Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19940920 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 20, 1994 Following a joint GMQS work session with County P&Z: Chairman Bruce Kerr called meeting to order at 5:00 P.M. Answering roll call were Tim Mooney, Sara Garton, Roger Hunt, Steve Buettow, Robert Blaich and Bruce Kerr. Jasmine Tygre was excused. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Bruce asked about the resolution for David Brown. Klm: I have it roughed out. CREEKSIDE SUB. - PUD - PUBLIC HEARING Mary Lackner, Planner: The applicant for the Creektree Subdivision has asked to be tabled to October 18, 1994. Chairman Bruce opened the public hearing. No public comment. MOTION: Roger moved to table action and continue the public hearing on the Creektree Subdivision PUD amendment to date certain of October 18, 1994 at the applicant's request, second by Sara. Ail in favor, motion carries. INDEPENDENCE PLACE Leslie: asked for tabling of Independence Place SPA. MOTION Sara moved to continue the public hearing and table action for Independence Place SPA designation and conceptual SPA Plan to date certain of October 18, 1994; second by Roger. Ail in favor, motion carries. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were none. MOTION: Roger movee to adopt the minutes of June 2, 1994; second by Sara. Ail in favor, motion carries. MOTION: Sara movee to approve the minutes of August 16, 1994; second by Roger. Ail in favor, motion carries. 610 WEST HALLAM LANDMARK DESIGNATION Bruce opened the public hearing. Kim: Made presentation as attached in record. Bruce asked the applicant's representative if there were any comments. Jim Iglehart: No. I think Amy covered everything. I think that we do meet the standards that HPC set forth. Bruce: No public comment. Public hearing closed. MOTION: Roger moved to recommend landmark designation of Lots P and Q less 7 and 1/2 feet of Lot P, Block 22 City and Townsite of Aspen finding that standards B, E and F are met; second by Robert. Ail in favor, motion carries. ASPEN YOUTH CENTER SPA AMENDMENT Leslie Lamont, Planner: Presented affidavit of public noticing. (attached in record) Leslie: Basically what the Youth Center Board is requesting is to expand the scope of services to allow more community oriented activities to use the facility and to use the dining facilities. The operation of the kitchen would be that it would be open all day during the summer when the Center is used the most and will shut down on the end of September and then tie into an accessory use of all activities that are on the Rio Grande playing field. Perry Harvey, representative for Youth Center: Made presentation also attached in record. Tim: To me this is not the space for profit or commercial organizations to come in and rent it. I can't see an oriental rug sale going on down there or somebody coming in with an antique auction and saying "This is where we are. We have got a great parking lot. We have got the Youth Facility and we are getting this space for $2.00 an hour". I can't see a commercial for profit restaurant working down there outside the auspices of the function that directly pertain to the Youth Center's operation. I want to vote for this. I want to keep the Youth Center going. I want to keep it as broad a base use for the community for non- profits as possible. I want to see as many kids and as many activities go through there as possible but I just can't see a satellite commercial operation starting to happen down there for profit. Bob: That comes back to my original idea of setting up some very clear criteria for this. Right now it is loose. How are you going to control this so that you are not in conflict with other for- profit food vending operations. I would also like to know how it relates to Iselin. There are some criteria for that. Bruce: We have 2 concerns. One is the concessionaire lease for the restaurant space and the other is the commercial type uses of other spaces in the building. The second of these is probably not covered by a lease but some kind of use fee agreement or some such thing. Bruce opened the public hearing and asked for public comments. Jeanine Donnelly: I have been running the diner and I wanted to say we originally opened for the youth. We are trying to get the zoning of the building changed. We set out to hire kids and to train them. I have been in the restaurant business and my deal with the diner is to run a cooking school for kids. It was very successful this summer. To continue running this for the kids we need to run it as a concession for the park so that we can afford to run it and train the kids to run cooking classes so it is not an extra burden on the Youth Center. That will cost money. Any kind of restaurant situation or school situation costs money. It is basically so that it pays for that. Tim: In this recommendation from the staff it says "Ail activity shall be public nature and/or sponsored by 501C3 organization". Maybe the Youth Center then sponsors this type class and most of the profits go back to the Youth Center and there is some kind of scale that we can approve that as long as you get the majority of the profits are given back, I can see that benefiting the Youth Center. Maybe you want to get creative with a way that the Youth Center can sponsor these for-profit organizations and then