HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19990907ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 7, 1999
Bob Blaich, Chairperson, opened the regular Aspen Planning and Zoning
Commission Meeting at 4:35 p.m. The following commissioners were present:
Jasmine Tygre, Roger Hunt, Roger Haneman, Ron Erickson, Tim Mooney and Bob
Blaich. Steve Buettow was excused. Staff in attendance were: David Hoefer,
Assistant City Attorney; Julie Ann Woods, Joyce Ohlson, Chris Bendon, Nick
Lelack and James Lindt, Community Development Department; Jackie Lothian,
Deputy City Clerk.
The tape from the meeting was not audible; the minutes reflect notes and the
resolution for the conceptual approval Aspen Mountain PUD Lots/¢3 and
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
Joyce Ohlson introduced James Lindt, Planning Tech, and Nick Lelack, Planner,
new City Community Development staff members.
There was discussion about the demolition of the Grand Aspen being postponed for
another year. The commission supported the extension of the Grand Aspen to be
utilized by the SkiCo employees in the winter and MAA students next summer.
MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to support Savannah in providing
employee housing through the efforts of not demolishing the Grand
Aspen this October. Jasmine Tygre second. ALL IN FAVOR 6-0.
John Sarpa explained that the MAA had contacted Savannah, since their new
housing construction was being delayed. Sarpa noted that it was already late in the
season to obtain an excavation permit and requested that the Grand Aspen be left
standing to be available for seasonal housing until the end of summer 2000. This
request will go to the City Council on September 13th (Ordinance #38-99). Ron
Erickson thanked Savannah for doing the sensible thing, not leaving a hole in the
ground for a year.
Bob Blaich noted that members of the public had contacted him regarding
problems at Truscott. He asked them to present these concerns to council.
Ohlson presented the schedule of up-coming meetings.
Roger Hunt inquired about the access for the Buttermilk project. Julie Ann Woods
noted the level of service would be compromised with an additional leg at the
Buttermilk intersection. She said that Randy Ready would be attending the
Buttermilk meetings to provide information.
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 7, 1999
DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Steve Buettow had a conflict with the Aspen Mountain PUD and was excused from
the meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING:
LIGHTING ORDINANCE
Bob Blaich opened the public hearing.
MOTION: Roger Hunt moved to continue the Lighting Ordinance
Public Hearing to September 28, 1999 at 4:00 p.m. Jasmine Tygre
second. ALL IN FAVOR. APPROVED 6-0.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING:
ASPEN MOUNTAIN PUD - CONCEPTUAL Lots/43 &/45
Bob Blaich opened the continued public hearing. Mitch Haas, consultant for the
city, provided a revised resolution (an addition to the packet) for the
commissioners to discuss. Sunny Vann, planner for the applicant, noted that there
were 2 remaining issues.
There was discussion about Savannah already having paid $250,000.00 as their
portion of the mitigation for the Aspen Mountain drainage study. The condition
was amended and included in the motion. Ron Erickson requested the drainage
study and engineering reports be reviewed so that the commissioners are qualified
reading the results. He noted that the last report did not say anything. The
applicant hired a Denver based firm to provide Phase I and computer modeling.
David Hoefer noted that the commissioners would see this applicant again for
final.
Tim Mooney requested that the hotel remain "moderate" in price. He inquired
about the accessory retail space. Vann responded that it was strictly for the
convenience of the hotel patrons. These items were included in the resolution.
David Booth, Aspen Lodging Company, inquired about the elimination of one of
the triplexes. Vann stated that it could not be eliminated since the overall project
included less free-market units that the original plans had included. Booth
requested there be less density on Lot #3 and the most density was preferred on the
south side. Vann replied that the affordable housing plans were not cast in stone
and with the process of gaining a duplex they will work with more improvements
2
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 7, 1999
at the next level. Booth cited the narrow street. Vann responded that there was a
balancing of impacts with Summit Place also.
Steve Fallander, public, asked that the corners of the building be marked along
with the story poles.
There was discussion about the Bavarian employee mitigation, which would be
decided by council. Hoefer noted they were still operating under the PUD and
Council could amend the PUD.
The commissioners voiced concerns with the criteria, process, density, parking,
access, affordable housing, accessory retail, mass and bulk, proper clustering, and
overall site plan specifics. The resolution addresses these issues for the conceptual
PUD and when the applicant returns for the final PUD, the remainder of the issues
and concerns will be worked out.
