Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19841204 RECQ, D OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting Planning and zoning Commission December 4. 1984 Chairman Perry Harvey called the meeting to order at 5: 06 p.m. with commissioners Jasmine Tygre (arrived at 5 : 11 p.m. ) , Pat Fallin, lVelton Anderson, David T,lhite, Roger Hunt , Tlari Peyton, and alternate Ramona I-Iarkalunas (arrived at 5 : 09 p.m. ) present. C.OMMISSrONERS' COMMENTS Hunt commented on last night' s meeting on SPA. The Commission should adopt section four by resolution. That resolution should be passed to Council. Alan Richman, planning office, commented that the Commission has already done that. Section four was in the resolution. Richman advised Council to remove this section from the resolution and then communicate through a motion or resolution to the planning office that section four be part of its workload. Harvey requested that Commission forward a resolution on section four if Council fails to act. Richman briefed the board that Council reviews this item December 10th and acts on the draft December 17th. Richman assured the members he will report back the actions by early January. Hurt asked if Hammond participated in the transportation meeting with the highway department . Richman replied Glenn Horn attended. Hunt asked what transpired about correcting the light at Cemetery Lane . The loop on the Cemetery Lane side is not functioning. Cemetery Lane loop trips in the absence of cars. That affects traffic . Fallin reported the presence of a sheriff there this evening. (Ramona Markalunas arrives in the chambers at 5: 09 p.m. ) Richman reminded the Commission that the two bodies, Council and the Commission, agreed to a session on the planning work program. On January 0, 1905 , the first Commission ' s meeting of the new year , Richman requested a fairly extensive session to present alternatives on planning ideas and strategies. He will invite Council to that meeting. The session will address the Commission' s planning work program. The second meeting in January addresses the residential CiP competition. PUBLIC HEARING WEINERSTUDE CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW Hunt mentioned he has talked from time to time informally with Helmut Schloffer, owner of the Weinerstube, about being forced out of his present location. The rent was increased. Hunt has not talked to Schloffer about this application however . Hunt has an ongoing business relationship with the owners , his usual business relationship that exists with many local restaurants. Lunt has no other interest in this project. Harvey asked Hunt if his business will. be affected by the 1,1einerstube move. Hunt replied no. Colette Pe nne , planning office, briefed the Commission on the application. In the C-1 zone, restaurants are a conditional use. RECORD QE PROCEEDING ftgular Meeting Planning and Zoning C i Degember 4. 19a4 Sumo' s used all the available square footage at the Old Post Office. The Weinerstube is interested in moving to the Old Post Office as of April, 1935. The Weinerstube will use about 3 , 500 square feet . Albie Fern, counsel for the applicant, corrected her figure, it is 5 ,000 square feet. Penne continued. There is another use already interested in the remaining space. (Jasmine Tygre arrives in the chambers at 5: 11 p.m. ) Penne said the intent of the C-1 zone in the code is to provide for the establishment of commercial uses not -primarily oriented toward serving the tourist population. The Weinerstube has been in its present location for about nineteen years. It serves a clientele that includes tourists but primarily locals. The reason for conditional use review is that the conditional use approval for Sumo ' s expired more than a year ago . Had that year not passed, the restaurant might have been considered a continued conditional use in the zone. Any time a conditional use changes in any substantive way, the new request is brought back for the Commission' s review. In this present application there are fewer seats. There will be ten parking spaces along the alley. She checked out with the building department complaints on Sumo' s, primarily a nighttime operation. The only complaint was from La Chamanie Apartments. The other concern is parking be clearly delineated for the restaurant. The operation of the 1.1einerstubc at this time is primarily daytime. The T-.7einerstube is a breakfast/lunch operation. The hours are 7 : 00 a.m. to 10 : 00 p.m. The applicant wants to keep that option to serve dinner. Sumo' s was open until 2 : 00 a. m. A nighttime operation may conflict with Abetone Ristorante , across the street. The critical question for the J,TC inerstube is parking. This restaurant ' s time of operation does not appear to conflict with Abetone as did Sumo' s. There are no problems in her mind. She advised Don Lemos who has a private parking lot near there to install signage indicating the lot is private. The planning office believes this request is good. The planning office recommends granting a conditional use permit for the ?°4 4 inerstube. The Weinerstube wants to change the entrance and to move coolers to the back loading dock of the post office. All that activity will be roofed. The area would count in commercial FAR. Charles Cuniffe, architect for the project , will present the design . The square footage is under five hundred square feet. The accumulative increase in FAR is over 250 square feet. A GrIP exemption is required for that roofing. incorporate the GMP exemption in this resolution. Otherwise, the applicant will have to go through another one step review process. Fallin asked what other use is contemplated for the space. Penne replied the use will not conflict with the restaurant use . The other use is a permitted use in the C-1 zone. The use will not gencrate much car traffic; the use will generate pedestrian 1) RECORD OF .PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting J!Janning and Zoning C i December 4. 198A traffic. Harvey opened the public hearing. Charles Cuniffe, architect, presented floor plans and elevations of the entrance and cooler . Cuniffe and the Commission review the drawings. Harvey arvey asked for further explanation of the G11P exemption. Penne explained if the expansion were under 250 square feet planning would simply sign off . Expansion from 250 square feet to 500 square feet requires a one step review process by the Commission. Cuniffe noted the actual overhang is 168 square feet; the coolers involve 331 .44 square feet. The entrance will not be enclosed, it is a covered. Roof area is counted in FAR. The space is not additional commercial square footage and the space is not enclosed. The entrance is a covered porch. Hunt asked if the 500 square feet is an approval for the building. Penne replied correct. The applicant cannot approach the planning office twice and incrementalize with the intent to obtain over 500 square feet. This request for 500 square feet is the last time that the 500 square feet can be allowed through a G11P exemption. The applicant is allowed small expansions up to 500 square feet . Hunt asked if the new area included the 3 ,500 square foot figure. Penne replied no. Hunt suggested including the 500 square feet in the 3 ,500 square feet for appro;.,imately 4 ,000 square feet. Penne explained the Commission ' s decision today does not mean the FAR is correct. The building department will have to substantiate that there is no FAR violation before granting a building permit. Penne stated that in her opinion there is no violation. She has preopted other applications for building on this property. The applicant is substantially under FAR. Hunt reiterated include in the approval approximately 4 , 000 sc,juare feet . Harvey asked if the ten off street parking spaces are in the lease for the restaurant. Kern replied yes. Cuniffe replied to a comment by T,-,Thite- noted; nothing new is being added or deleted. runt did not support Sumo' s because that restaurant was not a .r family or local oriented restaurant . The code indicates a restaurant in this zone should be family oriented. He supports the Weinerstube in this location. Penne advised changing the motion to read 4 , 000 square feet . Technically the permit would include all FAR. Entrances and cooler spaces are technically part of the! restaurant . Include approval of a GMP exemption for 500 square feet of expansion to alter the entrance and roof to the proposed locations. Harvey closed the public hearing. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Hgeting Planning and Zoning CoMMission pecem r. 4. 1284 Motion: Roger Hunt movr�d to approvo conditional use permit for the Weinerstube Restaurant to locate in ap mately A_ ,1000 square p r 0 X,i f the Old Post office Building at 307 South Spring subject facet o J ect to th- necessary perinitlsj being received zcrola the Environmental 1 t h Dcpartin.ient . He further moved to e,:empt up to 500 square feet of addition for ti,ntry wa-y and ref-rig :rated space from the 4 growth management requirement. The motion is seconded by JaSm Lne Tygre. All in favor ; motion carried. Penne advised the applicant of new bathroom facility requirements. The applicants responded the -facilities meet their requirements. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING ASPEN MOUNTAIN LODGE PRELIMINARY PUD-PHASING Harvey reopened the continued public hearing. Richman said Doremus and he compiled a list of original commitments presented during conceptual review and the proposed representations for phasing. Some of the representations are different. Most of the commitments remain the same between the original and phasing program. There are four areas with significant changes. First, the conference space proposed under the phasing is two-thirds of the originally proposed space. The later third would be built during phase two, the reconstruction of the Continental Inn. Second, the ice skating rink would not be accomplished during the first phase. Remember the entire block of Durant Street is committed to being open space and parks. During phase one there would not be an active recreation area. Passive recreation areas would be available. Third, the most important change evolves around the architecture and design question. There were many comments and much discussion about upgrading the entire PUD area and constructing the entire PUD at one time. Now the proposal is for two construction periods. Clearly, there will be two distinct lodges. This was one of Council ' s objectives. A unified architectural program has been eliminated. There is also a program which has been developed for the internal renovation of the Continental. Richman has not seen those plans. There is also a program for external upgrades. The applicant intends to spend money on the exterior of the Continental . The Continental Inn will function and look better . Fourth, there is change to the parking space commitment . Pre- viously, there were 353 spaces, presently there are 283 spaces. That is a change from .8 spaces per unit to . 6 per unit. That is significant. Harvey proceeded to comment on item one, water, sanitary, sewer and storm sewer. All improvements are upfront and there is no problem. A RECORD OZ—MCEEDINGS Regular Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission December 4. M4 Item two involves other utilities. Harvey noted that the cast block of Dean is under study. John Doremus, representative for the applicant, introduced A. J. Zabbia, engineering consultant . There are various things going on between F_Ioly Cross and Aspen Electric. Harvey asked if the Commission would be concerned about delaying the undergrounding of all the utilities until phase two. Doremus indicated on the wall a revised utility plan. The plan clarifies the hydrant locations proposed by Rea Cassens and Association and the fire consultant. The consultant failed to respond in time to include his remarks in the original submission. Zabbia commented that originally all the overhead lines on Dean Street were to be eliminated . These utilities also include telephone lines. The utilities were to loop around the development, run south on ?ionarch, east on Summit, north on Galena, and then reconnect. Dean Street is the problem. Dean is the demarcation line between Aspen Electric on the north and Holy Cross on the south. Both electric companies have their trunk lines along Dean. Aspen Electric' s trunk lines run north of Dean, Holy Cross ' trunk lines run south of Dean. The lodge development crosses that line and there is a problem removing the trunk line along Dean Street. Zabbia described the initial plan for removing trunk lines from Dean for both Aspen Electric and Holy Cross for the construction of the entire PUD at one time . This plan eliminated all the over head lines along Dean Street. Hunt asked how Aspen Electric would serve 1111ountain Chalet if Aspen Electric were to run its lines on Durant. Zabbia indicated on the plan where Aspen Electric would connect the overhead lines on Monarch and Durant into a transformer. The applicant would absorb the cost of that project. The phasing program eliminates the need to loop the entire development as once proposed. There are several reasons for this. He indicated the undergounding route on Galena which would -be torn up. During the second phase Galena would have to be torn up again. T4-- . L. is cost effective to underground the west half along Monarch and Summit , catch the overhead lines on Mill Street, and terminate at the Fasching Haus. During the second phase undergrounding would continue on Galena and Dean Street . (Zabbia illustrated the proposed work during the first and second phases on the utility plan. ) The first phase will encompass 60-70% of the total cost of undergrounding. Provisions will be made during the undergrounding of the first phase to insure to continuation of the undergrounding during the second phase. A substantial amount of money is saved with this plan . Holy Cross will eventually loop around both directions . He described the connections : Holy Cross will connect with a large e.-,isting overhead trunk line running east on Durant Street near the Chart House, will make the necessary underground connections, will run lines south on .11onarch, cast on C RECORD.. OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting I!la * - I Zoning Commisgion December 4, 1984 Summit, will eliminate all the overhead utilities along Mill Street, will make the necessary connections to handle the Fasching Haus, and then terminate the line at Mill Street and the Fasching Haut. He described Aspen Electric' s .connection plan. Hunt asked how Holy Cross will service the ski company. Zabbia assured him that Holy Cross will make the necessary connections to keep that overhead line in service. aunt unt expressed a concern -about a break in the service. Zabbia replied Holy Cross has indicated it can continue service by looping from the west. Holy Cross has not provided the first phase details to the applicant. Holy Cross has stated that they can keep the service. They will make the T necessary connections. I-aunt noted that presently there is not a trunk line - running up Mill -Strc-et-. - Zabbia -noted there '.