you are taking the responsibility because you are the one who is profiting from it. That is a way to get around it. I really think it is for public use and I really hope it is for non-profit. HOTION: Tim moved to table and continue the public hearing on this until date certain of November 1, 1994; second by Bob. Ail in favor, motion carries. MACCASKILL CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW FOR ADU Klm Johnson, Planner: Made presentation as attached in record. She presented affidavit of public notice. (attached in record) Klm: It appeared that one name was left off the public notice mailing and has since then been contacted. The project was explained to him and Mr. Jack Courshon of 700 Castle Creek Drive has now been made aware of the project and he states in his letter "I have no objection to accessory dwelling unit being added to new residence at 610 Cemetery Lane" (letter attached in record) Bob: Relating to not requiring the parking space I think it a little naive considering somebody down there, because there is bus transportation, that that is going to be desirable for the occupant of that unit. Klm: The driveway is very long and there is 2 spaces in the garage and the parking apron in front of the garage and a side pull off space in front of the ADU. Tim: Can you tell us what the intention is from the owner for this space? Scott: To have a caretaker. Klm: The unit is separated from the principle residence. It is on the other side of the garage. It doesn't have an interior access. Bruce asked the applicant if they had any problem with any of the conditions in the memo. Scott: We have addressed most of these already. Roger: This 85% FAR limit? That excludes ADUs? Klm: It excludes whatever credit comes out of FAR currently allowed by the FAR definition and that includes 500sf for garages, half of the square footage of the above grade ADU of 250sf and certain deck, overhangs and roof overhangs. It is not a gross FAR but the net FAR. Bruce: This is a public hearing. Are there members of the public here to speak on this application? There were none and Bruce closed the public hearing. MOTION Roger: I move to approve the conditional use for 372 square foot above grade studio accessory dwelling unit at the HacCaskill residence at 610 Cemetery Lane with conditions ~1 through ~8 on the Planning Office memo dated September 20, 1994. Bob seconded the motion with all in favor. SAN SERRANO CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW FOR A RESTAURANT IN THE C-1 ZONE DISTRICT Klm, Planning Dept., presented the public notice posting and certified mailing certificates for public notice. (attached in record) Klm made presentation as attached in record. I have received 2 calls in the last week regarding this application. One was a general inquiry. The other was Mr. Walton who is here tonight who voices a strong opposition to this request. Johnny HcGuire: The ventilation system which we talked about we didn't really know about the charcoal filtration system because we are going to use flat top griddles. There isn't going to be any charcoal. We have roof to prevent noxious odors to neighbors. The parking--we are not offering any extra parking. What we are going for is mainly foot traffic from the east end of town. And we are going to concentrate mainly on the dinner menu which is why we were worried when we saw in the paper today that 7:00 PH would be the end of our serving thing. We would like to apply for a liquor license in the future and serve mainly beer and wine. The dumpster space in the alley would be the same existing space and we would supply the concrete pad. If we were required we would also supply a grease barrel since we do have a deep fryer. And maximum 15 seats. However we would take some seating out if we could have some seats at the counter. Take one table out if we wanted that counter seating. Counter-standing is what we were thinking. The bathroom is in the rear left. And you do have to go past the cash register and the sink area would be on the left. But if we could put a doorway inbetween the fridge and kind of close this area off, we would have to use the hallway from the kitchen into the wash area. But what we were thinking we could do is where the triple sink is now, we can move the bathroom there and we could access through the front so you wouldn't have to walk through the back, and we can move our wash area into the rear. This would make it all kitchen area in the back. So that would really be no problem. The restaurant itself is going to be aimed at the locals. Our whole advertising scheme is no advertising--none--good food at low prices. Just word of mouth. Bruce: Are you aware that one of the conditions that we typically put in our approvals is that all representations made by the applicant will be adhered to? So that if this is approved we expect not to see advertising. Klm: You would be required to re-locate the dumpster so that it is not an encroachment into the alley. HcGuire: So where it is sitting right now? John Wyman's dumpster is encroaching into the alley? Klm: By 2 feet according to the engineer. You will have to work with Engineering to find a suitable location. Bruce then asked for public comments. Cindy (Public): We are the property managers for the property in question. And the owner wanted us to express his support for this