HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20090721Reeular Meetin¢ Asaen Plannine and Zonin¢ July 21, 2009
Comments
Minutes
Conflicts of Interest
Red Butte Cemetery PUD
434 ECooper -Bidwell -referral
2
2
2
2
9
Re¢ular Meetin¢ Aspen Plannine and Zoning Julv 21 2009
LJ Erspamer opened the regular P&Z Meeting in the Sister Cities Meeting Room at
S:OOpm. Commissioners Stan Gibbs, Jim DeFrancia, Mike Wampler, Bert Myrin,
Brian Speck and LJ Erspamer were present. Excused were Dina Bloom and Cliff
Weiss. Cliff Weiss was present for the Bidwell referral. Staff in attendance were
Jim True, Special Counsel; Drew Alexander, Sara Adams, Jennifer Phelan,
Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk.
Jennifer Phelan noted that there were questions about the height of the Stage III.
Phelan said for the record there were action items at the last meeting the Moore
Family PUD Amendment and there was language wordsmithing on the Resolution
at the meeting to add more clarity for the Resolution. Stan Gibbs signed the
Resolution.
Toni Kronberg, public, asked Planning & Zoning to address traffic and pedestrian
safety in town and the traffic on Main. Kronberg spoke of the recycle center and
the new council members. LJ Erspamer said the commission sent a letter to the
City Council. Jim DeFrancia said that the traffic increases are not solely created
by development but the vehicle population has increased greater than the people
population and also changes in lifestyle. DeFrancia noted that the opposition to
the recycle center was lead by Toni Kronberg on the last vote on it.
MINUTES
MOTION: Stan Gibbs moved to approve the minutes from 06/16/09. Seconded
by Jim DeFrancia; all in favor, Approved.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Cliff Weiss was conflicted on Red Butte Cemetery.
PUBLIC HEARING:
RED BUTTE CEMETERY, PUD
LJ Erspamer opened the public hearing on the Red Butte Cemetery PUD. Proof of
notice was provided. Drew Alexander stated this applicant had several reviews
and Conditional Use Review was the final authority with Planning & Zoning
Commission. Alexander said the other 3reviews were recommendation by
Planning & Zoning to Council with Council as the final authority for the
consolidated PUD Review, Amendment to the official zone district map and
Growth Management review for Essential Public Facility.
2
ReQUlar Meetine Asaen Plannin¢ and Zoning Julv 21, 2009
Alexander said the cemetery was established as anon-profit at the turn of the
century by organizations involved in the process including the Masons, Woodmen
of the World, Elks, Swedish Lodge and Columbine Circle. These groups joined to
purchase the 17 acre property where the cemetery exists today. The design of the
cemetery has a very grid like organization to it with walks and drives lined with
very old cottonwood trees. Alexander said there were various applications over the
years and based upon the public comment received the housing unit was deleted
and now there was 1,280 square feet maintenance facility that would act as a
permanent work yard and storage structure for vehicles and equipment (pick-up
truck, skid loader, four wheeler and trailer, large riding mower, motorized weed
eater and various hand tools). Page 29, exhibit C, was a site plan that showed the
work yard and maintenance facility as the bulk of this bulk of this proposal. HPC
approved the interior renovation and to gently restore the Victorian 216 square foot
cabin and 50 foot outhouse to turn this into something that will work better with
the property manager and users of the cemetery.
Alexander said that the proposed dimensional requirements were located on page 4
of the memo and the maintenance facility had an 18 foot height to the peak of the
roof and the maximum allowable in that zone district was 25 feet. Staff
recommended approval with conditions. Alexander said on page 8 of the memo
there was a condition to develop an ongoing management strategy for vegetation,
specifically the cottonwoods and expansion northward on the property.
Jennifer Phelan said the maintenance building was for the cemetery use and
appropriate to be approved as a Conditional Use; the size of the maintenance
building will assist the board in the operations of the day to day functions and
service to the community. Phelan said that HPC spent a lot of time for the size and
location of the building and recommend the Conditional Use and recommendation
of approval to City Council for the Growth Management Review as an Essential
Public Facility, the PUD dimensional standards and the site specific development
plan on the official zoning map. Phelan said that as a PUD it does lock in this
design so if there are any future changes being proposed it would come back to
amend the PUD to necessitate a public notice.
