Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20000620ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 20. 2000 Bob Blaich opened the regular meeting at 4:30 p.m. with Steven Buettow, Roger Haneman, Roger Hunt, Tim Mooney, Jasmine Tygre, Ron Erickson and Charles Vresilovic were present. City staff in attendance: David Hoefer, John Worcester, City Attorneys, Ed Sadler, Asset Manager; Mary Roberts,'Lee Novak, Housing; Chris Bendon, Joyce Ohlson, Julie Arm Woods, Community Development; Tim Anderson, Recreation; Kathryn Koch, City Clerk. COMMISSIONER, STAFF & PUBLIC COMMENTS Roger~ Haneman said that the ballots for judging Aspen Mass were submitted yesterday; there would be another meeting on Friday. Ron Erickson noted that the duplex driveway, near the Fifth Avenue Condos on North Mill Street, right below the Top of the South of Mill Project, was very steep and narrow. Erickson questioned the height of the Bell Mountain Townhouses. Joyce Ohlson replied that Sarah Oates checked the height and that Bell Mountain through the PUD process was granted an additional 3 feet above the allowed height in that zone district to a 25-£oot height limitation. Ohlson said they were allowed 28-feet; the timbers were allowed to project up to 38-feet. Ron Erickson and Bob Blaich stated that they were pleased with the DEPP progress and complimented Ed Sadler for his efforts. ELECTION OF A NEW CHAIRPERSON MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to retain the existing officers for another year, Robert Blaich, chairperson and Jasmine Tygre, Vice-chain Roger Hunt second. APPROVED 7-0. David Hoefer noted that the City ordinance required a vote every year. Ron Erickson complimented Bob Blaich on his efforts. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST None. PUBLIC HEAR1NG: VARIOUS MINOR CODE AMENDMENTS Chris Bendon noted that this would be re-noticed for continuation to July 18th' Bob Blaich opened the public hearing on code amendments. ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 20. 2000 MOTION: Roger Hunt moved to continue the public hearing for the various Code Amendments to July 18, 2000. Jasmine Tygre second. APPROVED 7-0. PUBLIC HEARING: TRUSCOTT FINAL PUD $oyce Ohlson said that this was not really a public hearing on Truscott tonight but rather an overview. David Hoefer stated that it was noticed as a public hearing, sO it was legally a public hearing. Hoefer stated the intention was to provide the information tonight. The notice met the jurisdictional requirements for the commission to proceed. Chris Bendon distributed the overview materials and noted the revieW was scheduled for July 11th. He asked the commission to provide feedback on the significant issues for staff. Bendon also submitted the traffic report. Laura Kirk, DHM, provided the overview with comments and recommendations. She said the design included a signalized intersection with a left-hand turn lane into Truscott. Kirk stated there was a proposed pedestrian underpass to create safer movement into and through the sites from the bus stops along with a bike underpass to connect with the regional bike path. Kirk noted the internal portion of the project was divided into recreational components and housing components. The recreational component includes 6 Tennis Courts (5 at grade and 1 slightly depressed clay courts with the best playable surfaces for long-term maintenance). The Pro Shop was the next component with an attached delivery area, locker rooms, storage facility and Nordic activity work space. There would be a cart storage area, which also provides a service and wash area for the carts. Kirk said the recreational parking area would include 133 spaces, currently there were 144 spaces. Kirk said that for the housing overview they tried to create a balance between the livability, density, parking close to each unit, and meeting the owner's financial objectives. There would be 99 new units with 123 bedrooms in Phases I and II. She said that with the existing units, the existing Red Roof and completion of Phase I and II, the build out was at 196 units. She said that there were 197 proposed parking spaces with 4 drop-off spaces, all at surface level, no underground spaces proposed., 2 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 20, 2000 Kirk noted the looped access with a total of 85 parking spaces for the units in thati area. There were 3 different tYPes of parking: carports, tuck-under the housing unit parking and surface parking. Kirk noted the laundry facilities and play ground area on the maps. Kirk said that Phase II of the Housing had 41 units with 73 surface parking spaces 10 spaces in front of the area and 29 spaces in the interior street area. She noted that some of the existing residents would utilize some of these new spaces. The bike racks and trash would be at the entry to each of the phases. Kirk said that Phase III would not be dealt with until 2006 and is not part of the conceptual application. Junior GOlf may move into the existing Pro building. Kirk said there would be an addendum to the site plan at the July 1 lth meeting showing a better relationship between the Pro Shop and Golf Course; adding more parking for recreational and housing; a better routing of the main sewer line. She said when the clubhouse was moved to the new location, the 18th Green would als0 be relocated for a better long-term project. Kirk said the timeline was extremely tight with the construction schedule beginning in September/October. She noted there was a construction management ..