Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19860722 Reqular Meetinq Planninq Commission July 22. 1986 , ~ Chairman Welton Anderson called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m. with members Jasmine Tygre, Mari Peyton, Roger Hunt, Al Blomquist and David White present. COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS Roger Hunt told the Commission he met with the Snowmass town planner and a Council member about overall transportation. Hunt said Snowmass is feeling left out of the area transportation planning. Hunt recommended having a joint planning meeting with Snowmass specifically to talk about the Aspen/Snowmass alternative transit system. Hunt said P & Z has a study session on this topic next week and asked staff to invite the Snowmass planning commission. Mary Martin asked the Commissions' position on condemnation of buildings that are non-conforming, such as Cheap Shots, that is out of context with the rest of the block. Ms. Martin asked how P & Z feels about satellite dishes. HPC has been asked to approve one on the Brand building and if one is approved there will be a proliferation of these. Anderson answered satellite dishes are reviewed by P & Z as a conditional use 1 they are not permitted by law. Conditional use is a public hearing, and things like screening and visibility are looked at. Ms. Martin suggested the Commission come up with stringent rules. Anderson said as far as condemning buildings, it is not up to the Commission to determine if a building is no longer appropriate for a block. The Commission cannot legislate sprucing up street scapes. MINUTES Hunt moved to approve the minutes of 8 July 19861 seconded by White. All in favor, motion carried. LODGE AT AS PEN GMP AMENDMENT Anderson opened the public hearing. Steve Burstein, planning office, told the Commission this was first submitted in 1981, and there have been a number of changes to the application. Burstein said lot 41 has been added to the parcel, increasing the lot area 7,280 square feet, and increasing the allowable FAR. Burstein said the number of lodge rooms has decreased from 31 to 26 rooms. The architectural design has changed significantly. The employee housing has changed from 4 one-bedrooms to one managers unit and one dorm room large enough for 8 people. There is a different concept of open space. 1 Reqular-Meetinq Planninq Commission Julv 22. 1986 "... Burstein told P & z the planning office went through the GMP criteria for 1986 and made recommended rescoring. Burstein said the staff feels the 1986 criteria was the most applicable way to process GMP amendments. The staff's recommended scoring is 54 points, which exceeds the threshold of 51 points. The position of this application has not changed relative to other projects1 this was the only legal application in 1981. Burstein said the P & Z could confirm the staff's scoring of 54 points, since this meets the threshold, or the P & Z can rescore the project. Burstein compared the percentages of scores because the 1981 criteria is quite different. In 1981, the project has 84 percent of point available, and in 1986, the project has 63 percent of the points available. This difference indicates there are some problems which should be addressed. The areas that changed are architectural design, the usable site is the same as in 1981 and putting the maximum FAR on the usable portion makes a cramped site. Burstein said energy conservation score has gone down because there is no commitment for solar energy, only increased insulation. The score for parking has gone down. The scoring criteria for parking has changed a great deal. In 1981, there was an incentive to have fewer parking spaces than one per bedroom1 the present parking requirements are one space per bedroom and special review for employee parking. Burstein pointed out the 20 underground spaces and 3 parking space on Alps property, for which they do not have permission. Burstein noted this is P & Z's one review of this project. Staff feels there is a problem with bulk and placement, there is very little side yard space on Aspen mountain road and to the west of the project. Burstein said the overhangs on the projects are too close. Burstein pointed out the applicant is giving a 10 feet easement on the Aspen mountain road, and the overhangs would abut that easement. In the event the road is widened, this could be a problem. The side yard easement may not be able to accommodate the level of landscaping proposed by the applicant. Burstein told the Commission the visual impact on this site is not a detriment to the project. The open space appears to have been miscalculated. The applicant claims there is 54 percent open space1 staff calculates it to be 30 to 35 percent. Burstein said he has not taken a technical measurement. Burstein suggested the caliper of the deciduous trees and the height of the spruce trees be specific as this is an important aspect of the landscaping plan and the entire project. Burstein recommended the Commission address the 12 conditions and recommend approval of a GMP exemption for employee housing. Sunny Vann, representing the applicant, said with the exception of architectural design, site design and parking, the other 2 Re-atrlar Meetin9 Planninq Commission Julv 22. 