-iiay be overhead lines. Peyton commented that the list should accurately say part of Mill will be undergrounded as opposed to Monarch, Mill , and the cast and west block of Dean. Harvey noted there is some potential for Mill to retain overhead utilities and to add some utility lines. Novak asked when Holy Cross plans to present its program. Zabbia replied he has not pushed Holy Cross for detailed plans. I-Jovak commented the applicant cannot respond to the commissioners ' questions since he has not seen detailed plans from Holy Cross. Richman said the critical commitment, regardless of what is done in the first phase, is a guarantee in the PUD agreement that the second phase is done. At some time the city has to be able to call the completion of undergrounding the lines. The city needs this commitment and needs a condition. Novak, agreed. Harvey asked what are the odds that the utilities will not be undergrounded on the east block of Dean until phase two. Doremus replied that those lines will probably not be undergrounded until phase two. Richman suggested that if the applicant does underground the lines during phase two, fine ; but, if phase two does not happen then by a designated year the lines have to be placed underground. The phasing analysis will identify commitments that must be included in conditions that eventually will be in the PUD agreement. The city will not lose anything with this arrangement. Zabbia said things may change somewhat between the time Holy Cross and the developer sign a contract. It may be more economical to address undergrounding the utilities at one time. The developer may also decide to do the entire program, at one time because of inflation costs. Harvey asked Richman if the same consideration is applicable to landscaping, item three. Richman replied the landscaping concern is planting trees then ripping them up. There is some additional landscaping in the new plan, in particular, around the parking area and in front of the Continental . Some specific commitments to trees are not being met. Harvey asked if there is a landscape I RECORD. OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting 1!1.anning and__Zoning C i December 4. 1984 plan. Doremus identified the plan on the wall. 1.1arvey asked for details about the landscaping plan in front of the Continental . Doremus said much of the existing, mature vegetation will be preserved and be augmented. There is a plaza entrance and a landscaped park . Some removed trees will be relocated. Richman reported on his conversation with Jim Holland this afternoon. Basically, the applicant has committed to everything that Holland has asked for in terms of relocation of trees. Holland was pleased with the program as identified . Doremus noted when Galena Street is relocated, the area around the elbow of the existing Continental which will be torn up, will be relandscaped immediately. Doug Graybeal , landscape architect from Hagman/Yaw, explained the landscape plan. The concern is the pedestrian traffic flow in the two phases. The pedestrian traffic from the Continental will be directed down (north) Galena Street across a major court to town. He indicated the vehicle entry for the hotel and indicated pedestrian accesses. Pedestrian traffic will be directed out of the hotel to the corner at 1111ill and Durant, next to the Mountain Chalet. The design encourages pedestrians to cross Durant at the appropriate corners. The design includes vegetation to discourage people crossing Durant mid block. Harvey expressed confusion about item four , trails . There appears to be an unattractive trail and a dependent trail . Doremus identified the location of the ski-in trail . There is a point where the trail splits and runs east toward Galena and west toward Julianna. There is one constraint, the trail will run between the Alpen'.Aick and the Continental. The Continental will be there for five years, both structures are two stories, and there is only fourteen feet between the buildings. The trail at this point will not be attractive. The buildings cannot be moved. All the other trails can be done. Richman commented that trails cannot go anywhere until easements are obtained. The Commission discusses item five : tourist hotel amenities . Richman queried the meeting areas. Is there any meeting area presently in the Continental will remain? Doremus answered yes. He provided figures on the hotel ' s amenities. The existing Continental has 3 , 550 square of conference space. The west wing will provide 14,000 square feet of conference space at a minimum. The total is 17 , 550 square feet of conference space. The original commitment was 22 ,500 square feet for 480 rooms. The rooms have been reduced to 447 . Prorated reduction in the conference facilities reduces the square footage requirement to 20 , 950 square feet. Compare 17 , 550 square feet (phased) with 20 , 950 square feet (not phased) . The difference is 3 ,400 square feet. The lobby areas are not a GMP item. The applicant made no representations as to how large the lobby areas would be. But, the lobby areas are large. The Continental Inn has 2 ,300 scluare feet of existing lobby space . RECORD OF PROCEEDING Regular Meej;ing Planning and ZoniLig Comission Dec ember 4. 1981 He has not calculated the proposed lobby areas for the west wing , there may be about 4 ,000 or 5 ,000 square feet. The food and beverage areas are a GMP item. The applicant originally committed to 15,000 square feet. With the proposed changes in the lobby area of the Continental, there will be 10 ,000 square feet of bar/lounge space. There will be 10,000 square feet in the Continental and 9,000 square feet in the west wing for a total of 19,000 square feet of bar/lounge space. In this case the applicant is over the original commitment of 15, 000 square feet. All the health and recreation amenities will be located in the west wing with the exception of a second pool in the Conti- nental . The refrigerated ice rink will not be built during the first phase. The original proposal for the accessory retail space was 7,000 square feet. The 700 square fee",- in the Continental might be doubled or tripled to at least 1 , 400 square feet. The west wing is proposed to have 2 ,455 square feet of commercial retail space. That total is Just under 4 ,000 square feet. J Tygre said in terms of the meeting areas and square footage is there an equation that relates square footage to number of people. What will the different group sizes be? Novak replied 20 , 000 square feet handles 800 people . 14 , 000 square feet handles about 550 people . Large conferences can still be accommodated. Remember these figures are minimums. Conference space could be increased if the operator were to conclude more generous conference space was appropriate. Clearly, the space will be adequate. Tygre remarked that Aspen has never accommodated large conference groups. The problem in the past has been the lack of space for groups composed of three hundred conferees. The present space appears adequate. The community is not neces- sarily unanimous about whether it wants to accommodate groups of one thousand people. Hunt expressed concern over the abundance of restaurant space. In the long run if the entire project were not built, then there would be 4 , 000 more square feet of unanticipated restaurant space. Harvey noted 22 ,000 square feet is the Continental lobby which is a bar and lounge. Doremus remarked much of this space is used for double purposes. There is a new concept in resort hotels. It is possible to have a larger, grander lobbies if the lobbies are used for multi uses. Lobbies cannot be built anymore simply for people to move around in. That is wasted space. The space has multiple uses. In the afternoon a third or half of the lobby is set aside for the cocktail hour. The setting is attractive and is separated from the main traffic flow. This lobby will be used as a multiple use space. Remember Patti Buggatils, which is 7 ,500 square feet, is already a popular, night club restaurant. This operation has been around for a long time. Hunt repeated there is still 4 ,000 more square feet of restaurant (space than proposed. Doremus remembered the original application included a country western bar/lounge at 0,500 square feet located at the corner of Durant and rlonarch. Thore was a request for rezoning the area for the restaurant . That plan was deleted from the program since the area was not rezoned. Novak commented that 11 RECORD OF. PROCEEDINGS Regular Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission December 4. 