Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19910319 ~~p RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MARCH 19. 1991 Meeting was called to order by Vice Chairlady Jasmine Tygre at 4:30pm. Answering roll call were Sara Garton, Richard Kerr, Mari Peyton, Roger Hunt and Jasmine Tygre. was excused. compton, Bruce Welton Anderson MINUTES FEBRUARY 19. 1991 Richard made a motion to approve minutes of February 19, 1991. Mari seconded the motion with all in favor. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Status of Ritz Amy: We did receive a letter from the partnership requesting an extension of construction schedules. There is a section M which allows the owner to come in and apply for extension of construction schedule and for City council to consider extending construction schedules based on evidence presented by the owner. It is going to Council on Monday the 25th and ask them to schedule that public hearing. In the meantime we will be working with the owner to get a little more information. Right now the PUD has a requirement that the Ritz Carlton will be occupied in late October. It is clear to us that they will not meet that deadline. All of the other elements are tied to that first deadline. So the ice rink and the other sections of PUD are____mumble. I don't have any more information than that. They have requested a public hearing and that will likely be held on April 22nd. STAFF COMMENTS Roxanne: The good news about the Pedestrian and Bikeway Plan-- last night at city Council work session they went through all of the budget issues for capitol improvement gains to get the Pedestrian Bikeway Plan through the Park's planning done for this year and on into the future and it looks good. It looks like we are finally going to see some action. LEWIS 8040 GREENLINE AND CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW Jasmine opened the public hearing. Leslie submitted certification of posting. " She then made presentation as attached in record. PZM3.19.91 ".,- Roger: What is the lot square footage? stan Mathis, Architect: 3,800sqft. Bruce: My question relates to parking spaces at the Tipple Inn. Do they have parking spaces that they can give up without creating a non-conformity with their own property? Mathis: No. I will be able to produce to the staff an agreement that shows that the owners of that house and the house below have by deed 2 parking spaces that have been in existence for quite a long time. It is not deeded. It is restricted or there is some agreement that forever and forever gives the parking spaces in their parking. That was worked out many years ago between Dr. Yarborough and Andermans. Leslie: Richard: Mathis: Richard: Mathis: compton: We will check that. It is a condition of approval. How many bedrooms in the current house? 2. And the proposed house? 2. Plus the accessory dwelling. No massive increase in bedrooms to generate more cars. Jasmine asked for public comment. There was none and she closed the public portion of the hearing. Roger: I am a little concerned with looking at these pictures as to how this is going to be perched up there as far as exposure. Mathis answered Roger's question using of the existing box is about 820sqft. around 1,300sqft. the model. The footprint The footprint of that is MOTION Mari: I move to approve the Lewis 8040 Greenline Review and Conditional Use subject to the conditions as outlined in the Planning Office memo dated March 19, 1991 as attached in record. Richard seconded the motion. Roger: I am a little concerned about the massing of the structure on such a small lot. The dwelling is 3,700sqft so it is almost 1 to 1. But the elimination of the accessory dwelling unit--300sqft just might improve that massing substantially. I am not sure we should continue to have that conditional use language in there because there are going to be spots like this that maybe an accessory dwelling unit for massing purposes and things like that is not appropriate. 2 /' PZM3.19.91 Leslie: Unless the accessory dwelling stan cannot take advantage of a floor adding an accessory dwelling unit. My understand is because the accessory dwelling unit is not below grade that it is part of his allowable floor area. unit is 100% above grade, area bonus because he is Everyone voted in favor of the motion except Bruce. TEXT AMENDMENT - SECTION 7-602 DEMOLITION. PARTIAL DEMOLITION OR RELOCATION OF STRUCTURES IN HISTORIC OVERLAY DISTRICT OR HISTORIC LANDMARK Jasmine opened the public hearing. Roxanne made presentation as attached in record. Roger: Roxanne brought up a piece of property with a problem that little piece of property--the Lane parcel--what that has done as far as access to the alley for a restaurant. They decided not to be defined as a restaurant but a club so that they wouldn't have to get access to the alley. My point is generally if there is a demolition of such property, I would like to see the re-development be reviewed to mitigate '- such problems. Is there a way of getting that into a review structure to address it? Roxanne: I am not sure that this is the way to do that. I think that in the way that you are talking about is that HPC be more cognizant of P&Z pOlicies. Roger: That was my problem with the re-development or new development as reviewed by HPC. Roxanne: It already is anyway and it wouldn't necessarily come through you in that case anyway. Roger: The problem is their review is not going to cover that kind of consideration by the very nature of their review. Jasmine: Yes. And then the applicant comes in and says "But HPC has approved this for re-development". And then puts the onus on P&Z as though they had relied on the HPC approval which doesn't necessarily cover the things that we are concerned with. But that is the kind of thing we got caught in in the particular instance that Roger has described. So we are trying to avoid having that sort of thing happen in the future. 