Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19841127 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Special Meeting , P7 anni na and Zoning C Migni-ou November 27, 1984 Chairman Perry Harvey called the special meeting , a continued public hearing , to order at 5 : 04 p. m. with commissioners Pat Fallin, Welton Anderson, David white (arrived at 5 : 12 p. m. ) , Roger Hunt, Mari Peyton, and Ramona IMarkalunas (alternate ) present. COMMI.SS ONERS' COMMENTS Richman reminded the Commission of a joint meeting with City Council scheduled for Monday, November 25th, at 5 : 00 p.m. The topic for discussion is SPA. Richman distributed to the commis- sioners a memo on the second reading of the SPA ordinance and the SPA ordinance being reviewed by Council. The ordinance reflects the Commission' s findings on SPA. Harvey asked if there was public comment at the first reading of the ordinance. Richman replied two people commented at length at the public hearing. The public' s concern was this this action was a rezoning process. Remember the Commission recommended further study of the language and zoning designation. There was no intent to rezone the properties. Harvey recalled discussion about reworking section four. Richman noted the Commission ' s recommendation was to delete section four . That was the message to Council. Council has received, has reviewed, and will take action. Harvey asked if SPA will still apply to all the parcels which currently have the SPA desig- nation. Richman replied yes. The Commission recommended a class action zoning . That will happen. Harvey said the concern at the joint meeting was the recommendation in section four be duly noted somewhere. (The reference is to the Commission' s evaluation of the existing properties with the SPA designation and its conclusions as to the appropriateness of those designations. ) Richman included this in the ordinance to make sure it was on the record. The ordinance has upset many people; the action appears as a rezoning action. It is not. New zoning involves a public hearing and a site specific analysis of each of the properties. That has not been done. Richman will recommend to Council the deletion of section four. Council wants some interaction with the Commission. The Council has questions . Richman answered questions during first reading but Council wants the Commission to answer the questions . Richman' s goal is for satisfactory response to the questions so that the ordinance can be adopted at the first or second Council meeting in December. The issue has been consuming much of the planning office ' s time. That time should and can be spent more profitably. Harvey requested the clerk provide copies of the Council minutes on the first and second reading of the SPA ordinance, in particular citizen ' s comments, for the commissioners. Hunt requested that no other meetings be scheduled in December ; the schedule is already very full . Richman assured the commis- sioners no other meetings have been scheduled. Barry Edwards, city attorney, asked if a formal motion will be made tonight on the Aspen Mountain Lodge preliminary PUD. Harvey replied no . Edwards explained there is some question as to whether or not the agreement between Cantrup and Commerce Savings RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS, Special Meeting Planning na and Zoning Commission November _27,_1984 is any longer in effect. He advised the Commission not make a decision until the attorney' s establish the position of the agreement. Paul Taddune, city attorney, apprised the Commission of the situation surrounding the agreement. The purchase agreement between Commerce and Cantrup' s estate contained several contin- gencies . Those contingencies had to be satisfied by November 15th. The contingencies were not been satisfied by that date. The bankruptcy court could not act fast enough. A hearing is scheduled for December 21st. Another hearing is scheduled in February. Commerce attempted to get an extension agreement with Cantrup. The estate was willing to sign. The creditors were also willing to sign. Cantrup on November 23rd failed to extend the agreement. Commerce subsequently was put in the position of either waiving the contingencies or terminating the contract. Taddune has been led to believe there are discussions underway to bring the situation to the same status of the pre-Macke decision. That is the plan endorsed by the creditors , the purchaser-Commerce, and the estate represented by Schiffer . The situation is complex. He does not know all the legal ramifications. (David White arrives at 5 : 12 p.m. ) Hunt asked how can the bankrupt person scuttle the court, the trustee, etc. Edwards said Cantrup is in a position to object to what is happening. This is the same position the Commission was in all year until the actions by Spence Schiffer were thrown out by Judge Mache in the bankruptcy court . The Commission can continue to review the application. He cannot recommend that the Commission take final action. Harvey remarked the approvals will run with the property. Tlells said that this project can never be put forward by Cantrup. The applicant controls certain parcels that Cantrup can never control . Without these parcels, this application is different. Taddune explained the reason Cantrup has an influence more than usual is that Judge tlache agreed that Spence Schiffer, the chief executive officer of the estate, did not propose a program of re- organization; although, many Colorado bankruptcy attorneys disagreed with Ilache' s interpretation. One quick way to get everything back on track was to adopt a plan which had Cantrup' s blessings. The plan did not have all the unsecured creditors' blessing, that was another problem. Taddune received all the information yesterday. CONTINUED PUBLIC HE RING ASP_E..N MOUN=N LODGE PRELIMINARY._PUD,_ VIEWPL_ANE, CMUMINIUMN TION, STREET VACATIONS Harvey opened the hearing. The Commission reviewed the proposed schedule for tonight : the remaining conditions. Harvey asked if there are areas which should be included in the meeting. The Commission is dealing 1) RECORD OF-PROCEEDINGS Special Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission 7oyMber 77 1994 with the conditions of Council ' s agreement. The Commission is dealing with the documentation of the project. The Commission will review phasing, growth management plan amendment , the viewplane, the condominiumization, etc. Somewhere he requested time for the design and scheduling impacts of the construction project . He wants the opportunity for the Commission and the public to deal with the physical elements of the project, how the project handles the zoning codes, how the project works through the planned process, and how the project solves the PUD conditions. Richman in response to a question posed by Fallin assured the Commission that the only complex item on the December 4th agenda is the Gordon/Aspen Club subdivision. The Gordon element has been withdrawn. Richman will provide a table that will compare each commitment of the lodge project . Doremus asked if the Commission is meeting January 2 , 