Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19860422 Chairman Welton Anderson called the meeting to order with commissioners Mari Peyton, Roger Hunt, Al Blomquist, Jim Colombo (arrived late), Ramona Markalunas (arrived late) present. COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS There were no comments. HOTEL JEROME UPDATE Perry Harvey, applicant, said they had decided to go ahead with construction on the addition, hoping to begin around July 1, 1986. Mr. Harvey said they were in the process of going through HPC approval so there was a possibility that the plan might be slightly changed during that process. The FAR that was approved was 2.7: 1 and now has been changed to 2.2: 1. Addi tionally, square footage will also drop, from what was originally approved, by about 23,000 sq.ft.. There were 105 room approved, being 28 rooms in the old hotel and 77 rooms in the new addition. Currently there are 27 rooms in the old hotel and now the proposal is for only 66 or 67 rooms in the new addition. Mr. Harvey reviewed the revised plans. Mr. Harvey said the parking had also been reduced from 60 spaces to 51 spaces. Mr. Harvey said he did not think it was necessary to worry about any impact on the surrounding streets. There will be on-site parking plus the area for employee parking across the street. Mr. Harvey said there would be no retail space. Addi tionally, the original approval allowed 4 restaurants with approximately 450 seats, now there will be only 2 restaurants with approx- imately 250 seats. The meeting space was originally 5000 sq. ft. and has now been reduced to 4000 sq. ft. Mr. Harvey said they would be losing 370 sq.ft of open space due to a change in the pool wing of the hotel. Colombo asked if anything had been worked out with the grade change on Bleeker st. Mr. Harvey replied no, stating they were exploring the matter with the City Engineer, however, the city does not have the money to do it nor does the applicant. MINUTES 1 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS REGULAR MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 22. 1986 Februarv 25. 1986: Hunt moved to approve the minutes of February 25, 1986; Peyton seconded. All in favor; motion carried. Februarv 18. 1986: Hunt moved to approve the minutes of February 18, 1986; Colombo seconded. All in favor; motion carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS CHART HOUSE CONDITIONAL USE steve Burstein, planner, explained that this project was being reviewed again because what had been represented to the Commiss- ion, with regard to the expansion, in 1985 did not include an increase in the dining capacity. In fact, there has been an increase of 6 seats in the dining area. Burstein reviewed the new seating arrangement saying it allowed for a basic reorganiz- ation of the dining space and a significant reorganization of the lounge area. Burstein said the planning office did not feel any of the changes were significant. The number of employees will remain the same. The lounge area does in affect increase the size of the operation but not significantly because this is not really a destination bar. Burstein said the Engineering Department had indicated that the trash enclosure was not working as well as it should be and that putting some sort of roof on top would be appropriate. Burstein said in the original review the parking situation was a subject of considerable discussion. In the end this commission made a recommendation for a variance in favor of the applicant from the Board of Adjustment. The Board of Adjustment did grant that variance. The Planning Office does not feel it has changed so significantly that more parking spaces should be added at this time. However, it does link in to the Lodge Improvement District with regard to parking and some of the other site considerations of the project. Burstein said the Engineering Department, as well as the Planning Office, recommends that the applicant agree to join the Lodge Improvement District. Burstein said another condition they recommend for approval is that the trash dumpster be brought up to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department. 2 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS REGULAR MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 22. 1986 Anderson commented that the memorandum from the Planning Office states that one of the previous conditions of approval was that the dining seating not be increased. Anderson said he did not remember that even being discussed in much detail except that the applicant had represented there would be no additional seating, however, it was not a big issue in the approval. Burstein said he had interpreted that it had been one of the prime representat- ions the applicant had made. Anderson asked if this case was being re-reviewed because that representation was not adhered to. Burstein replied yes, although it was not a condition of approval. Tom , applicant, said the reason they had specifically mentioned the seating in the original submittal letter was because they had made a number of studies and a decision was made not to add on to the dining room. Therefore, that statement was made in the original review. When the interior space was redone the additional seating was an effect that happened after the fact. The only change that was made during construction that raised this issue, when the occupancy permit came up, was that in the original application as a seafood bar was changed to a relocated cocktail bar. The main project was reorganization of the interior spaces. Alan RiChman, Planning Director, said the original review was both a Conditional Use and a Small Commercial Project GMP Exemption where the criteria is negligable, or no growth impacts. This applicant represented no growth impacts, there- fore, no mitigation was obtained. That is the reason it was discovered there had been small growth impacts, and it had to be determined if any mitigation is required. Anderson opened the public hearing, there were no comments, therefore, the public hearing was closed. Motion: Hunt moved to recommend approval of the Chart House request for a revision of the 1985 conditional use application subject to the conditions outlined in the Planning Office memorandum dated April 16,1986; Markalunas seconded. All in favor; motion carried. Burstein said there was a second item associated with this request, being a recommendation to direct the Building Department 3 REGULAR MEETING to require the illegality. Mr. landscape person, away. