Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20010306ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 6, 200! DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST .................................................................................................... 1 505 SNEAKY LANE STREAM MARGIN REVIEW ............................................................................................. 1 TRUSCOTT LIGHTING PLAN ............................................................................................................................... 2 BAVARIAN FINAL PUD .......................................................................................................................................... 2 ASPEN MOUNTAIN CONCEPTUAL PUD AMENDMENTS (TOP OF MILL) LOT 3 & LOT 5 ................... 3 10 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 6, 2001 Bob Blalch, chairman, opened the regular meeting at 4:30 p.m. in Council Chambers. The following commissioners were present: Jasmine Tygre, Ron Erickson, Roger Haneman, Eric Cohen and Bob Blaich. Steven Buettow was excused. Staff in attendance were: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney; Julie Ann Woods, Fred Jarman, Nick Lelack and Chris Bendon, Community Development; Richard Goulding, Engineering; Lee Novak, Housing; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST None. PUBLIC MEETING: 505 SNEAKY LANE STREAM MARGIN REVIEW Bob Blalch opened the Stream Margin Review for 505 Sneaky Lane. Nick Lelack stated that there was a site visit today and for the record no notice was needed for Stream Margin Review. Lelack utilized maps for location orientation of the property in proximity to Castle Creek and the City Shop. Lelack stated that there was difficulty determining top of slope because it was relatively flat between the creek and the property. It was agreed with the applicant and the City Engineering Office that the 100-year floodplain would be the measurement for top of slope. Lelack stated that the applicant proposed a partial demolition 20 feet from top ofslope; Lelack noted that there were 3 options submitted based on the top of slope. All of the Stream Margin Review Criteria must be met. He noted that staff recommended approval for either "Set B" or "Set C". Roger Haneman asked what the intent of the 45° angle was. Richard Goulding, City Engineering responded that the house would be built out of the 45° angle. Scott Lindeneau stated that his clients would prefer "Set C" which included the office. Bob Camp, applicant agreed with "Set C". No public comments. MOTION: Jasmine Tygre moved to approve Resolution' 10, series 2001, a Stream Margin Review for the Camp residence at 505 Sneaky Lane as depicted in plan "Set C" finding that all of the review criteria have been met with conditions. Eric Cohen second. Roll call vote: Erickson, yes; Haneman, yes; Cohen, yes; Tygre, yes; Blaich yes. APPROVED 5-0. 1 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 6, 2001 PUBLIC MEETING: TRUSCOTT LIGHTING PLAN Bob Blaich opened the public meeting on the Truscott Lighting Plan. Chris Bendon stated that the approval for the lighting plan was the same as presented with clarification of the types of lights and fixtures used. Lee Novak, Housing, said that he was not an expert on lighting. He explained the bailards would be 32" in height in dark bronze color with 26-watt bulbs. Novak said that there would be some sort of sensor to turn offthe lights but some would remain on for safety and CDOT specifications on some of the lights needed at the highway. Novak said that the parking lots would have 16-foot poles and that the 12-foot poles were more pedestrian. Novak noted that good lights in the underpass were a necessity for people to utilize the underpass. Ron Erickson asked for staffto follow up after a year or two to know what fine- tuning can be accomplished. Bendon noted that there might be additional lights needed around the golf course. Eric Cohen noted that a year after occupancy a follow up should be accomplished. No public comments. MOTION: Eric Cohen moved to adopt Resolution 01-06 approving the Truscott Affordable housing and Aspen Golf and Tennis Club PUD Lighting Plan with the condition that staff review one year after the certificate of occupancy has been granted and that public notice be provided to the residents. Ron Erickson second. APPROVED 5-0. PUBLIC HEARING: BAVARIAN FINAL PUD Bob Blaich opened the public hearing to be continued. MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to continue the Bavarian Final PUD to March 20, 2001. Roger Haneman second. APPROVED 5-0. 