. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the city of Aspen. The proposed text amendment is consistent and compatible with the community character in the City of Aspen and in the neighborhood. The proposed permitted uses and the new Aspen Art and Recreation Center use encompasses two of the stronger elements of the community's character the arts and recreational activities. The new use of the building should actually enhance community character. H. Whether there have been changed conditions affecting the subj ect parcel or the surrounding neighborhood which support the proposed amendment. The Red Brick School building was sold by the Aspen School District after the District planned and built a new elementary school on the Maroon Creek campus. The purchase of the property by the City of Aspen involved substantial public input. The change in ownership from a school district to the governmental entity is a changed condition which instigated this text amendment. The amendment is appropriate for the entire Public zone district, but is most appropriate in its application to the Red Brick site. 12 t') () y I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter. The proposed text amendment to add arts, cultural and recreational activities as permitted uses in the Public zone district is not in conflict with the public interest, but rather is strongly in the public interest. PUD DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE PUBLIC ZONE DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS section 5-220 (D) of the Aspen Land Use Regulations (Public Zone District, Dimensional Requirements) states that "The dimensional requirements which shall apply to all permitted conditional uses in the Public (PUB) zone district be set by the adoption of a conceptual development plan and final development plan pursuant Article 7, Division 9, Planned unit Development." Although this indicates that the only permitted conditional uses are subject to the PUD review, no dimensional requirements are established for permitted uses in the Public Zone. Therefore, as suggested in our pre-application conference, we have addressed the PUD section of the Code as a means of establishing the dimensional requirements and parking requirements for the property. As there is no new development proposed, but rather the Red Brick School is proposed for reuse as a public arts and recreation center, the footprint of the structure is not Changing at this time and the dimensional requirements proposed will be consistent with what has been in place since the building was constructed. As the Public zone district uses a PUD plan review only as a means of establishing appropriate dimensional and parking requirements, many sections of the PUD review are not applicable. We have addressed only the standards which apply to the specifics of this site and the proposed reuse of the building. All general requirements are considered not applicable, though the subject property complies with the general requirements of the PUD review. The following addresses the applicable concerns. section 7-903 (B) (4) Dimensional Reauirements. The dimensional requirements shall be those of the underlying Zone District, provided that variations may be permitted in the following: a. Minimum distance between buildings; b. Maximum height (including viewplanes); c. Minimum front yard; d. Minimum rear yard; 13 ("') , ;I (J e. Minimum side yard; f. Minimum lot width; g. Minimum lot area; h. Trash access area; i. Internal floor area ratio; and j. Minimum percent open space. If a variation is permitted in minimum lot area, the area of any lot may be greater or less than the minimum requirement of the underlying Zone District, provided the total area of all lots, when averaged, at least equals the permitted minimum for the Zone District. Any variation permitted shall be clearly indicated on the final development plan. Again, the Public zone district does not establish dimensional requirements, so the applicant is proposing the following for the Red Brick School site and the Aspen Arts and Recreational Center: a. Minimum distance between buildings: 10 feet b. Maximum height (including viewplanes): 25 ft c. Minimum front yard: 10 feet (except 4 ft at entry) d. Minimum rear yard: 15 feet e. Minimum side yard: 5 feet f. Minimum lot width: 60 feet g. Minimum lot area: 6,000 square feet h. Trash access area: See att'd survey i. Internal floor area ratio: 0.75:1 j. Minimum percent open space: No requirement These requirements have been developed from the dimensional requirements in the City of Aspen's 0- Office zone district and the adjacent R-6 Residential zone district, whichever was most appropriate. Section 7-903 (B) (5) Off-street Darkina. The number of off- street parking spaces may be varied from that required in the underlying Zone District based on the following considerations. k. The probable number of cars used by those using the proposed development. 1. The parking needs of any non-residential uses. m. The varying time periods of use, whenever joint use of common parking is proposed. n. The availability of public transit and other transportation facilities, including those for pedestrian access and/or the commitment to utilize automobile disincentive techniques in the proposed development. 14 ('j n o. The proximity of the proposed development to the commercial core or public recreational facilities in the city. Whenever the number of off-street parking spaces is reduced, the city shall obtain assurance that the nature of the occupancy will not change. The Public zone district does not address parking requirements so the applicant has addressed the parking section of the PUD review. As discussed previously, it is estimated that 23 to 48 employees will use the proposed arts and recreational center. Assuming each employee has one car, the historical parking on-site should be adequate for the new use and will be maintained for use by the facility. There has been no officially designated parking on the school site in the past. Historically the area to the north and west of the structure has been used as a parking area. Approximately 35 spaces have been accommodated, including circulation, in this area. Therefore, the applicant proposes to provide these 35 spaces for the 23 to 48 employee cars. The 20 to 25 on-street parking space will be utilized for guest parking or any overflow