Bert Myrin said that on page 7 was the affordable housing mitigation. Phelan
replied that it was a decision by Council to waive the employee mitigation. Myrin
asked about the Dimensional Requirements on page 11 for the PUD and asked if
these requirements were changed would they have to come back through the PUD
process. Phelan said there were 2 ways to amend a PUD; one was an insubstantial
which has very strict criteria that can be handled administratively and if you don't
3
Re¢ular Meetine Aspen Plannin¢ and Zonin¢ July 21, 2009
meet those thresholds it is a public hearing process going to the Planning & Zoning
or City Council. Myrin asked about the lighting code in Section 8. Phelan said
that residential lighting code was more lax than commercial.
Stan Gibbs asked the height requirement for a PUD. Phelan replied there was none
but it was established through the PUD process.
LJ Erspamer said that the maintenance facility would act as a work yard and
storage for trucks for the vehicles and equipment; he asked if there was any
restriction there on the size and number of vehicles or is it whatever they need to
do the job. Phelan said that Conditional Use allows some conditions but the
applicant will specify what their needs are.
Alan Richman introduced himself as representing the Red Butte Cemetery
Association; John Thorpe, president of the Cemetery Board and Gram Means,
Architect. Richman stated the Red Butte Cemetery was a private parcel of land
about 17 acres in size and owned by the Cemetery Association for more than 100
years. The Cemetery Association is a group of volunteers who have taken the
responsibility of maintaining the cemetery and its improvements. Richman said
that the vehicles used on the property include spick-up truck, a skid loader, 4
wheeler and trailer, a riding mower, hoses and hand tools and all is listed in the
text of the application. Richman said today the vehicles are stored in the
temporary fabric shed with no heat, no electricity, no water service, no bathroom;
the facility was inadequate to operate the cemetery on a daily basis. This existing
cemetery needs to be maintained; the association is proposing a modest building.
John Thorpe, president of the board, introduced Stone Davis a very active member
of the board. Thorpe said that nothing had been done to the cemetery in a long
time and now the City Forester has helped identify trees that were in trouble and
they have begun to replace the trees on the same historic planting grid. Thorpe
said the water delivery system was completely inadequate and that had to be
replaced with an underground irrigation system. They also had surveys done and
the plots are now on line and this proposed project is to preserve and maintain the
cemetery. Thorpe said this was completely anon-profit association.
Gram Means utilized an aerial photograph (Exhibit 1) of the cemetery property
which is approximately 17 acres about 600 feet wide over 1200 feet long with the
public view through the cemetery's iron gate on Cemetery Lane. Means said there
were 3 by use portions of the cemetery, the southern portion established historic
plots, the northerly portion that is open meadow and there is the strip off the edge
Regular Meeting Asaen Planning and Zoning July 21, 2009
of the banks with native vegetation and steep slopes. Means used a site plan
(Exhibit 2) showing the established southern part and the part that goes over the
bank and the maintenance building would not impact the historic part of the
cemetery. (Exhibit 3) showed the existing sage area in the northern part with 175
feet to the closest neighbor on the north. Means said they were proposing to
depress the whole work yard so that it was cutting into the ground 2 '/z feet at the
southern end; there were power poles and electric easements at the bank. (Exhibit
4) was the conceptual landscape plan and HPC had some ideas about how this
should work with the cottonwood trees. Means said the southern elevation
(Exhibit 5) and the maintenance building was 18 feet in height from the lowest
grade to the peak with 10 foot door openings for equipment. Rusted metal panel
construction for the roof and sidewalls; there were 2 garage bays, a sma119 '/z by
18 foot warm room, a required bathroom and small mechanical room.
Richman said that it was 18 feet from the lowest grade to the top of the roof.
Richman said the he was comfortable with the resolution and this structure was
needed for this cemetery to be cared for. The soils piles do get removed and the
area will be re-vegetated pursuant to city standards and agree to keep disturbance
within the work yard and the activity envelope is where the building will occur.
