HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20050705ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION - Minutes - July 05~ 2005
2
COMMENTS ............................................................................................................
2
MINUTES .................................................................................................................
DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ............................................... 2
SNYDER AFFORDABLE HOUSING PUD AMENDMENT ................................ 2
LODGE AT ASPEN MOUNTAIN CONCEPTUAL PUD AND TIMESHARE .... 2
LIMELIGHT LODGE CONCEPTUAL PUD .......................................................... 6
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION - Minutes - July 05, 2005
Jasmine Tygre opened the regular Planning and Zoning Commission Meeting in
Council Chambers at 4:30 p.m. Commission Members Brian Speck, Brandon
Marion, Steve Skadron, Dylan Johns, Ruth Kruger and Jasmine Tygre were
present. John Rowland was excused. Staff in attendance were Chris Bendon and
James Lindt, Community Development and Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk.
COMMENTS
Jasmine Tygre noted that the commissioners have been getting emails from the
public prior to public hearings and she did not want the public to think that they
did not want to hear from them but there was a methodology. James Lindt said
that he would email some standard language.
Tygre asked for the lodge occupancy for the 4th of July weekend.
Chris Bendon noted the Civic Master Plan Meeting on July 14th from 11:30 to
2:30. Steve Skadron joined the Civic Master Plan Committee.
MINUTES
MOTION: Steve Skadron moved to approve the minutes from May 3rd and May
17~h,' seconded by Dylan dohns. All in favor, approved.
DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
Ruth Kruger recused herself on Lodge at Aspen Mountain.
PUBLIC HEARING:
SNYDER AFFORDABLE HOUSING PUD AMENDMENT
Jasmine Tygre opened the public hearing for the Snyder Affordable Housing PUD
Amendment. James Lindt provided the proof of notice.
MOTION: Ruth Kruger moved to continue the Snyder Affordable Housing PUD
A th
mendment to duly 19 ,' seconded by Brandon Marion. All in favor, approved.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING (02/22/05; 04/05/05; 04/12/05; 05/10/05;
06/07/05; 06/14/05; 6/21/05):
LODGE Al? ASPEN MOUNTAIN CONCEPTUAL PUD AND TIMESHARE
Jasmine Tygre opened the continued hearing on the Lodge at Aspen Mountain.
James Lindt recapped the Lodge project proposed construction of an 82 unit lodge
on the west side of South Aspen Street. Lindt noted the applicants have made
further changes in response to the last P&Z Meeting. Staff recommended approval
with the conditions in the resolution. Lindt said it provided significant community
2
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION - Minutes - Jul~ 05~ 2005
benefits; it was in the appropriate place and warrants the flexibility of the
conventional requirements that were requested.
Lindt entered 5 letters into the record from (1) Don and Nancy Gilbert, Shadow
Mountain, were against the proposal because of the size; (2) K.K. Fletcher, Juan
Street, was concemed about the height, delivery, garbage, speed bumps and
laundry facilities; (3) Michael Mizen, Shadow Mountain, had concems about the
height and size of the development; (4) Todd Klindworth, Shadow Mountain,
supported the project under the current dimensions; and (5) Simon Pinniger,
Shadow Mountain, supported the project and removes his objection.
John Sarpa stated they spent some time with the neighbors in the last 2 weeks; they
made progress with Juan Street and will confirm on the record. Sarpa said the
building was lowered 5 feet 4 inches from Juan Street South, which lowered the
ceiling heights. Sarpa stated that this building was as good as it gets if you want an
82 room hotel. Sarpa said somewhere near 85% of the immediate neighbors
support this and they think that is a pretty good number.
Kim Weil utilized drawings showing the decrease in heights of the building with a
red line depicting the building corresponding to the blue tapes on site scaffolding;
the reduction was 5 foot 4 inches on south end to 2 foot 8 inches on the north.
Weil said the highest point is 95 feet back from South Aspen Street and Juan Street
at 64.9 feet; none of the heights are at the street but 100 feet back and they are
measured from grade to the ridge. Sarpa said both ends of the building were under
28 feet from grade.
Dylan Johns asked what were the floor to ceiling heights. Sarpa replied around 9
feet. Steve Skadron asked where the heights came down from. Sarpa replied they
were 10.
Public Comments:
1. Scott Stewart, Shadow Mountain, asked for clarification on not qualifying
for the new code. Sunny Vann explained the new lodge zone district was 42 feet;
if they met certain requirements meeting average number of units on site and
maximum room size of 500 square feet. Vann said this application was submitted
before the regulations were enacted but with anticipation of some of the changes.
