Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19920804 '-"<<"" , '",-, /,.'c......... ( '\..- r "- (\Ae; RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 4, 1992 vice Chairlady Jasmine Tygre called meeting to order at 4:30pm. Answering roll call were Tim Mooney, Sara Garton, Richard Compton, Bruce Kerr and Jasmine Tygre. Roger Hunt and David Brown were excused. < COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS Sara: corner that? This is a citizen's complaint. The condition of lot at the of Durant and Aspen. What do we do about the neglect on Diane: There are a couple of sections of Bill Drueding go over and look at that. qui te a while. code on that. I will have It's been an eyesore for Jasmine: I have been complaining about the Galena Street Shuttle for the last 2 weeks because I haven't been able to catch it. But today I did in fact catch it. And it was very nice. The driver was very courteous and he said that they do get a lot of people even though they don't have signage. But he agreed that they need more signage on the buses themselves so people would know where to catch it. He also commented that they have a designated parking space at the post office in which everyone in town who can't read parks there. STAFF COMMENTS Diane: city Shop Masterplan: This Thursday from 1:00 to 3:00 at the city Shop there is going to be a meeting with P&Z, HPC and the Blue Ribbon Committee. They are going to visually show you the proposed plan for the site with a chance to walk around. It is the initial stages of this--what we want to do is have all of you review it and look at it. Sara: I had a chance to really read over the packet and something has happened on this I think that the P&Z was left out of the loop. We had come before us the fence and we had come before us the fuel tanks which were conditional uses. I was under the impression from Jack Reid that we wanted to move that power plant. All of a sudden this masterplan is happening. And I understood how the Oversite Committee commented the other day to me that the City Council had directed the staff to go ahead with the masterplan. Diane: Actually what happened the City appointed the Blue Ribbon Committee to look at all the assets of the City of Aspen and try to look at how we can better manage our assets. One of the issues ;'""" PZM8.4.92 - was the problem we have down at the city Shops in terms of storage of some of the equipment, the inoperable conditions in terms of running the city Shop and all that. The Blue Ribbon Committee spent a lot of time down there with staff and with Council members. Their recommendation to council was that they retain that use on the site, that they go through a masterplan process and identify the different needs on the site, what can be accommodated, conceptual plans and all that. Then, eventually if they need to for the actual renovation go out for bonds for approval of that. council accepted that recommendation. This was probably about 5 months ago. They then set aside about $200,000 to put towards the masterplanning process for that site. And the city went with the requested proposals obviously to try to determine what can be utilized on that site, the best layout for it and the uses. That came back and where we are right now is we have gone through gathering actual data toward what they need on the site and some schematics for that. Sara: As far as the Planning position, it is a terrible place for the City Shop. Everything in here is for now. ,-.. "- Diane: That issue in and of itself was one of the first things that was discussed with the neighbors being involved. They have a Citizen's Committee established for that. The very first question that came up with the citizen's Committee is "How do you really feel about this particular use remaining on the site?" And when everybody got finished they felt comfortable with it assuming certain things would be addressed. So I think in terms of location and what the needs are for the City maybe it isn't the most perfect but I think it can work. Sara: First of all if a private applicant came before us we would never agree to this site. I think it is really bending the rules for the City. And the fuel tanks--I know they are encased in cement--but with flooding, or with some sort of geological disturbance we have fuel tanks next to the river. That is prime property that has park possibility. What is the matter with where the parking lot--the park and golf recreation shop area is now? Diane: There is not enough acreage for this kind of use. And you have got to go back to historically what the uses have been on the city Shop site. It evolved from a hydro electric plant. It has always been over the past 100 years some sort of intensive use on that parcel. It is not like this use has been there for 5 years. <~ Sara: Factories and mills used to be next to the river too. That '- ~ '" ._~. PZM8.4.92 - is not appropriate anymore. Diane: I think, Sara, before you really are firm in your thought from this is that you should take some time and talk to Jack Reid and Roxanne and Dave Gibson. Sara: Why were we not advised? Diane: They had to determine what the needs were on that site. They had to go through a whole evaluation. What size building