1984 everything originally proposed for the west wing is retained. In addition, there is the existing Patti Bugatti ' s. Hunt questioned the what happens if phased two does not materialize? The result is an additional 4 ,000 square feet of restaurant space. Richman noted that half of the space at Patti Bugatti ' s is dedicated to music, not to food or dining. flusic space is sorely needed in this town. He supported preserving Bugatti ' s. Doremus interjected that the accessory retail space is reduced significantly, by 4 ,000 square feet . Novak explained if the Continental were to be replaced by a new east wing, as per the original plan, there would be two restaurants, a bakery and fine dining. The proposal for the east wing incorporated two restaurants. The total square footage for those two restaurants is less then Bugatti ' s . Ile does not know if Hunt can make a compciri son. The sixth item, the design concept, is the most subjective item and the most overriding item. Richman advised the Commission to include this item in the discussion of -construction pausing a n cl architectural ( r sign scheduled for the next meeting. Thc, Commission agreed. Richman said item seven, site Worj-,, is not a problem. If anyt'hins, there will be more open space because there is less building proposed roposed on Durant and there will be a surface parking lot. Hunt asked if the s—E-urn on Galena will be straightened curing phase one . Richman answered yes. Doremus indicated on a site plan the actual improvement. White asked how the applicant is phasing Galena. Doremus explained 700 South Galena will begin in spring 1986 and be completed by winter 1936 -87 . Novak interjected this commitment is the same as in the original plan. Tlells remarked this residential component is related to the necessary GIMP approval . That approval is not resolved at this time. The applicant filed a new application Monday , and requested an amendment and not a now application. The applicant is waiting for a determination by the city . Richman said this is also a subject at next week ' s meeting. White suggested utility changes be made at the same time as the street changes . Doremus replied the applicant has made such a proposal . One problem is that the loop for the overhead connections may not be done during the first phase. Item eight involves energy conservation. Richman said there is an obvious problem with the lack of insulation at the Continental . Doremus pointed out a couple of features for the renovation. There are 'Lour additional energy efficiency devices: more effective lighting ; new room solid core doors; weather proofing; and a new roof with additional insulation . The most effective way of saving heat loss is through better management . The employees need to be trained in energy efficiency : turning thermostats down, closing windows, etc. Harvey asked if the new furnace is more efficient. Doremus replied yes. 0 RECORD OE PR QCF,EDINCS RegulaK Meeting Planning and Zoning C i December A. 1984 Item nine is par1king. Richman stated the parking is straight forward, there are not as many parking spaces. Doremus interjected it depends on one' s point of view. The original proposal involved 353 parking spaces to accommodate 447 room facility. Twelve of the spaces were set aside for the six residential units . The difference between the two figures is 341 net spaces applicable to the hotel. The parking average is .76 per room. Remember the parking expert concluded that .66 was perfectly adequate. In the phased plan the proposal is 192 underground spaces for the west wing, 19 additional for the current residential program, and fifty-four surface parking for the Continental . That totals 265 parking for the 285 room hotel and residential components. Subtracting the 19 spaces for the residential the net number of spaces for the hotel is 246 spaces. At an average rate of .76 spaces per room, the total necessary parking is 216 spaces. The result is thirty excess spaces . Those spaces can be applied for temporary use by the Continental . In addition, the applicant will make the Continental underground parking functional . That involves 28 spaces. This scenario provides 58 available spaces for the Continental . lie does not know how much parking is necessary for the Continental. Harvey asked what is the present parking at the Continental . Doremus replied none. Harvey commented the surface parking north of the Continental is for the 17oodstone. but is used for Patti Bugattils, for the Continental, etc. Novak commented there is no parking policy in this area. Harvey wanted to -focus on existing parking and how many rooms are being used at the Continental. The following table was provided by Joe TJells, consultant for the applicant. Table Ono.; eased Plan 192 underground parking for west wing 19 parking for residential component surface parking for the Continental Inn 255 total parking spaces for hotel and residential -12 parking for residential 246 net spaces for the hotel ZJL� 0.76 per room ( .76.-1285) 30 excess spaces available for the Continental Inn + 28 spaces at the Continental 58 spaces available for the Continental Harvey commented the significant figure is 265. Richman remarked the figure should also include the 28 spaces in the Continental ' s underground garage. ?Tells presented two other tables. in RECORD OF PR-OCEEDIN!GS, Regular Meeting , I!la ' _ I Zoning Commission December-- 4.- -1984 Table Two Existing I!arjiW Lodcle Dc�mand Supply Continental Inn : 178 rooms 0 .5 U,on 45 Aspen Inn: 65 rooms 0V .5 58 65 Blue Spruce: 35 rooms 0 .5 subtotal 133 100 Residential 40 units demolished 0 1.5 TOTAL 1918 108 additional construction 20 currently available 198 128 Shortfall of 70 spaces (190" - 178) . Table Three; Phase One Parkins Demand S u p p 1 y Ile s t ;ling 285 rooms 0 .7G 217 2 4 IG Continental Inn 1062 rooms 0: . 50 81 28 Hotel/rRe si d. 11 resid. @2.00 -02. . 22 Subtotal 320 296 700 S. Galena 4 02.50 9 • 20 Top of Mill 33 @2.25 74 90 Summit Place 3 01 .50 __z --k Subtotal PIG 116 TOTAL 408 412 Surplus of 4 spaces ( 412-408) . Wells commented on table two. Last week he raised the issue that there is a problem with the numbers and the requirements . He tried to represent to the Commission that it is ignoring the fact that the existing condition does not meet the requirements. Fie tried to review the existing conditions . He tried to be conservative with the assumptions. The demand figure for the existing rooms is .5 spaces per room. The demand figure for the new development is .76 space per room. The .7G figure accounts for the increase in accessory spaces . He also assumed that existing residential units are at the lower and of the space demand 1 . 5 spaces per unit even though some of the units are RECQRD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular large. The parking demand for the existing lodge rooms is 138 spaces . Only 108 spaces exist . This includes existing spaces in front of the Continental even though the spaces are committed to another project. This does not include any use of a parking structure that is not currently used. The 63 spaces at the Aspen Inn include the open space in front of the Aspen Inn as well as the spaces along the condominium units along Mill Street. Forty residential units will be demolished. Those units generate a demand of 60 spaces at the 1 .5 rate; no spaces exist currently . Presently, the current 20 on-street parking spaces will be eliminated on Dean Street during phase one. The net demand is 198 spaces, the net supply is 128 spaces. Fie addressed table three. Phase one (the west wing) will generate a demand for 217 spaces according to the TDA study. The rate is based on . 76 spaces per lodge unit . The supply is 246 . The Continental Inn demands 81 spaces at the rate of . 