Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20080401ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 1, 2008 MINUTES ................................................................................................................. 2 COMMENTS ...........................................................................:................................ 2 DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ............................................. 2 404 PARK AVE./414 PARK CIRCLE (ASPENWALK) CONCEPTUAL PUD.... 2 604 WEST MAIN, GROWTH MANAGEMENT .................................................... 3 1450 CRYSTAL LAKE ROAD, ASPEN CLUB, CONCEPTUAL SPA AND ASSOCIATED REVIEWS ....................................................................................... 5 Public Comments :..................................................................................................... 9 RECONSIDERATION OF 300 PUPPY SMITH RESOLUTION ......................... 11 LIFT ONE TASK FORCE ...................................................................................... 12 FORMER CHAIR COMMENDATION ................................................................ 12 1 LJ Erspamer opened the regular Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting in Sister Cities Meeting Room at 4:30 pm. Brian Speck and Dina Bloom were excused. Commissioners Michael Wampler, Cliff Weiss, Stan Gibbs, Jim DeFrancia and LJ Erspamer were present. Staff in attendance were Jim True, Special Counsel; Jennifer Phelan, Jessica Garrow, Sara Adams, Travis Coggin, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. MINUTES LJ Erspamer made two corrections to the minutes (page 3 and 12). MOTION: Michael Wampler moved to approve the minutes from March 3'd with the corrections noted by LJ Erspamer; seconded by Cliff Weiss. All in favor, APPROVED 5-0. COMMENTS Stan Gibbs asked if the commission could get keys to the building because they can't always pick up the packets on Thursday or Friday. Jennifer Phelan responded that they could deliver the packets. Jackie Lothian noted that the packets were on aspenpitkin.com with the exception of the large parts. LJ Erspamer asked if the changes could be red-lined. Jennifer Phelan replied that usually there would be a staff note stating the new material based on comments of the last meeting. LJ Erspamer asked the commissioners to tell Jackie when they would be gone on vacation. DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Jim DeFrancia was conflicted on the Aspen Club, 1450 Crystal Lake Road. LJ Erspamer had a conflict on 604 West Main. PUBLIC HEARING: LJ Erspamer opened the public hearing for 404 Park Avenue/414 Park Circle, Aspenwalk. MOTION: Stan Gibbs moved to continue 404 Park Avenue / 414 Park Circle to Apri115`"; seconded by Jim DeFrancia. All in favor, APPROVED. PUBLIC HEARING: 2 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 1 2008 604 WEST MAIN GROWTH MANAGEMENT Stan Gibbs opened the public hearing for 604 West Main, growth management reviews. Jim True reviewed the public notice. Sara Adams stated that 604 Main Street was a 9,000 square foot lot, designated historic and located in the Main Street Historic District, which is zoned mixed use. The applicant wanted to add two new buildings but the application before P&Z was for two growth management reviews; the first review was for the enlargement of a historic landmark and the second was for the affordable housing unit. P&Z was the final authority for both of those growth management reviews. Adams noted the project has already received conceptual approval from HPC and after P&Z it will go back to HPC for final review. Adams said that there were currently 5 buildings on the site; 3 of the buildin~s were historic, the Rebecca Wiley house, a garage located on the alley and 5` Street and a shed that straddles the property line between 604 and 612 West Main. There were 2non-historic cabins however HPC designates the entire property; HPC approved the demolition of the 2non-historic buildings and relocate the shed onto 612 West Main Street. HPC granted approval for the mass, scale, volume, height, setback variances and commercial design review for the proposal. The applicant was increasing the existing commercial by adding 2,975 square feet of new net leasable commercial for a total of 4,335 square feet of net leasable space proposed. Also proposed were affordable housing units to mitigate for the new employees that were generated by the net leasable space. There was no free-market component for this project. Adams said that all the criteria were met for the enlargement of the historic with extensive rehabilitation for the shed, the garage (Art Barn) and the Rebecca Wiley house. Exhibit B of the staff memo was growth management for the affordable housing, which was a 1200 square foot 3 bedroom unit and the applicant prefers a rental unit. APCHA prefers the unit be for sale, staff supports this. Section 6 of the resolution provides the 2 options (for sale or rental); it was a P&Z decision. Adams said this project was consistent with the goals of the AACP as well as the applicable review standards in the land use code and staff recommended approval. Alan Richman stated that he represented Neil Karbank, the owner of the property. Neil Karbank said that he was a practicing lawyer and was a tenant in this property from December 2000 to spring of 2005 when he purchased the property and the property next door. Karbank decided against free-market housing; he was well under the maximum floor area. Karbank hoped the 1200 square foot affordable housing unit would be for his employees; he was providing housing for the mitigation of the project. Karbank said the employee unit is handicap accessible 3 with an elevator; the project was intended for someone to live and work with dignity away from the commercial core and have