MOTION: Roger Hunt moved to approve the Aspen Planning and
Zoning Commission Resolution/4 99-25 and recommend that Aspen City
Council approve the Conceptual Planned Unit Development (PUD) for
Lots 3 and 5 of the Aspen Mountain PUD generally included the following
proposal for development of Lot 5 and Lot 3: Lot 5, GrandAspen site:150
moderately priced, upscale hotel units (132 standard rooms, and 18 suites); On-site
housing for 12 employees (four one-bedroom units and four studios); 8,000 square
feet of meeting space; 2,750 square feet of restaurant space; 800 square feet of bar
space; 2,400 square feet of kitchen space; 500 square feet of accessory commercial
space; Customary lobby and support spaces; 106,780 square feet of external FAR
floor area; 22,000 square feet of open space (plus an additional 25,000 square feet on
Lot 6); and, 106 below grade parking spaces. Lot 3, Top of Mill: Creation of 8
development parcels and 2 open space parcels, as follows: PARCEL 1:51,680 square
feet of land containing 2 triplexes (6 free market dwelling units) with a total of
27,000 square feet of FAR floor area; PARCEL 2:26,520 square feet of land
containing 2 duplexes (4 deed restricted dwelling units) with a total of 7,500 square
feet of FAR floor area; PARCEL 3:14,260 square feet of land containing 1 duplex (2
free market dwelling units) with a total of 9,000 square feet of FAR floor area;
PARCEL 4:13,290 square feet of land containing 1 free market single-family
dwelling unit with a total of 6,200 square feet of FAR floor area; PARCEL 5:10,370
square feet of land containing 1 free market single-family dwelling unit with a total
of 5,200 square feet of FAR floor area; PARCEL 6:10,380 square feet of land
containing 1 free market single-family dwelling unit with a total of 5,200 square feet
of FAR floor area; PARCEL 7:18,920 square feet of land containing 1 free market
single-family dwelling unit with a total of 6,500 square feet of FAR floor area;
PARCEL 8:18,390 square feet of land containing 1 free market single-family dwelling
unit with a total of 6,500 square feet of FAR floor area; OPEN SPACE PARCEL A:
28,740 square feet of land (of which 18,710 square feet lie within an access road
easement; and, OPEN SPACE PARCEL B: 50,230 square feet of land. Total of 17
residential units with the potential for up to 7 accessory dwelling units; Total of
3
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 7, 1999
73,100 square feet of FAR floor area; Total of 60,260 square feet of land meeting
the City's definition of "open space;" and: Section One: That the Planning and
Zoning Commission recommends City Council grant Conceptual Planned Unit
Development (PUD) approval for Lot 5 with the following conditions: 1. Any and
all Conceptual PUD approvals for Lot 5 shall be fully contingent upon receipt of the
necessary GMQS allotments. The Planning and Zoning Commission makes no
recommendation with regard to whether City Council should: (a) allow for
conversion of unused residential reconstruction credits to tourist accommodation
allotments, or (b) require that all allocations be obtained through the GMQS
scoring and competition procedures. 2. The recommendations of the Housing
Office and Housing Board with regard to Lot 5, as contained in the June 4, 1999
Housing Office memorandum to Mitch Haas of the Community Development
Department, shall be considered part of the Planning and Zoning Commission's
Conceptual PUD recommendation to City Council with the one exception being that
the Planning and Zoning Commission forwards no recommendation whatsoever
with regard to use of the Bavarian Inn site for affordable housing mitigation
purposes. 3. All affordable housing mitigation shall be provided on-site and/or in
an off-site location approved by City Council after receipt of a recommendation
from the Housing Board. 4. If any off-site housing receives approval, Savanah shall
be required to purchase and make available at all times valley bus passes for all
employees not housed on-site. 5. For the Final PUD and GMQS Scoring and
Competition applications: an appropriate number of parking spaces shall be
designated for dedicated use by the on-site employee dwelling units; 9 spaces in an
appropriate location shall be dedicated to Silver Circle Ice Rink patrons; and, an
appropriate amount of spaces shall be dedicated to the meeting space, restaurant,
bar, and accessory commercial uses. The remaining spaces shall be available to
hotel guests. The applicant should also consider providing short-term parking (for
restaurant, bar, etc.) as well as parking for contractors such as window washers,
electricians, etc., that would be present at the hotel on a semi-regular basis. 6.
Savanah shall commit to providing a shuttle to and from the airport for the hotel's
customers, and shall make a good faith effort to use an alternative energy source
vehicle for such shuttle purposes. 7. Savanah shall reexamine the garage entrance
plan with consideration given to affects on the Tipple properties across Galena
Street. A plan for vehicular and pedestrian circulation between and amongst the
passenger drop-off area, main hotel entrance, and the parking garage shall be
provided (both directions). Said plan shall, at a minimum, provide an analysis and
consideration of: potential conflicts (vehicular-to-vehicle, vehicle-to-pedestrian,
etc.); impacts on neighborhood-wide and site-specific traffic circulation; visual
impacts; signage required; and, enforcement mechanisms required to make the
plan properly and consistently function over time. 8. If the exit from the
underground garage is to remain on Galena Street, it shall include a means of
precluding right turns out of the garage, and the landscape plan shall maintain a
site distance triangle open and clear to view both to the north and to the south. 9.