1985 . Richman answered no. January 8th will be the first Commission meeting in January. There is a meeting scheduled also on January 22nd. Residential growth management hearings are scheduled for January 8th. Harvey asked if the planning office is satisfied with the appli- cant ' s compliance with height. Richman said the applicant has committed on record to complying. However, the Commission should look at the plans . There is a commitment by the applicant to meet the 42 foot height guideline. Harvey said it is necessary to answer the height issue, it is a condition Council imposed. Richman reported he viewed a drawing today. That drawing demon- strates the exact location on site of the covered areas that need to be included in FAR. Richman reminded the Commission it reviewed conditions one through three last week. Harvey said the Commission wants to look at the project as a whole at some point. Richman suggested the December 11th meeting. Harvey reiterated that he is concerned about the construction timetable. Doremus summarized the additional items to be covered December 11th: height, FAR, design, construc- tion schedule , and construction impact . The architect and contractor will be present on that date. The Commission proceeded to review the conditions of conceptual approval. �onditi,on Four: (pages 68 through 74 of the submission) Harvey asked if the fire department has submitted a memo ? Richman referred to pages 70-71 of the "Aspen Mountain" submission report. There is no specific referral from the fire department. Doremus talked with Steve Crockett last night. The report was the fire district hired Ed Neff to help with this project. Neff is still reviewing the proposal ; he has a heavy work load. Even though the time for the review has expired, a response bill be forthcoming shortly. He understood from Crockett that Neff has no major problems, except with hydrants. RECORD OF PROCEEDING.�, Sneciai Meeting P anning and Zoning Commission Noyember November 27 1984 Doremus explained he is trying to avoid five new hydrants. That is excessive. The fire expert wants four hydrants on the north side of Dean, a vacated street. The result is deadend lines. Engineers do not like to sign off deadend lines. There is continuing conversation between Rea Cassens and Associates and Eric Neff. In a week or two there should be a design for the revised fire hydrant locations that everyone can sign off. Again, the reason the hydrant locations are not on the map is because Neff did not respond in time. Harvey commented that it is not necessary to wait for the report. The issue is not that technical. As long as the fire department and engineering department are satisfied the report is not necessary. Doremus said Crockett will send the Commission a letter when Crockett hears that Neff has signed off on the plan. Neff is a professional fire consultant from the Denver Fire Prevention Bureau. Richman explained the local fire department determined it needed further technical expertise because of the complexity of the project. Harvey asked if the accesses and exits are satisfactory. Doremus said there are several state-of-the-art fire control systems. He is comfortable with the systems. Doremus said on page 72-74 of the submission is an outline of the applicant' s commitments for the proposed internal fire protection system for the lodge. The outline U the applicant ' s commitments, commitments he made at conceptual he makes now. Neff is reviewing this outline. Harvey asked how the list of proposed internal fire protection systems will be tracked. Is there language in the PUD agreement honoring commitments? How will this list be funneled to the building inspector? What insurance is there that the building inspector will check that the applicant has met the commitments? Planning office will not inspect the lodge. He does not want this lost in the system. Richman explained significant items the planning office intends to write in the agreement. Detailed items like the internal fire protection systems should not be in the agreement . He did not have an answer for tracking items. Planning office' s case load summary is not designed for a project of this magnitude. But, the city has to track these items. Hunt asked what document does the building department see . Richman explained the building department receives copies of the submission application during the review process. This allows the building department to cross check the plans with the proposed project. Harvey explained if every item were to be included in the agreement, then the agreement would be voluminous. Where does one draw the line? The agreement is only a recorded PUD agreement. Will the building department pull that agreement? A work book which consists of all referral agencies' requirements should be given to the building department for the conditional approval over and above the UBC requirements. Richman said much of the material needs to be copied and submitted to the building department prior to CO approval. Building department at some time will sit down A RECORD OF URCIC EEpTNG__ Special Meeting Planning and Zoning commission Nov per 27 1984 with the planning office and review, for example, GMP projects. Fallin commented that many items fall through the cracks . Richman said that is why the city and county managers proposed consolidating the planning and zoning, building, and environmental health under one chief. Harvey suggested language in the PUD agreement which states that schedules be in compliance with the proposals ; perhaps as a condition. It may not be- any -easier- to do the inspections. But, it may make it easier to enforce. Richman said there is a set of conditions with representations which will very be difficult to enforce more so than the hardware conditions. How will the city enforce the lodge ' s marketing brochure? Harvey requested the Commission see the report from Crockett as soon as it comes in. Condition Five: Parkiag and Traffic (pages -75 thr-ough 7E of the submission) Richman noted there are two strong commitments : vans and valet parking. The other commitments will be extremely difficult to insure : brochures and reservation packets, the hotel marketing, and parking reserved concurrently with lodgings reservations. The Commission has to be fairly comfortable with the first two commit- ments. Harvey asked how valet parking provides more efficient use of the parking area. How is valet parking a psychological disincentive to moving a car? Doremus explained the possible ten or fifteen minute wait to retrieve a car may serve as a disincentive to drive downtown for dinner . People might just walk if the valet were very busy. Valet parking does not make it easy to get a car. The choices are to drive or to walk, someone may select the walking alternative. Richman commented that courtesy vans are the most positive transportation elements. The applicant will take the lead in moving the lodge district forward. The applicant will not protest Rubey Park transit center. Doremus reminded the Commission the applicant is committing $25,000 to the city. The applicant encourages the improvements to the Rubey transit stop. The applicant is willing to put up $25,000 cash, a meaningful commit- ment. Wells stated the applicant will present the cash when the city undertakes the conceptual design. Harvey said that some hotels impose a surcharge on the rooms for transportation. That charge could cover parking the car or the use of vans, the internal transportation system. A number of people might use the transportation system because they are paying for it. Harvey asked if the applicant plans a similar system. Doremus replied it is an operator ' s decision. There has been discussion about surcharge parking. That charge will be noted in the rate sheets. That is a subtle auto disincentive. Someone might reason if he has to pay ten dollars per night to park a car in the garage and is near the center of town, not to M RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS SneoiB?. Meetina Punning and Zoning COMM ns;on November 27. 