was needed? What trucks and equipment had to be housed in there? What were the square footage needs? The decision had been made that it is going to remain there. So that wasn't really up for discussion. Sara: Jack Reid to us 8 months ago when he first came in with a request said "I want that shop moved". Diane: That was Jack's dream. That wasn't the recommendation from the Blue Ribbon. It wasn't the decision made by Council. Sara: I just think it is a parcel that shouldn't be used for that type of heavy use. Jasmine: I share some of Sara's concerns. We had 2 meetings for 2 separate aspects of this parcel. And at no point were we ever "-- led to believe that this was going to be part of a masterplan involving expanded uses rather than lessening uses of the site. I don't think there was necessarily deliberate intent to misinform the Commission but that is what it has turned out to be in terms of what was presented to us in that time frame. It is not that I am saying it was some sort of sinister plot against Planning and zoning. But the fact of the matter is that the way things were represented to us in various and separate applications gave us no clue at all as to what was intended for that parcel. And I think that we have a right to be concerned about that. Diane: When the fuel tanks consent issue came up that was reviewed prior to any review by the Blue Ribbon or any decision by Council. Kim: The conditional use was granted by the commission for maintenance facility. After we rezoned it we had to legitimize the use of the site. Jasmine: But we were under the impression that it was temporary. Diane: It was rezoned to "Public" with the recognition that it probably--9 chances out of 10 it was going to remain on the site as a use that was existing. ,""-" '-' 1. / PZM8.4.92 - Jasmine: It may have turned out to be the only place but it is not the way we would normally want to plan something as I am sure you will agree. PUBLIC COMMENT There were no comments from the public. MINUTES JULY 21. 1992 Tim: Made a motion to approve minutes of July 21, 1992 as submitted. Sara Seconded the motion with all in favor. GROSSE CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT Jasmine opened the public hearing. Kim, Planning: Made presentation as attached in record. ,~'"'''-''' Sven Alstrom, Architect for the applicant: One principal reason '~ HPC likes the project is this is this would be the view instead of the existing approach. For the ADU on the second floor __mumble__ We are going to go to the Board of Adjustment regarding the encroachment. Sara: Has there been any response from the neighbor right behind this about obstructing his viewplain. Sven: No. In fact the neighbors are in favor of the ADU. Richard: I don't know if staff has any information on why the Encroachment Committee did not approve this. I walked by the site and it is set well back from the street and the fact that it encroaches the ROW does not in any way impede the flow of traffic or pedestrians. On the alley itself where it encroaches there the next garage appears to encroach just as much into the alley. It is not that it is blocking the alley by itself. ~ '- Kim: True. But the Engineering Dept is of the opinion that whenever there is a substantial project whereby lmproving an encroachment situation can be addressed that they recommend and it was the unanimous decision by staff members to have the alleyways cleared to the 1.8 feet and also on the Garmisch side as a matter of pretty much standard policy. There weren't any extenuating .i /',.'" PZM8.4.92 - circumstances that we would not allow them to take down the part of the structure that is encroaching. If this had been an historic structure then that would have probably complicated the decision. But the garage has no historic value. Richard: If the alley encroachment is denied then the whole structure got that much closer to the main residence? Kim: What would happen is that they would take off that part of the garage setting the studs inside and go up from there. Sven: The only problem with that is _?_HPC well their motion ? So we would have to get into--to see of the Board of Adjustment-- mumble The affidavit of mailing and the mailing list of the surrounding property owners was presented by the applicant and is attached in record. Jasmine asked for public comment. There was no public comment. Tim: Can you tell me what you are planning to do with this unit? r---, Grosse: I am planning to arrange for my Daughter who works in town to stay in that unit. And I might add that the cost of taking the 2 walls down to conform with the encroachment would be in excess of $25,000. And it would be tantamount to taking the whole building down. And I just wouldn't do it. "-- MOTION Tim: I recommend that we approve the conditional use for 392sqft for the detached accessory dwelling unit above the existing garage at the Grosse residence at 100 East Bleeker with the conditions recommended by the Planning Office memo dated August 4, 1992. (attached in record) Bruce seconded the motion. Richard: The way condition #3 reads is "Prior to issuance of the building permit the Engineering Dept must have on file an executed, recorded copy of an encroachment permit for the fence in the N. Garmisch st. ROW". Kim: The fence was supposed to have an encroachment license filed many years ago. And we feel that now is the time to get it. It had been approved by Council many years ago but the actual filing was never done. - Richard: What about an encroachment permit for the building ...