Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19861216 ~CJ RECORD- OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING AND ZONING DECEMBER 16. 1986 Meeting was called to order at 5: 00 p.m. by Welton Anderson. Roll call was taken with Ramona Markalunas, David White and Roger Hunt answering. Jasmine Tygre, Mari Peyton and Jim Colombo arrived shortly after. COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS There were none. PUBLIC HEARING / HISTORIC PRESERVATION CODE-AMENDMENTS Welton announced to the large number of people present that the public hearing scheduled for this meeting is going to be tabled until after there is a work session in City Council with P&Z and HPC. There had been a number of comments made by the public at the last meeting which sent the Planning Office back to the drawing board in its approach toward this whole thing. Further work is being done in regard to incentive, the extent of the overlay district, the houses to be designated historic and the wording and general organization of the ordinance. He told everyone that no action would be taken on this matter until after public hearings scheduled after the first of the year. Alan Richman told the audience that this public hearing is being tabled at the direction of City Council so that City Council, P&Z and HPC could all meet together and reassess the direction they are taking to make sure they are all in agreement about the proper direction on this historic preservation program. The key dates for everyone to be aware of are January 6, 1987 with the P&Z. At that date we hope to have some draft regulations. The regulations are now being reviewed by the consultant trying to make them more understandable. Then on January 13, 1987 there will be a joint meeting between P&Z, HPC and City Council. That meeting really is for those three groups to talk with each other and determine what the overall direction they would like to propose is and what direct- ion they would like to give staff. He said he didn I t know if public comments would be taken at that time. February 3, 1987 is the date scheduled for the actual review data of the designation of the 185 structures. We have been out taking pictures of those structures and studying them to see if it makes sense to designate any or all of them. He asked if anyone had information pertaining to any of the structures, the Planning Office needs to know that and would use it in making , , 1 , decisions on historical designation. He said we are not anxious to designate structures which have no historic integrity. A lot of feelings are being voiced about what designation means. Designation is not as onerous as many make it out to be. An educational handout is being developed in the Planning Office to explain what it means if your structure is designated. Designation only means a structure is subject to review by the HPC. An example is the Glidden House on Bleeker. This was a designated structure and was taken down to its very timbers, reconstructed and added onto. Because a structure is designated does not mean you don't have any rights. But it does mean a lot to an individual in terms of whether the property is easily saleable or whether it can be added onto in the future. If we designate your house we do understand we have a responsibility to come up with a positive compensation type of program to award you for the fact that your house is designated. If anyone has any ideas about how to award we want to hear it. We don't want this to be a negative program or infringe on the rights of anyone. What we are trying to do is preserve the historic resource that we think makes this community a special place to be. Welton then informed the audience before opening for public comments that the board would not be making any decision on anything tonight. But if anyone had any comments about the philosophy of the overlay of the historic districts, the individ- ual designation, or the changes in the zoning and streamlining of the review procedures, the Board would be happy to hear those comments. Paul Taddune pointed out that the Planning office is not in a position at this time to unilaterally take a house that is on the 1 ist off the 1 i st. But that if someone had a house that was designated which they felt should not be designated they would have to appeal to the Planning Office. If the Planning Office was in agreement then they can make a recommendation to the HPC. Alan said if the HPC does not recommend a structure then that structure is not designated according to our regulations. Welton then opened the meeting for public comment. Debbie Segwin, 203 East Hallam, asked how do you get the Planning Department to make note of your structure. Alan said that it was only this afternoon that we really came to the conclusion that the 185 structures should be evaluated individually by the HPC. And that her house was on the evaluat- ion list at this point. 2 ,~ Debbie then said she did not understand what it means to her house if it is declared historic designation or historic overlay. Alan explained that there two things that the HPC and the P&Z are considering. One is the historic compatibility overlay district. The other is the individual historic designation. The historic compatibility overlay district is essentially the Aspen Townsite and the early additions to it. It is most of what we know as Aspen. The way we are looking at it now structures that are in that district, the new buildings, that happen to sit next to a historic building would be reviewed for three things. That is massing--how big the building is, siting--where does it sit on the lot, and materials. It is really more of a compatibility review for compatibility with the neighboring historic structures. He said the big thing that is different about individual designa- tion as opposed to the district is demolition review. If a new structure in the overlay district is to be demolished, that is not a problem. It is not subject to review by the HPC. However if an individually designated structure is to be demolished, that is subject to review by the HPC. The direction we are trying to take with that demolition review right now is not to say you cannot demolish a victorian structure. That