HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20110705 City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes — July 05, 2011
Comments 2
Minutes 2
Conflicts of Interest 2
861 Ute Avenue 2
Miscellaneous Code Amendments 5
Lift One Lodge PUD & Timeshare 5
•
1
City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes — July 05, 2011
Stan Gibbs opened the regular meeting of the Planning & Zoning Commission,
Tuesday July 5 in Sister Cities Meeting Room at 4:30. Cliff Weiss was excused.
Commissioners present: Bert Myrin, Jasmine Tygre, LJ Erspamer, Stan Gibbs and
Jim DeFrancia. Staff in attendance were: Jim True, Special Counsel; Jessica
Garrow, Chris Bendon and Drew Alexander, Community Development; Jackie
Lothian, Deputy City Clerk.
Comments
LJ Erspamer said that he was watching people standing on the roofs for the parade
on the 4 and he stated we need railings on these roofs. LJ Erspamer asked don't
they have to have a 3 foot fence. Jessica Garrow responded the code requires a 42
inch railing if it is an accessible roof top or any deck that is not on ground level.
Jasmine Tygre said that Timeshare regulations and tree removal are of concern
because we have 2 instances of which the regulations that are in place are either
improperly drafted to get at what we really intended with these regulations or
conditions or enforced but we are getting almost the opposite of what was
intended. Jasmine Tygre said that she wanted to visit as a general thing in terms of
our drafting or the AACP. Jasmine Tygre said that we have to look at the
Timeshare regulations to get tourists in beds. Jasmine Tygre said that whenever
there is a development plan and there is a tree on the property that tree is gone.
Jessica Garrow said that this is a separate issue from the Community Plan; it is a
specific issue of dealing with tree removal and the timeshare also.
Conflicts of Interest
None stated.
Minutes
MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to approve the minutes from June 7, 2011 seconded
by Stan Gibbs, all in favor, APPROVED.
MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to approve the minutes from June 14, 2011
seconded by Jasmine Tygre, all in favor, APPROVED.
The commissioners wanted to wait on the approval of the June 21 minutes for
some corrections and clarifications.
PUBLIC HEARING:
861 Ute Avenue — Residential Design Standards Variance
Stan Gibbs opened the hearing for 861 Ute Avenue. Jessica Garrow stated the
applicant is Laguna Sierra, LLC represented by David Johnston Architects and
requested a variance from the secondary mass of the residential design standards.
2
City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes — July 05, 2011
Jessica Garrow stated the Planning & Zoning Commission is the final review on
this and must find either or both criteria that the proposal provides an appropriate
design given the neighborhood context or is clearly necessary due to site specific
constraints. Jessica Garrow said that you do not have to find that they meet both;
they just need to meet one criterion to grant the variance. Staff does not believe
that the proposal meets either of the standards.
Jessica Garrow provided a little background that a previous owner in 2007 decided
to demolish the existing single family home and were going to build a home with a
variance request from one of the garage standards; at that time the owner
redesigned the project to meet the code. In January of this year (2011) the current
owner purchased the property so they hired David Johnston to make some minor
design changes and they are now requesting a variance from secondary mass. The
secondary mass requires that 10% of the structure be separate from the primary
house; it can be connected by a small linking element but it does need to be
separate and have that small linking element. Jessica Garrow noted the current
design was on the screen (power point and page 3 of the staff memo) includes a
linking element which is highlighted in orange. The secondary mass for the
project is the garage and is connected by a small linking element.
Jessica Garrow said that notice was provided and she had a few returned
letters /envelopes that were not deliverable. Jim True stated that the mailing list
was not provided but if it was provided within 24 hours then the application would
be complete. David Johnston's office brought the mailing list on Wednesday, July
6, 2011. The power point presentation was Applicant Exhibit #1.
Bert Myrin asked if the last sentence on page 2 of the staff memo was an accurate
description of the secondary mass. Jessica Garrow replied that is from the code
and specifically this secondary mass falls under the building form section; there is
no alley for this lot. Jessica Garrow said it was a pretty eclectic neighborhood with
single family, multi - family, and office uses.