3 PZM3.19.91 Roxanne: I will say that in that particular case HPC has already granted final approval for that and there is access that is going to be provided through that building. I do want to bring the 2 boards together and discuss these kinds of matters. Jasmine asked for public comment. There was none and she closed the public portion of the hearing. MOTION Roger: I move to approve the addition of Exemption Clause to Demolition provision of HP Code Language and Clarification of section 7-602. (attached in record) Mari seconded the motion with all in favor. ART PARK / TROLLEY / SNOWMELT CONCEPTUAL SPA CONTINUED Jasmine turned meeting over to Mari at this point. Alan Richman: In terms of the multiple use concept for the Theatre building--basically from the very beginning of developing this Art Park project we have had 3 understandings about the way we would develop the project and the way we would design it. since this is public land benefits. It shouldn't be oriented kind of a project. it should offer a lot of public a private oriented or a single use The Theatre Company really doesn't envision that it's rehearsal and performance schedule would take the full use of the building. It never conceived that it would need a building year round. And so in it's own planning purposes there was always the opportunity and the availability for other uses of the building. We knew that there were many other non-profit kinds of events such as the writer's Conference and the kinds of performances that the Museum has been doing recently, Design Conference kinds of activities, dance and music activities that don't always have a home that need a home and might like to use this facility. So really from the beginning design stage we committed ourselves to having other users of this building. We are hoping that we can receive some kind of conceptual go- ahead to get more specific about how the building would be operated. But we feel at this point it would be entirely appropriate for the Commission to condition an action on any 4 PZM3.l9.9l number of requirements that this building be a multi-use building. We firmly believe that is the only way the building should be operated--as a multi-use facility for the non profits that really don't have homes. Carol Lowenstern: In the same way, we would offer our dormitory space that we are proposing to the other groups. We have a very, very hard time finding places to put our visiting artists. So it is vital to our plan that we have this space to put people. It isn't permanent. We wouldn't have anyone in there more than 8 weeks at the outside if they came in to do a play. It would be 4 weeks of rehearsal, 4 weeks of performance and they would be out. There wouldn't be any automobile usage down there. We are aSking people to park in the parking garage. These people would fly in. We would pick them up at the airport. They can walk into town. There wouldn't be any impact in that sense. If we didn't have any housing and we had to put them in Snowmass or wherever as we will probably this summer, then they have to have cars and that creates a whole new scenario. So we feel very, very we want. It doesn't for 12 people to stay units for directors. strongly that this is a vital add a whole lot of footage. in dormitory space and then part of what It is a unit a couple small Susie: In the plan we are actually giving up theatre space for the dormitory space so that we can keep the footprint of the building reasonable. The requirements of the theatre are so particular. Many small theatres have what they call fly space. You can hoist your extra sets up above the stage. We don't want that. We are going to have a very minimal bare-bones kind of a theatre and giving up a lot of luxuries so that we can accommodate these visiting artists. In terms of our plans to grow--we don't want to grow in size so much as we want to grow toward higher professional standards. We are already making friends with universities that have drama departments in the hope of some day, for example Stanford university a good friend of our theatre, there is a very important man in the theatre department of Stanford who we would love to have an alliance some day so that young talent can come for the summer--technical talent as well as acting talent. Kids who could come and learn from our pros or maybe the professionals themselves coming and teaching our local kids. In this way we can someday reach this goal of being a real self-supporting ensemble theatre. 5 PZM3.19.91 ,- Alan: Presented 2 letters at this time. One from the International Design Conference speaking about being interested in using the facility for workshops, performances and panel discussions for their program needs. Also a letter from William Shorr who is the director of the Aspen Playwriter' s Conference supporting the need for the facility and the belief that this kind of facility would be a benefit to the community. (both letters attached in record) Also attached in record is a letter to the editor from Deborah Barnekow who has worked for the Art Park and supporting both the accommodations and the theatre. Mari: Like I said last week I am very supportive of the concept of the theatre itself. I do think we should require an operating plan that shows how you make it available to other non-profits. The thing that I have reservations about is your accommodations. I don't doubt that it would be a great asset to the theatre and it would be very helpful to you. My problem with it is there are lots of people who would find it a great help to be able to build accommodations or housing on public land for their own purposes. I don't see how we can justify having accommodations housing on public land for one specific outfit whether it is a non-profit or what. How do we say artists can be accommodated on public land but if you are a waiter you have no chance. The other problem I have is it is also, in away, competing against the lodging and housing industry in town. Are these people professional artists? Are they students? It is supposed to be a community theatre with a lot of local talent. I wonder why we have to import the talent. If it is going to be students and it is going to be a community thing, why can't we find volunteers to house them like we used to do with the racers who came to town? What do you say to people who have small lodges or dormitory space that are competing with publicly subsidized housing space? Those are my reservations about it. Richard: The housing is a sticking point for me as well. My reservations are narrower and less than yours are. It is simply . putting them on park land there and turning a public park into housing. Putting it in that location it becomes a--you have a dozen people living there for a theatre season in the summer, it becomes their residence. Their friends come over to party and you have a great little place but it is the middle of the public river park. If you could move 200 yards, it wouldn't bother me. 6 PZM3.19.91 Leslie: There is no question that that land was purchased with 6th penny money which is open space funds. Our real question is the trolley barn site because it was purchased with 7th penny but re-financed with 6th penny and what that means as far as requiring a vote to change the use of the land to permanent. The real question is the trolley barn as a permanent building. Sara: It is clubhouse. You they want one. Leslie: Any growth requires mitigation of employee housing. You have talked about housing but you have not talked about fully deed-restricted housing and that is what employee housing is. So if the theatre is built they would be required to provide employee housing. If we are to consider housing down on this site I think we should be considering fully deed restricted I employee housing and then those people who live there must qualify within