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 22. 1986 shed along Dean st. be removed due to its Wells responded that the shed belongs to a not to the Chart House, and is to be taken 4 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS REGULAR MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 22. 1986 GOLF COURSE MAINTENANCE FACILITY GMP EXEMPTION/ POD AMENDMENT/CONDITIONAL USE Anderson submitted letters from the depagters and the Simmons, Ruth Whyte, and the Frams voicing opposition to this request. Steve Burstein, planner, explained this request for an expansion of the golf course maintenance facility by 9000 sq. ft. The existing structure is just over 2900 sq. ft. Burstein said the planning office had reviewed this and had various comments from the referal agency. The Engineering has noted that the new entrance would improve the traffic patern of the area, and the Planning Office agrees. Addi tionally, there is ample on-site parking, wi th 26 spaces. Burstein reviewed and explained the plans. The plan is to put in a burm so that very little is visable. The culvert would be changed from its present situation with a series of pools, diverting through a culvert. Markalunas asked what would happen to the ponds. Burstein replied they would be filled in. Blomquist asked if there would be a burm towards the highway. The reply was yes. Blomquist then commented that the burm would hide the cars, as seen from the intersection of the highway. Burstein said the Planning Office's recommendation is for approval, subject to 11 conditions (outlined in the Planning Office memorandum dated April 22, 1986). Elyse Elliott, engineer, said they anticipate getting the architects proposals tomorrow so they can get a clear idea on the cost and some of the applicant's ideas. Bil Dunaway, Publisher of the Aspen Times, said he recalled that in the former approvals the City promised not to enlarge the building. Mr. Dunaway commented that was not included in any of the Planning Office memorandums submitted at this time, and he thought it should be considered. Burstein said he had not come across any of that information in researching this case. Hunt said this was a very sensitive subject to the residents in the neighborhood. Hunt said he considered this proposal a major expansion. He thought the proposal should come back when the architectural drawings were submitted, thinking there was no way to assume something appropriate for the neighborhood would be placed there. 5 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS REGULAR MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 22. 1986 Blomquist said, given the amount of machinery and equipment, the only choice would be to move the facility. The real planning issue is whether this is in the right location. Markalunas asked if this facility would be to house equipment just for the golf course or for all of the parks department equipment. Rich Columbe, Parks Department, said it would house combined equipment for parks and golf. Markalunas then asked if there was not another facility on the golf course that housed equipment. Mr. Columbe replied there was a small seed and fertilizer shed, which would no longer be used if this proposal is approved. Markalunas said the City also has a facility at the Hydro Electric plant and questioned if there was not some way to combine some of the facilities in a central location. Mr. Columbe replied the only feasible way for the golf course to operate smoothly would be to have the equipment housed on the golf course. Markalunas said that all of the equipment being discussed does not service only the golf course, and asked how many pieces of equipment would be needed to service the golf course. Mr. Columbe replied the golf course has approximately 30 pieces of equipment and the Parks Dept. has another 20 pieces. Ms. Elliott commented that the functions of the City Shop were not pertinent to the question of the golf course or the Parks dept., therefore the facility at the Hydro Electric plant would not pertain to the Parks facility. Ms. Elliott said they were looking at the possiblity of combining the city Shop with the County Shop. Colombo asked what type of size reduction there would be if only golf course equipment were kept in this location. Columbe said some of the equipment is being used by both the golf course and the Parks dept. and he did not see how it would work if the equipment had to be housed in separate locations. Ms. Elliott added that this facility would not only be for equipment storage but also mechanic bays, chemical/fertilizer storage areas, etc. Colombo said the building being proposed is very large and if it could be significantly reduced in size and overtness by having some of the equipment stored in another location then, being less intrusive to the neighborhood, maybe it would make sense. Ms. Elliott said she understood the point but it would defeat the purpose of the facility because as it is now the equipment is being stored in several locations throughout the City. Blomquist asked what the advantage of consolidating the parks operation with people and equipment. Elliott said repair, 6 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS REGULAR MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 22. 1986 storage of all chemicals and fertilizers, and equipment use. Mr. Columbe said the similarity of the functions was what was important and this would allow it to be a much smoother operationTrying to unfreeze other machine 7