Thorpe said the number of grave sites in the southern portion was about 6,000.
Commissioner Questions:
Bert Myrin said there were several suggestions in the letters from the public and
asked how they might apply. John Thorpe said they have a landscape plan and
have no plan to develop anything down the Castle Creek area. Gram Means
replied that this was a specific plan for a maintenance building and work yard area
and was not sure that these were specific areas but this was for the entire area.
Jennifer Phelan replied that the proposed development was for the exiting cabin,
the proposed maintenance building and work yard and the spoils area. Alan
Richman stated this was a group of volunteers as the Cemetery Board and that if
they want to do something that is not proposed in this application then they would
have to come back and ask for it. Jim DeFrancia asked that the PUD only asks for
what is included in the application.
LJ Erspamer asked if there would be over night storage of vehicles. John Thorpe
replied that they rely on an outside contractor to do excavation in opening of
graves and sometimes a piece of equipment is not taken out that night so there
would be from time to time. Erspamer asked the hours of operation. Thorpe said
they generally operate during the daylight hours unless there was an emergency
5
Reeular Meetine Asnen Planning and Zonine July 21, 2009
break down of equipment. Erspamer asked how soon the metal would rust. Means
replied that it would be pretreated to rust. Erspamer asked if the Marolt Ditch ran
underground. Thorpe replied that there was an underground pipeline that comes
from the Marolt property to their cemetery.
Stan Gibbs asked if this improvement increased the scope and scale of the
operation. Thorpe said it is just and improvement and won't change the scale.
Public Comments:
1. Arno Schetler, public, said that he lived on the north end of the cemetery
property and thought that they were all looking for the same thing that the
cemetery be able to be maintained but the impacts on the neighborhood be
minimized. Schetler said that there were things for example the maximum height
was 18 feet and that was 3 feet taller than his building which was set down.
2. Joe Porter, public, said that he lived at 1270 Snow Bunny Lane and said that he
was a founder of the Design Workshop. Porter said that he and some neighbors
have been working with the Cemetery Board. Porter said this entire site was a park
and landmark designated site.
3. Mariann Altfeld, 1250 Snow Bunny Lane, the back of her property boarders the
cemetery and she said that she knows what it means work hard as a volunteer.
Altfeld said that the cemetery has become a disgraceful eye soar as a dumping
ground for exposed piles of dirt, rock and unkempt piles of rubble in the north
meadow. Altfeld said that there were large trucks stored there (meadow area)
while a sewer line was placed elsewhere in the neighborhood. Altfeld said that
these deeds were a lack of respect for the surrounding neighborhood therefore she
wanted the footprint of the new maintenance facility never be enlarged, for the
height of the building never be expanded and future housing, dumping on the
property should not be allowed. Altfeld said that she and her husband and
daughter own 3 cemetery plots.
4. Steve Spiritas, 80 Overlook Drive, voiced concern for the impact on the
wildlife. Spiritas said the proposed building is almost 3 times larger than a 2 car
garage and 4 times larger than their current storage facility. Spiritas said the
interior lighting should only be allowed during daylight hours.
5. Fred Peirce stated that he represents some neighbors and the concerns were
landscaping and operations.
Reeular Meetin¢ Aspen Plannine and Zonine July 21, 2009
6. Mike Maple, 1250 Mountain View Drive, stated that he house was about 150
feet from this property. Maple thanked the Cemetery Association for all of their
work and asked how much time was spent on this process and the costs of the
process. Stone Davis replied they had about $38,000.00 in the process. Maple
said it was time to allow the Cemetery to do this process.
7. Margot Gubser Gardner, public, spoke about the 4,200 gravesites in the old
section and 6,000 in the new section. John Thorpe replied that 4200 were sold but
they were not all used to date.
Commissioner Comments:
LJ Erspamer said that P&Z would vote on 4 issues and 1 stops at P&Z.
