Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19940426 iU ~ RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS ~~~ PLANNING , ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 26. 1994 Chairman Bruce Kerr called meeting to order at 4:30 P.M. Answering roll Sara Garton. excused. call were David Brown, Roger Hunt, Bruce Kerr and Tim Mooney, Robert Blaich and Jasmine Tygre were COMMISSIONER COMMENTS There were none. STAFF COMMENTS Leslie: There is a Planning commissioner's training workshop in Englewood. It is $89 per person. We have money in our training budget for anyone interested in attending. The date for this is Saturday May 14. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were none. MINUTES MARCH 22. 1994 Sara: I move to approve minutes of March 22, 1994. Roger seconded the motion with all in favor. TROTT CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW FOR ADU Bruce opened the public hearing. Leslie made presentation as attached in record. She also presented affidavit of public notice by mail and pictures of property posting. (attached in record) David: I think it is absolutely reasonable to give the 50% bonus for the portion of the above grade on a pro-rated basis. I think it is appropriate to have some sort of device protecting the entry to the ADD from snow shed and avalanche whether it is a dormer or some other device that acts like a dormer making sure that the snow and ice doesn't build up at the entry to that dwelling unit. Bruce asked applicant if they had any problems with any of the conditions of approval from the Planning Office. Trott: No. '",- Bruce then closed the public portion of the hearing. r-" MOTION "'-_ Roger: I move to approve the Conditional Use Review for the attached accessory dwelling unit for 735 Castle Creek Drive with the conditions #1 through #13 as stated on Planning Office memo dated April 19, 1994 with the additional condition #14 "The applicant shall construct some type of architectural device to protect the ADU entrance from shedding snow." David seconded the motion with all in favor. CREEKTREE SUBDIVISION/PUD AMENDMENT MOTION Roger: I move to continue the public hearing and table the Creektree SUbdivision/PUD amendment to date certain of May 17, 1994. Sara seconded the motion with all in favor. INDEPENDENCE PLACE SPA DESIGNATION AND CONCEPTUAL SPA DEVELOPMENT PLAN MOTION "'- Roger: I move to table and continue the public hearing of Independence Place SPA designation and conceptual SPA development __ plan to date certain of June 7, 1994. Sara seconded the motion with all in favor. O'BLOCK/DURANT CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS Public notice was presented. (attached in record) Leslie: Made presentation as attached in record. Bruce opened the public hearing. Sara: Why do they want 4 additional ADUs? Jim Cook, representative for applicant: they have been selling these units to employee housing unit/caretaker unit is The owners and the people feel that the additional a beneficial thing. Andy Hecht, Attorney for applicant: We have one contract for a unit that is not one of the ADU units and I think that consistently people interested expressed an interest in having the possibility of having an ADU unit so he doesn't need a car, it is 2 blocks from town. And they think it is absolutely necessary to offer that as Aspen becomes a tougher place to live and find employees. So from our point of view it is necessary. ',-,~, 2 Sara: Is the Planning Office at all concerned about increased density? Leslie: I am not so concerned about the increased density as I am concerned about increasing the density without an additional parking space. This is the RMF Zone District. So that was not really the issue for me as much as the increase in density without the parking space and the fact of whether these units are being used or not being used. When the River Park townhomes over on original Curve were originally approved there was about 3 or 4 units that had accessory dwelling units also included in those units. And these units were starting to sell. I got quite a few calls from potential buyers asking if they could lift the deed restriction on the unit. They did not want an accessory dwelling unit. They have a condominium association that takes care of everything there and they didn't feel it was important or necessary to have a caretaker unit within their townhomes. Sara: I would continue to raise that. Hecht: There is a condominium association but as to River Park I think initially there was that concern of some of the buyers. But I think that as they become more familiar with the difficulties that they have finding employees here that it becomes more important for them to have that unit. In fact some units at River Park have not sold because the ADU unit is not available. So you may have some who have this already. You may have others who won't buy without it. And I think from the City's standpoint to have units available 2 blocks from town voluntarily--we are not asking for anything in exchange--is a pretty good situation. Leslie: These units approved subdivision. these units. are completely within the existing pre- There is no floor area increase attached to Bruce: Is it taking floor area away from the free market units? Leslie: grade. space. It doesn't take the floor area because the unit is below But it takes away from the previously approved living David: What is that space now? Cook: 414 square feet for the ADUs. David: Is it currently a mud room? Cook: It is a study. David: So the only real difference here is adding a kitchenette. 