HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19980818ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 18, 1998
Sara Garton opened the regular Aspen Planning and Zoning meeting at 4:30 p.m.
Commissioners Bob Blaich, Steve Buettow, Marta Chaikovska, Sara Garton, Roger
Hunt, Tim Mooney and Jasmine Tygre were present. City Staff in attendance were:
Chris Bendon, Stan Clauson, Community Development, David Hoefer, Assistant
City Attorney, Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk, and Lee Novak, Housing.
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Bob Blaich noted very shiny reflective silver pipes exposed at Waterplace and the
approval was for a subdued look. He said bears were a problem in the West End
and people were putting garbage in the blue recycle bins attracting the bears. Stan
Clauson said there was an ordinance and a complaint to the city manager or the
police should be logged. Blaich said it was between Francis and Hallam (4th and
5th). Clauson asked Blaich to call in the address.
Tim Mooney proposed a resolution on Burlingame to consolidate ideas in
conjunction with the county P&Z for a plan to work once and for all; build the
Affordable Housing there and not have the housing put down valley. He felt the
needs of the community weren't being met. He wanted to select the plan that
worked with a visionary designer and planner; he named a few. Mooney suggested
having a discussion tonight. Sara Garton noted today's memo from Dave Tolen
had a schedule. Clauson said Bob Blaich has sat in on Burlingame task force as the
P&Z appointed representative. Blaich noted there was a meeting with city council
right now on Burlingame. He heard that Jonathan Rose was going to be at that
meeting. Clauson said Rose was a developer of affordable housing with national
recognition from congress on urbanism.
Blaich said he did not want Snyder to happen again. Mooney was concerned
because the meeting was going on right now. He said there was blatant disregard
for the code with Snyder; we could end up with anything at Burlingame. He felt that
other developers were treated differently than the housing office. He said the
Resolution should be done as soon as possible. Garton stated in fairness there have
been worksessions, but with work, it was difficult to attend. She did understand
Mooney's concern. Mooney wanted a major up-scale from the Zoline plan for 15
free market units, to create a positive surplus and not just mitigate for a private
project. Clauson clarified there were over 200 AH units on a project, considerably
more than the mitigation required. Garton said all details were in the memo.
MOTION: Roger Hunt moved to place further Burlingame discussion
at the end of tonight's meeting. Jasmine Tygre second. APPROVED.
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 18, 1998
Clauson gave dates of joint worksessions with Council: Savannah, Aspen Mountain
PUD on Tuesday 9/1/98 at 4pm and SCI on Tuesday 9/8/98 at 4pm.
Garton asked why city council wanted a worksession on SCI. Bendon replied that
came up in first reading which passed; Council wanted to review without the
pressure of a council meeting, to hear the evolution of the zone. Garton said they
should be up to speed with all the work Chris has done; he could answer the
questions. Garton said you either believe in zoning or you don't. Chaikovska said
that they gave their recommendations and they are done. Tygre noted there was a
definite feeling, if they don't show up and give their explanations, they may yield to
the pressures of the public who were unhappy with the P&Z results. Hoefer asked
how they would have public hearing. Bendon said SCI would be invited but may
not necessarily be able to speak. Sara stated the zone has been defined and re-
defined.
Mooney asked when the traffic mitigation public hearing was going to happen.
Clauson replied that meeting was not scheduled and he didn't think council would
take any formal action on it. Mooney asked for a master plan regarding impacts for
any more traffic mitigation and for the tent. Clauson answered the master plan
recommendation had some council support, but didn't believe there was legal
authority to hold up other applications. Buettow read in paper the tent proposal was
going ahead. Clauson recalled that staff advised P&Z finding non-compliance was
not an appropriate course of action. Hunt agreed. Chaikovska said the rest of the
commission made a statement.
Jackie Lothian requested dates to meet with council for lunch.
Sara said that she was sorry Stan was leaving. Good luck from Marta and Bob.
DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
No commissioners disclosed any conflicts.
PUBLIC HEARING:
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 18, 1998
ASPEN COUNTRY INN AH PUD AMENDMENT
David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney, requested proof of notice be brought to the
city clerks office by 5pm, Wednesday, 9/19/98 with the understanding the hearing
will be considered null and void, if the proper notice is not received. He stated that
in the future, if staff did not have proof of notice, the public hearing would not
proceed. (The notice was received by the Deputy City Clerk).
Chris Bendon, staff, explained the Aspen Country Inn went through the process
about six months ago for a Planned Unit Development for an Affordable Housing
project at the former Pomegranate Inn. They went through GMC; PUD and
subdivision with Council. Subsequently, the contract for the sale allowed the seller
to amend the property which was being conveyed. Bendon said with the
amendment, portions of the lands that were being rezoned had changed the
boundaries. Originally 3.9 acres, now 3.1 acres.
Bendon noted the applicant found some structural issues with the existing building
and the repairs would effect the height of the western building. He said there were
two corrections in the memorandum to the height definitions as stated in the PUD;
page 2 and 3 amending 11 feet to thirteen (13) and 22 to twenty-four (24). Bendon
stated the reason was because of the grade level against the building.