Adam Roy said he was a planner with David Johnston Architects and he was
joined by David Johnston. Adam Roy utilized power point to show the location of
the property and the image of the building, which is just before the Aspen Alps
entry drive on the south side of Ute Avenue. Adam Roy said what they were
asking for was to slide that mass of the garage back so it is contiguous with the
structure; he showed the 5 foot void, the primary mass of the structure and there
was a fairly heavy tree wall. Adam Roy said by shifting the garage back they are
achieving closer to 15 feet from the front of the residence, which meets the code
3
City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes — July 05, 2011
recessing the garage from the front street line. Stan Gibbs asked if this was the
current design because it doesn't match what is in the packet; the void goes
considerably further so which is what we have in terms of design. David Johnston
replied that was the earlier version and they separated the garage. Stan Gibbs said
that he did not see this particular floor plan on the application and how you have
implemented and what is implemented behind it, interior. David Johnston replied
it was still a mudroom area.
Jim DeFrancia asked what is being varied. Jessica Garrow replied it was the void
space, that 5 foot setback between the southern wall of the garage and the main
house.
Bert Myrin said on page 4 of the staff memo "b" seems like it would be very
difficult overcome.
No public comments.
Jim DeFrancia said this relates to site specific constraints and there are a number of
others in the neighborhood that have garages in the front and he didn't see this as
detrimental to the character and quality of the neighborhood. Bert Myrin said that
fairness requires a site specific constraint under "a ". Jim DeFrancia said that his
sense of it was there is an element of fairness in having the property comply. Bert
Myrin said that requires site specific constraint. Stan Gibbs said from a
perspective of fairness he was more concerned with looking forward than looking
back; these things were already there and down the road if we had to make a
judgment based upon this particular in the future we want to be fair to those people
realizing that doesn't necessarily establish precedent but want to be consistent and
want to be fair. Jasmine Tygre said that the applicant's requested variance pushing
the garage further back from Ute Avenue, which is where most people are going to
see this building from foot traffic and this first story element, the garage, is more in
keeping with the residential design standards than the void space which is really
impractical. Jasmine Tygre agreed that "a" is the appropriate judgment standard
for this particular project and this variation provides a better solution to secondary
mass requirement of the residential design standards. LJ Erspamer said that one
wall left blank would be less energy efficient than this and he will support this.
Stan Gibbs said the design standard is well satisfied. LJ Erspamer stated there was
no alley.
MOTION: Jim DeFrancia moved to approve Resolution #12, series 2011
approving a variance request from secondary mass requirement from the
4
City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes — July 05, 2011
residential design standards to construct a single family residence located at 861
Ute Avenue, finding that standard "a" has been met. Seconded by LJ Erspamer;
roll call vote: Myrin, yes; Tygre, yes; Erspamer, yes; DeFrancia, yes; Gibbs, yes.
All in favor APPROVED 5 -0.
PUBLIC HEARING:
Miscellaneous Code Amendments
Stan Gibbs opened the public hearing for Miscellaneous Code Amendments.
MOTION: Jim DeFrancia moved to continue the Miscellaneous Code
Amendments to July 19 seconded by Jasmine Tygre. All in favor, APPROVED.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING:
Lift One Lodge PUD & Timeshare
Stan Gibbs opened the continued public hearing Lift One Lodge PUD and
Timeshare continued from June 21 Chris Bendon noted they had a site visit
earlier with P &Z members (Stan, Bert and LJ) to look at a spruce tree at the corner
of Gilbert and South Aspen Street. Chris Bendon said the tree used to be right
adjacent to the Holland House building and you can still see the outline of the
Holland House in the tree so the commission wanted to see that. Chris Bendon
said that Bert asked if the tree was healthy and Brian Flynn from Parks responded
yes and the tree was enjoying the lack of the Holland House and there was some
new growth on that side of the tree. Chris Bendon said they also looked at the
property boundary to east so adjacent to the Skiers Chalet Lodge and the
townhomes to the east.