parking needs. At approximately one space per employee, we feel this is sufficient, especially since most of the proposed tenants will not generate many visitors. The artist studios will not generate the need for additional parking. still, the standard does consider client and visitor traffic. Most cars will be arriving and departing at the beginning and end of typical work hours. The artist studios may have more flexible hours which would decrease peak demand for traffic and parking. As the building is centrally located and within a few blocks of the public parking garage, the commercial core and neighborhood shopping, many employees and visitors will be traveling by foot. The City of Aspen's public parking garage is two blocks (700 feet) east and is convenient for use by users of the Red Brick Facility. The use of the parking garage, pedestrian travel and other auto- disincentives will be strongly encouraged through the management and leasing operations. The proposed Arts and Recreation Center will always be for public, arts, cultural and recreational uses and the nature of the occupancy will not change. In addition to the requirements of the Public zone district, this is further guaranteed by the bond documents for the financing of the building's purchase as only five percent of the net leasable floor area can be rented to tenants who are not non-profits. (See Attachment 3.) 15 r-., r-., , :.; LANDOWNERS CONSENT Attachment 5 is a letter from the applicant authorizing Davis Horn Incorporated to prepare this land use application and represent them in the land use review process. Attachment 6 is a city of Aspen land use application form agreement. ATTACHMENT INDEX The following is a list of attachments: Attachment 1: Vicinity Map Aspen Arts and Recreation Center Rezoning and PUD plan; Attachment 2: Red Brick School Building - Existing First Floor Plan; Attachment 3: Letter to Director, bonds used Dallas Everhardt, from bond council for the purchase of City Finance regarding the the Red Brick; Red Brick Committee memorandum recommendations for the Red Brick and Management; Attachment 5: Landowner's authorization for Davis Horn Inc. to submit a land use application on their behalf and to represent them in the land use review process; Attachment 4: regarding Renovation Attachment 6: Land use application forms; Attachment 7: Pre-application conference summary sheet; Attachment 8: Legal description and proof of ownership. SUMMARY This application has described the subject property, the proposed use and requested approvals and has demonstrated compliance with pertinent sections of the Aspen Land Use Regulations which were identified by the staff in a pre-application conference. Please notify us if we have mistakenly neglected to address any of your concerns. Thank you for your consideration and please call if you have any questions or need further information. 16 ~l ffi ::: a.. :J: << ~ ::s I:: '-" z <C - z 0 N 4J ~ ~ 4J .... Z v 4J <..) ~ , . z e 0 - ~ .... . << , LU 0 ~ ~ <..) 0 z 4J z ~ 0 N 0 ~ Z << U) .... ~ << Z 4J a.. U) << , ii~ !,' h ~ n ~i .~ ~ ;~ !~~ ~ ;~ h~ t U z ...StI... :~. Oil!: '!-\ . ~ .~i; !" S U ="l: f " . ~ 'I" ,,- I <=>1..;!! h Ii ~ 95! !i ~;: s ..... J.... ...l .11.. ~ "ill il Ii! .,;, !-, ,- !II:;: M :~ ::\....i ~~~5 ~;ii:~;~i~ r...9R'., !IH':'!; ;..: h~;iht ~-iH~~!n; w I'~;E;~ ~!-~~ ... !:i:,:...~i~.. y! i ~ I~~I'H~~g~i ~ ~ 'I' ~HJ!'OI:. I :;;.! U1t;-S \j ~;I,~Mlo~~:!~: .. " ,- . 'i"'- , '" .l!I~~1~~~!":: a ~ i!his.:;!~~ I > :ll!~ ji= ~~ ~ ~qg:!~: ~F~:i ~ II> n~ g ;i~~g ! ; r. l: ;iv ~ ! ~ oaf "iP::: ~:. ";. Ii; e. -,' i ~ !~:!h ~;! ; ~ ; i; ~~g ;;;~I i" ! is :~i~ H!ij II> ~ d .~ ~!!' ~:;~.- I us ;;; ~!J!' 0" '''.ll g ~ I ! I.. li.;; ~~~iJ!' !! ~J g~~1 ~;!~~ ~ I ~ 1~! !ii; ~~iH i i Q i I is ~~!t til~= i I z _ . -. h t, " , ~ . ~ _;. ~I;: ii1i .... ~ .. 1; ~ ... !-, ' .... ~ 'Sf : i:; _i1.. .ii=! .. I ~J ; .1\ ~;~t :i == i ~ a; ~ ~~ ;~!~ i~~i~ Ii ; , . ;1- H:1. ~ i~i ~ ]- ~ ~ ~~ I! ~ rh ~ ~!i~ \3!llg t: ~~p " " I ~ ifl <l ~H! 3,' '" ~. ~~ ~ ; ~irl i v i~~i " w o z ~ ~!! ili ~ ~ z . v . ~ ....:"" " "0 <l :z.~ ~ .., ~ 15 ~ """ <<' ...~ 0 w 0 V Z " iI: 0,. . o ,..'~ ffi ~ S~~~ ~ ~ w! I: <::12 E ~~ ~ u>! ~ ~ ~ "- " " ! ~ !~ ; ::: , ; '- , " . ~ o "- \J ~ .1331:1 .Is /I , '. .1"';'," <," ,,' ..;~ I'~".. ~<t ,,<> ~. ~+ ~~ ~~ /' 0' i!- I:" ~:~!' " '-. f:j f!5 o ~ '<' '-J '-J ~ '-. o ;:; 11:)81 fYI/V:) N u ~ ~ w w " -, l; g; ~ ~ i , w_ > . ~~ , ~ I....:".::. ~I !, ,5 dh hi~ lill Ip, IHI p'. l:i "I ,I, '" !L in !i~:J l~~i .'~~ ~~~~ .;dS "-'h ~ 4 ;:; >- ~ z '-' >- i!: Q~~ !d ~n, n!~g :~!~ ~ ~~g; ~ "'i I. : ii~I\~ 5 ~~ a B~: ~ I >- l:I!t~~ 0'1' i: vHli! 1 ffi ::! x: ~ <rl 0: '" f- :z: '" CO :z: <:> - f- "" '" z 0: "" CO -J '" "'- 0: " q ::0 :z: "" "'- t/J f- 0: "" :z: '" a.. t/J "" , gl:! 't~ :~ ;! ~i ~ ;~ !a: ~; gE i ~. i3 ~e~ ~ ~~ ~ !~~; &:~! .! H~! ~ ill j, m ~ < I" ,+' ~ ~i~ ~i ii! i ~J:i 1\!!~ 1:\9.. ..J ~;n .. iH~ B ~ ~~;~ d... ~~i~ ,~ ~~Iii ~ ;L(I !E ~h It : !~ li~ = g~~~ I ~ ~!!~i -' ;S~~Q ~... ~i!i~ <:1'" '" 5; !: ~ ~ ~2 , !, ~i ~ i1 ~ ,. ~ ~; ~ ;;'1 .. ~'" '" ~: '" :;i~ ~ g~: ;; i=1 ffi s~~ ~ i~! v ~," ~ .: """"9!~; z~ ~~ ff .~~'=~l:~~~ ~.ttl1 ~~i~ i!~i;8;~i~ il~~;3S~;;:1 " ~t ijri.: ~~"=~"'t~; ~ H~~~~2;~~; ~ :i:~;!;;t:;! ;j i:~I~H~~~~; I ;; !!N~ .;;!~~~ .... ~I!;'tllh;:~ ::; !~ ,w~~.;>~! v ~::lgl;~i~~: ~ ~ ~i;i:~5:~i~ : >- i;;h~S>~!,~= I UJ ;~~~!111~ ~ ~ i\lE~E riil~ ;;: !HHi;ia;~ ~ " z . ~ 5 ~ ~ 5 " ~ ~ ~ .," :~.. .~ ,\~",,-, . ,- ~'" ~c "/-'" /~-:, 3!~ ~;~11 >~'r ~~s (;; ::; "- '" " , " f~ . '" /0 , ; " . '" ',:; (;} " (J ;;: J33" qJs " dl~1 ..0: "~" S :~~ U "I ';;i .~ d en ~i~~ '" ~: ~ 2 ~ ~~ol~ 8 ~;i~ ~ ~:!~ I <:> i~~i ~ ~!~! >0:: ~~~~ ; ~~ii v i~~i 3 , ' , ' lJ.J ; ~ ~ ~ I =11 ~ t ~ 'j :!'tl ~ 3; o ~ ;~ ~ ~ ~ e : i~ if 2"~ ~ ~~ 't15 ~~e! ~~ i~ l~hi lijihm!! ' s ~'t ~;: ~'t;;'t a, 1:1 ..~ ~l:'~ ~5~~~ ~ i ~! !;g ~~;gi i ~ ! ~~ 't~! !~!Q~~ " , ~~h~~!-! :! 'l!mmii i ~.." <~' .;: ~~ i /"",''Y ;~ ~~ . "" \:Ii .' ~..;?Q/ ts.s . './ S' /f/ OCio 0 :.?d'S'fr 3.LIr.)lr,j h-'./ 6'04' --- '0 I-- '" ~ --- "- ~i ~/?J-- ~ ::j @ ~if-- ~ '" (;0 ;; " "r ~ " If -.. :Jsj"'" fYYVQ .N --- Iv w o Z " ;: ~ " "- !:j ::; 6) "'" "" " " ~ ! ~!~ "- 6) o ! w ~~~ Jij ~ m!!~l!!ii w ~~~~H':~~! ~ ~i~;;:!~~~~ a g:l:'~3S~~;~ ~ ~H ~H~ ~ "-'';~ w ~ ~ . w ~ ;; z w > " > . ;, z " ~ < ~l ,. '1'5 dh ..,,- nH qil_ Ii!' 1," "1_'- f ' .; ~ ! i ~ ~ !P~ !dg ;.:1'" HH i;::J p' i~;~ !:"~~ ~id: "-1r-. !H I! ~~~ d~a S~a ~ << ~ > ~ z v > ,,' l !l ' I 1-, 1- ! '" ;), .' 