HomeMy WebLinkAboutresolution.apz.004-88RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
REQUESTING THAT THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL RECONSIDER ITS DECISION
NOT TO EXTEND THE APPROV/~T-~ PREVIOUSLY GRA~T~D TO THE
ASPEN MOUNTAIN PUD AND REQUESTING T~AT THE ASPEN CITY COUNCIL
BECOME AN ACTIVE WORKING PARTNER WITH THE COMMISSION IN ITS
REVIEW OF THE RITZ-CARLTON HOTEL PROJECT
Resolution No. 88- ~
WHEREAS, for the past six weeks, the Aspen Planning and
Zoning Commission (hereinafter, "the Commission") has been
reviewing the Ritz-Carlton Hotel project; and
WHEREAS, the Commission believes that during that time,
significant progress has been made in working toward a project
which would be in the community's best interests; and
WHEREAS, the Commission believes that with the recent
commitments by the applicant to put the issues of scale, height,
density and open space on the table, the project could be
improved even further; and
WHEREAS, the Commission is concerned that the recent action
by the Aspen City Council (hereinafter, "the Council") not to
extend the approvals previously granted to the Aspen Mountain PUD
will have the effect of forcing the applicant to build according
to those prior approvals, which the Commission believes are
inferior to the proposed Ritz-Carlton project; and
WHEREAS, the Council agreed at the time of the last
extension to the project that it would participate with the
Commission in the review of the hotel, and by the sporadic
attendance of its members, may not be fully aware of the progress
which the Commission has made.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Commission that it
does hereby request that the Aspen City Council reconsider its
action to not extend the approvals previously granted to the
Aspen Mountain PUD.
BE IT ATtO RESOLVED By the Commission that it does hereby
request that the Aspen city Council become a working partner with
the Commission in its review of the Ritz-Carlton Hotel project.
Resolution No. 88-J~
Page 2
APPROVED by the Commission
12, 1988.
at its regular meeting on April
ATTEST:
Jar~/Cagey,- Deputy
Clerk
ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING
COMMISSION
pzreso
MINORITY STATEMENT ON RITZ CARLTON PUD AMENDMENT
AUGUST 1, 1988
WE RECOS~END DENIAL OF THE AMENDMENT FOR THESE REASONS:
SITE DESIGN: Such a large project, with heights 100% over code,
and FAR 35% over code, should be designed with open space on
.the perimeter. Every foot of excess height should require an
extra foot of setback. A grand building requires grand grounds,
and the community requires mitigation for such an enormous
building. Privacy for hotel functions can be maintained with
hedges or fences.
EMPLOYEE HOUSING: This project is not producing a single unit
of new emploYee housing.
The Ritz will be the second largest employer in the valley.
If it is not required to actually produce employee housing,
what prececent are we setting for future projects?
The Ritz received 69 housing credits for only loaning money
to the housing authority.
Cost of 69 housing credits
for this applicant
$250,000 LOAN which the
housing authority repays
Cost of 69 housing credits
for any other applicant today $1,725,000.00 PAYMENT to
cash-in-lieu program
CHANGED CONDITIONS: We are in the midst of a building boom.
Other hotels are being built and have already come on line.
The employee housing crisis is even more severe than when these
approvals were orginally made. This amendment should not be
approved until conditions are made requiring the project to
address the changed conditions in the community, as your code says.
Mari Peyton
Planning Commissioner
David White
Planning Commissioner