Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19930907 /"- , -' RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING , ZONING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 7. 1993 Chairman Bruce Kerr called meeting to order at 4:30 PM. Answering roll call were Tim Mooney, Sara Garton, Roger Hunt, Jasmine Tygre and Bruce Kerr. Jake Vickery was absent. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Roger: I am concerned with the 6 to 8 pieces of earth moving equipment out at the new golf course. What are they going to do? Move mountains? It would be nice to know what the county P&Z approved out there. Has the County required dust mitigation as they would in the city? Because whatever goes out there blows up here. Kim said she would follow up on this. STAFF COMMENTS /""." Kim: Asked for scheduling site visit on the Chateau Eau Claire \-- stream Margin Review coming up for meeting of September 21. It was decided to meet at the site at 4:00 or before at any time and get there on their own. Leslie: I would like to offer the same thing for the Souki presentation if you need a site visit. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no public comments. MINUTES AUGUST 24. 1993 Roger made a motion to approve minutes of August 24, 1993. Sara seconded the motion with all in favor. LANDMARK DESIGNATION 935 EAST HYMAN SURVEY MONUMENT Bruce opened the public hearing and asked for public comment. ,- There was no public comment and he closed the public portion of the hearing. .-., - r ~ PZM9.7.93 Ami Amidon, Historic Preservationist: (attached in record) She then made record. Presented the public notice. presentation as attached in Pro specters came to the Roaring Fork Valley in 1879 and started a mining camp. They began to try and layout survey boundaries of the town site so that they could be officially incorporated and be recognized by the State. But in the meantime they needed to establish surveying points that they could use for mining. So this rock is actually known as U.S. Location Monument ute #4. The ute #4 doesn't appear to have any significance other than that one point. This was ute Indian Territory and this was ute City. The #4 doesn't mean anything as far as the Bureau of Land Management is concerned. All of the mining claims on Aspen and Smuyggler Mountains are connected to that particular spot. r'."...., The Planning Dept hired Lou Beutner to do some work on the description of where the rock was located. And he platted them and from descriptions from 1880, 1906, 1954 just to insure you that this is the rock of 1880, never moved and never changed. It is carved on the back of it, u.S. Location Monument ute #4. It has a cross on the top that was used as a surveying point. So it physically fits the exact description of 1880. -- The rock has historic significance in terms of it's importance to the founding of Aspen, the original mining heyday which began in 1879. I think it is really important that we recognize this as an artifact. There are not many mining-related historic markers left. It is also important to neighborhood and community character. I contacted the Colorado State Historical Society to see how they felt about this landmark designation. They thought this was clearly the sort of artifact which ought to be important to us and ought to be landmarked. They gave me some examples of other geographical features such as pike's Peak which is a national historic landmark. There are only 15 in Colorado and that is one of them. They didn't feel that this is improper at all. Roger: I am not really comfortable voting for landmark designation in that spot. ' r<~ Ami: It has been estimated that that rock weighs about 180 tons. It is possibly a rock outcropping. It may not be a separate piece of boulder. The equipment necessary to move that rock is extremely expensive and not available in the valley and would damage the roads as it came into town. So the only way of moving it would be in pieces and it would compromise the integrity of the rock if it "- 2 ,""- \ -- (- -,- ,"'" f -- PZM9.7.93 were broken into pieces. I think it is really important to this particular landmark that it be in it's original location. It is still an important piece of evidence from a surveyor's point of view of where the original location was for all of these historic mineral claims. MOTION Sara: I move to approve landmark designation of 935 East Hyman Avenue, Lot #1 of the Sund Lot Split, also known as Lot D, Block 35, East Aspen Addition finding that it meets three of the six required standards. Jasmine seconded the motion. Bruce: I somewhat share Roger's feelings on this. I am kind of in favor of designating the rock but not the site. David: As part of the application will there be a placque in front it on the sidewalk? Ami: HPC did add that to. their motion when they made approval that there should be some interpretation to the public as to what the monument was used for. Tim: I am curious as to how far it has gone with the current ownership. Do we have a letter of agreement--something that states that he understands that any future hardships that are created by this being an historical site he is willing to comply with? That construction may have certain requirements? Ami: HPC is not going to be very concerned with the appearance of their building. We are more concerned with public visibility