Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20050927 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING Minutes September 27~ 2005 DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ..................................................................... 2 THE ASPEN CLUB CONCEPTUAL PUD ................................................................................... 2 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING Minutes September 27~ 2005 Jasmine Tygre opened the special meeting at 4:35 in the Sister Cities Meeting Room with Dylan Johns, John Rowland, Steve Skadron, Brandon Marion, Brian Speck, and Ruth Kruger present. Staff in attendance were James Lindt, Joyce Allgaier, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST Brandon Marion stated that he was a member of the Aspen Club but felt that he could take part in the public hearing process. James Lindt responded that the attorneys were contacted and unless there was a financial interest in the club then members would be able to participate in the hearing process. Steve Skadron asked if there was a mechanism in place for presentations. Joyce Allgaier responded there may have been changes requested from P&Z that were requested prior to the City Council hearing that were included in the Council presentation. Allgaier said that if the changes were significant then the project would come back to P&Z before it went to Council. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEAR1NG (09/20/05): THE ASPEN CLUB CONCEPTUAL PUD Jasmine Tygre opened the continued public hearing for the Aspen Club Conceptual PUD. James Lindt said the applicant wanted to present additional discussion on the threshold issues and new public comments. Sunny Vann stated the visual impact was in compliance with the code and was not a consideration; the project would comply with the code with the only variation, which was the reduction in the setbacks on the affordable housing. Vann stated the property was zoned Rural Residential in the 1970s, which was the only zone district a recreational club was permitted and the rest of the Callahan Subdivision was zoned R- 15. Vann described other buildings and their uses in the area such as the Benedict Building, the Silver Lining Ranch and the existing Aspen Club town homes, which were approved with the SPA process. Vann said the street safety issues were speed, snow removal and parking. Vann spoke of cross walks at the Ute Trail and increased winter maintenance. Vann said the parking issue was driven by the current membership needs; there was a very successful shuttle service to the club and they can expand service to the new residential units. Dylan Johns asked who will own the buildings. Vann replied there will be deeded fee interests sold in multiple parts. Vann said there was a permanent easement 2 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING Minutes September 27~ 2005 across the river for the 35 parking spaces but the Aspen Club did not own anything on that side of the river. Steve Skadron asked what effect the new accessibility to the Club had on the traffic levels on Ute Avenue. Vann responded that was re-studied last year and it was not that substantial. Skadron asked if any other development was scheduled on Ute Avenue. Lindt replied there were no applications in currently. Skadron asked if the project was not fractionalized and only condominiumized would it still need a Specially Planned Area. Lindt responded they would still need a Specially Planned Area (SPA) because the multi-family use was not a permitted use in the RR zone district. Vann replied the only permitted uses were single family or a recreational club. Skadron asked how far an SPA could go to change the underlying zoning. Lindt answered that was part of the allowance for an SPA; there were site specific uses, which is what the Aspen Club was doing. Vann said the difference between PUD and SPA were the SPA allows the specific slate of uses like the ARC, Benedict Office Building and the Meadows. Ruth Kruger asked what impacts would be on the employees and club members during construction. Michael Fox replied that they were putting a plan together now to keep the club open during the process; the site allows parking on the tennis courts while the underground parking is being built. Kruger asked the length of construction. Vann replied about 18 months to 2 years. Vann said they were required to supply the detailed construction plan and how the construction would be phased. John Rowland asked if there would be a central reservation for hotbeds. Vann replied there was a requirement that the beds be listed on one of the central reservations. Rowland asked at peak hours of the club how many members were using the club. Linda Schmehl responded that it depended if it was Christmas week or Presidents Day week there could be 100 to 150 people in the club at one time. Rowland asked where the guests of the affordable housing units parked. Vann replied there was no reason that they couldn't park in the garage. Brandon Marion said he was having trouble with the Timeshare Lodge and the intent of the developer. Vann replied there had to be a reservation system and the club was for people who wanted to stay at the Club in a unique environment and avail themselves to the club facilities and a wide variety of community amenities. Marion asked if it was a lodge or a timeshare. Michael Fox stated the Aspen Club was a dynamic entity with membership, spa, fitness programs, sports medicine, ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING Minutes September 27~ 2005 seminars and speakers; the lodging component adds more diversity. Fox said they envision creating programming to be made available to the