Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19940510 ,- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS - SPECIAL MEETING PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MAY 10. 1994 vice Chairman Roger Hunt called meeting to order at 4:30 P.M. Answering roll Sara Garton. excused. call were Robert Blaich, Roger Hunt, David Brown and Tim Mooney, Jasmine Tygre and Bruce Kerr were COMMISSIONER COMMENTS There were none. STAFF COMMENTS Leslie: We have a meeting every Tuesday this month. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were none. ASPEN HIGHLANDS VILLAGE GENERAL SUBMISSION ~. Tim Malloy, Planning: Using plans explained development. The number of units in the old plan--there were 77 total single family free market lots. And this plan there are only 46 free market single family lots and 31 free market townhomes. Those townhomes are clustered on either end of the village in the revised plan. There are still 77 free market units. There has also been a fairly significant change in the mix of affordable housing units. Where previously there were 138 units that were all in the village and mostly 2 and 3 bedroom condo-like units, there are now a fairly significant mix of units including 9 single family detached affordable lots distributed in both of those free market neighborhoods. 6 duplex and 4 townhouse family oriented and 28 family oriented townhouse category 2 affordable housing sale units that are located in the village. We have asked what makes these affordable or family oriented. And they have indicated that it is because they are mostly at garden level walk out with some townhouse very small yard type outside space and they are 3 bedroom units. In addition to those 28 there are 6 affordable housing sale units located in the village which are more or less apartment type units. And they are not family oriented--l or 2-bedroom smaller units. And 8 category 1 and 8 category 2 I-bedroom sale apartments. \......- - The previous project had more commercial footage. It had 14,385sf ~ of restaurant distributed primarily in the hotel building and in a couple of other locations where there was ski-in access. That number has been reduced to 8,125sf. And then there were 37,440 of other retail space distributed through the village largely in the hotel structure including what they are calling independent commercial which is intended to be utilized as a drugstore, grocery store, small convenience store type of store. That number has been reduced to 21,600sf in the new plan and still is intended to be distributed in the village with much of that independent commercial space occurring in this building right here which has access to this parking directly in front. In the previous plan we had 450 to 500 parking spaces located in this lot out front. And then there were an additional 250 spaces associated with the tennis courts and below the tennis courts. Then there was also parking below the village. In the revised plan there will be a parking structure with part of it below grade. 450 spaces here and 137 spaces for the free market and affordable units underneath the village and parking structures similar to the last proposal. Roger: Is it still anticipated that all the service will be done in that underground parking structure? Malloy: Yes. That delivery would occur in a fashion similar to there is a driveway access into the underground phase and all "-, service for their commercial retail space will occur in that location. That roof road is intended for pedestrian access, shuttle busses and the electric carts. At this point you had hotel drop-off. And then there would be a gate here that only the shuttle busses could go through. There has also been a change in the structure relative to the tourist accommodation area. Before there was an 85-room hotel which was intended to be a fairly luxury hotel. This has been changed to a 73 unit lodge/condominium kind of thing which probably won't have the same level of amenities that the 85 room hotel proposed. Their argument is we had to cut back somewhere so we decided to mix the hotel. It is basically a financial thing. Hotels are a money loser. We still have no information regarding the economics as to how this whole plan works. Despite the fact that their argument relative to rezoning which relies heavily on that "We need this development to drive the improvements on the mountain" has not changed. Bob: They may have found it very difficult to rent that hotel with 3 other luxury hotels in town already. Why would people stay out ",--. 2 -- there at a luxury hotel when they can stay in here in a luxury hotel? It is not going to be easy to rent rooms in a hotel out ~. there with the competition of The Ritz and Little Nell. David: I would guess that market research indicated a lot of families that might typically go to a location or Aspen Square that the condo-tel is product. that there are Snowmass type a reasonable Roger: If it is a condo-tel, that is one thing. If it is just a condominiumized whatever, I have grave concerns about the basically what will happen with the vehicle miles traveled. It will accommodate fewer people yet have more cars on the road to service those people just because of the nature of the beast. So I find this direction upsetting. Malloy: We were disappointed too. We thought we had given them fairly good direction that the hotel aspect is what we liked. And yet they decided to bag it. Bob: What I read in the paper made them look like they are listening to the community saying "Everybody says we are too big. We will downsize the hotel and put something someplace else". That sounds great. Roger: If it is an operation similar to the Gant which is one of the better operations in town, that is one thing. But if it just ends up being a condominiumized complex like Chateau Roaring Fork- "-.._~, - Malloy: There is intended to be food service there. Roger: I am really worried about the operation of that facility. I would like to keep that operation as close to a hotel as possible. Basically like the Gant with its operation of supplying van service and they are really close to a hotel operation except they don't have a restaurant on site. And by that they are able to effectively reduce the individual automobile. My worry is that every property manager in town has a couple of units in this place and it ends up being serviced by individual automobiles. Sara: I want to support staff's dismay of the reduction of neighborhood/commercial space because I really saw a possibility of that becoming a community that would service not only the Highlands base but people that lived on Glen Eagle Drive and Meadowood and that they would not have to drive into town. Roger: I agree with Sara that this may have been reduced to below the threshold of the village. David: I do like the mix in affordable housing. I think it is i "'-- 3 '.- the right direction to get some out of - -instead of a pure condominium apartment configuration to have some townhomes and some _ single family. I like the idea of the split level parking. That is an excellent approach instead of having a field of 450 cars. This gets almost all of it out of view due to the nature of putting a little bit of landscaping right at the split level garage. But I absolutely share Roger and Sara's concern and feeling about the rest of the village. I can see where they are responding to comments made from County referral agencies which were quite strong and in the past they were more concerned with the size than we are. But my biggest concern is that when it has lost the village flavor. I like the mix of the commercial, restaurant before. And with some of the changes that they have made with the affordable housing I would wholeheartedly--given the changes in the housing and given the changes in the parking I would wholeheartedly support retaining the hotel, the commercial square footages and the retail mix. One of the biggest reasons is by having a certain magnitude--at some level it becomes a magnate to retain some of the tourists there. Bob: I agree with that principle. But I have a question about reality. People do that at Snowmass. But this is the magnate here. People want to come into town and try the restaurants, the night life and everything else. Or just be here generally. Just experience it. I know people that drive in just to putz around town--just eat and then go back to their condo. I don't know how we can defeat that. I think everything you are saying is right. Give as many amenities as possible on site. But I don't think you are going to defeat the fact that Aspen is the magnate for this area. I have a suspicion when they abandoned the hotel they did it for 2 reasons. They can't see it paying back because of the competition. And they can see better return on their investment and then that changes the whole mix which we don't like. And it could become just another development without and not give any benefit to Aspen in terms of the traffic load and all the other factors. That is what I would worry about. David: One reason for focusing on the restaurants and the hotel is those are the living rooms--the public living spaces for this village. And so the guests coming from out of town those are the places where there is an opportunity for them to spend some time on campus. Bob: I don't know how much traffic goes up to Snowmass of people who are staying in Aspen who are skiing here. But if you are here you don't want to go out there. You might stay for dinner if you were staying up there. But I see everybody coming here--not going ","" 4 ,~-.... in the other direction. - I think we need more information on just what the intent is to do with the condo situation. What is the level and how much food service and public space are they going to have. Sara: A base lodge is the whole idea that we wanted. fireplace and all the things that used to be skiing. A big In the free market homes is there still any talk of ADUs? Malloy: They are saying that they would be willing to 20 caretaker or some sort of employee housing in those units if that is something the County feels is attractive. They have identified 20 lots would be eligible for those. Sara: Because again we are approving a gated estate with a lot of other things with some affordable housing because that is what the plan says. We are really just approving a gated estate if this is what is going to go forward. Leslie: What do you feel about the 20 ADUs--caretaker units. Sara: They have to be rented--absolutelv have to be rented. There is no choice in this case. It is a requirement. Roger: They may have technically reduced the number of cars. And they will taught that. But in doing so they have created something that may of the remaining cars they be used more just by the very nature of what they have created here. If they have lost the threshold of the village there is going to be more reason for someone to drive his individual automobile into Aspen. There aren't the facilities there to attract people to stay there. Leslie: Our first review of the project