HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19900522
(y
rxil.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MAY 22. 1990
Roger Hunt called meeting to order at 4:30pm.
Answering roll call were Graeme Means, Richard Compton, Bruce
Kerr, and Roger Hunt. Welton arrived immediately after roll
call. Mari Peyton and Jasmine Tygre were excused. Michael
Herron had sent a letter of resignation because of having moved
out of the city of Aspen.
COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS
MOTION
Bruce Kerr: I move to direct staff to draft a resolution and
plaque to Michael Herron thanking him for his service to this
commission.
Richard seconded the motion with all in favor.
Welton: Regarding bicycle trails: Would you pass on to the City
Manager a request with a comment. One is that I have been
discovering that a lot of bicycle trails are being used by
construction people and their pickup trucks to load and unload
materials and have been using the trails as construction parking
'~- lots particularly between this and the Clarindon. Three times I
have told them it is a bicycle trail and not a construction
staging area and got a nasty remark from somebody today.
Second is the bicycle trail that goes through the Rio Grande
property. I think the city should be more conscious of not
disrupting bicycle traffic than anybody else if not just by
temporarily grading so that you don't have to take your bicycle
and put it over your shoulder and walk it through. That is right
from where the jail connects up with the trail that goes down by
the water standing ponds. They have the curb cuts there and they
could just tamp the ground down so you could still bicycle ride
over it. Right now it is every dissincentive in the world to use
your bicycle particularly through the city's construction
project.
I would like the City Manager to--if there is not a policy for
use of bicycle trails and temporary bicycle trails--I would like
to know what we can do to make bicycling as pleasant as possible
for everyone.
STAFF COMMENTS
There were none.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
__ There were none.
PZM5.22.90
MINUTES
MAY 8. 1990
After filling in Leslie's mumblings:
Bruce: I move to approve the minutes of May 8, 1990.
Richard seconded the motion with all in favor.
MOLLY GIBSON LODGE CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW
Welton opened the public hearing.
Kim Johnson of the Planning Dept made presentation as attached in
record.
After discussion--
Welton asked for public comment. There was none and he closed
the public portion of the hearing.
MOTION
Roger: I move to approve the conditional use of the summer
outdoor food service operation serving non-lodge patrons at the
Molly Gibson Lodge on Main Street with the following conditions:
Conditions 1, 3, 4 and 5 being the same as the Planning Office
memo dated May 22, 1990. (attached in record)
Condition #2 modified to read "Food service shall be limited to
short order snacks and sandwiches on a self service basis and
only during the hours of 10:00 AM to sunset from I week before
Memorial Day to 1 week after Labor Day.
Richard seconded the motion with all in favor.
ERDMAN CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW
Welton opened the public hearing.
Kim Johnson, Planning Dept made presentation as attached in
record.
Welton asked the applicant if they had any questions regarding
the Planning Office condition.
They had none.
Welton then asked if there was any pUblic comment.
'-
2
PZM5. 22 . 90
.'-;#
There was none and he closed the public hearing.
MOTION
Roger: I move to approve the Erdman accessory dwelling unit
conditional use with the one condition being the same as Planning
Office memo dated May 22, 1990. (attached in record)
Bruce seconded the motion with all in favor.
SMUGGLER MOBILE HOME PARK PUD AMENDMENT
Welton opened the public hearing.
Leslie made presentation as attached in record.
Brooke Peterson, Representative for Smuggler MH Park:
Clarifications on conditions of approval: Paragraph 1, it is the
Architectural Control Committee of the Homeowner's Association
which has to amend their rules and regulations. Paragraph 2, the
amendments of the PUD are conditioned on final approval by the
Board of Directors of the Homeowner's Association--not the
Homeowner's Association itself. We just want to make sure that
it is clear not only for the members of the P&Z but for our own
membership that what we are talking about is when we talk about
structures it is structures of any kind whether they are stick
built, whether they are modular homes or whatever and I would
like it to be reflected somehow in the minutes as being part of
the discussion.
Leslie: You mean letter C?
Brooke: Yes.
Roger: You want that included as a condition?
Brooke: I don't think it needs to be included as a condition. I
think when we do the amendments we perhaps want to be more
expansive in the language.
Welton asked for pUblic comment.
Tim Anderson: I have a mobile home in the park and I would just
like to recommend that you approve these amendments to make life
flow up there.
Doug Driskell: I have a trailer too up there and I second that.
Welton asked if there were any more comments from the public.
There were none and he closed the public portion of the hearing.
