HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20201104Minutes Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission November 4, 2020
Page 1 of 11
Chairperson McKnight called the meeting to order at 4:30 PM.
Commissioners in Attendance: Brittanie Rockhill, James Marcus, Rally Dupps, Scott Marcoux, Teraissa
McGovern, Don Love, Kimbo Brown-Schirato and Spencer McKnight
Commissioners not in Attendance: Ruth Carver
Staff in Attendance:
Amy Simon, Deputy Planning Director
Ben Anderson, Principal Long Range Planner
Garrett Larimer, Planner II
Hailey Guglielmo, Development Engineer
Jen Phelan, Development Manager
James True, City Attorney
Kate Johnson, Assistant City Attorney
Philip Supino, Community Development Director
Cindy Klob, Records Manager
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
None
STAFF COMMENTS
Mr. True introduced Ms. Kate Johnson as the new Assistant City Attorney.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Ms. McGovern motioned to approve both the September 15, 2020 and the October 6, 2020 minutes and
was seconded by Mr. Marcoux. All in favor, motion carried.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
None
DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None
PUBLIC HEARING
Introduction to the Lift One Corridor Project including separate applications for Planned
Development, Detailed Review for the Gorsuch Haus and Lift One Lodge developments
Mr. McKnight opened the hearing and asked Mr. True if proper public notice was provided. Mr. Ben
Anderson stated for this meeting they are not asking for a decision other than to continue the hearing.
Both projects were noticed for the hearing and they received affidavits of notice of the City posting on
both in the newspaper for the projects. In reviewing the affidavit for the Lift One Lodge (LOL) project,
staff noticed the number of posted days was not correct. The City requires 15 day notice ahead of the
day of the meeting which is interpreted by the City as not including the day of the meeting as one of the
15 days. The poster for the project that is hanging on the side of the Skier Chalet building was posted on
October 21 which only 14 days. In conversations with the City Attorney’s office, it was determined to
move forward with the hearings at this meeting because there will only be a decision at tonight’s
Minutes Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission November 4, 2020
Page 2 of 11
hearing to continue both hearings and there is redundancy in the noticing including the newspaper and
mailings to neighbors. The poster will be corrected.
Mr. True confirmed the conversations regarding the situation and feels the decision to continue with the
hearings at this meeting is appropriate. He stated the notice will be corrected for the time when
decisions will be made.
Mr. McKnight then turned the floor over to Staff.
Mr. Anderson noted the purpose of this meeting is to re-introduce the Lift One Corridor Project to P&Z.
Both projects were approved together by voters in the March 2019 election. He stated staff wanted to
reintroduce them together and then each project will have its own hearing.
Mr. Anderson reviewed an agenda for this hearing including the subjects listed below. He noted if
someone from the public had a comment, it may be more appropriate to wait for the hearing specifically
designated for the review of that project. Staff is recommending continuing the Gorsuch Haus (GH)
hearing to November 17th and December 1st for the LOL hearing. He noted there will not be any specific
land use review discussions at this hearing.
1. Project Summary/Introductions
2. Re-cap Previous Review Process
3. Current Land Use Review Request Overview
4. Stakeholder Presentations
5. Public Comment
6. Commission Discussion and Questions
7. Continue Hearings to Date Certain for Each Project
Mr. Anderson stated he will be handling the Specific Review for LOL and he introduced Mr. Garrett
Larimer who will be handling the Specific Review for GH. He also introduced Ms. Jen Phelan who has
been instrumental in this project since the beginning and getting it to where it is now. Ms. Phelan will be
representing the City’s interest as the project moves forward.
Mr. Anderson provided a map of the Lift 1 Corridor Plan and described the location of the City parks,
Skier Chalet Steakhouse, Skier Chalet Lodge, proposed Lift One terminal, LOL project, new cul-de-sac at
the top of Aspen St, and Gorsuch House project. The proposed new lift will be a telemix lift consisting of
a mixture of chairs and gondola cars.
Mr. Anderson provided a rendering from the east of the GH project and a rendering of the LOL project
from near the proposed lift looking uphill. He then displayed a rendering of the proposed City Park and
Dean St Interface including the following.