what they proposed greater square footage of commercial space than was previously approved. Our comment was that this was not consistent with the AACP. We talked about an overall reduction in commercial square footage. Sara: I would take a hard look at this 229 because by approving the Mountain you have got a larger ski school. Malloy: No. The Highlands vision for the mountain was consid- erably different than the Skico's vision for the mountain. The Highland's vision was they were going to continue to offer the whole spectrum of skiing including a s~gnificant ski school. The Skico's vision is much different. They are going to gear the mountain primarily toward the expert skier. They might not have ski school at all. And they are going to cut back on admin- istration. Administration is going to be handled in their other facilities in town. And they are also reducing the overall number of lifts from 10 to 7 and using higher technology systems which \....., 5 ,_ require fewer employees. ~ Bob: We are hearing people say that the lodges are having trouble because the hotels are taking away the people and some of these people are wanting to go out of business and are offering the properties up to the City for affordable housing. Malloy: The rezoning that they are requesting here really doesn't have anything to do with the area zoned Lodge. They are still intending to keep the area which is zoned Lodge, Lodge. Most of the rezoning is this being rezoned from AF-l which would in this case allow 10 or 12 single family residences to which would allow the 28 that they are proposing. And this from AF-l to R-6 that will accommodate mumble Leslie: So they are not rezoning the property as Lodge. Malloy: The plan as proposed still accommodates a drastically lower number of lodge units than was contemplated under the 25 acres of AR-l zoning to allow the 300 units. David: By comparing to the 300 room hotel I think either package is a vast improvement compared to what the impacts of the 300 room hotel on the community. But given the modifications in the parking and the affordable housing if those could be kept and goose up the quantity of the affordable housing I would be willing to go back to the increase in the extra 12 hotel rooms and some restaurant square footage just to try to build a nucleus of activity. Bob: What are the kinds of retail establishment are they talking about? Malloy: Whatever would normally make it viable to serve people. The postal office will not happen. Things like small convenience pharmacy, video store, book shop, laundromat, barber. David: We talked about at the early application some sort of recreational facility year round would be highly desireable. Something that was accessible to the public as well as the guests there. That might include things like swimming, tennis. Leslie: We might be better served to ask for those kind of amenities in a district kind of cash-in-lieu thing. We are about to adopt a Parks Masterplan. And the Parks Masterplan talks about recreational facility and the location for that is up by the schools. We might have a future commitment that this property would agree to participate in that Park and Recreation District to help us fund the construction or something like that. They are still proposing to continue the bike path. And they are still proposing to have the nordic connection. "'-- 6 '- Sara: And the lift to the schools which is a great idea. _ Malloy: It is still being discussed as being one to the Moore project also. The school lift is not gaining a lot of support because it's use is so limited. It would potentially only be open for about an hour at the end of the school day. And the question of whether it should be available on the weekends. It becomes an additional point in traffic and control. So it is receiving marginal support plus it would have impact on the adjacent lots in the Aspen Highlands and they are vigorously against it. Roger: What kind of transportation system do you see in the future servicing this? At the moment all I see is rubber wheels. I think we had better start looking a little further in the future. For example we have the Aspen/Snowmass project going on right now and it is conceivable that they could come up with a transportation mode that could access this area satisfactorily. At least in the planning phase have something that they can say "Well if something happens in the future this is where' we would put it". I am not seeing that in this plan. Bob: I wonder if there is any discussion with the school board about some kind of co-operation. You are unloading and onloading at roughly the same times. School busses go up there every morning and the are dormant during the day and they load the kids back at the end of the day. When the skiers are going up it is probably a little later and some of them might be coming back down a little later. But I wonder if there is any discussion going on about just '.. to conserve energy and have fewer buses so you wouldn't have those school buses sitting around all day long and maybe it is part of the whole public transportation issue to incorporate the schools with the skiers. Malloy: At one point Highlands was talking about a separate shuttle bus service to increase headways to 10 or 15 minutes. They are now of the belief that they can co-operate with RFTA to provide that same headway so one system is serving both uses. Sara: I am concerned about is even though the lodge and all those other things have been approved and are considered in the growth in the