2 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 6, 2001 PUBLIC HEARING: ASPEN MOUNTAIN CONCEPTUAL PUD AMENDMENTS (TOP O¥ MILL) LOT 3 & LOT 5 Bob Blaich opened the public hearing. David Hoefer stated that the notice was provided as well as the mailing for both Lots 3 & 5. Julie Ann Woods stated that this was a request to amend the conceptual approval that was granted to the Aspen Mountain PUD in December of 1999. For clarification Lot 3 was the Top of Mill and Lot 5 was the Grand Aspen site. She noted that there v~as a new owner, Top of Mill Investors, LLC for Lot 3 and Grand Aspen Lodging, LLC now own Lot 5. Woods said the amendment for Lot 3 was minor to create an additional lot where the existing garage building site for the Summit Place Condominiums~ Woods said that the parcel was 2500 square feet. Woods stated that major change was from the hotel use to fractional ownership. She noted the physical changes with Lot 5 were the relocation of the parking garage ramp from Galena Street to Deane Street. Kim Wyle, architect, explained that the ramps were eliminated from Galena Street and flipped the ramps to the north side of Deane Street. Woods stated that there was a reduction in rooms from a 150 room hotel to 51 two, three and four bedroom units or club suites (each having at least one or two lock-offunits or bedrooms). Woods stated the total room count of 125 rooms. She said that there was an increase of 18 parking spaces under the building in the garage and additional 9 parallel parking spaces along the Galena Street right-of-way. Woods stated that the semi-public accessory uses such as the restaurant and comer "bookshop" on the eastern comer of the Deane Street fagade were eliminated. She said that this was a loss for this project and inconsistent with the project; she requested that the applicant return with an alternate proposal. Woods said that Lot 3 was zoned LTR-PUD with lodge overlay and conservation; Lot 5 would remain the same. David Hoefer noted that Lot 3 and Lot 5 be kept together for review. Woods said that when the owners did not occupy the units, the suites or units would be available for rental to the public on a nightly basis. She said that there was segregation between the affordable units from the club suites and requested that be eliminated from the final design. Sunny Vann, planner for applicant, reiterated that the new owners were comprised of a group of local investors, Capital of California and Hyatt Vacation Ownerships. Four Peaks Management was formed by the parmership to complete the approval process and manage the development of the various properties. Vann said that the new owners felt that the conversion of the hotel to the vacation ownership format 3 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 6, 2001 would facilitate the construction of the development of the hotel and provide some benefits to the community. Vann said that the Summit Place Garage parcel would be included in the L°t 3 re-development plan for approval. Vann said that there would be a central lobby area and a small commercial area like what was originally included to provide notions, toothpaste and the like to the guests. He said there would be a small kitchen area for continental breakfast. He said that the restaurant and small meeting rooms were deleted. Vann noted that Deane Street was a vacated right-of-way that now belongs to Four Peaks. He said that the affordable housing requirements for the new hotel were 41 net new employees, the Bavarian Inn provided 13 and out of the remainder of the 28, 16 were to be housed on site per Savanaha's agreement. Varm noted that did not change with the new owners. He said there were now 124 packing spaces. Vann stated that the fractional or timeshare use was part of the fmai PUD application subject to the review and approval of the planning and zoning commission as a conditional use. He said there might be code amendments needed to amend the original code amendment. Dr. Dick Ragatz stated that he was executive vice president of RCI Consulting from Eugene, Oregon. He provided his background in the resort industry and on the vacation home concept. Ragatz said that by definition the term vacation ownership in the resort industry refers to anything that was sold in private ownership in less than., whole ownership, multiple owners per unit. He said that there were two kinds of vacation ownership (i) traditional resort time-share and ~) fractional interests. Traditional resort time-share were sold by the week and Fractional Interests were the bundling of weeks anywhere from ¼ ownership to 1/21 ownership. Ragatz stated that whole vacation ownership (on a national average) tended to be occupied about 8 weeks a year; a properly operated vacation ownership will operate at about 90% occupancy per year. He said that the qualitative advantages vacation ownership had over hotel use that was a psychological commitment to the community. He said that even though occupancy rates were higher, the intensity of the traffic and the use of public utilities during high season were usually less because of the longer length of the stay. He said that the repeat vacation ownership visitors came back at 60%. Ragatz report gave an economic impacts statement in the packet; he stated that some of the assumptions might be changed. Steve Ferrarini stated that he represented the firm of Hobson/Ferrarini & Associates, a real estate economics firm from Portland Oregon. He said that the 4 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 6, 2001 report comparing vacation owners were more satisfied after purchase rather than a hotel guest. Ferrarini said that the expenditure patterns were also higher for the vacation fractional owner than hotel guests. Ron Erickson asked for the methodology for their reports, were they national figures and applying to the community. Ragatz replied that there were relatively little hard statistics or economic indicators from the tourism industry in Aspen. Jasmine Tygre asked