HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20051206
_.,,,-~,,<~-~~-'-"-"--'-.~--------"""-;,---""
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
Minutes December 06. 2005
COMMENTS ............................................................................................................ 2
DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ............................................... 2
202 NORTH MONARCH SUBDIVISION ..............................................................2
LIMELIGHT FINAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPEMNT ................................... 8
1
__,~"--<.__~.'^L~"~,..;.""",._.",_____,,,,,,,,,<~,_,,,,_"
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
Minutes December 06. 2005
north in improving the alleyway. Lindt said the subdivision request meets the
review standards that conform to the separate lot sizes in the separate zone
districts; the single family residence would still be in conformance with the new
property size after the subdivision review. Staff believed it was consistent with the
AACP goals for infill development and that it would provide a better pedestrian
streetscape along Bleeker Street by abandoning the existing curb cut and providing
sidewalks.
Lindt said the proposal to open the alley is probably the most controversial issue
associated with this application. Staff supported the opening of the alley because it
would allow vehicular access from the alley, which was consistent with the
residential design standards and commercial design standards in the city code.
Stan Clauson and Tim Semrau represented the Blue Vic LLC. Stan Clauson
pointed out the existing parking pad and curb cut that would be eliminated as per
this proposal. Clauson said the historic preservation guidelines recommend that
whenever curb cuts and driveways can be eliminated because of alley access, they
should do so; this is a historic preservation parcel, the house was a Victorian House
from the Mining era. Clauson said that both properties after subdivision would
come under the purview of historic preservation; the proposed lot 2 that would be
created would be reviewed for compatibility with the historic resources that were
adjacent. Clauson noted that next to the lot to be created was the Jerome
Professional Building; the alley has a very steep embankment, which would
prevent the alley from being continued to Mill Street (an almost 20 foot drop).
Clauson distributed photos of the alley comer showing the entrance where the
paved parking was utilized but there was no agreement with the city that allowed
for that installation. Clauson stated the alley looking to the east was very level up
to the point where it drops off and from Mill Street the platted alley was used by
the KSPN building for a patio. Clauson said that opening the alley makes the most
sense for the standpoint of ingress to serve the residential property and proposed
mixed use property. Clauson said that a sidewalk would be built to city
specifications from the alley. Clauson said the shed was deemed not to be historic
and would be demolished and that alley encroachment would be eliminated.
Clauson said the house on the other side of the alley has a shed that encroaches on
the alley that would need to be properly addressed.
Tim Semrau stated that he was the managing owner of this property and
sympathizes with the neighbors who have parked in this alley for many years and
don't want to see any change. Semrau said that he was willing to do whatever the
city will allow to minimize the size ofthe alley with the alley going through.
3
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
Minutes December 06. 2005
function and this alley cannot physically connect because of the bluff line to Mill
Street.
2. Bert Myrin, public, commented that the land use code section 26.480.050(b)
could be used to deny a subdivision; the proposed alley creates a dead end alley
with mixed used and there were not any dead end alleys. Myrin said to picture
trucks trying to turn around with emergency vehicles trying to access. Myrin
referenced section 26.480.050(a) regarding character ofland uses of the area; the
side of Monarch was very residential and the historic tours started there. Myrin
suggested the applicant dedicate an easement off of Bleeker dividing the lot lines
between lots 1 and 2 to create an access alley. Myrin did not want the current alley
vacated. A letter was submitted by Bert Myrin.
3. Walt Madden, public, stated that Monarch was unique that the houses all
faced one way and traditionally alleys were behind the houses instead it comes out
the other way. Madden said the commercia110t would be accessed through the
street cones indicating the street and accessing the alley from the side.
4. Phil Hodgson, public, stated that he was in the house across from the
proposed alley; the 1892 book of general deeds has the ownership of the alley in
the possession of212 North Monarch, at some point that went away. Hodgson
said there were several buildings in the alley space due to this situation; Nells
Elder lived at 202 North Monarch since 1917 and said the neighbors respected the
open space the alley allowed them. North Monarch was a residential neighborhood
and to open the alley to commercial traffic would be a detriment to the character of
the neighborhood. Hodgson said besides being blocked off as the walking
experience on North Monarch there were troops of toddlers from the preschool
crossing the alley site, carriage tours, city races, pedestrians and bicyclists using
the road. Hodgson said he did have a parking space granted to him by the city
attorney and Michael Gassman, city councilman in 1990. Hodgson said that he
would relinquish this space to return it to the unfinished alley in order to preserve
this space; a public alley needs to access streets but this dead end alley could serve
the commercial area. Hodgson said he was opposed to opening this area. Hodgson
appreciated the concern for the large fir tree and other greenery in the affected
area. A letter was submitted by Phil Hodgson.
5. Robert Ryan, public, stated that he was the oldest son of Rainard and Janet
Elder and said that the shed was a slightly different structure used for chickens; a
chicken kicked over the lamp and burned the shed down, that was where the
dilapidated structure that was there now. Ryan said the back hillside was not as
large as it was because it was used as the dump for the Hotel Jerome. Ryan said
5
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
Minutes December 06. 2005
Letters were also submitted from Tom and Donna Ward, William Lake and Quinn
H. Young (all against the opening of the alleyway).
Clauson said that they have looked at all of the alternatives and looked as if it was
using a platted city alley; they wanted the recommendation from the Planning &
Zoning Commission as to what was the best form of access. Clauson stated the
'allowed uses in the mixed use zone district were very limited and they include
residential uses, office and service uses were provided. Allgaier and Lindt noted
that historic landmark property, which this was, could have retail or restaurant use,
until Council takes the historic landmark off of the property. Clauson said the
intention was office use.
