HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19960604PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 4~ 1996
Chairperson Sara Garton called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. with members
Jasmine Tygre, Roger Hunt, Timothy Mooney, Marta Chaikovska, Steve Buettow
and Dave Johnston present. Member Robert Blaich was excused.
STAFF COMMENTS
Dave Michaelson, Staff said the Aspen Club PUD amendment is on the June 18th
agenda, Dick Butera has come up with a new proposal and has chosen to go before
City Council with P&Z' s recommendation of denial with his new proposal to keep
a certain number of lots retained on the North side, Crystal Lake Rd. and he will
convert a number of spaces on the other side, if Council does not entertain the
amendment the project will die, if they are interested it will be before P&Z on the
18th.
Garton asked for clarification on the proposed amendment, "Butera is not asking
for entrance off Ute Avenue". Michaelson responded that he is not asking for
exclusive entrance, he will retain a certain number of spaces on the North side and
is requesting 80 spaces on Ute Avenue. Garton asked if the applicant would have
to public notice the entire neighborhood again. Michaelson responded that the City
Attorney's perspective is that the applicant does have the ability to amend an
application, the second reading before Council will be a public hearing.
Buettow asked how P&Z's previous action will be presented to Council.
Michaelson responded it would be presented as a recomendation of denial and
because we talked about alternatives he included the minutes in the Council packet.
There were no public comments' on items not on the agenda.
Minutes
MOTION: Hunt moved to adopt the minutes of May 14, 1996.
Seconded by Mooney. All in favor, motion carries.
Aspen Redhead Tours - GMQS Exemption
Suzanne Wolff, Staff said the applicant, Susan Thomas was here until 6 p.m. but
had to leave for her daughters graduation and asked that P&Z go ahead with the
application. Wolff stated that the applicant is requesting to set up a booth on the
Popcorn Wagon property to book scenic four wheel drive tours and sporting
activities, the impacts will be one employee running the booth for approximately
1
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 4~ 1996
four months of the year, the booth is 12 sqfl. it is considered net leaseable and Staff
has calculated a payment in lieu of $660 for employee generation. Wolff said HPC
will look at the application for the booth and the signs located on the booth to
comply with their requirements, the applicant will be required to pull a building
permit.
Mooney asked if the applicant would hire the drivers, fishing or rafting guides or
will she take names and sell them to existing raft companies, he said that because
we measure the way a business impacts the city by the size of their office, it has
nothing to do with what really goes on. Mooney said that if the nature of this
business is that one person will spend the customers into existing businesses, then
we have mitigated through those business applications, but if this new business
will buy jeeps and hire drivers, buy fly fishing materials and have guides standing
around, then he does not know if it is being properly mitigated.
Michaelson responded that using the square footage factor by land use is not
directly related to the number that could be generated. Mooney stated nor the
impact in the city with parking, traffic and everything that everyone, who does
business in Aspen has to mitigate for.
David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney said in answer to Mooney's question, that
the applicant's letter indicates that she plans to add two vans and two 7 person,
open top jeeps.
Garton stated that Mooney has a good point and what happens if the business
increases to 15 jeeps, this is a discussion that will have to happen with the county
because there are impacts that are hidden but very important to the community.
Tygre stated that in the past when we have had questions as to the employee
generation figures provided by the applicant, we have asked for a review after a
period of time and if they did have more employees they would have to provide
additional mitigation and she would like to see that condition added to this.
Wolff said that the calculation used to mitigate this application is not based on the
number of employees, but the sqfl. used. Tygre said that if the Commission has
reason to believe that a particular commercial use exceeds the normal amount
calculated, there is no reason we can not ask for additional mitigation. Tygre
stated, quote "all commercial uses generate the same number of employees" and
we know that is not true.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 4~ 1996
Garton asked if the Commission should add a condition that this application be
reviewed a year from now. Wolff asked if the application would come back to the
Commission. Tygre said it should come back if there is a significant change, if not
Staff can sign off on it.