• Relocated Skier Chalet Lodge which will house the Aspen’s Historical Society’s Skier Museum
and skier services for the Aspen Skiing Company.
• Relocated Skier Chalet Steak House
• Relocated Original Lift One gantry
• New Lift One terminal
Minutes Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission November 4, 2020
Page 3 of 11
He then reviewed a timeline showing the history of the project.
2011
• LOL Received approval (Ordinance 11, Series 2011)
2016
• GH application submitted
• PD Amendment for LOL (Resolution 2, Series 2016)
2017
• GH application tabled in March 2017
• SE Group hired for Lift 1A study
• Multi-Stakeholder group evaluated different lift locations
• Design teams redesigned projects to accommodate new lift location
2018
• Revised application submitted by LOL and GH
• Lift 1 Corridor project reviews begins
• City Council approves ordinances referring project to public vote. The two ordinances set
conditional entitlements, requirements and limitations that define the projects as the exist
today.
o GH – Ordinance 39, Series 2016
o LOL – Ordinance 38, Series 2018
2019
• March - Voters approved Lift One Corridor Project – PD, Project Reviews
2020
• Spring -Summer – Detailed Review of applications submitted by both projects
Mr. Anderson then discussed the previous reviews.
• Planning and Zoning (P&Z) Commission viewed both projects in 2018 and made positive
recommendations with comments.
• Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) is involved in a parallel review process of the Skiers
Chalet, Ski History Museum and Lift 1A. HPC also looked at the project in 2018.
• Open Space and Trails Board reviewed the project in relationship with the Dolinsek Garden.
• City Council had several meetings in 2018 and 2019 for both projects.
• Colorado Passenger Tramway Safety Board evaluated the two projects in the summer of 2020 in
relationship to the lift lines and lift corridor.
Mr. Anderson next summarized the Planned Development (PD) review process to date. He noted PDs
are a two-step process with the first step being the Project Review which was approved by the voters.
The second step is the Detailed Review and the following committee, board and commissions are
involved in this step. He added HPC and P&Z are the final deciding for this second step in the review
process. This will not go to City Council unless there is an appeal.
Minutes Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission November 4, 2020
Page 4 of 11
• Development Review Committee – Has completed their review
• Open Space and Trails Board – Reviewed the project in relation to parks and provided a positive
recommendation.
• HPC – Hearings are scheduled for the LOL and GH projects.
• P&Z – Hearings are scheduled for the LOL and GH projects.
Within 180 days of approval by both HPC and P&Z, both projects have many documents including
agreements, easements, plats, development agreements to be submitted to various City departments
for review.
The final step in the process will be the permit review by various City departments. He added there have
been many eyes involved in the reviewing of this project and will continue so as it moves forward.
Mr. Larimer then introduced himself as a planner with the City. He stated he would discuss the land use
reviews of the projects more specifically as P&Z is involved in the process. He stated both projects have
submitted applications for Planned Development – Detailed Reviews. There are some associated reviews
unique to each project and there are also reviews that are shared across the two projects. He added
there are other reviews to be evaluated by other commissions and boards.
Gorsuch Haus Lift One Lodge
1. Planned Development – Detailed Review 1. Planned Development – Detailed Review
2. Final Commercial Design 2. Final Commercial Design
3. Setback Variance
4. Special Review - Parking
Mr. Larimer provided the following list of review criteria for a PD-Detailed Review and noted this is the
most substantial part of the land use review in this second step. The first step established the
fundamentals or big picture items of the project and now this step will look closer at a construction set
of drawings and the building permit process. This process relies on collaboration and referrals from
numerous City departments including engineering, transportation, environmental health, parks and
others. The Development Review Committee gathers this information to ensure the project is meeting
the detailed review criteria. There are functional aspects of the project that are considered during this
review as well.
1. Compliance with Project Review Approval – The project continues to be in conformance as it
progresses along with any refinements or alterations.
2. Growth Management – allotments – Ensure adequate allotments have been allocated.
3. Site Planning & Landscaping
4. Design Elements – The second review continues to dial in more on the design elements.
a. Lighting
b. Architecture
c. Materiality
d. Fenestration
5. Parks and Open Space – Ensure the plantings are suitable and the spaces are treated
appropriately.