request. And he feels that it would fill our local needs and it would be a nice addition to his property. Adam Walton: I own the property adjacent to the proposed restaurant immediately to the east. I have been here since 1967, the year Snowmass opened. I purchased this property in 1972. It was just a shack. It was the old Wiesberg house. Those of you who were here in those days know the bad shape it was. Louise was 81 years old and she hadn't done anything on the house for many years. She was the first baby girl born in Aspen in that house. I am very concerned about this. The masterplan several years ago set up the various districts, commercial core, the C-1 District, the Office District. The C-1 District was set up, as I understood it, as a buffer zone between the high impact uses that were to go into the commercial core. Restaurants are very high impact. They are probably the largest producer of refuse of any business in town, and not only the refuge that goes into the dumpster, but when people exit the restaurant. I happen to live right behind Abetone- -these are very good friends of mine, but we have had some problems with that restaurant. It is across the alley from my house and I have got almost a complete set of cocktail glassware from Abetone over a period of time. It is not only glassware--I get all kinds of things in my yard. The biggest problem that I see that the whole block will encounter is probably the impact of more traffic. The impact of fumes--the smoke from the grill and even the Environmental Health lady, Lee Cassin, mentions in this memorandum that there is no way to mitigate the problem with odors from the kitchen. It is even more important now that there be a buffer zone because that Office Zone is almost all residential--whether it be homes or primarily condominiums. I have taken photographs just a few days ago of a couple of restaurants that appeared to me were emitting the most smoke. (passed photos) There is a problem in this town. Howard Gunther and Little Annie's. I know Howard from when he had his restaurant where I had my office in the Flora Dora that when he built the Grille on the Park; he bought the best, most expensive at the time and the best technology that he could afford. He spent $27,000, he told me, just a few days ago installing the electrostatic precipitater and he has had complaints. I have complaints documented if you would like to see them. I don't want to put Little Annie's on the spot. But here are pictures taken at various times on the same day a few hours apart. You can see the smoke is quite extensive. I have some of Lennie's place--Boogie's, which is also quite polluting. I contacted a consultant who also has a house here. He is a medical consultant. He specializes in pollution. He was kind enough to send me some information concerning PH10s which restaurant pollution contains. In the literature he discusses the carcinogenic problems that humans experience after breathing these fumes for a length of time. It is serious. Hy house is 16 feet 9 inches away from this proposed restaurant. Within that 16 feet 9 inches I have a patio. Above that awning and about 19 feet back is my bedroom with a dormer and dormer windows that I leave open for fresh air even in the winter time. I think that you can see the impact that this proposed restaurant, just looking at the impact of the fumes and the odor from the grill will have on my living. I am even more concerned now when I hear these gentlemen are going to apply for a liquor license. I urge you, if you want to see this victorian remain as it is and a lot of people do, please do not allow a restaurant in that block. Because then I will be forced to sell my property. It will no longer be a residence. And that is not a threat. That is a fact. I have worked hard. I like the residence. It has had a lot of loving care. I would like to keep it there. With your help I can. As far as problems with the trash, there are problems right now. They were red-tagged just the other day. (showed more pictures) There is the problem--the trash in the alley from that particular dumpster. The further aspect with the fumes is that the building that is proposed for the restaurant--the height of the building--the peak is 14 and 1/2 feet. The height of my dormer windows is about 14 feet and 3 inches. So I don't know with a low building like that how can it build a flue chimney high enough to get those fumes up in the air so they can be dissipated? I don't see how they can do it. That is the problem with Little Annie's as you can see in those photos. It just swirls around there. The people from the Cooper Street building--the architect Cunniff, his environmental health person told me he has complained many times because he can't even open his windows. That is true of all the people who own those lofts too--the Cooper Street Lofts which are condominiumized. I have letters from 2 gentlemen who would like to have been here;Dr. Wesson who is on the corner right across the street from my house. Bill has a nice office there and he is very concerned. He then read a letter from Dr. Wm. H. Wesson stating his objections to this application (attached in record). He also read a letter from Dan Sadowsky who has an office in the same block. Sadowsky also stated his objections to this application (attached in record). I took it upon myself to