Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20220201Minutes Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission February 1, 2022 Page 1 of 6 Chairperson McGovern called the regular Planning and Zoning (P&Z) meeting for February 1st, 2022 to order at 4:30 PM. Commissioners in attendance: Ruth Carver, Sam Rose, Brittanie Rockhill, Scott Marcoux, Spencer McKnight, Teraissa McGovern. Staff in Attendance: Amy Simon, Planning Director Michelle Bonfils-Thibeault, Planner Kevin Rayes, Planner Kate Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Cindy Klob, Records Manager COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Ms. Carver announced she recently married the mayor of Crested Butte, and she will be completing her term with P&Z in March. Ms. McGovern congratulated her. STAFF COMMENTS Ms. Simon congratulated Ms. Carver. She stated staff has not yet followed up on the commission’s request to schedule a work session. She and Ms. Johnson decided it would be best to have the work session on a day or time that is not a regularly scheduled meeting. Ms. McGovern stated her preference is to have a virtual meeting. Ms. Rockhill agreed. The commissioners are open to other days of the week. Ms. Simon stated she would email the commissioners to determine the best day for the work session. PUBLIC COMMENTS None APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. McKnight motioned to approve the minutes for January 4, 2022 and was seconded by Ms. Carver. Ms. McGovern requested a roll call: Mr. Rose, yes; Ms. Rockhill, yes; Mr. Marcoux, yes; Mr. McKnight, yes; Ms. Carver, yes; and Ms. McGovern, yes; for a total of six (6) in favor – zero (0) not in favor. The motion passed. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST None PUBLIC HEARINGS Ms. McGovern asked if notice had been provided. Ms. Johnson responded proper notice had been provided for both hearings. Rio Grande Park Signage Plan – Amendment to Detailed Review Approval Ms. McGovern then opened the hearing and turned the floor over to staff. Minutes Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission February 1, 2022 Page 2 of 6 Ms. Bonfils-Thibeault, Planner, introduced the application for a minor amendment to a development review regarding the signage plan in the Rio Grande Park. Mr. Mike Tunte, Parks and Open Space Landscape Architect and Construction Manager, provided an overview of the signage and wayfinding project for the joined spaces of the John Denver Sanctuary and Rio Grande Park. Mr. Tunte then provided some history regarding the area. He stated in the late 1800’s, this area was an industrial site with a rail yard, railroad switch yard, and a lead concentrator site. In 1998, John Bennett, a former Mayor, and Jeff Woods, a former Parks and Open Space Director, approached Ms. Annie Denver about creating a sanctuary for John Denver and ended up dedicating a 4.5 acre site within the Rio Grande Park. In the mid 2000’s, the Parks Department began a complex transformation of the site. It is now one of the most sought after sites for visitors to connect with nature. He stated the interpretive effort which is the focus of today began about four years ago. Mr. Woods and Ms. Denver designed the sanctuary along with Parks department staff and a contracted interpretation design firm. He stated the primary goal of the interpretation and wayfinding elements is to address some of the site’s features and amenities. He noted comments from the City’s Open Space and Trails board have been included in the plan. He then reviewed the goals of the plan in preparation for implementation. Mr. Tunte noted one of the goals is to provide for visitor needs and interests with a minimal number of signs. The plan includes both physical elements providing high-level information and a corresponding application to provide a greater depth of information. He displayed a site plan mapping the interpretive and wayfinding elements and noted there are seven welcome orientation panels, two small directional blades to assist with wayfinding and seven interpretive panels. Mr. Tunte displayed an example of a primary and secondary welcome panels and discussed the materials to be used. He then displayed a pictures of the proposed locations of the welcome panels. He also provided an example of another exhibit panel, materials and proposed locations. He noted one panel will be printed on a translucent panel to allow the visitor to see a hint of the existing landscape through the panel. He displayed other panel locations and free-standing panels. He noted the panels will not be mounted in the pathway as displayed. He then displayed an example of a sign to be placed near the theatre providing wayfinding and a locking panel for theatre shows. Mr. Tunte then displayed examples of the application available for viewing to find other elements in the sanctuary, the history and possible actions visitors can take. Mr. Tunte reiterated the Open Space and Trails Board unanimously voted on October 21, 2021 in support of the plan. Ms. McGovern asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Minutes Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission February 1, 2022 Page 3 of 6 Ms. Carver feels the main entrance is the corner of Rio Grande Pl and Mill St. Mr. Tunte replied there is quite a bit of signage on that corner, but the larger entrance will be next to the skate park. Mr. Austin Weiss, Parks and Open Space Director, pointed out the corridor from Aspen Mountain down to the Roaring Fork River. The main entrance of the park is on the corridor. Mr. Matt Kuhn, Parks Director, noted the corner already has a boulder with the name of the park engraved on it. Ms. Carver asked how many signs will be for the theatre? Mr. Tunte responded just the one sign is being replaced. Ms. McGovern asked if the existing signage near the entrance will be removed. Mr. Kuhn stated the trail map on the left will remain and the signs on the right are up for discussion. Ms. McGovern then turned the floor over to staff. Ms. Michelle Bonfils-Thibeault introduced herself and then reviewed the application for a minor amendment to a detailed review approval. She displayed and discussed a list of historical park approvals. She noted signage had not been addressed in any of the historic approvals. Ms. Bonfils-Thibeault then reviewed the criteria. Criteria A was discussed regarding the compliance with a project review approval based on the 2006 Civic Master Plan (CMP). Staff finds this criterion to be met. She noted both Criteria B: Growth Management and Criteria C: Site Planning and Landscape Architecture are not applicable. She then discussed Criteria D: Proposed architectural details which staff finds met. Ms. Bonfils-Thibeault closed stating staff recommends approval. Ms. McGovern asked if there were any questions of staff. There were none. Ms. McGovern then opened for public comment. There were none. Ms. McGovern then opened for commissioner discussion. Ms. Rockhill stated it seems very straightforward and she supports it. Ms. Carver feels they have done a beautiful job with the signage. She doesn’t believe people will use Galena Plaza no matter what staff does to improve the connection to the park. She would prefer the park remain a bit wild with a sense of discovery. She feels there are a bit too many signs and would like to see half the number of signs. Mr. Marcoux feels they did a great job balancing out the signs and like the use of the QR code and application to provide more detail. The application can adapt for seasons and events. Mr. Rose agrees with Mr. Marcoux and Ms. Rockhill. Mr. McKnight recalled previously discussing signage plans with staff and his only thoughts were to not have so many signs all over Aspen. He loves the area and like Ms. Carver, likes the sense of discovery there. He also feels the signs look great and likes the translucent sign. Minutes Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission February 1, 2022 Page 4 of 6 Ms. McGovern reminded the commissioners of their purview regarding the review criteria and the commissioners should base their responses on the criteria. Ms. McGovern believes everyone supports approving the application. Ms. Carver feels the number of signs clutter the park and hoped Parks can look into it more. Ms. McGovern asked if the commission is approving the sign plan as presented or just that signs are okay to use in the park. Ms. Bonfils-Thibeault responded the commission is approving the presented sign plan as provided in the application. Ms. McGovern would like to add something the resolution to note the changes discussed. Ms. Bonfils-Thibeault responded the resolution could be amended. Ms. Carver stated she would support removing the current signs except for the skate park sign. Mr. Marcoux does not feel the entrance should not be congested with signs. Ms. McGovern suggested amending the resolution to have the Parks department add existing signs to the plan and minimize redundancy as much as possible. Ms. Rockhill motioned to approve the resolution including the proposed amendment made by Chairperson McGovern. Mr. Rose seconded the motion. Ms. McGovern requested a roll call for Resolution #04, Series 2022: Ms. Carver, yes; Mr. Marcoux, yes; Mr. McKnight, no; Mr. Rose, yes; Ms. Rockhill, yes; and Ms. McGovern, yes for a total five (1) in favor – one (1) not in favor. The motion passed. Ms. McGovern then closed the hearing. 