----- ~ PZM8.4.92 <__ itself? Do we need to put that in here? Kim: That has already been decided upon by the Engineering Dept and the only appeal process is to the Board of Adjustment. If the Board of Adjustment overturns the Engineering and Encroachment Committee's decision then condition of that approval for a variance would require the filing of the encroachment document. Richard: It wouldn't have to come back to us? Kim: No. Everyone then voted in favor of the motion. There was then discussion as to whether the Planning Commission would make a recommendation to the Board of Adjustment. It was decided not to do this. /....,.."" Richard: The Board of Adjustment may not have the same concerns that we do. They tend to get more technical the way the Engineering Dept does and I think we need to let our view be known to them. And I think the Engineering's Committee view of it is a bit narrow to say that this is a major change and therefore the encroachment should be removed ignoring the fact that it is basically rebuilding half the structure. It isn't even a part of the remodel. '-' Jasmine then closed the public hearing. MOSS SPA AMENDMENT Jasmine opened the public hearing. Kim made presentation as attached in record. Notice of mailing was presented. (Attached in record) Sunny Vann, representative for applicant: Just so the record is clear there is a satellite dish but it does not fall within the size that would trigger a conditional use review. /""""" Tim: My idea of Neighborhood Commercial is something a little bit different. It impacts the neighborhood, the people who live in that neighborhood and it helps facilitate what is going on in that neighborhood. And it provides services that aren't in the neighborhood. I think of the neighborhood as the whole downtown commercial area. I think that advertising sales is going to go to a broader area than that. But the people that are going to be doing this are going to be coming into this neighborhood commercial ~ ~ ,;t:"'" '.._~ -- /,""".- '- ?"".;,,,,- ,-- PZM8.4.92 area it seems to me it is now a different kind of use than people walking down the street doing shopping from Clark's Market and moving across town to do their shopping. It seems to me that we had a problem with the parking when we tried to approve this when the bank came on. There were parking spaces taken away and we were concerned with if there was going to be some kind of in-and-out activity that wasn't going to be community or neighborhood commercially oriented that these parking spaces would have to be picked up by something over at the parking garage where the employees would have to park over there. And if you had people coming in from Carbondale and Rifle and other outlying communities to do business in this neighborhood commercial area that that would be some kind of traffic or would be something that this neighborhood commercial area wasn't prepared for. Moss: The bulk of our advertising comes from Aspen. In fact we have a Glenwood Springs sales office which does virtually all of our down valley business. The likelihood of getting traffic in from the Carbondale or Glenwood Springs up to here is very remote. It is not going to be any more or any less than it is now which is negligible. What it will do is take a guy like the Smuggler Land Office and instead of him getting into his car and drive out to the Business Center, he will walk down the street. So I think it will be the reverse of what you are saying. Jasmine asked for comment from the public. ,There was none and she closed the public portion of the hearing. Jasmine: I think that we on the P&Z have our own mental ideas of what Neighborhood commercial is. And it is always something that doesn't exist in town and can't because of the rent. The little cleaner who will take care of you at the last minute, the shoemaker. This kind of use does not coincide with our visions of what Neighborhood Commercial is. But then I think it is going to be as much of a Neighborhood Commercial--no more, no less than the previous bank was. And perhaps a little bit more. And though this is not the ideal use as the little shoemaker would be I think that the current use is certainly appropriate considering what has been there before. Moss: One of the problems with that building is that it is not well designed for retail operation. MOTION Richard: I move to forward to City Council approval of the SPA use variation to allow a radio broadcasting station in the Moss Building, 225 N. Mill st, with the four conditions contained in the memo dated August 4, 1992. (attached in record) 1. I"'''~ ~ - , '- r "-- PZM8.4.92 Bruce seconded the motion with all in favor. OLD LIBRARY PARCEL SPECIAL REVIEW FOR ON-SITE PARKING AND CASH-IN-LIEU FOR PARKING MITIGATION Diane made presentation as attached in record. I would like to make 2 additions to the list of conditions of approval. On condition #5 at the end I would put ",prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy". Jasmine: Shouldn't it be at the beginning of the sentence to read "Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy the sign should posted". Diane: And then on #6 there is a typeover regarding the square footage. The first sentence say 4,052sqft. That should be 5,042sqft of net leasable. The thought behind this was this particular parking on site works well with this tenant in the use of this building. Our thoughts are that if this would ever be condominiumized, then obviously we would need to re-review that and look at perhaps only providing 3 on-site. Bruce: Do we know how many spaces there are in Ma Bell lot? Bill: US West owns 6 lots and their existing building occupies about 2 and 1/2 of those lots. So they have the area that is open behind is 2 townsite lots ? 6,000sqft. Then there is about 2/3 of additional lot that is also ? back. So there are-- we have studied and I have indicated we are currently in some intense daily communications with US West to try to work out arrangement so basically we are working at a local level and then each time we generate an idea it has to go through channels with US West which is-- Bruce: It is conceivable that there is enough space there to satisfy the full 15-- Bill: I think the high end would be 10--most likely 9. Diane: It goes at right at 10 or 11 spaces. Bill: The US West lot is 110 feet of depth as the alley is vacated. So maybe an arrangement whereby we may be able to actually create head-in parking and agree to screen it. That is what we are working towards. .B. PZM8.4.92 - Sara: How many people will be working there? Bill: The number fluctuates from between 15 to 20. Right now we have 18 employees. Sara: And then your only tenant at this point is the Housing Authority? Bill: And they are considering other options as well. There were a few more questions and answers here but completely inaudible. Diane: You have to remember too that right in front of this building is that very popular RFTA bus stop. The figure is base on net leasable which the standard was 3 per thousand. Many months ago we did a survey nation wide and that was a very consistent and accurate number. Bill: We submitted a specific floor plan to the Planning Office and Bill Drueding. And those spaces ,?"-"" Diane: It is something that we had asked them to do prior to getting a comfort level on the number of spaces. They did that. '-"~ Tim: Where does the cash-in-lieu go? Diane: It goes into the parking fund that is set up in the city. Part of that money is used to payoff the debt of the parking structure. And also for some operations and then part of that money potentially could be used for the purchase or the operation of a new parking structure in town. Tim: Has there been any consideration other than this lot to consider asking the applicant to take permanent spaces in the garage and lay that cash-in-lieu off onto something that is logically going to work for them? Diane: One of the things that has been kicked around is that if they take a $2,000 space to actually then encourage them to use the parking structure, wouldn't it make sense to provide passes to the parking structure so the employees will have the passes and take advantage of it. The city policy was the way the code is worded is that the first payment that goes in is supportive of the structure. But we don't have a policy whereby DWI would have spaces outlined for them in the garage. - - .2. ."..... '~..... PZM8.4.92 -- Tim: Can you rent a yearly space there? Diane: Yes, you can rent a yearly space there. Tim: So as part of your mitigation why can't you submit that you will rent so many spaces? Diane: But you don't have that flexibility to payment-in-lieu. They would have to pay the payment in lieu and then you don't get passes with that. They would then have to go beyond that and buy a pass which would be X amount of dollars. Tim: It works out for me that--where do the cars go? That is the problem I am thinking about now. Diane: I agree with you. That cash-in-lieu policy doesn't really get at the heart of that matter. Tim: Maybe that was before we had an existing parking garage. And so maybe that should be looked at because now we have an alternative to offer somebody with mitigation. .,IIF'- Diane: In the next 5 months you are going to see a lot of changes in that. '- Tim: So as a condition maybe we should include the fact that you should re-apply after these policy changes. Or we should make these policy changes sooner. Diane: Bill is working with US West and is asking that we hold a portion of the payment-in-lieu from the parking fund in case of a re-imbursement because they may be able to work something out on the US West side. Bill: I think our best opportunity resolving something long term with US West would be some kind of purchase arrangement. So we really find that to be a very favorable condition because that would allow us at some point in time to go back before the City council to say "We contributed $150,000 cash-in-lieu. We have an opportunity to purchase a piece of land and organize these spaces on site. Actually there is a very good chance of doing this. And then ask that be refunded to allow us to use it to purchase the land for parking. That is the track that we are on right now. Tim: I would think you would want to put it in an escrow interest bearing account while this whole thing is happening. (""" ~ Sara: I have a suggestion to consider everyone--any commercial _?