is not reasonable. There may be no economic value in the structure. But if we do find that it is a valid usable structure, we may want to assist you in moving that structure to another site. We may want to look at public compensation to purchase that structure or the entire site. All a review does is give us an ability to look over your shoulder and say before you demolish that structure, give us a chance to save it for the future for the rest of the community. It does not say you can't do anything. We have lost about 20 of these structures in the past 6 years which is about 10% of the inventory that we had designated 6 years ago. Norma Dahl, Snow Queen Lodge, said they were designated notable several years ago. They just put a lot of money and effort into a new addition. What I am concerned about is I am not sure I want to be designated under the historic overlay if it says we don't like the colors you painted or something like that. Welton explained it has nothing to do with colors--only approp- riateness. Alan also explained color is not a review criteria. Norma then asked about their being designated notable and others were designated historic. Welton explained the catagories as being: notable historic, 3 "-, excellent historic and exceptional historic. Doug Allen asked what is going to happen on January 6. Allan Richman said at the end of this week we will get back a new draft of Chapter 24-9 which is the historic preservation regulat- ions. Staff will be reviewing it for about a week and will be presenting it to the P&Z on the 6th. It will be ready right after the first of the year for public review. What it does is it takes the existing historical preservation process and simpli- fies it. We hope it does nothing more than that. Since we are going to have a lot more structures under the purview of the HPC we want a process that is clean and simple. Doug then asked if color is regulated. Allan said color has been an area of discussion but not in HPC's guidelines for review. City Council made it clear that color was not something they were interested in regulating. Eloise Elgin suggested that the designation of houses be broken down into increments of 20 and invite the owners of those 20 to meetings so that they have something to say about what is happen- ing. Alan agreed that that was a very sensible suggestion. In looking at the structures individually we would want to do something of that nature. Manard Dahlyard said he has lived here all his life and owned his house for a long time. And does not see where you have the right to tell us it has to go on the historical list. That is up to us to say that. You are taking our rights from us. By putting it in the historical if we put it up for sale--I have my house up for sale and this is one of the reasons why I am doing it--is that you are stopping a sale for our houses. I don't have anything to say about it, it's my property, I pay the taxes on it and it has been in the family since 1917 and now you are coming around and telling me it has to go in a historical district. That is not right, you are dictating to us. Ray Bates, 819 East Hopkins, said he does not want to be in the historical district. There is no reason for it. Who is going to decide whether our structures are going to be in or not. Are you going to take my word that I don't want in it? Or are you just going to put me in it. Can you do that? What makes it historical? Wel ton told him yes. Some of the qualities for architectural designation are whether there were people of historical signifi- cance who lived in the house initially, geographical influence, and how it relates to the rest of the neighborhood, its relation 4 to historic people or events. Ray then said that he is completely surrounded by condominiums and that no one asked him if he wanted some open space. They just went ahead and built and they are still doing it. Welton said if your structure falls within a historical district something like that could not happen again because anything built around a house like yours will have to be reviewed so that it doesn't block your view. Alan said the final decision on historical designation is made by the City Council. They are the final body that has to adopt or not adopt the ordinance designating structures. Right now we are working with the HPC and the P&Z Commission. They will make a recommendat ion to the City Counc il who will make the final decision. Mary Martin a member of HPC said she is in favor of the historic overlay of the old townsite. One of the reasons we are looking at this overlay is so that the old houses wont be surround- ed by condominiums. Buzz Dopkin, 816 East Cooper, wanted to know what precedent is there from our cities or what basis is there that you really can set up a committee to do this and that it has to be followed through. Paul Taddune answered that historic designation and historic designation procedures are in place in every major city in the country which has been in existence for more than 75 years. It is a very common zoning technique. Historic preservation regula- tions have been challenged in New York City where the regulations have been upheld. This is principally in connection with the proposed demolition for alteration with the Penn Central Train Station. This was a case that was very controversial and received a lot of national news attention. The concept is not unique. Whether or not the criteria, the standards, the particular houses ought to be individually design- ated--those are all determinations which have to be made with regard to the facts. Buzz Dopkin then asked are you going to set up your own criteria or are you going to be using some proven methods which are going to be fair to everyone. Paul said in most instances the current historic preservation provisions could be improved. We have an opportunity in this regard in the sense that we have on board land use consultants who are now looking at the entire landuse code and evaluating whether or not it should improved, altered, coordinated, consoli- 5 dated, integrated, simplified, etc. I have instructed them to start working toward revising the code of the historic preservat- ion regulations. They have national experience and we are hoping