MOTION: Hunt moved to approve the GMQS Exmeption to
allow 12 square feet of new net leasable area to allow a booth for
booking of tours on the Popcorn Wagon property from June 1 to
October 1 of each year, with the following conditions:
1) All representations made in this application shall be
adhered to as conditions of approval.
2) Within 15 days of this approval, the applicant shall pay an
affordable housing mitigation fee of $660 to the City
Finance Department. Proof of payment shall be provided
to the Community Development Department.
3) If the booth is in use for a period of more than 4 months
(June 1 to October 1) of each year, the applicant must pay
additional employee mitigation in effect at the time of
review.
4) The applicant shall provide a copy of the Jack Stanford
lease to the Community Development Department before a
building permit is issued to verify the lessor has the ability
to sublease the property.
5) The applicant shall provide records to the Community
Development Director regarding employment activities
within one year of this approval to determine if further
review by the Planning & Zoning Commission is necessary.
Seconded by Tygre. All in favor, motion carries.
Marta Chaikovska excused herself due to illness.
Power Properties Conditional Use for an Accessory Dwelling Unit
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 4~ 1996
Hoefer stated the notice is adequate and the Commission has jurisdiction to
proceed. Garton opened the public hearing.
Wolff said the applicant has requested conditional use approval to construct an
ADU within a proposed new residence at 939 E. Cooper, unit "B". Wolff stated
there is a historic residence as well this proposed new residence, Staff recommends
approval with conditions, the proposed unit complies with basic ADU standards,
the unit is located subgrade, below the garage and will have to comply with U.B.C.
sound attenuation requirements. Wolff said that Housing has recommended that
the kitchen face into the main portion of the unit and Staff agrees with the Housing
office recommendation.
Garton asked about the "tree escrow" account. Wolff said there was an escrow
account for a tree that was relocated, the tree did not survive and the money went
into escrow, the money will be released for the purchase of a replacement tree.
John Davis, representing the applicant said there is no problem with reconfiguring
the kitchen, he thinks it is a personal opinion if you want to see the kitchen area
from the living area, he personally would not want to see it. Davis said it's not an
issue, but yet it is adequate from the requirements stand point, if that is what
everyone wants then we will re-address it.
Hunt asked if the lightwell is sufficient for the emergency egress. Davis responded
yes it is. Hunt also said the kitchen is a personal preference. Wolff stated that the
feeling from Housing is that since the only natural light is coming from the
window well, the current configuration blocks natural light and reconfiguring
would add natural light. Davis stated that if it meets the guidelines it shouldn't
become personal.
Johnston asked for clarification on the Commissions ability to dictate design.
Michaelson responded that the Housing guidelines define the specs. Davis said it
is minimal on requirement. Mooney stated that the Commission has perview over
whether or not there will be a certain quality of life and we have made
recommendations in the past if we felt the design did not accomplish the quality of
life.
Buettow asked about the door that used to be on the lower level floor plan. Davis
responded that when the original plans were drawn there was a door accessible
through there, but that was before the Commission started enforcing no interior
door connections.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 4~ 1996
Garton asked if this was an RO. Davis responded it is a single family second
home, they come and ski here all the time.
Hunt asked if the applicant had any problems with the conditions of approval.
Davis said no.
MOTION: Hunt moved to approve the conditional use for an
ADU of approximately 415 sq.ft, at 939 E. Cooper Avenue, Unit B,
with the following conditions:
1) Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant
shall comply with the following:
A) The owner shall submit the appropriate deed
restriction to the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Office
for approval. Upon approval of the deed restriction
by the Housing Office, the applicant shall record the
deed restriction with the Pitkin County Clerk and
Recorders Office with proof of recordation to the
Planning Department. The deed restriction shall
state that the accessory unit meets the housing
guidelines for such units, meets the definition of
Resident Occupied Unit, and if rented, shall be rented
for periods of six months or longer;
B) Kitchen plans shall be verified by the Housing Office
to ensure compliance with specifications for kitchens
in ADUs;
C) If the floor plan for the ADU is revised based on the
recommendations of the Housing Office, a revised
copy shall be submitted to the Housing Office.
