Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19880419 A'<'u Aspen Planninq and Zoninq Commission April 19. 1988 vice Chairman Jasmine Tygre called the meeting to order at 4:30 p.m. with members David White, Roger Hunt, Mari Peyton, Ramona Markalunas and Jim Colombo present. COMMISSIONER AND STAFF COMMENTS 1. Alan Richman, planning director, asked the Commission to table the Ritz Carlton application. Richman said Council will hold a meeting tomorrow, April 20th, to discuss a number of aspects of this application, including issues of density and process. White said the Board should give some comments on this application before tomorrow night. Richman encouraged the Board to show up at the Council meeting but not to have this hearing take place. Richman told the Board the city manager was very clear at the Council meeting in stating that the project had expired. John Sarpa, representing the applicant, told the P & Z they disagree with the assessment that the project had expired. Sarpa said they have agreed to meet with the Council tomorrow to see if they can get specific about density and height. Sarpa said it is the mutual goal of the Council to work with the applicant to see if they can reach agreement on the project. If agreement on the project is reached, they can then discuss the process and how to bring that project to fruition. Perry Harvey told the Board the applicants have no objection of being tabled to May 3. Richman said he is trying to keep the public hearing alive if by some circumstance Council puts this back in the amendment process. Mari Peyton said she understood Council is going to discuss whether the P & Z will be part of this process or not. Richman said P & Z will be part of the process because the land use code requires P & Z to be a recommending body. Richman said the question is what the actual steps in the process will be. White said the Commission has not talked about what they think is the appropriate size for the hotel. Herron moved to table the Ritz Carlton hotel GMP/PUD amendment to May 3 and to continue the public hearing; seconded by White. All in favor, motion carried. 2. Richman said there has been some communication to P & Z about the Gordon subdivision. Richman told the Board no application has been submitted. When one is, it will be scheduled for the P & Z with proper notice. MINUTES Hunt moved to adopt the minutes of March 8, 1988, correcting on page 18 on the second line, "from the second major break on the 1 Aspen Planninq and Zoninq commission April 19. 1988 Mill street winq"; seconded by White. carried. All in favor, motion 700 EAST MAIN RESIDENTIAL GMP PROJECT/PRELIMINARY PLAT Ms. Tygre opened the public hearing. Cindy Houben, planning office, told P & Z in condition #3 she noted there should verification about the planting in the courtyard area above the subgrade parking. Ms. Houben said this letter has been submitted. Ms. Houben said at conceptual, she represented the pocket park at Spring and Main was to be a publicly-accessible space. Ms. Houben said private versus public accessibility does not affect the open space count. Ms. Houben said she thought it was resolved at conceptual that this would be a public park. The applicant would like to clarify this; that this was a public park was not their understanding, and the benches will be supplied on the public right-if-way. Ms. Houben said in condition #5 there are some engineering specifications regarding the sidewalk and the space required between the curb and sidewalk. Ms. Houben told P & Z Council requested the applicants look into the amount of existing parking and how many spaces would be deleted because of the development. Ms. Houben said the applicant has stated only 2 spaces out of 16 will be deleted on Main and Spring streets. Ms. Houben said since conceptual approval the Main street elevation has been changed. The form of the building has changed giving a different look. It is the same floor plan. The height is still below the maximum allowed. The design adds a sense of bulk to the structures. Ms. Houben went over the site plan and pointed out changes since conceptual approval. Ms. Houben said the applicants represented at conceptual that the maximum square footage would be 42,000 square feet and are now requesting this be 43,000 square feet. Ms. Houben said there is some confusion as to what is to be calculated and how much of the balconies count in this square footage. Ms. Houben said the applicants are also requesting condominiumization of the free market units. Don Ensign, Design Workshop, told P & Z they tried to redesign this in order to avoid one of the curb cuts. Ensign said it is difficult to get the cars turning in the project. Ensign said the visual effect with only one curb cut and all the concrete sidewalk is very uncomfortable. Ensign said the plan will result in a loss of one parking space on the perimeter of the project. Hunt said his goal was to get some parking along the project but not to create a safety hazard. Ensign said he will talk to the engineer- ing department. Hunt said he would work with the applicant and the 2 Aspen Planninq and Zoninq Commission April 19. 