parking. Richman said they were pleased with the staff report and the recommendation of approval but there was a condition to be discussed. Richman said that the non- historic additions to the Wiley house would be removed and all three historic buildings will be restored. Richman stated the floor area and height were well below what was allowed in this zone district; the public amenity space was at least 35% when 25% was required. Richman stated the one condition that they were concerned about was the affordable housing unit being a for sale unit; if the unit would be sold it did not provide the opportunity to place and employee in the unit. Richman said that if the unit was not rented to one of Neil's employees then the city required the unit be rented through the Housing Authority. Richman said that the section for affordable housing reads either or: for sale or rental; they were requesting that it be a rental unit. Richman said that housing clearly gave them the opportunity for it to be a rental unit and they requested that P&Z accept the language of 6b as opposed to 6a. Karbank said that a for sale unit presumes that the city would own 1/20 of 1% of a unit or the whole project; he did not condominiumize this so if he had to create a sale unit not only would he lose control and not be able to offer a housing unit as an amenity to a prospective employee but he would be forced to condominimize and create a separate unit for the affordable housing. Karbank said that he worked on one of the most complex leasing transactions and he was confident that the city attorneys and he can create a leasehold agreement and that's what he was suggesting. Cliff Weiss asked how Neil would address that he was someone's employer as well as their landlord; that would be undue influence and control. Karbank replied that was an interesting philosophical question and there was an intention in the code particularly to lodges but his understanding of affordable housing units was that the leases were for a term of years. Karbank said there is some tension in that but lawyers by statute were employees at will; that was what you get into when you get your law license. Richman said that Neil would have first priority in renting the unit if he could place someone that is fully qualified; if he can not then the unit goes into the pool. Weiss asked if it was a housing office lease. Richman replied yes. Weiss asked whose decision was it to have one 3 bedroom as opposed to three one bedrooms or studios. Richman replied that was their proposal and what fits best on the site. 4 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 1, 2008 Mike Wampler applauded the applicant for no free-market housing and has no issue with renting the unit. Wampler said as long as a113 bedrooms have to be filled he was okay with that. Karbank replied that they do. Wampler asked if the 20 to 22 height blocked any neighbors. Adams replied that was under the purview of HPC; that was already granted. Wampler asked who was being targeted to fill the new office space. Karbank replied anyone who needs offices other than manufacturing. No public comments. Jim DeFrancia supported the application and agreed with the rental unit as opposed to for sale. Gibbs asked if the city attorney did a lot of these lease agreements. Jim True responded that it has been done before and the proposed resolution sets forth the terms required. Gibbs supported the project and the terms on for sale or rental were not very clear. MOTION.• Jim DeFrancia moved to approve Resolution #015-08 approving with conditions, the growth management for the enlargement of a Historic Landmark at 604 West Main for mixed use and growth management for a three bedroom affordable rental unit; seconded by Michael Wampler. All in favor, APPROVED 4-0. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING (02/05/08; 02/19/08; 03/04/08; 03/18/08) 1450 CRYSTAL LAKE ROAD ASPEN CLUB CONCEPTUAL SPA AND ASSOCIATED REVIEWS LJ Erspamer opened the continued public hearing. Jessica Garrow stated this was for conceptual commercial design, PUD, SPA and timeshare application. Garrow said the reviews that were before P&Z today were Conceptual Commercial Design Review, this was final review at P&Z; the conceptual PUD, conceptual SPA and conceptual timeshare were Council reviews also. Garrow said staff asked if there was any way to get a second sub-grade level; the applicant's engineer provided documentation that a second level in the sub-grade garage was not feasible on site due to the water table. Staff was still concerned for the amount of parking on this site and would like to see proper screening and access issues addressed. Garrow said the second issue was related to a transportation management plan; there were concerns for parking, shuttle and access. The applicant provided 5 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 1, 2008 information on a transportation management plan that was in the packet. Staff added conditions to the resolution requiring the applicant address the issues in the final application. Garrow said the applicant proposed improvements along Ute Avenue in terms of speed bumps and cross walks; these were not reviewed by City Streets or Engineering Departments in time for this meeting but this can be addressed at the time of final Development Review Committee to make sure the city requirements are met. The transportation management plan has been reviewed by community development department and the transportation department; there were 8 tools outlined in the proposed plan and a monitoring program. Garrow said that on page 4 of the memo were staff s recommendations. The first aspect of the transportation plan was "The Aspen Club will provide shuttle service to and from the Club at intervals of up to 3 round-trips per hour: ' Staff would like to see the applicant address the feasibility