if there was a way to break out from the national data ~ statistics were ones that relate to seasonal resorts. Ragatz responded that the occupancy rate was a blend of occupancy rates gathered throughout the world. The figures were based on 365 nights a year. Roger Haneman asked how many of the 1,000 units studied were mountain locations. Ragatz answered that about 60% were in sun and surf locations, 25% in mountain locations and the remainder in urban locations to large lakes or regional resorts. Eric Cohen stated that it surprised him that the analysis of interval ownership units with kitchens would still have a higher dining out expenditure rate. Cohen asked if the statistics were from the vacation owners themselves. Ragatz replied that they have surveyed owners from all over the world. Ferrarini said that his report was taken from hotel occupants surveyed. John Burlingame, executive vice president of Hyatt Vacation Ownership, Chicago Illinois stated that the vast majority of their customers used local restaurants and used the kitchens in their units minimally. Scott Writer said that of the 51 units there were 74 lock-offs structured just like a hotel without access to kitchens. Cohen asked if the unsold units would also be available for rental. Blaich asked if the unit owners could leave their cars in the parking garage when they were not residing in their units. Vann replied no that they could not leave their cars. Varm said that there 120+ parking spaces which more than met the parking requirements. Erickson asked the negatives of this kind of development. Ragartz said if the sales of the units were too aggressive then that would be a negative. Ragartz said that the units generated more vacation rooms with the lock-off feature, which would generate more sales tax. 5 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 6, 2001 Tygre asked what amount of commercial space was lost. Vann replied that the Deane Street Restaurant was a reduction of 2500 square feet not counting the loss of meeting space. Blaich mentioned that this was the third time that P&Z reviewed this project; the first time was for condominiums, which never went onto Council; the hotel was approved by P&Z and then went onto Council for approval. Vann said that this hotel never had pure retail commercial space like the Little Nell or St, Regis but some accessory hotel use, which were being retained with the exception of the restaurant. Scott Writer stated that there were a number of different reasons not to have the restaurant were the price point that they were hoping to achieve did not provided the necessity for a restaurant. Writer said there would be the necessary services with an open lobby, inviting entrance, a place for a continental breakfast or a place for people to get together for a cocktail. Writer said that the redesign of Deane Street with the sidewalks and not cars would add the vitality of people walking. Writer said that the higher occupancies and off-season use would also add to the vitality. Writer said that the Silver Circle Rink would be made as an asset to the community. He said that to add another restaurant to the mix would take away from the existing restaurants and there would be no trucks servicing the restaurant. He said it would function as a hotel. Woods stated that the intent was not to say that there had to be a restaurant on this property but more public/private space at the facility. Staffwanted to see more interaction with the street front than ski lockers across the front fafade of the building. Woods said that this was right across from transit and a very visible property. Hoefer noted also that the Tippler was now becoming residential also. Erickson asked how the suites differed from condominiums. Vann replied that suites were meant to be more of a hotel room with a kitchen and living room and a number of bedrooms. Vann said that interval ownership was a sign of the change in the industry. John Burlingame stated that the owners have the right to rent their units or a portion of the unit through the Hyatt. Tygre asked what other ski resorts Hyatt operated with fractional ownership. Burlingame replied that Lake Tahoe (a 1/51) and Beaver Creek (a 1/21) and Breckenridge. Burlingame said that Lake Tahoe was about 45% sold with about 90% usage; 100% of Beaver Creek was sold and used about 75% of the time, which was in excess of what the hotel did. Cohen asked what the lock-off rooms might rent for. Vaun replied that they were still 6 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 6, 2001 trying to put the program together but these units would be available with moderate prices for a similar product. Cohen asked how the property was being marketed. Burlingame responded that this would be about a 4 star hotel. Writer stated that would depend upon the finished product. Burlingame stated that in vacation ownership they would entertain someone offering a lower price for the night. Blaich asked for examples of what the rooms rates were from the other resort operations in the high season. Buflingame responded that the rooms in the other resorts went anywhere from $I00.00 to $500.00 a night depending on inventory, it just depended upon the location. Haneman said that it was contradictory to have the report read that the people in time share