5; 28 spaces will be supplied in the underground structure. The eleven residential units in the west wing demand at two spaces per unit yielding 22 spaces. Supply and demand are equal. For 700 South Galena. ( four units) at 2 . 5 spaces per unit , the demand is 9 spaces and the supply is 20 spaces. Top of Mill (33 units) at 2 .5 spaces per unit demands 74 spaces, the supply is 90 . Summit Place (three units) at a rate of 3 demands five spaces and is supplied six. In this table there is a slight surplus of supply over demand of four spaces in the phasing -program. There is a shortfall with the existing conditions. Fie tried to be conservative by including things that are not legally available. He tried to use the low side of the demand. Peyton asked if people who are not guests of the hotel but cline at the hotel restaurant will be able to use the hotel parking lot. T'lells explained the TDA study included that kind of inter- change, spaces being vacated in the structure for quests who drive elsewhere to eat. TDA assumed a certain demand for additional spaces for the accessory uses in the building . The city ' s parking standard is designed to assume a certain level of accessory space utilization. Again, Peyton asked if people who are participating in a wedding reception will be able to park in the garage. Novak replied if unique events were to be postulated then the parking would not be aderuate. Tut, buildings are not designed around unique events. An eight hundred person wedding at the hotel cannot be accommodated. Peyton asked how will it be determined who uses the parking . Novak noted valet and stacked parking will be available. All the traffic consultants have stated that one does not design a hotel for the one annual unique event. Peyton asked if someone who is not a guest of the garage and who wants a cocktail at the hotel bar can use the parking garage. Doremus referred her to page eight of the parking study in Appendix; A. The analysis concluded a shortfall of fifteen parking spaces for food and beverage use. The person who did the study considered people using the food and beverage facilities at the hotel . The i7 RECOIRD. OF PROCEEDINGS P i IeQular_ Mee-ting PIa - I zgaing commissign December, 4. 1-984 four elements considered were articulated on page nine . The study concluded fifteen more people would come to the hotel to dine than the people leaving the hotel . The study included fifteen extra spaces for that shortfall . The parking analysis was very thorough. The analysis included every hotel use. The figures are based on average peak occupancy and historical patterns. Peyton again asked how will bar patrons be discriminated from the guests. Novak replied valet parking will be used for the restau- rant. Doremus noted during peak periods there is a possibility of parking fifty to seventy extra cars in the garage over and above these counts with valet and stacked parking. Novak commented someone who uses the underground garage will go through valet parking. Harvey asked what will happen to the surface parking in front of the Continental . Doremus replied it will be eliminated. Novak said that space will become a park. Harvey asked how will the parking on the west side of the Continental Inn, the fifty- four surface parking spaces, be controlled. Richman posed the real question. Is the operation of the c:,Iisting Continental less parking intensive than the operation of the new structure? There is an assumption by Wells that the Continental is less parking intensive. If the Commission were to conclude that the east wing under phase 1A (the Continental) is less p_-rl.,-.ing intensive than a new hotel there, then the proposal would be reasonable. If the parking demand for the phase IA project were the same as a new 447 room hotel then the proposal would not be reasonable. Richman calculated sixty less spaces with the phased program. Is the loss of sixty spaces acceptable? The parking reduction responds to a less intensive use of the Conti- nental . I Iells asked how one assumes that the Continental without some expansion of the accessory space is more intensive. It is sad to say that that facility is booked 100". during the winter . The phased program, provides the saitic rooms but a better value. There will be the same intensity of use at the Continental. Novak- remarked planning was based on information unavailable for the new hotel . There is no history of usage for the new hotel. There is a history of usage for the Continental. There is no reason to change the historical usage of the Continental for future projections. Start with the understanding that, except during peak periods, neither the Continental nor the new hotel will be at full occupancy. The assumptions are based on peak periods . I-lost of the year there will be no problems. I I i t h respect to the Continental there was no reason to use the higher coefficient of the new hotel . The applicant agreed however to use the higher coefficient because of the underground parking . Doremus corrected that the TDA study calls for . 55 spaces for the winter peak occupancy demand, and GG spaces for the summer peak occupancy in the neighborhood . The applicant is providing substantially more. Recall every time parking was discussed with RECQRD OF. PROCEFADINGS Regulgir &eting - Fljnaing and Zoning C i December A. 1984 the Commission and Council the two bodies requested more parking. They determined the higher coefficient. White commented that currcntlU there are 108 on site spaces and .Z 28 off street spaces, totaling 128 spaces. After the project is completed the parking space count is approximately 250. Technically more spaces are being provided. Novak said there is no comparison in the legitimacy of spaces. Harvey noted present occupancy and parking spaces cannot be compared with the proposed plan. Wells disagreed. People do occupy the existing buildings that will be demolished for the new hotel. The Aspen Inn rents a room for $200 per night. Novak reasoned no one can argue that the applicant is providing less parking than the current existing parking. Harvey continued the public hearing to Tuesday, December 11 , 19004 . NEW BUSINESS REFERRAL OF AF-,SKI ZONE Harvey remarked there is no specific regulation requiring referrals of master plans to the city. Richman e.,zplained the county code provides that categorically. Harvey asked why and what is the Commission is reviewing. Richman again replied the county code categorically requires land use applications within two miles of the city limits be presented to this Commission. A lot split on Tlilloughby Tlay the Commission will not spend time on . These applications are evaluated by the planning office. The planning office has been delinquent in addressing and referring some of the larger applications, for example, activities on Ajax and at the base of the mountain , to the Commission. Those activities relate to the city. Hunt argued the county does not pay attention to the Commission as a referral body. Richman replied there is no requirement in the code that pay requires the county to attention. Nick, McGrath,I J counsel. for Aspen Skiing Company, the county code is modeled on the state statutes . The statutes only require a reforral. The statutes do not require paying attention to that referral . That may be a defect in the statutes. Hunt said the remedy is to annex the base area of the mountain. Richman interjected the Commission will be anne.-ing that area. The main reason this issue is before the Commission is because it is a study area for annexation. The Commission needs to be involved and informed on these areas. The planning office will be a ref e-rral agent. Annexation has become much more critical since Centennial. He recognizes the default in the piiocess. Bil Dunaway, publisher for the As-nen Timeg, inquired if the code requires time limits for the submission to the city. The current submission !