that we can rely on them from some of their experience. Richard Pabst asked if the city is considering providing incent- ives to the owners for being designated historic. Wel ton said there are a lot of ideas along these lines and the Planning Department is open to suggestions. We would take the input from people. Paul Taddune warned that, until city council puts these incent- ives in place, anyone who had historic structures should not presume at this point that those incentives are available at this time. None of these regulations have been installed. No decision has been made with regard to compensation. Alan Richman said the City Council has given clear direction that incentives have to be a part of this program in order for it to be successful. We are continuing to investigate this part of the program. Any input from the public will be welcome. Every meeting will be a public hearing. We will not do anything and then let you know about 2 months later. Dieter Bibbig, Park Avenue, said it seems you are taking on a big job going for these 185 houses. You are going to have to hire more people. Maybe you should just have everybody get a building permit before a house gets demolished. So if somebody gets a building permit you say don't demolish it, we are going to buy it. Then other people who maybe look like they need help with their house, approach them and maybe help them. Then leave the others alone because they seem to be doing pretty well so far with keeping their houses up. This way it won't be such a big job. Jim Boyd asked if there was any information available to the public which would show why a particular structure was chosen for designation. Welton said there is a page of information and a photo on each of the houses on file in the Planning Office which merits it for inclusion. Steve said this was first done in 1980 and is not complete in all cases. Cather ine Lee, 124 West Hallam, asked if anyone on the P&Z, HPC or the Planning Office owned any of the 185 houses. Mary said her house and the Mayor's house was designated a long time ago. And that she and her husband were opposed to it at 6 that time and it was automatically designated. This is a fair solution to the whole thing. If you stop and think you have a lovely house now and nobody is going to change your house. Nobody is going to do anything to you. But if across the street somebody wants to build a massive duplex, if it is zoned for duplex then it has a review process. You are not going to be affected by this except that there is an overlay over the old townsite to keep what we have as much as possible within the confines of what it was--a victorian town. Catherine then asked what qualifies a person to be the judge or the arbitrator and delegate what is victorian and what isn't. Welton told her the people who would be doing the reviews are the HPC. They have a certain set of guidelines that are applicable to historic structures and guidelines applicable to new struct- ures in historic districts. We have had historic districts on Main Street and in the commercial core for 8 years. Georgeann Waggaman said the reason people were informed so early is that we are in the process of making these decisions. We are not trying to surprise people. We are trying to protect people like Ray from having so many structures around his house it has destroyed his value because it has been overwhelmed. We are trying to protect people like you from that happening in your neighborhood. We don't have all the answers. And we are not trying to throw anything over on you after the fact. Anyone can join the HPC. We have 3 vacancies now. Paul Taddune said there are written guidelines for anyone who is interested in historic designation to refer to in the municipal code. These are not being invented at this point, they already exist. Welton then called upon the gentleman in the back in the center to identify himself. Bill Stirling, Mayor of Aspen, stated that this was the first P&Z meeting he had come to in the last 3 and 1/2 years. But that he felt so strongly about this particular issue that he did want to come. Fundamentally he felt that what his motivation is as an elected official and as a citizen is to save the old buildings but be fair. That is quite a challenge for us. But that is what everybody who has any kind of position of responsibility is attempting to do here. For us as a town as opposed to a town like Keystone or Vail, the past is our hallmark. It kind of sets the standard for us and leads us into the future. We need to have respect for that past and a lot of reverence for it because it is what sets us apart. It is what makes Aspen distinctive. It is part of what makes people come here both to live and to visit. For a long time now people have only been 7 paying lip service to this caricature and slowly the inventory of victorian homes is eroding. I do not 1 ike 1 i sts and am not particularly enthusiastic about being on a new list. That is what this inventory is trying to clarify. It is another list. For me the problem with a list is it is intentionally discrim- inating, it has onerous aspects to it and it has inequitabilities to it. To me the most fair thing is what we have been doing in two districts in the town now for almost a decade and that is the historic overlay. All of Main Street has a historic overlay and all the downtown commercial core has a historic overlay. So it doesn't matter whether you are a new or an old building in those two historic districts, every time you want to do something to the structure, you have to come in and have a review process. That is all we are talking about as an alternative for the west end and other parts of the historic townsite. What we are talking about is trying to preserve the ambience of the community so that we can take that distinctive heritage into the future and preserve it in the best way that we can. We do have to provide some incentives. The kind of incentives we might provide would be relief of water and electric rates, relief of a tap fee into the water system if that was a needed thing. Density relief to be granted in order to give an economic lift. The only tax benefit the city can give is--we have a 3.88 mill levied on city property and that