call these gentlemen's landlord, Sy Kelly. I said "Hey, how do you like the tenants over there--Johnny McGuire's?" He said "Well they are out of here". I said "What do you mean?" He said "Well, unless they correct that situation with the exhaust from that grill, they are not going to be here". I also talked to the one of his tenants, the chiropractor lady. She complained about the loud music. Les Holst: I see this as a catch-22. I like McGuire's. I think these gentlemen have a good plan. I think what they want to do would be an asset to the community. And I hope they pursue this no matter what happens. Hy problem with this particular block is--at HPC this was one of our biggest mistakes we made on this block when we left the old mining shack go that was across the street. And we agonized over this block for a long, long period of time because we considered this part of the City, one of the very important transitional area in the east end of town. And the feeling at the time in complying with the AACP and maintain an historic resource that we needed to retain as much of a residential feel as we could in this particular block because it does have some wonderful victorians. Hy problem with this is I don't see this as being compatible in a victorian residential area like this. I think the C-1 was designed as a buffer. I think this would violate the intent of the C-1. If they do lose where they are now at HcGuire's and they have to move the whole operation to this, I think it would just be too much of a burden on this transitional area. And if we start forcing people out of their residences and the little victorians, then what is going to happen is, we are going to get this incredible economic pressure for them to sell and this whole pyramid thing goes again and we start losing the stuff we shouldn't be losing. So I would like to see this denied and I hope the gentlemen will find a really appropriate space someplace else for this. Harsha Goshorn: Right now there is only one victorian as residential on that block; that is your house on the corner. The others are commercial uses right now. The large duplex that you mention used to have a beautiful apple tree in the middle of it. I wasn't thrilled when that was built either. But this is a commercial zone. I have been in an office building right behind there for 9 years where my windows face that alley. I never smell the garlic from Abetone's. So it is possible to not have it and it was above Abetone's. In the cases where they are talking about Little Annie's, the places they are talking about that have the complaints are condominiums or offices that are above the level where the restaurant is. Annie's is only one level. Those are all condominiums that are above it. This one doesn't have anything above it other than half a block down. And for the most part that block is commercial. There is very little residential. Lennie Oates: I am attorney and have been asked to appear here on behalf of several of the adjoining property owners. Specifically Dan Mesko, and Jean Truesdale who own the 2 townhouses across the street from Alpine Bank. In addition Leslie Troyer who owns the building that The Ranch and Pitkin County Title is situated in with the caveat that that building is under contract for resale. In addition I represent Fern Gulf Limited which is the owner of the old furniture shop which fronts on Hyman Avenue but which is a tenant occupied building. Our position is uniformly on behalf of those clients which I represent that they would object to the location of the use in it's proposed space. Fern Gulf has provided us with a list of its tenants who include DeDe O'Brien, Astronaut Mortgage, Aspen Mountain Christmas Shop, Doremus and Company, Smith/Barney, Aspen Activity Center. Ail of these businesses are opposed to this application. Essentially, from the standpoint of the townhouse owners, much like Adam, they have decks constructed on the second floor to the rear of their properties which are outdoor oriented. We are concerned about the fumes especially given the height of the structure where you don't have any way of getting the stack up high. I think that when you are grilling there on a flat grill, that stuff is just going to lay in there and aggravate everybody in the neighborhood. And that is based upon the experience which I think these gentlemen have had with a similar grill in their existing location. I don't think it is any secret. I don't think it is heresy. There are problems with that location documented in the newspaper. And their landlord's displeasure with the cooking and grilling operation has been aired in the newspapers. Again, I like the operation that they run. I think it would be great someplace else. And I hope they can find an operation. I would like you to do a site inspection on these properties to get a real flavor of what the neighborhood looks like. I would like to know what the ratio that these gentlemen think will be take-out to sit down. And I think they may have some experience in that regard by virtue of their operation, Johnny HcGuire's, which is obviously a successful operation. They know how many sandwiches they serve a day and they know how much goes out the door. They know how much is related to people who are coming in, sitting down and eating and how many people are coming and going. 