1984 bring a car to Aspen. He encouraged the use of the vans as a non cost item. The operator will make the decision. Richman asked if there are any key measures in the TDA study that the applicant will not implement. Doremus replied the TDA proposed fourteen measures, the applicant will implement thirteen. The fourteenth measure made no sense. Richman noted condition five is a clarification that the applicant is representing a commitment to virtually all measures proposed in the TDA study. The applicant has met the requirement of the condition. The applicant has clarified what he is committing to. Enforcing the commitments is beyond Richman' s boundary. White commented the project at 700 South Galena had extra parking spaces . What is happening to those parking spaces? Wells explained there were forty total parking spaces at 700 South Galena. As a. result of the revision in the plan for 700 South Galena there will only be twenty spaces. The remaining spaces have been shifted back to the hotel. Council approved a hotel parking plan with 353 spaces. That plan has been adjusted in response to the increased number of bedrooms in the lodge. There are now no extra spaces at 700 South Galena. White raised the issue of employee parking. The applicant has committed to no parking for employees. On days like today when the weather is very cold everyone drives his car. It is bad not to have parking for employees. He is concerned about the policy that does not provide for parking spaces for employees . Where else will the employees park? White suggested the applicant propose to Council to use the $25 , 000 for a parking facility under Rubey park . The applicant will be digging up property anyway, why not continue the excavation across the street . Doremus remarked that similar suggestions were rejected by Council. Harvey requested a summary of the present parking situation. There will be a total of 447 rooms. The rooms will not be all located in the hotel, some in the Continental . 353 underground parking spaces were approved for 447 units . It appears there will be 265 spaces with the present proposal ; 192 underground for the hotel, 19 underground for the eleven residential units in the west wing, and 54 additional surface parking spaces for hotel use. He referred to page sixty of the submission. Wells noted there will be 28 usable spaces underground at the Continental . The intent is to convert the space under the Continental for usable parking. There are problems with that space. Currently, that space is only usable for a waxing room for skiis. Doremus noted that the architects have made a commitment that the space is usable. The space may not pass all code requirements. But, the space could be made usable for 28 cars. Harvey said with the 28 spaces 83% of the approved parking for 1000 of the rooms is achieved; without those spaces, 70o of the approved parking is achieved. 111hat will happen to the street- f RECORD OF PROCEED_INCG Special. Meeting Panning and Zoning Commission November 77. 1984 scape? What is the difference between the current available street parking and the available street parking after the completion of phase one? Doremus answered less. The applicant is replacing existing units, both residential and lodge , with underground parking. Some of the existing lodges are staying. What makes the Continental different from the Fasching Haus during this interim period? Harvey replied that phase one of the project includes 100% of the rooms but not 100% of the parking. ghat happens if the remaining parking is not completed? Richman remarked that is a phasing issue. Doremus commented there is time set aside for this. Harvey argued parking has to be talked about. Richman agreed it is an important issue but Harvey is ahead of himself. Harvey said to note that he is on the record for bringing forward this issue. Richman reasoned there are a series of issues not seen in the first phase and yet there are 447 rooms. Doremus requested that the Commission at this time sign off the parking and circu- lation related to the full project. Then go into the parking and circulation related problems if the project is phased. That is another issue. Harvey quoted and questioned item six of condition five, page seventy-six of the submission: there is no mention of a time table: "The Hotel, Top of Mill , Summit Place, and 700 South Galena Condominiums will take a lead in moving the Lodge Improvement District program forward and encourage the early formation of the financing district . The Hotel will develop its facilities (lighting, sidewalks, cross walks, street furniture) in conjunction with that improvement program. " Doremus replied that the city is responsible for the lodge improvement district. Hal Schilling, the new city manager, did express doubts about how the hotel was proceeding on the lodge improvement districts. Schilling did question the applicant absorbing the planning bill and using the same planners for the work. The applicant cooled it. The applicant asked the city to show him how to do the improvement district. The applicant does not want to disrupt anything. The applicant is a participant . Harvey asked if this is another issue for phasing. The last sentence reads that the hotel will develop the lighting and sidewalks along the hotel with that improvement program. Any other subdivision does so as a condition of CO. Doremus assured the Commission he is just as interested in inaugurating a lodge improvement district and adopting a plan before construction begins. The applicant will absorb the cost of the improvements on the street if the district is not formed. The formation of a district is beneficial to the applicant. The applicant will have to plant street trees if the district is not formed. Harvey noted because of the number of pedestrians associated with the facility the city cannot take a chance of 7 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS having inadequate sidewalks and lighting. He is concerned about the vague language. Doremus suggested an addition to the resolution that addresses this issue. Harvey preferred the district be formed and the entire area be improved as part of a master plan. Harvey asked