~'~ . and phasing timeline. She asked if there were additional key items from the commissioners to focus on the July 11 th meeting regarding density, parking, transportation demand management and construction phasing. Blaich noted there was a lot of material to review. Bendon stated that he also had not had the ability to review the materials nor have the referral agencies had the review time. Bendon asked that the questions be for clarification tonight only. He said the addendum would be prOvided prior to the next meeting. Lee Novak, HOusing, stated that they have taken the direction of the commission on high levels of density and higher parking ratio. He said there was a extremely tight timeline with the construction phasing plan. Ron Erickson stated that the one section with no control was the intersection because of CDOT; he asked if CDOT had a timetable. He said intersection controli is the one item prior to construction that is needed. Kirk replied that since May, CDOT and the consultant for the City have been working together to finalize the design of the intersection. She said that in terms of the actual building of the intersection, it probably would not be done until next spring because asphalt could not be laid in the winter. Erickson asked the July 11 th presentation include the construction schedule, as it would relate to the position of the highway every step 3 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 20. 2000 of the way. Novak said the construction phasing plan was not easy to understand, but it will help understand process demands. Erickson asked where the 18th Green was being moved. Tim Anderson stated that it would be moved straight back to the fairway with the hole playing the same distance. He said that there will be some cascading water added around the sand trap to the clubhouse and additional parking will be picked up. Roger Hunt inquired about the westbound access having handicap access. Kirk replied there is access. Hunt asked what plans, if any accommodated a high-level parking lot. Novak replied that the cost impacts without an actual plan for a garage were very large on the utilities vs. what made sense on future garage costs. He said that there were no physical features designed for an future potential garage use at this time. Hunt reiterated that the future re-routing of sewer and water were not designed at this time. Erickson restated comments of lowering the grade of the existing parking lot enough under the current plan not to impact the possible second story ora garage. Novak replied that he did not think that there was the ability to lower that grade without re-routing the utilities. Erickson questioned that ability. Blaich said that Ron was asking for that information not provided in this packet. Bendon stated that after the referral process, he would be able to answer those questions. Erickson stated that area had too much potential for storage parking being so convenient to town. Jasmine Tygre asked what exactly does the Transportation Demand Management cover. Novak responded that was a referral memo from the Environmental Health and Transportation Departments on conceptual measures in the application, which cover a range of reducing the number of vehicles to and from the site. Tygre stated that was very important. Blaich said there were 133 recreational parking spaces planned and there were concerns from the public on the number of spaces. Kirk responded they were meeting with the Golf Board prior to the July meeting. Blaich asked how the parking would be monitored for the residential aspect with people having a second car. Novak replied the details would be worked out, but a second car may not be allowed. Novak said there was a City goal to keep the trips across the Castle Creek Bridge to the 1993 - 1994 levels; he said many of the methods were to keep those goals in place. Blaich asked when the recreation parking leveled out and how would the new restaurant affect the traffic. Tim Anderson. responded that there would probably be fewer people coming to dine than the current number of softball players~ Kirk stated that currently there were 97 existing units and 91 existing parking spaces. 