Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19781107 BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.,DENVER R E C O R D OF P R O C E E D I N G S Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission November 7, 1978 The Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission held a regular meeting on November 7, 1978, at 5: 00 PM in the City Council Chambers. Members present were Charles Collins, Ellen Anderson, Welton Anderson, Donald Ensign, Olaf Hedstrom and John Schuhmacher. Also present were Karen Smith, Joe Wells, Richard Grice of the Planning Office; Ron Stock, City Attorney; HJ Stalf, Transportation Director? and Torn Dunlop, City Sanitarian. Approval of Minutes Ensign moved to approve the minutes of October 17, 1978 , as submitted, Ms. Anderson seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Post Office SPA Wells introduced the application. This is a public hearing to approve the Post Office' s SPA application on Lot 2, Trueman Subdivision. The land is zoned S/C/I . The uses are to be set with the adoption of the SPA plan. The building is well below the maximum FAR permitted and meets the open space requirements. The Engineering Department is concerned with the entry at the corner of the site. He noted the bike path easements. Ellis recommends approval subject to his concerns being resolved. Ms. Anderson asked what the plans are for two way public transportation on Mill Street. Stalf said the trolley car. Ms. Anderson was concerned that people would jump in their car to get their mail instead of walking. Collins opened the public hearing. There were no comments. Collins closed the public hearing. Schuhmacher moved to approve the SPA plan of the US Post Office as submitted subject to the resolution of the con- cerns of the Engineering Department as outlined in their memo of November 1, 1978, Anderson seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Schuhmacher moved to amend the previous motion to include an encouragement of development of increased public trans- portation in both directions on Mill Street to accommodate the increased traffic as generated by the Trueman Center and the Post Office, Anderson seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Annexation Issue, Smith introduced Marty Hershey who has been studying this Introduction issue. P&Z will be asked to cooperate in reviewing what changes will be necessary in zoning, etc. Hershey showed a map of the area being considered for annexation and introduced the issue. Brownell, Grice introduced the application. The application involves Subdivision two duplexes on Lots 1 & 3. Brownell Subdivision. The Exemption Engineering Department recommends approval subject to the moving of a fence to the property line. One of the four units is occupied by the applicant, the other three are rental units. The applicant suggests that one of these three units be restricted to PMH guidelines for five years. Mark Danielson recommends that all three units be placed under these restrictions. Gideon Kaufman, representing the applicant, noted that the applicant just entered into new year leases on these units. He is agreeable to the five year restriction. He is willing to restrict the rent increases to $60 over the next five years. Ensign moved to recommend subdivision exemption for the Brownell duplexes provided that the City Attorney and the applicant' s attorney come to a legal agreement that ( is- allows sale of the units for five years and rents are es- calated on those two units at the rate consistent with the IWM Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission November 7 , 1978 PMH guidelines and that the fence on lot 3 be moved back to the property line, Hedstrom seconded. All in favor, motion approved. US Forest Service, Smith introduced the application. This is a conditional Conditional Use use hearing to consider expansion for a public administra- tion building in the R-6 residential district. They are asking for additional office space and a garage behind the proposed office space. She showed the addition on a map. This would double the square footage of the office space. She noted the proposed changes in parking. She also noted their future plans to locate employee housing on the pro- perty. She stated that they must consider the impact on the surrounding area. The Planning Office does not feel this will have any adverse impact on the area. Collins opened the public hearing.. He read letters from Mrs. Paepcke and Ann Schwind in support of the expansion. Collins closed the public hearing. Hedstrom moved that this commission approve the proposed Forest Service Public Administration building expansion as a conditional use in the R-6 zone inasmuch as it con- stitutes an improvement of the site and is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and subject to the recommenda- tions and requirements of the City Engineer as described in the Planning Office memo of November 3 , 1978 , Ensign seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Mill Street ROW Stock noted that the City is interested in improving Mill Acquisition, Street. He asked for a recommendation for exemption of Subdivision a certain parcel of land from the definition of subdivi- Exemption sion under Section 20-19. The Engineering Department is preparing the documents with a due date in May so this may go to a vote if necessary for a general obligation bond. The plans call for a straightening of Mill Street close to the river with a new bridge and expansion to a four land roadway. This requires a larger right-of-way. Stock noted a parcel of land owned by Edward W. Morse who has agreed to partially release his easement. The application requests exemption of the lot line change which would allow Mr. Morse to deed to the City the parcel which is approximately 430 square feet. The City will not actually use this parcel for the paved portion of the roadway but it may be used for a sidewalk and landscaping. Ensign moved to grant subdivision exemption to the property in question inasmuch as the intents and purposes of the subdivision regulations have been met, W. Anderson seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Code Amendment, Smith introduced the application. This is a public hearing Bus Depot, to consider an amendment to the code to add a bus depot Conditional Use to the conditional uses now permitted in the Lodge-2 dis- in L-2 zone trict. She noted that specific applications for condition- al use will not be considered until a later date. L-2 