Chris Bendon said at the last meeting they spoke about the height of the proposal,
specifics, diagrams, responses to questions asked previously, review of the DRC
comments and staff review out of the criteria and staff made a recommendation of
approval with conditions to be in a resolution that has been drafted. There were
answers to additional questions that we had last time and Exhibit I, which is
additional detail on heights. Chris Bendon said there was additional information
on fractional occupancy practices here and Drew will cover that portion. There
was a draft resolution in the packet.
Bert Myrin said on page 4 on the car to go question; what is the duration on the
developer paying. Chris Bendon replied it was a 5 year commitment. Bert Myrin
said page 5 how does the 2000 square foot addition act with the PUD process.
Chris Bendon stated that you have to look at the code under which the application
was submitted. Bert Myrin asked if you consider these lessons that have been
5
City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes — July 05, 2011
learned since and fixed. Chris Bendon replied that you have to look at the specific
concern or public interest and put yourself into the text of the 2005 code.
LJ Erspamer asked about the $600,000.00 funding for future service in Willoughby
Park, who holds those funds. Chris Bendon replied the City will. LJ Erspamer
asked if that went into a separate fund. Chris Bendon replied yes. LJ Erspamer
asked if the day skier lockers would be an annual raffle for use. Chris Bendon
replied yes and there were 80 lockers being proposed within the project free for the
use with a lottery system to issue those. LJ Erspamer asked if there were any pay
lockers. Chris Bendon replied that he did not believe so. LJ Erspamer asked the
duration of the Museum lease. Chris Bendon answered it was an existing lease; he
believed it was a 100 year lease and we were 15 years into it. LJ Erspamer said the
30 day advance notice for the rental of the Timeshares was rather short but is there
going to be a day when they release that to the public, a deadline. Chris Bendon
responded there is a deadline for which owners have to tell the operator that they
will or not be arriving; there is usually a secondary owner pool and then a public
for rent pool. LJ Erspamer asked how much advance notice would the public get.
Bob Daniel replied no less than 30 days; typically these programs work under an
annual rotating base which owners have access to their units; there is an annual
calendar sent out to the owners and then to the general ownership with space
available and after that it is released to the general public. LJ Erspamer asked
about the $150,000.00 for the volleyball court, when does that go to the city and is
it in a separate fund. Chris Bendon replied it goes to the city parks fund for the
replacement of the volleyball court at building permit issuance. LJ Erspamer asked
if there were any hydrants for snowmaking. Chris Bendon replied no. Bob Daniel
said he couldn't speak to where the hydrants were but he knew the SkiCo did push
piles of snow in and around the base of the lift and the bottom of the race course.
LJ Erspamer asked how wide the corridor was that goes from the bottom of Lift
One A down to the museum. Bob Daniel responded the tramway corridor was 45
feet wide at a minimum and is greater than that at most portions.
Jasmine Tygre asked what mechanism do we have to ensure the public rental
requirement actually happens. Chris Bendon replied periodic checks to make sure
that they were actually renting out rooms, there would likely be in the development
agreement a cure period and cure remedies that could include revoking their CO.
Jasmine Tygre asked even after the units were sold. Chris Bendon replied yes.
Jasmine Tygre asked what incentive does the management company have to rent
these rooms to the public. Bob Daniel responded clearly a profitability because a
percentage of the rental goes to the management company; most management
companies operate between a split between the owner and the company as it relates
to their other rental revenues received. Jasmine Tygre asked what was there when
6
City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes — July 05, 2011
the project was sold and a homeowners association was formed what is there that is
there to say that some do not want to rent out their units. Bob Daniel said there is a
covenant in the Timeshare agreement that is a part of the disclosure document as it
relates to the governance of the Timeshare structure which requires that.
Chris Bendon said that Drew Alexander will give an update on fractional
occupancy. Drew Alexander stated that staff reached out to some of the lodges in
the community that reflected the same type of operation that Lift One is proposing.