2) The ADU shall be clearly identified as a separate dwelling
unit on building permit plans and shall comply with UBC
35 sound attenuation requirements.
3) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the
Community Development Department shall inspect the unit
5
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 4~ 1996
to ensure compliance with the conditions of approval.
4) The applicant shall comply with the following requirements
of the City Engineer:
A) All new surface utility needs and pedestals must be
installed on-site.
B) The applicant shall obtain permits for any work or
development, including landscaping, within public
rights-of-way from the Community Development
Department.
C) The approved 12' wide driveway shall be aligned in
the middle of the ADU parking space and the garage
to permit access to both parking spaces.
D) All drainage shall be retained on-site.
E) Construction of sidewalk, curb and gutter, and the
driveway cut, and relocation of the existing street
light, shall be completed by the City as part of the
East Cooper Avenue Street Improvements Project
and shall be billed to the applicant. Payment shall be
made within 30 days of receipt of the bill. Any public
improvements damaged by the applicant during
construction shall be replaced prior to issuance of a
Certificate of Occupancy.
5) All material representations made by the applicant in the
application and during public meetings with the Planning
and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and considered
conditions of approval, unless amended by other conditions.
Seconded by Tygre. All in favor, motion carries.
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 4~ 1996
Aspen Mountain PUD, Lot 3 (Top of Mill)
Jasmine Tygre excused herself.
Michaelson said with Lot 3 there are some geotechnical issues, Staff wants to have
the Engineering Department and the Colorado State Geologist look at the
geotechnical report.
John Sarpa, representing Savanah Limited Partnership stated that the
Environmental report has been submitted, there is lead on the site but not in a
concentration level that would be of any concern, we hope to work with the P&Z
through the other various issues. Sarpa stated that one of their very strong
objectives was to keep the density on Top of Mill as low as possible, that is why
they have worked so hard with P&Z to make sure the larger density of the 47 units
was on Lot 5 (Galena).
Sunny Vann, representing applicant said Lot 3, Top of Mill is approximately 5.5
acres, it's located in a natural bowl at the very end of Mill St., it is surrounded by
Aspen Mountain on three sides, the property is three separate zone districts, the
lower portion next to Summit St. and S. Mill is zoned LTR, above the LTR zone
and following the 8040 Greenline elevation is zoned R15 and above the 8040
Greenline is zoned C - conservation, all the property is subject to a manadatory
PUD overlay and the portion of the property zoned R15 has a lodge overlay,
existing manmade improvements on the site is the "black" duplex, which will be a
reconstruction credit and the Aspen Valley Ski Club building at the very top of
Mill St., we have an obligation to either build a new facility or pay a cash-in-lieu
payment. Vann stated that several problems arise out of multiple zone districts, a
regulation that was adopted in the 1988 land use code dealt with density, if you
have multiple zone districts it says that you would compare the various
dimensional requirements and use the most stringent one, if those regulations were
to be applied today they would preclude Savanah from realizing the development
parameters that were agreed to as part of the first amended PUD agreement. Vann
stated that their application asks for a code amendment and the R15 portion of the
property be rezoned to LTR with the purpose of accomodating the multi family
use, multi family density and FAR, upon rezoning of the project the development
proposal for 17 units complies with all the dimensional requirements in the LTR
zone district, in addition the code requires development within 150' above or
below the 8040 Greenline to go through 8040 Greenline review, the Greenline is
actually on the flat portion of the site. Vann said that the elevation and grades that
are there today are the result of a considerable amount of fill that has been placed
on the property, the various drawings in the application and model are based on the
7
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 4~ 1996
historic grades, he feels, upon further review by the Engineering Department they
will have a relatively clean bill of health on the 8040 criteria, the road has been
designed to comply with the Fire Department and fire code requirements for
turning radius and so forth, the Top of Mill site is also in the Wheeler Opera House
viewplane, that viewplane basically intersects the ground below the Top of Mill,
meaning anything built in the Top of Mill will be in the viewplane, this
development will be essentially invisible from the Wheeler Opera House, the
property is encumbered by an easement that is designed to provide open space and
a ski easement for the SkiCo, this application proposes to re-define that easement
and we have an agreement with the SkiCo to modify their ski easement to reflect
the area skiers actually ski on. Vann stated that there were two trail easements on
the Apsen Mountain PUD plat, one is referred to as the Aspen Mountain trail
easement, it will be retained and improved under the conditions of the PUD
agreement, the second easement the Top of Mill trail easement, designed to
provide access from Ute Avenue across this property. Vann summarized the
application, it requests conceptual subdivision PUD approval, 8040 Greenline
review, Wheeler Opera House viewplane review, a code amendment and rezoning
of the portion of the property zoned R15 to LTR.