4 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 20, 2000 Blaich stated that the parking issues must be reviewed to understand what was not happening here in terms of solving parking problems (long term, over-flow and re- development of current recreational and housing parking) prior to Council review. Ohlson clarified that for the next review that the transportation management plan (traffic on and off-site) and all parking issues (relating to one another) would be discussed. Mooney asked i£Phase III representations should be included in this application to logically fit with parking issues and infrastructure. Bendon responded that there was no plan for Phase III. Carol Farino, public, asked about the signalized intersection. Kirk reiterated that CDOT was in contact with the city on the signalized intersection approval process for a left hand-mm signal but because of the asphalt construction season, next spring was the plan. MOTION: Roger Hunt moved to table action and continue the public hearing on the Truscott PLANNED Unit Development (PUD) to July 11, 2000. Roger I-Ianeman second. APPROVED 7-0. PUBLIC HEARING: WITZ PROPERTY INITIAL ZONING AND GREENLINE REVIEW Bob Blaich opened the public hearing. David Hoefer stated that for the record the affidavit of notice met the jurisdictional requirements and he provided a criteria sheet for the review process. Chris Bendon stated that the applicant applied for annexation into the City of Aspen and within a certain number of days the zoning must be provided after annexation. The application also included a lot split and within the 8040 Greenline Review process. He stated the reason it was called an initial 8040 Greanline Review was because there were no details of architecture or final grading plans for the typical final 8040 Greenline. Bendon showed the property, 705 Spruce Street, currently with a house and gravel drive, a stand of Aspens and a field of sage brush above Williams Ranch. Bendon noted the lot split with a new drive on the uphill side of each building envelope. He said the proposed building envelopes were smaller than zoning allows. Bendon said the lot split was a City Council action with P&Z input from the 8040 5 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 20, 2000 Greenline Review. The applicant would use a Transferable Development Rights (TDR) created from the Smuggler Mobile Home Park in order to gain a GMQS exemption on the newly created lot because it was originally located outside of the town site. Bendon noted that in condition #3 of the Resolution #00-32 development also meant planting trees. Bendon stated that curb and gutter was not appropriate in the rural areas of town like this one. He said the drainage had to be handled in a softer approach with swales or riprap. He said that in the original request for a trail that was to be located along Spruce Street and that was included as condition #9; he said this was not a requirement and requested this condition be deleted from the Resolution. Staff recommended approval. Alan Richman, planner for the Applicant, introduced Camilla Auger; Raymond Auger; Chuck Brandt, attorney; David Panico, site planning architect and Jay Hammond, Engineer. Camilla Auger stated that her involvement was based upon community and neighborhood amenities for benefits to the larger Aspen Community. She said that she felt the two smaller houses with two ADUs were better than one mega-house. Auger said that their property was above this one and helped gain city water. She stated that they were committed to this neighborhood and planned on living in their home forever. Auger said a landscape plan was important for this property. She said the Hunter Creek and Lani White Trails do not have easements and she is willing to grant those easements. She said that they worked closely with the trails people to connect those trails. Richman said that each proposed new house would include an ADU. He said that the Augers have also purchased a 575 square foot one-bedroom free-market unit at 6th and Main (the Little Victorians), which will be deed-restricted to a category two affordable housing with a maximum sales price of $100,000.00. Richman said the Housing Board approved this unanimously. Jay Hammond provided the drainage plan for the Witz property and properties above the site. The site above contained a large drainage basin, which comes down and crosses two culverts then was diverted into the Williams Ranch area. Hammond noted the soils were porous and rocky. He said that there would be an erosion control plan for the construction phase of the Witz parcel with little movement of material offthe sites. 