of the rock and understanding of what it was used for. But it will be a landmarked parcel and will be subject to HPC review. They stated agreement at the HPC public hearing. Everyone voted in favor of the motion except Roger. ASPEN MEADOWS TRAFFIC MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW Bruce re-opened the public hearing. Kim presented notice of the public hearing. (attached in record) Kim made presentation as attached in record. PUBLIC COMMENT 3 '''''...... (' \, '~ r '- r- - PZM9.7.93 Jim Markalunas: As far as I am concerned there hasn't been any mitigation. All it has gotten is worse from year to year. I have been out there for about 40 years now and it just gets worse every year. I see so many near-accidents--people racing back and forth through the west end. It is getting just as bad as Main street for outbound traffic. During concert time I have people driving across my lawn. They have done nothing to mitigate the problem other than aggravate the neighborhood. You can't hear yourself think there is so much traffic and such a parking problem. I remember when they had the Meadows submission they were saying about serving the Meadows with small vehicles and vans. You go out there any time of the morning at 6 or 7 o:clock you see these big delivery truck and semis going down to the Meadows. So there hasn't been any mitigation. aggravation. The least they could do is put in some speed dips to slow the traffic and carry the drainage away. All we have had is George Vicenzi: I have been on the Transportation Committee representing the west end. Our goal was to try and make it pedestrian oriented. We worked on a shuttle bus coming through, a natural gas bus, in trying to come up with a compromise. Anne Altemus: I live on 3rd street. I know it is only 10 weeks that we have the music. And I don't really consider the bus the major problem with the number of people who drive. If the MAA wants to restrict parking to stickers so certain number of people can park in there--fine. Then when that lot is full and the stickers are all sold, then maybe people will take public transportation. I don't see why they can't get on at Main or 8th. They can go 3rd and 5th to Meadows in the morning and 7th and 8th in the evening. But we have had a long year on 3rd street and 5th Street and I don't think it is a fair shake. If there was an A.M. route and a P.M. route so that we weren't the total inhalers of that much pollution. Sally Putnam: I live on Bleeker Street. I am not sure what the purpose for the buses going down Bleeker Street at all--why they can't go down Main. We get a substantial amount of traffic on Bleeker Street in addition to the buses and I see no reason for it. Jan Collins: What happens when we put the buses on Bleeker in the summer time? And what happens with more buses with the Early Learning Center? This has gotten to be a bigger problem than just down around the tent. We are looking at how to get the vehicles out of this particular area. We have a PM10 problem. This is more than just vehicle circulation problem. It is vehicles exhausting 4 - PZM9.7.93 --- and causing more particulates in the air because of non-paved parking lots during concert and afterwards. There are a lot of issues of the neighborhood which is the last historic residential neighborhood in Aspen. So I think what we are trying to do is come up with some alternatives here that might alleviate all of these various people's problems along Bleeker. vicenzi: We have an alternative. We gave Kim a letter of our concerns. In that letter we have suggested possible alternatives to the existing bus route to try and make it less impacting on the residents. Bruce: I am having a hard time getting a handle on this whole situation. I feel like all the players are not here. This mitigation plan was part of the whole Meadows SPA mitigation plan. We have an MAA representative here but it also includes some other players. Savanna and the Institute, the Physics folks. That also includes RFTA as one of the major players in this if we are talking about increased enforcement or putting dips in the streets or whatever, we have got some other players that aren't here. I am a little puzzled about how to proceed. I don't think it is news to anybody in this room--yes there are some problems in the west end with traffic and those kinds of things. I don't think anybody is trying to cover that up or hide it. We are trying to mitigate. fl"'""'" - But I am a little puzzled on how we need to proceed here. When we have a proposed recommendation that is in front of us it seems to me, frankly, if we just accept this recommendation and go ahead we really haven't done anything to address the problem. We have just put it off for another 2 ~ears. .' Kim: On behalf of some of the other players I have heard from RFTA who couldn't be here. I also heard from Jack Reid who couldn't be here--Randy Ready, Transportation. All of whom got back to me and said that my recommendation specific to Meadows looked very good. Bruce: What we are doing is reviewing the traffic mitigation plan that was part of the SPA approval. How much authority or leeway do we have to require the applicants or any other persons to do certain things to further mitigate traffic problems of the west end? Can we require the City to put in bumps? I want to make sure that the public knows that this is not the only forum to try to get improvements in the west end and what is going on out there. There are other things that need to be done. This forum is only to discuss the specific mitigation plan as it related to the Meadows SPA approval. r- Anne Ibbotson: It seems to me that now what we are looking at as '- 5 '..