the guidelines. just tough. The Rugby players might want a should allow them a clubhouse on that land if Mari: Visiting artists would not qualify. Leslie: There is a 6 month minimum lease restriction. Bruce: The housing has been characterized as dormitory housing. My vision of dormitory housing is several people in a room with one bathroom at the end of the hall. Is that what you are talking about? Are you going to put some star actor in dormitory housing? Susie: Yes. They will be happy. They will be thrilled. Alan: It conceptually was our intention to provide deed-Ian restricted affordable housing because that is the requirement that we have to meet. Leslie: Is that a recognition that aside from providing local accommodations for visiting artists was the housing mitigation a separate issue or was this intended to-- Alan: This is hoped to meet that requirement. We haven't gone out and done the computation of the number. We knew that the very concept of providing housing on this site would be controversial and therefore until there is a yea or nay on that concept, getting beyond that seems fruitless. If you buy the concept we will get into all of the details. Remember Conceptual SPA is really--we don't know what use is appropriate to the site. We are all planning it together. But we do have plans that go back to the 70s and the early 80s and 7 PZM3.l9.9l the late 80s that say a performing arts center or arts usage is appropriate for this site. I don't think we are the first ones in on the Oklahoma Land Rush. I think that this site is designated for arts for 15 years. And we are finally taking up the challenge. Jasmine: Among the many exercises that were done on all the Rio Grande Conceptual SPAs was prioritizations of the various uses. We anticipated that we would have the same type of pressure by many groups in town--non profits--to use the public land just as we have had with Marolt. And so there was prioritization of the elements that were going to be included in the Rio Grande plan. It might be helpful to bring those in to see how our priorities ranked and in terms of the actual applications which are now coming before us. One of the things that we were concerned about was that all of a sudden there was no open space left. Alan: In every case it was transportation, open space and cultural uses with performing arts being the specified use repeatedly. The specific statement that was made in the '88 Conceptual SPA that you are talking about said "The Snow Dump shall be reserved for future arts usage". And this was the place that you did designate for arts usage. It shows on the Conceptual SPA Plan. It is a condition of Conceptual SPA Resolution 88-37. This was the use that you thought was appropriate. Back In 88 originally the performing arts facility was suggested up in the area where the Library is now and it was a much, much larger facility. And the final decision was no that is really not where we want to go. The Commission at the time was working with Richie Cohen who was representing the Arts groups and a conclusion was reached that that site was appropriate and at the time you came to the conclusion that a tent-like structure was what you conceived of at that time for that site. Now we are coming back here and saying we understand the use is appropriate. We don't think the tent works for our purposes. We think that a building is appropriate in that location. But it is in no way changing that use that this commission and city Council approved for the site. Jasmine: ~y conception of what an arts usage was in a tent-like structure 1S a completely different conception of what you people conceive of as your Art Park structure. 8 PZM3.l9.9l Mari: I would like to get a feel'ng from the Commissioners now about their feeling conceptually bout using this space for the theatre and multi-use. And also a out the housing issue. Roger: I don't have too much pr blem with the theatre itself. But I agree with Richard very st ongly concerning that this is really not the place for housing short or long term. And that relates to. the more park aspect 0 this particular piece. And, like Richard, if it was 200 yards omewhere else I could probably deal with it a lot better. The snowmelt is there--like it Council definitely want to put it see that somewhere else and mayb comes before us. or not--and we and the city somewhere else. Maybe we will we won't when the snowmelter Planning recommendation would be there and get the snowmelt out of eventually to get a theatre here and not to allow housing. Jasmine: I have a real with the concept of a real permanent building in that parti ular location. I just don't think that is appropriate in that particular location. A lot of the things that people think make t really attractive are things that I think would be drawbacks 0 it. The lack of automobile access; I think it sounds really ice to have people walking to theatres, walking to public perfo ances. I think as a practical and realistic matter that is not a appropriate thing. I would much rather see another I I agree with the members of the C really inappropriate on that site. cation for a theatre facility. mmission that housing would be When the County referred the Co everybody came up with the same i a building and said well, we will this, this and this instead of space and saying to them "What do build a building that was base required by these various groups. unity Center plans to us and ea that said somebody designed allocate little parts to this, oing to the groups that need you need?" and then trying to on the functions that were It just seems to me a shame that lot of these things are going on here are an Art Park Theatr Company that is looking for space--somehow doesn't it seem to you that it would have been a nice thing for them to have been included in a Community Center Plan somehow? Or the school site? There were so many opportunities that could have bee taken advantage of and which now somehow, according to this printout, are impossible for groups like this to use. It se like a crying shame that we have got these buildings all ove the place. None of them is 9 being used full time and we have are half empty part of the time an benefit from any of these structur s. To me building another structure another problem like this and I appropriate way to plan this. PZM3.l9.9l ot all of these edifices that nobody is really getting full here is just going to cause eally don't think this is the Mari: I think we do have a cons en us on the Commission that Bruce: I will say I am changing y feelings a little bit. I am more and more attracted to the i ea of this park and the small theatre being there. But that doe n't change the concerns that I stated last week. I am not ready to sign off on the dealing an SPA Conceptual Development Plan a proval to this. I am willing to think about it more than I was ast week. I am enamored