of utilizing the cross-town shuttle service rather than adding additional vans. Garrow said the second aspect of the transportation management plan "Car-sharing vehicles will be available on site, for employees and registered guests." Staff would like to see the feasibility of a corporate membership with the city's car-share program and if the Club does determine that they would like to have their own car-share program more detail would be needed on the operational characteristics including management, the number of cars, any charges for the program and follow up concerns that might come up. The third aspect "Shared bicycles for employee or guest trips to town will be available at the Club." Staff would like to see more information in the final application regarding the operational characteristics of this plan including types and sizes of bicycles, what kind of safety equipment would be available and how it was managed. The fourth "Either car-share vehicles will be available for longer trips for employees living on site so that they do not need their own cars for themselves or arrangements will be made with a local or rental company for discounted car rentals." Garrow said again the operational plans should be more detailed. Fifth "Aspen Club shuttle service to and from the Airport will be provided for owners and guests." Garrow said the plan should reflect how existing services could be utilized including hotels and RFTA in order to minimize the total number of trips. The sixth and seventh areas "Club employees will be required to carpool, use our shuttles or take public transportation to the Club in order to get their cars off of Ute Avenue and Crystal Lake Road." "Institue paid parking at the Aspen Club as an auto disincentive." Staff would like to see more specifics in terms of the operational characteristics, how the carpool parking will be enforced, how will employees be assisted in the formation of carpools, were there any incentives for club employees taking public transportation, paid parking as an auto incentive and how it was managed. The final aspect was "One parking space will be assigned to each of the affordable housing units, as required by code." Garrow said 6 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 1 2008 information was needed on how the affordable housing residents might be encouraged to use alternative forms of transportation. Garrow said there were a number of questions concerning the 1996 Dick Butera approvals and were those conditions met. The Community Development Staff went back through the record and determined that the Club made an effort to comply with the requirements that were in that Ordinance. From 1999 to 2003 the cross town shuttle served to meet the shuttle service compliance. Beginning in 2004 the Club decided to provide its own shuttle service to meet the requirement; there was nothing in the record to indicate that Council ever approved a change to where the shuttle should operate. Weiss asked why did the Club change to their own shuttle. Fox replied that they actually do both now. Garrow said the shuttle currently should be running on Highway 82 to Crystal Lake Road and only deviating to Ute Avenue for physical therapy patients. Staff believed that the shuttle route is something that should be addressed in the transportation management plan; this was conditioned in 1996 and likely the existing conditions of the Club have changed since then in terms of membership and adding the affordable housing residents and time share people might impact the need for shuttles and the way that they might run, which should be addressed in the final application in terms of the transportation management plan. Garrow said the commission asked how much was being reinvested into the Club as part of this project; the applicant provided information between $12.3 and $16.75 million dollars will be re-invested in the Club. There was a question from the public on the appropriateness of SPA. Garrow replied the SPA process allows a specific plan to come onto a property and encourages flexibility and innovation in the development of that land and promotes the objectives outlined in the Aspen Area Community Plan by allowing the underlying zone districts requirements in terms of land use dimensional requirements to be amended for the benefit of the public. Staff believed that an SPA designation was appropriate; it encourages innovative design practices. This parcel was zoned Rural Residential, which was fairly limited in the kinds of uses permitted; it allows recreation facility. Garrow noted the table on page 8 of the packet that that outlined the approximate floor area ratios of the Aspen Club, Silver Lining Ranch and Benedict Building. Garrow reiterated staff recommendations. The proposed transportation management plan adequately addresses transportation concerns at a conceptual level. Staff had concerns related to mass, scale, building placement and design of the proposal; especially with concerns for the mass on the lower bench and would like to see it reduced to create more modulation; staff's main concern was that the mass located on this bench creates a wall of development perceived as one mass; it 7 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 1, 2008 eliminates any perception of the river and riparian area from the top of the property. Garrow said the riparian area also means the trees and the activities that happen by the river. Sunny Vann stated that the staff's principal concerns were one aspect of the site design and some of the units. Vann said that as part of the final the transportation management plan would have additional detail. Vann said that they need an approval on the commercial design aspect of the project with P&Z being the final review. Vann said that we need to get the site design problems out on the table. Cliff Weiss asked how