6 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 20, 2000 Richman said the setbacks meet City and County standards. Camilla Auger said they would work with the neighbors prior to house placement so the nearest new house was not a problem for the neighbors. Richman stated that the applicant agreed to houses no larger than 5,000 square feet, including the ADUs and garages. Jasmine Tygre asked if the representation was for a single-family house with an ADU on each lot and not duplexes. Camilla Auger replied that was absolutely true. Roger Hunt asked how the Lani White easement would be conveyed. Camilla Auger stated that would be given to the city. Richman added that at the time of final recordation, it would be reflected on the final plat. Camilla Auger stated that the homeowners association would continue the upkeep of the road without asking for the city's involvement: Bendon stated that private roads did not have to be adopted by the city with annexation. Bendon noted the roads would be upgraded to the standards required: Richman said that the homeowners were more worried that the city would take over the road and they want to leave it as it is under their ownership. Steven Buettow asked about the FAR discrepancies with lot area reduction. Bendon said the lot calculations were done were as one lot and not the reduced area, so they were larger numbers than what you could actually build. Bendon said that the hous~ would be no more than 5,000 square feet. Roger Haneman stated that the road was a single lane road and with the redevelopment of the Witz property more impacts would take place. Camilla Auger replied that right at the Witz property, which was the most narrow section o£the road, they would be make it a bit wider in conjunction with the landscape plan. Ron Erickson asked how the Homeowners Association felt about the deed 'restriction of the Little Victorian Unit. Camilla Auger responded that the response from the Condo Association was a very enthusiastic response. Jim Moran and his wife Mary live at 688 Spruce Street. He said the drainage problems from up the hill still existed and provided photographs of the problems. He said that his house was located in the city and the city led them to believe that this problem would be solved in 1999, it was not. Jim Moran said that curb and gutter and storm drainage were needed in that intersection. Moran illustrated the problem on the map, which was caused by the SilverLode Subdivision construction trucks. SilverLode still does not have a proper drainage plan. Moran said that the would oppose the annexation and the lot split unless there was a condition that the applicant must not allow drainage, surface water, sediment and erosion to run down their driveway which created the mess shown in the photos. Jim Moran said 7 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 20, 2000 the problem occurred after 1998 when Mr. Markel and Auger paved North Spruce Road and put in the water line extension. Moran said that unless a ditch was maintained along the paved road, it made no sense, because the gravel would continue to come down. Moran said he was encouraged that Mrs. Auger stated that she would solve this problem so there was no erosion coming down the road. Moran stated that he wanted to examine the plan prior to approval. Moran asked the ownership of North Spruce Street and what the user rights entailed because there was nothing in the application. Camilla Auger responded that they would aggressively undertake a better solution for the water that runs off the tip of the Witz property now. Auger said that whatever the Engineer needed to do would be done. She said that they do not control the gravel that comes from the public street, Spruce Street, that runs in front of Centennial but would control the North Spruce Street run-off. Auger said that everybody who owns property off of North Spruce Street has easements with one another and she would be responsible for the gravel maintenance from that road. Cecil Lewitz, public, stated that he was adjacent to the property and questioned the FAR. Richman replied that the city FAR calculations were higher than the county. He said the city allowed about 5500 FAR. Lewitz asked that the size of the houses be kept at a minimum with the allowable 8300 square feet prior to the lot split, which would put the two individual houses in the 4,000 square foot range each. Lewitz said the bulk and size should be considered. Scottie Cooper, public, stated that she lived at 708 Spruce. She said that the annexation was being requested to allow for 5,000 square feet. Camilla Auger replied the reason for annexation was because of the county moratorium and that they applied to the city because of timing. Auger said they did applied for the same as they would have to the county and increased all the setbacks and did not have any concept of any FAR differences. Scottie Cooper agreed with Mr. Lewitz, than having one 8300 square foot house would be better than two houses, two ADUs and all of the attendant traffic brought on by the project. Cooper asked about the Lani White trail access and commented that Williams Ranch skated out on the emergency access being fixed. She said that she was opposed to the annexation and lot split approval. Bendon said there was an agreement between Williams Ranch and SilverLode on who actually had the monetarily responsibility to fix and clean-up that emergency access. He said the city had a bond in escrow from the developer, which recovered some of the money for the Williams Ranch Homeowners to use in other parts of their subdivision. Bob Blaich noted that P&Z and Council approved the project with that basis