by the idea of havin this theatre in the Art Park. But my concern about the planning of how it came about that this is the right group for that pi ce of land and that somebody already signed the lease. I don't how that fits together. But I suppose .I am moving more in the irection of at least thinking about this project. Mari: It looks like it is going 0 come down to a vote. We are split. Sara: Alan, I just wanted to co ent on the history of all of this as to how it was conceived of--this whole art area down there. Again, it happened and we have gone from Lincoln Center down to this nice, wonderful, m nageable little--but it is--I think it got on that plan because those guys were really pretty colorful. It got in there. I do 't know if we have to be stuck with that history--that that is wh re the theatre is going to be. Susie: I wasn't even here whe happened. But I do know that the in this park. And as long as objects, but as soon as we want to an issue. that Performance Arts thing spen Theatre Co has a history e are made of canvas no one make it into boards it becomes We are there already and if the R gby Team wants to fill out the SPA application, let them. But our history-and we have moved from one basement space to another into another and to the place where we are now. And we are mad of canvas and we want to turn that canvas into wood. Luckily teArt Park has evolved around us and it just seems like it is so perfect and so appropriate. 10 PZM3.l9.9l I want to remind the Commission th t what we are doing is giving to the community something absolut ly wonderful and sublime. We are not trying to run a filling s ation or a doughnut shop. It is a non-profit arts organization. And housing 200 yards away, I am afraid that would be objectiona Ie to the people also. Carol and I have a list of the pe sonal people in this town that we have approached for a spare ro m or a loft or a lodge space for not only talent but our tech c ew that comes in. And we have 100% refusal rate. The people a e very gracious but they say "No". It is almost totally impos ible to house people with the budget that we operate on. SNOWME T Chuck Roth, Engineering: read pre entation as to history of snow dumps in Aspen. Mari: My feeling is the snow dump has to 00. Just strictly as a planning recommendation I believe the City is making the same mistake that a lot of people make when it comes to public land. Because they are not writing the c eck to pay for the use of it, it is treated like it is worth ess land or like it is not valuable. If the city were having 0 write a check for the market value of that piece of land they re putting that snow on, they wouldn't be finding it very econom cal to put snow there. I just think that we have to find anoth r place to put it. And, of course, no one is going to want i anywhere at all. But no one wants it there either. Sara: Chuck, if you had 6 melters it would be ideal? Chuck: Yes, that would take all t e snow as fast as it comes off of the streets. The footprint of the operation would be extremely reduced. There would be no snow dump anymore. Mari: What about the sludge that omes out of the pits? Chuck: That is currently remove with a backhoe and put in a truck and hauled to the County dum Richard: How much area would be r quired for those 6 melters? Chuck: About 1/8th of an acre 0 1/4th of an acre or a number something on that magnitude vs th 3 acres historically reduced to 2 acres by widening the chann I and providing for the Arts Dept. So we are down to about 1/4 of an acre. Leslie: But you also have to consider that the more snowmelting ,..--, - 11 PZM3.l9.9l you have, you may have to increase your water treatment capacity. And that is an environmental question. Sara: There is another piece of land we are about to get down next below the Meadows that is going to be a wildlife preserve or going to be called a natural preserve. It is next to a river again and how you get to it other than by foot-bridge--anyway it would be within 2 kilometers of the center of town. Roger: I have been on this Board long enough to be through every proposal that has come up for it including notifying the City Council that they are in violation of their own codes. I would love to see the snowmelter most anywhere else other than this. But Hal Clark last week brought up the idea of the Airport which you say is 3 miles and he says is 2.3 miles. I know there are some problems with that. Have you looked at it before? Chuck: We haven't looked at that specific site. We have looked at down valley sites and have assessed them on an economic basis. I don't know that the County P&Z or the Airport people are going to approve of that proposed location. And it seems to me to be a NIMBY situation. As strictly an economic issue, we took a drive out there in a truck to time how long it takes. From the central core out there and back is about 21 minutes. This is during morning traffic hour. Whereas it is about 6 minutes from the center of the commercial core to the existing site. So potentially we would need about 3 and 1/2 times as many dump trucks hauling to get the snow out of town at the same rate. We have about 4 trucks now so that would be about another 8 or 10 trucks on top of the ones we have. It is just an economic question and a political question. Roger: It is a little unfair to use the morning hour. lot of it between 3 and 7 in the morning in which case would be drastically reduced. You do a the time That does seem to me a possibility not that it won't have some insurmountable obstacles in the process. But I would like it looked into further. My desire would be to have the snowmelter off the site it is located right now and get that into more of a park type of atmosphere. The problem I equipment that backhoe and it there. have with 6 snowmelters is if you look at the is down there right now, there is at least one looks like there is an awful lot of stuff down '-"-,.",, 12 PZM3.19.91 Chuck: It is the remains and remnants of the impound lot. This snow dump conversation used to be the snow dump impound lot conversation and we took care of a lot of the impound lot. Richard: We do need to balance the costs of putting the snow somewhere else with the cost of not having that land available as a park as a reconstructed riparian area which I think would be a tremendous benefit to the community. I would recommend some level of extra money put into removing the snow from the center of town. Sara: I agree. Roger: I would ultimately. But I don't know the timing of it. There would have to be a practical solution. Jasmine: I don't think there is anybody on Commission who really is in love with having the snow dump on this particular property. I think we have to take into account not just the land use here but obviously questions that have to do with not only where you are going to put the snow dump but what other kind of