if CCLC is responsible for organizing the improvement district. Richman answered yes. Fallin asked if the applicant has met with CCLC. Doremus answered yes. The applicant pursued a planning program. But, the city and the city manager had problems with this concept. The applicant decided not to argue with the city. The applicant suggested that the city manager do it his way. Harvey suggested there be a "be it resolved" in the resolution to address this concern. Wells explained one reason the district has been put on hold is those improvements in the vicinity of the west wing of the hotel will not occur until the summer, 1986. In fairness to the city manager, there is no great rush. Harvey said it is important to track that implementing these improvements not occur after the hotel ' s opening . The bottom line is the applicant will have to develop lighting, sidewalks, etc. , regardless of a district. Richman believed the applicant has met the commitments of condition five. The applicant has clarified his commitments. Harvey asked if the resolution will cite the submission . One method of tracking the full subdivision agreement. The critical document is the subdivision PUD. That document will identify everything. Hunt changed the introductory language of condition five from "project applicants intend to implement" to "project applicants a X11 implement (on page seventy-five) . " Hunt questioned item twelve of condition five, page seventy-eight of the submission. Who will provide the shuttle service for employees? Doremus answered it may be an outside contractor. Hunt asked if the outside contractor will be financed by the hotel . Doremus explained the hotel will find someone who will provide shuttle service that the hotel cannot provide. PIarkalunas asked if the employees will pay for the service. Doremus said the employees will not pay. The applicant has promised the employees free bus tickets. There is no intention for employees to pay for transportation. Hunt asked again if the service will be provided at the cost of the hotel . Doremus said yes. White and Hunt recommended language covering this be in item twelve. Clhite said the buses to the Airport Business Center run once an hour after normal commuting hours. The buses do not run at midnight, or one, or two in the morning. Those are times employees will be changing shifts and need to get home. He wants language in the submission which covers the employees' transportation. Doremus said that is covered in the employee housing section. Harvey said the applicant admits the parking demand will exceed the supply (reference to item two of condition five, page seventy- six) . The applicant also states that valets will stack cars in 0 RECORD OE -2ROCEEDINGS SRecial Neeting , Planning and Zoning Co ' November-27. 1284 the garage when necessary. Item three states that during peak periods, parking reservations will be made when lodging reservations are made. How will the applicant address the situation when the number of cars is greater than the supply of spaces? Harvey proposed that the applicant participate in a lease agreement with the city for spaces in the Rio Grande parking lot and the golf course parking lot, a requirement similar for the Hotel Jerome. Richman said the difference between the Jerome and the Hotel is that there is no on site parking for the Jerome. Doremus noted off site parking is twenty-four hours. Harvey asked if the city wants to provide an arrangement to keep additional cars generated by the hotel from parking on the street during the peak times. Remember there will be fewer spaces after the hotel is built. During peak times parking will be a problem. Consider leasing for $2 . 50 per day twenty parking spaces at the golf course. That lot is not busy during the winter . Make the hotel responsible for shuttling the cars to that lot. This is in the city' s best interest. Richman agreed the suggestion is reasonable. Doremus said it is not the intent of the code to require the applicant to guarantee parking. The intent is that the applicant show responsible, background work. The applicant spent over $25 ,000 on parking . That included a $5,000 parking study since none existed. That is included in the submission as Appendix A. The results of that that study and other studies covering the west state categorically that the parking requirement will not exceed a percentage of the number of rooms. The study concludes the summer demand is greater than the winter demand. Look at page eight of Appendix A. The study projects 327 spaces for the winter demand for the hotel . The applicant is providing 353 spaces, unstacked. The summer demand is 278 spaces. The parking issue associated with phasing is an entirely different question. Harvey encouraged the city to provide an outlet valve for the applicant. The Commission is responsible for reviewing the impact on the immediate neighborhood by this project . Consider the impacts on reducing street parking. White quoted from the study: "During the peak periods when only ten employees spaces will be provided the Aspen Lodge will reserve available parking in a remote lot for their employees. " Where is that remote lot? White concurred with Harvey ' s sug- gestion. Peyton asked for the location of the street parking that will remain after the project is constructed. What is the available street parking after construction? Doremus delineated the parking on a site plan : it includes angle parking , parallel parking, etc. The improvement district will determine the type of parking on Mill Street. The applicant' s parking expert suggested limited night parking so that the streets can be cleaned. Harvey questioned 0 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS SRecia?_ Meeting Planning and Zoning, Commission November 27. 1984 that suggestion. The area is a residential area intensely used by tourists and locals. There is intensive condominium usage. The only available parking is on the street. Doremus repeated this is not the applicant ' s problem. It is community-wide problem. Short of the improvement district addressing this, the city should act. Harvey wants to deal with the immediate impacts on that neighborhood. Doremus said the applicant is mitigating the impacts significantly by parking cars underground at a cost of millions of dollars. The parking expert says the demand will be . 