­,as been presented a week before the public hearing and final solution. A week is not adequate time for the city consider the request . Richman responded that the county code is not really specific. It states there should be a referral . The Commission should be critical of the master plan. Before the Coi-,inission 1A RECORD OF PR OCEEDING,9 Regular Meeting P nning and Zoning Cgmmigsio-n, December .4. 1984 today is the procedural -aspects of the code , similar to the city' s SPA process. Richman assured the Commission it will sere the master plan upfront. Harvrcy repeated that the county has no obligation to listen to '-.-he Co�Lmission. In esscnce 'L-hc' proceSS is oducational. Richman rcmarlkod that the county .•fill not Z111ond, the code to it a rejuiremont to 14 sten -1L-o thc-! Coimr,,ission' s co i i i 1c,n t z. '71-4,ite intcrjected the negotiations between the city and county managers on the planning office involves the county relinquishing more planning authority in the extra-territorial issues. Richman clarified the emphasis is or, planning authority not regulatory authority. White agreed the Commission should receive those projects sooner. T r arvey agreed the real issue is the master plan not the regula- tions. Richman said he does not normally pass regulations before the Commission. But, there is a proposal to rezone areas on the city' s doorstep, for example, the two mountains. That is the land use issue. That land use issue relates more directly with the Aspen .'fountain master plan, to be addressed early 19,95 . The Commission will and should see that plan. The master plan addresses the base of Little. Nell. McGrath assured the Commission that the master plan for the mountain will include all current uses and proposed uses. The plan will be detailed. Hunt asked if that area will be annexed by the time the Commission receives the master plan. Richman replied no. Hunt responded he has real problems with this. Richman asked Hunt specifically what is he uncomfortable with. The base area conceivably will be annexed next year . That time table is determined by Council . Hunt highly recommended Council to act on this annexation. Richman remarked the city has annexed most of the base area already. Hunt expressed concern about a quadruple chair in the city area. Harvey articulated the issues . How does the Commission feel about this resolution to rezone and to require a master plan . The master plan concept appears to be sound . He encouraged the Commission send to BOCC a request that language be added about timing on referrals to the city. Include language that the county recognize the proximity to and impact on the city of their decisions. 11cGrath reiterated Harvey' s comment that the master plan concept is sound. Apart from the difficulties between the city and the county on sound planning, apart from the differences of opinion between the elected officials with regard to the planning office, he believes the concept is sound. Perhaps the city will USE., the concept for Potential (annexed ski areas . The concept enables the county to review the planning for the entire ski area. The county has never been able to do that. The county would not have to stretch its definition of accessory use every time the ski company comes -forward with a specific approval . The ski company Z Mill not be able to do :anything without a master plan approval, that is the concept. The county has never had a mechanism for looking , E7 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Rgqular Meeting J!Ianning and Zoning CoMMigsion pegembpr 4. 1984 at an overall proposal . The ski company in proposing this concept , is relinquishing much of its power and is relying on good faith with the county. Un,,Jer the master plan concept the county has an immense amount of power . There are advantages looking at an overall plan for every involved party to look at an overall plan. The concept is sound and legitimate from a planning perspective. Harvey asked if the Commission agrees the master plan concept is sound. Peyton asked if the concept is similar to a PUD. Richman replied that the plan is similar to an SPA. The two processes follow similar paths. Peyton asked if an approved will be good for five years not one year. !IcCrath responded correct. The county regulation includes an automatic time lapse on an approval after one year . If the applicant were to receive an approval during the spring, for e.-ample, for a lift, and subsequently were not able to afford the improvement, then the approval would lapse within a year. The Buttermilk base plan completely lapsed . I llarvi)y asked what is the strategy now. I Richman replied he will take the Commission' s comments to the county. Fred Smith will make a presentation on the master plan, that will occur in January. Richman will communicate the procedural concerns , for example , timing, to the county . Richman explained again the planning office has been delinquent in referring issues to the Commission. Harvey argued that the county is irresponsible in referring issues in a timely fashion. The county treats the city' s comments similarly to public comments at public hearings. The county should be aware that the city is concerned about the current procedure even though the city approves the concept . That procedure is only a courtesy referral to the city. Richman replied the timing issue is a staff error. The second issue BOCC needs to address. Harvey said the city needs to be involved in this planning process. Hunt argued the county is not receptive to the city' s opinions. By the time the city has a chance to review the issue the county has already massaged everything in their minds. In effect, the county is reluctant to review an issue again. Richman summarized the Commission ' s points . The Commission should be a referral agency like the county engineer or the Colorado Ceologic Survey. Any application is submitted within the first thirty days to the referral agencies . This action is occurs before DOCC reviews the issue. That is a sensible request. "IcCrat"i-I remarked a major portion of the mountain is in the city. It is likely that when the ski company presents a master plan the plan will be presented to both governmental bodies, city and county. The ski company needs the city' s approval of the master plan. Harvey askcd if there will be a parallel rezoning request before the city. 'Richman replied no . The only activity involving the city is the replacement of the lift at Little Nell . The city' s limit is well up the mountain. ir RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Rgqglar, Meeting Planning and Zoning C . . i December 4. 1284 Harvey directed Richman to thank the county for referring this to the city. Richman acknowledged the gratitude . TrI a r v(_�Y also appreciated Richman for taking responsibility for the ti-l'.1ing problem . Harvey reiterated that Smith still should make a presentation before the Commission. Hunt is concerned whother the quadruple chair will be located in the correct place . 11 Iluch planning has been in progress and the city has had no input. Richman remarked the planning office has not participated either. Nothing has been seen or approved by anyone . White said the confusion may be over the city' s discussion over revenue bonds. Smith made a conceptual presentation of the changes on the mountain. The ideas are fluid. Nothing is set in stone. NEW BUSINESh5 CORDON—ASPEN CLUB SUBDIVISION Colette Penne, planning office, distributed site plans of the project to the commissioners. She oriented the members to the site location. .13enne asked if the commissioners received Callahan' s subdivision plats. On that plat the lot under consideration is lot fourteen. The house referred to in the memo dated December 4th is the Benedict House. The request is for subdivision on the parking lot section of the property. The original rezoning request was submitted February, 1984 . The request was much more expansive. It included work with the Gordon property and some exchange of the upper lots . 