>,.--
3
PZM5.22.90
MOTION
Roger: I move to recommend approval of the amendments to the PUD
of the Smuggler area Mobile Home Park with conditions as follows:
That condition #1 as a result of amending the Smuggler precise
plan and redefining the dimensional requirements of this specific
PUD, the Homeowner's Association shall amend their rules and
regulations and procedures for the Architectural Control
Committee
Brooke: What it should say, Roger, is The Architectural Control
Committee of the Homeowner's Association shall amend their rules
and regulations and procedures.
Roger: OK. So corrected. That is condition #1. Condition #2,
the amendments to the PUD are conditioned upon the final approval
of the Board of Directors of the Smuggler Homeowner's
Association. And Condition #3, the final PUD agreement shall be
amended to reflect these changes.
Richard seconded the motion with all in favor.
ASPEN MOUNTAIN SUBDIVISION PUD
ICE RINK. CONTINUED
Welton re-opened the public hearing.
Leslie made presentation as attached in record.
After presentation and discussion:
MOTION
Wel ton: I would entertain a motion to approve conceptual PUD
with condition #1 being as on Planning Office memo dated May 22,
1990. (attached in record)
with #2 being deleted.
#3 through 6 being as on the Planning Office memo.
#7 being changed to read "The applicant shall use a cooling
system for the rink which is the least environmentally impactive
system.
#8 and #9 the same as on the Planning Office memo.
And the new #10 being written to read "That previous
representations of the applicant as to the public nature of the
",-
4
PZM5.22.90
rink shall be complied with as a condition for approval and be
formally spelled out in the deed restriction at the zoning phase
of the approval.
Roger: I so move.
Bruce seconded the motion with all in favor.
Welton closed the public hearing.
Leslie: I understand #3 was to be changed.
Welton: #3 to be changed to new trees and landscape features to
be added.
Roger: I amend my motion
Bruce amended his second with all in favor.
BAVARIAN INN AFFORDABLE HOUSING ZONE
PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE
There was discussion as to whether Welton should
this conference because of conflict of interest.
by the majority of those concerned including the
he should not step down.
step down from
It was decided
applicant that
Paul Murry: I am on Board of Directors at the Aspen Villas. I
would just like to correct one statement that Welton made. In
that statement you said that both the villas are more and more
people who don't live here. I must correct you. The Aspen
Villas--there are more people that live here now than ever did
before.
Welton: I was speaking only from my impression from walking
through both complexes every day.
Bobby Carson: I have noticed that since I have lived at the
Villas Of Aspen that we went through a period where there were a
lot more absentee owners. But it seems more and more lately that
people who are going over there are year around people that work
here.
Tom Baker, Planning Dept. This is like the Ute Avenue affordable
housing project. We are going to be bringing all the affordable
housing projects to the Commission for pre-application
conference. This is not a pUblic hearing. It is just a
mechanism to give the applicant some conceptual thoughts from the
P&Z without any reliance on future decisions.
5
PZM5.22.90
Herb Klein has put a letter in your packet making comments about
this. (attached in record) I also received a letter from the
Villas of Aspen Townhouse Association speaking against this
proposal. These 2 letters will be put in the formal record if
and when an application is brought forward as well as appearing
before this Board.
All I would like to do tonight is get some conceptual guidance
about the 2 alternatives that Parry has here.
Parry Harvey: We are going to be requesting a rezoning to the
affordable housing zone district, a conditional use for the
dormitory housing in the existing Bavarian Inn. The Affordable
Housing Zone District requires a whole bunch of special reviews.
This is 36,000sqft of land--18,000 on each side of the alley. So
it is going to require a special review for the FAR up to 1 to 1
under special review.
Parking must be set by special review. Density must be set by
special review, open space and the height. And there is the
public hearing process for the rezoning.
On the north side the existing Bavarian Inn has 19 rooms in it.
And there are 5 cabins on the property that are currently 1 2-
bedroom, 1 1-bedroom and 3 studios. Then on the south side of
the alley on the west corner of that parcel is a single story 2-
,,- bedroom house. So under the guidelines now there are 32 people
living on this property.
There is restricted access to this neighborhood. There is a lot
of on street parking. There is inadequate parking for the
existing Villas and the new Villas. So the first goal we sat was
to try and internalize parking for residents and guests on the
site. That came up with the concept of an underground parking
structure.
We have created a project with a mix of 1, 2 and 3-bedroom units.
Using drawings Parry showed P&Z other schemes.
