HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20051018ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
Minutes October 18~ 2005
COMMENTS ............................................................................................................ 2
MINUTES ................................................................................................................. 2
DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ............................................... 2
MEADOWS SPA AMENDMENT FOR HEALTH CENTER EXPANSION ........ 2
943 SOUTH MILL STREET 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW AND SPECIAL
REVIEW FOR ATTACHED ADU .......................................................................... 5
LONG RANGE PLANNING UPDATE ................................................................... 6
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
Minutes October 18~ 2005
Jasmine Tygre opened the regular meeting of the Aspen Planning & Zoning
Meeting at 4:30 p.m. in the Sister Cities meeting room. Commission members
Steve Skadron, Brian Speck, John Rowland, Dylan Johns, Ruth Kruger and
Jasmine Tygre were present. Brandon Marion was excused. Staff in attendance
were Stephen Kanipe, Chris Bendon, James Lindt, Jennifer Phelan, Ben Gagnon,
Community Development; Kathy Strickland, Chief Deputy City Clerk.
COMMENTS
Stephen Kanipe provided an overview of accessibility in building codes and how
the American Disabilities Act applies to Community Development.
Joyce Allgaier asked for an extra meeting on November 22nd. Allgaier noted the
Given Institute requested a presentation on the expansion to P&Z, HPC and City
Council even though they are under the auspice of the University of Colorado and
the City of Aspen doesn't have jurisdiction to oversee their land use request or
grant approvals. This meeting would be tentatively scheduled at the Given
Institute on November 16th at 5pm to present their ideas and concepts; Harry
Teague was the architect on their team.
MINUTES
MOTION: Ruth Kruger moved to approve the minutes of September 2tYh with the
change by Steve Skadron to add to the minutes Skadron's objection to the Aspen
Club proposal; seconded by Brian Speck. All in favor APPROVED 6-0.
DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
None stated.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING:
MEADOWS SPA AMENDMENT FOR HEALTH CENTER EXPANSION
Jasmine Tygre opened the continued public hearing from October 4th for the
Meadows SPA Amendment. Notice was provided on October 4th.
James Lindt stated the application included an amendment to the Aspen Meadows
SPA as well as a Growth Management Review for an essential public facility to do
an approximately 3300 square foot addition to the Meadows Health Center; P&Z
shall be the recommending body to City Council on the land use requests
associated with this application.
Lindt commented that the Master Plan for development for the Meadows SPA was
approved in 1991, which approved reconstruction of 60 lodge units and 50 new
2
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
Minutes October 18, 2005
lodge units. It also approved the renovation of the existing restaurant as well as an
1800 square foot expansion to the health center at that point in time; most of those
approvals were constructed with the exception of the health center expansion and
one lodge building of about 13,000 square feet. Lindt said the FAR from that
13,000 square foot lodge was reallocated for the construction of the conference
center currently being built on the site; there was an additional amount of square
footage allocated to the health center at that time now equaling 3300 square feet,
which was subject to the SPA Amendment for design and site review.
Lindt stated that it was a partial interior remodel to the health center; the existing
maintenance facility will be relocated to an underground extension to the parking
garage. Lindt stated there would be an extension to the rear of the health center
building for a Pilates/Yoga studio, an indoor/outdoor Jacuzzi area and a new
leisure pool. HPC reviewed the application and found the design to be consistent
to the character of the building and approved the conceptual design of the building.
The expansion was one story in height, lower than the existing gym portion of the
building.
Lindt stated the Growth Management implications were accounted for in the
previous approvals; waivers were given to employee housing mitigation in the
1991 SPA and staffbelieves that no mitigation be warranted for this application.
Lindt said Parks stated concern for the footers being seen from the open space to
the west so there was a revised site plan as part of Exhibit B in the packet with the
floor cantilevered over the foundation, which was pulled back. The Parks
Department approved this revised plan. Staff believed that the review standards
have been met for an SPA Amendment and recommend approval with the
conditions in the proposed Resolution.
Jim Curtis, represented the Institute, introduced Olivia Emory from A-4 Architects.
Curtis stated that there was a tree lined entry on Meadows Road, which was an
improvement to the entrance of the complex. Curtis said the Institute broke ground
in September for the new conference meeting hall facility; that will be the last
major new construction on the campus with a completion date of December 2006.
Curtis reiterated the 1991 SPA approval for the Master Plan without changes to the
facades of the buildings and the additions were to the backsides of the buildings.
Curtis stated the resolution as prepared was fine with the applicant.
Ruth Kruger asked about the maintenance moving to the parking garage. Lindt
replied maintenance was moving to the parking garage extension, which was
completely underground. Kruger asked if there was going to be a loss of parking.
Lindt answered there would not be a loss of parking within the Meadows SPA
3
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
Minutes October 18, 2005
because the applicants were proposing to loose 7 spaces in the garage but between
the two tennis courts there would be 8 spaces. Lindt noted there was a net increase
of one space.
