Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19990112ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12~ 1999 [] Bob Blaich, Chair, opened the special Planning & Zoning meeting at 4:35 p.m. Commissioners Steve Buettow, Tim Mooney, Tim Semrau, Jasmine Tygre and Ron Erickson were present. Roger Hunt was excused. City Staff in attendance were: Chris Bendon, Mitch Haas and Julie Ann Woods, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. COMMISSIONER~ STAFF AND PUBLIC COMMENTS Ron Erickson requested a time line for the long range housing plan from the Housing Office and noted the figures provided were not accurate. Bob Blaich requested staff follow-up. Jasmine Tygre stated that it would be helpful if the affordable units were noted which were ADUs. Blaich asked if the commissioners could respond to his memo regarding the date of a special meeting on long range planning. The long range planning meeting was scheduled for February 23rd. Blaich reminded the commissioners about the party honoring Sara Garton at his residence on Friday, January 29th from 5:30 to 7. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST None. CONTINUED ACTION ITEM: BURLINGAME SEASONAL HOUSING- CONSEPTUAL PUD Bob Blaich opened the continued item from December 15, 1998. Chris Bendon stated the applicant's presentation was about 90 minutes containing responses from the December 15th meeting. The transportation issues, site planning for architectural and external issues as well as internal issues. Jim Curtis, MAA representative, introduced Ralph Trapani, C-DOT; Roger Millar, OTAK; Steve Pouliot, MK Centennial; Bill Kane, Aspen Skiing Company, Julia Marshall, Landscape Architect; Michael Hassig, and Harry Teague, Architects. Roger Millar, OTAK, presented a slide show and the background for the Entrance to Aspen with the relationship between transportation and land use. He noted 3 big projects: The Entrance to Aspen Light Rail Project, The Roaring Fork Valley Rail Project and the Connection to Snowmass. The Elected Officials Transportation Committee (EOTC) extended the Entrance to Aspen project to the base of Brush Creek from Rubey Park, which was tied into the Roaring Fork Valley Rail Project. 1 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12~ 1999 [] Millar stated the EIS and station area planning were conducted with the public process included the Main Street Planning. He said they were asked to provide community base planning both short and long term to analyze and select extended implementation that best to met a variety of goals. Millar said there was a capacity problem during peak hours and the EOTC set a goal to limit vehicles across Castle Creek Bridge in the year 2015 to levels at or below 1994 figures. He said they were trying to deal with the increase in number of people without the increase in number of vehicle trips. The evolution of public mass transit from the old street cars through a variety of enhancements to buses to a light rail vehicle, used in a variety of places to move lots of people efficiently through urban and suburban settings. Millar said one of the reasons light rail transit was technically feasible in the upper valley was because the current transit system has done so well to date. He noted that RFTA was the second largest transit agency in Colorado moving some 4,000,000 people per year. He noted that light rail had been implemented in various cities through out the nation with similar ridership numbers projecting the 2015 needs in Aspen. Millar stated that many of the most beautiful urban areas were very dense. He said that transportation and land use was about allocation of open space and public space; open space could be utilized for public debates, a living room extension and art instead of parking lots. He said that density was needed to make transportation work depicting the Portland West Side Rail Line as an example. Millar said to make the Brush Creek Terminal work housing was needed in proximity of ¼ to ½ mile radius. This station area would include the connection from the Valley Rail to the Entrance to Aspen Light Rail termination at that point. He said the station area plan worked independent of the mode of transportation. The Airport Station Area included the airport, AABC, North 40 and a plaza with an under ground walk way. Millar stated the 5-minute walk radius (¼ mile) for the Buttermilk station area with light rail transit, underground parking, office, housing and an island with a connection to the trail system. He said there was an underground walk way at Old Stage Road and an at grade crossing at Buttermilk and under crossings at either side of the new Maroon Creek Bridge, Truscott and the round-about at Maroon Creek Road. He said there would be an over crossing at the cut and cover tunnel coming into town. Millar said the direction from council and citizens for work on Main Street was to stay within the curb lines and maintain 4 lanes of traffic with a one- lane rail. He said the station detail included the irrigation ditches and what it would 2 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12~ 1999 [] look like in the winter with a snow buffer. He encouraged people to attend a meeting Thursday for more details. Ralph Trapani, C-DOT project manager, presented the 4 lane AABC to Buttermilk project boards from the December meeting. The light would be moved down valley to encompass North 40. He said the access would be cleaned up at the upper part of the AABC with