Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20080506Aspen PlanninE & Zonine Commission Meetin¢ Minutes May 6 2008 MINUTES ................................................................................................................. 2 DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ............................................. 2 1450 CRYSTAL LAKE ROAD, ASPEN CLUB, CONCEPTUAL SPA ................ 2 1 Aspen PlanninE & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes May 6, 2008 LJ Erspamer opened the regular meeting of the Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission in the Sister Cities Meeting Room at 4:35 pm. Commissioners Michael Wampler, Stan Gibbs, Dina Bloom and LJ Erspamer were present. Brian Speck joined the commissioners at 4:40 pm. Jim DeFrancia and Cliff Weiss were excused. Staff present were Jim True, Special Counsel; Jennifer Phelan, Jessica Garrow, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. MINUTES MOTION: Stan Gibbs moved to approve the minutes from April I5`~ with corrections as stated, seconded by Michael Wampler. All in favor, approved. DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Jim DeFrancia was conflicted on the Aspen Club, 1450 Crystal Lake Road. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING (3/4/8, 4/1/8): 1450 CRYSTAL LAKE ROAD, ASPEN CLUB, CONCEPTUAL SPA LJ Erspamer opened the continued public hearing on the Aspen Club. Jessica Garrow provided a copy of the resolution. Garrow stated that today she would like to focus on questions that were raised at the first meeting and get a recap of the transportation component. There was a need for a detailed transportation plan that addresses transportation, uses in terms of transit and shuttle and how those shuttles would coordinate in terms of pick-up and how it coordinates with hotels, a paid parking scenario, car pooling, car-share, bike-share, and a detailed monitoring plan. These were all required to be addressed in a detailed transportation plan submitted as part of the final PUD application, which the planning & zoning commission will see at that time. Garrow noted that all of these items were in Section 10 of the Resolution titled Transportation and on page 12 of the staff memo. Garrow stated that before designating a specially planned area or SPA, City Council must find that there is a public benefit created through the proposed SPA and Council makes that determination after considering the recommendation from the Planning & Zoning Commission. Staff believes that there are public benefits associated with this SPA request and specifically the SPA is allowed to have Affordable Housing and Timeshare on this property because they are not a permitted use in the underlying zone district. Garrow noted that the applicant provided a list of public benefits they believe are created through this project (exhibit G). Staff believes that the on site affordable housing creates housing opportunities for Aspen Club workers who may live down valley and by enabling those workers or any other person who is not an Aspen Club employee to get into 2 Aspen Plannine & ZOn1nE Commission Meeting Minutes May 6, 2008 affordable housing and that creates some benefit in terms of transportation stress on the roads, so it removes some cars. Garrow said that in terms of the time share units staff believes that it enables the Club to hold publicly accessible lectures and programming; these were commitments that the applicant has made. This also provides funds to reinvest in the Club infrastructure, which includes the actual building, fitness equipment and programming. Staff does believe that this threshold of a public benefit has been met and it is addressed in detail in exhibit A, which includes the standards for designation. Garrow stated there were changes to the design since the last meeting; the mass was reduced and some of the mass was relocated. The overall floor area for the development has decreased from 103,520 square feet of floor area to approximately 100, 860 square feet (a little less than a 3,000 square foot decrease). The three bedroom townhome units have been reduced in size by 8% and the four bedroom townhome units have been reduced by 10%; the applicant removed one of the units that was located on the lower bench and relocated it to the upper bench in addition the applicant has proposed a 20th unit which would be added to the upper bench. Garrow said that by reducing the mass on the lower bench the applicant has created a larger opening on that lower bench that staff believes creates a clear connection between the site and riparian area. Garrow utilized the sketch up model to show the site with topography, buildings and proposed buildings. The 6 Club units are to be located where the administrative offices currently are, which are separated from the front desk and the rest of the Club functions so the new units would continue to function separately from the main desk and the rest of the facilities in the Club with separate entrances. Garrow reiterated that staff believes moving one of the units from the lower bench to the upper bench has helped create more openness and connection with the riparian area. Staff