Dylan Johns asked if the model shows the new configuration as far as the
replacement and expansion of where the maintenance area was located. Olivia
Emory responded the area where maintenance was now located would become
health club.
Steve Skadron asked if the new maintenance would be placed where the
construction that was currently going on. Curtis replied yes, under that area; the
dirt was stockpiled on site for the backfill for the new conference facility. Skadron
asked what made this site historic. Lindt replied that it was designated historic
with Herbert Bayer and Bahaus Architecture. Allgaier stated that the landscape
was also considered important. Skadron asked if the new architecture mimicked
the old or carded forward the Bahaus Design. Emory responded that it was
intentionally different so it was not confused with the original, which was what
HPC approved; each piece of architecture could be read as of its own time, it was
sympathetic and similar to the underlying architecture. Skadron asked if the new
addition carried the historic designation. Lindt replied that the new additions did
as well. Skadron said that his goal was preserving the parcel and wanted to make
sure that the underlying zoning (Academic) had some restrictions that prevented
unfettered development in the future.
Tygre stated that the 1991 Master Plan process was lengthy with part of the goal
to preserve the rights of the Institute to continue to function; over the years their
goal was to have conference facilities for their participants and the health club,
which was an integral part of the original SPA.
No public comments.
MOTION: Steve Skadron moved to approve Resolution #32, series of 2005,
recommending that City Council approve with conditions, an SPA amendment and
GMQS review for an essential public facility to allow for an addition of 3,327
square feet to Aspen Meadows Health Center located at 880 Meadows Road, City
and townsite of Aspen; seconded by Brian Speck. Roll call vote: Johns, yes;
Speck, yes; Rowland, yes; Kruger, yes; Skadron, yes; Tygre, yes; approved 6-0.
4
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
Minutes October 18, 2005
PUBLIC HEARING:
943 SOUTH MILL STREET 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW AND SPECIAL
REVIEW FOR ATTACHED ADU
Jasmine Tygre opened the public hearing for 943 South Mill. Ben Gagnon
provided the proof of notice and mailing.
Gagnon stated the 8040 Greenline review was fairly simple because 9 of the 11
criteria were approved in 2002 in the original PUD; there were only 2 criteria left
to be reviewed. The first was that the proposal does not have an adverse affect on
the quality of the city. The second criteria deals with the height and bulk, which
would be minimized (broken into 3 forms) and the structure would be designed to
blend into the open character of the mountain. The building height was established
at the 28 height limit.
Gagnon said the special review for the ADU was for the design criteria, which the
ADU was to be detached but this was attached by a covered walkway. Gagnon
said the side entrance and window in the front improved the livability of the ADU.
John Galambos, architect, utilized the model of the project to show the separation
between the residence and the ADU on the pie shaped lot.
Steve Skadron asked the square footage of the ADU. Galambos replied that it was
300 net livable and around 350 total. Joyce Allgaier stated there was a site plan in
the packet which shows the overall site plan for the Top of Mill Development; this
proposal was parcel 7.
Jasmine Tygre inquired about windows in the ADU. Galambos replied there were
2 windows in the ADU; one on the side with the door and one in the front. Tygre
asked if the ADU met the minimum size requirement. Galambos replied that it
did.
No public comments.
Ruth Kruger said that she liked the architecture and asked the square footage.
Galambos replied the site allowed 6,500 square feet FAR. Skadron asked the
height from grade to the top of the roof. Galambos replied that it was about 30 to
31 feet. Steve Skadron asked what in the project blended into the mountain.
Galambos responded the use of materials that blended into the hillside. Galambos
said the house was set back and down the hill. Skadron asked what does a skier
5
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
Minutes October 18~ 2005
see coming down hill. Galambos replied the steep skiers would see mostly roofs
and the World Cup skiers would see a subtle subdued house.
Tygre said that there would not be long horizontal bands of development because it
was not appropriate for 8040 greenline review. Tygre stated that this design
approach worked well. Galambos noted the retaining wall will be the same stone
as the house.
Dylan Johns stated that it was an interesting design and broken up moving with the
hillside.
Brain Speck asked if the ADU was flat on the grade or was it stepped down.
Galambos responded to get into it was flat. Johns stated that this design complies
with the intent of the plan. Tygre stated that this embodied the goals of the
reviews. Kruger said that she did not have a problem with the ADU not being
separated because of the site constraints. Tygre stated that there was a space
separating the ADU from the main house even though it was separated with a
covered walkway.
MOTION: Dylan Johns moved to approve Resolution #31, series 2005 approving
an 8040 Greenline Review and a Special Review for an ADU for property located
at 942 South Mill Street finding that the review criteria for the application has
been met. Brain Speck seconded. Roll call: Johns, yes; Speck, yes; Rowland, yes;
Kruger, yes; Skadron, yes; Tygre, yes; approved 6-0.
The commission adjourned into the discussion of the Information Item:
LONG RANGE PLANNING UPDATE
~ackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
6