1-' .., }, J: ' . " . .. I ~~I"'~ ' i? l:' l ~,~l~ ' t :\ I , ~ I! l I i", x- U@\ : ~ .... -.. I ~ ~ d I j o ~ ~ ; I! h , x ~ , s If ~ n . I . . ~ I . e ~ l tr' t I t:' C " ~ t\ I :r- \ I . , I \. ~.I.~ ~-;o;.'...a... ~J..;I::'I; f 15 I I r\ I J r-, I ,j , SECTION VII EXISTING FLOOR PLAN ATTACHMENT 2 L1:"d N3dS~ JO A1IJ Wd,,:~0 26, 2283J ",.,11 _... ........ ,-- '" . ~ r'"o,sloiH' urano fax \fi=.IlSmlUal memo 1071 'I\l p_ r) George K. Bau 0, co. COpt, Phon.. IlMs'nml~ Fa. * q;.S' -51 it) .x ........Cft 0' Nl!W '"0." 8TMIC IMC"ANGC. INC. "IDwl;e.r 5TCllIC. I.w.CHllNGC .UIT. .... OINV... eo",e".D6 eoloa..i'. ,..&.ItPMONII. .a.a. .'I.'~H lamwy 25,1993 A1TACHMENT 3 Mr. Dallas Everhart FiDaDce DirectOr City of Aspen 130 S. Gakna Aspl:Jl, Colorado ReI S3.'OO.DOO at)' of Aspen. Colorado GtIlel'8l ObJilatlon BoRda Suitt 19,U (Red Brick SchooDioae) Dear Da1lu: I thought it misht be prudent tofollow-\l.P our phone conversation of wt week l'eprdiDg the above referenced issue. Specifica11y, you had questioned what type of users the City could rent space to, and the maximum lease temls into whidl the City coulc1 CDter. The ultimate structure used on tbis issue allows the City the flexibility of lea.siDg on an umestrlcted basis to any 501-c-3 corporation or ~ gavernmental eDtity. There are no restrictive prov.lsioDS governtng how much or how little squue footBIe space these users lease, Dor any restrictions 80vernlng how 1013g of a lease term. may be entered into 'between these wets and fJle City. The one caveat reaardisla D.Ot-for-profit c:otporatiOJlS under this scena.do is that wI)' nmst 'be duly constituted SOloC-3 col:pOrations, having rceeiYed such des1gn.a.tion and not-for-profit status from a filing with the Inten1al Remme Service. , FurthenttOle, the bond structure allowed the City the flexibility of also leasiDg space in the building to non.S01.c-' desisnatecl corpOratib.us or indMdaa1si 0% users otbol' than iovernmental entities. However, under these cOnditions the space has to be available and open to the general public (versus dCcli~! or resming space only for a spec:l1led type Of wer(s) or a specific class of users). . iticma.Uy, any sp~ leased to & nOl1-501.c-3 corporation Or DOn-governmental entitJ' ~ ob1y be tor I. lease term of 30 da)'s or less. Rollins 3().day leases, whereby the lease is mmmatica11y renewable uNe. C1IDCelled by the City would J1At work. It would be necessary to ellter into a new lease with these parties every 30 days. Under leases with non-S01-c-3 users or non-governmental users there would be no proht"bition 0J1 how mu.y times a Jiven party could enter iJUo a new ~ lease. Nor would there 'be any prolu'bitiOD 0J1 !loW muc'h space these types of users cou1c! rent; either in terms of sl:luar~ footage or rental inc:oznc received. , 'd N3dS~ jO A1IJ Wd8E:20 E6, 92 a3j I') f) Pap 2 Lastly, the Federal government in all municipa11ssues ha.s what is referred to u a 'S% bad money rule", Such rule essentially states that as llms as 81\ issuer applies 9S9D or more of tax.eJCempt bond proceeds in a qualified, legal manner; then the issuer has complied with the intent of the regulAtions, ancl5% or less invi1icl spcndins of proceeds will not jeopardize the tax-e~c"'Pt status of the issuer. Although I am not oitorl)' enthralkd with scciDg you use this provision, I believe it gives you the ability to .;.o1atc the provisicms rve laid out to the extCJlt of no more than 5% of the net leasable square footage a.V8l1ahla in the project. I belieye this aenerally summarizes our discusslO11 of last week. However, if you have further questions. or require greater elabol'lLlion on any of the above, please let me blow. Very tmly yours, ~.-...---- ~.~, Steven D. Jetters Senior Vice Preaic:lcnt SDJ:sn 2"d N3dS~ JO A1IJ Wd6E:20 E6. 92 e3J f""\ t} UJ MEMORANDUM AlTACHi.':ENT ~ TO: Mayor and Council FROM: Red Brick Committee DATE: February 9, 1993 RE: Recommendations Regarding Red Brick Renovation and Management The Red Brick Committee has met approximately eight times to discuss and recommend to City Council a long-range program for the Red Brick Building. The Committee is made up of the following members: Julia Marshall Lee Ambrose Jill uris Don Fleischer Janet Garwood Bill Martin Joanne Lyon Mary Martin Janet Roberts Katherine Lee Bob Camp_ staff support has been provided by: Bill Efting Ken Collins Rob Thomson Cindy Wilson Amy Margerum The Committee reached a consensus on the following key points: * The Red Brick site should be used for arts, recreation and compatible community uses; * The parcel should not be split or sold off for other purposes or uses such as housing; 1 ("'\ 1""'\. " <.;( , * Management of both tenant relations and day to day maintenance of the building should be by one entity; * The City Council should appoint an review both the operational aspects recommend capital improvements. The provide feedback on programmatic and would have no management authority. advisory committee to of the building and advisory group would operating issues but Renovation The committee received a report from Smith Associates Architects which presents four alternatives for renovation. The report is attached as Appendix A. The four alternatives are summarized below: Alternative 1: requirements. Minimum upgrade to meet code and maintenance Paved on-site parking lot with 35 spaces. Alternative 2: Demolish the 1941 portion of the structure. Upgrade and remodel the classroom and gym areas, construct a new addition of 6,000 square feet designed for an arts center, paved parking lot on-site with 60 spaces, new landscaping. Alternative 2B: Demolish the 1941 structure, upgrade the remaining portion of the building to meet code and maintenance requirements, reconfigure and renovate the floorplan to meet Art Council needs, paved parking lot on-site with 35 spaces. Alternative 3: Demolish the entire building and build a new 23,000 square foot arts and recreation center, create a paved parking lot on-site with 60 spaces, new landscaping. Cost estimates of the alternatives are: Alternative 1 : $1,425,106 Alternative 2 : $2,172,331 Alternative 2B: $1,287,138 Alternative 3 : $3,146,235 The Committee reached consensus not to support any of the first three alternatives primarily because of the costs involved. The Committee recommends the proposed renovation costs stay within the $1,000,000 budget which the City has earmarked and should not be dependent on fund~ng from outside sources. However, any savings or interest earnings experienced by the City due to the delays in 2 (") " this project would be appropriate to use for the renovation and could increase the $1,000,000 budget. Recommendation: After reviewing all four alternatives, committee with the cooperation of the Arts Council recommend City Council consider Alternative 4. Several factors support recommendation: the that this ,-- 1. Cost - The committee feels that we were challenged to recommend an option which would most benefit the artistic community for a $1,000,000 project. - 2. Arts Council Needs - with the new configuration of rooms in the newer section, most of the Arts Council current needs will be satisfied. 