recommends approval for the conceptual level. Michael Wampler said that there was an overall reduction of about 3,000 square feet and asked if basically the units were a little smaller. Garrow replied yes. LJ Erspamer asked where 20`h unit was located. Chris Ridings from Poss Architects distributed a map showing the unit numbers. Garrow said at conceptual you talk about how big the box is but not what goes into the box. Garrow noted that it was a design issue. Jennifer Phelan asked if P&Z is comfortable with the site plan as proposed; is the placement of the buildings okay. 3 Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting Minutes May 6, 2008 Chris Ridings said that from the last meeting the applicant reduced the massing in terms of providing more openness, bringing in more of the riparian area and more landscaping around the Club and creating a greater connection between the two. Ridings stated they reduced the three bedroom units by 8% and the four bedroom units by about 10%; they removed the footprint of the enclosed pool, which has allowed a more open area on that upper platform that allowed the unit to be moved from the lower bench and the addition of another unit to the upper bench. Ridings showed the new location of the pool is where the existing pool is located right now. Ridings utilized slides and sketch up showing the site. Michael Wampler asked if the architects looked at making the 2 open spaces into one big open space instead of 2 smaller ones. Ridings replied that they did take a look at that but it wasn't as graceful; this allows a couple of views along the mass. Ridings said the openness of two units on each side works. Sunny Vann said the PUD and SPA uses the underlying zoning as a guide and this case the floor area under the original submission was about .6, which is probably lower than any zone district in the city; this was a large site with a lot of vegetation on the site. Vann noted there was no FAR limitation in the Rural Zone District. Garrow stated that Rural Residential was the only zone district that allowed a recreation club. Garrow noted the changes to the resolution. Stan Gibbs asked if the architect considered moving the orientation of the units on the lower bench to the same orientation as the units on the upper bench. Ridings replied the lower bench could not accommodate the rotation of those units because of the topography and a setback relative to the river so there wasn't room to turn all of the units on the site. Erspamer asked if the reduction in square footage and with the addition of a unit, did that increase density or the scale of the project. Garrow replied that it increases the density of the project, which staff did not have a problem with the density. Erspamer asked the requirement for employees of this project. Garrow responded on page 7 of the packet explained that the employee mitigation was based on the timeshare units; the 20 timeshare units include 62 bedrooms, which under the code generates 31 FTEs. Garrow said the mitigation requirement was 60% of the 31 FTEs so it equals 18.6 FTEs and the applicant is proposing 12 two bedroom affordable housing units, which under the code could house 27 FTEs. Garrow said they were providing more affordable housing than is generated by the 20 timeshare units. 4 Ashen Planning & ZOnlrig Commission Meeting Minutes May 6, 2008 Erspamer asked about the sanitation plan requiring the Silver Lining Ranch to accept the plan and if asked that could hold up the project. Vann answered that when the project was originally proposed there was aman-hole that dead ended at the Silver Lining Ranch from the existing sewer line that runs through this property. Vann said the solution was to create a private sewer line that was acceptable to the Sanitation District and took out the Silver Lining Ranch hook up. Erspamer asked if the City had someone to review the applicant's traffic study. Garrow replied that as part of the final application the applicant would provide a detailed transportation management plan, which is reviewed by the Parking Department, Transportation Department, Engineering Department and Planning Staff. Erspamer asked if they were participating in the LEEDS. Michael Fox answered that they were accepted in the LEED pilot program for development. Erspamer asked about the Red Flag on page 46 of the staff memo. Garrow replied the zoning officer used the words red flag so that the applicant would pay attention to the Zoning. Vann replied that the sub-grade garage extends into the setback but it is underground, the setbacks apply to above grade development. Gibbs asked where would he find the staff concerns in the text with the AACP from the staff memo on pages 16 and 19. Garrow responded that staff had concerns related to open space, transportation and design. Staff said at a conceptual level the project meets these but for final review these concerns must be met. Public Comments: 1. Jessica Garrow entered into the record the email from Lee Bryant in support of the project. 