Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20081216Aspen Planning & Zonin¢ MeetinE -Minutes -December 16, 2008 Comments 2 Declarations of Conflicts of Interest 2 411 S Monarch (Dancing Bear) SPA Amendment 2 Pitkin County Jail SPA Amendment 5 Aspen Institute (Greenwald Pavilion) SPA Amendment 8 Aspen PlanninE & Zonine Meetine -Minutes -December 16, 2008 LJ Erspamer opened the regular meeting of the Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission at 4:30pm in City Council Chambers. Commissioners Brian Speck, Jim DeFrancia and Dina Bloom were excused. Members present were Bert Myrin, Mike Wampler, Cliff Weiss, Stan Gibbs and LJ Erspamer. Staff present were Jim True, Special Counsel; Jennifer Phelan, Andrea Hingley, Errin, Evans and Jason Lasser, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. COMMENTS Cliff Weiss said that he received an email on Friday afternoon about picking up his packet and requested that when packets were this big that they be distributed earlier; there were 2 brand new applications with a great deal of reading. Stan Gibbs asked when the packets should be distributed. Weiss replied that a week would be great. LJ Erspamer defended the Community Development Department. Jennifer Phelan stated that if the commissioners know that they cannot pick up their packets she will deliver the packets. Phelan said that they were looking at the drop box idea. Phelan said that she would try to pare down material in the packets. Toni Kronberg, public, said that there was something in the land use code that requires an application be available for the public to inspect before the public hearing. The minutes were postponed until the next meeting. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST None stated. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: 411 S MONARCH (DANCING BEAR LODGEI PUD AMENDMENT LJ Erspamer opened the continued public hearing on the Dancing Bear Lodge PUD Amendment. Andrea Hingley stated that the size of the enclosure was to be decreased but she did not think that it had been. Eban Clark, attorney for the applicant, stated that they thought that they could reduce the footprint of the structure and the height but they found that they could not reduce the actual footprint but they stepped down the structure. Clark utilized a power point presentation to show the roof step down with it below the level of the rail. Ken Robertson, architect, said that the spa maintenance people would not change the wall and they were the people who had to get into the maintenance structure. 2 Asgen PlanninE & Zoning MeetinE -Minutes -December 16, 2008 Robertson said the original structure was made of corrugated metal with thin fiberglass insulation; it looked like a dog house and did not show up on any of the elevations. Robertson said they came onto this project a little over a year ago; the original spa engineers wanted a 25 foot by 25 foot spa mechanical structure that was easily accessed. Robertson said that the size of the spa mechanical structure has been reduced to what it is today to fit in with the building as best as they could and make it look like it is a part of the building. Robertson said reducing that north piece below the parapet has more effect on what's perceived than if they stepped back that west wa113 feet you would still be looking at that and doesn't really change your view of that. Robertson talked to some people about the electrical panel that P&Z was concerned about and that does want to be within visual site of the equipment that is in there because it needs to be part of the tempered system and not an exterior unit. Eban Clark said the heating unit that is in there is to keep the fire suppression thawed in that structure. Robertson said that space will be kept at 40-45 degrees. Bert Myrin asked the highest point from the ground at the alley to the top of that structure; how tall is the building. Clark replied that this structure was lower than the highest point on the building and showed in the elevations on power point. Erspamer asked the approved height. Jennifer Phelan responded 46 to 48 feet at the highest point of the building. Clark said the spa equipment structure was 6 feet lower. Cliff Weiss asked when the stairwell that had to be covered came before P&Z. Phelan answered that it was an administrative health safety issue. Robertson said that there had to be 2 means of egress off that roof deck and one needs to be enclosed; when they received the project both stairwells were open. Erspamer asked how far setback was that spa room from the wall of this pump house. Robertson replied about 4'/z feet. Public Comments: Toni Kronberg, public, spoke for Susan O'Neal on the view from the Southpoint unit towards Red Mountain. Erspamer stated that the commission needed to weigh the intent of the original approval with the practical constraints presented to them in making this decision. Erspamer asked Andrea's recommendation. Hingley replied a soft denial because of the concerns of the original approval with regards to the height. 