Vann said that fractional ownership projects were already subject to mandatory
PUD for reason that such projects were unique. Vann said that if they did the 500
square foot unit limit there would be a 180 unit hotel and they can not build a 180
unit hotel. Vann said that technically the height limit was 28 feet for new hotels
that don't meet the 500 square foot room requirement but projects that do then
have a height limit of 42 feet.
3
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION - Minutes - July 05~ 2005
Stewart said 4 of the 5 Shadow Mountain board members were against the project;
he was never contacted by the developer. Stewart said they were putting the
largest building in Aspen in a basically residential area; it didn't make sense to
him.
2. Doug Allen, attorney for Lift One Condos, said the developer has been
working with them and they were now in support of the project.
3. Brad McKee, Shadow Mountain; said he also was speaking for Alex Beil
and echoed the comment by Scott of the mass and size of the project, which
transforms the whole street and block. McKee said this will change the entire feel
of why they come to Aspen.
4. Sanford Sorken stated he was representing Mark Wendell of Shadow
Mountain and echoed everything that Scott has said. Sorken asked if there were
any more drawings showing the impacts on Shadow Mountain and it does not
appear in any way that the street will be able to handle the traffic.
5. Jim Ellis, Shadow Mountain, said the project impacts his unit and several
other units on the second level as far as the views of the mountain; he asked what
height limit did this project came under. Tygre responded that the code limit for
this project was at the 28 feet height limit; they applied under a PUD which allows
them to request variation from the underlying zone district dimensional
requirements. Tygre stated the commission makes their deliberations based on
criteria. Ellis voiced concern for the steepness of the street and requested
information on the lift replacement. Tygre replied the lift was not part of the
deliberations.
6. Todd Klindworth, Shadow Mountain, stated he owned 2 units in Shadow
Mountain and met with Mr. Sarpa today. Klindworth supported the project but had
concerns about the dangerous street and snow removal. Klindworth said that Mr.
Sarpa would give the Shadow Mountain owners some passes to the Spa and 2
guest parking spots, which would help them.
7. Peter Greene, real estate broker, stated this was a logical place for a hotel; he
said that you can not pay these prices for the land and construction and build a
Holiday Inn. Greene understood it was a big project but it was either this or 14
condos that would sit empty for half of the year. Greene stated for the overall
community this project should be approved.
8. Bart Johnson, Timberridge, said that he can not say that 100% of the
Timberridge owners approve of this project but a large majority do based on the
4
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION - Minutes - July 05~ 2005
commitments the developers have made and good compromises; he continued to
support the project.
9. Michael Morgan, Juan Street, read Derek Johnson's letter regarding the use
of the project's property being treated as Juan Street's property and were sad to see
the area developed but they understand that Aspen needs high end properties to
compete as an Alpine Destination Resort. Morgan read that this support represents
the majority of Juan Street Homeowners contingent upon the continued
involvement in the planning, construction and operational phases of this project.
Steve Skadron asked for the list of concerns. Sarpa said they would be happy to go
on the record and agree to (1) the loading dock remained and the street would
include some speed humps (2) the 1st floor balconies would be Romeo and Juliet
balconies (3) upgrading the existing street and (4) parking in front of the units for
Juan Street parking. Sarpa said that Juan Street patios encroached on the Lodge's
property and they have agreed to license the land to Juan Street.
Brandon Marion asked for clarification on the Shadow Mountain comment about
85%. Sarpa said that he said that 85% of the entire neighborhood supported this
project. Sarpa said the 10% to 15% was primarily Shadow Mountain with half on
each side.
Sarpa said they were committed to do whatever it takes to make the street safer and
they would do their fair share and go to the next level if necessary. Sarpa said he
knows what it takes to make a hotel work; this project was at the base of the
mountain where it belongs.
Marion said this was an important project; the definition of community benefit was
a work in progress; it was an appropriate site for a hotel and he would support this
project. Marion said that he was concerned about the street access and a parking
benefit from this project.
Dylan Johns said that this project has undergone some changes since the start and
he was committed that this was the appropriate type of use for the land at this
location and was impressed with the cooperation that the neighborhood has yielded
a positive mm from the negative point of view. Johns believed that as the project
moved closer to final and through city council the street will be more appropriately
discussed with council. Johns would love to see public/private sector parking
cooperation in the area. Johns supported the project.
Skadron stated that he had 2 concerns the impact on the neighbors and what was
most desirable would be a moderately priced lodge driven by the dimensional
5
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION - Minutes - July 05, 2005
requirements and the least desirable would be 14 townhomes, which would add
nothing to the viability of the town. Skadron said he would support this project.
Brian Speck stated he was in support of the project and the applicants did a great
job working with the community and compromising extensively on a lot of issues.
Speck said that he was hopeful through City Council and the development stages
brought good vitality to the community.