Bill Poss, architect stated that Lot 5 and the lower portion of the development is a
transitional point between the high density C 1 district and then it starts to break
down, we continued with the city's orthangenal grid having the buildings orient to
the street, bringing the parking around the back and keeping the footprints as small
as possible, then break them down into smaller buildings that are remeniscent of
mine shaft architecture. Poss stated that the road follows the road that has been
built where they dumped the fill, it bends around and we will create a landscaped
open space that will screen the homes that are built around the natural contours, we
chose an architectural aesthetic that is more compatible to the city's core which is
brick oriented but as we went up the hill we chose to do more of a mountain
design, break them up, orient to the street with front porches, it is somewhat urban
because we are making a transition as go up, there are two designs for the
duplexes, more of a residential design working into the base of the mountain with
very tall vertical elements built on a stone base, building a level into the side of the
hill with smaller residential structures on top breaking down the scale. Poss said
the attempt is to keep the footprints small, going for the height, building space
under the roofs, allowing the landscape to come down between the buildings, what
is important in urban design are what is called "negative spaces", that set up as you
come up the street.
Vann stated that this is designed to work under the underlying zone district
requirements, with respect to height as measured from natural grade. Vann said
8
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 4~ 1996
the proposal also involves the upgrade of the Mill St. streetscape, sidewalk, curb
and gutter, streetlights, all previously done in the lodge districts below.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Mooney asked if the street is public all the way up around the proposed circle.
Vann responded that it is privately owned and may be maintained by the
homeowners association.
Garton asked if the applicant would advertise these as ski-in, ski-out, will they cut
into the ampitheater so they can ski over to chair 1.
Sarpa stated that they had not contemplated that. Poss responded that he did not
think they could do it. Vann said there is quite a bit of vegetation that we want to
maintain, not only to help stabalize the slope but it also provides a marvelous
ammenity to those homes.
Garton asked what is the total count of bedrooms that will be added to Top of Mill
and she has concerns of the streets and grade of the road in the winter. Sarpa
stated that based on the type of people who will purchase these homes, more
activity will be in the units below. Vann stated there will be 6 four bedroom
townhouses, 6 three bedroom duplex units and 5 single family homes, there will be
approximately 62 bedrooms, we are well under the density that can be
accomodated, under the FAR that could be accomodated and over the minimum
required open space, we are within the height limitations and have 46 parking
spaces. Garton asked if the applicant will build the homes and then sell or will the
lots be sold individually. Sarpa stated that in previous developments when that
question arose, we agreed on guidelines.
Mooney stated that he is very sensitive to 8040 reviews, one on Ute Avenue
required retaining walls because of a radical road cut to get up there, we don't
understand the site work that will be done to get down to the original grades and
how much of the mine tailing is left up there. Mooney asked if after the applicant
excavates the site, will there be retaining walls and what will the landscaping have
to be like to create the former natural grade to measure what we will see in the
height of the house. Vann responded that the prior grade is a matter of public
record and the topo was certified and recorded as part of the original Aspen
Mountain PUD, the fill does not disturb the surrounding hillside it has been built
up in the center of the site, there is no retainage required to stabilize the site.
Mooney stated that he wants to anticipate how radical it will be to place these
homes above the 8040. Poss stated that it is not, we anticipate using the back wall
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 4~ 1996
of the homes built into the hill, the lower level will be the retainage, it looks
harsher than it is.