3. Energy Efficiency - This alternative will provide the community with a much more energy efficient building. 4. Expansion - This alternative leaves room for expansion of the art center at a future date. 5. Occupancy - The committee projects that this option would allow the building to be functional approximately 1 year after the design team selection. Manaoement The Committee reached consensus that property management and tenant relations should not be segregated from building management. Whatever group is responsible for managing the building should be responsible for both the tenant relations (negotiating leases, collecting rents, etc) and day to day building maintenance. The Committee also agreed that regardless of who manages the building there should be an advisory group appointed which consists of City Council representation, citizen/business representation and Arts Council representatives. The advisory group would be used for feedback on programmatic and operating issues but would have no management responsibility. The Committee considered several management options. The Committee evaluated management alternatives based on the fOllowing criteria:. Financial viability: financial reports standards; will the management entity prepare timely and have clear financial goals and Support of the Arts: encourage the arts; will the management entity support and Who is the best organization to determine uses of building? 3 1'"'1 r""ll f Does the entity have property management experience? The Committee narrowed the options to either management by the City or by an outside board such as the Arts Council. The Committee agreed that any management option chosen should be re-evaluated after a year or sooner if problems arise. The Committee was split on which management entity they preferred, however all except one member felt they could "live with" Arts Council management for one year with a review. All agreed that they could "live with" City management of the building with oversight by an advisory board. In considering the alternatives the following assumption was made: * The direct cost of managing the building was assumed to be the same regardless of whether the City or the Arts Council managed the building. City Manaqement: * If the City managed the building the City would hire staff or contract for property management services including negotiating leases and maintenance services. There would be an office in the recreation area for staff or property management contractors. An existing City manager(s) would oversee staff or contractors. Advantages: * The City has existing infrastructure (i.e. attorney support, l.nsurance, management experience, personnel system, financial system, etc) * Financial reporting and accountability is already in place. * More direct and timely accountability to the public. * City Council would set goals for the building. Staff reports to Council. Disadvantages: * City staff not as aware of arts groups' needs. * City doesn't have a great deal of experience in renting space and being a landlord. Arts Council Manaqement: * Arts Council would hire a director which would oversee the leasing and building maintenance aspects of the building (in addition to other Arts Council duties). Leasing and tenant relations issues would be handled by the director. Building 4 ~ ~ 'f maintenance functions would be either contracted out or done by other hired staff. Staff reports to the Arts Council. Advantages: * Arts Council has good understanding of tenant needs and has a mission to support and encourage the arts. * May be the best organization to determine uses of the building, however there is a concern that property management will conflict with the mission of the Arts Council. Disadvantages: * Financial viability: the Arts Council will need to develop a system for financial reporting. Reporting would be made to the Arts Council. The community as a whole and the City Council may have delayed access to financial information. * The Arts Council as an entity does not have a strong background in property management. RECOMMENDATION: The Committee would like to discuss the above options with City Council and get feedback. 5 ~ , n ATTACH=.lENT 5 AMY MARGERUM City Manager City of Aspen 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 February 28, 1993 Kim Johnson Aspen-Pitkin Planning Office 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Aspen Arts and Recreation Center (Red Brick SChool) Rezoning and PUD Plan Dear Kim: This letter authorizes Davis Horn Incorporated (215 S. Monarch Suite 104, 925-6587) to submit a land use application for the Aspen Arts and Recreation Center (Red Brick School) and represent the City of Aspen in the land use review process. Please contact me if you have any questions. Thank you. Sincerely, AMY MARGERUM CITY MANAGER .""\.'....,'.11.......... 1) 2) "-,,, l\:lT1\01MENr 1 t .j Il\ND USE APPLICATION FORM ~ Project Nane4"'f1?!1 Arl-s t tZer:lY!a:HCf\ (mter [-hrrt.PF(Y iN> R.1d. f:rld. 5tIY.bJ) Project Location 110 East t-ICilldrY1 45pen CO, A.;p:1n TOI1Jnsiw Blo(/( roL.f Lots A-TJ 1<-5 t-l1n a/J.eu Lc;tJ:ea+!O{ t~a.1 (indicate street a<Hress, lot & block lD.IlIVer, legal description where'" ~ropriate) Present zoning (2..-~ IA 3) 5) q.f'J./!:Dsl- S' rd:1.l<2M H. Ispen. (0. 4) rat size Aw1icant's Name, l\dd:ress & Ibone It Cd"..! of- ASllOn , ~ /'2,0 ('10",) C};l5- (,.,SR7 6) Representative's Name, l\dd:ress & Ibone It Davis Horn IN (~1) Q:lS-foSE7 2.1') S, vYlorarr},)ui-le.