3 Leslie: Right. Cook: And adding an additional bathroom. David: And the parking space for the bedroom. Leslie: Right. David: And so the bathroom wouldn't be that important. What would be would be the kitchen. Because there is a kitchen allowed per dwelling unit. Leslie: And this kitchen has to meet requirements of the Housing Authority. We are not going to get a wetbar/sink. And the UBC requirements for light, air and ventilation will be calculated based on just the accessory dwelling unit. David: I would share Sara's concern about the parking. I don't have any problems with the additional density. I think that an additional ADU would be a good idea here. The only concern I have would be the parking and that might be mitigated by the fact that it is within walking distance. -- Hecht: We have 3 parking spaces 3 parking spaces for the 2. And who own them will have 3 cars. available for the employee. for these 3 bedroom units. And I can't imagine that the people If they have 2, that makes one David: So just the proximity to town, bus service and with the implementation of on-street parking restrictions I think that will go a long way to assuring any occupant of this unit to "keep their car on a leash" so to speak. Bruce asked for public comments. There were none and he closed the public portion of the hearing. Bruce asked if the applicant had any problems with the conditions of approval. Hecht: No problems. MOTION Roger Hunt: I move to approve the accessory dwelling units proposed for the Enclave at Little Nell finding in units 830, 834, 838 and 844 East Durant Avenue with the conditions #1 through #5 as outlined in Planning Office memo dated April 19, 1994. David seconded the motion. 4 Sara: I will approve this because it is within all the conditions. But I have to tell Andy and Jim I am very suspicious that we are '__' just approving more luxurious guest rooms. Bruce: I have to say I share some of the same concerns just looking at that floor plan layout. That bottom level just appears to me that this is just a part of a bigger house and I note that there is separate entry--does the entry come in from the garage to the main unit? Cook: Yes. Bruce: And everybody comes outside for the ADUs. Cook: There is no access to the ADUs from the garage. Bruce: It looks like there is a revolving door kind of situation there. I can envision what we don't want it to be used as and could very easily be used as. Everyone then voted in favor of the motion. WEST END TRAFFIC STUDY After in-depth discussion-- David: The big difference between Bob and Roger's plans and the original plan is the pedestrian walkway down 4th. The principle ones--the pedestrian walkway down 4th, buses going on 4th as opposed to the 3rd and 5th. And buses exiting off on Bleeker at Aspen street. Am I missing something? George Vicenzi: That is basically the original plan. Also it had 4th street as a walkway. There would be signs in the middle of the streets to advise people that it was a walkway and to slow down. Those are the basic differences. The new plan would be the buses would come out 4th and go down mumble MOTION David: I move that we accept the plan on the right as it is currently presented with some direction to RFTA and MAA staff to try to figure out a way--not being a traffic expert--that knowing there are ways to analyze the traffic patterns to be more efficient. But for right now I see that the one on the right will cut down the face blocks that are impacted. Probably the efficient thing is just put all the traffic on 4th. But that really penalizes the people on that one street. So one of the things I like about the one on the right is that it does help share the pain. """'~-"'-'- 5 ..0- Bruce: Would you clarify that to indicate in some way that that ~ is something that is an amendment to the SPA mitigation to be tried this summer and analyzed at the end of the summer. David: Yes. Absolutely. Bruce: So that we understand we are not writing a plan that is forever a done deal. David: This is strictly for the season and it has to be revisited constantly. And I think we will all learn from every season's efforts and constantly try to improve it. Roger: I will second but--because I don't know why but there are at least 2 blue signs missing on that right hand map. And one is the exiting on Hallam where the music tent--and the other one until there is a way of turning left on Main Street from what we call the west end to northwest end it basically is essential for RFTA to go down Bleeker to be exited right at Aspen. David: What does it take to get a light? ?: Probably 2 months. Becky Blaine, PD Dept: The only consideration of a light is it is 12 months out of the year. It cannot be used arbitrarily. David: Is it something that--I can just see having somebody standing out there and direct traffic. Becky: It would take 2 people to direct traffic there. David: I think it is worth pursuing the light. I think there are days even on slow days all year around that turning left from the west end--it will alleviate traffic not just from the MAA, not just traffic