They received occupancy percentages for individual lodges; they walked in
assuming the role of a customer to these lodges. Drew Alexander said that they
gave the lodge a date that was further out in the year that was in the off season and
they were able to tell us yes there were rooms available and some were able to say
there were rooms available now in peak season. Two of the lodges gave rates for
peak season versus off season; the off season numbers were anywhere between the
20% to 40% occupancy range and it was during these time period that these lodges
were seeing more of the impromptu on line booking, public walk in. For the peak
season everyone was between the 90% to 100% booking rate, holidays at full
capacity; one of the factors was how many ownerships have been counted so if all
of the ownerships have been purchased there is more of a chance that the owners of
those condos will be there. One lodge gave an annual occupancy rate and that was
in the 70% range and soon as we get that information from the other lodges we will
provide it to the commission. Jasmine Tygre asked which lodges did you talk to.
Drew Alexander replied that he told the lodges that we would keep the details
confidential. Jasmine Tygre responded that she wasn't asking for individual
occupancy rates but which lodges you talked to. Chris Bendon replied Hyatt,
Regis, Dancing Bear, Innsbruck, and Residences at Little Nell. Jasmine Tygre
asked if there was a breakdown whether the occupancy was owners or tourists.
Drew Alexander replied they did not get specifics other than the amount of public
increases in the off season.
Stan Gibbs asked on the parking issue can you explain which parking spaces are
being referred to. Chris Bendon replied he believed it was the top of South Aspen
Street; there will be a turnaround at the top of the street.
LJ Erspamer said the fire department needs room for a ladder truck on the east side
and the slope is at such an angle that he couldn't get the outriggers down
adequately; did you address that. Chris Bendon stated that he spoke to Ed Van
and he was good with the report from Hughes Associates, Inc.
Public Comments:
7
City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes — July 05, 2011
1. Eben Clark representing Silver Shadow recapped objections of his client
such as the floor area in the application, the heights on the eastern wing, the
request of the 10 year vested rights, variances on their side and the
conceptual is different from the final. Eben Clark said if the western
building had the height it would not impact any other buildings. Eben
Clarks asked the Commission to look over these matters one more time.
2. Lucas Peck clarified what they were saying about the parking at the Top of
Mill for the 4 spots being replaced by a turn around and Shadow Mountain
will be impacted by that. Lucas Peck voiced concern for the parking and he
felt that the class B permit was to give parking for those people and it will be
taken away by this project.
Stan Gibbs closed the public comments section of the meeting.
Bob Daniel said there was a question posed what if the 2005 land use code was
used and what would the heights look like; Stephen Holley would address that with
the graphic. Bob Daniel said the turnaround area is not an access point for their
lodge because their access is internal. Stephen Holley said the graphic showed the
heights for a flat roof and sloped roofs; sloped roofs have different measurements.
Chris Bendon said that they wanted just the heights whether it is a ridge or a
parapet or a roof.
Chris Bendon stated that the vested rights would be looked at by City Council and
staff would likely recommend something less than 10 years. There was a comment
about conceptual being vastly different and staff did find that the final application
was in accordance with the conceptual approval.
LJ Erspamer asked about page 22 3.9A; the shuttle creates a taxi like transportation
solution and was this advisory or etched in stone. Chris Bendon replied they had
to have a transportation management plan and that is part of the development
agreement and the transportation management plan needs to be reviewed every
now and then and changed as it needs to be. Chris Bendon said you could change
the wording direct and how they operate. LJ Erspamer said that he would not like
to see on demand shuttle in there; he wanted more open verbiage.
Bert Myrin said that his biggest concerns were height and mass; the other concern
was the south end of the project that appears to have no setback. Chris Bendon
replied on the south end there would be a 25 foot wide right -of -way and it is the
main utility feed to the tank on Aspen Mountain.
8
City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes — July 05, 2011
Bert Myrin said there was a lot of information to go through and LJ's idea of going
through the resolution makes sense. Bert Myrin said that he wasn't ready to vote
on this tonight.
LJ Erspamer said he had concerns about some things and other things that he
would like to discuss and to go through and find out what it takes to approve it and
make recommendations with that.