- lOll- 4'5f'!n CD 8/1011 f!.lic(! Q:WI') '1' {,/Qm f(cm) 7) Type of Aw1ication (please dIeck all. that apply): Con:litional Use _ Cbnoeptual SPA _ Cbnoeptual Historic nev. _ Spe<-;:'ll Review Final SPA 8040 Greenline ---.L Cbnoeptual roo _ stream H3rgin -L Final roo Final Historic nev. Minor Historic nev. _ Historic D3ID1ition M::mrt:a:in view' Plane SUbdivision . _ Historic lPo:i')J1ation O::nkmini.umization _ Text:jMap AlllehJwe..lt _ IDt Split:,IIDt Line 1\djusbllent 8) r:.escxiptian of Eld.sti.n:J Uses (rn"T'E"r and type of erist.ing sb:ucbn:es; ~te sq. ft.; rw'-"'- of kh.UU1b; any previ.als awrovals granted to the prq;lerty) . ExL'Sti"1 .'if-roctul't of f.lppro),' ~5i t;COst; ~?()ni~ -frofn Q-&; +0 .Pnbtl( ~ ,SINl()I+ar'tJ()()51~ wi+h -+hi"> fllD plan, _ G!Q> AlloI:ment - G!Q> Exeapticn 9) r:.escxiption of Devel~ ~1ication PUj) p/{ln I'S -In ~ <;iabJish. ~ -fflr fNJ J i-t-fJ purs! ')(jrrf -to TN. r€.{Julo +iof\~ , T- par/:.J~ at rrmst'ona( A reqUI re.rt"errts Public- 10M dLsiric+ 10) Have you attadled the foll=in:J? ~ Response to Attachment 2, M:inimJm $I'!-wn;=i.on Contents ~ Response to Attachment 3, Specific $I'!-wni=ion Contents ~ Response to Attachment 4, Review' standards for Ycur AJ;:p1.ication ,..,i ji-\v"h";;'i~' ,0 1) 2) ("') A1".rnO:IMENl' ~ P=ject Nane A "~n ~ ~r;: rUS;(J=:~ ;:-fer ~m~dy W fui f3r/a. XhCDQ P=ject Location 110 eaSt H.allam :4sfJen cO, , ~e.e ) r,/~')[IL (,,4, LlJk A-r,l:'-c:, r-nn all-ey (legal in AHQ/~+g (indicate street address, lot & block: rnmi:ler, le<jal deScription loIhere awropriate) 3) 5) Present Zon.in:J R. -~ 4) rat size qQ. 7m sl lq;.plicant's Name, l\ddress & Rlone I r i +y 0 f- A '3p~n 130 s, ?-.a (errq St, 45fX2n (0 1?1~ II (30~) q ](')-srrn Representative's Name, 1d1ress & Rlone I [)aUt" -Horn /(le... Sui-le. 104-1 A5)~n (0, 'if1"U (303) 1:15. {.S<67 {A./ile Type of Application (please dIeck all that apply) : 6) .2/ S s, rrorarch D:Wt.<; t- C; (-em ttor~ 7) Corrlitional Use _ <lxDeptual SPA _ Final SPA _ Cancepblal Historic Dev. _ ~;",l Review .' Final Historic Dev. 8040 Greenline _ <lxDeptual roo Final roo Minor Historic Dev. _ stream Maxgin _ M:xmtain yiew Plane _ SUbdivision Cbrrlcminimnization ......L. 'l'ex.t:,M3p 1.nemment _ rat Split,IIDt Line AdjusbJent 8) ~iption of Ex.ist:irg Uses (rIlIlDer and type of exist:in] st:rucbn:es; awroximate sq. ft.; n..mt:>er of bedroans; art::{ pmvi.als awrovals granted to the prqJerty) . .1. s+ruc.wre. (b();!+ a+ 1 d.jl-f-ererr& -HnYlS) wifh o.pproKirra:{ely 3S,'dCJ)sf Slip n-ththrran+ 2. bj~+,"5 Flror Plan ~ PHlJinv.sll{ m huildirg LIft> u!:Rd -Gran. eJpm;n~ schm/' ~7onlrYJ lC, -to a{/(JLO puJ;Ut arn, c.u lfur'll T +i O(\aJ () se.!> , -:::J 9) ~iption of Devel~ lq;.plication (I) .i1mPMfNn+- -10 umir;g mo.p in rt.zrN! 5i~ from (2-{O -fa P()bl ic. (2.) ArrrerorTWJf -to +eJd- nf- / (JrY1 Use.. RaglJ/afttJfl<., -10 odd an as pQrtr:trit.'Pd. IJ5e in ffl, p()blir_ 7(JNJ' "nrts, w/fura.1 +-~lfecd-i.on. ., (:>>E)(15t-1~ Dudding (0. (X)r'ttCX"l CJf e>:i5t-irg p()ildl~)iO b-e. useal.a~ ad-ivril~~, 10) llave y= attached the foll=irg? 0.. pub IIC- Art:> T /lecteaf/on ~ Response to Attactnnent 2, Minim..nn SlI!-rnk<:ion O:lntents ('(2nter. -L Response to Attactnnent 3, Specific slI!-rn;=ion O:lntents ~ Response to Attactnnent 4, Review starrlards for Your lq;.plication ----- Historic Demllition _ Historic Designation QQ:> Allotment - QQ:> ExeIpti.on ~ A1TACH:.'.EHT 1""'\. CITY OF ASPEN vL/11/'13 ~RE-APPLICATION CONFERENC~Y . PR<>JEcr; RJ ~ ~ ~ P"b~~t<;, If ~p APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE: . ~ ~ ~ REPRESENTATIVE'S PHONE: 5"~ &. >~7- 7 OWNER'S NAME: W&MJ SUMMARY ,. Type of _"-=tio", 2~~/7e;t/a_;/ji,p~ 2. .', Describe action/type of development eing requeste : ']11:74 f ~ I~ (#P I~MM1<f~;' (~a7%I/ Uncr~JI rtn E4'-1'~~) . ~ PddG~', 1), K. C .' ~/4-tN4~/~..tI 'J,'.' , 3. Areas is which Applicant has been requested to respond, types of reports requested: Policy Area/ Referral AO'ent Comments ,p~ II' f4 - 4. ~:)fl 5. W 6. 7. 8. 9. (~en t~ Review is: (P&Z Only) (CC Only) Public Hearing: Qy~j) Nl- (f.~~ Number of copies of the application to be submitted: 0 .--...... What fee was applicant requested to submit: :J.;jbt?1+ 93 -= ;2.}7b~ Anticipated date of sUbmission::;It (!~ niJ $; COMMENTS/UNIQUE CONCERNS: t/l1i;;(fl MfJ. l~ fJ!71kL e~ ~ a;ttu-;J fdk ~fYlo.(..1- - 9...b......~lb..... ~ -'lAp'" i::114-~~:9 -7 c.c... r . vt ~. ~ iOI:' frm.pre_app "'-":'___r'f -~ n n MEMORANDUM Yl\V ~_D \ ~J~(M( Director Jo~ ~ ~~ e'M~^ ~' ~,\)1J,vl TO: cindy wilson, Assistant city Manager THRU: Diane Moore, City Planning FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner DATE: July 15, 1992 RE: "Red Brick. SClfCl9J!" - Land Use Processes and Scheduling <":~'~," , .. ., .... ,. ,'-" , ---------------------------------------------------------------- Recommended Processes: Rezoning to Public; Designating as SPA along with rezoning; special Review for parking in Public Zone The uses permitted in the Public Zone do not cleanly match with most of those listed in cindy wilson's 7/14/92 memo. The closest ones are "performing arts center" and "community recreation facility". "Accessory buildings and uses" are also listed as permitted but we would have to make a finding that certain uses are accessory to others within the building. The arts-related offices in cindy's list is probably stretching the limits for permitted uses. "Affordable housing" is listed as a Conditional Use. If the parcel obtained an SPA overlay, any uses could be considered as variances to the permitted/conditional list without the potential difficulty of trying to judge that some of the uses in fact comply with or are accessory to the list allowed in the zone. Plus, .contemplated uses not currently contained in Cindy's list could be handled with SPA use variance review. An SPA Development Plan would be the outcome of the four step review. Any changes would be handled as insubstantial amendments by the Planning Director or other amendments approved through P&Z and Council review. ----------------------------- SPA approval requires a four step process - Conceptual and Final reviews before the Planning and zoning commission and City council. Public hearings are held at steps two and three. There is not a consolidation allowance as per PUD. Rezoning is a two step process. Special Review is one step at P&Z. At Conceptual SPA review, rezoning should be discussed as a threshold issue, to have actual rezoning review and approval during the Final SPA Plan reviews by P&Z and Council. Special Review by P&Z occurs at step three. Planning could accept the application during the week before the August 11 bond election. We would review the application for completeness and prepare it for routing to referral departments. . n r-..