in mind. 8 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 20, 2000 David Hoefer stated that it should be made clear that annexation was not an issue tonight, but would be brought before City Council. Bendon stated that the public hearing was only for the zoning action of the application tonight. Brooke Peterson, attorney, stated that he represented the Porath family trust. He said that there were important factors about the infrastructure that affects the project and the neighbors. Lewis asked the difference between the R-30 City and R-30 County zoning. Bendon stated the property sizes were identical at 30,000 square feet each but the FAR was different. Camilla Auger stated that their landscape plan was right next to the Williams Ranch entrance/exit and she was willing to work with getting them to work cooperatively to get the whole thing done at once. Auger felt that the ADUS were an important part of their commitment to be occupied for a proper mix of Aspen. Erickson asked for a commitment on renting the ADUs. Auger replied that they probably did not have that capability to deed restrict the ADUs but that this neighborhood did tend to have occupied ADUs as opposed to downtown Aspen. Erickson stated that he did not feel qualified to make a zoning decision tonight because they do not know what will be located there. Buettow stated frustration on the numbers with FAR and thought there could be a clearer presentation on the differences between County and City FAR. Bendon said the final 8040 would include the criteria for the building sizes. MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to extend the meeting to 7:30 p.m. Tim Mooney second. APPROVED 5-2. MOTION: Tim Mooney moved to approve P&Z Resolution #00-32 the "initial" 8040 Greenline Review for the two proposed development parcels on the Witz property, 705 North Spruce Street, with the conditions and recommendations that City Council include this property upon annexation the Low-Density Residential (R-30) Zone District amending Section 2 ¶3 strike development change to structures and delete ¶#9. Roger Itaneman second. Erickson asked if the motion were denied, could P&Z then vote to continue the public hearing or would the applicant have to start over again. Hoefer replied that 9 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 20. 2000 an alternate motion to continue could be made if this motion were denied. Mooney stated that he made the motion because it was the appropriate zone district within in the city and shared Roger's concern with the initial 8040 review or the designs. Mooney said that during the 8040 final he had hoped that all of the appropriate parties would be present for that review process. Tygre stated that she shared the uneasiness of the rest of the commission with this initial 8040 Greenline. She said that it was naive to think that no reliance would be placed on tonight's approval of this initial 8040 Greenline review. She agreed with Tim that there was no other zone district that would apply to this project. Richman stated that if the 8040 portion was the problem was with approval tonight, then he would remove it from this review tonight. He stated that that he wanted to just deal with the zoning issue. Mooney withdrew the previous motion. MOTION: Tim Mooney moved to approve P&Z Resolution #00-32 and recommend that City Council include this property upon annexation of the Low-Density Residential (R-30) Zone District on the Witz property, 705 North Spruce Street. Roger Haneman seconded. Roll call vote: Hunt, yes; Tygre, yes; Blaich, yes; Erickson, yes; Haneman, yes; Buettow, yes, Mooney, yes. APPROVED 7-0. Ron Erickson and Jasmine Tygre excused themselves. PUBLIC HEARING: ZOLINE BURLINGAME HOUSING Bob Blaich opened the public hearing. Julie Ann Woods stated that Tim and Roger were at the discussion last Thursday. John Worcester stated the statewide election in August was under discussion, and Council asked about placing the Zoline pre- annexation on that ballot. Mary Roberts, housing director, explained that the chart. Roger Hunt stated the housing was not a problem but the access and the re-opening of Old Stage Road were problems. Hunt said that the city should be held to the same standards as a private project. Hunt cited that the Buttermilk Road redevelopment should be tied into the Old Stage Road re-opening with a four-way intersection and held accountable even if the Maroon Creek Club interchange was developed. Blaich agreed with Hunt as a problem for the development of the entire property and wanted the CDOT solutions. Worcester said CDOT's traffic solution was the 10 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 20. 