66 spaces per room. Harvey noted the proposal is contra- dictory. This figure does not coincide with peak demands; cars will be stacked during peak times. That indicates there will be more cars than spaces. These figures are only averages. The city should provide some type of relief. Wells noted that there are only 175 new lodge units and 12 new residential units. The applicant is providing off street parking which does not know exist for any of that. It is easy to get the parking out of perspective when thinking in terms of 477 rooms and 54 residential units. The applicant is significantly improving the current situation. Anderson preferred the Commission proceed to the other condi- tions. He will rely on the report by the parking consultant . It is counterproductive to target the parking. Condition. Six: Street Vacations Richman highlighted the commitment to retain the streets and sidewalks for public use, despite the vacations. Those right- of-ways are not lost to the public and are maintained by the applicant. He highlighted the second benefit. Land is being given by the applicant to widen portions of Galena and Monarch. That will improve the circulation. Those are two positive responses by the applicant. Doremus said the applicant did ask for streets to be vacated. He reported that Jay Hammond, city engineer, had explained that the applicant does not buy vacated streets from the city. The city justifies vacations because of the benefits of such action. City Council thought the applicant had to buy the vacated streets. The benefits described in the submission are real . Since the submission was written the argument that Dean Street remains a public access to both vehicular and pedestrian traffic is incorrect . That decision occurred before the change in the location of the entrance to the hotels. He failed to catch the error when the submission was re-written. Dean Street will be for pedestrian access and not for vehicular access. The applicant fears vehicles traveling at 20 m.p.h. will destroy the attractive pedestrian experience. vehicles will also hurt the Dean Street trail concept. Dean Street in the master trail plan is a con- tinuation of a trail system from Little Mell. With the combination of entrances to the porte cocheres for both hotels and the pedestrian entrances to the hotel at the intersection of Mill and It A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Special Meeting Planning and Zoning Commi Gs?on Ngyember 27. 1284 Dean, there is no need for outsiders. Harvey asked about the circulation pattern for taxis. Doremus responded there will be a looping system. The Continental provides essentially the same system. Harvey asked if there is a round about center plaza for cars. Doremus said no. The trans- portation expert discouraged that circular vehicular pattern, it would destroy gill Street. The applicant eliminated that intersection in the design . Cars will unload at the porte cocheres. Pedestrians will filter from the mall, the extension of Mill Street, and then up Mill Street. There will be a mall area that also accommodates traffic. He indicated on a site plan the intended pedestrian flow pattern from the core of town to the hotel. The pedestrian entrance to the hotel is isolated from the car entrance. Taxis will deliver guests away from the flow of people traffic. Richman asked how will the other traffic, except taxis, be prevented from entering. Doremus said the goal is to discourage incidental traffic in the area. The traffic planner recommended the image of driveway entrances. People entering Mill Street to Dean will travel more slowly because of the enriched paving. The enriched paving and other techniques will help create a sense of driveway. Remember, there will be heavy pedestrian traffic. Originally, Hammond had suggested the utilities and the public access be maintained. Hammond now has agreed with the current thinking to discourage Dean as a public access. The applicant does not think this will be an issue. The area will look private and most people will respect it . The few who violate the access will not make that much difference . The applicant cannot prohibit someone from using a public access. Hunt stated that Dean Street will have to maintain the ability to accommodate a forty-six foot semi plus a tractor . Dean Street does service the Chart House. The only exit for a truck is through Dean Street, through the hotel district. Dean Street toward the west is impossible to negotiate in the winter time. Semis travel south on Monarch, and exit east on Dean Street. Doremus preferred Dean to be a public access only for pedestrians. Hunt protested. The applicant has to accommodate the semis. The traditional truck route is south on Plonarch, east on Dean , and north on Mill Street. That is the only way to service the Chart House. Wells argued that Aspen is a resort community and the lodging district should not be planned to serve exclusively the semis of the Chart House but planned more to serve the guests of the hotel . Hunt argued the hotel complex will be rendered useless unless service vehicles can circulate in the area . Wells suggested that semi tractors not be accommodated at the entrance to the hotel. Hunt agreed, but those trucks already exist to service existing facilities. What does the applicant propose? Come up with a solution. Richie Cohen, consultant for the applicant, said the trucks are utilizing that portion of Dean Street because it easier than driving behind the Chart House. The question is expediency, not what will happen if the trucks cannot move west on Dean Street. Hunt said those semis cannot 11 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS $_pecial Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission NoyMb r 27. 1484 negotiate the parking lot west on Dean in the winter . It is impossible . The problem is exacerbated by the skier parking behind South Point. Cohen reasoned the issue is enforcement. Skiers can be forced to park like civilized people, then the trucks can travel west on Dean. Enforce the normal parking laws. Do not change the design of the hotel . Harvey requested further explanation of Dean. If the area between Galena and Monarch on Dean is a vacated right-of-way then the applicant can do anything he wants. 1-Tells explained not with the present agreement. The applicant wants to control the character and the management of the entry ways to the finest accommodation facility in the community. A condition that suggests that public traffic be accommodated on Dean is very different from the applicant ' s designs for the street. The pedestrian domain has been maximized and the car domain has been minimized in the design. But if the city were to require the applicant to maintain through traffic then the area' s appearance would be different. Peyton asked if there will be separate sidewalks for the pedes- trian. Wells referred to the site plan. The design narrows the road for the cars to a minimum. The intent is to make the domain for the pedestrian and not for the automobile. He indicated the path for the cars. The area is designed to make the person who arrives by car understand that the area is designed to accommodate pedestrians. Slow down. Respect pedestrians in this area. Ilarkalunas asked where service vehicles will service the hotel . Wells indicated the locations on the site plan. Peyton asked if there will be sidewalks. Wells replied yes. The pedestrians will be encouraged to walk away from the streets and to walk under the arcades. Harvey asked if Hammond accepts this current proposal. Richman said it appears he does. Harvey said the language is very vague. The issue is control . [That is acceptable to engineering? Doremus shared these ideas with the city engineer . The ideas made sense to the city engineer. If the ideas do not make sense to the Commission, fine. The applicant really wants to discourage uncontrolled cars in the entrance areas to the hotel . Make that area pedestrian oriented. Harvey agreed with this. Richman said once cars are allowed in that area it will be impossible to keep other cars out. Doremus referred to page thirty-sip: of the submission. The drawing clearly illustrates the sidewalks and the streets. Hunt agreed with the concept of minimizing unnecessary vehicular traffic. But, there is some traffic that the applicant will have to accommodate. Flow, he does not know. Doremus took exception to the need to accommodate semis . In a few year: the city may very Beverly restrict semis in Aspen. 