Aspen Area Community Plan the free market component completely knocks the plan out of whack--those free market units coming on line. It eats up all the free market to the year '23. David: Hearing what we heard regarding the enclave 2 blocks from Little Nell, that they are finding their market is asking for ADUs- -I would be inclined to permit ADUs in every single family dwelling unit and then perhaps require it in the 20. But permit it in the additional. And encouraging occupancy in all the ADUs that have been approved in the past couple of years. If there is some way to get a tax credit out there toward the occupancy and the use of those units such that they could prove that they have bonafide ,""_"0' 7 -""",, tenants on a year round basis and the owner could get some kind of tax credit. ,"""-'" That is also in the Community Plan to explore. Malloy: How do you feel about the increase of traffic impacts associated with the ADUs. David: I think having the mass transit facilities even though they are RTVs (rubber tired vehicles) they are still--I think it is highly likely that it will be used. Malloy: Assuming that you were to have ADUs in 20 of the units or the potential for all the units. Would we be willing to accept an increase in traffic impacts in exchange for having these. David: I take a larger picture which it is reducing traffic impacts by housing those people here rather than in Rifle, Basalt and everything in between. Bob: It may increase local traffic to a degree but is taking it off the highways. Malloy: It is just one of the areas that doesn't have a whole lot of flexibility or extra capacity in terms of local traffic impacts. David: I totally disagree with that observation. I have looked at those numbers very closely from the previous submissions and I '., think with the addition of 1 lane a lot of that bottleneck will go away with better signal lighting and an additional lane through that intersection the bottleneck at peak hours in both directions will be substantially reduced. I think the larger greater magnitude of the proj ect here will help contribute toward the improvement of that intersection. I think the mass transit system that goes out to this village will help alleviate some of the load on that road up Maroon Creek. One of the reasons I ride my bike up there almost every day in the summer is because there is so little traffic on that road. Some of the traffic studies that have already been suggested for the improvement of that intersection--signalling and turn lanes I think will go a long way--the hourly vehicle counts--I was surprised how low the peak hourly vehicle counts are. Malloy: Some people are suggesting that the intersection is simply not well timed. David: That is an understatement. Roger: Yes. just doesn't That is an understatement for sure. I guess CDOT like the idea of vehicle demand modification of ."...., ~r 8 -. timing. It is time we really pick the good out of California. There is some good when it comes to signalization and how they work - it. If a car comes up into the non-priority direction of the intersection and there is no cars on the main rod he, all of a sudden, gets 4 seconds of green light to ge the heck out of there without stopping any traffic. I have been at this intersection and waited the full 45 seconds with hardly any cars going by just because they have this insane fixation on some fixed time. Why they don't go to demand modification of timing I wish I could figure out. It really improves flows in California. For example in Cost Mesa- -we worry about 30,000 over the Castle Creek Bridge. They deal with 60,000 vehicles a day at the intersection of the 405 and Harbor Blvd. But it flows! They have this entirely demand modified signalization system. Sara: Yes. Backups are dangerous. Roger: And it is stupid to have 1 or 2 cars just idling there and that is the highest pollutant period other than PMI0 while there is no traffic crossing there just for the sake of waiting for a red light to turn green. There can be a lot done to improve signalization. ,-,-. I would love to see the money they are spending on that ',- intersection go into an alternative system which will in effect reduce the traffic at that intersection and maybe get it down to acceptable levels. And that is not what I am seeing in this plan. I would like to see the previous base village more or less as is. And everything on the Jerome side be affordable dwellings. Everything on the Thunderbowl side be the free market. I am afraid we have reduced the affordable dwelling units to 1/2 of what it was before and the free market wasn't reduced at all. Malloy: The single family homes were reduced but they were substituted with 31 townhomes. Roger: I am afraid we are gong in the wrong direction proportionally. Sara: I want to second Roger. There is too much free market. We have just approved a residential development that is very large. This is asking for a residential development that is very, very large. David: It doesn't bother me as I look at it in context where the development is occurring relative to town. It is within the metro area. It is within the standard metropolitan statistical area. _. 9 ,~, Especially with the Community Plan that we are reducing commercial space. We are reducing lodge. We are reducing employees working .