the re-location of the Owl Creek Road and consolidation of a new intersection at Buttermilk. Trapani noted the access to Buttermilk will be from the new Owl Creek Road; just past the Maroon Creek Club interchange where the highway will drop the 4 lane and tie into the existing 2 lane. He continued that there will be a new Maroon Creek Bridge and then onto the cut and cover parkway. He explained the bus stops would be the same as down valley shelters, pulling off onto concrete aprons with pedestrian cross-walks. He said he had hoped that before 2000 the Owl Creek Intersection would be completed. Millar remarked that the 2 of 4 lanes would be peak hour HOV. Bill Kane, Aspen Skiing Company, provided drawings for the Buttermilk Master Plan with changes in chair lifts and new lifts with new terrain. He said the most dramatic element in the plan was the link between Buttermilk and Highlands, which would influence the site planning as a major context issue. He further utilized drawings to show site plans of the gondola base at Highlands and redevelopment of the Buttermilk Base Area. Kane said Buttermilk was a focal point because the Entrance to Aspen EIS called for a 750 space parking area; the 4 lane transition to 2 lanes at this section of Highway 82; light rail transit station; skier services and re- development of the Buttermilk Base. Kane noted this base area connection and transportation area change would open skiing from Buttermilk to Highlands. Kane stated Aspen Skiing Company would like to build a world class children's center (13,000 square feet) licensed to operate with infant care to 7 year olds. He said these facilities exist at other world class ski areas. He noted consolidating all of the administrative offices in one place and relocating them at the base of Buttermilk in two buildings on the main floor would be a plus. He said the second and third floors would be affordable housing (approximately 73 units). The third building would be skier services. Kane said there were representations for RFTA, Light Rail Transit and Owl Creek Road on the site plan; there was a landscape plan that was not shown. Harry Teague, architect, stated the site was at the edge of a large hill with a bow1; the idea was to carve out the inside of the bowl and create the housing form in that area. He said the plan had very minimal roof lines visible from the road. Curtis 3 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12~ 1999 [] noted that this was a new plan from the one that was included in the packet. Teague said the parking became part of the inside keeping the landscape impact minimal. He said the make-up of the units was 4 units in each section with 4 bedrooms in each unit opening to a small courtyard. Julia Marshall, landscape planner, illustrated the berm with photographs and explained the berm was growing out of deer hill wrapping around the housing. She noted story poles were placed on the site. Marshall said the berm was a great modulation from the highway and airport, especially since music students would be living here in the summer. She said it would take 100 feet of trees to have the same sound mitigation as the berm. She stated that she had worked with Steve Ellsperman from Parks on a seed mix to blend with the other areas. Marshall stated the berm was 4 feet lower than the Maroon Creek Club berm. Curtis said the status of the balance of the property was that there was some potential development with the Zoline family owned property, but the current need for the MAA housing was a priority. He noted there was a physical separation between this parcel and the rest of the property. Curtis stated the Zoline family would be responding to the city on their plans by the end of January. He said the only physical and legal access was the Maroon Creek underpass and new Stage Road. Ron Erickson questioned the natural bowl excavation. Curtis presented an aerial photo showing the bowl situation. Michael Hassig replied the excavation would be about 6 feet at the most and in other areas none. Erickson asked the number of parking spaces. Hassig answered there would be 84 total, 14 of which were shown as guest spaces. Erickson asked if there would be a tie in with seasonal housing at Buttermilk; if so how many units would be MAA. Kane responded the plans were not finalized but the long-range plan was for 80 seasonal beds. He noted the project would be phased. Erickson asked how many units were planned for Highland Village. Kane replied there were 29 dorm rooms at Highland Village and almost 300 long-term beds in various configurations. He said the MAA had right of first refusal on the Highland 29 double occupancy units. Erickson stated that he was trying to get a number of all of the beds in the various locations to fit in the master puzzle. Robert Harth, MAA, stated they were loosing 180 beds in September when the Grand Aspen will be demolished. He said that was the driving force for the June 1 st deadline. He said the enrollment has been reduced by about 15% over the last 4 years. There were about 750 to 780 students. Harth said there were 282 beds at the 4 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12~ 1999 [] Marolt with 23 years remaining on the lease. He said the Holland House provides another 42 beds every year Mooney asked if the size was reduced. Hassig stated there was about a half-acre reduction. Curtis said there were about 3 ½ acres, which would comply with the FAR for the RMF-A zone district. Blaich