\ ' t"J ~' , If the bond is approved, the application would be released for processing. The following schedule is considered a fastrack review for the SPA four step process: I. Referral reviews requested, submittals to Planning Office by 'August 26, 1992. II. Planning and Zoning commission Conceptual SPA Review - september 8, 1992. III. city council Conceptual SPA Review (public hearing) - September 14, 1992. (for quick turn-around, attach P&Z memo) IV. Submission of Final SPA Plan by October 1 and Referral Routing (limit referrals to 1 week turn-around). V. Planning and Zoning commission Final SPA Review, Rezoning (public hearing) and special Review for Parking - october 20, 1992. VI. City Council Final SPA Review and Rezoning - first reading of approval ordinance - November 9, 1992. VII. Second Reading of approval ordinance (** public hearing pre- noticed by city Clerk) - November 23, 1992. 2 ~ "",.,-.".. - ~~,."",-- ELDER, r',LS REI!JHARD ESTATE OF 0 ELDER'v"r,ET C. 202 NORTH MONARCH STREET ASPEN, CO 81611 A 01.. j at'lf\+ Prop'€..r*'-t ()wreJbT' o wN.r S lJ,J 1-4---1 rl 3CD -fL 0+- '*e w 6rkk. Sc~l SeGALL, MARIA 101 E. HALLAM STREET ASPEN, CD 81611 HODGSON, PHILIP R. & PATRICIA H. 212 NORTH MONARCH ST ASPEN, CO 81611 GREENBERG, L ANTHONY AS TROSTEE OF THE 1983 1.513 INNES PLACE VENICe, CA 90291 MANCLARK, WILLIAM R. & DARLEEN J. 313 E. BAY FRONT BALBOA ISLAND CA 92662 PARlYBDK, WILLIAM G. JR. 13617 160TH AVE NE ReDMOND, ~A 98052 PAEPCKE, ELIZABETH H. HOLLAND AND HART - C/O 600 E. MAIN ST. ASPEN, CO 81611 BeRKO, FERENC BERKO, MIRTE POST OFFICE BOX 360 ASPEN, CO 81612 S~GUIN, WILJJAM L. BOX 4274 r "I ASPEN, Co 8.612 KWUMM, DO~ALD PAUL P.O. BOX 874 ASPE.N, CO 81612 QUAM, CLARENCE 0. AS TRUSTEE ANDE.RSON, HILOUR AS SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE P U BUX 554 ASPEI~, CO 81612 SAOLEk,PRISCILLA ANNE POST OFFICE BOX 2989 ASPI':N, CO 81612 KLL CO~IPANY PO BOX 3129 ASPEN CO 81612 ABELS, J. E. BOX 4707 ASPEN, CO 81612 T.R.S. FAMILy TRUST C/O GARY WAYLAND 1079 AVIATION BLVD HERMOSA BEACH, CA 90254 TISCH, STEVEN E. AND PATRICIA K. 14454 SUNSET BOULEVARD PACIFIC PALISADES, CA 90272 ~ PENN, PAULt", PENN, SUSAr. ..J. 9505 COPLEY DRIVE INDIANAPOLIS IN 46260 GROSSE, EDWIN J. & ADELINE M. 23049 FARMINGTON ROAD FARMINGTON, MI 48336 BRUMDER, WILLIAM G. TRUSTEE 2054 FIRST WISCONSIN TRUST CO. MILWAUKEE, WI 53201 JOHNSON, RICHARD B. AND JOHNSON, MONTAE IMDT 6820 bf<ADBURy DALLAS, TX 75230 HONDO PARTNERS, INC. 4940 ~RDADWAY: SUITE 325 SAN ANTUNIO, TX 78209 HOLYOKE, EDITH L. ESTATE b8b SOU1H GRANT STREEl DENVER, CO 80209 LIGHT, JOAN ENID 733 13TH. STREET BOULDER, CO 80302 FIRST NATIONAL BANK IN GRANO JUNCTION Tt<U:;T1:,E FOR MONA FROS T' BUX 608 GRAND JUNCTION, CO 81501 ~ HOGUEt; CON~,NCEM.' 333 EAST 681..; STREET NEW YORK CITY, NY 10021 AMATO, JOSEPH A. PUSI uFFICE BOX 503 HIGHLAND MILLS, NY 10930 LEVY, DAVID M. TIMES SQUARE BLDG. 115 EXCHANGE ST. ROCHESTER, Ny 146111 WEAVER, GEORGE S. JR. AND SHIRLEY M. HURST, V1RGINIA - C/O 1300 CHAPLH1 ST WHEELING WV 26003 REDD, JAMES V. SCHOLNIK, LOUIS N. 1901 NW 62NO ST ~1I15 FORt LAUDERDALE, FL 33309 PALMER COMMUNICATIONS INC CIO KERMIT S. SUTTON 400 FIFTH AVE S; SUITE 301 NAPLES, FL 339110 SUTTON, 'KERMIT S. SUTlOi~, JENNy W. 400 51H AVE. S.; SUITE 302 NAPLES, FL 33911~ TRUEMAN ASPEN CO. A LIMITED ~^RTNERSHIP 4355 DAVIDSON ROAD HILLIARD, OH 113026 -.-._...."..,,'~~..,<'.- .~ , . r", , .", Aspen Center For Environmental studies P.o. Box 8777 Aspen, CO. 81612 The Givens Institute 100 East Francis Aspen, CO. 81611 united states Post Office Aspen, CO. 81612 n , ("'\ ("') b~~ W- -;DO! tr-r - MEMORANDUM - TO: Mayor and city council A,II ~ Amy Margerum, City Manager~ .FROM: DATE: October 19, 1992 RE: Red Brick School: Next Steps I have attached the notes from the saturday Retreat regarding the Red Brick School. The critical part of the notes start on page 7, "I would support this project more if..." The city agreed to set up two broader based citizen committees. One to review financial and management issues and another to review planning options for the site(s). I have attached the list of those invited to the meeting. Please review this list and provide me with your suggestions for participants on these committees bv this Fridav. We can then discuss it at the following Monday lunch. You need not limit yourselves to those on this list. I r'\ i""\ - MEMORANDUM - TO: Mayor and City Council Interested Staff FROM: Amy Margerum, city Manager DATE: September 22, 1992 Red Brick Retreat: October 10, 1992 RE: The following people are now confirmed for the 10th: Harry Teague Don Fleisher Jill uris Chuck Brandt Mick Ireland Maggie DeWolf Julia Marshall Bob Camp Jeanette Darnhaurer Katherine Lee Andy Hecht Patti Clapper Steve Goldenburg (Recommended by Lee Ambrose) Martie Sterling (Recommended by the Martin's) Micheal Kingsley . City Council It will start at 9, end at 4. people. Lunch will be provided for 30 Lousie Ninneman will facilitate. Ken Torp was unavailable. Please see attached proposal. ~, 1 (') RED BRICK SATURDAY MEETING Invited Attendees City Council Chuck Brandt - F Joanne Lyon - F Jeanette Darnauer - F Janet Roberts - F Lee Ambrose - A Bill Martin - A Carol Ann Jacobson - ? or A Katherine Lee - A Sandy Stuller - A Harry Teague - F Dave Stapleton - A Bill Pass - F Nick McGrath - ? Jim Kent - F Mick Ireland - F Les Holst - F Maggie DeWolf - F Bob Camp - F Alternates "A" Patti Clapper Bob George Gideon Kaufman Don Fleisher Andy Hecht Alternates "F" Evan Boenning Jill Uris Michael Gassman Michael Kinsley Julia Marshall .. OCT 19 '92 06:27PM GRAD SCHL PUBLIC AFF AIRSCDP DEN r\ r\ P.2/9 RED BRICK SCHOOL RETREAT October 10, 1992 Group Memory ****************************************************************************** CONCERNS * Small arts groups and artists are an endangered species in Aspen and need support. * $3.6 million is a lot of money - is it too much for an arts center? * As tenants, the facility should have artists and artist demonstration space, not offices! The city doesn't need to subsidize another organization, * The arts center should be a county-wide expense; cost not borne just by Aspen. * The 3 vote margin is so close - city council should examine carefully. * The mil levy increase