1986 " scores are consistent. Vann said the regulations have changed substantially since this project received a GMP allocation. The intent has been to produce a project which is superior to the previously approved project, and to increase the unit size and the area for amenities. The purpose for this amendment was the ability to acquire lot 41. This lot would be difficult to build on and would impact the Aspen Alps building. The previous units were quite small as was the area for amenities. The project has put the additional FAR into areas felt to be deficient. It was recognized that the buildable portion of the lot has not changed, but the footprint has increased. The attempt has been made to mitigate the impact of a larger building on adjacent areas. Vann said the 12 conditions imposed on the project by staff are fine with the applicant. Vann said the applicant can get into details if the Commission wants to rescore the project. Hunt said he would like the open space defined and show how it works. Vann said the minimum requirement for opens space is 25 percent, which this project meets and exceeds the open space of the previously approved project. Alan RiChman, planning director, told the Commission some of the area does not meet Code definition for open space but it is clear it will meet the minimum. Vann said the courtyard will be a hard surface. They plan on extensive landscaping in the project. Hunt said he has trouble with landscaping on the west side of the project and also with having 6 foot firs, which will grow over the center line. Vann said the applicant did not specify the nature of the trees1 the planning office set a minimum requirement of 6 feet. Vann pointed out where the employee housing units will be and a proposed courtyard to create some privacy for these units. Vann pointed out the first floor of the building is setback. Hunt said he does not want to see trees growing up under eaves of the building. Ms. Tygre asked about the difference in the size of units. Vann said the old units were 270 square feet, and the new units are about 600 square feet. Ms. Tygre asked about the change in the footprint of the building. Vann said the footprint has increased about 30 percent from 6400 square feet to 8400 square feet, most of which is placed in tourist units, some in employee units, and guest amenities. There will be 9 employees housed on site. Bil Dunaway asked the zoning, and the answer is L-l. Dunaway asked why the allocation for these units did not expire. Vann said these units were embroiled in the Cantrup bankruptcy, and the expiration date was placed on hold until the bankruptcy was resolved. There wa a review by Council which established a 33 month expiration period, starting April 1, 1985. Jerry Hewey, Aspen Alps, told the Commission that lot 41 is still in controversy with the forest service over ownership. The Alps has 3 /tfI:;- Re-qular Meetinq July 22.-1986 Plannin9 Commission paid taxes on that lot for the last 20 years. The forest service did award it to Lyle Reeder, but the Alps is contesting that. Vann said the applicant has submitted documentation to the city attorney's office, who has said it is sufficient to apply. Vann said obtaining a building permit would be dependent upon resolution of this issue. Burstein pointed out condition 4 asks that clear title be demonstrated prior to this application going to City Council. Vann said this should be done prior to the issuance of a building permit 1 they would like to proceed with Council's review of this application subject to clear receipt of title. Richman said if this allocation is confirmed, the other allocation no longer exists. This project will be the only allocation that exists. In the event the Alps is successful, and the applicant does not receive title to lot 41, there would be a project that would not meet underlying zoning, and the other proj ect is void. Richman said he does not feel this is a successful conclusion to the amendment process. Blomquist asked if the Code requires title to the land before application is made. Richman said an applicant has to prove ownership. Vann said the position of the city attorney's office is that the title will be conveyed to Lyle Reeder1 the appeal is currently pending. Vann told the Commission there is precedence for this approach, like the Aspen Mountain Lodge. Richman told the Commission when the Council finally approves this project, 5 lodge units will be given back to the quota and all rights to the 31 unit project previously approved will be abandoned. Vann said the presumption is Reeder owns the land, and the fact this has been appealed should not deny the right to process an application. Barry Edwards, representing Terry Williams, told the Commission that paying taxes on property the federal government owns does no good. Edwards said the applicant and Alps are attempting to resolved the issue amicably. The city attorney's position is that Reeder has a contractual right to purchase the property, and there has been a determination in his favor so far, these applicants have the right to process the application. Any approval must be condition upon proof of ownership. Hewey said the Alps is negotiating with these applicants to solve the issue. Anderson closed the public hearing. The Commission decided to rescore the application. Ms. Tygre said she feels this application is a significant change from the original application. Vann said in availability of public facilities and service, the scores attached to water, sewer, storm drainage, fire department are consistent under the current criteria. There are improvements being made in water, which improve the overall se rv ice in the area, indicated by Jim Markalunas' letter. The sewer is standard, and a score of 1 is appropriate. In storm 4 Re-qul-ar Me-etin9 Plannin9 Commission -JolyZ2. 