- r'-' ~ ~ - PZM9.7.93 a mitigation plan is already outdated. There are many issues now that have come up that aren't addressed in the mitigation plan as it stands now. I am not sure that the general public, and maybe you in particular, know where the problems really are. I invite you to my house on Smuggler some afternoon at concert time and see exactly what is going on out there. It is wild. I love living in the west end. But I have been giving serious consideration to moving out of the west end because it is becoming an extremely unpleasant place to be especially in the summer when the buses are going back and forth to the tent. George has come up with a proposal to re-route the buses and I am totally in support of what George has proposed. I think that could alleviate a lot of the problems that are occurring right now in the west end. I would be in favor of saying first re-route the buses and then down the road when we can figure out what the overall traffic planning will be for not just the west but for Main street getting cars out of town in general. Vicenzi: Gave background on what has and has not worked with the mitigation plan. And plans for a new bus route. The impact of 8 or 9 blocks with the new plan vs 40 blocks with the old plan. Charlie Marquesee: The concern with the plan that you are proposing might create another problem. That is if you are coming in on 82 and you make a left turn on 8th street it is impossible. You will be backed up on the bridge. We have discussed this since 1972. We have always been concerned about coming in and backing people up on the bridge to make a left turn on 8th street. I think you should give serious consideration to this. vicenzi: We do need more lighting on Lake Avenue. People drive instead of walking at night along there. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Roger: I think we can recommend a long overdue light at 3rd street. And this proposed route that George has come up with doesn't get people where they want to go in the first place. And that is the music tent. That, in effect, is a disincentive which unfortunately just encourages more automobiles. Havoc is reeked when in the afternoon added on top of the east-west flood of traffic trying to get out of town and add to that the north-south flow trying to get to the music tent, it is chaos. I know. I see it all the time. Jasmine: I share your concerns about the lack of all the players being here. One of the first things that struck me when I looked at the plan is that there are unbelievable impacts occurring on the west end and they are coming from different entities. The entities 6 PZM9.7.93 -- are now separate. They are not all coming under one plan so we know we don't have one applicant anymore that we can say "YOU" as a condition of approval must do this, that or the other thing". And part of it is the Hwy 82 alignment. I think George's idea is very intriguing. I share some of Roger's concerns about it. It sounds to me from the public comment that I have heard that the main problem seems to be from the events at the music tent rather than the Institute. That may not be accurate. When the overall plan came before us there was the so-called rehearsal hall which has turned out to be a major concert facility which is going to be a real problem in terms of traffic impact. I am also intrigued by Sara's idea. If we consider that the music festival as the worst 10 weeks in terms of automobile pollution it seems to me that some kind of limitation on private vehicles is something that we really ought to look at. There should be some kind of provision for people who are elderly or frail or handicapped in some way so that--they should have handicap vehicle access if that is what is necessary. I'''';.'~'- Reducing the number of cars in the long run is the way we really have to go. And in conjunction with RFTA other forms of public transportation rather than the big buses. '- Marqusee: I agree that I am affected by the Institute traffic more than anybody else and there is no problem with the Institute traffic. That is zero as compared with the music. Sara: I would like to add a condition to the conditions that have come forward from staff. I think training young students to really work with those barriers and having an appointed traffic director. I think things like that can even be a neighborhood group effort. I know in ___?