Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19761123BRADFORD PNBL~ENING 00., DENVER R E C O R D O F P R O C E E D I N G S Special Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission November 23, 1971 Chairman Collins called the meeting to order at 5:10 p.m. with members Hunt, Abbott, Schuchmacher, Hedstrom, and Isaac present. Also present were City Attorney Stuller, Hal Clark and John Stanford, planning office. Hunt moved to table approval of the minutes until the next meeting; seconded by Abbott. All in favor, motion carried. Hotel Jerome John Stanford mentioned the concerns of the planning office PUD Conceptual as outlined in the memo submitted to the P & Z. The primary Review concern was with the massing of the building and the impact it has with regard to the original Jerome building. It was the feeling of the planning office that the new building would overshadow the old and detract from it. There was also a problem with the FAR as submitted. There was some confusion as to the square footage breakdown between the existing and the proposed structure. The location and vicinity map as well as the sketch plan are in order. The data tabulation sheet did not indicate the square footage of the existing building, and there were some discrepancies as to that square footage and that presented in the written narrative. The ownership disclosure was not submitted by the applicant. The zoning recommendation is to change from 0-Office to commercial/lodge. More. specifically, Snanford stated that the planning office would recommend anew building comparable in size to the existing Jerome. The planning office has stated that the existing commercial space could be considered commercial space that is accessory to a hotel operation.. The new addition to the Hotel Jerome includes additional commercial space, which could be broken down into two categories; hotel-related (the restaurant and snack bar) and an additional 6,230 square foot of non-hotel related space. The planning office has identified three categories relating to square footage and size of the building that P & Z should consider in their decision on conceptual; (1) need for additional tourist lodging in the City; (2) the importance of supporting the hotel's historic use, and (3) the appropriate- ness of additional non-hotel commercial space. The planning office feels this amount of development will result in a building mass that is too large. Some accommodations should be made to make the building more consistent by reducing the non-commercial space. Stanford told the Commission that the planning office had met with the applicants to discuss the problems of the hotel. A decision is whether to have the building cover a greater area and be lower, or cover a smaller area and be taller. Stanford said the planning office would like to see drawings that indicate the latter footprint and with a larger fifth floor. In the FAR, it is not clear whether the 39,000 square feet in the existing Jerome include the addition that would be built into the garden to the west of the Hotel Jerome. A portion of this should be included in the FAR. The presenta- tion does not address the FAR that should be counted in the limosine garage and employee housing. Transportation has not been fully addressed with regard to the new C/L zone, which eliminates parking requirements. However, the planning office would like to see a more positive and definite statement on exactly how the limosine service would accommodate people coming to the hotel. In the memorandum submitted, the planning office described discrepancies in the proposal. The written narrative calls for 71 rooms and the plans call for 66 rooms. There is the Special Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission November 23, 1976 Hotel Jerome C/L versus the CC zoning; the square footage in the existing continued building; the FAR data is not clearly presented; and a more thorough presentation is needed on transportation service to the site. Stanford concluded that the planning office is in support of the concept, what is being proposed to make the Hotel Jerome a viable first-class hotel in downtown Aspen, this is the most approrpiate location for this facility. The planning office cannot support the conceptual presentation as presented in the data. Collins asked if the Council was going to amend the C/L zone and how. Stanford answered the parking requirements would be eliminated; subgrade space would be counted in the FAR; and the height limit would be 28 feet..with special review to go to 32 feet. J. R. McCarthy, representing the applicant, explained that the employee housing would be a second story over the limosine storage, which would house five limosines. This would compris 1500 square feet. McCarthy stated that in the CC zone, they took out all the basement storage, Rocking Horse, KSPN, art gallery, etc. They are included as an FAR; the 39,000 square feet does include all the basement space that exists now. Nothing more than the storage area that is applicable to the hotel was taken out, that is excluded from the FAR under CC zoning. McCarthy pointed out that by his calculations, the building is under the allowable FAR. In the plans there is approximately 6,000 square feet of commercial space on the lower and top levels. The amendment to the C/L zone allows commercial space on the lower level. City Attorney Stuller stated that the code does not allow commercial uses on any floor but the street level. The ownership disclosure is in the mail but