critical mass was created with 19 units as opposed to 25 or 10. Michael Fox responded that his biggest fear was ending up with a lot of construction, some impacts but no vibrancy when it was done like the Aspen Highlands. Fox said that they tried to make it comfortable with 59 beds and to insure critical mass and vitality instead of less units. Weiss said there were 1900 members and do they out-shadow 19 units with 60 beds. Fox replied that it gets back to world class programming to be able to invite superstar lecturers and leaders and instructors you have to be able to sign up enough people to sign up 3,4 6 months out. Weiss asked if 19 units of this size would likely be families with kids; kids would not necessarily attend this type of wellness. Fox answered it depends on the program; there were family programming that they can do. Mike Wampler asked where the numbers were coming from; he said that he had a problem with the extra 6 units on the building. Wampler suggested they be used for employee housing or held for the future to see if this works and was successful. Wampler asked where the experience was to keep this going. Fox responded that the Club did a great job for this town, which provided a guest experience and a hospitality experience. Fox said they would move the tennis courts while they were building the underground parking lot. Wampler asked if the healthy living would go away like the racquet sports but the condos will still be there; he had an issue with making that area into a hotel area. Fox responded that health was still a major concern for the demographic trends of this country; he said the concept will be around but once the units were sold those owners will not disappear; the owners will come to Aspen and participate in Aspen. Stan Gibbs asked how you attach the people who will be in those buildings with both the owners and the people that participate in rentals; how can you guarantee that those people will be interested in the Club. Fox replied that the people who were buying there would be buying because of the Club because there were other options in town; they were buying into the whole Aspen Club concept; this ties the whole piece together. Gibbs said that he had trouble the benefit aspect of the SPA 8 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 1, 2008 and he wanted to hear about the public benefit; the people in the community, general Aspen. Vann replied that the code talks about where and when the SPA process can be used; the review criteria do not require a finding that you meet all of those, in fact the city has extensive experience in SPAS which has little or any direct relationship to some of those criteria. Vann said the neighborhood looked to the SPA process for an un-precedential method to approve the uses that were there with an SPA overlay. Fox stated growth of the Club allows the employees to grow and remain and serve the 1900 members, most of which are local; physical therapy services, sports performance services, train local high school and Olympic athletes and provide space for non-profits inside the Club, contribute to 30-40 different charities. Fox said what we do at the Club everyday is giving back to the community and participating in the community; they were an integral part of the community and hopefully this project will allow them to continue to do that and hopefully do it better over time. LJ Erspamer said that in the land use code 26.440.01 OC "Establish a procedure by which land upon which multiple uses exist or are considered appropriate, can be planned and redeveloped in a way that provides for the greatest public benefit." Erspamer said that an avalanche review was requested; was one done across the street at the employee housing. Vann replied that it was done for the affordable housing located on the Benedict property because there was an obvious avalanche Shute across the street. Erspamer asked what a Council call up was. Garrow replied that a commercial design review was approved and sent to City Council and if the Council thinks that a procedure was incorrectly followed; it was a procedural call. Public Comments• 1. Rick Neiley, attorney, responded to Sunny with respect to the surrounding SPA zone district designation; the code was clear 26.440.030A on "Standards for designation. Any land in the City maybe designated Specially Planned Area (SPA) by the City Council if, because of its unique historic, natural, physical or locational characteristics, it would be of great public benefit to the City for that land to be allowed design flexibility and to be planned and developed comprehensively as a multiple use development." Neiley said that Michael's facility provides public benefits to people on a daily basis and non-profits but the problem was the approach that was to continue to grow the business of the Club; realistically if the Club sold tomorrow all of the good work might go away. Neiley said the land use code was set up to insure public benefit from the SPA to continue in perpetuity and there was nothing in the application that commits in any concrete way to provide public benefit. 9 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 1, 2008 2. Chris Klug said that he has had experience with the Aspen Club for the last 16 years with the physical therapy department. Klug was grateful to Michael in support of the non-profit. Klug stated the Club was a community asset and the new units would help provide the void for short term rental units for Aspen. 3. Claudia Curry Hill stated that Michael has provided a great asset to the community and was philanthropic; Michael was also a great sponsor for the race and ride for the cure. Hill said the race and ride get smaller every year because there was no place for people to stay so the timeshare units were a good idea. 4. Steve Centosanti, owner of Durrance Sports, said that this project would bring more vitality to this town; he said this project was all about the community. 