is intended to accommodate tourist uses. The Planning Office does not feel this use is inappropriate. She suggested a time limit for the conditional use with a review after the time expires. She noted that this is close to the City transportation depot at Rubey Park. She noted tele- graras from Ron Krajian, a letter from Condominium Rental Management, and a letter from Mr. and Mrs. Larry J. Cano all in opposition to this amendment. Gideon Kaufman noted that although the Cantrup' s offered this land for the bus depot, they are not really in _favor of this site. He did not feel they should approve this amendment if they did not feel this site appropriate. He also suggested that this may be spot zoning which is il- legal. He felt the appropriate place for the depot is -3- BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.,DENVER R E C O R D OF P R O C E E D I N G S Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission November 7, 1978 the airport. He felt this use incompatible with the surrounding land uses. He felt it would be dangerous to bring buses into this area. He submitted a letter from Tom Dunlop, City Sanitarian, complaining of previous problems with the buses idling. Kaufman noted that the pollution will be trapped in this area of town because of the surrounding terrain. He felt this is a short term solution that creates more problems than is solves. He suggested Paepcke Park, Rubey Park and the base of 1-A. He felt this amendment is illegal, inconvenient and in- appropriate. Collins opened the public hearing. Jeffrey Sachs Sachs noted that one element of bus service is commercial freight. This will generate more traffic. He noted that most chartered buses deliver to the door of destination. This depot will not serve the majority of the tourists staying in this zone. June Cantrup She noted that she is president of the Lodging Association. She offered this site because of an immediate need. She would rather they find an alternate site that is more ap- propriate but stands by her offer. HJ Stalf noted that Trailways was contacted one year ago and told they could not stay at their old site. They had not found a suitable site by July when the bus station was torn down and the City offered Rubey Park temporarily without freight and baggage service. He agreed that the airport may be the best solution. He did not feel that Trailways has considered every possible site in town but agreed that each site would have problems. Joan Anderman Anderman borders the property in question. She felt this depot would cancel out her house. She noted that she is not entering into this suit with the others but felt she had her own case. Gary Plumley Plumley has lived in the Tipple Inn for eight years. He read a letter from the owners of the Tipple Inn strongly objecting to this amendment. E. Anderson asked Tom Dunlop to comment on the possible noise and pollution. Dunlop stated that there is an idling ordinance that ap- plies to all. He noted that the pollution generated from a deisel engine is less in carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon content than a gas powered engine. However, the particu- late matter and visible pollutants are greater. After conferring with various authorities, the consensus was that the buses should idle no more than five minutes. Bill Comstock Comstock asked Stalf if they could consider putting this in the airport temporarily where Bonanza Airlines pre- viously operated. Stalf stated that this was totally up to the County al- though the impact would be on the City. Phillip Moore Moore is the president of the Durant Condominium Associa- tion. He stated that the grades in this zone are 7% or steeper and did not think they could maneuver the buses successfully. There is very heavy pedestrian traffic in the area and the roads are very narrow. This area of town tends to contain smoke and pollution because of the closeness to the mountain face. This action would devalue their property. He noted that he is authorized by the owners of the Durant Condominiums to take legal action. 4- Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission November 7 , 1978 Collins asked how many buses would be running per day. Robert Smallwood, representative from Trailways , said they would be running two buses per day Sunday through Thursday, 6 buses on Friday and 8 buses on Saturday. The arrival times vary. This excludes charter buses. E. Anderson asked how many people the buses hold. Smallwood said they hold 46 people. He estimated that they could bring in 1400 people per week. Larry Ulrych Ulrych asked the Board to consider this depot as a mag- net that will attract courtesy vans, etc. He noted that he had his only automobile accident at that intersection. The grade is steep. There is an easy potential for a mountain inversion that will contain pollution in this area. Don Crawford Crawford feels that nothing smells worse than a bus. He said having the bus depot in this area would drive him crazy. Joan Anderman Anderman asked if they could have a guarantee that there would be no charter buses at this depot. Smallwood said the charter buses may come into the area to deliver their riders to the destination but they would not deliver to the depot. Hal Clark Clark felt the City and County should get together to determine a suitable site. He felt that with multi family residences and duplexes in the L-2 zone, it is a residen- tial as well as tourist zone. He submitted that a bus depot is inappropriate. He did not feel a conditional use should be temporarily compatible. He suggested a transpor- tation zone overlay. Collins read a letter from Carol and Don Kopf and a letter from Gus Hallam opposing this amendment. Collins closed the public hearing. Hedstrom moved to recommend denial of an amendment to Section 24-3. 