19 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Special Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission November. 27.. 1984 Hurt said until that occurs a forty-six foot semi needs to be dealt with. Semis are used in this area. Doremus suggested the use of smaller trucks. Harvey said the impassable situation west on Dean Street can be corrected. Hunt argued this applicant is burdening the rest of the neighborhood. The applicant has to accommodate the semis. Harvey commented it is a problem that the territory has. Anderson noted the parking at Buttermilk was solved with saw horses and chain link fences. Currently there is no delineation for parking on Dean, delineation will help keep the right-of-way open. Richman cited the Hotel Jerome. It was originally held responsible for the expense of Bleeker Street. After some discussion it was decided that Sleeker Street was the city' s responsibility not the Jerome' s. Harvey noted that a city has certain duties associated with the construction of an attractive hotel . Include a note to the effect that the city needs to be aware of what will happen and what the city needs to do. Hunt suggested noting there be a reduction in traditional skier parking. Hunt discouraged curb extensions at the end of parallel parking. That is impractical for cleaning streets. The most obvious curb extension is on Galena Street. Also the turning radii are not sensible. The extension of curbs sharpens the curves. Vehicles will have to make larger radial turns . Use a larger radius curve. This lessens the chance of a car passing into another lane. White favored minimal traffic through the hotel area. The concern is truck delivery. The Commission has to address this issue. The delivery system in this town is bad. Technically, he does not know what control the city has over this. Harvey recommended this be included during the discussion of the trans- portation sketch plan. Harvey queried the pedestrian ski link. Doremus indicated on a map the alignment of the ski trail. This link will be for the entire community. He indicated what part of the trail the hotel guests will most frequent. There is a special ski entrance to a ski storage area. The ski entrance is designed with stairs that are broad and shallow for ski boots. He indicated the section of trail guests of the west wing will use. There will be melted sidewalks. He located both ski entrances . He indicated the sections to be constructed during phase one. Peyton requested clarification of the I:och Lumber trade. Doremus explained the applicant offered to donate to the city a portion of land not in the land exchange. The exchange involved about 21 , 000 square feet , the donation involved 42 ,000 square feet. Peyton asked when will the exchange-donation happen. Doremus said upon final approval during phase one . Wells briefly commented for tax reasons the donation cannot be mentioned in the submission. Richman said the land has been freely offered and donated. The city has accepted the donation. 11 RFCORD. OF PROCEEDINGS Snecial, Meeting Planning and. Zoning Commission November 27 1984 Harvey asked if the applicant is requesting fewer vacations. Doremus said the requests are the same. Peyton asked if the land is to be freely given and freely accepted what actually binds the donor to follow through with this donation. Is it a condition or is it not a condition? Richman replied it is not a condition. The applicant has offered the land to the city already. The city has accepted that offer . The land transfer has effectively been handled. Peyton asked if the land can be taken back by the donor. Harvey assumed the trade would happen coincidentally with the vacations of the right-of-ways . Peyton asked if the right-of-ways will be vacated at phase one. [dells explained the final plat, which is labeled at preliminary, is drawn to reflect the boundaries of final approval . Slivers of land are relinquished, Galena Street is realigned, etc. That will happen with the approval _of_ phase one. Hunt questioned the lack of parking behind the Mountain Chalet. Currently there is parking . Has the owner of the Mountain Chalet made an agreement with the applicant? Doremus replied yes. The agreement appears in the appendix of the application. Rich,tian cited condition seven. That condition addresses the maintenance and use agreement . Doremus referred to the agreement, specifically, item four on page four in Appendix C: no surface parking allowed. 90% of the public parking on Dean Street is not used the Mountain Chalet' s guests. There is no city enforcement on time limitation for parked cars. Hunt said the only enforcement is through individual complaints. Condition Seven: Harvey asked if the city has any problem with this condition. Richman replied the city has no argument. Condition Eight: Utility Companies L.oss .of Bight-of-ways Richman noted from page eighty-three to eighty-nine there are specific letters from each of the utility companies signing off on the vacations and requiring the applicant assume all costs related to any relocation of utilities brought about by the vacation of the streets . The applicant has no problem with assuming those costs. Harvey asked if this tracks with the city' s relinquishing right- of-way vacations. Will that be separate agreement from the PUD agreement? Richman commented that Council addresses vacations through ordinances. Ordinances will be done at the same time as final plat. Condition Nine Richman said the applicant did submit a detailed subdivision plat. The applicant did indicate the parceling. But, Hammond made 1 d RECORD OF .PR CEEDINGS Special Neeting Manning and Zoning Commission November 27, 19-MU minor comments about platting in his memorandum (to Richman dated November 6 , 1984 , about Aspen :Mountain Lodge preliminary subdivision and PUD) on page five. There were some unclear items. Richman found the trails to be particularly unclear. The applicant can respond to those before final plat. Doremus discussed with Hammond the issue of open space (referred to on page five of Hammond ' s memo) . (Doremus referred to two areas on a- map:-) --Hammond -had also requested the applicant more clearly define the south west corner of the property and another area . One area is 14 ,377 square feet. Hammond also questioned the ice skating rink; was that rink meant to be open space. The applicant did tell Hammond that the rink is not open space. The space is covenanted as private open space; the applicant promises never to build anything on that