What we basically want to do is scheme "B". Basically it allows
for a l-bedroom which is sunken down a half level and either a 2
or 3-bedroom in a 2 story configuration above that. This program
allows for 26% of the site as open space and we feel allows for a
better experience for living. It also allows us to have on-site
management both in the Bavarian Inn and in the other unit.
The underground
deal. And given
it makes sense.
sense.
parking structure is about 3/4 million dollar
that if that is going to serve X number of units
A smaller number of units, it doesn't make
6
PZM5.22.90
I don't know what the use of this is going to be. It is going to
be predominantly Ritz Carlton when the hotel opens and there is
the impact of those workers. Down the road I think it will
probably be for-sale project and will be much along the lines of
the Villas in terms of owner-occupancy except for the fact that
it will be deed restricted under the guidelines.
Tom: Could you give us some conceptual feel for the FAR under
option B and the density.
Parry: Basically what we have is about .85 to 1 FAR.
Additionally in the density calculations we have about 15 or 16%
less density than is allowed under the AH Guidelines under the
special review. The AH Zone had certain density guidelines for a
lot under 27,000sqft. 27,000 up to an acre has to go through a
special review. This is 36,000sqft for the combination of the 2
parcels.
The 18,000sqft that includes the Bavarian Inn is zoned LP. The
18,000sqft on the other side of the alley is zoned R-15. So it
has 2 zone districts on it.
David Brown: The FAR includes the .86 to 1 includes the FAR in
the existing Bavarian Inn as does the density factors.
--
Parry: So we are
review for the AH
Preservation on the
is the R-15.
about 15% below the maximum under special
Zone. The Bavarian Inn is zoned Lodge
north side of the alley. On the south side
Scheme A is 31 new units of 2 bedrooms so there is 62 bedrooms.
That is before the 19 bedrooms in the Bavarian Inn. Scheme B is
60 new, the 19 existing a total of 79 bedrooms. That is a total
of 34 new units. Now that doesn't--when I say 34 new units there
are the 5 cabins that are being demolished that are being
replaced and the one single family. So there are 6 units on the
site that will be torn down and replaced.
David Brown, architect: I have been doing some consulting on
this and scheme A we started with we felt that there were other
options that we should be testing. We felt that by going to
scheme B, stacking units and putting one unit being a flat and
the other unit being a 2 story unit and fixing the flat unit a
half level down would keep the structure within the height
guideline and preserve quite a bit more of the space to landscape
and open space. And at the same time take the parking and
putting it underground creates I more step up towards open space
and landscape.
","-'
7
PZM5.22.90
Tom: The Highway Dept won't allow any access between the bridge
and 7th street because of the new highway.
Parry: So we are looking at relocating and doing some planting
in there and creating that as landscaped space.
Tom: You can talk about access. Whether you prefer the acces on
Bleeker or in the alley if possible. The. 86 to 1 FAR--
36,000sqft lot. How does that feel to you? You recall in the AH
Zone we have a 1 to 1 FAR on lots of 27, OOOsqft or less. And
then at special review from 27,000 up to an acre and it can vary
from .36 to 1 to 1.
Parry: It is 1.1 to 1 below 27.
Tom: The Council has said they don't want to see the lodge, the
LP Zone rezoned to AH. That was in a public meeting.
Welton: The old lodge would sort of be in what capacity?
Parry: Dormitory. One person per room. Dormitory is a
permitted use in the LP Zone. The lodge itself is being
preserved simply because it is economically the best way to do
it. And it works. We are willing to put some restrictions on
occupancy standards on these units. So that a 3 bedroom doesn't
end up with 6 people in it. We are going to keep the same 19
-- rooms but we are going to re-configure into--we are going to put
in a 2-bedroom and a I-bedroom where there are now a dining room
and offices. But that is figured into the density calculations.
The number of units on the site will be under scheme B. 34 units
plus the existing Bavarian. So 34--17 ones, 8 twos and 9 3-
bedrooms.
David: And then among the 19 bedrooms in the Bavarian Inn there
will be a pair of 2-bedroom apartments. There is an existing
manager's apartment and then there is a restaurant which will be
remodeled into a 2-bedroom apartment.
Parry: That is 19 bedrooms configured.
Bobby Carson: So in the Bavarian there will be a maximum of 19
people housed.
Parry: Yes.
Herb Klein: Real people or--you are talking dormitory and yet
you are saying you would limit to occupancy by I live breathing
person per hotel room?
8
PZM5.22.90
Parry: Yes.