costs which might be equally unattractive in terms of transportation costs, labor costs etc. As a planning recommendation obviously if it were possible to find another location for the snowmelt facility that would certainly be my choice. Bruce: I agree with that. Mari: I think we have a consensus. It could be that it won't ever be moved until it has to be moved. And maybe it will have to be moved if an SPA plan does not include it as approved. That might be what forces the issue. But I think as a Board we are going to recommend against the continuance of the snowmelter in that location. PUBLIC COMMENT ON ART PARK Tim Brown: One idea that we have had for the theatre all along has been to include an informal gallery for paintings and visual artists in the lobby. That, in my mind, would be an important multi-use aspect of the theatre because there is a whole community of local artists who have a very difficult time finding an appropriate venue for their art. Right now there is a lot of activity at the Prince of Peace Chapel where artists regularly have shows. But this can be a great downtown location for the visual artists who are working in Aspen to have regular shows. " 13 PZM3.l9.9l The park down there is a green park but it is also a kind of open air laboratory for working sculptors. Every summer we have local artists doing sculptures down there. One thing that I could envision some dormitory style housing for is to bring in one nationally recognized artist a summer to come and do a piece on that spot and put him up for that time. That would be a very exciting thing to have there for the public to see and also an inspiration to the artists who are local and who are working down there. I think it is very important for both the theatre and the visual as a community that we do have a mix of national artists--theatre and visual artists coming in. That is why the housing is dormitory housing is so crucial in this aspect. We need to have that. Finally I would just say that having the theatre really is a question of artistic guidelines. The Theatre Co has brought their projects along for 7 years now. And they really can't go the next step for Aspen--the next step in terms of the theatre excellence. They deserve that chance and I think Aspen as a community deserves that. Pat Fallin: I am the Vice President of the Board of Trustees of the Art Museum. We would like to have other cultural neighbors down there. The Art Museum is in need of having--this would also have the joint uses. The Art Museum is in need--we have lecturers come in visiting, directors of other museums and people in the art world. We do not have the facilities to hold these lectures in a space where people can really hear them. Our acoustics are terrible. We would like to have a film program. Most art museums across the country have some type of film program. This would be an opportunity to use that facility for that and to broaden the education program which we are unable to do in the facility we have. Just as a personal comment, I like to think of this as the theatre that grew. And I really think that they deserve a permanent place. It has been an excellent theatre for locals. It is really a locals theatre. And having a visiting artist here only extends the talent that we have in this community. As far as the housing goes, we spent a lot of years developing housing for the Music Associates which is on public land and is dedicated to a specific group. So I see this as sort of being an extension of that need that we helped alleviate the Music Associates. 14 PZM3.19.91 Rachel Richards: In light of the long-range community planning effort that I have been attending quite a bit, there seems to be a strong incentive among the community for support for non- profits. And I see this as being one of our emerging non-profit groups. I look at what our other non-profits need to flourish and as Pat just pointed out--it is housing. MAA was not going to survive if we did not house 300 of their employees because that traditional pool of housing for accommodations had dried up. The emphasis that has gone into the Meadows property has been to allow them to have a level of growth that will allow them to house the people who come for the summer for non-profit events. The Institute has housing there and that is what makes it all possible. I live in Hunter Creek. I have made sure that the Hunter Creek Boards have received copies of this SPA--the Lone Pine, both free market and deed restricted. Presidents of their associations have received it. I haven't seen them here to make negative comments. And they are the immediate larger neighborhood for this project. I started working at the Art Park as a weeder, the gardening, the planting of the flowers and things like that. When the plan evolved for having a canvas tent to a permanent structure I was a little hesitant. I liked the rural feeling of the tent. But I have come to feel that it is really appropriate. I haven't seen them put up a gigantic structure. I haven't seen them reaching for the sun or the moon. I have seen them reaching for something that is really sustainable. And when the kids come down the Rio Grande Trail on their bikes they will want to stop and play on the porch there. And we can put other uses into that area. I have grown to feel that it is very appropriate for that site. Hal Clark: First of all I am speaking for myself. It has been my experience in life--it is very rare to find positive energy in a community especially this community on anything. I have found more associated with this Art Park than anything in my 22 years of being here. I think that is extremely important. I am involved with 5 different organizations that came to Council last night for replacement language for use of open space property to be on the ballet on May 7th. The idea would be that if some group wants to use 6th penny property or land purchased with 6th penny monies that essentially they would either have to replace it with land or money back into the 6th penny fund. It is something that a lot of organizations are very concerned about and we are working on that. We see a huge trend to just jump on 15 PZM3.19.9l 6th penny lands because it is free land. concerned about that. And we are very I would like to give you a little bit of history in regards to what I would call nuisance uses. And the snowmelt/dump is a nuisance use. I was in the gravel pit business for 12 years. I know what a nuisance use is. There were gravel pits in the City of Aspen at one time. There was also asphalt plants in the City of Aspen. There were concrete plants in the city of Aspen. The dumps were located in the city of Aspen. Then they were located at the Maroon Creek. Now they are 8 miles outside of town. The large uses--industrial uses and space-using uses in the City were relocated out of the City. An example that comes to mind is the