units spent more time in their units and then to say that they spent more by going to shops and businesses in the area more frequently. Writer said that the repeat customer, the vacation owner, was likely to find the locals shops on the back streets of Aspen. Haneman asked if the numbers surveyed for the hotel were national figures; across what spectrum of hotels. Ferrarini replied that the data was from a national tourism research company; therefore it was a combination of incomes surveyed. MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to extend the meeting until 7:30 p.m. Roger Haneman second. APPROVED 4-1. Public Comments: Jack Crawford, public, stated that he was a Tippler Inn owner and president of the homeowners association. He said that they supported the elintination of the restaurant and inquired about the off-street and on-street parking. He asked where the Ice Rink parking would be located. Vann replied that the 9 spaces were replaced on Galena Street but would be decided by with City Council. Crawford said that they were happy about the Galena Street garage entrance elimination and supportive of the project as presented by the developer. Chris Hamilton, public, asked Ragartz about the research of how many of those developments were similar to this situation. Ragartz replied that there were many different vacation packages in many different areas. David Boothe, public, Aspen Lodging Company stated that he was also happy about the parking changes. He asked what the traffic pattern might be for the 9 spots on Galena Street and voiced concern about people doing loops up Galena Street for those spaces. Klm Wyle said that they would trade out the parking from Durant onto Galena. Vann noted that Deane would have two-way traffic. Boothe 7 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 6, 2001 stated that the height was still a concern and asked if there would be a reduction of the height since there was a reduction of the number of rooms. Boothe said that his company provided lock-off rooms and that they were primarily rented in the summer time; people looked for a different product. Ann Murchanson, public, stated that the city plowed the streets with a road grader, which was not plowed to the edge; the cars would get plowed in facing uphill, which would present problems for the winter parking. Vann replied that they would get a referral from streets department. Steve Fallander, public, stated that his concern was for the height of the building. He noted that the plan that John Sarpa presented had much landscaping in front of the building, the new building had no landscaping. He said that he was concerned that the parking in front of the building would not be for the entire neighborhood but for employees of the project. Bob Blaich excused himself at 7:15 p.m. Gerry Moncard, public, said that he agreed with everything the other neighbors have said. He asked for no parking from where the street was level on up. He questioned that there were no proformas from the companies involved in this project for price points. He said that the city would not get an appreciable room tax f~om this project. Moncard stated that he couldn't believe that a $30,000,000.00 project did not have reams of paper on the economics. He said that they could eliminate that fourth floor and still make the project work. Mary Grosso, public, stated that she spent 6 years in Aspen and most recently spent 6 years in Telluride, where she said that she became very knowledgeable about the fractional industry. She asked if the exchange program would be with RCI. John Burlingame replied that all Hyatt properties had the exchange program. MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to continue the Aspen Mountain Conceptual PUD Amendments (Top Of Mill) Lot 3 & Lot 5 to April 3, 2001. Eric Cohen second. APPROVED 4-0. Erickson asked for commissioner comments on the issues of the project. He stated concern for how the process will work; he stated that he did not want owners or exchanges occupying the rooms 90% of the time. He wanted information on how and what procedures would be in place so that the owners would not leave the units empty. Erickson stated that he was not opposed to the concept, but he had seen the 8 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 6, 2001 concept transformed into something he would never approve. He requested more specifics on prices for the units on a seasonal basis. He stated that this was a new use, which was a conditional use. He said that he needed to be convinced that this would benefit the tom. Cohen stated that he echoed Ron's comments and stated that based on the facts from the presentation, he requested a representation of a minimal number to be closer to the 1/21 than the 1/12 ownership. He requested initial sales figures and a height schematic relative to the buildings around it, particularly the Tipple Inn and the St. Regis. Haneman inquired as to how the numbers that were presented and how were they generated. He requested the daily use and spending numbers. Tygre stated she wanted to see a comparison of other very seasonal areas to be more relevant to our area. Erickson suggested obtaining the numbers from Beaver Creek and Tahoe from the Hyatt. Meeting adjourned at 7:35 p.m. ~fackie Lothian, DepUty CitY Clerk 9