Roger: Concerning access by either Bleeker or 7th Street--on
your scheme B it seems to me when you are trying to match up what
you have underneath there and everything that even with this
scheme if you needed to maximize parking you have this whole
section right here that would be--
Parry: We looked at swinging around.
ramp and swing around but you lose just
spaces here that you pick up over here.
And if you come up the
about the same number of
Roger: I am looking at the loss of what looks like 3 spaces in
that section there because nothing changes here. Maybe it is not
an easy swing. But by the same token you pick up all the
parallel spaces from there to there. You are picking up 22 spaces
in that section for the loss of 7 maximum. And underground
parking is more permanent storage for the automobile off the
street.
As far as to whether it should be West Bleeker or on 7th street,
with the highway alignment going to the Main street alignment I
see nothing wrong with the 7th street alignment or the 7th street
access in the future.
Parry: I think it is important to realize that this project will
be up and running prior to the highway.
Roger: My objections to the 7th street would be that that is
where the highway is and let's not complicate the highway with
another curb cut.
David: During the meetings with the neighborhood we started with
this scheme with the ramp and landscaping. We thought this made
sense because given the closing of 8th st this provided a second
emergency access into the neighborhood in addition to West
Bleeker.
We also thought it made sense to provide access for the trash
pickup. One thing to keep in mind is that the traffic is now
coming up Cemetery Lane will eventually migrate to this inner
section in all likelihood because this will be the light and a
light at 7th and Main st.
So to the tune of 7 cars that are stacked in a dwelling at that
light at any given time will be stacked up along this lot. So
that is one of the reasons we put the ramp where we located it.
The neighbors, however, were very adamant in some ways due to the
ratio of parking, which is also the reason why we wanted to
increase the parking to that ratio higher than the standard. We
9
PZM5.22.90
don't want to further increase the deficiency of the parking in
the neighborhood.
But as one who parks on this street all the time I realize that
the loss of any space is dear. The other home owners suggested
we locate the ramp on the alley. That is why we looked at the
other plan showing the closing of the alley and trying to get
whatever traffic that came into this garage off of Bleeker which
would further decrease any impacts on the neighborhood at least
from a parking standpoint.
Welton: My gut reaction is having the ramp go down behind Herb's
house keeps building further away from his house than would
happen in--
Parry: That was the other consideration. We originally had it
over next to the Bavarian. We flipped it over to here but--
Welton: It sort of more--a never-to-be developed zone as is the
alley. I cannot see the Fire Protection District going for
anything that would make this a dead end alley behind Herb I s
house. So I think Bleeker st is a better way. Particularly
since we don't know when 7th st is going to stop being a main
thoroughfare. Bleeker st works whether Hwy 82 is on Main st or
on 7th and Hallam.
Much rattling of maps.
David: We felt it would be easier to turn on and off Bleeker
than it would be coming off this alley. Especially with 4 or 5
cars parked here.
Roger: I have no problems with a Bleeker alignment. Whatever is
convenient for the neighborhood as far as I am concerned. I
would like to see that Bleeker is used and that underground space
for usable storage for either automobile or other things.
Murry: As a resident of the Aspen Villas, they go on Bleeker to
7th--now it is impossible to get onto Bleeker. Now adding all
those people trying to get onto or off of Bleeker it is a real
problem now.
Mrs. Murry: We have 26 units at the Villas. We average 2 and
1/2 cars per unit. Then what happens if there is that accident?
That if Bleeker is the only way out of there, how can a fire
truck get in there? That is a short cuI de sac for such heavy
density. We do have some concerns about safety. That is why we
were trying to keep that traffic off of Bleeker.
10
PZM5.22.90
There seems to be a lot of us kidding ourselves that these people
aren't going to have cars. Or that they are going to put them
under the building and are never going to drive. Our cars at the
Aspen Villas have a complete turnover. We have no residents that
come there, park their car, and don't drive it. I don't know why
this particular project is going to be any different. I don't
know why these 79 bedrooms are not going to have the same as the
Villas. I can't see why they are going to have any less than 79
cars.
We have a 24 year old Son who is in the work force. Every single
one of his friends owns a car--some of them unfortunately have 2-
-a good one and a bad one. And I think that parking and
automobile density are some real major concerns that we at the
Villas want to see addressed.
Herb Klein: When you have a bedroom or an apartment it is not
just the people that are signed up on the lease that live there.
It is their friends who come to town looking for an apartment and
they just need a place to stay till they can find their own
place. People coming at the holidays can't possibly be
accommodated just because of the number of cars in the
neighborhood.