- at 300 lodge units. We are getting the housing close to town. Sara: But we are out of balance as far as the Community Plan goes. David: I am looking at this in relationship to the existing 300 hotel unit approval not from ground O. Sara: Why would you look at that? It doesn't probably really apply anymore. It is there by right but it will have to be changed so much if that is what they come back in with. David: I think that is why. Because it is there by right. And relative to some other places in the valley that the development could occur. Looking at the land available over time I think this is a reasonable place to locate it. I think it will have a significant chance of using mass transit and some of the support facilities in this village. And whether than having a spread sheet development throughout the valley with those same 77 units over the next 20 years that 77 units here will have a much less impact. Bob: I agree with you on that. I think this is a good thing. I wouldn't want to see Roger's proposal because you would have "The other side of the track syndrome". I think the mix is very nice. Sara: To me these free market homes are second homes. And so we have just approved another community of second homes. I am not all ',,-, sold for the conversion. I think it really puts it out of whack then--the number of free markets coming in under this application. Roger: With the Moore project we are getting a decent mix there. I also have reservations about the commercial space being reduced below the level of the threshold of creating a village. Leslie: So reduction of commercial space is not consistent with desire to reduce vehicle miles traveled because of lack of support services would encourage people to leave the village. Roger: And their plan at this point looks awfully fixed--this is what we are going to get in perpetuity. And if that is the case we are not looking at being able to develop into a village that would meet that minimum threshold nucleus. Leslie: So we would want to put in that some members of the Commission feel that the conversion as far as mitigation impact goes is better-- Sara: It doesn't meet the plan--the conversion does not meet our overall goals at the existing ratio. """-.'C_' 10 ".,;- Roger: The future in transportation basically may not be limited to rubber wheeled vehicles. And it is insane to plan an area without keeping in mind a transportation corridor for something other than rubber wheeled vehicles should that time come. Leslie: We will add that on page 12 number 12--0ther measures that the applicant should pursue. MOTION Roger: I will entertain a motion to adopt staff's findings as amended as related to the Aspen Highlands Village general submission and the proposal's consistence or lack of with Area Community Plan. Sara: I so move. Bob: I second the motion. Sara: And as an addition in my motion I move to direct staff to present these adopted findings to the County for their review and to the City Council for their review. Bob: I accept that for my second. David: The only hesitation I have to agree with the motion is on page 13--the 3 items under #3. As I alluded earlier I am starting to have second thoughts about those 3 items. First as member of the Growth Committee my recollection is that at the time of preparing the AACP we assumed that the Highlands would be developed as it was proposed at that time. So I do not believe that this would throw the AACP out of balance. Second I find that given the the project in its overall of what is being proposed I think that the conversion is reasonable and acceptable. Third that I look at some of these single family homes as being potentially occupied by locals. The rumor running rampant through the community is the west end is completely vacant and no one lives there and people are leaving or have left in droves yet 50% of the Board that is present here today live in the west end shocks me. And so I think it is possible and perhaps likely that 25% of these homes will be occupied by full time locals and that the other might be short termed and therefor become lodge accommodations. And so I look at the project and I see a balance. So I agree with everything in this package and everything we have talked about except--I see this project as being consistent with the AACP. Sara: I think there is an error in the original submission by Highlands that was approved- -how many free market homes were approved in that? Malloy: None. 11 Sara: So you couldn't have-- ,,-."""" David: But there was a lodge. Sara: That's why I cannot approve a lodge to conversion--of lodge to free market. That is an imbalance to me. David: A lot of second homes are short termed and therefore are an alternative tourist accommodation. So whether it is 3 hotel rooms or 1 single family house-- Sara: Apples and oranges, David. I can't accept that. David: It would be interesting to try to figure out who is the largest tourist accommodation business in town. Is it the Silver Tree? Is it the Ski Company with the Little Nell? Or is it Coates, Reid and Waldron. And if it is CR&W and or Aspen Club Properties or some of the other property management firms in town then I think that further proves my point. Roger: I look at it as a lot more impact from those free market housing units than I do from that whole village as far as trying to service it. It just shouldn't be done on a 1 to 1 basis. I am not totally philosophically against conversion but those are some of the factors in trying to reach a balance. Leslie: I am going to change #3 based upon a growth action recommendation these are the various issues raised with conversion. plan the Everyone then voted in favor of the motion. Meeting was then adjourned. Time was 6:45 P.M. PUTY CLERK - 12