10 There is diagonal parking. I would say a situation where they have a lot of takeout has got to compound the situation over at their existing location there is a drive through. There is a lot of traffic which is moving all the time by virtue of the City Harket operation. You don't have that at this particular situation. You don't have the traffic coming, pulling in and pulling out all the time. You also don't have the drive through at this particular location which they have in their present location. The question with regard to tourist orientation--to me that is just a red herring. If it is cheap food who is to say who is going to come there and eat. You are going to get whoever walks through the door and I submit to you there is no such thing as a restaurant which is going to cater to locals almost exclusively. There has been a problem with loud music out of the operation which this will be a subsidiary. I know it operates with it's door open most of the time, and if there is an approval, obviously, there would have to be some sort of condition in this residential neighborhood. This is a buffer zone. Adam is right and we think that it is a mistake at this point in time to introduce a restaurant facility into the neighborhood where it is surrounded on 2 sides by residential properties and the entire block to the east is residential properties. In connection with that, I think that the criteria on a conditional use is that the conditional use is consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development in surrounding land uses or enhances the mixture of complimentary uses and activities in the immediate vicinity of the parcel proposed for development. There has been a representation made to you that there have been 5 employees of Wyman's. We have information to the contrary. We believe that there have only been Hr. Wyman and 1 other employee for at least one year and a half past. I would like to know what investigation has been made, what the criteria is for establishing the number of employees, over what period of time, in order to be able to satisfy that employee housing impact. There were no further public comments at this time. Klm: I talked to John Wyman and while he agrees that since June he has been the only hair cutter there; he has been moving his location for the last 6 months and he has paired down his staff. As of 6 months to a year ago he was at 5 persons. 11 Roger: I like Johnny McGuire's. Unfortunately, I feel that this type of operation, though it is a real community benefit, is in the wrong place. I find myself agreeing with Lenny Oates siting those 2 points of conditional use being consistent with the immediate neighborhood in this case. I think this is a major intensity increase in the use of that property. The reason we have restaurants as a conditional use in the C-1 Zone is basically to prevent that type of impact occurring on the immediate neighborhood. So, I can't support the conditional use. Steve: What do you propose that the ratio between the take-out and the sit-down service of your restaurant will be? HcGuire: I would estimate 35% take it out. Who knows what is going to happen there. The location we are at right now is about 65% take-out. The other 35% is included in the deliveries, as well. So, in-house seating is not a major part of our business. Tim: I am not in favor of this restaurant in this space. I am not in favor of extending the conditional use in the C-1 Zone for a restaurant of this kind. To me the building isn't adequate. This restaurant is not compatible with the neighborhood. And I just don't think that this type of experiment should happen to that neighborhood. To me if it is really a restaurant it has the space to prep. It has the freezer space. It has the toilet space. It has the sit down space. It has the office space. If it walks like a restaurant, it is a restaurant. This is a haircutter's shack that is going to serve take-out and I just don't see it as a conforming use--even as a conditional use in the C-1 Zone. I don't want to discourage you guys from trying to do business under this scenario. I really hope that you find a location where you can build a restaurant, where you can have a real legitimate restaurant business and a real legitimate restaurant space. And I hope we can approve that for you. But I can't vote for this. Bob: I have the same opinion. I think this is pushing the use of the existing building. I think you are trying all kind of things within a very limited environment there and that is going to be very complex. I think there are too many unanswered questions as to take-out, fast food or sit-down or combination and the implications that has on the parking in that area. I know it is already difficult. I used to go to the dentist across the street and I never could park anywhere near there to go to the dentist. Then I think that there is the music thing. I am sure you could control that. It could be in the lease. I think the odors are a big question. Whether it can be controlled or not I am not sure. 12 I think one of the major points that was brought out before is the access to trash. I know that area through there as I cut through there. I know the neighbors on the back and I think there is going to be a greater problem. Those are the kinds of things that I don't think are going to be satisfactorily resolved in that facility, and