Garton asked if the applicant would review one of the corners, there is a concern
that a few units in the back of the Fifth Avenue Condominiums will be boxed in by
the proposed duplex. Vann stated they are willing to look at anything to be good
neighbors however, there are some units on the basement level that will be
impacted, to some degree by any development on that side.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Doug Nehaus, public stated that the Summit Place Condominiums asked him to
comment about the driveway for the tri-plexes, Summit Street is basically a one
lane street and they feel there is too much traffic to allow this driveway to go up
where it is, they would like to see a driveway come up Mill Street and go between
the two sets of tri-plexes, they would like to see a one story pole on the front of the
lowest tri-plex to see how high that building will be, and finally it is the Summit
Place Homeowners position that Savanah Limited has a contractual obligation to
build three garages by January 1 st, will this be affected in any way by the planning
& zoning going on here today. Vann stated that service parking is already there,
we have an obligation to enclose them. Nehaus said Fifth Avenue Townhomes are
very concerned about the West duplex, the height of the tri-plexes are ominous and
would like to see a story pole, there is a skier access trail behind the Durant and the
Fifth Avenue as ski-in, ski-out, we would like to see some kind of access remain
for the Durant and Fifth Avenue after these buildings are built, he asked the
applicant about their concerns of the SkiCo's plans to change the top of Kleenex
Corner and adding more snow making, we have a lot of problems with water
flooding us out. Nehaus stated that Fifth Avenue, Durant and the Mountain Queen
have all had building movement and he would like to make Savanah aware and ask
what precautions they will take.
Ann Merkasen, public a resident and board member of the Fifth Avenues said her
way off the mountain has always been the little road that cuts through the trees and
is actually above the Ski Club building, she would like to keep some access to the
top of the street for the skiers, it's been there for a long time and she thinks it
should stay, in regard to building movement her home the C building, foreign
water caused it to shift and has caused pipes to break, and all sorts of problems,
two years ago they had to jack hammer in her living room to find out what is
happening underneath her house. Merkasen said she is very worried about the
addition of any more foreign water to this area and asked the applicant to keep a
serious eye on this because she does not want to see her home heading down the
10
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 4~ 1996
hill any more than it has, the pipes that were put in to existing storm sewers were
defenses to catch leakage have been working, so far.
Michaelson stated that Engineering has pulled in and there are some issues that we
need to get to some closure with before July.
Sarpa said that for all kinds of reasons whether it is being good neighbors or the
safety of Merkasen's place or the safety of what we build, we are going to have to
take a lot of precautions and do many things to make sure all those needs are met.
Sarpa stated that even if we had permission to build the homes, no one will buy
them if there is doubt about them sliding into the Fifth Avenue's back yard, we
have taken a long time reviewing this with our own engineers and we will start
working with the State and City engineers, P&Z and Council to try to figure all this
out, short of solving the Mountains problems we are going to work very hard to
come up with a plan that everyone should be comfortable with.
Merkasen stated that her main concern is the addition of more foreign water
because foreign water is the cause of this problem.
Garton said the the Aspen Mountain Master Plan presented improvement of
Kleenex Corner and asked for additional snow making, Garton said she questioned
adding more water and they responded that they are expanding the area of snow
making, not adding more water.
Vann said that we acknowledge this is a difficult site in the sense that it has more
issues associated with it, there have been substantial sums of money spent on any
number of reports and studies on a variety of issues, all of which have come back
with a variety of issues that require careful attention, but can be mitigated.
None of the Commissioners had comments on design issues but were concerned
with the technical issues.
MOTION: Garton moved to table Aspen Mountain PUD to
July 2, 1996. Seconded by Mooney. All in favor, motion carries.
Meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
Amy G. Schmid, Deputy Clerk
11
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 4~ 1996
Minutes 1
Aspen Redhead Tours - GMQS Exemption 1
Power Properties Conditional Use for an Accessory Dwelling Unit 3
Aspen Mountain PUD, Lot 3 (Top of Mill) ?
12