is all. That is the only tax we now control in the city. There can be relief given there. Maybe a business use could be allowed in a residential zone in order to preserve a victorian. Then maybe you could take some density you might have on your property and transfer it to another site so that it might become sellable. The fundamental purpose of this is to preserve this wonderful town we live in and to be able to take it into the future so that the real meaning of western style and victorian continues to have that meaning that we all understand it to have and that we no longer just pay lip service to it but strengthen those ordin- ances. There are 3,000 designated structures in San Antonio, Texas. The entire town of Telluride is an historic district as is Crested Butte. Mayor Stirling said he did not think we need an historic list but as a district, everybody would have equal treatment and everybody would be reviewed. Aspen is like one neighborhood. We are the community of people who are going to determine what the quality of the neighborhood is going to be. All we are talking about are some neighborhood covenants. Bob Abar, 219 West Hopkins, said you are tying a lot of people's 8 hands as far as selling their houses. In this way you are making a hardship on people. Wel ton asked if there were further comments. There were none. He then tabled the public hearing to the meeting of February 3, 1987. The proposed code amendments to Section 24-9 are tabled to the meeting of January 6, 1987. GLEASON EXEMPTION FROM MANDATORY POD Steve Burstein said the Gleason application has to go through the PUD exemption process because there is an increase in ground coverage. A variance was granted to allow building within the west sideyard and rear setback. The Planning Off ice says there are no real impacts from this proposal with regard to impact on the vegetation or the character of the neighborhood. It is basically a harmless project. It is our recommendation that it be tabled so that the conditions of the Board of Adjustment can be confirmed. Welton then asked the Gleasons if they had any problems with the conditions listed by the Board of Adjustments. Mrs. Gleason said that they have a survey for the west side section which shows that they do have their 5 feet. Roger Hunt said he noticed there was a difference in the recom- mendation from the analysis there are 340 sq.ft. addition but in the recommendation there is 320 sq. ft. He then moved to approve the request the 340 sq.ft. addition subject to the condition that it be located no less than 5' from the west property line and no less than 10.5 feet from the south property line and no further action by the Board of Adjustment is necessary. Ramona seconded the motion. Welton asked if there were any questions. David White asked the Gleasons how long they had been in the process with this application. Mr. Gleason said they applied for a building permit in May. David asked if they would mind telling the board what the cost was of this. The Gleasons said 8 months and $350.00 but there was one month that they were gone. Everyone then voted in favor of the motion. LODGE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT Ron Thompson made this presentation. He said The Lodge Improve- ment District Task Force has been working on this project for 8 9 ,.",--.. months. The task force was before this board on August 26, 1986 with a pre-presentation and got generally favorable input from P&Z. Since that time there have been some changes. There have been some meetings with City Council also. At this point the City Council has given their general approval of the plan. We are hoping that the P&Z would support a resolution of the endorsement of the Aspen Lodge Area Special Improvement District plan. Originally we went to City Council with an 8 and 1/2 million dollar plan. They asked that be reduced to something more compatible with the City of Aspen. So we brought in as. 4 million dollar plan of which the City is going to pay $710,000 for paving the streets. The rest of the improvements will be funded by the property owners in the district. The design parameters for this project were to emphasize pedest- rian movements throughout the district and tie them in with the central core area. We are doing that with wide sidewalks, street lights and street trees. We were asked to retain the same number of parking spaces as exist now. At this conceptual stage, there have been 20 lost. We were also asked to capture the drainage in the district. Discussion then was held regarding the exact area encompassed by the improvement district, curb and gutters and the fact that people now walk on the streets instead of the sidewalks. Roger said he could see major problems with the projections into the street and projections into the intersection. I continually look at the courthouse on Main Street which is, in effect, a projection out into Main Street and you are asking people to step off a curb into a moving lane of traffic. There is no intermed- iate safety barrier for them when they step off the curb into the street. They are right there--right in the action. I think that is the most unsafe design that could possibly be. I have not seen a good neckdown yet. He then pointed out several trees on the map which will block the view. The object he said is safety, not what looks neat on a plan. We want to get both pedestrians and traffic integrated with each other with the most safety possible. Ron said that one of the goals of the task force was to create an environment that works for the pedestrian, not necessarily the automobile. Roger then asked if it was safe for the pedestrian to step out into the moving lane of traffic. Ron said according to Allan Jacobs, City and Regional Planning Professor at Berkeley, trees should be brought within 12 feet of the corner. Landscaping shOUld be brought right up to the 10 corner. He said the standards we have are excessive and they increase the speed of the automobile. If you bring the trees right up to the corner and if you load the roadway with foliage, that causes a psychological need to drive at a slower speed, hence your safety is increased. Jim Colombo asked what do they consider absolution to any ---- I missed