HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20040518ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Minutes MAY 18, 2004
COMMENTS .............................................................................................................................. 2
DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ....................................................... 3
1201 RIVERSIDE DRIVE REZONING ............................................................................. 3
1300 MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN ...................................... 3
777 CASTLE CREEK DRIVE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN ..... : ....................................... 3
RIO GRANDE PARKING GARAGE AND PLAZA SPA AMENDMENT ............. 4
CHART HOUSE LODGE 219 EAST DURANT - CONCEPTUAL PUD ............... 9
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Minutes MAY 18, 2004
Jasmine Tygre opened the regular meeting of the Aspen Planning & Zoning
Commission at 4:30 pm in the Sister Cities Meeting Room. Members Jack
Johnson, Steve Skadron, Ruth Kruger, John Rowland, Brandon Marion, Dylan
Johns and Jasmine Tygre were present. Roger Haneman was excused. Staff
present: David Hoefer, John Worcester, City Attorneys; James Lindt, Chris
Bendon, Joyce Allgaier, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City
Clerk.
Jasmine Tygre stated the first three items on the agenda were being continued and
then the Rio Grande will be the first and Chart House the second.
COMMENTS
Ruth Kruger mentioned that she would like to see some sort of arrangement to
have parking passes for the commissioners when they were in a meeting; she stated
that she was proud to be a commissioner and happy to donate her time but was
offended to have to pay to park during the time she donates for these meetings.
Jasmine Tygre thanked Joyce for the ARC update.
Joyce Allgaier asked if the commission wanted to discuss the 210 Sesame Street
Resolution #11-04. Brandon Marion said he was satisfied with the resolution.
Tygre responded that she was not satisfied with the answer responsive to the
question that she asked, which was what the restrictions were if any on the
property. John Worcester found the title was clearly in the applicant; the issue was
during the lot split in county approval process they placed the building envelope on
the lot. Worcester said the question is does that survive the fact that the property
was annexed into the city and his response then and now was there were two ways
to look at it neither of which affects the commission's decision on the 8040 Green-
line Review.' The first is that it is a part and parcel of the county's land use
approval process which became moot and void when the property was annexed
into the city; secondly it could be viewed as a private covenant between the
property owner and the county and should be enforced by the county if they feel
that those covenants survived the deed-restriction and the annexation into the city;
in either case it doesn't affect your decision on the 8040 Greenline. David Hoefer
stated at this point the easiest thing to do would be to have a motion to accept the
resolution as written.
MOTION: Jack Johnson moved to approve Resolution #11-04 as written;
seconded by Brandon Marion. Roll call vote: Rowland, yes; Kruger, yes; Skadron,
yes; Johnson, yes; Tygre, no; Marion, yes. APPROVED 5-1.
2
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Minutes MAY 18~ 2004
Curt Sanders, attorney for Mr. Degraeve, stated that they wanted to take out any
reference to the county in the Resolution because he felt the condition allowed the
county a veto decision over any approval of P&Z. Joyce Allgaier read the
condition: this approval is conditioned upon the finding by the city attorn~ that
title to the property is properly vested with the applicant and that no conflicts exist
that wouM prohibit the development as Proposed. Should the city attorney or
Pitkin County be unable to convey clear title and use the findings of the Planning
and Zoning Commission shall be null and void. Sanders said he didn't know what
convey clear use means and was all in favor of this as simple as possible and the
inclusion of that language would over-ride what the commission has approved.
David Hoefer stated procedurally this meeting cannot be opened unless a
commissioner who voted in favor of the application makes a motion to do so and it
would have to be by a majority vote. Worcester said the whole thing was moot at
this point because the applicant had clear title.
MOTION: Jack Johnson moved to reconsider Resolution #11-04 and reopen the
hearing; seconded by Steve Skadron. Roll call: Kruger, no; Skadron, yes;
Rowland, yes; Marion, yes; Johnson, yes; Tygre, no. APPROVED 4-2.
MOTION: Brandon Marion moved to remove condition #7 of Resolution #11-04;
seconded by Steve Skadron. Roll call: Rowland, yes; Kruger, no; Brandon, yes;
Johnson, no; Skadron, yes; Tygre, no. DENIED 3-3, the condition remains.
DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
'None.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1201 RIVERSIDE DRIVE REZONING
1300 MOUNTAIN VIEW DRIVE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN
777 CASTLE CREEK DRIVE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN
Jasmine Tygre opened the public hearings for 1201 Riverside, 1300 Mountain
View, 777 Castle Creek with all public notices in place.