111any problems have developed during the interim. History of the Aspen Club PUD and amendments have been complied. The application has been tabled over a number of months for various reasons. Thc, ownor of the club, Dick BLItera, would like the subdivision element completed . The other aspect of the application came forward on December lst as a MIXID application . The Commission tonight will deal only with the subdivision request of the Callahan Subdivision. The Aspen Club and the Callahan Subdivision are a PUD. The Benedict House on lot fourteen is actually two single family dwellings. Fritz Benedict built that house in two stages . TT built the first phase in 1958 and the second phase in 1902. I.-l'olledict used one of the quarters for the children' s nanny. Andy Hecht, counsel for the applicant, informed the Commission at that time the Benedicts adopted children, there was a dramatic increase in the number of children . The Benedicts consequently built another house on the property. The primary residence was built in 1958. The subsidiary residence in 1962. Penns Said there is a problem. Thor: is procedure for verification of units . Generally the planning office asl:s for CO' s or building permits. In the absence of those documonts the planning office asks for utility information or the office chcc,!-,s thr_� growth management survey which reflects the nur.,iber of units . Affidavits from , "7 RECORD, OF ,PROCEEDINGO Regular Meeting Plaaniaq .and Zoning CoMMisgian DeceMbgr 4. 19.84 individuals is the final recourse. T ,Jecht presented to Ponne a series of items 11hich she described and submitted to the record . First, Bill Drueding, building inspector, did make a physical inspection of the 'Benedict-Butera residence. The letter from Drueding dated November 30 , 198 , stated: " In the easterly portion of the residence was a three bedroom, three bath, kitchen dwelling. On the westerly portion was a two bedroom, one bath, kitchen dwelling. The two units were connected by a large breeze way. Under current code that does not meet the 200- common wall criteria for a duplex. What we have at this time are two single family dwellings. " Penne submitted a letter from Ann Ballard, administrative assistant at the Aspen Water Department, dated December 4 , 1984 : "As requested I have searched the Water Department records on properties previously owned by Fritz Benedict and/or Coldsant on Crystal Lake Road. I have found two oroperties that were in those names. One at 1450 Crvstal Lake Road is listed as a single family residence , and the tap permit (?,'0690 was paid November 19, 1984. The other property is located at 1305 Crystal Lake (Coldsant) . Our records indicate that as of 1982 this property is a single family residence with a guest house. I could find no record of a paid water permit, as our records go back to 1955 . " Penne presented an affidavit from Fritz 7ened-ict dated Doc-ember 4, 1984: III , Fritz Benedict , being duly sworn , hereby depose and sav as follows : 1 . At all times prior to May, 1976 , I was an owner of 2 property described as lot fourteen, Callahan Subdivision, as more particularly described in the official approved plat thereof recorded on "lay 19, 1976 . 2. 1 am generally familiar with all conditions required for the construction of a single family (3welling unit in Pitkin County and Aspen, Colorado. 3 . 1 have been --involved in development- activity in -Pitkin County and Aspen, Colorado for many years. 4. As one of t-hc� owners of what is now lot 'fourteen, Callahan Subdivision (which at the time of construction of the two single family residences thereon, was situated in Pitkin County, Colorado) , I was responsible for developing two single family dwelling units on that prcporty. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regular Mceting R1 a , - I Zoning CgMmigsion 12ecember 4. 1284 5 . The 1;-!-,rgcr residence was construct-ad. in 1955 and the smaller resi(lencc was constructed in 1952 . C. On the basis of my c.­.,perience and to best of my knowledge, all governmental requirements were satisfied in con- structing a two single family dwelling unit situated on lot fourteen of the Callahan Subdivision. " This affidavit is signed and notarized. Panne submitted a litter from Andy liecht dated 'November 30 , 1984: "This letter is intended to amend that portion of the application submitted on September 20 , 1984, by R. S.G. Develop- ment, Inc. and Sheldon Gordon concerning -a lot split of lot fourteen of the Callahan Subdivision ( "Subdivision") . Since that application was submitted, the applicant has verified that there, are now in existence two dwelling units on lot fourteen of the Subdivision. There will not be created any additional dwelling units. The applicant is proposing to demolish one of the dwelling units and to reconstruct that dwelling unit at another location on lot fourteen of the Subdivision . Such development activity is exempt from complying with the allotment procedures of growth mana-emenlL quota system pursuant to Section 24-11 .2 (a) of the Aspen 1111unicipal Code ( "Code") , and therefore, the applicant requests a declaration of exemption for the reconstruction of an existing dwelling unit. The applicant also requests approval for the c-emption from resubdivision requirements of the Code pursuant to Section 20-4 (d) of the Code. Section 20- 19 (b) provides for the exemption for a division of land not within the intent and purposes of the subdivision regulations. The division of land in the instant case is solely for the purpose of reconstructing the same number of dwelling units on the same lot on which they already exist in a better configuration and to permit the transfer of each existing dwelling unit to separate ownership. " Panne received these documents today. iir.i THilson and Alan Richman need to sign off on these. That is the procedure. Those two have not signed off as yet. The documents substantiate the e.,;.-istcnce of two separate properties. The proposal is to demolish one unit and reconstruct it on lot 1,1W. That is not particularly a problem. That subdivision line will be added as a PUD amendment. The rezoning requests a change, from the current Zone classification of R,R t0 11-15. The Aspen Club was rezoned in 1975 as RP, rural residential. The RR designation does not exist anywhere else in town. Hecht explained lot 15, lot 14, and lot 14a wore zoned P.R, with the balance of the property zoned R-15 . Panne cxplaincd the RR designation allows for a recreational club. When the Aspen Club was built the existing house was no longer occupied by the Bonedicts. Goldsant wanted to use the house as a restaurant . Part of the approval of the Aspen Club PUD included the use of the 1 n RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Regglar Mgeting Planning and Zgnina Commission pegeMber 4. 1984 house a-- -a restaurant. Therc is now a request for change in conditions. Butera does not want to use the house as a restaurant, that use would require r- ,u., ..