Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19960514PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MAY 14~ 1996 SPECIAL MEETING Chairperson Sara Garton called the meeting to order at 4:35 p.m. with members Roger Hunt, Timothy Mooney, Marta Chaikovska, Steve Buettow, and Dave Johnston present. Excused was Jasmine Tygre and Robert Blaich. There were no public comments' on items not on the agenda. Aspen Mountain PUD John Sarpa, Savanah Limited Partnership said that it is inappropriate to lower the ceiling heights and to preserve the architectural theme of this building we could not make further ceiling height adjustments. Sarpa stated that they brought the computer generated photos, with the Dean Street building ;~ghosted in" to see what effect it will have. Bill Poss, architect stated that due to the slope of the parking garage they were able to lower the building two feet, they took off the top floor and redesigned the massing and fenestration of the building to go from a four story building, 55ft. at the center portion to a three story building, 43ft. to the top of the parapet on the center portion, he said they lowered the townhouses and went from four to five buildings. Poss stated that the Dean St. building is 150ft. back from Dean Street, by taking off the upper floor and lowering the building it is at the height of the trees on the pedestrian mall. The applicant presented the computer generated images of the Dean Street building "ghosted" in, to the Commission and the public. Garton stated that she did not know how much the area in front of the Dean Street building would be used because of the shade. Poss responded that the town is laid out east and west, so all north side streets are going to be shadowed and everyone walks on the south side. Vann said that is correct, in terms of using an active space in winter, in the summer there is plenty of sun. Sarpa said that it goes back to the ice rink, it is the rink, and what we can do in the rink, is what we are missing. Sarpa stated that if they, with Staff can think of a way to berm the busses, the noise and the commotion they create in front of the rink and come up with a better use, it would help with this part of the project. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MAY 14~ 1996 SPECIAL MEETING Vann briefly went over the PUD for new member Dave Johnston and Marta Chaikovska who were not present during previous meetings. Mooney asked with the new design and the lower building will entering and exiting, parking, and service elements still be underground. Johnston asked if the number of parking spaces were affected. Vann responded that the 72 spaces is a conceptual count and it will depend on the structure, but they will meet the parking requirement. Hunt asked if the applicant could stay within the height limitation, and not require a variance if they move the building out into Dean Street, which they are entitled to do. Poss responded that if they did that they would not be able to keep the articulation of the roof and would flatten the building, when the height is squeezed down there is less vitality in the architecture. Chaikovska said that she would be very concerned if they carried the red brick from the Ritz down the street, in the summer time the green trees look great, in the winter it would be red brick all the way down. Garton stated that the building is too high, but she appreciates what they are doing with the interesting roof line and understands that if they go lower they could not do the roof with this interest, but it is a big building and she hopes that she has the communities interest at heart, the Durant Street presence is very important. Garton said that she hopes the brick will be different shades. Sarpa said that they did not know another way to lower the building and feel they have looked at all the alternatives. Vann stated that they are not starting from scratch, they are taking previously approved parameters and are trying to make it work as best we can on this site. Garton responded that the Commission has an obligation to the community to work with those parameters under today's community character guidelines. Garton asked if there were fewer units would they need to go to that height to achieve the roof line. Poss responded that they would. Garton said that suggests that the entire commercial core is going to request variances with any re- development, it will always be a height variance if we want an interesting roof. Poss responded that in the core the limit is 40', and all those 2 PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MAY 14~ 1996 SPECIAL MEETING buildings are over built because we have down zoned twice, putting them well over allowable FAR. Vann added that in downtown it is rare that one site occupies more than one or two Townsite lots, the ability to tear those buildings down and reconstruct anything of similar size, under our current regulations, is virtually impossible. Chaikovska stated that she would not have an objection to the height if other things in the design overcame the height, so that when someone comes to town it looks as if it blends. Vann said that there is some guarantee of that in the PUD we will be recording architectural drawings and detailed agreements between the City. Garton said this is a transitional building between commercial and residential, but it has such a presence, she agrees with Staff in looking for some way to bring it into the community. Garton stated that these are all private homes and yet it has this presence right behind a very public area and she would like to see it pulled into this very difficult area, and see more things happen around the ice rink. Hunt said he felt that because this is tourist/lodge zoning, this is where tourist accommodations belong and would prefer a replacement of the "old continental inn", but realizes that is not going to happen. Hunt stated that he did not like the term "transition", this is more appropriate for short-term residential than it is for long-term residential, he said that given the parameters of the PUD the applicants have done an excellent job. Mooney said that to grant a height variance in this location is the deal breaker for the whole project, P&Z has an obligation to abide by the rules of zoning and code. Mooney asked how to utilize the biggest liability in this project, to our advantage, he looks at people in the future saying, "why did they do that", "how could they have done that", or "didn't they realize the mass that was involved", that 10' means a lot. Mooney said that the AACP says that we need affordable housing and when these questions are asked, in the future, maybe we can answer that with, the developer generously donated something that was not required. Bob Hughes, Counsel for Savanah Limited, stated that we have not asked for a lot more so they would have room to retreat, we traded off internally in our planning so that we would not waste your time. PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MAY 14~ 1996 SPECIAL MEETING Vann stated that they wanted to be perceived as working with P&Z to come up with something that works. Vann said they are not asking the Commission to violate code regulations, but we are suggesting