1988 engineering department on the preferred parking plan along the streets. Marty Pickett, representing the applicant, told the Board they are required to get approval from the state highway department because this is along the highway. Ms. picket said all the highway department is requiring is a curb and sidewalk. Ms. Houben said the city's engineering department is requiring a guardrail also. Joe Wells, representing the applicant, said it was the applicant's intention to provide an open space area or visual relief at the corner of Main and Spring as a break on the property and to protect the existing cottonwoods. Wells said the applicants had intended to have boulders for people to sit on outside the property. Wells said it was not the intention of the applicant to open up the area to the general public and assume that liability. Wells said there is no incentive in the code to encourage public use of private property. Wells said the code requires open space on the project site itself to be usable by the residents of the project and to offer relief from the development. Wells said he does not think P & Z made that a condition of their resolution of conceptual approval. Ms. Houben said her memo contained that condition and it was accepted by P & Z. Ms. Tygre asked if any commission member felt this issue would have affected their scoring or approval of the project. David White said he scored the project according to having two pocket parks available to the public. Herron said he feels it is inappropriate to tell an applicant what to put on their property. Herron said the purpose of open space is to not have a wall-to-wall develop- ment. Ms. Tygre said the Commission does not feel that benches should be placed within this project. Ms. Tygre said there are 4 Commission members in favor of benches versus rocks for seating outside the property line. Ensign showed the Board the configuration of the hot tubs so they are a continuation of the terrace wall. Ensign said they are not using usable open space to put the hot tubs in because of the steep grading that comes to the walls. Ensign said the hot tubs will not be seen from the streets. Ms. Tygre said the concern was this adds to the massing of the building. No Commission members felt that the new configuration of the hot tubs caused problems with the FAR or massing. Michael Thompson, Hagman Yaw, told the Commission the applicants were comfortable with a 42,000 square foot FAR topset at prelimi- nary PUD. The site allows around 50,000 square feet. Thompson told the P & Z there have been two changes, one is an internal change which did not effect the footprint or the external skin of the building. This was an increase of 672 square feet. The second 3 Aspen Planninq and Zoninq Commission April 19. 1988 increase is how the applicants were looking at the floor area regulations. Thompson said originally they read it that when a deck is covered by an overhang of more than 3 feet than just that portion of the deck is counted. Thompson said the interpretation of the building department is that if a deck is covered beyond the 3 feet allowable, the whole deck counts in the FAR. Thompson said this will add another 500 feet to the FAR. Thompson said the applicants can commit to 43,000 square feet, which is still under the FAR allowable. Ms. Tygre said the change of facade with the balconies in her opinion does not make the bulk larger. The Commission agreed. Ms. Houben told the Board, the Council discussed the 6 month minimum restriction and determined they did not want to give waivers to any project in the RMF district. Ms. Houben recommended this project be granted condominiumization but that the 6 month minimum lease restriction is in effect. Ms. Houben said the applicants have requested to be reviewed under the new code. The new code states is a project is displacing people from homes, an affordable housing fee will have to be paid. Ms. Houben said there is one-bedroom house on the project, which would calculate to a $3700 affordable housing fee. Ms. Houben said P & Z needs to determine if the applicant mitigated the employee housing impacts with their cash-in-lieu payment, which was over $600,000. Ms. Markalunas moved to waive the affordable housing fee of $3700 in light of the $600,000 cash-in-lieu payment; seconded by Herron. Ms. Peyton said this would be against the direction of making new development mitigate its own impacts and its employee generation numbers. White agreed Council is discussing replacement of affordable units when they are displaced. Ms. Peyton said the cash-in-lieu payment only covers 50 percent of the employee generation. Herron said the code required an exactment, which has been taken. To keep taking money just drives the cost of the project up. Ms. Tygre said the P & Z has the choice to require the affordable housing fee, to require one deed restricted unit on site for 5 years, or to waive the fee. Markalunas and Herron in favor; White, Tygre, Peyton, Hunt and Colombo opposed. Motion NOT carried. Hunt moved to accept the affordable housing fee of $3700; seconded by Herron. Ms. Peyton said she feels the most benefit to the community as a whole would be a deed restricted unit on site for 5 years. Ms. Peyton said the Commission has already given this project 2 extra units of GMP quota. White agreed the real benefit is to get a deed restricted unit. Ms. Tygre agreed the P & Z should be working at 4 Aspen Planninq and Zoninq Commission April 19. 