The service/delivery area shall be provided with a means of precluding exiting
vehicles from turning left onto South Mill Street. Time limitations for deliveries
shall be set, and a plan indicating how trucks will maneuver to enter the loading
docks shall also be provided. All service/delivery functions shall comply with
regulations currently in effect, as may be amended from time to time. 10. The Final
4
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 7, 1999
application shall include a management plan for demolition and construction
parking, traffic, and noise, and said plan shall consider neighborhood concerns. It
is recommended that meetings with the noticed neighbors be held in preparation of
the management plan required pursuant to this condition. 11. A model and/or
simulated three-dimensional photograph of the proposed hotel relative to the St.
Regis and other surrounding structures, with Aspen Mountain in the back-drop,
shall be provided prior to presentation of the Final PUD application to the Planning
and Zoning Commission. 12. Any and all variance requests shall remain
outstanding until Final PUD review. 13. Prior to GMQS Scoring and Final PUD
Review, Savanah shall provide accurate "story poles" at roof height changes to
reflect the peaks of the proposed roof as well as new building corner indicators. 14.
A detailed landscape plan will be required in connection with a Final PUD
application, and staff suggests that the applicant work cooperatively with the Parks
Department to arrive at an acceptable Final landscape plan with regard to selection
of species, spacing of plantings, and tree removal permit requirements. It is
suggested that, in order to help buffer the visual impacts of the hotel structure from
the adjoining property to the south, species for tress proposed along the site's
southerly property line should be selected to provide mature heights closely
approximating the height of the hotel in this area. 15. Additional lighting details
will be provided with the Final PUD application, and if any outdoor lighting is used
on the subject property, it will not cause glare or hazardous conditions. All outdoor
lighting shall employ down-directional, sharp cut-off fixtures. There will be no
lighting of landscape materials or building facades, nor will the swimming pool area
be lighted beyond the minimum required for safety reasons. The lighting details to
be provided with the Final PUD application shall be consistent with the Community
Development Department's currently proposed/pending outdoor lighting ordinance
or such regulations in effect at the time of Final PUD submission. 16. Any and all
internal driveways and access roads shall comply with all pertinent City regulations
and ordinances. 17. All material representations made by the applicant in this
application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission
shall be adhered to and shall be considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise
amended by a Board/Commission having authority to do so. Section Two: Lot 3
with the following conditions: 1. Any and all Conceptual PUD approvals for Lot 3
shall be fully contingent upon subsequent rezoning hearings. That is, should the
necessary rezoning request(s) be denied, the applicant would have to come back
through the Conceptual PUD process with a proposal that meets the requirements
of the existing zone districts. 2. For the Final PUD application, the applicant will, in
good faith, explore and potentially pursue a rezoning request different from that
currently proposed. Instead of the currently proposed rezoning, the applicant will
consider applying to rezone all portions of Lot 3 for which development is proposed
to L/TR(PUD); if this is done, the request to amend Section 26.40.070, Zoning of
Lands Containing More Than One Underlying Zone District, (as recodified) will be
withdrawn. 3. The Final PUD application will contain further information,
including a slope analysis for each subdivided parcel, to determine compliance with
all applicable zone district and dimensional requirements. Allowable FARs for each
Lot 3 parcel will remain a function of City Council's decision as to whether or not
Savanah may reallocate unused floor area from one or more parcels to other parcels
within the PUD. 4. The recommendations of the Housing Office and Housing
5
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 7, 1999
Board with regard to Lot 3, as contained in the June 4, 1999 Housing Office
memorandum to Mitch Haas of the Community Development Department, shall be
considered part of the Planning and Zoning Commission's Conceptual PUD
recommendation to City Council. 5. In the Final PUD application, proposed
building mass and related impermeable surface layout will closely conform with the
final outcome of the Aspen Mountain Drainage Basin Master Plan (AMDBMP)
design and construction criteria. It shall be the developer's or its successor's
responsibility to fully comply with the drainage criteria and perform within the
parameters set forth in the report. 6. Savanah Limited Partnership's
(owner/developer) representative agreed to provide necessary drainage easements
and shall continue to provide these easements for safe conveyance of surface runoff
and debris through the site. 7. In the Final PUD application, the developer's
representative will make necessary adjustments to building footprints to ensure that
the requirements of the AMDBMP and the above mentioned conditions are met. 8.