Minutes Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission November 4, 2020
Page 5 of 11
6. Multi-modal transportation – Ensure trips are mitigated and there are transportation options
provided.
7. Engineering Design Standards – The drainage, grading and right-of-way designs are reviewed.
8. Public Infrastructure and Facilities
9. Phasing of Development – Review the sequencing of the project and how it will move forward.
Mr. Larimer then discussed review criteria for the Commercial Design Review.
1. Commercial, lodging and historical design guidelines based on the associated character area -
He noted both projects fall within the Mountain Base Character Area which looks at how the
building relates to the surrounding area based on the following items.
Mountain Base Character Area – Final Design
• Building Articulation
• Street Level Character
• Roofscape
• Materials
• Paving and Landscaping
2. Public / Pedestrian amenity – The name of this criteria has changed since the prior approval of
the GH project which is vested in Public amenity code.
3. Utility, delivery and trash services - Engineering and Environmental Health reviews how these
elements function and ensure there are no negative impacts from the commercial development
to surrounding neighborhoods.
Mr. Larimer then covered topics not included in the P&Z review. Many topics have already been decided
so the commission does not need to re-evaluate or reconsider the following decision areas. Staff will
work with the commission to ensure they understand
Height, mass, scale Approved by Voters in March, 2019
Density / Intensity Approved by Voters in March, 2019
Allowed uses including use of the park Approved by Voters in March, 2019
Affordable housing mitigation rate Approved by Voters in March, 2019
Design of the ski way Approved by Voters in March, 2019
Preservation and Design of Historic Resources Subject to HPC Final Review
Design of Willoughby / Lift One Park Subject to HPC Final Review
Location and design of lift configuration Approval granted by the Colorado Passenger
Tramway Safety Board
Mr. Larimer reviewed the following staff recommendations for the meeting.
1. Staff recommends continuation of the GH hearing to November 17, 2020, a date certain.
2. Staff recommends continuation of the LOL hearing to December 1, 2020, a date certain.
Mr. McKnight asked if there were any questions of staff. There were none.
Mr. Anderson requested the applicants present and then give time for the other stakeholders including
Aspen Historical Society (AHS), Aspen Skiing Company (ASC) and City Parks department to comment.
Minutes Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission November 4, 2020
Page 6 of 11
Mr. Stan Clauson, Stan Clauson Associates, introduced himself as representing the Lift One Lodge
Project Team. He provided a list of the other organizations representing the LOL team and noted
representatives from some of the organizations are in attendance at the meeting (*). He stated they
have worked closely with the City Parks department, ASC and the AHS.
Planning Stan Clauson Associates, Inc
Architecture Guerin Glass Architects, PC*
Civil Engineering & Survey Sopris Engineering, LLC*
Landscape Architecture DHM Design*
Mudflow Analysis Tetra Tech
Structural Engineers KL&A
MEP Engineers BG Building Works
Legal Representation Waas Cambell Rivera Johnson & Velasquez LLP
Mr. Clauson then reviewed the approvals to date by Ordinance 38, Series 2018 and the voters.
• New Lift One Lodge – mix of 11 fractional and 52 hotel rooms for a total of 104 keys
• East Building
o Residential condos – 6 units, average unit size of 3,139 sf net livable
o Affordable housing – 1 unit 791 sf net livable, plus off-site mitigation or cash-in-lieu
• Renovated Steak House Restaurant – To be moved, renovated and open to the public
• Subgrade Parking Garage – 126 spaces, with 50 spaces for public use
• Renovated Skiers Chalet building to include:
o Aspen Ski Museum operated by AHS
o Ticketing and skier services for ASC
o Locker facilities provided by LOL for public use
• Dean St improvements including bike lanes and skier drop-off
• Renovation of the historic Lift One gantry and towers
• New Lift One Telemix lift with a combination of chairs and cabins
• New continuous park incorporating Dolinsek Gardens and Lift One Park
Mr. Clauson next reviewed the growth management approvals.