1988 getting more employee housing on site. This site was an area that was originally designed to be permanent employee housing. Colombo, Hunt, Markalunas and Herron in favor; Peyton, Tygre and White opposed. Motion carried. Don Ensign requested the project be allowed to heat the sidewalks in the central court and the parking entranceway but not be required to do so. Ms. Tygre said condition #8 can be modified to reflect this. Ms. Houben requested a condition be added which states that the applicant receive all necessary permits from the state highway department. Ms. Tygre closed the public hearing. Hunt moved to recommend approval of the preliminary subdivision, PUD, exemption from growth management for the employee dwelling unit, condominiumization, stream margin review and special review approval for the 700 East Main project with the following condi- tions; (1) all representations of the applicant shall be conditions of the approval unless herein modified; (2) in the memo of the planning office of April 19, 1988; condition #3 deleted as it has been met; two park benches shall be set adjacent to the open space at the coroner of Spring and Main street in the public right-of- way; condition #4 as in the memo; the sidewalk curb and gutter alignment along Main street shall be designed parallel to the property line for approximately 150 feet from the Spring street curb and then doglegged to the Original Curve curb to maximize the available on street parking without reducing the safety, subject to the approval of the engineering department; new condition 4(f) adding a sentence to old 5 (f) "or a design modified as approved with the engineering department"; new condition #5, the total square footage of the project shall not exceed 43,000 square feet; new condition #6, the hot tubs for individual units shall be located partially on the footprint of the patios as shown on exhibit A of the preliminary plan, foam covers are required for each hot tub on the site; new condition #7 the pool area, recrea- tional building, and access ways and parking ramp may be heated for snow melt purposes; new condition #8 is the same as condition 9 in the memo; new condition #9 the public river overlook shall include a bench and boulders for public seating; new condition #10, applicant must receive necessary permits from the highway depart- ment; new condition #11 (a) and (b) the same as 12 (a) and (b), and (c) the applicant shall be required to pay an affordable housing fee based on one unit pursuant to section 7-1008 of the proposed new code; seconded by Colombo. All in favor, motion carried. 5 Aspen Planninq and Zoninq Commission April 19. 1988 MCDONALD HISTORIC DESIGNATION AND CONDITIONAL USE Ms. Tygre opened the public hearing. Jim Colombo stepped down due to a potential conflict of interest. Steve Burstein, planning office, presented a site plan showing the parking plan, the original house, and the expansion. Ms. Tygre introduced a letter from the adjacent neighbors supporting the project. There is a letter from Ruth Whyte, also adjacent, listing concerns about doubling the size of this structure, including roof and height, parking and access. Burstein told the Board there are 3 aspects to the application; historic landmark designation, conditional use for the restaurant, and special review for reduction of parking. Burstein told P & Z this application is to convert the existing house of 1400 square feet into a 50 seat restaurant/bar, and to build a 2300 square foot addition for a four bedroom residence. Burstein said HPC has reviewed the application for historic compatibility. HPC has granted conceptual approval with condi- tions. The HPC is still working with the applicant on meeting the conditions of conceptual approval. HPC has recommended historic designation. This house was built in 1944. There are unique features to the house which make is eligible for historic designa- tion. It is a good example of rustic architecture. The house is visible from Main street and contributes to the character of Main street. Historic designation is a zoning classification, so P & Z recommends designation to Council. Ms. Tygre said historic designation does allow certain uses in order to encourage preservation. The P & Z was concerned about size of additions to historic structures. Ms. Tygre said she thought there was a limit to the size of expansions to historic structures. Burstein said there is no limit. The discussion focused on the mitigation of employee housing impact. Ms. Tygre said the P & Z also discussed the size of the expansion. Burstein said Council discussed putting a cap on the expansion but decided HPC has the historic compatibility criteria under which to review each project. Ms. Tygre said above a certain amount of square footage addition, a project gets into the GMP issues. Burstein said this is being reviewed under the old code. Ms. Peyton moved to recommend to Council historic designation of this property; seconded by Ms. Markalunas. Ms. Tygre said she is concerned that historic designation opens up growth impacts that are not controlled by P & Z. 6 Aspen Planninq and Zoninq Commission April 19. 