part of Jim's question here because at this point there was a private conversation going on between Ramona and Mari. His question ended with--displacement of snow where would it go? Ron said they had met with the city maintenance people who did not have any problem with it going out into the street. Jasmine said she did not agree completely with Roger, but his approach is something that should be included as you move forward in your conceptual plan. It is important not to lose sight of the fact that Durant is still a major artery for vehicular traffic both public and private and in our desire to make the pedestrian climate as attractive as possible we really do still have to take into account the vehicular segment. David White said he was concerned about Galena and that we want to look at some kind of shuttle up and down Galena. What is being done with Rubey Park. What are current plans with City Hall and how much of the budget is going into Rubey Park. Ron said none of the budget is going to Rubey Park except as a public right of way. One of the things the task force directed us to do is not study transportation in the lodge district. They were not interested in traffic being involved. David said he also was concerned about the projections into the intersections. If a pickup truck parks in the intersection right now it is horrendous--you can't see around it. Ron said in regard to the neckdowns--we aren't supposed to go within 20' from the curb and our perspective of how we look at it this provides better sight distance at the corner and also provides pedestrian a shorter space to go across the street. David said with the gondola now being there and the access to the mountain being changed totally, he is concerned that when the plan gets to more detail will we really be able to see that. We are very concerned with the Little Nell lodge. We all worked very hard on that and would like to be involved so that concept- ually some of the things stay together on that. Ron said they had been working with the Ski Company to insure that conceptually we are all the same. We will be getting into construction drawings in February and be meeting with each of the neighborhood areas so that we can work out any specific problems 11 /"- we could have with each of the lodges. Welton asked for a show of hands for anybody who had concerns with the neckdowns but thinks that those concerns can be address- ed when it gets to a more precise design development and con- struction document stage. Roger said we all favor larger sidewalks. But and a lot of us have problems with the circulation on Durant with the neck- downs. That needs to be looked at very closely. I just don't want it to be said we all responded to this plan favorably and then all of a sudden when we see the construction drawings, its this plan inch for inch. Wel ton said he agreed with the engineers with the neckdowns if properly done, as with the conditions of Aspen Mountain or the Little Nell Hotel. Hold the curb back 2 or 3 feet so you can have half the neckdown and you are in the street before you are beyond the line of cars. If you put something in here that says the neckdowns are acceptable I vote against it. Roger said if you reduce the neckdowns it becomes more tolerable to me. It gives more of a margin of safety area for the pedest- rian. Ramona suggested an amendment to the second paragraph about the improvements in the public right of way making them subject to review prior to draft of the working drawings so that we can get a better idea of what these neckdowns really are. This is very conceptual. We don't know what kind of trees they are planting and we don't know anything about the protrusions into the street. Discussion took place here as to construction drawings being developed and when precise plans are to be done and who reviews them. It was also brought out that this had been to City Council for approval and that Council had generally gone along with suggesting modifications and has been supportive of the concepts. Ron then suggested that he could make a change to the second whereas that says the P&Z generally favors the concept but are concerned about the safety factors as they focus on the neckdowns and bring the resolution back to the next meeting. Roger said the foliage around the corners had to be looked at from a safety view as well. And again stated his concern that we are looking at this conceptual plan, and we state our concerns now and that's the last we see of it--it all goes to precise plan and the next thing we know we have full neckdowns. Ron said then that everything we have there is a major concern that arises Hammond said it will be addressed. done is preliminary and if at the P&Z level that Jay It w ill be back to P&Z. 12 ~~ Anything of this scope goes before P&Z. Ron then suggested that the second whereas read "Whereas at those meetings the Commission generally responded in favor of the plan which focused etc. However one major concern did arise in terms of pedestrian safety in general and specifically pedestrian safety related to neckdowns and foliage at the intersections." Roger added "And now therefore be it resolved as to the change very slightly to." Ron said he would mention the concern in the "now therefore" section as well. The resolution can be brought back to P&Z and would let Jay Hammond know that a major concern did arise and that P&Z is requesting that the task force bring the plan back to P&Z at a more detailed level. Ron said what they were assigned to do next was to do construct- ion drawings for different portions and get approval. He said he would like to include P&Z in with the neighborhood meetings so P&Z could hear what the neighborhood people had to say. Welton asked for a motion to approve. ."", Mari moved to approved the resolution to include "Whereas at those meetings the Commission generally responded in favor of the plan which focused etc. However one major concern did arise in terms of pedestrian safety in general and specifically pedestrian safety related to neckdowns and foliage at the intersections. And to include the recommendation to the second paragraph. Jasmine seconded the motion with all in favor except Welton. - Meeting was adjourned. '1 --- 13