Jasmine Tygre voiced concern for the size and mass of the building; the model
scared her and when she looked at the little Skiers Chalet with the gigantic
building behind it. Jasmine Tygre said they want to incentivize lodge uses and to
that extent dimensional changes that will allow larger dimensions for a lodge use
than we would allow for a residential use, which is why she wanted to get to the
occupancy issue and occupancy by owners and occupancy of tourists. Jasmine
Tygre said if a project is going to be occupied by owners only it is a residential
project whether it is fractional or fee simple full ownership and she has been
concerned about this that has been approved under the lodge and does not rent to
the public. We created lodge incentives to prevent free market residential from
appearing in lodge zones and we have a responsibility to the community to make
sure that it is being used as a lodge to create tourist accommodations. Jasmine
Tygre said that the regulations that we have in effect address that; she was
concerned about these dimensions without having the absolute mechanisms in
place to make sure that we are getting what we want and she was not ready to sign
off on this project until that is detailed to her satisfaction. This was only one piece
of an area that is all going to be redeveloped.
Jim DeFrancia said the Dancing Bear had the obligation to rent is in fact contained
in the declarations; the declarations were approved by the city and it mandates that
time be available to the public.
Stan Gibbs said we can put in the resolution we approve this with a condition that
it is made and established very clearly that rentals must be a provision when the
owners are not in occupancy.
Chris Bendon said that he walked into the Dancing Bear and spoke to a Jacqueline
Carr and rented a room for tonight but then declined it and made a reservation for
October but also declined that reservation. Bob Daniel said there were certain
things that you could put into a declaration and he has done this under KIOWA,
which is the common interest ownership act for the State of Colorado in which you
state that amendment to this section requires a PUD Amendment or requires action
9
City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes — July 05, 2011
by City Council; there are certain things that you can do in your declaration with
the agreement of the declarant and with the agreement of the City which cannot be
changed by a 2/3 majority of the association. Jasmine Tygre said that was the kind
of information that was needed to be included.
LJ Erspamer stated this was a great opportunity to relocate some parking in the
City and it is not the applicant but the City Government; this is outside of this
application.
Bert Myrin said that Exhibit I had the trellis and he thought that was going away.
Chris Bendon replied that was represented as going away. Bert Myrin asked about
the platter lift being addressed. Jim DeFrancia said there were a lot of positive
things with this project by rejuvenating that part of town; that includes the
reconstruction of Dean Street; making the Skiers Chalet into a Museum for the
public is a huge benefit.
Chris Bendon said there were improvements that were to the streets that might be
shared when the adjacent project goes in and the utility improvements also.
LJ Erspamer said the street was dangerous to pedestrians. Chris Bendon said the
applicant was removing all the parking from the street; the engineering department
requested that the sidewalks be detached to extend with a little bit of buffer and
street trees; the surface of the street was a rough aggregate; they are providing a
sanding truck.
Stan Gibbs asked how far setback was the Skiers Chalet Lodge from the property
line and what was the setback of this proposed building. Stan Gibbs asked for
more on the transportation plan to be connected to the downtown; he wanted more
detail. Chris Bendon responded that the applicant can't make allegations to how
the City distributes its transportation funds and he asked if Stan or the P &Z would
be happy recommending to Council to do that; there is a transportation impact fee
that they will have to make in addition to the TDM issues. Stan Gibbs said that
something needs to be put in there for Council to connect this part of town to the
core; it should be as convenient as the Nell; take one of the shuttles to go over
there; extend dial -a -ride to there with a regular schedule.
Bert Myrin asked if they should start by looking at the current resolution. Chris
Bendon said he would provide an updated resolution they would have as soon as
needed.
10
City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes — July 05, 2011
Bob Daniel replied to the setback question that it was 24 feet for the Skiers Chalet
from the 6/21/11 presentation and the new lodge moved back on slides 12, 13, and
14 of the 6/21/11 presentation of the applicant. LJ Erspamer asked to bring a slide
of a 5 foot setback with a normal height of 38 feet and then another slide with a 24
foot setback and a 52 foot height.
MOTION: LJ Erspamer moved to continue the public hearing to July 19th
Jasmine Tygre seconded. All in Favor, APPROVED.
Adjourned at 7:05 pm.
X igle244.0J kie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
11