108 Neale Ave| Herron Park | Stream Margin Review & Special Review to Establish an Alternative Top of Slope Ms. McGovern opened the hearing and turned the floor over to staff. Mr. Kevin Rayes introduced himself and then described the application to establish an alternative top of slope. He described the location of the park and displayed a footprint of the park. He then displayed a site plan with lines indicating the area under a stream margin review. Any proposed development in the stream margin area requires a heightened review. Mr. Rayes noted a new playground was installed last fall and it went through a stream margin review administratively. The playground project also received a No-Rise Certification from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). He displayed pictures of the park including the entrance and the porta-potty structure. He stated the application proposed to replace the temporary porta-potty structure with a permanent structure, to memorialize the building envelope around the restroom structure and to memorialize the building envelope around the playground structure. Minutes Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission February 1, 2022 Page 5 of 6 Mr. Rayes displayed a survey showing the top of bank location established 10 or 15 years ago which doesn’t reflect an actual top of bank. The application requests to amend the top of bank as recommended by the Engineering department. He also displayed some layers defined by FEMA including Zone AE (floodway) for a one hundred year flood and Zone X for a five hundred year flood. He stated based on these studies, it doesn’t make sense to memorialize the building envelopes. He then provided photos of the proposed restroom. A small portion of it will reside in the one hundred year flood zone so staff added a condition of approval for the applicant to obtain a No-Rise Certification from FEMA. He added they could also move the restroom a few feet to remove it from the one hundred year flood zone instead of obtaining the certification. Mr. Rayes next reviewed the stream margin review criteria. Staff found all criterion to be met and recommend approval subject to the conditions listed in the draft resolution. Ms. McGovern asked if the commissioners had questions staff or the applicant. Mr. McKnight asked if the commission is approving anything involving the structure of the restroom. Mr. Rayes stated the park is not a planned development so there are no criteria for the design standards. It is zoned in the Park Zone District. The structure must comply with height and floor area requirements which will be confirmed during the building permit process. Ms. Carver feels the restrooms are critical for this location. She asked if the Parks department will carefully look at the usage requirements for the visitors to ensure the restrooms accommodate their needs. Mr. Tunte responded the image displayed earlier is an example of a design. He then described the process including direction from the Open Space and Trails Board and City Council to build the restrooms. He stated they are looking at installing a prefabricated structure which would allow them to include features to meet the needs of the visitors. Ms. Rockhill asked if they will be compost toilets. Mr. Tunte stated they will not be compost toilets. Mr. Kuhn added they are considering including two unisex stalls, sinks, toilets, and changing stations. Mr. Marcoux asked if staff could hold off considering new signage for this park until after the changes to the signs at the Rio Grande Park have been completed and the visitors have had time to use it. Ms. McGovern opened for public comments. There were none so she closed the public comment portion of the hearing. Ms. McGovern opened for commissioner deliberation. She then paraphrased the review criteria. Mr. Rose and Mr. Marcoux agreed with staff’s recommendation. Ms. Rockhill feels it meets the criterion. She’s not sure why the applicant would not just move the building a few feet to remove it from the flood plain, but she is okay with staff’s suggested condition of approval. Ms. McGovern remarked she does not see the “or” condition in the draft resolution. Ms. Rockhill suggested the condition be added to the resolution. Minutes Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission February 1, 2022 Page 6 of 6 Ms. Carver also agreed with staff’s recommendation. She feels the playground is great and the restrooms are needed. Mr. McKnight agrees with the previous commissioner’s statements and with staff’s recommendation. Ms. McGovern also finds the criterion to be met and agrees with staff’s recommendation. She then ended commissioner deliberation. Ms. McGovern suggested modifying item 1 under Section 2 to state “A No-Rise Certification shall be obtained prior to building permit if any portion of the proposed restroom facility is within the one hundred year floodplain.” Mr. McKnight motioned to approve Resolution #5, Series 2022 for a stream margin review and special review to memorialize the alternative top of slope and to approve the development of a permanent restroom facility subject to the conditions as listed and discussed. His motion was seconded by Ms. Rockhill. Ms. McGovern requested a roll call: Ms. Carver, yes; Mr. Rose, yes; Mr. Marcoux, yes; Ms. Rockhill, yes; Mr. McKnight, yes; and Ms. McGovern, yes for a total six (6) in favor – zero (0) not in favor. The motion passed. Ms. McGovern thanked staff and the applicant and then closed the hearing. OTHER BUSINESS None Mr. McKnight motioned to adjourn and was seconded by Ms. Carver. All in favor and the meeting was adjourned at 6:00 pm. Cindy Klob, Records Manager