MOTION: Ruth Kruger moved to continue the public hearings for 1201
Riverside, 1300 Mountain View, 777 Castle Creek to June 1, 2004; seconded by
Dylan Johns. APPROVED 7-0.
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Minutes MAY 18, 2004
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING:
RIO GRANDE PARKING GARAGE AND PLAZA SPA AMENDMENT
Jasmine Tygre opened continued publi~ h~ahng °n' t~ei~i°Gr~'a~idd'Piaza'sp'a
Amendment; notice was provided at the May 4th meeting.
Chris Bendon explained this was an amendment to the Rio Grande SPA (Specially
Planned Area), which was essentially the same as a PUD; the dimensions and uses
can be varied of the underlying zoning. The parking area to be created was along
the alleyway south of the plaza by the planter; there would be 8 head-in parking
spaces. Four trees would be removed and part of the planter box. Bendon
provided the history of the Rio Grande parcels from the plaza to the river
describing various lots, master plans and SPAs for each concept; Spring Street
extension was now Rio Grande Place. Bendon utilized the site plan map to show
the different lots and provided the different scenarios including the Obermeyer
COWOP, Visitor's Center, purchase of the Zupancis property and the current Civic
Master Plan Meetings.
Bendon spoke about the Visitor Center's need for parking and the police and
sheriff cars having a safer parking area with a minimum of 8 spaces. This plan
provides those 8 spaces away from the visual pedestrian corridor and provides
another 6 spaces for the visitor center where the police and sheriff currently.park.
Bendon said those trees need to be relocated because they were built on top of a
parking garage without the proper drainage membrane; parks has always looked at
those trees as a temporary position and at some point need to be pulled out with a
proper drainage facility installed. This was a way to maintain the plaza and this is
the highest priority of al! the drainage problems in the parking garage because it
drains into the electrical facility for the parking garage. Staff believes this meets
the criteria for an amendment to the SPA. Bendon said the SPA can not be done
administratively if open space within that SPA were diminished by more than 3%;
of the 4.1 acres of the original SPA this is about less than 1% reduction of open
space but because the parcel was further subdivided and the garage placed on a
smaller parcel, which exceeds that 3%. There was a report from Walker parking
consultants, the structural engineer for the city to comment on the structural
capability of parking cars on top of the parking garage deck, which was designed
for a fire engine to be able to drive around anywhere on it. The garage was also
capable of holding a building of 7,000 square feet but not a library load. The
Walker report stated the existing parking structure was capable of withstanding the
changed load capacities of the 8 parking spaces.
Tim Ware, Director of Parking, and Ben Ludlow, Asset Management, represented
the applicant. Ware said regardless of the Visitor Center moving or not this was a
good project just to clear up the traffic circle for the Galena Street Shuttle and the
4
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Minutes MAY 18, 2004
pedestrian experience. Ware said whether the visitor center moved or not they
would want to explore this project.
Brandon Marion asked the width of the alley. Bendon replied that all alleys in
town were 20 feet Wide. Bendon said the depth of the parking spaces were 25 feet
and typical spaces were 18 feet in depth and there would be a little more room with
sufficient turning radius. Marion asked if it had to be concrete with a special
membrane; he asked if (for the pedestrian experience) other materials could be
explored. Ware replied it could be pavement or colored concrete to match the
planter boxes or whatever works. Mari0n asked if they were approving the designs
or just the concept. Bendon replied that the commission was approving an
amendment to the SPA and the addition of 8 cars was what was being amended
adding 8 parking spaces to the existing garage spaces and the reduction of the open
space by about 2200 square feet. David Hoefer stated that this was not a design
review. Bendon noted that design was an element included in the SPA amendment
and they looked at an island but there was difficulty maintaining (plowing) the site
for an aesthetic contribution yet buffers the parking from the circle; this was a
conceptual to hire a design build firm to complete. There were four trees to be
removed and relocated either on the site or to the golf course. John Rowland asked
the cost of this project. Ben Ludlow replied the initial estimate was around
$90,000.00 including the installation of the drainage membrane in that area only.
Dylan Johns asked does this solution adequately accommodate the use for police
and sheriff parking for this area. Bendon replied they believed so and there was a
lot of existing parking behind the Court House and Plaza I buildings, which needs
to be used more efficiently. Tim Ware responded that this solution alone does not
accommodate the needs so if this goes through the spaces behind the Court House
and Plaza I would be used for emergency vehicles only. Johns asked what was
driving this parking change and was this jumping ahead of something that could
potentially come up in the master plan where now all of a sudden the parking
doesn't make sense and because of the water-proofing issue this goes forward.