hospital because of the space needs and re-Iocated outside of town. The whole business center was created 20 years ago because of needs for larger space for larger types of uses like lumber yards, the telephone company and a variety of other places because that type of use was felt to be incompatible with the downtown area. I submit that the snowmelt is that type of use. I personally believe it will be located outside of town. just a matter of when. The use has already been established there from a land use perspective. The use is there whether it is canvas or wood. The catch 22 of this Art Park issue is that in order to create the park there, you need to have the permanent structure. This is the emphasis for creating the park. The energy of this group will create that park down there. If the Art Park is not there and goes away, I don't think it will be created. It is Carolyn Zaroff, speaking for the Aspen Writer's Foundation: I wanted to address an issue about competing with the private housing market. We of the Writer's Foundation bring in, in the course of our 3 or 4 programs a year, 250 to 300 writers and publishers and editors who use public/private accommodations. The rooms that we can't afford to pay for, and I am sure it is true for every non-profit, are those people that we have to bring in. We have a need for perhaps 50 faculty in the course of the year that we have to place in the private homes which is more and more difficult. That is the sort of help we need is housing. I think that the audience that we are going to generate is going to build hotel and motel rooms. other needs for the Writer's Foundation is for reading space. We use the Community Center now. We have work shops allover at the Community Center and lecturers. We are going to lose that 16 PZM3.l9.9l facility. We don't know where we are going next. And they have reached out to include us. Remo Lavagnino: I was on that Rio Grande Task Force and it lasted for a year and a half. We heard from over 90 groups who had interest in using that land. So we did have a comprehensive representation as far as the city was concerned. And area was provided for a performing Arts Center and it was a huge structure exceeding the height of the Hotel Jerome with it's flag space. The plan was approved before city council by Resolution and the only reason it wasn't implemented was that they didn't have the funds for it. So here is a group of enthusiastic volunteers who have taken upon themselves to actually attempt to bring to fruition in a more modest way what the city was incapable of. I think that deserves a lot of consideration. Jeff Bently, Dance Aspen: I don't have any direct connection to the endeavor except as a member of Fraternal Arts Community in town and the realization that their needs ultimately are all of our needs. I guess the secondary relationship would be the fact that I am connected with the organization that was unsuccessful in the last 20 years in getting--and possibly well that it happened in that respect in terms of size. But I think there is a lot of assumptions that we make about space. And I sort of have a feeling about some of the comments that I have heard sitting here the last 2 weeks that there is a lot of space to be used and that it is too bad we can't all use them together. I think the assumption is based on the kind of simplistic about the idea of what the needs of various arts organizations are. Arts organizations cannot just fit into any spaces especially when they are operating 90% of the time simultaneously. The arts economy in this community is a summer economy. The Music Festival, Dance Festival, Theatre operation all happen at the same time. So it is almost impossible to think of them working out of the same edifice or edifices. When you are considering this further I would like, if you could, to re-visit the whole idea of non-profit organizations. I think we see the leadership of the organizations, the non-profits, as being the owners-a sense of ownership and why you give this thing to these specific people. Ultimately that is not what we are talking about. We are talking about community resources that exist only to provide service back to the community. "'"^''' So when you are talking about a theatre plan or you are talking about a place to house, you are not talking about a difference 17 PZM3.l9.9l between why the artist and not the writer. That is a different issue. It is a commercial issue vs something that is it's entire existence is framed around service to the community. That is why the board is called a board of trustees. It is not a board of directors. One closing comment is the roll of artists and arts organizations in any community to give you these kinds of problems. You must rise to the creative solutions as they rise to create a board to provide you with those problems. Bruce: I am convinced that from a conceptual standpoint this is a proper use for that land--The Art Park and the Theatre. The reason I am willing to approve it on a conceptual basis is there are going to be at least 3 checks. There is going to be a public vote on whether that land can be used. Another is their own fund raising efforts. I f they don't raise the money, they are not going to be able to build the building. The 3rd is I am confident that the city's legal staff will draft lease documents in such a way that if the Aspen Theatre should ever go under that somehow or another that structure will stay in the public domain. So I am convinced at this point from a conceptual standpoint that the Art Park and the Theatre are proper uses for that land and I am prepared to so vote. Mari: I am convinced also. We have had some comment about "You '" can just go in there and stake your claim". Well, maybe that is who deserves to have it. I believe that the people who do go in there and take an action and stake their claim--we have been talking about the SPA for this land for years and years and years. And I myself am encouraged that we still have enough community spirit somewhere-a grass roots organization really got this together. And I am fully in support of it. I still have reservations about the employee housing. You brought up the question it is not the waiter or the artist because we are talking about a commercial as opposed to community service--well, why not the firemen, why not the policemen or the Planning Office getting to live in parks? That is the crux of what bothers me about it. Richard: I am fully in support of the use as a park and theatre space. Again my one bone of contention is with the housing in that specific location. Perhaps we should work with some of these groups about other locations that might work. I mentioned last time putting it on top of the trolley barn where the trolley people said there was going to be room for housing. But we are not going to build it right now. Perhaps that can mesh. 18 