from the Institute but the traffic coming and going throughout the west end which now goes up and down Bleeker. And will help pulse traffic going up and down Main Street. Bruce: This is a summer experiment and when we decide this experiment does work--we really do want 4th to be the street and then you have to move the light. Roger: A light in that general area is long overdue for the needs of basically the west end to get out somewhere there. Bruce: So is a reference to a light in your motion? David: Yes. I think we should go for it. '..0<._'' 6 Kim: My concern is then are we having 2 issues in one motion. One to adopt the chart on the right. And the other to continue to '-- pursue the best option for-- Bruce: sign. The chart on the right calls for a pedestrian crossing David: I misunderstood it. I thought it called for a light. Then I amend my motion to say a pedestrian crossing and then also investigate and continue further discussion meetings on where the best location for a light or lights are. Roger: I will give second to that. Sara: I want the motion to include all those things in the second paragraph to be implemented. Roger: I think at some time or another that we as a body have to start reducing the number of non-consensus items. Because it is a non-consensus item doesn't mean necessarily that the community should not make a decision along that line. ROLL CALL VOTE: Sara, yes, David, yes, Roger, yes, Bruce, yes. _ BUSES '-- MOTION Roger: I move that we find that the number of trips by RFTA in the west end--at 16 now, approaches a minimum and that a related issue is the threshold issue at what point transportation is not convenient. And I think that 16 gets close to that siting previous studies in the downtown where people will say they walk two blocks and they usually find a parking space within a block and a half of their destination. That relates to the convenience of a transportation system. And I don't want to see that transportation system impinged by a seven block walk if you really count the actual number of blocks. I think we can get away with it at 10 people right now that being the structural--but if you start getting mOre people than that, there is going to be a heavy incentive to transfer to automobiles. And I further move to continue the RFTA research into smaller, quieter vehicles on some of their events realizing some of their financial restraints. . Sara seconded the motion. Chuck Roth, Engineering: approaching 16? Did the motion say that the average was __'~_;r'- 7 .'--- '- Roger: The present average of 16 is approaching the point that I am very uncomfortable with when taken in the light of the threshold of pUblic transportation. I am uncomfortable going below that. David: If there is a way of going below that which I think there might be given closer analysis of ridership frequency, head times, all of those good things. And as Roger said smaller buses and along the line of what the west neighbors are saying--a jitney or the thing the Ritz has--something along that line might lesson the impact. I think that should continue to be researched. Roger: I don't have a problem with that but keep in mind when you do go to the smaller you sometimes increase the numbers. David: I think in off peak, some of that might make sense if it can work into procurement of equipment, etc. Everyone then voted in favor of the motion. TIME OF EVENTS Robert Harth, MAA: Most of our concerts end around 10:30. They start at 8:00 and they run 2 hours. But by the time we clear out it is 10:30 or 10:45. We tried 7:30 my first year here which was in 1990. And we took it on the chin from our patrons and also the _ Restaurant Association which was verv angry with us. '-- I don't see why we are even talking about this. This has nothing to do with traffic mitigation plan. I don't think it necessarily is the purview of the Planning & Zoning commission to talk about what is--at the moment by the way it is a relatively informal curfew but we honor it at all times--the airport closes at 11:00 and we endeavor to shut down at 11:00. And we try to come down earlier. But to ask us to move our concerts earlier than at 8:00 is going to be very onerous for our patrons and to a lot of the restaurants in the community. We have tried it and it failed. Bruce: I must say I agree with Robert. I don't think this is part of the traffic mitigation plan. I am not prepared to sit up here and tell the MAA or anybody else that "You have to close down at a certain time of night". That's done in a totally different form than this. Sara: However we are recommending delivery times for the Institute. So we are saying times of traffic are an impact to a neighborhood. But I have to agree with the MAA. I think that 7:30--I just think 8:00 is when movies start and when people are done eating. Vicenzi: The reason that we feel that it is part of the traffic mitigation plan is--it is not the time of the events themselves. 