3 Aspen Planning & Zoning Meeting -Minutes -December 16, 2008 Cliff Weiss said the birthday cake concept where everything was setback and mass and scale were mitigated by the setback which was changed to the negative by the covered stairwell. Weiss said that if the covered stairwell wasn't designed quite the way it was then this would have more of an effect so because of the size of that stairwell this is irrelevant to him so he would vote to approve. Bert Myrin said that in this picture he did not see the cooling units that he walked around. Clark said that those cooling units have always been in that place back to the PUD. Myrin said that he worried about the little nibbles that constantly come to P&Z like this is one and down the road there could be something. else that could be expanded. Myrin read from the city council meeting minutes from July 2003that Rachael Richards could not accept the 4`h floor and where the gazebo was placed does not meet what the council intended when they said 38 feet at the highest. Myrin was leaning toward what staff recommended. Erspamer said that he was thinking the same way as Bert; he wanted to see the roof line cut down to 6'7" instead of 9'7" because the main wall is so far out it gives a large presentation of scale. Stan Gibbs said this was a tough one because this was a classic case of the horse getting out of the barn when trying to close the'door. Gibbs said that if this application had come in this form he would never have approved this based on the commercial design review because it clearly says that things should not be visible from the street. Gibbs said the roofscape is important and should be setback. Gibbs said the people constructing this building have gotten way ahead of what has been approved because this has not been approved. Gibbs said what was approved was that little nothing structure on the building that had no real reality to it; the city bears some of the responsibility for this because this kind of thing can't happen in the future. Gibbs said the commission has to know what it's going to look like when an approval is made for something like this; going from the early drawings to this is an incredible change. It should be clear when the approvals are done; what it is going to look like; there should be a set a real hard limit from what. you can see from the ground. Gibbs said that if this were denied they would have to rip out all of that stuff and in some ways the developer should be forced to do that because this is a bad precedent to set to let this go through but on the other hand he agrees that all in all it is a very small violation and in the best possible place it could be on that roof. Gibbs would like to see it shielded more by continuing that glass wall that comes across the top that you see on the right side; the black slate is not going to help. Gibbs asked if they could make that visually go away. Clark responded that it (prior) was going to be an ugly thing and now the developer has gone with 4 Aspen Planning & Zoning Meeting -Minutes -December 16, 2008 nice black slate to blend with the building. Gibbs said it was the position that was shown on early drawings that was much away from the parapet, much smaller and no height was ever given and we need to be able to specify that kind of thing. Clark said that they got stuck between building and planning because they got a building permit on plans that showed this enclosure in this area and so he agreed with the characterization that they got down the road with what they thought were approved plans and were told that this didn't pass mustard with another part of the administration and so it wasn't the case that the developer was out there running wild and asking for forgiveness this was more the case this is what the permit said. Clark said they were happy to consider conditions or work with what the commission would want to see in order to get this approval. Clark said that they were trying to get a CO next Tuesday. Myrin said that he would support Stan's condition but also what LJ had said. Robertson stated that he did not think that there was a way to make that one roof plane continue out without balancing out the two and maybe coming together. Erspamer asked if they could drop that roof 18 inches. Robertson replied that he would have to look and see; that upper roof could come down 8 inches and still clear the door and he was concerned that the 3 foot wide door and there was a lot of equipment that has to fit in and out of that door. Robertson said that if they were to figure out how to put a piece of the railing that would be the easiest. Clark said that they would accept an approval with that condition of the railing. MOTION.• Stan Gibbs moved to approve Resolution #034-08 The Dancing Bear Lodge, 411 S Monarch with an additional condition that the applicant shall extend the glass guard rail facade on the west side of the building to the first roof break of the roofline to the spa equipment enclosure; Mike Wampler seconded. Roll call: Myrin, no; Weiss, yes; Wampler, yes; Gibbs, yes; Erspamer, no; APPROVED 3-2. PUBLIC HEARING: PITHIN COUNTY JAIL SPA AMENDMENT LJ Erspamer opened the public hearing. Jim True reviewed the public notice and it was accepted so the hearing could proceed. Errin Evans stated that the city and county have reached capacity for technical computer needs to accommodate an expansion of IT equipment; the county would like to add a 300 square foot addition to the jail building, which would be a prefabricated building. Evans said the roofline would match that of the existing building; the structure would house only computer servers and other technical equipment. Evans said there will not be any working employees in the building except for equipment checks on a regular basis. Evans said that the Planning & Zoning Commission will make a Aspen PlanninE & Zonine MeetinE -Minutes -December 16 2008 recommendation to Council to approve, approve