1986 drainage, the project is retaining everything on site and are improving conditions in the area. The project is putting in curb and gutter along the unsurfaced Aspen mountain road. The applicant is installing an additional fire hydrant as well as additional lines in the service area. Vann told the Commission the applicant is making improvement on the Aspen mountain road, as well as channelizing traffic in the front of the building and cleaning up traffic in the area. The applicants believe these to be improvements and would request a score of 2. Charles Cunniffee, architect, said he feels architectural and site design should receive more points than scored by staff. Cunniffee told they tried many different plans on this site. Using lot 41 would create a more spread out building. Vann said one of the concerns of the planning office is the easement on Aspen mountain road. The center line of the property is in the middle of the road, there is a current easement for 6 feet, which the applicant has agreed to increase to 10 feet on his side. Vann showed the first floor footprint, which is 15 feet off the actual easement line. Vann showed the second floor balconies, which are a concern with the easement. Vann said the balconies can be redesigned to function off the back side of the units. Cunniffee pointed out the drawings illustrate an already widened road. Vann said the comment in the scoring that there will be no setback from the building if the road is widened is not correct. Vann said it is reasonable to address the balconies on the second and third floor, and these will be redesigned. Vann said in the energy category, this project provides everything the previous proj ect did, except solar. Vann said using solar for domestic hot water in this location is not feasible and it has been deleted in the presentation. The applicant is providing energy conservation devices in excess of the underlying requirements. Vann said a score of 2 is low in this category. Vann told the Commission that parking circulation is one of the real problems in this application. Under previous scoring, points were given for putting less than the minimum requirement of parking spaces, and there was a special review provision. The previous project has 31 units and 15 parking spaces. The revised project with 26 units provides parking at a ratio of .7 per unit or 18 spaces subgrade and two subgrade spaces for employees. There are 3 spaces provided in the area of lot 41, even though it accessed by the Alps road. Vann said in negotiating with the Alps, they hope to be able to use these 3 spaces. There are other locations to put these parking spaces. Vann said P & Z can waive the employee parking requirement given the location of the property. Vann said he does not feel .7 parking spaces is inappropriate as that is what has been used in other lodge projects. However, there no longer exists a special review 5 Remrlar Meetinq - Planninq Commission July 22. 1986 ;1'>," procedure to reduce parking and the project is inconsistent with the minimum space of 1 space per unit. Vann said he feels the number of parking spaces provided is all right practically for the nature of this project. The engineering department has commented this is a better solution. Vann told the Commission they would like to explore with the city attorney to problem between the old and new regulations, and that they do not have to build the old project because of technicalities. Vann said if the applicant cannot identify a mechanism to resolve the problem, they plan to go to the Board of Adjustment and identify a practical hardship and obtain a variance. Vann said the P & Z can waive the parking requirement for employees. There are 20 spaces on this property and if they are not being used by guests, they will be used by employees. The project will provide 2 limousines. Vann told the Commission the have reduced the impact of the rear of the building from the previous project. Vann argued the increase in the size of the guest amenities represents a significant improvement and they should receive a higher score. Cunniffee said the number of rooms has decreased and the amenities have increased, so the scoring should increase. Vann said their employee housing proposal is consistent with the employee housing guidelines and they are housing 100 percent of employees generated, exceeding the code requirements. The Commission scored the proj ect at 52.6, which meets the threshold. Hunt requested condition 12 state the applicant shall join the lodge improvement district ann any other district rather than or. Vann said if the commission wants the west landscaped area to be at least 6 feet in width, they will have to remove an amenity for the employee housing, it is their only outside space. Cunniffee pointed out the patio and green space. Cunniffee said he feels 3 feet of planting is