The City will use the funds put in escrow to study and develop a master plan with
design and construction criteria and utilize the balance of these funds toward
implementation of an interim drainage mitigation project to control runoff to the
extent the remaining escrow funds will support. 9. Savanah shall be responsible for
implementation of such on-site drainage improvements as necessitated by their
development and typically required of new developments in the City of Aspen. 10.
In the Final PUD application, the site layout must be such that it will in no way pose
a significant blockage in the natural stream bed or drainage path. 11. The
development must comply with the most recent municipal engineering practice
standards and the "Best Management Practices" (BMPs) identified for water
quality control requirements. The existing site must be carefully studied and
evaluated to ensure a proper design and correct selection of BMP(s). 12. The Final
PUD application shall include further grading and excavation plans, based on
today's conditions and all parts of the current design concept, with suggested
conditions for development. 13. For the Final PUD application, Savanah shall work
cooperatively with the Parks Department to relocate and replat the Top of Mill
Trail, where Savanah further agrees to have any agreed upon alignment of the
relocated trail staked and approved by the Parks Department. The relocated trail
must have a legal description, be shown on the Final Amended Plat, and be
dedicated/conveyed to the City of Aspen Parks Department. 14. With the Final
PUD application, plans must be provided for the construction and post-construction
phases of the development in order to address the problems associated with the
grade of South Mill Street. 15. Savanah shall commit, in the Final PUD application,
to construct a detached/separated sidewalk along the South Mill Street frontage of
Lot 3, and to plant appropriately spaced street trees in the area between the
sidewalk and the curb. 16. All residential structures will be subject to the
provisions of the Residential Design Standards. When more detailed architectural
renderings are submitted in conjunction with the Final PUD application, staff will
conduct the Residential Design Standards review under the provisions applicable at
that time. Staff suggests a different roof form for the Parcel 3 duplex. 17.
Concurrent with Final PUD review for Lot 3, a general 8040 Greenline Review will
be carried out for the proposed building envelopes, but each parcel will still be
subject to a site- and design-specific 8040 Greenline review prior to its development.
18. The Final application shall include a management plan for demolition and
6
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 7, 1999
construction parking, traffic, and noise, and said plan shall consider neighborhood
concerns. It is recommended that meetings with the noticed neighbors be held in
preparation of the management plan required pursuant to this condition. 20. Any
and all PUD variance requests shall remain outstanding until Final PUD review. 21.
A detailed landscape plan will be required in connection with a Final PUD
application, and staff suggests that the applicant work cooperatively with the Parks
Department to arrive at an acceptable Final landscape plan with regard to selection
of species, spacing of plantings, and tree removal permit requirements. 22. Two
sets of simulated three-dimensional photographs of the proposed development shall
be provided prior to presentation of the Final PUD application to the Planning and
Zoning Commission. The two sets shall depict summer and winter conditions of the
proposed development, and both sets shall include views of the development from
downtown (i.e., Wheeler Opera House) and from above (i.e., on Aspen Mountain or
the Silver Queen Gondola), relative to the surroundings. 23. Additional lighting
details will be provided with the Final PUD application, and if any outdoor lighting
is used on the subject property, it will not cause glare or hazardous conditions. All
outdoor lighting shall employ down-directional, sharp cut-off fixtures. There will be
no lighting of landscape materials or building facades, nor will any light be directed
up the mountainside. The lighting details to be provided with the Final PUD
application shall be consistent with the Community Development Department's
currently proposed/pending outdoor lighting ordinance or such regulations in effect
at the time of Final PUD submission. 24. Any and all internal driveways and access
roads shall comply with all pertinent City regulations and ordinances. 25. All
material representations made by the applicant in this application and during
public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission shall be adhered to and
shall be considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended by a
Board/Commission having authority to do so. Section Three: In accordance with
Section 26.84.030(C)(1)(b) and (c), Sections One and Two of this Resolution, as
provided above, shall not constitute final Planned Unit Development approval or
permission to proceed with development. Instead, such approval shall constitute
only authorization to proceed with a development application for a final
development plan. A development application for final development plan shall be
submitted within one (1) year of the conceptual development plan's date of approval
of by City Council, should such approval be granted. Unless an extension is granted
by the City Council, failure to file such an application within this time period shall
render null and void the approval of a conceptual development plan. Jasmine
Tygre second. Roll Call vote: Haneman, yes; Erickson, yes; Mooney,
yes; Tygre, yes; Hunt, yes; Blaich, yes. APPROVED 6-0.
The regular meeting adjourned at 6:15 p.m. and the commission went into a work
session regarding the Ullr Lodge Affordable Housing.
Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
7
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 7, 1999
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS ........................................................................................................................ 1
DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST ............................................................................................ 2
LIGHTING ORDINANCE .................................................................................................................................. 2
ASPEN MOUNTAIN PUD - CONCEPTUAL LOTS #3 & #5 ............................................................................ 2