land except what is built ini- tially. There will be no structures or density on the south west corner parcel . That is part of the PUD agreement. The applicant will maintain at his expense his open space. Doremus reported Hammond believed this concept made sense. The land ought to be dedicated open space as the applicant proposes . If the city were to want a public ice skating rink then the applicant would let the city build and manage the rink . The agreement reads the rink is open and available to the public. The rink is not restricted to hotel guests only. Condition Ten Survey Richman noted that Hammond did not make any comments on surveys. Ten is alright. Condition Eleven Richman continued. This condition is a response to Dunlop' s concerns raised at general submission. The concerns are included on pages ninety to ninety-three of the submission. The applicant has responded one by one to each of the requirements that Dunlop set . The requirements are environmental laws of the state and city. The additional concern of air pollution from demolition is a state regulation that the applicant has to comply with. Richman addressed site run off. That issue has not been addressed well . The conclusion is that the only way site drainage will be adequately addressed is in the residential submission. Richman asked the Commission to defer site drainage to the residential component. Doremus explained why site drainage cannot be answered at this time. There are two kinds of drainage problems that the applicant is required to deal with: on site drainage and clean water. On site drainage is a function of the increase problem of run off that occurs when undeveloped land is covered with impervious material . That creates greater surface water flow. Secondly, the entire mountain produces water . That water is referred to as clean water. The water drains from vegetated areas. The water resulting 1 , RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS gRecial meeting Planning and Zoning CoMission Ngvem1ber 27., 1981 from the on site flow is referred to as dirty water. The city drainage master plan, a plan developed by Wright 11cLoughlin in 1973, is out dated. But, the plan does represent that the clean and dirty water be kept separate . That is one of the applicant' s intentions. The water from on site and mountain drainages was studied at intervals of two years, five years, and one hundred years. The two year and the five year flood condition can be handled by the municipal storm drainage system with the addition of one thousand feet of new storm sewer . The only problem is the great one hundred year flood. The applicant intends to detain the clean water off the mountain in detention ponds. As the water flows out of the ponds it will be diverted underground or on surface to Monarch Street. This is under study. The on site drainage for the five year flood will be handled in the newly constructed underground garages. The water will be retained there and released at the five year flood level . This will probably be handled by a gravity flow system. The garages are so deep that pumps will be necessary. The reason for the delay in the design is the complex relationship of the mountain flow to debris flow. There are three geological hazard areas on the mountain. The applicant has to deal with these areas at preliminary. The applicant determined it was more appropriate to deal with these issues during the residential component which is most affected by the debris flow. In addition, the geological studies were not completed in time for the hotel submission . The geological studies for the debris flow, the landslide, and the mine dump problems are underway. This study will relate to the storm drainage flow. It is intended that a plan handle the debris flow and the water flow in one design system. Every one hundred years there will be a debris flow problem. That is connected to the water flow. Richman reiterated that Dunlop' s conditions have been handled quite well except for the site drainage. Con ition Twelve Richman noted this condition deals with reconstruction. Taddune has indicated the question cannot be answered because of liti- gation. Twelve will be satisfied after a bankruptcy decision. Forty-two units involved in the reconstruction have been verified, thirty-two units at the Aspen Inn and six units previously demolished. The other question is will there be the right number of units based on the allocations. The result will be more than forty-seven units. The allocations are assured by the elimination of sixteen existing units at the Continental Inn. The phasing will address those rooms: maids rooms, new shops, hallways, etc. There is a need for some type of demolition plan. Condition Thirteen RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Special Meeting _ Planning: and Zoning Colmi gsi on November 27. 1984 Richman reminded the Commission that last week Allan Novak explained why the condo-tel had been dropped as an option. Both the Commission and Council have raised questions on the financing of the hotel . Richman has not addressed financing since nothing in the code gives Richman the authority to deal with this question. The Commission can continue to discuss this with the applicant. The applicant has suggested the operator will be selected before the year is over . Harvey asked if the applicant anticipates the entire PUD being under one management. Doremus replied not necessarily. The operator will determine whether he wishes to manage the residential units. One operator who the applicant has talked with would be happy to manage. The claim is that if the operator were to take his fee then there would be no problem with the development . Therein lies the major problem. An operator has stated he wants control of the 285 rooms, that phasing makes sense financially, and that the other wing could be a separate adjunct to the 235 room hotel or be a separate competing hotel . The competing complex might not be as conference oriented as the larger complex. Hunt asked for confirmation of one operator for the hotel and for conference facilities. Doremus replied if both wings of the proposal were considered in the term "hotel" then there might be two operators. Richman noted there is 14 ,000 square feet of conference space in the west wing and 7 ,000 square feet in the east wing. Harvey asked if the refurbished Continental Inn might have separate management from the new hotel. Doremus remarked that the applicant has made the representation in the submission that the Continental Inn will have a separate management from the new 285 room hotel. Harvey asked if the Top of Mill and Summit Place will have a separate management . Those units could be sold off with a management contract. &Jill it be the operator ' s decision whether to manage the residential units? Doremus replied that the operator will make that decision. The Hyatt does not want the Top of till but will manage the residential units attached to the 285 room hotel. Top of Mill and South Galena could be sold as condominium units. The condominium association would work out a management arrangement with the operator. Richman clarified that only condominiumization requires insurance of certain levels of services. Those commitments will be reviewed under -condominiumization review. In terms of this broad condition the code does not give the Commission the authority to review this. Doremus noted the applicant has proposed a condominium declaration. It is located in the back of the submission. There is no discussion in the declaration about timesharing. Hunt asked if the condomi- niumization is for the residential units of the hotel or the condominiumization of the entire hotel . Doremus replied the entire hotel. Hunt preferred a hotel operation for this type of a project. 