_that may give actual spaces ____?_ it can somehow be pro- rated. If we don't start getting some of these employees into the 10 /'" n,", PZM8.4.92 "'-' structure and out of the commercial core--somehow if these passes were handled by the city and actual spaces marked out in the parking structure-- Diane: That is something that will be worked out with the Transportation Committee. Tim: The other phase is that the City loses too because the cars are going to remain on the street. So it is a lose/lose situation. Jasmine: I think that obviously the use of the parking that a company bought from US West is much more likely to be used because it is a much better solution for the people that should work there. So this does have to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. I am sure that if people who work for Design Workshop have guaranteed parking over there, they are not going to bother cruising the street. They are just going to pull into the company parking lot because it is right there and convenient. .-- Bruce: I agree conceptually with Sara and Tim. But we are getting into some things--the garage has bonded indebtedness with revenue based on X number of parking spaces generating so many dollars. Then it can start being designated in spots and using the cash- in-lieu then that revenue is going down unless you take cash-in- lieu and actually apply it to the indebtedness. It gets very complex. There are some financial constraints in doing what you guys are talking about. It has got to be a comprehensive plan. - Diane: We are going to revamp our whole approach to dealing with automobiles in the community. This will be part of the complicated puzzle. Jasmine: I don't understand that condominiumization would trigger a review of the parking situation. Condominiumization would automatically come before someone for review. But subleasing would not necessarily be triggered by anything. Diane: I think probably perhaps the honor system of them telling us perhaps changing--the Zoning Dept looks at the occupation licenses and business licenses in the Community. We have the authority to review that through the Zoning Office. So I think that the condominiumization-- Jasmine: Condominiumization, I am not worried about. That would automatically trigger it. There are some things that would not. Diane: They have the ability to sub-lease now. - Bill: The building is almost 8, OOOsgft gross. We are showing 5,042 of net leasable which is a pretty low commercial efficiency. - 11 /"'"'''''-.. PZM8.4.92 - The fact is that we are really limited in what we can do because of the space that is sub-grade. The 5,042sqft represents space accessible to light and ventilation. The building permit application that was submitted has a specific plan for configuration of internal partitions and we can't change those. So the city has a pretty good fix on that. Richard: Condition #6. I don't understand the second clause--Or more than 5,042sqft of net leasable space to sublet. Diane: That is what Bill was just addressing. If they determine based on Bill Drueding's takeoff from the building plan that was submitted it is 5,042sqft. If it exceeds that then obviously we need to re-Iook at the parking. Richard: The way it is written it sounds like they would be sub- leasing all of it and going somewhere else. Diane: No. There is 2 things here. One is if more than 5,042sqft of net leasable is sub-let or whatever, that would trigger--that obviously impacts the parking requirements for the site. The second thing is if it is condominiumized. The idea being that what works so well on this site now with the primary tenant being able to manage the ",..- "-- Jasmine: What about if they subdivide the existing space further so that there is not one primary tenant? Diane: The parking is based on 3 per thousand. Richard: But it is also based on the 2 stacked spaces. So then it would seem that if there are suddenly 3 firms in there of about equal size then you start having problems with-- Diane: Then the owners of the building will be managing the stacked parking on site. Bill: I did a survey of the office. We have 18 employees and there were 8 cars driven today. And we have 8 employees that live down valley and _?_ And we have 2 employees that _?_' MOTION ......""