___ Michigan they plant every space, their boulevards. The neighborhoods come out and do it. The City provides the plants. We could do things like that to enhance the experience of traffic signage and barriers. r vicenzi: We did that. We planted. The MAA didn't want to do anything as far as donating any kind of money or time to that. We felt if they created the impact, they should help out. Sara: A condition I would like to see added is a study of the parking lot being for permit parking only. Vicenzi: We talked about that originally. And it really doesn't work unless there is a full residential parking permit program. If you say the lots are for permits only then people are just going '-- 7 ,.....""""'" PZM9.7.93 - to park in the neighborhood. So unless you have the enforcement to keep people from doing that you can't really-- Sara: That has to go hand in hand with the City'S permit parking. vicenz i: The City wasn't prepared to enter into a residential parking permit program at that time. Sara: Then that should be studied in conjunction with the city's residential permit program. I have to agree with what Jasmine said. Unless buses are smaller, and I know they cost money, but that is the city's feeling. They pay for things that are for the improvement of the quality of life. We need smaller buses that seniors can get on and off and that are available. The hotels shouldn't be the only ones that are shuttling people to and from specific locations. I should know that if I live over at Midland Park that I can walk to a certain point and get on a bus that is going to be ? and it is going to be a small bus. And that a senior knows~hat they can walk to a certain point and climb on a bus that they don't take their life in their hands to climb up that step. I think that has to be implemented next year--these small buses. "...-- David: I am curious to hear from the MAA. I would like to add one other condition and that is that someone undertake to do an additional study of the previous transportation to see what bus route might further reduce the impact on the west end. And it could be that a light on 4th, 3rd or somewhere along that line is necessary so that everybody leaving the west end doesn't have to wind their way back through Woody Creek. "- There is a discussion about dips to cut down on traffic flow and speed along 7th and 8th. This is just a small version of what Denver goes through with Mile High Stadium. They also have designated routes in that neighbor-hood for the public to use to get to the stadium. MOTION Tim: I make a motion not to approve the Planning staff's proposed changes and send it to the Planning Director for her signature without expanding these recommendations. What I would like to see is a work/stUdy session with someone from the neighborhood group, someone from our P&Z Board, someone from each of the non-profits involved and someone from the City who can help understand what the city can do and push that forward--Engineering, Parks or Trails. ;- This work/stUdy should then make a series of recommendations and bring it back to us before we recommend it to the Planning Director '- 8 - -- -- - I - PZM9.7.93 to sign. I think that some of the things that should be considered that were mentioned here today is to re-route the buses. Go through a study that exhaustively looks at all the routings. I specifically think the Vicenzi idea should be looked at. That buses stop along Main street at different areas to pick up people so that there is not just one location where people have to go to get to the tent. Maybe put a light at 3rd street or 4th street to change the schedule on 3rd and 5th and maybe alternate those schedules so that one group of neighbors are not more impacted more than another. Selling stickers for the parking lot so that there are people who can pay more and the money goes to the MAA. This should be in conjunction with some kind of residential parking sticker system so that people who are residents have a parking pass and can park in front of their houses. And people who buy tickets and can buy a parking pass then can park in the rest of the parking spots in the lots that aren't taken up by people who are priority people. I think we should look at speed bumps in the neighborhood and we should explore more barricades and more blocking off of the streets so that the traffic is contained in the routes that we are recommending so that the streets that are impacted are designated routes that we have signage on so people know that the traffic is going to be there. I think that there should be a plan for the traffic patrol to go into these streets and check during the concerts for people who are loading up the streets with excess parking and they should be ticketed on a regular basis. We should appoint not only a co- ordinate from the MAA but a co-ordinate from all of the non- profits that can work with someone from the city who is co- ordinating all of these efforts. It doesn't matter if the MAA has somebody and they don't have anybody else to talk to specifically somebody in the city. I think the City is ,responsible neighborhood needs are so that representative on this board and at enforcing whatever the City has to have a work session. for the this There should be another traffic study done for the long-range of the west end so that the MAA, so that the neighborhood, so that all the non-prOfits are included in the study and it is not just a Meadows plan. street lights should be enhanced so that people can use these walking paths down Lake Avenue. And maybe there should be some kind specific lighting that should direct these people so that it is a different type of lighting that enhances the pedestrian 9 , _ PZM9. 