Semrau stated that they have every intention of restoring this house to the 1885
glory; he said the historic preservation officer wanted the house left in the comer
and the access to the house from the alley.
Tygre said that once again P&Z had different thoughts on the AACP in this very
neighborhood and the unease has to do with responsibilities as outlined in the code
for this particular property once this leaves P&Z, the uses, architecture, access and
other reviews will be determined by another body. Tygre sympathized with the
applicant being placed in this position because what P&Z says could be 180
degrees the opposite of what HPC determines.
Kruger said it was good to hear the history and from the neighbors. Kruger said
that she could support the subdivision but not the entire application because the
impacts were unknown to the neighborhood and unknown to what would go on
that property therefore she could not support the access and the opening of the
alley.
Johns said that he would support the subdivision but would not support a
concurrent request to open the alleyway. Johns agreed not feeling comfortable
with the unknown changes to just grant access without the information.
Skadron said that he felt similarly and added that he valued the fact that the
character of the area has remained unchanged and opening the alley stands in
contrast to the property. Skadron stated that he was a strong proponent for biking
and walking in the area. Skadron also supported the subdivisiof! but not allowing
access through the alleyway.
Rowland echoed his fellow commissioners' comments and the review criteria did
not address access. Rowland asked for staff comments on the piecemeal process.
Lindt responded that by right the applicants have ability if they meet the criteria to
7
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
Minutes December 06. 2005
Lindt explained the application was submitted by Limelite Inc and Lime1ite
Redevelopment LLC to redevelop the Lime1ite Lodge, Snowflake Inn and Deep
Powder Lodge properties into a traditiona110dge of 125 lodge rooms and 17 free
market residential condominiums. Lindt said the conceptual approval by City
Council included up to 128 lodge units, up to 18 free market residential units; the
lodge portion of the building was approved at 46 feet in height; to work to a 42
foot height limit on the residential building; conditions to rent out the
condominiums on a short term basis as well as a good faith effort to preserve the
Deep Powder buildings.
Dale Paas thanked the commission for hearing them and said that they have
listened to P&Z and Council and think that they have a project that will be
workable and benefit the community.
Steve Szymanski stated this project was driven by the moderate priced lodge
returning as the Limelight Lodge owned by the family with the residential side as
the financial engine.
John Cottle said the boards in the packet and the boards brought by the architects
were the same. Cottle gave the basic orientation of the project with the relation to
Wagner Park and the residential changes. Cottle said the first change was pulling
back the Hyman side of the project (done during Council) eliminated some rooms,
now at 125 rooms; changed the setback from 7 feet to 21 feet on the fourth floor of
Hyman Avenue; setbacks on the comers of Hyman and facing the Wheeler. Robin
Schiller presented a color coded roof plan depicting the heights of the building.
Cottle said the materials took their clues from the historic buildings with sandstone
or heavy rough materials at the base and the rest of the building was predominately
brick. The fourth floor had a green stucco; there were dark grey windows and sun
shades with similar materials to tie into Aspen's history as does the scale and
rhythm of the building. The building had a variety of 2 story and 3 story elements
and 1 story and 4 story elements; the fenestration of the windows in particular and
the articulation of the building. Cottle said there were 2 barrel vaulted elements
(one faced south) only 3 feet above the flat roof setback from the street and come
under the heading of architecture elements meant to soften the building.
Robin Schiller said the heights were measured from the grade, which were
different grades; the height of the lodge building was set at 42 feet at the entrance
off of Monarch, which was as tight as they could get the building with 4 floors of
marketable hotel rooms with the depth for infrastructure. The heights were at
9
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MEETING
Minutes December 06. 2005
Ruth Kruger asked the square footage of the lodge. Szymanski replied that it was
approximately 94,000 square feet. Kruger asked where the current in lieu payment
of $66.37 per square foot came from. Lindt replied it was with the Council In-fill
Code Amendments there was a growth management requirement of the single
family cash-in-lieu payment; it was a mitigation option available to the applicant.
Steve Skadron asked what factors drive the necessity of that 10% variance that was
allowed in the lodge room ordinance (500 square feet per 110dge room). Lindt
replied that it was for flexibility for P&Z and Council.
MOTION: Ruth Kruger moved to extend the meeting 15 minutes; seconded by
Dylan Johns. All infavor, motion carried.
Skadron asked for purposes of clarity the reduction in height along Cooper Avenue
where 210 Cooper was most impacted; how has that been lessened. Cottle utilized
an old roof plan with the new plan indicating the building was now 3 stories; the
gable was deleted.
Tygre asked the material of the shallow barrel vault. Cottle replied the fascia was
the only part that would be seen and that was not determined; it would either be a
pre-finished sheet metal or a membrane roof. Schiller said the color would be a
charcoal grey.
Mr. French asked for a written statement from the city attorney regarding his
concerns.
MOTION: Ruth Kruger moved to continue the Limelight Final PUD to December
13th; seconded by Dylan Johns. All in favor, motion carried.
ckie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
11