The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutminutes.apz.20011113ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION- Minutes-November 13, 2001 MINUTES ................................................................................................................. 2 DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST ..................................................... 2 LOT 5 ASPEN MOUNTAIN PUD - SUBDIVISION, CONDOM1NIUMIZATION, TIMESHARE, CONDITIONAL USE, MOUNTAIN VIEW PLANE, SPECIAL REVIEW CODE AMENDMENTS, GMQS and FINAL PUD .........................................................................~................................................. 2 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION- Minutes-November 13, 2001 Jasmine Tygre, Chairperson, opened the regular Planning and Zoning Commission meeting at the Pitkin County Library at 4:30 p.m. Bob Blaich, Steven Buettow, Roger Haneman, Eric Cohen, Bert Myrin, Ruth Kruger and Jasmine Tygre were present. Ron Erickson was excused. Staffin attendance were: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney; Fred Jarman, Joyce Ohlson, Julie Ann Woods, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. MINUTES MOTION: Eric Cohen moved to approve the minutes from 11/21/00. Roger Haneman seconded. APPROVED 7-0 DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Steven Buettow stated that he sat on the Five Trees Board with a member of the applicant's team. Ruth ICruger stated that she worked as a temporary for Savannah for a short period of time. David Hoefer noted for the record that the project had been substantially changed since Savannah's involvement; he said that there was no apparent conflict and the applicant agreed. PUBLIC HEARING: LOT 5 ASPEN MOUNTAIN PUD - SUBDIVISION, CONDOMINIUM1ZATION, TIMESHARE, CONDITIONAL USE, MOUNTAIN VIEW PLANE, SPECIAL REVIEW CODE AMENDMENTS, GMOS and FINAL PUD Jasmine Tygre opened thc ASpen Mountain final PUD public hearing. David Hoefer stated that the notice met the jurisdictional needs for the commission to proceed. Fred Jarman explained that the request was for a 60-unit structure including 9 affordable units; this hearing would focus solely on Lot 5 and the physical site issues. The time-share public hearing will be on December 4th' There will be another P&Z hearing on December 11th and after that, onto City Council. Vann Associates and Four Peaks Development represented Aspen Mountain PUD (AMPUD). The zoning for the site was LTR with a lot size of 86,605 square feet with a FAR of 115,000 square feet. Jarman stated that the threshold issues were approved at conceptual and tonight would include the 51 one, two and three bedroom free-market units (with a total of 130 lock-offrooms) and 9 affordable units. The amenities ora central check-in desk, concierge, lounge, pantry area, exercise room, public restrooms, ski/bicycle area, small accessory commercial space, the courtyard and pool area. Jarman provided the history of the conceptual approval in December, 1999; GMQS 2 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION- Minutes-November 13, 2001 property line to the wall and the depth of the window wells. Bill Poss answered that it was about 20 to 28 feet across to the trail easement, but it varied. Jasmine Tygre inquired about the difference in the 150-room hotel and the 130 guest rooms plus the kitchens and living rooms. Vann explained the different scenarios for lock-off rooms. Tygre asked about the residential credits and conversions. Vann replied that there were 47 residential credits authorized under the PUD; 13 used on the Top of Mill with 34 remaining for the 51 units with 50 lodge credits on Lot 5. Vann said that they were converting the 50 remaining lodge credits to 17 residential units and all of the lodge and PUD credit would then be gone with this proposal. Vaun provided the history of Savannah with the Four Peaks amendments to the conceptual approvals. Vann said that the box o£the building was the same from the conceptual approval. Vann introduced Scott Writer and Frank Goldsmith from Four Peaks, the architects Bill Poss and Les Rosenstein, Ron Garfield and C~is McCroy the attorneys and the Hyatt operators John Burlingame and Larry Schulman. Vann stated that the conditions were acceptable but a couple of issues staff brought up such as the livability issue of the AH units would be discussed. Vann stated that the units have always been at the back of the hotel with a uniform height; there was a trail and utility easement along the back. Varm stated that the employee units were oversized for category 2 units; the units were designed in such a way to make it as attractive as possible with a landscape area transitioning to the trail. There were 12-foot ceilings and felt the outside patios made the units less livable. Vann explained the difference of the employee generation from the 150-room hotel to the 5 l-unit condominium was 39 employees; for purposes of this particular project there would be no new employees generated, cash-in-lieu was suggested for the remainder (page 11 of the 11/13/01staff report). The density calculation was a technical issue addressed from the code. Roger Haneman asked what mechanisms would control the rent of the category 2 units. Vann replied that the units would be deed-restricted to APCHA's Guidelines at the time of building permit to place a qualified employee with a condition on the approval to convey a partial interest in the units to APCHA. Jarman noted that it was stated in the staff memo as condition #9 on page 13. Kruger asked if Savannah provided 100% employee mitigation. Vann answered with the history of the Savannah mitigation at 100% including the vote. Kruger 4 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION- Minutes-November 13, 2001 inquired if that was because of the form of this presentation that there were no net new employees. Vann responded that the with the PUD agreement today they would generate 39 net new employees, there was a credit of 47.8 existing hotel; therefore there were no net new required for mitigation. Marsha Goshom, public, stated that she was also on the Housing Board and discussed the livability issues. Goshom said that the Board's decision was based upon the units being over-sized; the back of the property had a terraced effect and the issue of thc angle of the sun