Tygre agreed with the members of the commission that this was an entirely
appropriate place for this facility but was not quite sure about the supply and
demand; we do not have the correlating information on the demand. Tygre said
she really believes in zoning and her interpretation of the PUD was that you may
vary the dimensional requirements but exceeding them by 2 to 1 in terms of height
goes beyond what she thinks was proper discretion of a planning and zoning
commission. Tygre explained with the new code amendment the height limit was
28 feet unless the project possessed rooms of 500 square feet, which this project
did not so they were not allowed the new height limit of 42 feet. Tygre said that
these were the rules that were established through a lot of discussion and what was '
passed into law in the code; it was P&Z's job to interpret the code and can't just
because we like a project approve but it has to be looked at more carefully. Tygre
noted that there were different weight factors that were used to evaluate a hotel
project and the responsibility to the community was to abide by the code as written
was important even though she doesn't give that up easily; she thought this project
had a lot of potential. Tygre thanked the applicants for the scaffolding but she still
looked at the very large footprint and above grade of the town; the visual impacts
of this project were going to be enormous. Tygre stated that the height of this
project was inappropriate for this location.
MOTION: Dylan Johns moved to approve Resolution #09, Series of 2005,
recommending that City Council approve with conditions, the Lodge at Aspen
Mountain Conceptual Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Conceptual
Timeshare. Seconded by Brian Speck. Roll call vote: Marion, yes; Skadron, yes;
Speck, yes; Johns, yes; Tygre, no. APPROVED 4-1.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING (06/21/05):
LIMELIGHT LODGE CONCEPTUAL PUD
Jasmine Tygre opened the continued public hearing on the Limelight Lodge.
James Lindt recapped the previous hearings with the commissioners accepting
40% of the project free market; there was no place to replace Deep Powder Lodge
portion; the majority expressed a need for public parking in this area of town
however staff did not want to hold this project up for that decision making process.
6
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION - Minutes - July 05~ 2005
Staff felt that the building heights were still unresolved at the meeting; the
applicant made some height revisions to be closer to the 42 foot height limit.
Chris Bendon stated that staff supported this project because of the high density
and moderate room size. Bendon stated the 42 foot height limit came from the
Independence Building because it felt appropriate in our town; this did not have the
benefit ofknowinghow exactly abuilding fitsinto 42 feet. Staff supported the
application at 46 feet and has watched P&Z struggle with the ceiling heights and
overall heights.
Dale Paas stated that they have had time now for the architects to look into the
construction of the building and feel that they have come back with a more
appropriate size.
Steve Szymaknski said that he would be glad to answer any questions about
"qualifiers".
Robin Schiller said back in January they did not have an accurate survey of
elevations and topography across the site and the 48 foot height limit was a
planning assumption to provide flexibility for choices of structural systems, ceiling
heights, program and topography. Schiller said since that time they have an
accurate survey and he utilized drawings showing the "L" shaped lodge building
bordering Cooper and Monarch Streets with a 4 foot elevation change between the
southeast comer (where the entry of the lodge is today) all the way to the northwest
comer near the little white house. Schiller said they have reduced the floor to floor
height on the lodge building from 12 feet to I0 foot 4 inches; the top roof of that
building would be 42 feet high at the southeast comer and the other comer at 46
feet. The 46 foot height was stepped back from the edge for the white house.
Schiller said the residential building across the street had 3 portions; the east
portion facing the park; the middle portion facing north and the western portion
facing the residential neighborhood. Schiller said only the eastern portion was
proposed to exceed the 42 feet; two-thirds of the residential building was within
the underlying zone limit.
Brandon Marion asked if they re-diagramed the Wheeler View Plane because of
the reduction in height. Schiller said that they would be taking 2 feet off the top of
the building but did not have drawings.
Skadron asked what the setback was from the northwest comer (the white house).
Schiller said there were about 15 feet back on the 4th floor and about 7 feet from
the street.
7
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION - Minutes - July 05~ 2005
Public Connnents:
James Lindt read 10 letters into the record (1) Dr. R. Gerald Pugh supporting the
goals of the. Paas family; (2) John and Barbara Cutler long term guests of the hotel
supporting the project; (3) Fred and Fran Davies urging approval; (4) Jessica
Goldberg supporting the project; (5) Joe and Judy Zanin supporting the project; (6)
Craig Canon supporting the project; (7) Carol Peachey supporting the project; (8)
Lydia Morrongiello concerned about the height and parking garage entrance off of
East Hyman (9 & 10) Janet Razak concerned about the height, not stepping back,
the scale, and the parking lot entrance.
1. Lisa Busch, public, had issues with the height and blocking the views of
Aspen Mountain; her concems were with increased traffic and the historic house
being overpowered by this project.
2. Andrea Clark, 210 Cooper, said she hasn't heard any modifications for the
comer across from her building.