not available at this time. McCarthy stated that they presented the original plan under the CC zone, realizing that the staff was recommending CL zoning. The C/L would maintain the upper levels always as a lodging facility. This would be no problem. Under the PUD, the C/L could be modified for height. The biggest problem is whether the lower level could house commercial. The 6,230 square feet of commercial space that is termed "non-related" McCarthy stated he did not feel was non-related. There is justification under a first submittal that these uses are supplementary and are definitely related to hotel. In order to preserve the general concept of the original building, the owner has stated that a total number of 100 rooms is required. This is still the program. The program of uses and number of rooms is essential in order to preserve the original building. The initial footprint is a five story building. The proposal was to reduce the impact of massing, predominantly on Mill and then on Bleeker, and to design a hotel that is functional. McCarthy showed the Commission a model that is another alternative in an attempt to reduce the impact. If the Commission intends to have the addition behind, exactly, the Hotel Jerome, there is no way the applicant's program can be satisfied. McCarthy stated they would not be willing to go to smaller rooms, lower ceilings; this is not in character with the building. McCarth `.~ BRAOFORO POBLIBX~NO CO.. DENVER R E C O R D O F P R O C E E D I N G S Special Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission November 23, 1976 stated he felt they could solve the bulk of the problems, but this would depend upon how the P & Z placed the constraints. McCarthy said he did not want to mimic the original building, either in shape or size. The number of rooms in the old hotel will be reduced in order to make them larger and to add bathrooms. A court in the center of the old building with a skylight will be introduced. The new addition will need 66 rooms, to equal a total of 100 rooms. The Rocking Horse expansion is shown on the drawings and is included in the FAR. The storage area behind it for the hotel is not. With reference to the limosine service, the owner had submitted a memorandum. These. are to be parked off of the alley. The point of relevance of commercial space should be addressed The 6,232 square feet comprises those uses. .DS this square footage. relevant to the applicable uses. Collins asked how the plans had changed. McCarthy answered that the number of rooms had been reduced about 6 or 7; an attempt has been made to cut portions out of the buildings, they are down to 58,000 square feet. The C/L zone will take out the commercial space on the lower floor. Stanford reiterated the planning office feels that all the commercial space is too much with relation to the proposal as an expansion to the hotel. The 6,230 square feet of commercial is just too much. Gilmore pointed out that the commercial space is essential functionally and economically To remodel the 34 rooms and build 66 new rooms would not be feasible without commercial space. Hedstrom asked of the commercial .space how much is on the lobby level; McCarthy answered 1,600 square feet. The rest, 4,500 square feet, will be in the lower level. Hunt asked why it was impossible to reduce the footprint by going up an additional story. McCarthy pointed out the build- ing is already five stories; the constraint they set was not to exceed the cornice line of the existing building. Hunt suggested reducing some of the commercial space by that method; Hunt pointed out he did not see the appropriateness of art gallery, antique shop in the new building.. Auxiliary uses would be barber shop, magazines, travel shop. Hunt stated he had a problem with the footprint and with the amount of non-accessory commercial space. Isaac asked why there would be three separate food uses in the hotel. McCarthy said the uses are from an operational hotel standpoint; the coffee shop serves a different need than a specialty restaurant. The snack shop would serve more or less the pool area. Collins stated that the real areas of concern are (1) bulk and massing and (2) the commercial uses. There are certain uses that the planning office recommends that can be support- ive to the hotel, rather than just commercial core activities. McCarthy said concern had been expressed about the height of the building previously. Some of the setbacks in the models have been an attempt to get the top floor at a lower scale near the street. The HPC wants the old paint taken off the Hotel Jerome. McCarthy stated they would use a masonry type material for the new building so that the buildings would sort of flow together by color. -3- ' Special Meeting Planning & Zoning November 23, 1976 Hedstrom stated it is difficult to evaluate the bulk and masses at Mill and Sleeker. Hedstrom said after studying the corner, one more floor will not make a difference. The facade will be right against the street and another floor will not change the oppressiveness of the building. A higher building with a smaller footprint might have even less mass- iveness from Mill and Sleeker. Hunt agreed that another story would give more desirable rooms and would reduce the footprint so that there is more air space all around the building. Collins asked if the planning office opposed because the bulk is just too much, or is it the form the volume takes. Stanfor~ answered the FAR is 2:1 in this zone. The planning office feels this proposal