• Employee Generation Review approved including free market staff will be shared with lodge use
• Off-site, affordable housing credits and cash-in-lieu approved to meet affordable housing
requirement
• Approved employee generation
o LOL and condominiums for 39.52 Full Time Equivalents (FTEs)
o Skiers Chalet Steakhouse for 6.1 FTEs
o ASC services for 0.49 FTE
• Ski Museum is exempt as an essential public service
• Additional growth management allotments approved for one free market unit and 20 lodge keys
in addition to the prior allotments in the 2016 approval.
He then displayed summer and winter site plans and described the location of the various structures of
the LOL project.
• Ski Museum in the Skier Chalet building
Minutes Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission November 4, 2020
Page 7 of 11
• New Lift One – base will be located where the original 1947 Lift One was located
• Skier Chalet Steak House
• Lodge
• Condominium and affordable housing building
• Continuous park / ski way
Mr. Clauson then reviewed the community benefits for activating the Lift One portal as a true second
portal to Aspen Mountain.
• New restaurants and lodging to replace important facilities lost through the years and revitalize
the Lift One neighborhood as well as the Shadow Mountain neighborhood
• Opportunities to interact with the history of the earliest days of Aspen skiing through the ski
museum.
• A new telemix lift will provide better access to the mountain and allow for the return of world
class ski racing
• Reduced congestion at the Gondola Plaza and adjacent streets, along with a reduction of
shuttles taking guests to Gondola Plaza and close access to Rubey Park for transit
• A great expanded park facility for summer use, incorporating Willoughby Park, Lift One Park and
Dolinsek Gardens
He then displayed a historical picture of the old Lift One towers and the Skier Chalet Steakhouse
showing the vibrant use.
Next, he displayed renderings of the new project and noted the following.
• The new base with gestures to its history along with new commercial and public amenities to
create an exciting base area experience.
• The new lodge to replace lost inventory
A map was displayed comparing the walking distance between Rubey Park to the Gondola Plaza and
Rubey Park to Lift One. He stated it is nearly the same and will be more convenient and less congested
for other west end lodges.
• Rubey Park to Gondola Plaza – 600 ft
• Rubey Park to Lift One – 730 ft
Mr. Clauson displayed additional project images including the ski way, S Aspen St façade, S Aspen St
façade from the cul-de-sac, south façade of the Lift One Lodge building, the ski way and telemix lift, the
new Lift One telemix base and project elevations. He added they would go over these in more detail at
the next hearing.
Mr. Clauson then discussed the Dean St improvements. He displayed a rendering showing the entrance
to the garage and the front of the Skier Chalet building. They worked with the City Engineering and Parks
departments to make the street more pedestrian friendly. He noted the surface will involve materials
other than asphalt and will work on the final design to ensure the materials are appropriate based on
the subsurface conditions. In their plan, the street would become a one-way street going from west to
east and a dedicated bike way going from east to west.
Minutes Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission November 4, 2020
Page 8 of 11
He then displayed renderings showing the historic Lift One gantry in the summer and winter. He noted
the City Parks department provided a conceptual landscape design that was then taken into the detailed
design by the landscape architect team.
Next, he provided a rendering of the Skier Chalet Steak house patio off of S Aspen St and another one of
the back of the building which showed the entrance to the new Lift One base.
Mr. Clauson displayed the pedestrian amenity plan noting the amenities are extreme for this project
including the Ski Museum and the continuous public park from Dean St and up the mountain. The offsite
amenity space is 40,258 SF and the onsite amenity space is 2,740 SF for a total of 42,998 SF.
Mr. Clauson also displayed a plan showing the entrance to the garage as well as the garage. He pointed
out the ramp, ski patrol room, drop off area for the museum, the 50 public parking spaces and private
parking spaces.
He stated Dean St will be reconstructed with a 12 ft travel lane, six ft bike lane and new sidewalks. He
displayed some sections of the proposed road construction.
He closed his presentations discussing building heights. They recently met with Mr. Jim Pomeroy, City
Zoning Enforcement Officer, to discuss how heights will be shown with the grades.
Mr. McKnight asked if there were any questions of the LOL team.
Mr. Love asked if the parking spaces were compact so some of the will not be functional. Mr. Clauson
responded the spaces meet all the City’s requirements and noted the City does not allow for compact
parking spaces.
Ms. Brown-Schira asked if the sidewalks will be heated. Mr. Clauson noted most of the sidewalks will be
snow melted including the plaza, the drop off and some of the S Aspen St sidewalks.