7.93 - walkways. My motion is that these things be explored at a work session before we send it back to the Planning Director to sign. I include in my motion that a representative from the Neighborhood Advisory Committee be at the work session. Jasmine seconded the motion. Roger: I think this is the wrong way of going on this. What you said should be included as another item. I don't see any point in holding up this review at this point. What you are talking about is more of a general nature than just mitigation of the Meadows traffic. I can't support the motion because of that. What is the point of holding up this review for something that will take another 2 years and we will have to review again anyway. I would rather get some of these items going rather than holding them up at this point. As an additional item set up your work session or let the staff figure out how it should go through those committees that are already charged with these areas and get them co-ordinate. But do it as an additional item. .-- Tim: I change my motion then to put a time frame on it that - through staff direction that this action be taken and that something be brought.back the P&Z within a 60 day period. Kim: It took a good 3 months at least to get to this point. I can tell you with Randy Ready-- Randy Ready: We have until next summer. Bruce: Let the onus be on the applicant--the burden is on the applicant to get the .various players together to come up with a plan and not put the burden on the City Planning staff. ?: I would like to point out that we did have a committee like you are suggesting and that is what really created this 11 page document that was adopted by the City. That was a group of the non-prOfits, neighborhood representation, City representation. And this was the final report. The reason we have a biennial review is to fine tune. I don't know that re-convening that committee for another year of work is going to really create an entirely new plan other than this one. ,.-, ( Tim: We have been given a list of 6 proposed changes to it and just from hearing from the public there needs to be more changes to it. So I am not willing to endorse just having 5 changes. And 10 - Ie /"'-""'- PZM9. 7.93 ~ I think if it means this committee has to re-convene and that more action has to be taken because the specific needs right now after it just being one summer of the plan not being adequate. I think the committee has to re-convene and that is what I am calling for. Kim: I think we have to make sure we are not focusing on any particular neighborhood. I am sure other staff would have other opinions on what other neighborhoods are planning for and I think we are putting a lot of eggs in one basket by focusing just on this one neighborhood when a lot of the daily problems could be handled with some of this responsibility of the Transportation Director. Sara: You are asking us to do the traffic mitigation for Meadows. The reality is, Kim, other neighborhoods at this time don't have a review in front of us for things like lights, speed bumps, sidewalks, etc. This is a review that can encompass all those things and I, like Jasmine and Tim, was amazed to sit here on this this afternoon and not see these other people here. It is not enough. The recommendations are not enough. They are not strong enough and so that is why Tim is aSking to take it back to a work session. '- Bruce: I think we are dealing with 2 different ways of dealing with this. If I understand your motion right, we are not doing anything. The traffic mitigation plan as it exists now stays the way it is. There is no requirement on the applicant other than to get the groups together. ".,-, , Tim: I would like to see something move forward but I don't think that this really does anything. And it certainly doesn't satisfy any of the neighborhood needs. I can' t give a rubber stamp of approval to something just because there is 3 months of work in it and these committees are already frustrated. I think we have got to solve something here. MOTION Tim: I move to approve the Planning staff's proposed changes to the Meadows traffic m~~igation plan and direct the City Planning Director to sign the ~mendment to the Meadows. I would like to add the additional amendments which item by item stated that came out of the suggestions of this meeting and that I would like to see the group re-convene to include the new players that we talked about and that positive action be taken on these specific suggestions to enhance the transportation plan. r- Bruce: Include a time frame saying that in 6 months they report back to the P&Z Commission with the recommendations of things beyond what are required in this staff memo. -- 11 r- PZM9.7.93 - Tim: Condition #3 Roger: That Condition #3 basically is for the Planning Department and Transportation Department to get together to determine a venue under which to take a look at the systemic problem. MOTION Tim: I withdraw my other motions. I make a motion that the Planning commission approve the Planning staff's proposed changes to the Meadows Traffic Mitigation Plan and direct the city Planning Director to sign the plan with conditions #1 and #2 as stated in the Planning staff memo. I would also propose adding Condition #3 which will contain the requirement that a work session be convened with all of the players--the non-prOfits, the Neighborhood Advisory Committee, Planning & Zoning Committee. Things to be discussed are re- routing of the buses, bus stops on Main street to pick up pedestrians along the way to the tent--all of the items discussed previously. And that this committee or group report back to the Planning & Zoning