Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19950418 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS CITY/COUNTY JOINT GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMISSION APRIL 18. 1995 Meeting was called to order by Chairman Bruce Kerr. Answering roll call for the City were Roger Hunt, Sara Garton, Tim Mooney, and Steve Buettow. Jasmine Tygre, Robert Blaich, and Marta Chaikovska were excused. Answering roll Krazoff, David Cathy Tripodi. Ben Dorman. call for the County were Suzanne Caskey, George Guthrie, Shellie Harper, G. Steve Whipple, and Excused were Jack Hatfield and Jake Vickery and COMMISSIONERS COMMENTS There were no comments. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments. 1994 GMOS TOURIST ACCOMMODATION - L'AUBERGE LODGE Chairman Kerr opened the public hearing and requested Leslie Lamont to proceed. Leslie Lamont: There is one item on the agenda for the joint Growth Management Commission to review and score. The application is requesting a 1994 lodge allocation, and they are requesting 12 lodges. She submitted for public record to the clerk, Affidavit and Proof of Public Noticing (attached in record) . Lamont said that there was a possibility that applicant will be making amendments to their applicant and would come forth in their presentation to the commissions. However, she said she would make her presentation based upon the application submitted. In presentation, she stated the applicant is requesting 12 lodge units and there are currently 9 cabins on site, with 1 manager's residence. There are fireplaces and wood stoves in the cabins and in the manager's residence. The applicant is proposing to expand their lodge use within the office zone district. Right now, a lodge is not an allowed use in the office zone district, and as part of further review of this application by the City P&Z GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMISSION APRIL 18. 1995 Commission, the applicant will be pursuing a text amendment to allow lodge use in the office zone district. They will also be seeking a Conditional Use Review by the P&Z Commission for the lodge. Lamont said the criteria to be scored is: l. Revitalizing the permanent community. A strong emphasis is placed on family-oriented housing. The application, when submitted, proposed a cash-in-lieu payment to mitigate their employee housing needs. Their cash-in-lieu payment far exceeded the minimum requirement of providing housing for the increase in employees. It was nearly 100 per cent. 2. Providing transportation alternatives. Applicants have stated will provide a fleet of bicycles for guest residents and employees, and a "curbside service" for guests, so that guests do not have to rent a car, they will provide bus passes for employees, and the applicant's prime location on Main Street is the primary bus route from the City and the County and there is currently a RFTA bus stop on the site. Applicant has provided a nice little bench at the bus stop. It is proposed by applicant to provide on parking space per cabin. 3. Promoting an environmentally sustainable development. Applicant included materials that would be used in construction and feels are environmentally sensitive. Applicant is not proposing the heat any of the parking pads or driveways, and will not install air conditioners. Applicant has emphasized they will have bicycles, new cabins will be installed with gas log fireplaces. There is one wood stove, 7 wood-burning fireplaces on the property in individual cabins. The application, as proposed, does not change what presently exists in regard to the wood-burning in the present units, only in the new units. 4. Maintaining design quality, historic compatibility and Community character. This site is on Main Street, and is considered an historic district, and has been reviewed by the HPC. The character is very pedestrian-friendly, the site plan has small cottages and compatiable with historic setting. Lamont said that in three of the four categories, staff scored applicant less than threshold. Presentation was then made by Gideon Kaufman, attorney, presenting 2 GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMISSION APRIL 18. 1995 the applicants, ALH Holding. archi teet on the proj ect, Jay engineering, Tracy and Michael, Audrey, the owner. Kaufman Hammond, managers introduced Dave Gibson, who has worked on the of the Lodge, and Kaufman said that this project was slightly different from what one is used to seeing. It was a project to preserve cabins, vintage 1950's, and incorporate design and structure around the cabins. Emphasis on preserving the small lodge and uniqueness qualities were pointed out. Dave Gibson, architect, also made presentation to give physical understanding of what was being done architecturally in terms of construction on the site. He pointed out some of the character of the Lodge such as: small seating areas and flower boxes in windows, small-scale architecture, preservation of mature aspens, cottonwoods, pines and lilacs, parking spaces allow the grass to come through, gardens and walkways. Spacing between buildings was pointed out-open space vistas. The Site Plan was viewed, as well as other architectural maps in summary. Kaufman went over criteria 1 as first issue. He stressed the fact that applicant mitigated almost 100 per cent of cash-in lieu, and applicant is willing to take one of the units and convert to affordable housing and did not meet threshold with staff scoring. The second issue of providing transportation alternatives, Kaufman added that the lodge is willing to provide sidewalks on both sides of the site. The applicant chose to ask for one parking space per cabin next to each cabin. Kaufman went to criteria 3, promoting environmentally sustainable development. Again, he pointed out also the applicant will pave the alleys and eliminate the tremendous amount of dirt at the site. One of the criticisms of the project has to do with the fireplaces that the applicant is not proposing to eliminate, and Kaufman defended the fact that one does not want take away those amenities that make a small lodge desirable; wood-burning fireplaces being one of those amenities. Chairman Kerr: What is the heat source in both the old cabins and the new cabins? Is there heat available in each of the units beyond the wood-burning fireplaces? Gibson: Natural gas. In terms of criteria 4, maintaining compatibility and community character, was open before scoring. design quality, historic Kaufman stated discussion 3 GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMISSION APRIL 18. 