community and to target markets. Kruger asked if they were going to affiliate with another club or what is meant by new programs. Fox answered there were pieces of great programming at the club and today it would be great to have a bike week, a great spa for a mother/daughter retreat week or father/son week. Vann said the community benefit is that those benefits become available to the existing membership base so it not only allow enhancement of the available programming but stabilizes the operations by the unit residents. Jasmine Tygre asked who owns the property that the 35 parking spaces are located on across the river. Fox replied that it was owned by the homeowners. Lindt said it was private ownership. Vann said that he wasn't sure of the ownership but it had an irrevocable easement for parking on it for the benefit of the Aspen Club. Public Comments: Jasmine Tygre entered 2 letters into the record: 1. Frias Properties and 2. Ms. Hollingsworth. Susan Welsh, 10 Ute Place, said that the people that live on Ute Avenue live there because it was a quite area zoned RR. Welsh said that this was high density with extra traffic all the way through Aspen. Paul Kopeig, 62 Ute Place, asked if there was a master plan for this area and does this use fit the master plan. Lindt replied there was not a master plan for Ute Avenue. Kopeig asked for a copy of the traffic study. Kopeig said if there was a bridge across the river to the parking garage it would remove all opposition from the Ute Avenue neighbors. Allgaier said the land would have to be owned by the City or the applicants for a bridge across the river to the club for vehicular access. Michael Hoffman, represents Rhodes Hart and Stewart Lasher, said that he was contacted by many owners on the Ute Avenue side as well as Ms. Hollingsworth's brother with concern about the intensity of use for this pamel as well as use of Ute Avenue. Hoffman spoke of the use as a fractional hotel in the land use code. Hoffman said the SPA was a 2 step process and read from the code the criteria for the SPA and spoke about the AACP. Kruger encouraged as many parking spaces as they were willing to build and discouraged any decrease in parking. Kruger said this plan was appropriate for the 4 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING Minutes September 27~ 2005 AACP because it brought more hotbeds to town; as a ski resort we can't afford to turn down any hotbeds. Kruger said in the last presentation the aerial maps provided the detail of all of the commercial uses in the area so she felt comfortable with the consistency of use for this proposal. Marion said that he supported the change for the Aspen Club but felt that this project was an inappropriate use for the site in that it is a residential area albeit there were some spattering of commercial use in the area; this was too much density for the site. Marion said that the commission had to be careful and selective about adding hotbeds to the community. Skadron agreed with Michael Fox in that the Aspen Club touches every member of the community in some way and he felt that the Aspen Club was an important asset to the community. Skadron said that his issues were transportation and growth; he was a proponent of reducing automobile traffic and to add the number of spots undermines the objective of that goal. Skadron said this was an inappropriate use for that property. Johns said he saw the area as being a mixed use area. Johns supported the evolution of the project. Johns said this project does not impact the fiver corridor and the vegetation above the trail was protected. Johns said that he was in support of the project. Rowland stated support of the project at the conceptual level and wanted to see more hotbeds distributed through out the city, which would create a great opportunity for other people to benefit from the club. Rowland said that he would like to hear more about the parking; if the club was under-parked. Rowland noted that in the winter Ute Avenue was not a pleasant place to walk because it was under-lit but it was a pleasant drive with traffic slowing down because of winter conditions. Speck commended the applicants and supported the project. Speck said initially he had concerns, which have been answered. Speck agreed with the parking concern and the ability for people from the outside to rent the units. Speck said the base of the community was the building of body, spirit and mind, which served the greater community. Speck said that he would like to see more parking. Tygre stated that she liked the idea of a destination Spa but questioned if this was the fight location for it. Tygre said this was not the appropriate locati°n for hotbeds in the community. Tygre said the reason for more hotbeds was to bring money into the community. Tygre stated that she was always opposed to moving 5 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING Minutes September 27~ 2005 the parking onto Ute Avenue and the entrance since servicing from Highway 82 made mass transit or dial a ride more possible and the ability to get to and from town. Tygre said the level of density in this project was disturbing at this location because people would be driving up and down Ute Avenue. The Architecture, parking and conditions of approval were issues to be continued. Johns and Kruger stated that the architecture was good as submitted. Vann stated that the stream margin review would be fully addressed at final and the conditions were acceptable. MOTION: Dylan Johns moved to continue the Residences at the Aspen Club and Spa Conceptual Timeshare public hearing to October 4th; seconded by Brian Speck. All in favor, Approved 7-0. Meeting adjourned at 6:45 p.m. ~t~kie Lothian, D~puty City Clerk