commission by March 31st with their recommendations and then we know whatever channels we have to go r- through. ,",-, Jasmine withdrew her original second. David seconded the motion. Roger: Would you include co-ordination with the Planning or Transportation and include in your motion that it comes under the venue of the Planning and Transportation Directors so it get co- ordinate within the city. Tim: I agree to add thi~to my motion. .,.. David agreed for the second. Bruce closed the public hearing. Roll call vote: David, yes, Tim, yes, Sara, yes, Bruce, no, Jasmine, yes, Roger, yes. ,."" , Bruce: For the record the reason I voted "No" is I don't think it is the city's business to tell the MAA or any other applicant that they must appoint a traffic co-ordinate or designate someone to traffic co-ordinate. I don't think that is the ro~ of government to tell private business how they want to accomplish their objectives. 12 '- ,,- PZM9.7.93 - SOUKI CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW AND 8040 GREENLINE REVIEW Bruce opened the public hearing. MOTION Roger: I move to continue the public hearing and table action to september 21, 1993 at the applicant's request. Jasmine seconded the motion with all in favor. 103 PARK STREAM MARGIN AMENDMENT Kim made presentation as attached in record. Sara: I feel that the banks look different now. The stream line is different. It is different than we wanted it to look and the boulders give it a whole different feeling. Secondly the earth moving permit It is a waste of our time to approve--to ask for Stream Margin Review and then make recommendations if there is no one from the City up observing. ."'" - Tim: Now what we are doing is basically changing it so that it complies with what was done--not with what was approved. Kim: This is the set of plans that Larry bought. ?: This is stamped and approved. Roger: That is not what we approved. I would like to know who was responsible for drawing in that minor change on that because what I am very distressed ~bout is had I seen that at the time of Stream Margin Review--no way would I have voted for a Stream Margin Review. This is just wrong. And as far as I am concerned Sutherland is the darer here. This really irritates me. I saw one thing and that is one thing I very specifically looked at. That, in effect, the final grade wasn't changed by the moving of that pipe because that was very important to me. Now all of a sudden it is in a dike. ?: No. The point of it is the differential between the way it was drawn either one way or the other and the way it is now we are talking 12 inches. The location of the pipe is 12 inches higher than it was set so that the slope essentially is minutely different. /""". - 13 PZM9.7.93 - Sara: I asked that the whole parcel be red-tagged. Our City Attorney recommended "No, only the bank work". If the whole parcel had been red-tagged we could still have gone in and gotten those boulders out of there and returned the bank. Now it is a reality. The whole structure is there. If we pass an amendment to this stream Margin Review I would like to recommend to the city Attorney that I don't accept his ruling on that. I also want to recommend to staff that we don't ever ? again until that earth moving permit is in effect. Why did-he get approval when there is nothing out there enforcing that approval? Tim: We are setting a precedent here. If something isn't complied with according to what we approve or even if there is a misrepresentation in a set of plans, then you can come in and just amend anything. It basically should be what we have is an approval process. You go through the approval process. If there is a problem in that process or after that process then there are other rules that get us where we originally want to be and representing what the City and what the river banks needs are. Not just saying "OK after the process goes along--so we make a mistake. It is going to come back to us and we are just going to say "Well, it was a mistake and it is over with". r""-. '- David: The irony here is that verbally is says "No work outside the building envelope". This water line is outside the building envelope. For the pr~ctical matter it is very common that the plans and the are"two different things. Practically speaking to move that water line out according to what this plan shows it is up in the air and the bank has to be stabilized. MOTION Tim: I make a motion that the Planning & Zoning recommend approval for the 315-317 Park Avenue stream Margin amendment with the following conditions as in the staff memo. David seconded the motion. Sara: I don't want it in the motion but to recommend that there is something in place in the 8040 Greenline Review to prevent this type of thing happening again. Roger: On what is showing the new approximately 4 feet above the grade. reality it is on the grade". corrugated metal pipe is You are saying that "No, in ,'- ?: Yes. As the house sits and the deck comes out the deck will be actually even with the top of that pipe. As you walk out on the deck you will essentially step from the deck to the top of that - 14 ~ PZM9.7.93 ~ pipe with a couple of inches of soil on top. Everyone voted in favor of the motion. Roger voted in favor under protest. Bruce then adjourned the meeting. Time was 7:10 P.M. M. Carney, city Deputy Clerk .,..A'''"'''"''' - --- '- 15