Jim DeFrancia asked when the north portion of the cemetery plots are created is
that a separate process. John Thorpe replied that normal cemetery operations have
a plan for the operations. DeFrancia said there has been an expression of this
northern portion as a park or meadow or open space but we need to keep in mind
that it is a cemetery; a cemetery not having plots on it right now but it will have
plots in due course but it is not a park and it is not a meadow and it's not wildlife
habitat but it is a cemetery. DeFrancia said that an interim use as a meadow is de-
facto but that does not make it a meadow in perpetuity. DeFrancia said he
appreciated concerns for the piles and the illegal dumping and his understanding
was that this improved maintenance facility would improve the rubble piles and the
disturbances. DeFrancia said the size of the maintenance building was reasonable;
he would go with the existing governance on lights. DeFrancia said there were
other cemeteries with the maintenance facilities in the middle. DeFrancia stated
this was a PUD and they can't do anything that is not granted without coming back
and he fundamentally supports the application and with some refinements.
Bert Myrin said the hours of operation for lighting were a big concern and supports
conditions that include more restrictive residential ornon-residential lighting code,
whichever is more restrictive for this space. Alan Richman said that was accepted.
Myrin said the dumping ground was raised several times and he would like to see
something referring tb that. Erspamer asked who enforces the conditions of the
resolution. Phelan answered the lighting codes will be harder because two
different standards will apply to figure out which is more restrictive of each
standard.
7
Regular Meetin¢ Asoen Plaunin2 and Zoning July 21 2009
Brian Speck commended the cemetery board for taking such good care of the
cemetery and he was in support of the proposal with the stipulation of no one
living in the building and supported Jim DeFrancia's comments.
LJ Erspamer voiced concern for the trucks starting up in the morning on a cold day
and asked if the applicant would plug the trucks in when the temperatures were
below 40 degrees. John Thorpe replied that he would but the contractors may or
may not have that ability to plug into an outlet. Stone Davis said that an outlet
would be furnished. Erspamer asked about an employee review. Alan Richman
said that was an acceptable condition. Erspamer asked if the operations were in
daylight hours. John Thorpe replied that was typical but in the event of
emergencies that might change. Erspamer said only items necessary for the
cemetery operation and there would be no storage of other items on the property.
John Thorpe responded that other than their contractors and agents; there were
numerous easements on this property and last summer had very little control over
the work that went on in the sanitation department easement; the cemetery allowed
that work in the cemetery rather than on the street for the upgrade of that sewer.
Thorpe said there was a gas line on the north boarder. Erspamer did not like the
approximate but minimum lot size but no more than 16.8 acres; minimum lot width
no more than 545 feet; minimum front yard no more than 15 feet; minimum rear
yard no less than 175 from the neighbor per site plan.
MOTION: Jim DeFrancia moved to extend the meeting to 7: 30 pm seconded by
Brain Speck. Approved 5-1.
Erspamer asked if the conditions from page 32 of the packet Condition 1. The
Cemetery Association shall collaborate with the City Forester to establish a
landscape plan and a landscape maintenance plan for the entire cemetery property
including the north meadow and the Castle Creek corridor that is acceptable to the
City. Condition 2. Heavy equipment shall be plugged in the night before when it is
below 40 degrees. Condition 3. Operations shall be during the daylight hours
except for recoded easement agreements. Condition 4. After 2 years the City
Housing shall review employees. Alan Richman agreed to the conditions.
MOTION: Jim DeFrancia moved to approve Resolutionll, series of 2009 with
the amendments regarding equipment, daylight operations, the 2 year review on
employees and the prohibition of a living unit, addition of truck plug ins, no
vehicle storage from outside the cemetery use and the lighting standards that are
more restrictive and approving the Conditional Use Review and recommending
approval of Consolidated PUD, Amendment to the Official Zone District Map and
8
Reeular Meetine Aspen Plannine and Zoning July 21, 2009
Growth Management Review for an Essential Public Facility for the property 808
Cemetery Lane; seconded by Stan Gibbs. Roll call vote.• Speck, yes; Gibbs, yes;
Wampler, yes; Myrin, yes; DeFrancia, yes; Erspamer, yes; APPROVED 6-0.
Discussion:
Stan Gibbs asked about the top of bank, which was an official line on the drawing.