with conditions or deny the Specially Planned Area to Council. Evans said that in January this will come back to P&Z for Growth Management Review; this does not create new net leasable area. Stan Clauson, planner for the applicant, introduced Jody Smith, Facilities Manager for the County; Jim Considine, City IT Director; and Malcolm McMichael, County Technology Coordinator. Clauson stated that basically the city and county have run out of space to properly house the data processing servers including emergency services. Clauson said that they need a space that is secure and free from a possibility of water escaping as part of the fire suppression system and would be climate controlled to insure the functionality of the equipment. Clauson said there was no space anywhere so they arrived at a modular building behind the jail on property owned by the jail and will treat the modular building facade to look like the jail with brick similar to the jail. The addition is 324 square feet and no more than 10 feet high with a footprint at 12 feet by 27 feet. There was landscaping and screening proposed, which will be an enhancement to the corner of the property. Clauson utilized some drawings for the proposed building and landscaping. Mike Wampler asked if this was built into the 2009 budget. Jody Smith replied that it was. Cliff Weiss asked if these servers were for emergency service for dispatch. Clauson responded that this was for servers that serve a broad spectrum. Jody Smith replied that this takes care of some of the Clerk and Recorder's server, the Treasure's servers, the City/County network servers; anything that they can relieve any closets in City Hall, the Jail basement, the basement of the Court House Plaza; they were trying to get a place where they can put anything into that space. Malcolm McMichael said there were certain public safety system servers. Weiss asked why it was a modular building. Clauson responded that modular buildings were more cost effective but it wasn't a cheap building with the brick fapade and metal roof but it is more cost effective. Weiss said that they have seen a good deal of the Civic Master Plan and the ZG Master Plan and know that the Treasurer and Court House is over extended and needs to go though some form of change. Weiss asked if this changes a lot now and will it change again. Clauson responded that it was very hard to anticipate how it would be affected; he has worked with the ZG Master Plan for public facilities for the County and had discussion about the Zupancis Property whether some substantial portion of the facility should move out to the Service Center area; those things are up in the air and unclear in what time frame they might be resolved. Jody Smith said that this building was built as a data center and is fully self-contained; it has its own air conditioning. 6 Aspen Planning & ZOn1riE Meeting -Minutes -December 16, 2008 Bert Myrin asked if the spaces where all the servers were coming from were they mostly closets and not staff desks. Smith replied that currently there was a closet in the basement of the Courthouse Plaza that is about 150 square feet and the Courthouse; part of the reason for moving out of those space was that there was no way to control the temperature and cost prohibitive to place a unit on top of the Courthouse. Smith said all the closets were maintenance or broom closets or storage spaces. Jim Considine, IT Director, said the existing closets won't go away in their entirety they will still have to maintain a presence in the current facilities but they will be reduced in scale. Considine said that they were fundamentally out of space. Considine said to retrofit the Courthouse would have cost 100% more than this proposal. Myrin asked if the open space was an issue for tonight. Evans replied that in a previous application for the Jail in 1995 they were required to mitigate for open space that was displaced but she could not find anything that created that requirement in the first place; the space was not zoned open space it was zoned public. Clauson stated that there is no open space requirement as such in the code. Stan Gibbs asked Errin to expand on wanting to see a master plan for the area. Evans replied the property to the north, the triangle piece also belongs to the county, and they want to see master plans for all public facilities to avoid piecemeal projects for the long range. Gibbs asked the applicant if the conditions were acceptable. Clauson replied that they were. Erspamer said that in Ordinance 10, 1993 talks about the property north of the Pitkin County Jail for future expansion of the Jail. Clauson replied that this was it. Erspamer asked what kind of fire suppression was it. Clauson responded that it was anon-water system, a chemical system. Bert said that Section 2 stated that the applicants were to store snow on site; he asked in intent of that. Evans said that in the original SPA Approval they were required to store snow but in this case the applicant has indicated that they were going to take the snow away. Evans said that piling up snow on the park damages the sprinkler heads. Public Comments: Toni Kronberg, public, said the building fits nicely. Kronberg said the open space should be changed to vacant land. Myrin suggested clarifying before Council. 