2. Kathy Klug said that she was a teacher at Aspen High School and a College Counselor. Klug said that Michael Fox was paying attention to housing with 12 employee units embedded in the town. Klug spoke of the Olympic hopefuls utilizing the Club. Klug said that Michael Fox cared about his employees. Klug stated the public benefit of more employee housing was becoming a real issue in our community and this employee housing would contribute to the community. Klug supported the project. 3. Pamela Kerr, deputy director at the Aspen Given Foundation, agreed with everything that Kathy said as well Kerr supported the project and whenever she asks for help the public benefit is there at the Aspen Club. Aspen Planning & Zonine Commission MeetinE Minutes Mav 6 2008 4. Tom Mossberger, Aspen Sante Fe Ballet, agreed with all of the comments about Michael Fox and the great contributions to the community. 5. Warren Klug supported the proposal and read from his letter dated May 6`h and said the Aspen Club was a very important community asset. Klug said that all the members of his family have spent time at the Aspen Club. Klug stated there were so many positives of the Club and there was a serious situation of the loss of rental and short stay accommodations in Aspen. Klug said the Club was a benefit to all of Aspen. 6. Tom Sharkey agreed with everything that he has heard and non-profits benefited from the Aspen Club. Sharkey supported the project. 7. Rick Neiley stated that he represents a group of people who do not support this proposal and gives credit to Michael and Sunny for their revision to their plan reducing the FAR. Neiley said this wasn't about the good things Michael and the Aspen Club do but it's really about whether or not this project merits a Specially Planned Area, Rezoning. Neiley said the proposal is a massive increase in development in a zone district that doesn't permit it; no other purely private project has ever received in the history of this town SPA designation without considerable public benefit. Neiley said the Silver Lining Ranch was anon-profit specifically designed program to help children and families with cancer, there's no private component to it at all. Neiley said there wasn't any permanence to the great things the Club does in the community; you have to rely on Michael continuing to be here and continuing to operate the Club. Neiley said there was no new open space, no new trails, there's no new amenities and nothing of any permanence. 8. Casey McCullom stated that you do not know what is going to happen in the future and it can been seen with the neighbors at the Silver Lining Ranch sitting empty. McCullom said that private business does do non-profit benefits but it should not enforce what ties the business's hands farther down. 9. Michael Conniff said that the most important word in the presentation was permanence; if this proposal doesn't go through then the Aspen Club may not be there anymore. Conniff said that the notion that only anon-profit can operate to the public benefit is really be lived by Michael Fox and everything that they have done. 10. Chad Murphy said that project Graduation was held at the Aspen Club; that program was put together to take care of the youth of our community. Murphy 6 Ashen PlanninE & Zonine Commission Meeting Minutes May 6, 2008 said the Aspen Club is providing community benefits without the requirement to do this and he didn't see any reason they would not continue to do so in the future. Sunny Vann said the standards and criteria for SPA designation were on page 15 Exhibit A of the staff memo. Vann explained his background and the SPA uses for the Benedict Building and the Silver Lining Ranch. Stan Gibbs commended the applicant for the changes that make the project a lot better. Gibbs stated concern about transportation and will expect a lot more information. Gibbs said from a conceptual perspective he could support this project. Brian Speck supported the project and said the Aspen Club had permanence. Speck noted the Club has been well spoken of the community needs and Michael Fox has been a good example of leadership in the community. Mike Wampler said the applicant did a great job and he did not have problem with the density, design and traffic would work itself out. Wampler was concerned with the great public benefit, whether the area was appropriate for lodging, employee housing. Wampler asked for adeed-restriction on the Club to remain a club in the future. LJ Erspamer said that Michael Fox does a good job and that permanence cannot be placed on this club. Erspamer said this project will probably go forward but was concerned about the extra unit, the number of units create more of a traffic problem. Garrow said that the conceptual commercial design was how big the box was not what was going inside the box. MOTION: Brian Speck moved to approve Resolution #009, series 2008, recommending conceptual approval of a Conceptual Specially Planned Area (SPA), Conceptual Planned Unit Development (PUD), Conceptual Timeshare and Commercial Design Review for the Aspen Club project; seconded by Michael Wampler. Roll call vote: Gibbs, yes; Bloom, yes; Wampler, yes; Speck, yes, Erspamer, no. APPROVED 4-1. MOTION: LJErspamer moved to amend the motion to decrease the number of units. No second, motion dies. Adj oumedC~~ C~~u~J Q'""""`-' G~ 7