noted adding up the beds located at the Highlands, Holland House, Marolt and Burlingame the total was 582 beds. He asked where the remainder of the 770 beds came in. Harth replied that on the average students come for 3 or 4 years and the older students sometimes rent condominiums or were housed in private homes. Mooney asked where the affordable housing definitions came into the RFM-A zone district. Curtis replied the units would be deed restricted under housing guidelines comparable to Marolt Ranch. He said the existing housing guidelines recognize the MAA students as part of the affordable housing balance of the community, as were seniors, since 1982. Semrau asked what happened if there were 150 cars. Curtis replied if that happened, then some off site parking would be sought. He said based upon 10 years experience at Marolt Ranch; people tend not to arrive with cars. Kane said the SkiCo recruited early this year and stated the housing package that was offered did not include cars. Curtis said there was an additional fee for parking extra cars at Marolt. Semrau asked if they had considered in traffic counts that there were possibly 500 more bedrooms in the city portion of Burlingame, which would add cars and impact Stage Road. Curtis responded that both projects had to stand on their own merits. He said Steve Pouliot did some studies of both projects using Stage Road. Blaich said the issues that were being looked at had to do with the MAA project only. Semrau noted that there was no way to know if Stage Road could accommodate the city's project in addition to this one. Curtis said based upon the work that has been done, Stage Road could accommodate the traffic. Trapani stated that he was not that familiar with Stage Road in answer to the question. Pouliot responded that the first time they looked at it was about 1000 cars a day not accounting for the golf course traffic. He spoke about different level services that were found in the traffic impact study dated 10/27/98. Blaich asked if the new Stage Road tums were taken into account with the studies. Pouliot said that only sections were reviewed separately. Curtis said there would be a separate golf cart under pass. ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12~ 1999 [] Buettow asked if this intersection, Stage Road, would work with the addition of the more traffic from Burlingame. Pouliot stated an acceleration lane would be added and the intersection could work with the right tums instead of left tums. Trapani said hopefully the merge would happen before this area with the two-lane configuration. Buettow stated there was a more direct route if it were directly across from the Buttermilk parking lot. Millar responded that this was not selected to specifically service this housing project with the under crossing but the trails and pathways were considered for the AABC and Owl Creek trail. He said the crosswalk under the area where the light was located. Buettow stated the application that was being reviewed was relevant to the paths and crossings in relation to the intersection and transportation. Curtis said the MAA will be running an internal bus during the hours needed. Blaich asked how much time would there be a risk value without the crosswalk. Millar replied the stoplight; street lighting and the crosswalk would be constructed in 1999 prior to ski season. Blaich asked if there was a possibility to widen the road at that point to avoid the possible bottle neck and asked if the road was wide enough for two buses. Millar replied that the level of service might work better at slower speeds. John Kane, Buttermilk Homeowners Association President, voiced concern regarding the limited open space, a conflict in the numbers on vehicle trips at the intersection of Buttermilk and Owl Creek Road, the number of parking spaces added to Buttermilk, the addition of housing, office space and Highlands parking re- location. Kane said that there would be less parking spaces for day skiers in two years than there were now. He urged the parking be done properly now; not having to re-construct at a later date. He said that building housing on the highway 82 corridor was unfortunate. He appreciated the planners concern regarding the MAA housing. Blaich asked what was expected from the commission tonight with regards to the resolution. Jim Curtis stated the resolution and conditions were acceptable. Buettow asked for more design work on the parking lot for the MAA housing in the bowl. He said the old design was better for the quality of life for the residents not having to face a parking lot. Hassing said the parking lot was still under review and the courtyards were the concern for residents. Mooney asked if placing the parking under the units was considered. Hassig said that cost was prohibitive at $15,000.00 per space. Teague noted there would be basketball hoops placed to take advantage of the absence of cars as afire place, with a positive slant on these areas. ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12~ 1999 [] Kevin Tripp, Aspen Daily News, asked if the applicants were anticipating any mitigation credits for the housing in the RMF-A zoning. Curtis replied there was a presentation before housing on January 20th and at this point there was a request for 59 FTE's mitigation credit. Jasmine Tygre stated her main concern was that this project had been done backwards; the project has to fit into this land no matter how it won't work. She voiced concern about the understated traffic concerns for the area and could not support the project. Mooney said that this was a better plan with the parking in the middle but having only one drawing and limited facts that changed the entire layout made him uncomfortable. He felt this was going in the right direction but questioned the need for a variance for open space. Curtis stated there would be a variance for open space because they were under the required 35%. Mooney requested the applicant buy enough land not to need that variance for open space. He stated transit and traffic were a major problem and there were still questions on the numbers regarding this application. Mooney said there needed to be another application placed on the table for this new plan. Erickson asked if the commission would review this again. Bendon responded that the commission would review again at final and the applicant was on a fast track amending the plan based upon concerns the commission had at the prior meeting. Erickson stated at this time there was enough information for a conceptual approval tonight. Bendon requested as much information as possible to the applicant regarding the concerns for direction. Erickson asked the entire height of the project be lowered. MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to recommend that City Council should approve this Conceptual Planned Unit Development application for the Burlingame Seasonal Housing project subject final annexation of the property into City of Aspen, P&Z Resolution 98-41, with the following conditions: 1. This recommendation and any other City land use action on this application are subject to annexation. Failure to annex this property shall render any land use action by the City void. 2. The final PUD application shall include: a. an application for Final PUD, Subdivision, Rezoning, Special Review, Growth Management, and Residential Design Standards. A pre-application conference with a member of the Community Development Departments required prior to submitting an application; b. delineation of all dimensional provisions to become requirements of the PUD. This includes all variations; c. a proposed subdivision plat and a Lot Area analysis of the property for purposes of density and allowable floor area calculations; d. a transit plan addressing the interim and long-term conditions for the Summer, Winter, and Shoulder Seasons; e. a construction plan delineating minimal areas of construction activity and a plan to protect as much of the natural vegetation as possible. The plan shall also delineate the any special provisions for site access and staging, any necessary Highway 82 traffic mitigation measures, a planned route for modular delivery (considering bridge heights), a dust mitigation 7 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12~ 1999 [] plan, provisions for contractor parking and any incentive programs for carpooling; f. delineation of the short-term and long-term maintenance of the site landscaping There shall be submitted a plan or documents describing the on-going maintenance of all common areas and provisions which ensure landscape success for a three-year period; g. incorporation an appropriate number of planting buffers in the parking areas. The requirements for said buffers are located in the Special Review section of the Land Use Code. The final application shall also delineate an appropriate amount of snow storage area. 3. The applicant shall lower the berm heights to a necessary minimum. 4. The applicant shall investigate the ability to provide temporary vehicular and emergency access to the center of the proposed courtyard with the Fire Marshall. A member of the City Planning Department is available to facilitate this discussion if desired. S. The applicant is encouraged t a full evaluation and submit those reports with the final application. Examples of typical information requested are a soils report and a drainage report. 6. The applicant is encouraged to submit a "mock-up" plat for review, submit with the final application a draft plat and draft Subdivision Improvements Agreement, and make the necessary amendments to said documents prior to second reading of the final Ordinance by City Council. 7. The applicant shall record this Planning and Zoning Resolution with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder located in the Courthouse Plaza Building. There is a per page recordation fee. In the alternative, the applicant may pay this fee to the City Clerk who will record the resolution. 8. 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 the recommendation, unless otherwise amended by an entity with the authority to do so. Tim Semrau second. Roll call vote: Buettow, yes; Erickson, yes; Mooney, no; Tygre, no; Semrau, yes; Blaich, yes. APPROVED 4-2. Blaich requested an informal basis of discussion prior to final review. Julie Ann Woods noted a lunch could be set up for the information gathering. Blaich thanked the applicant for their hard work. Meeting adjourned at 7:15 p.m. Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 12~ 1999 [] COMMISSIONER, STAFF AND PUBLIC COMMENTS ................................................................................ 1 DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST .............................................................................................. 1 BURLINGAME SEASONAL HOUSING - CONSEPTUAL PUD ..................................................................... 1