7 Ashen Plannin¢ & Zoning Meeting -Minutes -December 16, 2008 MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to make a recommendation to City Council to approve the consolidated development plan for a SPA amendment with conditions listed in Resolution#036-08 for the Pitkin County .Tail; seconded by Cliff Weiss. Roll call vote: Wampler, yes; Gibbs, yes; Myrin, yes; Weiss, yes; Erspamer, yes. APPROVED 5-0. PUBLIC HEARING: ASPEN INSTITUTE (GREENWALD PAVILION) SPA AMENDMENT LJ Erspamer opened the public hearing. Notice was provided. Jason Lasser stated this was a review for the Greenwald Pavilion Tent consolidated SPA Amendment. Lasser stated the Greenwald Tent was a special events tent at the Institute; there were 400-600 seats and the dimensions were 60 by 120. Lasser stated they were operating under a temporary use permit from 2005 until now; that opens up the SPA for an amendment. Lasser said that the criteria is reviewed by P&Z for GMQS and SPA Amendment for an essential public facility to recommend to City Council. Lasser said the proposal that was originally submitted showed the tent in one location as the applicant explored further and realized there was a water main and sewer main that ran right underneath where the temporary use tent is located so in an effort to appease the referral agencies they located the new tent location off of these mains. Lasser said that another amendment from the applicant was received on December 9`h with a compromise with the homeowners on the other side of the river and the cart path. Staff has not reviewed that December 9`h application. Lasser said that this final conceptual approval was to go to HPC on January 14`h Lasser said that the staff criteria in the packet is Exhibit A and the applicant memo is Exhibit B; the employee generation from the applicant is Exhibit C; the transportation analysis is Exhibit D; DRC comments are Exhibit E; HPC minutes are Exhibit F; and the last two Exhibits are G and H. Lasser said that staff was asking the applicant to consolidate the proposal and staff was looking to Planning & Zoning for direction. Lasser said that the fire department turn around, moving the cart path, the terrace in front of that tent is in the proposal, connecting pedestrian paths to Anderson Park, a walk through to the Meadows, additional toilet facilities on a temporary use basis were part of the improvement with this application. Lasser said the height was increasing on the proposed tent. Jim Curtis, representing the Aspen Institute, introduced Jody Schoeberlein, architect. Curtis said the Institute has put up a tent for special events in the summer of 2005and 2008; that tent was approved under a temporary use permit. 8 Ashen Plannine & Zoning Meeting -Minutes -December 16, 2008 Curtis said the Institute would like to make improvements to a nicer tent; make landscaping improvements to benefit the Pitkin Reserve neighbors and Red Mountain neighbors. Curtis said that they were considering an asphalt floor for the new tent not concrete not with rebar. Cutis said the Institute was completely indifferent on where the tent was located; based on initial comments on the water and sewer lines they realized that was a potential problem. Curtis said the San District and Water Department asked for a plan with the tent located off of those easements and they have done that. Curtis said the Pitkin Green and Pitkin Reserve neighbors have asked for the tent to be pushed the other way to the south and he had a power point presentation with "Plan A" and "Plan B". Curtis said the draft resolution was fine. The Institute would like to get the new tent in place for the summer season 2009. Curtis stated that HPC requested a new tent that was attractive and they have found a manufacturer in Canada to make the tent. Bert Myrin asked about page 34 in the staff memo that spoke about the essential public facility that the community development director determined. Jennifer Phelan responded the Aspen Institute has been considered an essential public facility and the tent on the site would be part of that essential public facility. Myrin asked about the affordable housing audit. Phelan replied that P&Z could determine that this does generate employees; that was the purpose of the essential public facilities review. Lasser stated that there was a statement from the applicant that said they were not generating any employees and was all that can be required. Curtis said the facility in 2007 and 2008 was used no more than 6 times and there is no catering of food; since 2005 they have not had to staff up to handle those 5 or 6 events. Curtis said that the Fire Marshall mandated the width of the access to the tent for a fire truck and the hammerhead to tum around. Curtis said that concerns from HPC about the size of the tent brought the tent down below the ridgeline of the old tent and the width from 60 feet to 55 feet. Myrin asked if there were alternatives to asphalt that would support fire trucks. Curtis replied there was an existing service road that goes back to a dumpster area and the Koch building so that road is being increased to 14 feet of asphalt with gravel on both sides; originally Ed VanWalraven discussed 20 feet of asphalt. Jody Schoeberlein clarified that the Fire Marshall was entitled by the code to and there was a certain axel weight that had to be met using a gravel road but what he said that he would prefer less asphalt, less overall width, so the disturbed area is less under what he offered; the Fire Marshall would not consider grass pavers. Lasser said that they were looking at 14 feet of asphalt with 1 foot of road base on either side, so it was 16 feet. 9 Aspen Planning & Zonine Meetine -Minutes -December 16 2008 Lasser said the newly created terrace paths were of concern. Curtis stated there were no new paths; there were existing crushed gravel paths which is the primary access through the Elizabeth Paecpke Memorial Garden into the tent and then there is an existing crushed gravel path that provides access to restroom facilities in the Koch Building. Curtis said those paths may have to be asphalt to comply with ADA regulations; he was still having discussions with the building department to see if there was any leeway to that interpretation. Myrin asked if they were looking to surfaces other than asphalt for the pathways. Curtis replied yes. Mike Wampler asked if the neighbors preferred one plan over the other. Wampler asked what the concerns were over colors. Curtis replied that the Institute wanted to continue with white for the new tent and HPC recommended white also. Lasser said the final at HPC will address the color and the finishes. Stan Gibbs asked how HPC figures into this SPA; he was trying to understand the P&Z role and the HPC role. Lasser said the historic component of the whole SPA is the reason why HPC has purview because of Anderson.Park, the historic elements and buildings; this is just one piece of the SPA agreement and there were overlapping reviews with the height, mass and bulk. Gibbs asked if HPC has seen Plan B. Curtis replied that they have not. Curtis said that all of the Aspen Institute property, which is 40 acres and both the grounds and the buildings are designated historic resources under Ordinance 48. Cliff Weiss asked if the new tent was not approved would they use the old tent. Curtis replied at least for the summer of 2009. Weiss asked the size of the new tent and how much more seating will it provide. Curtis replied both the old tent and the new tent can accommodate up to 750 people; the proposed new tent has less square footage under canvas. Public Comments: Paul Taddune, attorney representing Pitkin Reserve Homeowners Association, stated that they were interested in Plan B. Taddune said that Jim and the people from the Institute have listened and the asphalt over the easements allow the utilities to be accessed the same as they are in the road. Taddune said by moving the tent to the south with regards to using the easements and to participate in landscape along the ridge. Taddune said that the institute has been very good about modulating the roofline of the new tent but the homeowners association would still like to see the color blend in more because the tent could be seen from the north side of town; hopefully there would be more landscape mitigation. 10 Asuen Planning & Zoning Meeting -Minutes -December 16, 2008 Taddune noted that more people wanted to attend this meeting but couldn't because of the holiday. Fred Pearce, attorney representing a neighbor to the east of Pitkin Reserve, echoed what Paul said about the applicant being very proactive and responsive. Pearce asked the applicant if there would be a restriction of using this tent only 5 or 6 events a summer. Curtis responded that the Institute is willing to limit the events but he did not know what the number is 5, 6 or 7; he said that he was not authorized to make that commitment but would communicate that to Amy Margerum. Pearce said in the past they have offered to take down the tent between events. Curtis said the Institute is very much in favor of the new tent; the Institute is not prepared to take the new tent up and down because of wear and tear on the tent. Pearce supported and encouraged the new location of the tent in Plan B. MOTION: Stan Gibbs moved to continue the hearing until 7: I Spm; seconded by Bert Myrin. All in favor, APPROVED. Weiss asked if the tent was being dropped in the winter. Curtis replied yes; the tent is proposed to be up 7 weeks and 3 days in the summer. LJ Erspamer asked the attorneys, Paul and Fred, if the peaked tent made it look better. Paul Taddune answered that they did not know and didn't know if the design was even finalized. Curtis said that the Institute is perfectly fine with Plan B if that's what everybody would like. Erspamer said that he would agree with staff on this proposal. Myrin said that he usually agrees with staff but this was a tent. Myrin said that his concerns were the hammerhead, aspen grove and to use something other than asphalt for the pathways that was ADA compliant. Myrin said that if there was a way to landscape to help the Pitkin Green area for visual and audio that would be a good screen and no private events. Myrin said that he was not comfortable waiving the affordable housing mitigation. Weiss said that he did not have a problem with the height, style or design of this tent; his biggest concern was the river and mitigation and distances from the river. Weiss preferred Plan B. Stan Gibbs said between the two plans Plan B was more desirable and wanted to have the tent as far as possible from the top of slope. Gibbs said that he was leaning towards looking at this a second time; staff hasn't reviewed Plan B. Weiss asked if they were moving a lot of soil. Curtis replied that under either plan they were not proposing to cut down the natural grade. 11 Aspen Planning & Zoning Meeting -Minutes -December 16.2008 MOTION: Cliff Weiss moved to continue the public hearing for the Aspen Institute (Greenwald Pavilion) SPA Amendment to January 6, 20D9; seconded by Stan Gibbs. All in favor, APPROVED. Adjourned at 7:20 pm. 0 ackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 12