I just agree with the others. I think that that kind of a restaurant, whichever form it would take, is really not appropriate for that location. I am not against your having a restaurant. I think what you are trying to do for the community is good. But there must be some other location where you won't run into all the problems that you are facing on that location. So I am not in favor of it. Sara: I like seeing mixed use in the C-1 Zone. I think it brings a lot of liveliness to the street. I think it is fun when you have retail, residential, restaurant. It is a very interesting neighborhood. And if we could solve things like that alley access, I agree with Roger and Bob. I know that whole little block so well. I don't see how you could do without re-landscaping the whole thing. I think the impacts would be very difficult and harsh on the other people. It really is an intense use. But it is a wonderful thing to try to do a neighborhood restaurant and I wish we could just find a block parallel to it that would work. I think you are trying to make this building work for something that it just can't work and I also agree with Tim. I don't like the idea of carting prep things back and forth. I worked in a restaurant and I wonder what the implications are for that with health inspections. I want to see it work. I don't think it can work there. So I can't support it as a conditional use siting the 2 conditions that Roger recognized. Steve: I have to agree with Sara. It seems like a really good idea, but the location seems inappropriate. Roger: This particular location in that building is not an appropriate place for any restaurant. I like your restaurant representation. We need that type of thing in this community. And a Johnny McGuire's type of operation--I looked at that from my point of view as being positive, but, unfortunately, not in this location. Bruce: In some ways it is too bad that we are not deal makers. That is not our roll up here. But interestingly enough the very next item on our agenda is a restaurant space that is not going to 13 be a restaurant space any more. It is going to become lodge rooms. Somehow you guys should have found out about that space. You have heard from several of the Commission members; specifically, regarding what people are having a problem with, and that is that it really is not consistent and compatible with the character of the immediate vicinity, and about odors and circulation that this Commission seems to have problems with. I don't think that anybody is suggesting that they don't want more local-oriented businesses. We struggle with that all the time on this Commission as to how we can get local-oriented businesses and get those uses in the proper zone districts. We are very much aware of what is happening with rents and all of that that is out there. On the one hand you are hearing a lot of negative comments from us. But at the same time we are very sympathetic to your cause. As Roger says, it is not here. It is really not a NIMBY kind of thing as much as it is compatibility with the immediate neighborhood. Bruce closed the public portion of the hearing. MOTION Roger: I move to deny Conditional Use of the San Serrano Restaurant project at 625 East Hopkins Avenue. Bob seconded the motion with all in favor, motion carried. MOUNTAIN CHALET GMQS EXEMPTION FOR CHANGE IN USE Klm made presentation as attached in record. Bruce asked the applicant if they had any problems with the conditions of approval. ?: Very little. It all seems very straight forward to us. We are continuing along the path of decreasing the impact on parking and need for employees. We have always been giving employee housing for our employees and we continue to do that. And we have been trying to increase the amount of parking we have. Bob: Is Lauretta's moving out because you want to do this? 14 ?: The are already out. Laurreta continues to operate catering out of a new kitchen. Bruce: Will this change whatever you serve your guests for breakfast? ?: In a recent addition when we built the conference area we have been serving breakfast back there for the last few years. Sara: I hate to see a small locally serving restaurant go but I am also in favor of anything that will keep that lodge district viable. I think it is important to see these small lodges continue. Bruce: I know my guests say all the time that they miss The Home Plate. I have a lot of guests that say "Where is The Home Plate". ?: We regret that too. It was something we had nothing to do with. The rent terms never changed. MOTION Bob: I move that we grant the GHQS exemption for the change in use for the 1,566 square feet of commercial area to 3 lodge rooms at the Hountain Chalet Lodge with the conditions as stated in the Planning memo dated September 20, 1994. Sara seconded the motion with all in favor, motion carried. Bruce and Sara brought up the fact that there had been no election of officers in 1994. MOTION Roger: I move to confirm nominations and elections of the existing chair and vice chair. Bob seconded the motion. Bruce requested there be a reminder that election of officers be held in June. (I have done so) Roger: I will include that as part of my motion. Bob accepted this in his second. Everyone then voted in favor of the motion. 15 Heeting was adjourned. Time was 7:45 P.H. JANICE M. CARNEY, CITY DEPUTY CLERK 16