Bendon responded that this satisfies a lot of needs like the visitor center parking
and having parking for the police without the obstruction problem and solving the
drainage problem in that portion of the parking garage; the plaza area remains as a
plaza with maybe some encroachments on the northern edge.
Steve Skadron asked if a yes vote on Resoluti°n # 16 corroborates the building of
the visitor center. David Hoefer responded it did not in terms of the visitor center
approval. Skadron said essentially the project would enhance the pedestrian
corridor by reducing the police aesthetic and address the drainage issue; was it just
a coincidence that happens to come at a time of the visitors center discussion.
Bendon replied that it had been put on the front burner by virtue of the visitor
5
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Minutes MAY 18~ 2004
center discussion and the drainage has been talked about for years; the visual
obstruction has been talked about a~ something that should be resolved to enhance
that corridor. Bendon said in discUssing the visitor center it is obvious that what is
needed is as much immediately available usable parking as you can possibly get.
Tim Ware added the drainage problem in the parking garage was kind of what
spurred on the Civic Center Master Plan with a study done four years ago to
address that there was no membrane under those bricks when the contractor put it
in and a lot of the drainage was just aesthetic drainage. Ware said that the project
price was about $2,000,000.00 to rip up the bricks, put in membrane and drainage
so rather than just do that and have the same space again it was incorporated into
the Civic Center Master Plan. Ware said it would fix a mai ority of that. Bendon
stated that his expectation was the plaza stays and any building would have to go
through all public reviews.
Kruger asked if those six spaces were assigned to the visitor center. Ware replied
they were assigned to the visitor center.
Tygre asked why didn't anyone listen to the people that didn't want to put the
Youth Center right there.' Bendon replied in hindsight it was a very good
suggestion. Tygre said because of the blockage of the pedestrian experience going
straight from downtown down to the fiver and seeing the expanse change. Tygre
said when the Rio Grande SPA was in process there were many requests from
various groups to use various parcels of the Rio Grande and one question important
to P&Z at that time was weren't these lands purchased with 6th and 7th penny
money, in other words open space and transportation tax. Benson replied they
were; the open space moneys are along the river, 10% of the whole parcel, and the
rest was 6th penny, which was transportation money, the majority of the park and
some general fund money from the city and county that resulted in the library, jail
and county parcel. Tygre asked if a lot of parcels were swapped between the city
and county with a combination of funds and the parcel that was being considered
for parking was purchased with transportation funds. Bendon replied that they
were and that it wasn't open space money. Tygre asked if parcels were purchased
with open space money required a vote. Bendon replied yes parcels purchased
with open space money required a vote.
Tygre noted that there was a revision for parking north of the courthouse to
accommodate sheriff vehicles as an amendment~..t0 the SPA.~0 recpnfigure the
parking; she asked how that ties into what was planned on this parcel. Bendon said
that was on county parcel 5 directly north of the jail was for county facility
maintenance parking and alongside the jail housed sheriff vehicles and personnel
that need vehicles located on site, it may not be used as efficiently as it should be.
Tygre asked the number of spaces on the side of the courthouse. Ware responded
6
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Minutes MAY 18, 2004
there were approximately 7 spaces and an ADA space; at times there were as many
as 13 vehicles parked in the area. Tygre asked what would happen because 13
spaces were needed and only 8 were being provided with this proposal. Ware said
the other combination was to better use the space behind the courthouse and the
jail as well as emergency vehicle parking: Bendon noted there was discussion with
the Master Plan group for the possible connection of the lands all the way to the
Zupancis property as a Civic Courtyard concept. Bendon said the spaces needed
for emergency were 8 and the rest were non-responding to emergency situations;
they could be in the parking garage, behind Plaza I, the basement of the new
Obermeyer building or a variety of places. Tygre asked how many spaces were
they talking about total. Ware replied during the day there were 26 spaces, not all
emergency responders, Monday through Friday, to accommodate all of the
vehicles. Tygre read from the original approval of the SPA "the roof of the
parking facility shall be a people place with landscaping and not considered for
parking" and why should they now look at it differently. Bendon replied that was
a concept in the original SPA what to do with this area, the whole 15 acre site,
which was something to consider in a final review what was said at conceptual and
was it still agreed with; that was what the commission had the flexibility to do
tonight. Bendon said that the SPA goes on to say that it should not be a "dead
space" and it is a dead space, not everything in the original SPA was realized.