PZM3.l9.9l It is temporary housing. They are not going to move in permanent people. And it is an issue like the MAA. However the MAA has invested in some commercial housing and rent it out in the winter time to pay for their summer use. But I guess they didn't see fit to do so. And I don't know if these other organizations have the clout to do that kind of investment around town. Barring that I think it is worthwhile some participation in creating that kind of housing. question of location. Roger: I agree with Bruce and Richard. I definitely prefer not to have housing 1n with the theatre. But to throw out a brainstorm or bombshell--across the river is the Art Museum. The city owns the Art Museum. Wouldn't that be a better place for housing and then re-create the Art Museum and Theatre over in this area. Just a thought. It moves the housing closer to where it belongs. sort of public For me it is a I will vote in favor of this conceptually. I really do not want to vote with it including housing at that site. Sara: I think the most successful parks in the country and probably in the world--Golden Gate, Central Park are multi-use. Museums encroach into the park. There are games being played. There are paths going through them. They work. I agree with what Hal said. I have been weeding at the Arts Parks since it began too and I have never seen such community spirit. To dream up something that should go there is backass. Something happened to the community there and space that was for the community. And all they are asking us to do is legitimize it. And that is probably actually what we should be doing. They planned it probably better than what we could probably plan it. And so that is very, very important. Studies show one thing but people do another thing. People have already done something there. I hope that we can approve a concept down there but dangle the housing. I want to see it multi-use. Jasmine: I am the philistine of the P&Z. But I feel very much the way I did when all the little children came in to be able to put the nursery school on the Marolt property. I just don't feel that this is the proper use for this particular site in as formalized and intensive a manner as the Art Groups would like to use it. Not here and not in a permanent theatre facility is the way I feel. My feeling is that this not the best and most appropriate spot for his type of endeavor. I am very concerned about the housing. Whenever you do something that you think is good for one particular segment of the community, even though it 19 PZM3.l9.9l is a pretty wide-spread portion of the community and very well intentioned, you then open the door for future equally well intentioned well-meaning segments of the community and deserving to come forth to cut yet more pieces out of the "public land" which we all know is "free". Because we made an exception for the Marolt with the MAA housing we are now faced with other groups who have just as much of a need for housing and just as much of a desire to then use another piece of public land to provide housing. So that when the next group comes along they too will need housing because every person in this town needs housing not to mention the waiters and then they too will want to use this public land. My concern about this is that you can't put everything on the Rio Grande. As far as I am concerned these are the things that are the most questionable in terms of their location here on this particular portion of public property. Mari: I believe we have a consensus that this Commission will look favorably upon recommending approval conceptually of the Art Park/Theatre but not housing. Informally the only condition that I would see in here that I think should be under the Art Park Theatre submission is we should require an operational plan at final showing how the facility would be available to other non-profits. And also at "- final what exactly is the ownership structure going to be and the what-ifs in case of defaulting. I think that all has to be required in the final plan as a condition. CONDITIONS Mari: I think there is a consensus to delete condition #1. #2 will stay. Roger: Shall we expand employee to mean other things or how about denial of housing on the site. I am back on #2. Why not just recommend denial of housing on the site. (this is what was decided on) Mari: #3. deleted? The trolley stop is eliminated. Should that be Roger: It should be deleted. It is not appropriate for here. Mari: #4 stands. #5 stands. #6 stands. 20 PZM3.l9.9l #7 for the operating plan and that could also include the financial structure and default. #8 will be ownership, funding, default, performance bonds. Bruce: Funding is covered a little bit up in #3c. Sara: Under #7 an operating plan and a policy of multiple use. Mari: Yes. The operations plan profit organizations would have managed. would explain how other non- access and how it would be After discussion on having a pre-app meeting or work session. Leslie: theatre removed I think we are looking at conceptual approval of a building with the contingency that the snow dump is and when the snow dump is removed then we submit final. Mari: suppose we insert the word "temporary" in front of water treatment ponds. Richard: Where if we eliminate it, it presumes that further development of this Arts Park is contingent on removing the snow dump. So that including it in there presumes that they can co- exist where in fact maybe they can't. .-.. Mari: Maybe the question is maybe we want to force the issue. I think that in accordance with our recommendations we are assuming that that is going to be gone. Leslie: Why don't we shift it out of the Art Park and we will put it in the Snowmelt. Mari: Eliminate 3b and it will become #3. TROLLEY CONDITIONS Mari: I think we have a consensus on the trolley. Bruce: I am not sure how the trolley barn and the recycling and all that--I feel about the recycling business the same way I feel about the snowmelter/dump. I think they are both nuisance uses. And if we don't like the snowmel ter then let's get rid of the recycling thing and put it somewhere else too. Leslie: The recycling facility was asked to submit an application also with this process. And since it is a County function, the County Manager originally did not want to submit an application because he would ultimately move to a point where we -' 21 PZM3.l9.91 don't need a recycling site within the city that everything is curbside pickup. According to Jim Duke the reality of that is that with such a transient population curbside recycling doesn't work 100% and so you still need a dump site for the lodges and the condos and people who are just passing through. So he has been operating under the premise that could the carbarn site incorporate also the recycling facility--temporary or permanent. And Jim Duke has drawn up plans for his dream of recycling on that site. My