adequate. Cunniffee said this plan works for both the employees and the Alps. Hunt said he feels the patio is a better choice. Vann suggested combining condition 1 nd 2, look at the area further, and return to the planning office wi th a more detailed landscape plan prior to issuance of a building permit. Burstein said he feels it is an inadequate landscape buffer area, it needs to be wider and have more trees in that area. Blomquist suggested the applicant working with the Alps on the fence and landscaping plan. Vann said they would develop a plan between the two buildings. Burstein suggested wording, "A site plan mutually acceptable to the Alps and as submitted to the planning office shall be submitted prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy with regard to the western edge of the property. " 6 Re-qular --Meetinq -Prannin9 - eommission-- Jul v 2-2. -1-9ft6 ~ Vann said in condition 5 it is not a service entrance, it is an outside access to the kitchen to be able to provide room service at night. Service access will occur in the basement. Vann said the project will retain all run off on site with dry well, which will be reviewed by the city engineer. Hunt moved to recommend approval of the requested GMP exemption for employee housing subject to the conditions in the housing office memorandum 12 June 19861 and to recommend to Council to confirm the GMP allocation for the project subject to the conditions as amended1 seconded by Ms. Peyton. Vann said he would like the Commission to waive the employee parking requirements. The Commission did not agree. All in favor, motion carried. Vann asked how P & Z feels about the appropriateness of .7 parking space per lodge room, which has been used in lodge developments in the city. Ms. Peyton said every time that reduction has been granted, it has been granted with the applicant assuring the Board it would not be used as a precedent. Blomquist said he feels .7 is adequate 1 the problem occurs with lock off rooms and more beds. Blomquist said he feels parking should be proportional to the pillows rather than the rooms. white agreed the Commission has to start relating parking to pillows, not rooms. Ms. Tygre said the Commission has to re- evaluate the parking requirements. Ms. Tygre said she feels usage is more the answer. The current way of counting parking spaces is not accurate. (White left the meeting> SAWMllit --BltlOOE---sTR-EAM - -MARG IN - REVIEW Steve Burstein, planning office, presented the plan for the Sawmill bridge, showing the removal of trees, the Sawmill barn. The bridge is about 300 feet. The two pillars supporting the bridge are 45 and 50 feet from the bottom of the Castle creek gorge. Burstein showed the proposed construction road to get into the construction site. Blomquist suggested coming through the road under the Castle creek bridge and through the lower Marolt property into the Sawmill site. Chuck Roth, engineering department, said he would be willing to look at the lower site. Blomquist moved to grant the review on both options1 seconded by Ms. Peyton. Burstein said one of the main concerns is that revegetation be accomplished. Blomquist said he would like to withdraw the recommendation of not demolishing the Sawmill barn. Anderson said he feels that structure gives character to the area and to 7 Retml-ar- Mee-tinq-- - PI ann inq Commi-ssion -- - - n -.JutV' 22.' 19-81) , the trail. Roth said one of Dietsch's conditions of granting the trail easements is removal of the barn. Roth said the center line of the trail runs through the building. The condition is that Council should ensure that the alignment avoids the historic Sawmill so that it will not be destroyed. Blomquist said this requirement may ruin the easement negotiations. Burstein said this will put a burden on Council to look at the easement placement on the property. Anderson said he would like Council to know the Commission wants the Sawmill barn to remain. Hunt moved to approve stream margin review of the Lixiviation plant bridge subject to conditions 1 through 8, including serious investigation of a lower access road for construction of this, by the city shops, that can be used as part of a future trail alignment on a riparian way of Castle creek, approving both versions in theory and allow the planning office to determine if they think the disturbance to the natural grade and vegetation is so severe it should be brought back to the planning office as condition 91 seconded by Ms. Tygre. All in favor, motion carried. YARB ROUG H ilil-4irGREENL INE- REVIEW Anderson stepped out of the room. Steve Burstein, planning office, told the Commission the proposal is to build a porch 5 feet on the west side of the house. There is a dedicated trail easement. There is a problem with the proposed flagstone walk from the trailway to the proposed porch. This trail has been used for skiers to come down to get onto the Little Nell slope. Jim Gibbard, engineering department, said there is a potential liability with using flagstone and would recommend gravel. Burstein recommended approval of this greenline review with three condi tions. One is that the trees not be located in the trail easement. Burstein pointed out the third condition is that the center line of the easement be real igned. Bur stein said the distance from the tram structure