2000 one presented and he did not believe that there would be an underpass like Maroon Creek. Worcester said there was a little computer generated models that CDOT brought in to: illustrate their point with stoplights. Mooney said that city would be building the Zoline's affordable housing and infrastructure in exchange for a 20-acre parcel. Mooney said the pre-annexation agreement made agreements that may not have the money backing it. He said that the open space was not open space but rather a working ranch for the Zolines without the cost of negotiating access. Mary Roberts responded that the Zolines were responsible for some of the costs and the free-market houses would offset some of the affordable housing costs. Herb Klein stated that the Zolines could have come in with fewer affordable housing and the placement would have been in a much more environmentally Sensitive area. Klein said this would not be the same as the Snyder project. Roberts commented that there was still a net gain of 100 affordable housing units. Blaich stated that what concerned him the most was that a suburbia was being built. He cited the Library example as not being able to do the in-fill in town where it belonged. He said this was a sprawl issue; 125 units on approximately 25 acres and on the 103 acres there would be 12 free market units. He said that if the road would be extended from the AABC it would take a load off this intersection. Blaich asked that these issues get solved up-front and not doTM the line. Mooney said that during the land use review process, if the Zolines had already designed the project. Mooney said that there needed to be the ability to go back to the Aspen Valley Land trust and ask about the access; he asked the sizes of the residential sites and building envelopes and the sizes of the cabins. Worcester said that CDOT ruled on the 4th leg to the intersection. Hunt asked that P&Z deal with what was given. Mooney asked what components needed to be considered. Roberts said there were conservation easements on the irrigated portions of the land, which would remain as the BAR/X Ranch. Woods asked for feedback to give to Council for the ballot language. The commission said that they had they same issues from prior meetings with the Zolines mitigating the monster homes. Worcester stated that the election was not binding but he said that he did not believe that City Council would proceed without voter approval. Worcester said that Exhibit B was the most important part. Klein stated that there was no tax charitable gift but rather a quid pro quo. Mooney said there should be an appraisal on the land that the city will redevelop. Klein 11 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 20. 2000 said that when the bowl was endangered of development he contacted the city to mitigate the environmental impacts. Charles Vresilovic asked about doing away with the ADUs for the larger homes since the affordable housing units were so close and in exchange for those ADUs for more land. Roberts said the TDRs could be used to delete the ADUs. Vresilovic asked if less units could be placed from the affordable housing end. Worcester said the commission would have the review process to come up with the number of units. Hunt asked if the Maroon Creek Club was asked to allow the New Stage Road to be used by the new development. Worcester replied that was not worked out as yet and said that CDOT was the deciding factor on the solution to the road. Blaich stated that the Maroon Creek underpass was always iced-up and the Stops made it a very difficult intersection. Worcester stated that it was not an ideal access for Highway 82 in the winter. Blaich stated that the design process had to include the whole traffic pattern in order to make it a livable community. He said there needed to be a road connection to the AABC from this development and the Burlingame project; he said that the Aspen Valley Land Trust would not discuss those options. Blaich excused himself from the meting. Mooney said this was all about design and to split the access was necessary to make the project work and for highway safety. He asked where the TDRs came from, He asked about the use for the open space. Meeting adjourned. Tr~scribed by Ja~kie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 12 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION JUNE 20~ 2000 COMMISSIONER, STAFF & PUBLIC COMMENTS ................................................................................. ~....... 1 ELECTION OF A NEW CHAIRPERSON .............................................................................................................. 1 DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST .............................................................................................. 1 VARIOUS MINOR CODE AMENDMENTS .......................................................................................................... 1 TRUSCOTT FINAL PUD .......................................................................................................................................... 2 WITZ PROPERTY INITIAL ZONING AND GREENLINE REVIEW ............................................................... 5 ZOLINE BURLINGAME HOUSING .................................................................................................................... 10