idea with the trolley barn site was to incorporate within the facility itself those recycling needs. Roger: I suggest that it be re-worded to indicate accommodate the recycling facilities as they exist now. In words not a major expansion or a minimal expansion. that other Bruce: Using the same logic that I used on the Art Park and Theatre, we are planning this site. And I don't want a recycling center on the Rio Grande Open Space Park/Transportation. I don't mind putting it in there as a contingent use or temporary use. But we are planning this site and I don't want recycling on the open space transportation land. Sara: I consider that a public amenity. A snowmelt I don't. Bruce: Maybe temporarily. Maybe when the train comes in and cuts up the Rugby field it goes on the other side of the tracks. Sara: This is a transportation center. When you recycle you bring things in your car. When you get off of it there it is, right there. Leslie: I think there is time between now and the next steps, not holding anything up, for Jim to come and make a formal presentation to you so you understand what his operation is and what his needs are. The trolley people are operating on the mode that they can accommodate his operation. Mari: Let's just leave #8 alone for the moment. #1 says we need to see what the routes are going to be. We had a consensus last week that we didn't want the route to wrap around the ball field. But aside from that I think you can take your case to city council on which alignment makes the most sense. <",,"""-... #2--no problems with that. #3--no problems. #4--no problems. #5--no problems. #6--no problems. #7--no problems. #8--I don't have anything to add. Does anyone else? I do think .~ 22 PZM3.l9.91 that the rail lines terminal and alignment should be part of the SPA plan. Leslie: You already have adopted conceptual SPA plans which adopted the rail. Mari: The maps we saw on the SPA submission did not show it. Leslie: We took the maps that were adopted for the track alignment, the train alignments and where the platform and what we would probably need. What they are talking about is just having a covered platform-not having a huge terminal building. Mari: to be other I believe we need as part of our condition that that needs shown and that nothing should conflict--the trolley or the uses. SNOWMELT CONDITIONS Mari: I think our first condition should just be--#3 should be made into # 1. And that is it. I don't think we need any other conditions. '- That is our recommendation. Our recommendation is to re-Iocate. Bruce: I think we need to send the strongest message we possibly can. Let's use the strongest terms. Get the thing out of there! Alan: For our timetable to it. anything. purposes it would really help if P&Z put a Saying "every effort" really doesn't do much of Mari: Instead of saying "every effort shall be made", I would say "The snowmelt facility shall be re-Iocated before the season of 1991-92". MOTION Bruce: I encompassing conditions. move to direct everything we staff to have just prepare a re-iterated resolution in these Roger seconded the motion with all in favor. Leslie: We thought at staff that if we could identify one area to accommodate such things as the Farmer's Market, Arts Fair etc that we would layout some criteria. But I was thinking that the 23 PZM3.19.91 top of the parking garage actually will be an area that could be available for special event permit for these type of activities. We would layout specific criteria which we could even incorporate in the code that we would bring back to you for review. You wouldn't review every special event. There are people who use the Buttermilk parking lot every year. They go through a horrendous process in the County to do something like that. We were thinking we have the top of the parking garage which would be a perfect spot for an arts fair or farmer's market. Jasmine: Everyone talks wonderful non-profit thing. they are using public land. are so wonderful. about them as though they are a They are commercial enterprises and I am sorry. I don't see why those Sara: We have to pay a licensing fee. I agree, Jasmine. Jasmine: Suppose you just want to sit there. We have that space out there next to the library where you can sit in peace and quiet instead of having somebody sell you 1960 ceramics. I have a real problem with that. Mari: I think at this point we probably aren't ready to give you direction on that. Let's just leave it open at this point. - Richard: As far as areas within the SPA that seems the most appropriate to me. Once you get beyond the ball field it is very much a pedestrian area. Roger: I think that area was designed for such events and I would like maybe not necessarily farmer's markets but award events or something like that. I think there should be some guidelines for the usage of it and a relatively simple way for the city to approve such events. Mari: Right off the top my feeling about it is it seems kind of strange to have commercial things on a piece of public property. A farmer's market does compete with grocery stores that pay rent and licensing fees and sales taxes. It is a policy question rather than a development question. Richard: And how you deal with things like the Food and Wine Festival in Wagner Park and the Art Museum having their art show where people sell things out of the tent. It seems to me to be an extension of those policies. Leslie: Michael Gassman raised the issue a couple of Council meetings ago that wait a minute--this is public land and we are -- 24 PZM3.l9.9l "- going to let the Food and Wine people do their deal. Are they just going to let the pUblic enter or are they going to charge this huoe price for people to use the facility on public land? council said "Well we have done this all along" . Michael suggested we start thinking about charging for the use of public land. Mari: For example the Parks Dept allows private functions on park land but you have to apply for a permit and I guess you have to pay a fee. I don't know about that. But I was surprised last 4th of July. There was a big privately catered party in the middle of Paepkce Park while everybody was lining up for a parade. And they had it all roped off--this is a public park. There was a parade. There were people with their dogs and frisbees and bicycles and everything and they have got it barred off from the public. I thought this was very strange. Bruce: Well you have restaurant seating on the Mall too. You have Dan Arrow's Popcorn Wagon and his seating. There is a whole range of those kinds of things. Mari: But they do pay the City for those things. My feeling is the SPA plan is really basically dealing with development issues--not policy issues right now. '''"'- Jasmine: But it is something we should certainly think about. There being no further business Mari adjourned the meeting. Time was 7: 50pm. c""""". - 25