Mr. McKnight asked the GH team to make their presentation.
Mr. Richard Shaw, Design Workshop, began with an introduction of the project. He stated the Lift One
Corridor was initiated by the GH application and the City’s desire to bring the lift further down the
mountain. It’s been a cooperative process between the many stakeholders. The project includes:
• 81 lodge units that have reduced in size by a few feet that had been approved.
• 4 multi-family residences
• 1 on-site affordable housing unit
• Commercial use including 7,438 sf of primarily restaurant space
• All the parking is underground with the entrance of the improved terminus of S Aspen St
Minutes Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission November 4, 2020
Page 9 of 11
He stated the GH project includes about six acres of land of which one acre is being developed.
Conditions included in Ordinance 39, Series 2016 restrict future residential area or use above the GH
and to the west resulting in ski facilities and activities in use on the remainder of the site.
Mr. Shaw then discussed the arrival experience is a compilation of a couple of new ideas. The first being
the top of S Aspen St has historically never had a terminus. The project will include a cul-de-sac that will
meet the City’s standards at the top of the street improving the neighborhood’s connectivity to Aspen,
providing an adequate emergency turn-around, and provide a sense of arrival with a landscaped center
maintained by GH. He stated the arrival was architecturally inspired from alpine buildings with stepped
roofs and sheltering areas. At the arrival level, a good deal of the building has been masked in such a
way so there are covered, protected entrances and the roof forms step with articulation and variation
up the hill. He then displayed an elevation of the building noting the design fits within the lodge district
40 ft height limit.
Mr. Shaw then displayed examples of the alpine character materials to be used including stone bases,
wood columns and siding, diamond shaped roof that are solar panels. Portions of the roof will be green.
Mr. Shaw next displayed a rendering of the lodging from above and discussed site planning and
landscaping for the project. The public amenity is focused on the east side of the building with dining
activities spilling out onto terraces adjacent to the ski slope.
He then displayed a plan of the S Aspen St terminus and discussed the functions including the arrival to
the hotel, short term parking. The plaza around the cul-de-sac will be snow melted along with the
pavement area simplifying the ice accumulation improving the pedestrian experience. There will also a
dedicated walking path to Monarch St. A public stairway is located on the western side of the building.
Mr. Shaw then reviewed the site infrastructure including a new water line serving this area and a large
portion of the City that will go along the Hill Street right-of-way, drainage improvements to satisfy water
quality and quality using stormwater vaults, and grading and swales to deal with mud flows.
He stated the project has tried to maintain an open flow of communication with the neighborhood.
In closing, he displayed a rendering of the building from the cul-de-sac and reviewed the
accomplishments of the project and how it addresses the objectives.
Mr. McKnight asked if there were any questions of the GH team.
Ms. McGovern noted the public comment email received just prior to the meeting from Shadow
Mountain about their right-of-way. She asked Mr. Shaw to discuss this further. Mr. Shaw replied the
right-of-way (ROW) area between Shadow Mountain townhomes and GH site contains some existing
improvements from the townhomes that were authorized by a licensing agreement. He noted the
closest improvement is about 42 ft to the west side including walkways and a barbeque area. The GH
project have a number of things to address within the ROW including intercepting drainage above and
mud flow. A grading plan takes portions of the ROW to accomplish the improvements but does not
Minutes Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission November 4, 2020
Page 10 of 11
disturb the existing improvements. They are discussing tree mitigation with the City to be placed in the
area.
Ms. McGovern noted Shadow Mountain had come before the commission approximately a year and a
half ago and were told it was not the appropriate time. She asked Mr. Anderson if this will be brought up
as part of the GH approvals. Mr. Larimer stated a vacation of the ROW is not part of the GH review at
this time. He added that staff can provide more information on this at the next meeting.
Ms. Rockhill asked for clarification of the ski access on the Shadow Mountain Condos down to the Lift
One Townhomes. She asked if there was no longer skier access across S Aspen St. Mr. Shaw stated at the
top of GH, there is a ski area maintained down to Shadow Mountain Condos. Mr. Shaw stated to access
the Lift One Townhomes, a skier could ski to the top of GH, remove their skis and walk down the stairs
to the cul-de-sac and on down to the townhomes or they could ski down on the east side of GH and
walk across a new pedestrian crossing on S Aspen St.