The surface parking for the 2 Villas projects is about the same
as what they are talking about just for this project in this
underground parking space. Conceptually the surface parking for
the 2 Villas projects the number of cars going in now would be
the same for the resident parking proposed on the Bavarian
project and it is a parcel that is 1/5th the size of the acreage
of the Villas project and the Villas project is too dense
relative to its parking and circulation aspects. So you are
talking about dumping an equal number of cars onto Bleeker street
right across the street from the entrance to the parking lot for
the Aspen Villas. Those people have to turn together and they
have to get onto 7th st where the current alignment is going to
be an impossible situation and God know how long the lead time
will be before that highway is in. Even when that is in we don't
really know what the realistic traffic counts are going to be for
7th St even after the straight shots in.
Suffice it to say that left turn parking movements out of Bleeker
are going to be very difficult even with the straight shot.
Right turn they will be subject to back ups but there is a huge
volume of cars.
The other thing the type of workers that are going to be here--
dormitory use I think has proven itself to be incompatible with a
residential neighborhood. And that is what we have got here.
Hotel workers in particular. They are trying to staff a full
11
PZM5.22.90
~,..'
service 24 hour a day hotel. My bedroom is the wall right next
to this parking ramp that is shown on the map. I am not real
pleased about the idea of having the night shift, the people who
come 1n a 2:00 in the morning and the people going out at 2:00 in
the morning, going up and down that parking ramp within 10 or 15
feet of my bedroom. It is totally incompatible.
The zoning on the other side of Main street where Bruce Berger's
house is and the Fillmore house is that is all R-15 also. It
doesn't work for the neighborhood.
Parry: There is another
affordable housing and
whatsoever.
alternative that has been explored with
that is not providing any parking
Graeme: Or decrease the density.
Welton: I told you when this first came out in the newspaper
that this was proposed for this property that the neighborhood
is, at certain times of the year, especially in the winter time,
it is to the point of exploding with cars.
And the thing I would look most critically at on this was that
this development would not worsen that problem. Whereas
providing a ramp off of 7th st going down in order to get
additional parking is not a very good idea in the short term and
is probably not a good idea in the long term as far as fire
protection. A re-work of something that comes off of either West
Main or Bleeker st and perhaps uses some of the area underneath
the alley but does not restrict fire truck access through the
alley. We approved the last of the Lipkin TDRs on the Oblock
property which incorporated parking underneath the alley with the
understanding that there is going to be a nest of utility lines
that were going to have to be re-worked. That is a possibility
for you. Doing a nice rectangle underneath the entire property
is, of course, the least resistance but perhaps in getting a
little extra space underneath the alley is something that will
bring it up to a 1 to 1.
I agree with the Murrys that
unusual for employee housing
neighborhood that is already
appropriate not to make an awful
1 parking space per bedroom
at full strength. But in
bursting at the seams it
situation even worse.
is
a
is
Parry: We are now at .86 to 1.
Welton: Maybe this number should be upped to 1 to 1. The other
big question that Parry had for us at this initial meeting is is
the .86 to 1 FAR a number that the P&Z can get behind?
12
PZM5.22.90
Tom Baker:
this time.
This does not commit you.
This is your feeling at
Graeme: I would have real problems thinking that I
that many people on this property and have it all work.
open space. We have got an 180 foot long facade here.
could see
There is
David: The facade is 160. There are setbacks on each end.
Graeme: If you drive up and down Main street you are not going
to find too many buildings like that. I think it is incompatible
in that sense. And I think that the problem of introducing a
different type of person into a residential area is going to be a
problem too. Where there are going to be guys getting off work
at 11:00 at night and they are going to go out and they are not
necessarily going to be quiet coming in at 1: 00 in the morning
when people are trying to sleep.
I myself am within hearing distance of the project so I am a
neighbor. But I think that could be a real problem. I think the
density is a threshold issue. It is either a make or break
situation. Do the parking garage and solve that problem and live
with all this density or else change the scale of the project
quite a bit.
Bruce: I haven't figured out how we kind of get reversed in our
rolls but conceptually I must say that I am somewhat in favor of
this plan as a conceptual plan. Some of the same arguments that
we talked about when we were considering caretaker units and
carriage houses are now being reversed. If I had an accessory
dwelling unit at my house and it is a small unit then the kind of
person that is likely to be there is going to be the kind of
person that we are talking about that is going to be coming in
late a night and he is going to be disturbing the neighbors.
Again, it all boils down to this thing of where are we going to
put employee housing and I think this is one of the sites that
has been identified. I may still have some concerns about
density, access into the parking and all of that. But
conceptually I think we are headed in the right direction.