that if you do vary the height, the end product, under the PUD parameters it will be a better deal for the City. Garton asked if Staff agreed that a variance is necessary, in this instance to meet the community plan of interesting roof treatments. Michaelson responded that based on the basic architectural design of this project, it is, in his mind, defined by the roof structure. Michaelson said that part of what makes this building massive is the dimensions of the lot it is not a typical, grid lot it is an entire block that narrows back up a curvilinear street system. Michaelson pointed out that it is a two way street with Top of Mill, for example, if for some reason geologic, ect.., the number of units is reduced from 17 to 8 and the applicant says they are going to try to put those 9 units on Lot 5 (Grand Aspen Site), we would be concerned, he said that he did not feel they could put another unit on this lot. Poss said that he is compassionate to the city's plight but is also compassionate to the architectural stand point, he said they balanced Lot 3 with Lot 5 and spent a year looking at 27 scenarios of how those units would mix-out to get the best civic plan. Poss stated that the intention, as architects was to make this a striking civic building and he feels the city can enhance Rubey Park and the ice rink to make this a civic plaza. Chaikovska asked how tall the Little Nell building is. Poss responded it is 44'. Chaikovska said that the applicants building looked a lot like the Little Nell building with the interest in the roofs, similar architecture, if the applicant was to squash this down it would look like a roof ending up on the first floor. Chaikovska stated that they needed some of the height to provide the scale for the roof, the most important thing for this project, for her is the visual impact this particular building has and how it integrates into that spot which is the most visible spot for people getting off the bus, people walking from the Ritz, people walking off the mountain. Johnston commented that one of the important things that he looks at is the perception scale and how pedestrians or the public treat this building, he said a couple points are working for this design, the open space in front of the building takes the perception of people on Durant and actually reduces the scale of the building, it does not sit up prominently on a hill, it is integrated more in the ice rink in the trees and the landscaping. Johnston stated that because of the ice rink 4 PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MAY 14~ 1996 SPECIAL MEETING anything that goes there will be prominent and he thinks this is very successful. Johnston said one of the reasons, in his mind, the Little Nell and the North of Nell don't work is because it is slammed up against the pedestrian, in this project we have a natural buffer that exists, works and justifies having the roof a little higher, to a pedestrian that is 10' to 12', even 20' away from the building, the roof design, the windows and the articulation successfully reduces the perception of the height. Hunt said that if the applicant did not get credit for the ice rink open space and they are not asking for that there would basically be a commercial structure hiding this building so all of these arguments would be moot. Hunt stated that he could ask the applicant how many employee housing units they currently have that they are not getting credit for, how many feet back, from where they could be are they off of Dean Street, how much more open space do they have, excluding the ice rink that is where he is coming from in identifying the trade-off to allow a nominal height variance, they have integrated a screening of the machinery that will potentially be on top of the roof, that is a trade-off. Hunt stated that he had identified these trade-offs because of his years serving on the Planning & Zoning Commission. Garton said that she is persuaded that to meet the character guidelines, which are very important to her, that the variance is necessary in this case, reducing the units is not going to help the height. Garton stated that she hoped the neighbors can agree with that. Vann asked for a straw vote, in terms of where they are with the height variance. The majority of the Commission is in favor of the variance. Hoefer said that in effect this becomes its own zone district so it does not impact anything else and it is required, on the recorded Platt that this was variance was granted only for this zone district. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Chaikovska said that she is 90% there, she does not like the look, she would like to see a different mix of materials, something lighter, evergreen landscaping and the tie-in with Rubey Park. Chaikovska stated that the townhouses are also important, it is a very interesting architectural area and she did not think it would take much to create some interest in the townhouses along that street, they are as important as the main building. 5 PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MAY 14~ 1996 SPECIAL MEETING Hunt said that he thinks brick can be used very effectively by varying the color throughout. Garton stated that she does not mind brick, but she would not want the applicant to use the same brickyard the Ritz used, the landscaping is important, and she is happy with the setback which is more than they thought and Garton asked for some suggestions about what could liven the ice rink area. Johnston said he is curious as to the entrances into the buildings, how they deal with the architecture being public and private and the transition that happens in between them. Mooney said he did not have too many worries he thinks it is going to work, and feels some kind of brick would be in line. Buettow stated that perhaps the buildings could be differentiated by the shades of the brick, as you look at them you would see separate buildings because it becomes very monolithic if it is all the same, then scale and massing come in to play. Mooney stated that the size of the brick is always fun, some of the Victorian buildings have bigger stones that break it up. Garton asked how the soil test on Top of Mill were going. Sarpa responded that they are finished and they hope to submit their environmental and geotech analysis to Staff, this week. Garton continued the conceptual hearing of Aspen Mountain PUD to June 4, 1996. PUBLIC COMMENTS Doug Nehaus, public representing Galena Place said he would like to see a computer generated photo taken from the Durant parking lot at the corner of Aspen International and Durant showing a picture across town of Shadow and Red Mountain, indicating what this will do to the Galena Place ground floor view. Nehaus said he agreed that the applicant have given up quite a bit, they could have put a lot more on this site, and if you are going to eliminate anything on this site, they would not want any more on Top of Mill. Meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. 6 PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MAY 14, 1996 SPECIAL MEETING ADU Regulations, Work session Minutes were recorded but not typed. Amy G. Schmid, Deputy City Clerk ASPEN MOUNTAIN PUD 1 ADU REGULATIONS, WORK SESSION 7