- a 'PUD amendment. P)Utcr,-.) cnnnot now use that space as a restaurant because the commercial sc:uarc footage attributed to that structure aas passed through PUD amendment and was moved to the club for various types of club e.,:pansion. Everything on the club side of the river would still be zoned RR. The applicant requests tho area on the western side of the river be zoned RZ-15 . Everything else on that side of the river is zoned R-15 . It is not fitting to have the area zoned RR. That zone permits other sorts of uses. She preferred to see a zone designating residential use. That designation generates less traffic. It does not add to housing problems. Using the house in a commercial capacity may never have worked . The logical choice is to retain the house as a single family residence. Dividing the property into an eastern and western lot and replacing one of the units on the western portion is fine. It is possible the new lot will go through stream margin review. Alpine Surveys did some preliminary work to insure that there was a building site . The applicant does not have to get an easement for the relocated parking lot from Pat r1tatt-alone. "lattalonc does not own the property in question. The FAP calculated by Alpine Surveys for the new house is 5, 900 square. The lot size will be reduced for use of the property for parking. The FAR of the house will be reduced. Ponne reported that the conversations between Pjuter-a and Tiattalonc indicate that Nattalone is agreeable to the parking relocation. Butera has also agreed to a landscaping plan which will obstruct the cars from Tiattalone ' s house. The Commission tonight can act on a rezoning, subdivision, and PUD. Planning office advises the Commission to recommend approval of the subdivision and PUD amendment with the proposed parl,,i,-,g -olution to Council . Harvey- rvey addr ssedl the planning office ' s conditions or, page two o--f-- the memo 6atcd December 4 , 1904. Should condition two be deleted. Pcnne preforrod that two amain. --he units will h--v` Lo 4J-1 vcri-Fic-` !D-fore Council tak 4:,--- final a-tion. The Co.mimaisslon 'does not verify the czistcnc,,? of two unit S. There is enough cvid^ncrr- for the Coiamission to assume the, two units If the Commission worc comfortable that two units c;,ist then the Commission could table action. The applicant Acant can chose to either remove a kitchen from one unit and connect the two units to meet the duplci: criteria or to demolish a unit completely. Hecht interjected the option is not to make a duple:7; the option is to remove th•-! kitchen and attach the units for a single family unit. Hunt asked if the result will be another 14 ,700 square foot building with three kitchens and with a single family residence designation. Hecht replied not . There will be. one kitchen . ,)n RECORD OF PROCEEDING Regular Meetin Planning and Zoning Commiaiqij2 -cember 4. 1984 Penne noted delete condition three. It is not necessary to have casements. Harvey suggested a condition that states the replacement pariking solution provides at- least twelve space~. Delete the state- mcnt that easements be obtained and recorded. A parking condition should ellist, that is critical. Anderson asked if lot 14A is the large parking lot . 11 o c h t answered yes. Harvey asked if the proposed subdivision lot line is the access to the Aspen Club. Mill an easement be granted? Hecht replied that easement exists in the PUD prps,�ntly. Penne mentioned for the 1983 tennis festival the city approved additional partying work with the understanding that the Commission would review that parking at a future date. If there is a problem the lot can be demolished. Penne suggested that when the plat is recorded with this change that the current parking configuration be shown on the plat. The parking should be depicted as it actually is . That action would approve the current situation. The new parking circulation is -far superior to the original plan. Lunt e:Ipresscd problems with the parking near the service area. There is much unauthorized parking off Ute Avenue. fAotjon; Welton Anderson moved to recommend approval of the rezoning of lot fourteen from RR to R-15 and of subdivision of lot fourteen through the amendment of the PUD plat with the following condi- tions: 1 . Recordation of a plat approved by the engineering department which includes the sedimentation ponds and an accurate depiction of the current parking configura- tion. 2 . That two units are verified as existing on the parcel presently and one unit is eliminated prior to any issuance of excavation or building permits. 3 . The replacement parking solution must provide at least twelve parking spaces on lot fourteen i'W" (141-7) . That this parking solution be recorded on the -amended PUD plat. The motion is seconded by Pat Fallin. Discussion.. Hunt asked asked if a duple;r can be built on lot 14`7 at R-15 zoning. Penne said the Commission will exempt the unit from GNP for a single family. If the lot were over 30 ,000 s(-,,uarc .r Loot the applicant could compete for a duplex under C-111). Harvey called for the vote. All in favor ; motion carried. Motion: r.Tel ton Anderson moved to eXem.-ot from growth management a singlc n'l RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ReQular Meetina Planning and Zoning C . . i December 4. 1984 family dwelling on lot 141W; seconded by Pat Fallin. Discussion. T y gr- asked if the ,motion should read that this is contingent on the verification on the pre-existing dwellings on the site . r1el ton Anderson amended the motion to read: moved to exempt from growth management a single family dwelling on lot 1411 and that CUP -exemptipa is conditioua . upga verification of two units ezisting on the --or-esent narcel known as lot_.l4_ . " Seconded by Pat Fallin. All in favor ; motion carried. RESOLUTION LEE RARDEE COMMENDATION RESOLUTION Motion;- Ramona Narkalunas moved to approve Resolution 8w•-15; seconded by Tltlelton Anderson. All in favor; motion carried. RESOLUTION ASPEN ART MUSEUM RESOLUTION Harvey suggeStcd that the SPA plan for landscaping, at a minimum, be submitted for consideration. The city has to submit an SPA plan by the first meeting of August, 1'0-85. The plan is either accepted by October 1 , 1,0005 , or the 'Lill will have to be removed. The fill could be there another year. Change the resolution to say that at a minimum a landscaping plan for the Rio Grande be submitted by the first meeting in August, 1985, and be accepted by October 1 , 1 �85 , or the fill will be removed by October 1 , 1935 . The city will at least have to do something , provide a landscaping plan at a minimum. Peyton questioned reviewing a landscaping plan before the city knows actually what it plans for the area . Harvey wanted to review a landscaping plan for the 'Lill . Penne interjected there is no adopted SPA plan for the Rio Grande property. If there were a landscaping plan presented on the SPA the plan would not be a SPA plan nor would the plan be an amendment to the SPA since the there is no adopted SPA plan. Harvey encouraged the city use this action to implement the Roaring Fork, Greenaway plan . At least the city could look at the Roaring Fork Grcenway area. IT-unt asked what happens if the city deposits the fill in an area which might be a site for a future building . Harvey noted there is an SPA plan for the Rio Grande, the plan has never been adopted. Penns agreed there is a SPA plan which has been submitted and there is master , 'Jo one recognizes plan which has been adopted. ­4 that plan. There certainly is a plan for the Rio Grande . The plan was adopted by the form r Council. That plan was submitted as an SPA submission just at Itt-11c time SPA was nixed. (Peyton �1) REQQRD OF PROCEEDINU. Regular Meeting Planning and Zoning -C i December 4. 1984 a s k ej, for a copy. ) Penne continued. The plan is simple . it keeps the playing field, it incorporates a performing arts center, it has a greenway, it includes the Andrews-14cFarland Duildings and Caps, and the jail. Harvey noted that the jail was built on the property before the adoption of the SPA. The city traded property with the county : jail land for land for thre performing arts center land. Motion:- 111ari Peyton moved to approve Resolution C.,S-14 ("Temporary Storage stipu- lations")Fill Material or, the Rio Grande Property under Certain D 4- �ipu- la-11-ions") with the conditions under "no,,,7, thcreforc, be it resolved" amended as follows : 1 . An SPA pla,:I which dota-ils. lands-caping at a miniziu�m is ubmitijad for - cQnsideration b,T thg Commission' s first i-aectinu gf August. 1985.-. and, is. accgptg� by- October 1. 2,05: or 2 The fill is removed by October 1 , 19'5 . Seconded by Welton Anderson . The motion is carried with Pat z Fallin opposed. Perry Harvc-y adjourned the meeting at 7 : 15 p.m. Barbara 'Mlorril,--6—ep-Uty City Cler!',. ')-1