is right at the FAR. Collins said he was concerned about the mass from street level up, and this bulk and its relationship to the Hotel Jerome. The applicant is asking how can they structure the mass and bulk that would be acceptable to the planning office, P & Z, and HPC. If the bulk has to be reduced, thus reducing the number of rooms, then the project will not go. Kienast asked if during the re it have to be totally gutted. lobby level, all walls will be be done. They will attempt to existing hotel. There will be new mechanical and wiring will up to code. zovation of the old Hotel, would McCarthy answered above the torn out. Fireproofing will keep the character of the structural improvements. All be put in to bring the building Gilmore stated he would rather not build any rooms at all but would rather have an office building. Commercial space is much more profitable. Every sguare foot of commercial space not allowed, rooms cannot be built. Gilmore stated that he cannot get financing with less than 100 rooms. Hedstrom said he was not concerned with the commercial space in the lower level because he did not see what else could be done with it. If the commercial space is that valuable, then a concession of 10 hotel rooms might be worked out. Gilmore pointed out that taking the 10 rooms off the top is taking off more than 10 rooms because they are the most valuable. Schuhmacher stated, concerning bulk and mass, the reason for the addition is to preserve the Hotel Jerome. The applicant will have to. be careful not to damage what is trying to be preserved. Schuhmacher said he was concerned about the addition overpowering the hotel. Schuhmacher said he did not feel that the ground floor is the best use for hotel rooms. Schuhmacher said he would like to see the bulk and mass of the addition reduced so it is not so big. Kienast said this projected plan would be the most valuable piece of real estate in Aspen if this goes through. The argu- ment is that this proposal is the absolute minimum which can be built to support a financial investment. if this is presented, then the P & Z needs extremely detailed financial statement. Kienast said he would like to see the Jerome renovated, and would like to see it stay like it is. The proposal will make that block of Main street the center of town commercially. Abbott said he would like to see a mirror image of the Hotel Jerome; that way the bulk and mass could be obtained. Abbott said he felt a first class hotel should have commercial space on the ground floor. Isaac said he is in favor of the project and would like to see the Jerome turn into a first class hotel Aspen does not have one at this point. Isaac said he did not -4- . M.., RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves iCPM SD L. E. HOE CN EL 9. B. B L. CO. Special Meeting Planning & Zoning November 23, 1976 Jerome (cont.) like mixing services and lodging rooms on the same floor. As far as the mass, Isaac said he would like to see it smaller. If the commercial space is diminished, perhaps the mass of the building will be diminished. Isaac said he liked the design. Isaac stated he was concerned about the amount of commercial space and felt it is too much. Six Month Lease Restriction Hedstrom agreed with the goal of preserving and enhancing the Jerome. The addition should be compatible and as far as possible subordinate to the present Jerome. Hedstrom stated that the number of rooms needed should be justified and substantiated. Hedstrom felt the square footage on the lower level could be devoted to commercial uses. Hunt stated basically he is in favor of a class A hotel and preserving the Hotel Jerome. Hunt would like to see this accomplished with the least impact. Hunt is concerned about the commercial uses, especially non-related uses. Hunt said he would like the walk-in traffic reduced; the building should be primarily lodging facilities with accessory uses. Hunt said he wanted to know what the balance is, as far as the program is, between rooms and commercial space necessary. Collins concurred with Hunt. The two items here are main- tenance and restoration of the Jerome, and providing a first class hotel facility. These are worthwhile endeavors. Collins stated the uses should not be commercially oriented other than support of the hotel operation. Collins said that whatever addition is done should be compatible and supplement the existing Hotel Jerome. It may be that contrast is necessary so that each building stands on its own. Collins said he felt that the proposed addition has too big a footprint. Stanford reiterated that the planning office recommends denial as the project is presented. The P & Z has the optior to approve, deny, or table and have the applications revised McCarthy said the applicant would prefer tabling. Collins told the Commission there is a study session with the City Council regarding the Hotel Jerome on December 6th; the P & Z should attend that. Kienast moved to table action; seconded by xedstrom. Isaac said he would like to see the applicant come back by Decem- ber 6th with some changes. All in favor, with the exception of Isaac. Motion carried. Hunt moved to continue the public hearing on the six month lease restrictions until the next meeting; seconded by Hedstrom. The P & Z directed City Attorney Stuller to draft a resolution for consideration. All in favor, motion carried. Hunt moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:23 p.m.; seconded by Isaac. All in favor, motion carried. Kathryn H uter, City Clerk