1988 Ms. Peyton withdrew her motion in order to hear the applicant's presentation. Scott McDonald told council the addition is 1700 square feet of living space and 160 square feet will be used for the kitchen. The intent of this project is to use the original structure for a restaurant. The structure is currently a four bedroom house. The addition will be a four bedroom house. McDonald said there is about 6000 square feet open space on the lot. They have enlarged the garage to accommodate two cars and two small dumpsters. There will also be 3 parking spaces for the restaurant. McDonald said there are a number of large spruce trees on the property, which limit where the addition can go. Hunt said he feels there should be 10 feet between this and the building to the west. McDonald went over the storage in the basement and the service area. Ms. Tygre opened the public hearing on the historic designation and conditional use of 300 West Main street. There were no comments. Ms. Tygre closed the public hearing. Hunt reiterated his concern about the lack of 10 feet between the building to the west. White said the housing authority has requested there be some mitigation of the employees generated by this new restaurant. Ms. Tygre said this building is worth preserving; however, to what extent is the Commission willing to give other considerations that are applied to buildings that are not historic. Ms. Tygre said when historic designation is granted to this building, the city loses control over things like employee housing generation created by the ability the commission would have in the code. Ms. Tygre said she does not feel the trade offs in this project are appropriate because there are great problems in town. Herron asked if there is a way the P & Z can make a recommendation conditioned on employee housing being addressed. Burstein said the old code does not require the applicants to take care of the employee housing impact. Burstein said the McDonalds originally had an employee unit on-site but due to the bulk, they decided to delete that unit. Burstein said the 10 feet between buildings may be germane to this discussion and the conditional use concerns. The HPC is attempting to address the compatibility and are concerned about the effect of this building on the structure to the west. Ms. Tygre said her concern with the conditional use is that this project does not deal with the things she is most concerned about. Conditional use review does not include those areas of concern in the purview of P & Z. Ms. Tygre said she does not want to grant historic designation because she has no other recourse to mitigate impacts caused by the change in use of this building. 7 Aspen Planninq and Zoninq commission April 19. 1988 Burstein said this applicant is in the transition between the old and new codes. Burstein told the Commission he has discussed with the applicants that the new code has the intent to have employee housing mitigation. Ms. Tygre said she is also concerned with size and bulk. McDonald told the P & Z they also have the option of constructing a duplex on this lot. Caroline McDonald told the Board that she and Scott will be running the restaurant so the addi tion can be looked at as employee housing. Hunt said the residence is not now an employee unit. If this residence becomes designated, the community would be gaining one employee unit. McDonald said this will not be condominiumized, and a buyer would be buying the whole unit. Ms. Peyton said in this case the benefits of preserving this structure warrants action. White said he would like to figure out a way to preserve this and mitigate some of the impacts without opening up another area for the next applicant to come in an do whatever they want to do. White said a payment to cash-in-lieu for employee housing would help solve some of the concerns of the Board. Herron said 1700 square feet of bulk is not much of an issue; the question is the economics. Herron said a cash-in-lieu payment would render the project beyond the applicants desires. Herron said the Board has to decide whether they are willing to lose this piece of property or to let the applicants have the restaurant and not address employee housing as they are entitled to do under the current code. Herron suggested deed restricting the 1700 square feet to housing and for nothing else. Burstein said this could be an accessory unit of the restaurant. Ms. Tygre said 1700 square feet is not unreasonable but it is doubling the size of the existing structure. McDonald said the intent of the addition is for the owner or someone connected with the restaurant to occupy the addition. White suggested continuing this to next meeting in order to give the applicant time to come back with some conditions that may address the concerns outlined by the Board. Ms. Peyton moved to table this to a week from today; seconded by White. All in favor, motion carried. Ms. Tygre continued the public hearing. The meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. fanc'70 . V~ ~ Kathryn . Koch, city Clerk 8