in last year's budget was deceptive, * Concern that we come to some agreement today facing possible passage of the Bruce Amendment. * Goals need to be set regarding occupancy, costs, etc. The arts groups need to commit to financial partnership. * Allows arts groups to have funding support without being dependent on city council, etc. to decide. * Discussion of who is "worthy" to be supported/housed - cOuld lead to segregation. * Concern about question of private (professional) vs. non-profit management of the facility. * The building is a public asset and should be preserved. * This possibility to preserve the sense of community and connection should be pursued. * It should be a locals facility and serve this community. * If Early Learning Center loses space at the Yellow Brick, could the Red Brick use be expanded, have more of a human services focus? OCT 19 '92 06:27PM G~ SCHL PUBLIC AFF AIRSCDP DEN. () P,3/9 * Concern about money given to the arts vs. human services in Aspen - can we balance out money given to the arts? * Maintaining a link to Aspen arts community is ideal - tie in to working artists as well as offices. * Want to see the integrity of the building maintained and its historic value. * Concern that arts groups are not reliable or viable and that the city would be left holding the bag. * Don't lose sight of what the arts groups are capable of - the arts are a big business in Aspen. * Don't want to lose sight of the value of the arts in our community. * Need to nuture small arts groups, and there needs to be a centralized place to do this. * The project is too costly in the long term . $1.0 million is too much to just bring it up to bare bones/code. * It is too large a building; it makes more sense to rehab just part of it. * Should explore public/private partnerships to share financial burden, * There would be significant neighborhood impact in an already high density neighborhood - raises transportation issues, parking issues. * Hallam Ave, has historical significance. * Consider the site, not the building historic. * The neighborhood was assured that if they accepted the Early Learning Center, the impact for the Red Brick would be kept as low. * Zoning could be an issue - zoned Medium density single family. * Hallam Lake Buff review. an environmentally sensitive area. * Arts groups are underwritten by donations from the community . fear that the project could cause some groups to lose funding. * The project plan is not financially responsible. * Have an obligation to the school board to follow through on agreement already made. OCT 19 '92 06:28PM GRAD SCHL PUBLIC AFF AIRSCDP DEN r", (\ P,4/9 * Have a concern about turning over administration to the Arts Council. * Should preserve the accessibility and "nearness" of the neighborhood. * Should the city be footing the bill for this project? * Are there bigger priorities that need more attention than this project (i.e. transportation) in light of the Bruce Amendment? * What are the long term benefits? To have the community control the site is important, as well as maintaining the community fabric. * Need to highlight recreation center aspect and the connection with the Early Learning Center. * Need to weigh aesthetics and what gets returned to the community. this project is not just about money, but includes other values, * 15 year bonding is a short time frame. * Saw the arts groups as financial partners - would help city purchase site it would like to maintain, * Need to look at having office, studio, and education aspects combined as a model of an arts center that is holistic, vital, and synergistic. * Who will administer the center? Need to nuture the central organization that is set up to administer it. * The building has sentimental rather than historic/artistic value. * Concern regarding financial viability . want to leave this meeting with a monitoring system process in place for creating a group to insure financial viability. * Important to co-mingle arts groups functions in building. * Arts groups need administrative space. * Need to give thought about how to be good neighbors - parking, impact, etc. * Concern about process and future validity of the electoral process, * 'City council had not explored public/private partnership options. Concerned about the bare bones approach - is this the best priority and does the public really know the other needs? * OCT 19 '92 06:28PM ~ SCHL PUBLIC AFF AIRSCDP DEN ~ .".. .j P.5/9 * Is the school district getting the best deal in light of coming issues in school finance? * I Should try to make this a non-car facility, accessible by foot and bike, * Concern that city council will feel that there will always be 49% of population against the project. * Keep the integrity of the neighborhood balanced with the project. Voters thought they were voting to save the Red Brick School. * * Are all the user groups identified? Are there more non-profit groups that could be included? '" The project has long term value in that the Aspen arts economy draws people here and many arts non-profits do marketing for the community. * I am delighted to pay for something that benefits this community. * It is clear that the need for the arts facility in this community is real. * What is the real need for space by artists? * What are appropriate other alternatives for the facility? * What is the real cost? * Are we extending the life of a property that is obsolete and inferior? * Support for this project by the community is split by finances. * Need to separate this project from past baggage. * Vote should be interpreted as a victory. * Timing is good regarding interest rates. * Leasing guarantees would lead to tenant viability. * Environmental impact from automobiles and traffic should be mitigated. * Why underwrite all arts groups in town? Be more selective. * Concern that is was a city rather than a county election. * Concern that the arts community will be the bad guys, OCT 19 '92 06'28PM GRAD SCHL PUBLIC AFF AIRSCDP DEN ~ f\ P,6/9 * Concern regarding sterilization/urbanization of Aspen, * Our responsibility is to find a solution that is good for the community. * What are the greater needs for Red and Yellow Brick sites long term? Concerns broke down into the followinl! catel!ories: Finances/Financial Viability Management of the Facility Site Use - Who uses it? Community Preservation Neighborhood Impact Community Support for the