1 -7 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Special Meeting Planning and Zoning..Commission November_27, 198 That is also what Novak wants. Hunt did not favor condominium units managed by Interwest , Coate Reides and Waldron, etc. Richman requested that this issue be raised during condomin- iumization. The Commission has the ability to control the project as a hotel not as a condominiumized apartment house. Condition_.Fourteen: Pedestrian Issue Richman noted the series of commitments on page 103 and 107 , a series of positive improvements for sidewalks and crossings. There was an analysis on existing population versus projected population. The analysis concluded there would not be an enormous flow of people on the street. The results of the study are on page 105. Presently, there are 829 people occupying the existing facilities. He does not know if the figure includes guests at the Blue Spruce or the Aspen Inn. Based on the assumed existing population there is a net increase of 360 people generated by the new hotel, a conservative figure. The Continental is currently utilized. The Aspen Inn and Blue Spruce are not utilized as much. Tlells interjected this figure included all the facilities. Harvey said proper lighting is a concern. Crosswalks are not apparent during the winter . Harvey requested a description of the pedestrian traffic flow patterns. Doremus said the two big flows are at Durant and Galena , and Durant and Mill . Harvey asked if there is some provision to prevent crossing in the middle of Durant, for example, to Rubey Park. He focused on the area around the ice rink.. The largest pedestrian impact will be the flow from the new facility. Harvey questioned the meaning of the figures 08/38 for the intersection at Durant and Galena Street on page 105 . Doremus explained those are numbers of people crossing both directions. Harvey quoted thirty percent of the trips are northbound, and seventy percent are southbound . Doremus said the analysis involved a people count at Durant and Galena, Galena and Hyman, and one other point. Those figures are in the traffic study in the appendices. Harvey again questioned the multiple crossing points. Doremus said the analysis addresses this issue in the last pages in Appendix A. Richman noted there is a Table Seven labeled "Pedestrian Peak Hour Volumes. " Richman quoted from this study: "Observations of pedestrians during the survey indicated that the absence of traffic signals resulted in little preference for intersections versus mid-block crossings. Therefore, our counts included all pedestrian crossing within one hundred feet of an intersection. " There appears to be people crossing everywhere. Harvey suggested the project control and direct the flow of pedestrian traffic at 10 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS See i al Meeting . Planning and Zoning, Commission__ NQVember.27.. 1984. the intersections . It is difficult for a motorist to dodge pedestrians who are crossing Durant randomly. People crossing near the proposed ice rink area will be a problem. He did not favor overhead, blinking lights for pedestrian crosswalks at the two intersections. But, make an attempt through the design of the project to concentrate the pedestrian flows on either end of Rubey Park or at Galena and Mill . Richman asked if signage is a possibility. Harvey said he is talking about the winter and the completion of phase two with the ice rink and shops. Richman said there is no way to stop people short of encouraging them not to cross in the middle of Durant. Harvey agreed signage is the logical answer . There is continued discussion of pedestrian access. Wells cited one disincentive to crossing the street , there is slight change in grade . Someone in ski boots might prefer to walk the long way to avoid steps. Harvey requested solutions be discussed during phasing. Doremus noted that the applicant is proposing a paved sidewalk entrance through the middle of the project with landscaping and park benches. This will be a condition of phase one. He assumed this would be maintained during the winter. People concerned about their safety will use the intersection. white is concerned about the people flow. People will randomly cross Durant Street. At eight or nine o' clock in the morning or four o' clock in the afternoon the area is a mess with people and buses. People walk aimlessly down Durant Street. Here is an opportunity to address this issue. The city has some respon- sibility. Richman commented there is conflict with an overhead bridge , an underground system, etc. The conflict is there. White said the Commission needs to resolve this problem. Poten- tially there will be five hundred more people in the area, exacerbating the congestion. Anderson argued there will not be a major increase in people. The parking lot in front of the Continental Inn does not encourage or discourage people. The bulk of additional pedestrian circulation will not go through the Mountain Chalet ; it will flow north from the new hotel wing down Mill Street. He argued there will not be any increase in the problem. Harvey preferred to clean up the problem by channeling the pedestrians. Peyton asked if any of the sidewalks will be snow melted. Doremus did not know. Thefe may be snow melt sidewalks on Dean. Peyton preferred to wall: down a sidewalk cleared of snow. A sidewalk cleared of snow is a big deterrent from walking down the street. Harvey did not believe it should be the applicant' s responsibility to snow melt the city streets. Harvey requested the applicant work on a design for pedestrian traffic flow across Durant . SigInage may be the answer . The problem is occurs in the summertime problem and wintertime. Richman promised to come up with some positive design solution. , n RECORD OF- PROCEEDINGS Special Meeting Punning and Zoning Commission November 27, 1,984 (IM'arkalunas leaves the meeting at 7: 20 p.m. ) Condition Fifteep; CCLC Lodge JmRroyement District Richman said the applicant has agreed to participate. Condition Sixteen Richman said the applicant has met the condition. Condition Seventee aterial Representations. No comments. Condition Eighteen Richman said this condition is worthless. Condition Nineteen Richman said this condition has been accomplished. The applicant did submit within the time required. Harvey continued the public hearing to December 4 , 1984 . He adjourned the meeting at 7 : 00 p.m. Barbara Morris, Deputy City Clerk �n