Roger: I basically agree with Bruce. One thing I would like to
add as far as the underground parking. Of course everyone would
like less density. We are always squeezing and being pushed out.
But the practicality is if you have less density here, where do
you put that density that you need elsewhere in a community as a
whole and I think every neighborhood should do its part but I
don't think we should overly impinge anyone given neighborhood.
13
PZM5.22.90
I really like the underground parking idea. I like maximizing
the underground and storage idea. And along that concept
particularly in this neighborhood where parking is a problem on
the surface that if you have more than sufficient parking for
your project the problem is leasing out spaces to people in the
neighborhood.
Richard Compton: I do have a concern about the density in this
neighborhood stacking things up like this. But I can't put any
hard numbers or anything like that on it. And having this 160ft
facade on Hwy 82 at the entrance to town is a concern to me both
for the people entering town and the people living in the
building that physically facing right out onto the highway with
no buffer for air or noise seems to me to be extreme.
Welton: My first reaction looking at the site plan was that it
is virtually no open space left after parking. There are just
little fringes of grass around the perimeters of these units and
there is very little--the Villas may not have enough parking--the
Aspen Villas--the Villas of Aspen. Are you changing your name to
the what?
Mrs. Murry: The Bleeker Place West.
Roger: Hurray! Good for you.
Welton: Let me tell you something. The old Villas are changing
their name to West Bleeker Place.
There may not be enough parking because it was built before the
parking requirements were stylish but there is a lot of space
between buildings and a lot of breathing area. Agreeing with
Graeme--this is an awfully long facade. Maybe it needs to be
broken up. Maybe it needs scaled into 2 or 3 smaller chunks
scaled similar to what is further down Main street. However the
block of Villa of Aspen townhouses here is 100ft long. units 32
through 36 is 520ft units in a row which never needed to be
addressed because there was never a question of anybody seeing it
from a highway.
So open space--it seems like there is not real outdoor breathing
space. This facade is too long.
Concerning Herb's problem about cars coming down behind his
bedroom at 2:00 in the morning. I was in Denver last weekend and
there are gates on the underground parking garages for most of
the large buildings in Capital Hill that restrict entry. You
could have a timed entry situation where the people who live
there absolutely know that they can only get their car out
between 9:00 in the morning and 6:00 in the evening. They can't
14
PZM5.22.90
get it out at night and they have to use public transportation.
Maybe RFTA needs to run an hour later at night so the people can
get back in. But that would restrict ingress and egress from the
parking to times that were more manageable for the neighborhood.
I do agree that if you don't in fact use the 1 to 1 parking
spaces that are being acquired maybe leasing--
Parry: Is this being required or being suggested or is that a
goal to shoot for?
Welton: This is advisory pre-application kind of first reaction
stuff. I told you 6 months ago that I thought at least 1 to 1
for bedrooms was going to be a minimum. And I remember at that
time there was a figure that in the newspaper of 90 units. And I
think you explained to me that wasn't 90 units--that was 90
bedrooms. And I think we are looking at what 91 bedrooms right
now?
Parry: No. We are looking at 79 bedrooms with the underground
parking scheme as it is laid out here. It is 79 including the
Bavarian. That is total on the site. I just did a quick
calculation based on FAR and density and said this much square
footage will handle this many bedrooms. That was before we got
into site planning.
Welton: In general the .86 to 1 seems to be
philosophically. But looking at it on the site plan it
like it is too much building and not enough air around it.
fine
looks
Parry: We haven't delineated open spaces and areas the way we
should. We will do that as we go through it.
Welton: It just looks like it is way too much building on this
and with the 3 stories all around here it seems like it is more
like 1 and 1/2 to 1 just looking at the site plan.
Parry: In terms of that facade what we tried to do and it
doesn't show it in the elevation but it shows it in the site plan
was set back the 2 ends of the building so that that length of
the facade that you see on page 2 in the center is less than 90
feet.
Graeme: But you stand across the street from the building and
you don't see the 6ft setback.
Welton: But even driving you view this happening for longer than
any other building on Main street. There is no continuous wall
whether it is offset or not.
Parry: The Floradora building is the closest thing we have got.
15
PZM5.22.90
Welton: You are not that set back. You could add a lot more
interest too. This is interesting. The diamond windows are
really interesting. This is set back and it is really set back
from these gable ends but it is still a fairly repetitive
barrier.
Meeting was adjourned. Time was 7:10pm.
16