Project Flnancial Criteria: Lessees Needs Use $1 million for smaller portion of the site Creditworthiness of lessees Total commitment to community regarding finances Centralized [mancial responsibility Buy bonds at lowest interest rates possible Proceed with lowest bond issuance cost possible Tenants return as much revenue as reasonable to pay for bonds after building management, maintenance, and reserve costs are covered Timely financial reporting Consider public private partnership Consider privatization of portion of site OCT 19 '92 06:28PM G~SCHL PUBLIC AFF AIRS~DP DEN A P.7/9 Plan financial goals for project, then evaluate Can it be county-wide supported rather than just city of Aspen? Project was approved at $3.6 million for that particular site Is value of the building worth $3,6 million'? No disposal of public land I would sUP90rt this Droiect more if... 1. There was more financial stability. * Leases should be based on standard business practices. * Assure professional management. * Expand management authority which is broad based - create an oversight board. * Have a long term financial plan which recognizes growth potential and the need for reserves. * Have performance criteria met at the end of 3-5 years; if not met, the project should be re-thought. 01< Project should be reviewed annually; if losing major amounts of money then it should be reassessed after the fIrSt year, 01< Council should review other options for revenue generation (private money, grants, county funding), 01< Explore pre-paid lease payments. 01< Non-profits should explore grants and we should make this easy to do . raise money for capital improvements, 01< A fundraising committee should be set up. 01< Should attribute the amount of funding going to recreation users. * Use open space funds (city & county) to pay for lawn area. OCT 19 '92 06:29PM GRRD SCHL PUBLIC RFF RIRSCDP DEN /""'\ f\ P.8/9 2. The def"U1ition of utilization was expanded to include more communitylhuman services. * Leave open possibilities of other community uses. * Explore educational/institutional options if it works with community arts/recreation program. 3. Financial support for the project included county sources of funding. 4. It was leased to fmancialIy responsible non-profits/users. S. Users (arts groups) present a more unified management entity. 6. Automobiles were minimized. * Restrict parking places with resident parking permits. * Leave spaces in back of the building. * Auto disincentive program. 7. There was a more experienced property management group. 8. Grant money was pursued. 9. It is was aligned with a stable artistic or other institution. 10. There were no criteria for "artist". 11. The $3.6 million was used in the most effective manner. * Study options, including renovating gym and newer portion with the $1.0 million. Spend $2.6 million to purchase the site, * 12. The Arts Council had a director. 13. The project costs less than $3.6 million to the city. * Include deed restricted housing? Or include combination with Early Learning Center and Yellow Brick site? 14. We end up with a better product than the renovation of the existing building at $1 million. OCT 19 '92 06:29PM G~SCHL PUBLIC AFF AIRSCDP DEN Ie , f"l ,. .j' P,9/9 15. Criteria was developed based on the "need" for space. 16. Publidprivate partnerships were pursued to reduce the cost to the city. 17. Any additional uses were compatible with "public interest" and arts/recreation/open space. 18. There was more information about how the site will be used, managed, and developed. 19. Impacts are mitigated to the neighborhood and open space planning taken into consideration. NEXT STEPS 1. City to move forward with purchase of Red Brick. 2. City to proceed with ArtIRec Center but will: A. Explore other options B. Set up broader based committees with citizen participation to review financial and management issues and planning options C. Get consensus on options ~ J t') n ~1 ,:}or (f~ }JM MEMORANDUM FROM: Diane Moore, city Planning Director ~ cindy wilson, Assistant City Manager~ TO: DATE: July 14, 1992 Red Brick School RE: As we discussed earlier, I'm putting together a comprehensive time schedule for all projects related to the Red Brick school. Please provide me with a schedule of all Planning office related items. I think this is probably just the process for re-zoning to public. The following are the proposed uses for the Red Brick school: Aspen Ballet - ballet classes, dressing facilities, maybe showers, maybe office spaoe Theatre in Park - office space, lecture hall space Dance Aspen - office space, share dance studio in summer Aspen Filmfest - office space, meeting rooms, work space Aspen writers' Foundation - office space, share lecture halls as workshop meeting spaces, lecture halls for occasional community activities Aspen Art Museum - classrooms, possible share with Anderson Ranch to teach classes, possible share with CMC for art space Aspen Ridiculous Theatre - rehearsal space, classes, office space KAJX, public radio office space - broadcasting and production studios and Aspen Snowmass Council for the Arts - office space Artists studios - These may not happen since council has indicated that criteria for evaluating tenants should include a "non-profit" status. Diane, I'd like to know if including artists studios is a problem as this may come up for further discussion. "Live -in" space - In conjunction with the artist studios, the Arts Council at one point proposed one "live-in" unit as caretaker for the building. Is this possible? . ~ , n < city Uses: Wheeler - possibly scene shop, costume storage, rehersal space Recreation recreation etc Dept. - Recreation Dept. offices, use of gym for various programs such as gymnastics, volley ball, basketball, possible other uses: Grassroots TV - broadcasting and production studios and office space. This was originally included but I think they've found other space. Would it be possible for them to be in the building in the future? Yoga classes Aspen Interactive - Computer interactive multi-media publishing If you could get me the time line by wednesday, I'd appreciate it as I'd like to get a comprehensive schedule to Council by the end of the week. If this is a problem or if you have any questions or concerns about any of the above uses, please call me. Thanks u ~vh' ~6YlI~ 10 PU0/IG :P:- ~d- - SJ'/'U'Af f1.V~ It ~M~ tor Urvvp~~ ~ SPit 2 6 rlpf 11~M