Mr. Love asked how service trucks will handled. Mr. Shaw responded there will be a fully enclosed
service dock off the cul-de-sac.
Mr. Marcoux wanted to ask both applicants if there was anything that could pop up in future meetings
to halt the progress. He thinks everything looks great at this point. Mr. Shaw responded they don’t see
anything that could stall the progress. Mr. Clauson responded they are making good progress
recognizing it is a complicated project and believes they are on track.
Mr. Anderson asked if the other stakeholders could make comments at this time.
Mr. Mak Keeling, ASC, wanted to acknowledge all the hard work by all the stakeholders of this
collaborative project. He wanted to highlight they were able to secure all the required tramway board
variances contemplated with the City approvals. Other components they have been coordinating with
the stakeholders on include the highspeed telemix lift which will be approximately 4,100 ft in length and
14,020 vertical ft, taking four – five minutes for the trip. It will consist of six person cabins and quad
chair lifts. He wanted to thank the Dolinseks who were willing to permit skiing across their legacy
property. There is snow making and storage throughout this corridor along with the other skier services
at the base. They are also excited there will be World Cup events back in Aspen in the future.
Ms. Kelly Murphy, AHS, echoed Mr. Keeling’s acknowledgement and kudos to the group of people who
came together to make this happen. AHS is very excited to build and operate a ski museum.
Mr. Mike Tunte, City of Aspen Parks, wanted to commend the applicants on their application. The Parks
and Open Space teams provided a schematic design document for the continued design of the public
space. On October 15th, the LOL applicant presented to the Open Space and Trails board. There was a
unanimous support for continuing their application. He congratulated the applicants.
Mr. McKnight then opened for public comment.
Minutes Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission November 4, 2020
Page 11 of 11
Mr. Larimer wanted to formally include the letter received today into the record from Karen Hartman,
President of the Shadow Mountain HOA. He added this will be included in the packer for the November
17th meeting.
No one else spoke, so Mr. McKnight closed public comment.
Mr. McKnight opened the commissioner discussion. He asked Mr. Anderson to identify specifically what
is expected from the commissioners. Mr. Anderson replied the intention was to reintroduce the project
to the commission.
Ms. Rockhill asked about the timing of the new lift in coordination with the development plans. Mr.
Clauson stated the lift would have to be taken down for some period of time for the subgrade
construction. Theoretically, once the subgrade construction is complete, the vertical construction could
begin for the Lift One buildings and so could the lift construction. He stated they are looking at about a
two-year hiatus for the Lift 1A and Lift One construction.
Ms. Brown-Schirato asked for historic background after the election. In July there was a newspaper
article stating the project was on rocky ground and in December there was another article stating it was
moving forward. She doesn’t want to go through this if there are still issues. Mr. Jim DeFrancia stated
there were issues between the two partnerships dealing with the structure of the partnerships. This has
been resolved and would assure everyone this project would not be here today if there were any
remaining issues. Mr. Aaron Brown agreed with Mr. DeFrancia’s comments.
Mr. McKnight thanked staff and the applicants from bringing everyone back up to speed. He then asked
for a motion to continue to the specific dates. Mr. Anderson stated staff is recommending continuations
of November 17th for the GH project and December 1st for the LOL project.
Ms. McGovern motioned to continue the hearings to the dates stated by Mr. Anderson and was
seconded by Mr. Love. Mr. McKnight requested a roll call: Ms. Rockhill, yes; Mr. Marcus, yes; Mr.
Dupps, yes; Mr. Marcoux, yes; Ms. Brown-Schirato, yes; Mr. Love, yes; Ms. McGovern, yes; Mr.
McKnight, yes; for a total of eight (8) in favor – zero (0) not in favor. The motion passed.
Mr. McKnight thanked the applicant and staff.
Mr. McKnight thanked everyone and asked for someone to motion to adjourn. Mr. Marcoux motioned
to adjourn and was seconded by Ms. McGovern. All in favor and the meeting was adjourned at 6:20pm.
OTHER BUSINESS
None
Cindy Klob, Records Manager