3. Bob Leatherman, 210 Cooper, said they were having a special meeting for
all unit owners this Saturday with a representative from the Limelight to discuss
the height, dimensions and parking.
4. Hannah Pevny, public, said this was a critical project for the economic
stability of this town for accommodations for the average traveler.
5. Curtis Paas, Limelight employee, voiced approval for the project.
6. Maric Debski said that he was an employee of thc Limelight and supported
the project.
7. Bill Tomsich, Stay Aspen/Snowmass, said there was a need and demand for
more rooms; this weekend was at 90% occupancy. Tomsich said the timeliness of
the approval process for this project was critical.
8. Tom McCabe, public, spoke in favor of the Paas family project. McCabe
said this family grew up as the Ski area grew up and they were not selling out to a
giant corporation and they were our own folks revitalizing the town. McCabe said
that we could afford the extra height necessary to make it more economically
viable to them; they have demonstrated their good will as neighbors.
9. Warren Klug, public, said that he was the general manager of Aspen Square
and spoke in. support of the project as presented. Klug said the Paas family
8
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION - Minutes - July 05~ 2005
provided a good product for people who can't afford to spend thousands of dollars
on accommodations.
10. Shelly Roy, public, stated that people are complaining about the Iow
ceilings, small rooms excreta, excreta; people today act negatively to the product
that we have. Roy urged the commission to approve this project.
11. Steve Seifert, public, said they need to take their hats off to the architects
and the Paas family for bringing a revision to their proposal for reducing the
height; this project needs to be financially feasible for the family to continue to mn
the lodge.
12. John Boyd, public, stated that he has been staying in Aspen and would like
to continue to visit Aspen; he supports the project.
MOTION: Brian Speck moved to extend the public hearing to 7:15 pm; seconded
by Brandon Marion seconded. All in favor, motion carried.
Skadron said the project goes to great lengths to enhance community character by
encouraging the diverse population, while he was sensitive to the impact on the
immediate neighbors this application is a carefully formulated development plan
that will provide appreciable benefit to the community as submitted with the
current modifications.
Tygre agreed with Steve and appreciate the applicant's reduction of the height
bringing them closer to the code; the applicants have made every effort to work
within the height limits that were established for the kind of product that they are
producing, which was what city council said they wanted. Tygre said the variances
the applicant requested were minor in the overall scheme of things but she would
like the applicant to re-examine the heights in the residential area because of the
impacts on the neighbors. Tygre supported the project.
Marion said that the applicant has done a great job working with the commission
and the community; he said he has never seen so much support that speaks
volumes about the character of the family and what has been created. Marion said
the one thing that keeps him from supporting the project was the Wheeler View
Plane. Tygre suggested that Brandon place a condition into the resolution to that
effect.
Tygre left at 7:05 p.m.
9
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION - Minutes - July 05, 2005
MOTION: Brian Speck moved to approve Resolution #20 Series 2005,
recommending that City Council approve with conditions, the Limelight
Conceptual PUD request to construct 128 lodge rooms and 18free market
residential units on the Limelight Lodge, Deep Powder Lodge, Snowflake Inn
properties, City and Townsite of Aspen, Colorado. Ruth Kruger seconded.
Skadron, yes; Johns, yes; Marion, no; Kruger, yes; Speck, yes. APPROVED 4-1.
Discussion of motion: Ruth Kruger stated that the architects and developer have
done everything that they can possibly do to figure out how to trim off from the top
as best they could and the view plane comes off the top. Kruger said the project
has so much more value to the community than that fractional loss of whatever the
view plane is (trees at the base of the mountain). Dylan Johns said the reason he
supported the project was because of the price point of the rooms; he said that he
wasn't sure that the building couldn't be dropped down but he wasn't going to
pursue that line of thought. Johns said he was disappointed that there was a code
adoption that made a height limit that did not work with building systems; he
stated that P&Z worked on the height limits in great length and for the code to
have an odd ball number was disappointing. Johns said that if there was any way
to keep the height down he would support that; there were different processes
based on certain things.
Steve Szymanski said they were only asking for a 4 foot variance; if the site were
flat they probably wouldn't need a variance and they were trying to be good
neighbors with 210 Cooper.
MOTION: Brandon Marion moved to extend the meeting until 7:30p.m.
seconded by Brian Speck. All in favor, motion carried.
Brandon Marion reiterated that the view plane violation would not allow him to
vote affirmatively on this project. James Lindt explained the PUD process allows
for exemptions or the project to go through the GMQS process.
Kruger agreed with the point pricing for this lodge and wished that they could have
stayed with the 42 foot height limit.
Robin Schiller said that they could not come back without a conflict on the
viewplane.
Meeting adjourned at 7:35.
,
d_/Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
10