Gram Means said the activity envelope was to the top of bank and what was
included in that activity envelope was the turning space for trucks. Means said the
spoils cribs were approximately 10 feet and the building itself was 58 feet from the
bank. John Thorpe said they have that because along the exposed edge of that
irregular top of bank and there is the place where trucks turn there are boulders.
Stan Gibbs said there were 2 telephone poles there. Gram Means said they have
worked hard to minimize the truck turning and how a dump truck enters the site
and dump into the spoils crib and things like that. Gibbs asked what would prevent
a truck from going over the bank. Means replied there was a detail showing
boulders that would be place on the bank. Gibbs said that he would accept a
boulder as a sufficient barrier at the top of bank. Means said the electric easement
area has boulders.
434 EAST COOPER - BIDWELL
LJ Erspamer opened the referral for the 434 E Cooper, Bidwell Project. Sara
Adams said that staff was asking P&Z for referral comments regarding
Commercial Design Review to HPC. HPC will be hearing this case tomorrow
night during a public hearing; this wasn't noticed it was just a courtesy referral.
Adams said it was a 9,000 square foot lot with a demo and replace with a mixed
use building to the commercial core historic district is why HI'C has purview.
Previously HPC granted conceptual commercial design and view plane exemption.
P&Z recommended Subdivision approval to City Council, granted growth
management for new commercial and affordable housing; all of those approvals
that were granted during those reviews are still valid and P&Z will be seeing this
again because there was more commercial proposed so there will be another
growth management review.
Adams said that the lack of public amenity space was of concern so the applicant
was proposing 12% pedestrian amenity space with an 18 foot setback from the
property line at 60 feet wide. The height on the original building was 41 feet to the
highest point and now the height was dropped to 36 feet 7 inches.
9
Regular Meeting Asaen Planning and Zoning Julv 21 2009
Adams said that staff was recommending approval to HPC tomorrow night for
commercial design review but there were two issues one was having a one story
mass at the corner and the second conflict with historic design guidelines was the
glazing at grade level.
Stan Gibbs said that he was in favor of HPC looking at the massing at the corner.
LJ Erspamer commended the match of the corners to Paradise. Bert Myrin agreed
with the lower massing. Jim DeFrancia agreed. Adams said that the guidelines
call for two stories and this was a concern of the public and Council to bring the
massing and height down during subdivision review. Jim True asked why it was
on the agenda as a public hearing. Jennifer Phelan stated that was a mistake.
Public Comments:
Junee Kirk, public, said this was an improvement but this was one of the most
important corners in Aspen. Kirk asked the applicant to provide elevations along
Cooper Street and Galena as well to compare the heights to the average heights.
Kirk asked P&Z to recommend the fu1125% pedestrian amenity just like Paradise
Bakery. Kirk also asked the building be limited to two stories as are all of the
other buildings on that block.
John Rowland said for the record Paradise Bakery was 6% pedestrian amenity.
Toni Kronberg, public; said there was zoning in the city of Aspen with 2 historic
districts, Main Street and the Commercial Core Historic. Kronberg said that she
asked to refer staff to the Wienerstube lawsuit that was successful on the court
level.
LJ Erspamer closed the public comments.
Cliff Weiss asked about the number of trees being displaced. Mitch Haas replied
none; they were beyond the property line. Weiss asked if the tenants were locked
in. Haas replied that none of the tenants were locked in. Adams said this was a
referral for mass, scale, pedestrian amenity and height.
MOTION: Jim DeFrancia moved to extend the meeting for 10 to 15 minutes;
seconded by Brain Speck. Approved 5-2.
Weiss said that he liked the project and did not think that it was too high.
DeFrancia said the P&Z was split on the height. Gibbs favored the two story. The
10
Reeular MeetinE Aspen Plannin¢ and Zonine Julv 21, 2009
commissioners agreed on the public amenity space as proposed. LJ Erspamer
asked to see an elevation from the alley.
Adams stated that she would relay the P&Z comments to HI'C.
MOTION: Stan Gibbs moved to adjourn the meeting seconded by Jim
DeFrancia. All in favor, approved.
Adjourned at 7:50 pm.
+ ~~u~,~i
ckie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
11