5. Kathy Frye stated that this was a great new project and was encouraged by the Club. 6. Letter from Elaine Grossman supported the application. Jessica Garrow stated there were 4 issues: Conceptual SPA, Conceptual PUD, Conceptual Timeshare and Conceptual Commercial Design. Cliff Weiss said that he was not a proponent of underground parking and would like to see a transportation plan that eliminated parking and relied on a much more sophisticated shuttle system. Weiss said that he would like to see the shuttle go to the Crystal Lake Parking area and a more direct footpath to the Club. Weiss said physical therapy patients could use Ute Avenue. Weiss voiced concern over critical mass for the 19 units and would be better served if there were more smaller units. Weiss said that he was opposed to the units on the club roof and the encroachment to Silver Lining and suggested the affordable housing units be moved to the roof. Weiss said that making the spaces for the non-profits more permanent was a good idea. Mike Wampler stated that he liked Michael and the Club; he said that he was having trouble with how the wellness was a public benefit. Wampler said the 6 units on the Club should not be timeshare but hotel units. Stan Gibbs said that this had a long way to go; his biggest concern was the traffic; there should be maximum use of Highway 82 and Crystal Lake Road and make the shuttle service run from that side. Gibbs said the layout of the 13 units blocks the relationship from the club down to the river and that could have a better landscape integrated into the project; he thought it would be better to engage with the riparian 10 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 1.2008 area as opposed to the fagade of buildings. Gibbs voiced concern over the public benefits and SPA. Gibbs wanted to see a commitment of making the Club more accessible to the public, which would be a benefit. LJ Erspamer stated there were certain criteria that the commission followed. Garrow said that staff concerns with the transportation plan will be addressed when it comes to the final application; staff had concerns with the mass, scale and placement of the design. Jennifer Phelan said that staff looked at the size of the box in terms of design and where it was located. Garrow said the 19 timeshare units were under the PUD and the commercial design review doesn't consider the 19 units but rather the size of the box and is the size of the box appropriate for the site. Erspamer supported staff and wanted to see less massing; it was too massive, too dense and too close to the river. Erspamer said that the underground parking might hit water; he said the transportation could be taken care of in final. Erspamer said that the design was a problem. Gibbs said that they would see the commercial design again at final. Garrow said that at conceptual the size of the box is determined and at final it is determined what the box is going to look like in terms of materials, fenestration, roof materials and solar panels. Vann said that they would like an opportunity to look at the units by the river further and going back to Highway 82 for shuttle service would be addressed at final. Vann said that they would like to continue this to work out some concerns of the commission. Weiss said that he wanted the transportation problem solved and one person in a van doesn't work. Vann said that there was an approval for a certain amount of parking spaces at the Club and the parking was pursuant to the city codes. MOTION: Stan Gibbs moved to extend the meeting until 7:30; seconded by Cl~ Weiss. All in favor, APPROVED. MOTION.• Cliff Weiss moved to continue the Aspen Club to May 6`"; seconded by Stan Gibbs. All in favor, APPROVED. OTHER BUSINESS: RECONSIDERATION OF 300 PUPPY SMITH RESOLUTION LJ Erspamer opened the reconsideration of the resolution. Jennifer Phelan explained that Resolution #11 was approved on March 18~' but there were a 11 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 1, 2008 number of sections, public works, affordable housing and sanitation that were too detailed and more in the final format than conceptual format so it was put in more conceptual format. Phelan wanted to be clear that it was a conceptual recommendation to City Council and P&Z approved Conceptual Commercial Design Review based on the conditions in section 1. MOTION: Jim DeFrancia moved approve the reconsideration of 300 Puppy Smith Resolution #I1, Series of 2008 for the recommendation to Council on the Conceptual SPA and P&Z approved the Conceptual Commercial Design Review for sub-grade parking and subject to the conditions; seconded by Stan Gibbs. All in favor, APPROVED 4-0. MOTION.• Stan Gibbs moved to approve amended Resolution #11, series 2008; seconded by Jim DeFrancia. All in favor, APPROVED 4-0. Cliff Weiss asked when roll call votes were necessary; what was the protocol. Jim True replied that there wasn't a requirement for roll call vote in P&Z. True said that in the charter there was provision that City Council could not not vote unless they were recused for a conflict. True said for Council it was only on Ordinances not on Resolutions or to extend. OTHER BUSINESS: LIFT ONE TASK FORCE Erspamer asked how many PBzZ members could serve on the task force. Jennifer Phelan replied one P&Z member. Travis Coggin said there were no proxies and this would still come before P&Z. Coggin said the first meeting was April 10`h and the next April 17`h from 11 am to 2 pm. Cliff Weiss was the P&Z member for the Lift One Task Force. FORMER CHAIR COMMENDATION LJ Erspamer asked if this was for Dylan. Jennifer Phelan replied that it was and she would proceed with the commendation. Adjourned at 7:30 Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 12