Sara Garton inquired about those boundaries. Bendon said there was a golf cart
path which was an easement owned in fee by housing; the Maroon Creek Club
decided that they wanted to own it and amended the boundaries at the last minute.
This action nullified the agreement (PuD/subdivision ordinance) and affects the
areas that were being rezoned because it was affordable housing. Garton noted this
was a housekeeping measure. Bendon replied that procedurally they just can't
amend insubstantial; it has to go back through that process. Bob Blaich asked if all
parties affected by this have agreed. Bendon answered the Pomegranate
Condominiums, Maroon Creek Club and Housing were all in agreement.
Roger Hunt understood the need for minor meets and bounds changes, but this
seems like a tremendous shrinking of Affordable Housing. He commented that it
was all take and he needed justification.
Lee Novak, project manager for Housing, said nothing structurally has changed, not
even landscaping. He said the invisible property lines changed and the golf cart
path would have still been there and the berm. Novak said it was a fairly minor
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 18, 1998
change and did not really change the mass of affordable housing and there was
enough active space to move around on site.
Hunt asked the total square footage lost through this boundary change. Novak
replied that it was less than an acre, from 3.9 to 3.063. Hunt stated losing that
acreage designated to affordable housing, now goes to private developer. Bendon
responded that it did not convey any additional development rights to the Maroon
Creek Club; just additional lands for the golf course. He agreed it meant the
housing authority bought less land but the project was the same 40 senior units;
invisible property lines moved. This was not a preferable contract to be backed
into; selling less than the original and requiring the PUD/subdivision, re-zoning
agreement to be amended. Hunt asked how would the acreage (not owned by
housing) be prevented from not being used by another developer. Clauson
answered the Maroon Creek development was a PUD with all development rights
allocated. He said each parcel and sub-parcel had square foot limitations in terms of
lot sizes and permissible floor area. Those were accepted from county to city.
Novak said there were minor changes, 2" on the side setback and 6" on the rear, he
illustrated these on a map. Hunt asked if the golf club had to amend their PUD.
Bendon replied they were revising their plat. Hunt requested monitoring so the
additional acreage doesn't end up as an additional development acreage. Bendon
said there wasn't any additional development rights, this part was zoned park.
Blaich asked if the PUD was maximized for the Maroon Creek Club. Clauson said
he believed it was fully developed. Several members heard Maroon Creek Club
was for sale and were advertising for time share units. Bendon stated they would
have to go through GMQS and PUD application
No public comments.
Jasmine Tygre agreed with Roger that having almost an acre less than we have paid
for needed to be addressed in case of future development possibilities by the private
sector. She said if this happened in a free market sale, the lawyers would be suing.
Tygre wanted to include this language the intention of P&Z that the transfer of
boundaries which result in nearly an acre to the Maroon Creek Club not be used in
calculation on Maroon Creek parcel. Tim agreed. He asked why couldn't they
reconfigure their parcel and we keep this acre. Garton reminded the commission
that hearsay could not be considered for land use review. Garton said there were
conditions on the contract for purchase from the Maroon Creek Club that property
lines may change. Tygre stated changed but not reduced.
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 18, 1998
Clauson said this was originally intended to be demolished and rezoned as park on
the original approval for the Maroon Creek Club. He said their development rights
have not changed but they can make a proposal. Blaich wanted to see this project
go forward, and add language to the motion.
Steve Buettow stated the reduction will effect the flexibility this project. He said
with the reduction, parking would be eliminated and so would expansion. Novak
agreed that it would limit future development on this site. Novak hoped in the
future, they would not get involved in agreements like this one. He said this was an
excellent project and hoped that they would not be held back. Mooney noted that in
real estate, the buyer was always urged to obtain legal advice before signing a
contract. He asked if housing had an attorney. Hoefer said that unfortunately this
was something that was rushed through and was a mistake. Hunt inquired as to the
number of feet or acres referred to in the contract. Hoefer replied that he had not
really worked on it and could not answer the question.
Terry Kappeli, housing office, said he has worked with this project since last fall
and did not think they should worry about loosing .8 of an acre. He said it might
have been a mistake from the beginning about what they intended to sell us. He
stated the golf cart path follows the edge of fairway goes right to it. Kappeli said
the side cuts go at an angle because of a tee box. He stated the way he looked at it
was that we got 40 units for seniors and they lost 3 acres. Tygre stated they were
paid for the land, it wasn't lost. Kappeli stated the original intent wasn't for a
certain square footage but for 40 units for seniors.
MOTION: Roger Hunt moved to recommend City Council approve the
amendment to the Planned Unit Development, Subdivision and Rezoning
of the Aspen Country Inn with conditions 1-5 outlined in the Community
Development memo dated August 18, 1998 with changes to pages 2 and 3
(11 to 13 and 22 to 24). The intention of P&Z that the transfer of
boundaries which result in nearly an acre to the Maroon Creek Club not
be used in calculation on Maroon Creek parcel. Bob Blaich second.
APPROVED 7-0.
Meeting adjourned at 5:40 p.m. into a worksession on Iselin Park with Parks.
Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS ....................................................................................................................... 1
5
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 18, 1998
DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST .............................................................................................. 2
ASPEN COUNTRY INN AH PUD AMENDMENT ........................................................................................... 3