to the proposed porch is only 14 feet. Burstein said the trail is still workable, and the third condition should be reworded. Michael Thompson, architect, said relocating the center line of the trail will be expensive because it is a continuous line from parcel to parcel. Thompson said other property owners would also have to move their easements. Thompson said the trail easement was informal and was one person wide and skiers grew accustom to using this. Thompson said the easement occurred after the building and the centerline takes a corner off the existing building. Thompson showed photographs of the trail. Thompson proposed another solution to leave the centerline as is to alleviate the owner from relocating it, and reduce the souther margin. Burstein read condition 3 "The trail easement shall be 8 #' Req-urar-Merlrnq-----PlanninqCommission-- _n -july-22.- 19~ modified by reducing the width to 14 feet in the area of the proposed structure, a realignment survey should be recorded with the Clerk and Recorder's office prior to issuance of any final or temporary certificate of occupancy." Thompson said he would like to change 14 feet to what clears the house from the easement. Burstein said he would prefer an exact number to retain the integrity of the trail. Thompson said he feels there is only 12.5 or 13.5 feet for a trail. Hunt suggested saying the trail width can be varied around the centerline. Blomquist suggested at least 12 feet. Ms. Peyton moved to approve the 8040 greenline review subject to the amended conditions1 seconded by Hunt. All in favor, motion carried. CON CEi"l'U1lf.-- Sm3DrVrS I-oN n_ "AGATE Steve Burstein, planning office, told the Commission they have seen this application, and it has not changed1 however, the application expired because preliminary submittal was not submitted within 6 months. The applicant would like to revive the project. The applicant is requesting that the restriction on building on lots A and K be removed in the case that the direct connection highway alignment is chosen by the voters. Burstein said staff feels it is still reasonable to have that restriction. This is still a major connector street. Hunt disagreed if the highway is relocated, this street will not have the volumes of traffic it presently has. Doug Allen, representing the applicant, told the Commission to build this plan, there will be 2 trees that cannot be replanted. At the preliminary stage they will have a more detailed landscaping plan. Hunt said if the highway is moved from the existing alignment, then the restriction on lots A and K should be null and void. Blomquist suggested imposing a 30 foot setback. Ms. Tygre said this condition was not just because of the highway location but also because of the overall size of the project, and the impact of the duplexes. Ms. Tygre said she would not be willing to put the duplexes back on lots A and K regardless of the highway location. Hunt said he fel tit was essentially the highway that created this issue. Blomquist suggested tabling this until after the August 12th election. Allen said if this is conditioned on the outcome of the election, then it is over. Allen said if the highway is not located on the existing alignment, the chief justification for moving the duplexes is gone. Allen said this applicant is not being allowed to do what other owners of corner lots in the west end are being allowed to do. Hunt said if this 9 ,..4;- Requ-1ar--Meeting-- ----planninq eommission-- - - Ju1y-22-.-l-986 is a residential street as a result of the election, there is not justification for the setback at the corner. Ms. Tygre said the visual impact is still there. Burstein said this should be a wider buffer in this area. Allen said he is asking that this applicant be allowed to have the same setback as other property owners. Anderson pointed out this could be only a 6'8" setback. Allen said they could live wi th a 10 or 15 foot setback, they are only objecting to the 30 foot setback. Blomquist suggested giving the city fee title to a 10 foot strip on Seventh street, making a new property line and a 10 foot setback. Ms. Peyton asked why the duplexes are not located on the south end of the parcel. Allen said the duplexes are not as valuable and they are located on the least valuable lots. Anderson said he was comfortable with the conditions passed, and would like to reconfirm the previous conceptual subdivision application. Ms. Tygre agreed as nothing has changed. Ms. Tygre moved to recommend approval of the Agate conceptual subdivision with the conditions listed in the planning office memorandum 1 seconded by Blomquist. Hunt said if the highway is realigned, this is putting an undue hardship on the applicant in that he is not able to use his property the way other property owners in the immediate area are. Hunt said this condition was imposed because the Commission anticipated expansion of the highway. Blomquist said his preference is to wait until after the election. Allen said he could live with a 15 foot setback, even if the highway is relocated, which is a reasonable compromise. Roll call vote Blomquist, yes1 Ms. Peyton, yes1 Hunt, no, Ms. tygre, yes, Anderson, yes. Motion carried. Ms. Tygre moved to adjourn at 7:26 p.m.1 seconded by Blomquist. All in favor, motion carried. ~;;;:;;, - d f:iu-l. :/ City Clerk , 10