would be an advantage because of the south facing unit would gain more light in the winter. Chris Hamilton, public, stated that he was the property manager for Alpenblick, Aspen Mountain and Galena Place; he said that the concerns were the parallel parking for the ~ce rink. Hamilton said that the concerns were for landscaping and the uphill parking. Hamilton stated concern for the Tippler return causing more congestion late at night. Hamilton said that residents were using the area for storage of vehicles. Vann responded that there were 9 spaces on Dean Street with landscaping around and it was requested by the city with the original approval of the ice rink. Myrin stated that he supported the Housing plan and thanked Marsha for the clarification. Myrin said that if there could be additional landscaping even if it meant taking away one space of the parking he would support it to avoid the headlights going up hill. Myrin agreed with more signage. Eric Cohen asked what the plans were for parking of owners' vehicles for storage and personal belongings. Vann replied that there would be no storage for any vehicles; the individual units were purchased furnished and functioned like a hotel. Vann said that there would be a valet service for skis but not for any permanent storage. Vann stated that it wasn't a condominium with storages areas. Bob Blaich asked if it was called the Hyatt Club. Scott Writer responded that the official name wasn't chosen but were leaning toward the Hyatt Grand Aspen. Steven Buettow asked about landscaping on the east side. Varm responded that there was landscaping along the street. Buettow asked how much oversized the employee units were. Vann replied that the averages were 675 to 750 square feet for category 2 units compared to a regular category 2 was 500 square feet. Jasmine Tygre said that she was one of the people who went along with the mass and scale when it was going to include private/public spaces in a hotel; now that it 5 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION- Minutes-November 13~ 2001 Jasmine Tygre, Chairperson, opened the regular Planning and Zoning Commission meeting at the Pitkin County Library at 4:30 p.m. Bob Blaich, Steven Buettow, Roger Haneman, Eric Cohen, Bert Myrin, Ruth Kruger and Jasmine Tygre were present. Ron Erickson was excused. Staffin attendance were: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney; Fred Jarman, Joyce Ohlson, Julie Ann Woods, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. MINUTES MOTION: Eric Cohen moved to approve the minutes from 11/21/00. Roger Haneman seconded. APPROVED 7-0 DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Steven Buettow stated that he sat on the Five Trees Board with a member of the applicant's team. Ruth Kruger stated that she worked as a temporary employee for Four Peaks Development. David Hoefer noted for the record that the project had been substantially changed since Savarmah's involvement; he said that there was no apparent conflict and the applicant agreed. PUBLIC HEARING: LOT 5 ASPEN MOUNTAIN PUD - SUBDIVISION~ CONDOMINIUMIZATION, TIMESHARE, CONDITIONAL USE, MOUNTAIN VIEW PLANE, SPECIAL REVIEW CODE AMENDMENTS, GMQS and FINAL PUD Jasmine Tygre opened the Aspen Mountain final PUD public hearing. David Hoefer stated that the notice met the jurisdictional needs for the commission to proceed. Fred Jarman explained that the request was for a 60-unit structure including 9 affordable units; this hearing would focus solely on Lot 5 and the physical site th issues. The time-share public hearing will be on December 4 ' There will be another P&Z heating on December 11th and after that, onto City Council. Vann Associates and Four Peaks Development represented Aspen Mountain PUD (AMPUD). The zoning for the site was LTR with a lot size of 86,605 square feet with a FAR of 115,000 square feet. Jarman stated that the thresholcl issues were approved at conceptual and tonight would include the 51 one, two and three bedroom free-market units (with a total of 130 lock-offrooms) and 9 affordable units. The amenities of a central check-in desk, concierge, lounge, pantry area, exercise room, public resrrooms, ski/bicycle area, small accessory commercial space, the courtyard and pool area. Jarman provided the history of the conceptual approval in December, 1999; GMQS 2 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION- Minutes-November 13~ 2001 has changed in use without those public spaces, but the proposed building was still massive. Blaich stated that he also felt the proposed building was massive. The commissioners discussed the physical site plan, minimum lot area per dwelling unit, and GMQS conversion without any major issues. Ruth Kruger and Bert Myrin stated that they commended the applicant on going above and beyond the employee mitigation and felt the units were livable. Blaich thanked Marsha Goshom for the clarification on the livability issues. Fred Jarman stated that the ceiling height of 12 feet was for the entire floor not just for these units. Jasmine Tygre echoed Bob Blaich's statements. Tygre asked why cash-in-lieu was not an option previously. Vaun replied that at the time cash-in-lieu payments were a lot less and there was more ora need to physically build the housing; the condition of 12.15 FTEs was over and above the employee mitigation requirement. Vann stated that there was a need for that cash-in-lien in another place; the cash-in-lieu would be required at building permit. Vann stated that the cash-in-lieu would be about $2.2 million; the current number was $183,000.00 for each full time employee. Bert Myrin said that the housing authority knew best where the money should be placed. Roger Haneman said that housing would use the cash-in-lieu to bail out other projects; with other scenarios some truly new deed-restricted housing could be built. Tygre stated that the issues have been discussed at length and that was the reason the hearing was good. Tygre stated appreciation for staff's organization of the issues. MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to continue the public hearing for Aspen Mountain final PUD, Subdivision, Condominiumization, Timeshare, Conditional Use, Mountain View Plane, Special Review, Code Amendments and GMQS until 12/4/01. Eric Cohen seconded. APPROVED 7-0 Meeting adjourned at 6:40 pm. ~ckie Lothian, Deputy City'Clerk