8 It is the traffic and buses when they leave. So we feel it is tied together in that respect. And when these buses leave at night it ',- can be 10:30 or 10:45 by the time the buses are out of there and these buses are pretty noisy. And a lot of the neighbors unfortunately--the kids can't sleep until after the concerts are over and the buses and are gone. And the cars also. People slamming doors, talking. That is whey we feel it is appropriate to review it under the traffic mitigation plan. The solution to that time would be quieter buses. basically the problem--the buses. That is Robert: In the hundreds if not thousands of hours of discussion of the traffic mitigation plan when the whole SPA process was taking place with City council and Planning & Zoning commission at no point in time during the conceptual or final review was there ever a discussion about ending concert times. And there was always discussion about deliveries to the Institute. That was always an issue from the very beginning. The discussion about the 10:00 curfew for the MAA is new as of a couple of months ago from George. And it never came up before this time. I have had a lot of trouble with it--obviously. It cuts us off at the knees in a very critical area. There was no motion on issue #2 at this time. - UTILIZATION OF 4TH STREET -- MOTION Roger: I move that for this summer 4th Street becomes restricted to pedestrian, bicycles and resident access only. And would encourage investigation of other modes of transportation such as trolleys or other alternate modes of transportation. Sara: When you say trolleys you don't mean putting in wires and everything, Roger. Roger: Well, a trolley does have an overhead wire. other modes of transportation. I am leaving it open. a wire down the center of 4th Street with a trolley of the MAA and get the buses out of the west end. But I included I would love to take care Sara: How about taking trolleys out and just put in "Investigate alternate modes of transportation". Roger: Including trolleys? Fine. David seconded the motion with all in favor. 9 WEST END SPEED LIMIT MOTION Roger: I move to encourage the continuance of the traffic Warren study with the hopes that the general west end speed limit would be reduced to 20 MPH. Sara seconded the motion. vicenzi: We talked to the City Attorney and got a copy of the code that covers reducing the speed limit. The Warren study that Becky had mentioned is a guideline set by the state. There is no mandate to follow that guideline. The Municipal code just says there has to be a traffic investigation or a survey. Becky: That is not correct. Municipal code adopted the State code. The state code adopted the Manual of the Uniform Traffic Control Devices. In the manual it exclusively explains what a traffic investigation survey is--which is the Warren study. It is not that you have a choice to do it or not. vicenzi: We would like to go forward with the Warren study and see what happens. Everyone then voted in favor of the motion. - MOTION ''''-'~~ Roger: I move with regard to the traffic signal on Hwy 82 to encourage local study as to whether it should be 3rd, 4th or 5th or 2nd or where it should be located to basically facilitate pedestrians crossing Hwy 82--not necessarily at the light but nearby would definitely help improve it. And also to ease the flow of traffic from the west end as well as events from the music tent onto Hwy 82. Also encourage the study of or the placement of a traffic control person on Main street at 3rd at the end of events to ease the egress of traffic. David seconded the motion with all in favor. Bruce: I am going to vote "No" on this because it has already been indicated that somebody is going to research a traffic signal anyway. And this--we don't know where or when or if we are going to need one anyway until after this summer's experiment. So I am going to vote "No" on this one. Roger: OK. I withdraw my motion. David: I call the question. " . 10 Everyone voted against the motion except Roger. ~,- Bob Gish: Thank you for the guidance you have given us tonight. We have direction now that we will order the devices and get started with installation. The thing that concerns me after being at all of these meetings is that there are no winners. There are no losers. The MAA and RFTA hate to continue to talk about these issues over and over again. And the west enders--you can't say they have lost. You can't say they have won. But they continue to have concerns over the issues which are not resolved to their satisfaction. At the end of our meeting in October we have got to put the issue behind us. We just can't continue to talk about the same issues over and over and over again. I think it is important that this sub-committee is effective in that everybody buys into the sub- committee. And when I make changes or we do things differently then people buy into it. I don't know how we can ever get closure on this. But it is absolutely essential that these issues come to closure this Fall. Again I want to thank you for your efforts tonight in getting this started in the right direction. Sara: And it will be reviewed every two years. - Bob: Right. The small committee has got to committee that will continue to re-evaluate. natural correct things evolve with changes so to something that works. That is my goal. be a long-standing I hope that the it just comes down --- Bruce: There also has to be an understanding that whatever decisions are made and reached--not everybody is going to be totally happy. In fact everybody may be a little bit unhappy with some decisions. Work session on Langley was continued to Tuesday May 3, 1994. Meeting was adjourned. Time was 8:20 P.M. Deputy Clerk "~'''''. -., 11