Tygre asked why a space that was utilized by people reading was considered a
dead space. Bendon answered the group felt the level of activity was disappointing
and envisioned as something more active and vibrant with events; the city
approached the farmers market with this space but they declined it. Tygre asked if
tree location was usually done with in the parcel whenever they can. Bendon
responded that Parks was in change of the relocation and more concerned whether
a tree can be removed and relocated but it was up to Parks where the relocation
would occur. Tygre asked if this would be seen again with regards to the design
questions that were brought up like the configuration or kinds of materials used.
Bendon replied unless the approval was conditioned for review again by P&Z it
will not be seen again by P&Z.
Public Comments:
Toni Kronberg, public, presented a packet to the commission and stated that she
wasn't satisfied with the city council ordinance so she wrote letters to the
newspapers regarding the public noticing. Kronberg spoke about the confusion of
the public hearings and requested the parking area go to a vote for the mixture of
police, sheriff and visitor center parking. Kronberg said there was too much traffic
and congestion and talked about the Aspen Area Community Plan.
Bendon stated that the Civic Master plan would have to work for all the entities
involved, which requires a level of specificity that is very tough when you are
7
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Minutes MAY 18~ 2004
doing long range policy planning and specific facility planning, so they have tried
to manage that balance. John Rowland volunteered to be a member of the Civic
Master Plan and Steve Skadron volunteered to be the alternate.
Johns asked how or how not this parking may or may not tie into the visitor center;
regardless it makes sense to get the police vehicles out of this area. Johns said that
he was in favor of moving them just to make that pedestrian corridor friendlier; if
the planters were taken out and the water problem were fixed it would probably
cost more than to put the planters back in than just make it into parking in that
area. Johns said he didn't feel that loosing 3 trees took away from the park
experience; there were other trees.
Tygre commented that the confusion on the parking had to do with the way the
memo was phrased; because the purpose says one thing and then a sentence says
another thing. Tygre said she was looking at the end result, the idea that we
believe in is to enhance the pedestrian access and experience and she questioned
how that could be accomplished when cars were being added. Tygre said maybe
some of the maintenance vehicles needed to be moved so that the sheriff and police
vehicles could park down below might make more sense. Tygre stated her feeling
was that they were doing little pieces just so we supposedly have parking for the
visitor center regardless of whether or not you think the visitor center location is a
good idea or not, this was not a good way to plan. Tygre said the solution that was
planned was really not the best solution and she would like to see more
coordination; in order to accommodate law enforcement appropriately moving 8
spaces to the alley was not the answer so nothing was being solved and adding
some problems that could have been avoided. Tygre said there could be a mini-
comprehensive plan involving the law enforcement, library and parking structure
and this seemed like the least attractive solution and complicated by the fact that
there was more behind than just accommodating sheriff and police. Tygre said
putting in a condition about a review of materials and plantings.
The commission concerns were the visitor center creating more of a parking
problem on Main Street; does this solution adequately accommodate the usage for
police and sheriff parking in this area; library book drop-off could be more user
friendly; how to make the plaza utilized more; this issue tied into the visitor center;
effect on the future use of this space; repairing the leakage problem in the parking
garage with regards to the electric panel.
MOTION: Ruth Kruger moved to approve Resolution #16-04 recommending City
Council approve the Rio Grande Parking Garage and Plaza SPA Area to
accommodate surface parking along the alleyway for Police~Sheriff vehicles;
adding that steps be taken in the design process to integrate as much as possible
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION Minutes MAY 18, 200,
the portion to the existingplaza be incorporated into the who[eplan and keep the
unnecessary vehicles out of the area; seconded by Jack Johnson. Roll call vote:
Rowland, no; Marion, no; Kruger, yes; Skadron, no; Johns, yes; Johnson, yes;
Tygre, no. DENIED 4-3.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING:
CHART HOUSE LODGE 219 EAST DURANT - CONCEPTUAL PUI3
Jasmine opened the continued public hearing. Joyce Allgaier noted there could be
a special meeting for just the Chart House next Tuesday, May 25th.
MOTION: Ruth Kruger moved to continue the public hearing for the Chart
House Lodge Conceptual PUD to May 25, 2004; seconded by Dylan Johns. Roll
call vote: Rowland, yes; Marion, yes; Kruger, yes; Skadron, yes; Johnson, no;
Tygre, no; Johns, yes. APPROVED 5-2.
~/~ck~e Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
9