2 of the zoning code to add a bus depot as a conditional use in the L-2 district inasmuch as a general passenger and freight distribution loading and unloading site would be inappropriate and detrimental to the usage and residents of that zone, Ensign seconded. All in favor with E. Anderson opposed, motion approved. Code Amendment, Smith introduced the item. This is a public hearing to Rental Limitations consider an amendment to add the rental limitations of in RMF & R-6 six month minimum lease to the R-6, R-15, R-30, R-40, Rural Residential and C-Conservation districts. Presently they only apply in the RMF, O, and C-1 districts. She noted that there would be a restriction of no more than two shorter tenancies per year. The amendment would also delete the exemption for single family and duplex units. Any use which had been short term would be nonconforming. Collins opened the public hearing. Jeffrey Sachs Sachs felt that this amendment would make 2/3 of the pro- perty in Aspen nonconforming. He asked how they could enforce this. He noted that alot of people short term to make the mortgage on the house. He feels they will drastically affect the property values. Ensign did not feel this is any more restrictive than what they have now. Sachs asked why they would enact one thing when they can ' t enforce what they have now. -5- BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO.,DENVER R E C O R D OF P R O C E E D I N G S Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission November 7, 1978 Smith noted that this will add other zone districts to the list of those effected by the restrictions. The Planning Office believes that those residential zone districts were intended for permanent residences. People are short terming increasingly more. Ensign felt that single family houses were a higher impact. Mayor Standley noted that it is a function of distance. Tourists tend to generate more traffic by going,downtown for the ac tivi:ties. Schuhmacher asked who wants this restriction enforced. Standley said City Council requested it. Bil Dunaway agreed with this restriction. Zoning laws are not made for people to make money, they are to pre-. serve the living quality of the town. Stock said the City does not have a responsibility to allow people to use their property in such a manner that allow the most amount of money. Schuhmacher felt this is a severe restriction for the homeowners in the West End. He also noted that there is an enforcement problem presently. Gideon Kaufman Kaufman noted that Council is preparing to pass a condo- miniumization policy. They fear that people that cannot condominiumize will short term. He felt they should strenghthen their condo policy. Sally Mencimer Mencimer runs the Aspen Center for Physics. They rent about 70 places for the MAA students. She asked how they were being protected by this amendment. She feared losing this housing. Smith noted that the new restriction, does not define the length of time for the two short term per- iods. Jeffrey Sachs Sachs asked Stock to explain their enforcement for this ordinance. Stock said there are not enough people presently to enforce this. It would require a process where a neighbor would inform the City of violations. He suggested the adoption of an abatement procedure for nonconforming uses. Standley noted that because of Growth Management and other restrictions placed on housing, the outside demand for housing by absentee people has put pressure on the West End and other residential districts. The town is now becoming tourist accommodations and this pushes locals downvalley. The only way to stop absentee ownership is to put restrictions on short terming. Ensign was hesi- tant to enact another ordinance when the impact and results have not been documented on Ordinance 53 of 1977. Smith noted that the intent of Ordinance 53 was to protect, not create, employee housing. It is also an objective of the Master Plan to separate a permanent residential community from the tourist residential community. Collins felt this ordinance would reinforce the present zoning. He felt they should decide which way they were going to go; enforce the present zoning or rezone. Gideon Kaufman Kaufman agreed with the theory of the amendment. He did not feel that many locals will be able to afford housing if this goes through. He felt housing will go toward the wealthy foreigners that don' t care or know about the situ- ations in Aspen. Standley noted that having tourists in the West End could be a very dangerous situation. They tend to forget that they are staying in a residential district with children. They create a tourist environment that is incompatible with the residential neighborhood. Ensign suggested going to the Real Estate Boards for suggestions. Smith noted C. Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission November 7 , 1978 that is not within their interest to consider these solu- tions. Dunaway noted that this ordinance only reinforces the intentions of zoning in the Master Plan. Collins closed the public hearing. E. Anderson had a problem with approving an ordinance when they could not enforce the laws they have now. She turned to Stock for suggestions . Stock said they will need one additional person in the inspection department who will drive around the community. There is illegal construction going on now but not enough personnel to enforce the code. This may also require some additional assistance in the City Attorney' s office. They want to avoid a gestapo approach. Smith noted that this action was being taken by the In- dependent Commission but that Mayor Standley would not have a vote on the motion. Ensign moved to recommend denial of the code amendment as presented in the Planning Office memorandum of November 2 , 1978, on rental restrictions, Schuhmacher seconded. Roll call vote: Schuhmacher, aye; E. Anderson, nay; Ensign, aye; Hedstrom, aye; Collins , nay. Motion approved. Code Amendment, .. Stock introduced the item. He noted Resolution 18, 1978 , Housing Guidelines adopted by the Council, which sets housing price guide- and Section 24-10. 12, lines. The sale and rental prices are based on square GMP footage. The prices are comparable to the County' s prices. He noted that everyone in City Hall had an input into determining these price guidelines. He then explained the amendments to Section 24-10 . 12 of the code. Code Amendment, Condominiumization, Code Amendment, Section 24-10. 12 GMP Collins opened the public hearing. Ensign moved to continue the public hearing on the Housing Guidelines to the next regular meeting, E. Anderson seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Collins opened the public hearing. Ensign moved to continue the public hearing on the Condominiumization Policy to the next regular meeting, Hedstrom seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Collins opened the public hearing. Ensign moved to continue the public hearing on the Amendments to Section 24-10. 12 to the next regular meeting, Schuhmacher seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Ensign moved to adjourn the meeting, E. Anderson seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Meeting adjourned at 9 : 00 PM. Sheryl ,S, mmen, Deputy City Clerk