-., Sara: I move to approve the on-site parking plan for 120 East Main and the payment in lieu of $150,000 for the remaining parking that is required in the Office Zone District with conditions 1 through 9 as stated in Planning Office memo dated August 4, 1992 as amended. (attached in record) Tim seconded the motion with all in favor. '-- 12 PZM8.4.92 ,- Tim: I would like to make a recommendation that as looked at by staff and by the new parking office that it is going to be put together in the future how it would affect reducing the bond indebtedness if $150,000 cash loan payment was made and how that would positively affect the projections on reducing the indebtedness and create more open community parking lot and that in the future there is some policy put together so that mitigation can be made by taking long term or either weekly or hourly, daily passes at the garage. SANDUNES LOT SPLIT Kim made presentation as attached in record. Richard: I would be in favor of asking for an easement because that is the route from the Marolt property and the hospital area to go downtown that we have music students and other people and lots just like this for bicycle route the next block south of there. So I think any more easements we have to play with and design pedestrian corridors through there the better. Kim: with the new Meadows road admitting at 7th that would be the main intersection--7th and Main. ''-'-- The existing structure will be demolished. It is in the city yet the replacement housing--development rights are in the County where no Ord #1 requirement equivalent exists. The County does not have a housing replacement requirement whereby an applicant could provide an accessory unit to mitigate that. But the County has those 2 opportunities to provide ADU type facilities--one is called caretaker unit which is up to 700sqft deed restricted to resident occupied and there is no mandatory occupancy which sounds a whole lot like the City ADU. The other is an employee dwelling unit which is for 700sqft and has some occupancy and price limitations on the unit. So that is getting well beyond what the city is. Sara: 700 is the minimum? Kim: For the employee unit. Caretaker unit is up to 700. The logic in the larger unit is that if you are getting the benefit of a larger unit for your employees is that if those require mandatory occupancy which is something that we are intrigued with that concept even with our smaller ADUs. Tim: I like the thing that of it being restricted for 6 month minimum lease. ~- .,,,.,,, - 13 f/""" PZM8.4.92 '~-- Kim: That is always a standard of ADUs. If rented it has to be a 6 month minimum lease. The access for proposed Lot #2 will be off of 7th st. Access for proposed Lot #1 is through an easement granted by the Adams Subdivision-the parcel to the south. So they will come in off a separate driveway not to impact Lot #2. Bruce: The work "annexation" keeps coming to mind. I just wonder why parcels like this that are a part of town are not--why we are even dealing with this City/county line intercepting the property- -why it is not in the City. Krabacher: When I had pre-application conference with both the City and County planners they said "You could go annexation but that you may raise a bunch of other issues and if you restrict your development just in the County we will process it on that basis that there won't be any development in the City." It seems to be the easier proces to go through. Bruce: will you be on City services? Krabacher: It is going to be city facilities. /'. Kim: They are already on City water and city sewer. ,- Bruce: It just makes more sense understand that it may not be applicant to do that but it seems this. to me your to me that they be annexed. I job as representing the a normal thing to do with Jasmine: I think you are right. Sara: I went to city Council to appeal the Berger annexation as we recommended and they tabled it because it is such political hot potato now with the highway that they didn't want to arouse the wrath of the neighbors. They tabled it for 6 months. Jasmine: I have always been very uncomfortable with these referrals from the county. Basically what we say I am sure they listen to it very politely and it has absolutely no effect whatsoever. And so why should we waste our time with this? That is a very cynical point of view but I have a lot better things to do with my time than to try to come up with comments that have absolutely no relationship with what is going to happen. When you are only a referral agency and have nothing to do with it- -the Ord #1 implications alone I think are something that would be very much a concern to us. I can't blame Joe for taking the route ._ that he is taking. Why should he deal with Ord #1 if he doesn't '- 14 " PZM8.4.92 '- have to. On the other hand, why shouldn't he have to deal with Ord #1. We have nothing to say about this. Tim: It is my opinion that this parcel should be annexed to the city and that all city Ordinances should apply. If that is not accepted then my concerns are that there should be adequate mitigation for Ord #1 not being in place and that the FARs be kept at whatever minimums they can kept at. In terms of the sidewalk easement I think is something very important and should be a major concern of the developer and they should be required to put a sidewalk easement in there. Richard: On the issue of FAR that I have some problems with a 7,000sqft house sitting on the bluff at the entrance to the city. And I don't know how we can work with that. Krabacher: We calculated it with the City FAR--Lot #1 would be 5,200sqft and Lot #2 would be 5, 500sqft. We took the slope out and maybe that is what makes the difference. The County FARs I got was for Lot #1 was 4,300sqft and Lot #2 it was 5,200sqft. Jasmine: I think Tim's summary was excellent and I would certainly '-- go along with that. ,.,....."'... Everyone agreed. Jasmine adjourned the meeting. Time was 6:25pm. Clerk - '-- 15