1995 Harper asked what would happen with the manager's residence. Kaufman stated that the manager's residence is on one portion of separate property and the lodge is on the other. What the applicant is doing is combining the two together, but wishes to reserve the option to sell the manager's residence as a house in the future. Kaufman stated also that the applicant is eliminating one of the three existing curb-cuts and will grass it over, reducing by 33 per cent, the amount of curb-cuts that exist onto Main Street. Mooney asked if the applicant intended to condominiumize the project and sell individually. Kaufman did say at one time the owners looked at the option before this application, but determined not to do so. Mooney expressed concern regarding the environment, nature of the design, and made it very clear that if the design was going to stand with him, it would have to remain and long-range qualities maintained. Kaufman defended applicant stating that all the applicant was trying to do was keep flexibility and preserve options in the future should the City decide to offer such options. It is not part of the applicant proposal at this time to condominiumize. Lamont stated that any substantial changes in the use of the site would open it up for re-scoring and/or amendment for conditional use review. Chairman Kerr asked applicant and staff, what kind of buildings could we be potentially looking at on this site if property was redeveloped as office? Kaufman: It is a .75 in the 0 office zone, up to one to one, so you could have a 27,000 sq. ft. building on this property, instead you are ending up with .34. You are ending up with a third of what would be appropriate. Lamont added that in addition the maximum height in the office zone district is 25 ft. and another important aspect is there is no open space requirement. Chairman Kerr asked what were the setback requirements. Lamont answered the minimum front yard is 10 ft. The applicant is requesting a variance to the Board of Adjustment of 1-1/2 ft. Chairman Kerr asked how to insure the shuttle service would continue in the future. Kaufman thought it would be a condition of approval that the shuttle would stand. Harper suggested that a free taxi to and from the airport for guests might be a cheaper solution; she felt committed that people have free transportation to the lodge. Caskey stated concern regarding the wood-burning fireplaces in the 4 GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMISSION APRIL 18. 1995 ",...,...,.- present units and asked if gas appliances could replace them; Kaufman stated that the applicant did not want to lose the nature of what brings people to the lodge - the wood-burning fireplaces. At this particular time to commit to eliminating the fireplaces was not feasible, but perhaps sometime in the future. Chairman Kerr opened public comment and Lisa York, and 5 month resident of Aspen who resided at the lodge, spoke in support of the expansion of the lodge. Steve Goldenberg, a neighbor of the lodge, also spoke and was supportive of the lodge and the transportation issues. He felt the project represented the community and was pleasant. Doug ( ? ), a businessman in Aspen, has brought several large groups into Aspen to stay at the L'Auberge. Recently, the lodge has not had the capacity to hold the groups and he was in favor of the expansion. Chairman Kerr then closed the public hearing. Kaufman went through areas where the applicant is amending the application and requested flexibility in decisions of scoring. First area the applicant is amending has to do with affordable housing. There is a proposal for cash-in-lieu for about 100 per cent of the employees. Second, the applicant is proposing to eliminate the curb-cut, add sidewalks, in addition to the bicycles, curb-side service and a streetlight. Third, applicant proposes to pave the alley and pave and eliminate the dust problem that now exists. Last, applicant is willing to eliminate one fireplace. Scoring commensed by paper. Whipple chose not to vote. Buettow chose not to vote due to conflict of interest, for the record. Five county members and four city members voted, totaling nine. Lamont did scoring count and passed to Chairman Kerr. The applicant made above threshold in all categories; 3.7, 3.5, 3.7, 4.4. MOTION Hunt moved to recommend to City Council application has met threshold in all four of its categories and recommends a 1994 Lodge Allocation from City Council for 11 units. Guthrie seconded, roll call vote was unanimous, motion carried. MOTION Caskey moved to eliminate Conditions of Planning Office memorandum dated April 18, 1995 as purpose of meeting was to score, that was done, applicant already made representations and amendments and is expected to adhere to those. Tripodi seconded, vote was unamimous, motion carried. 5 GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMMISSION APRIL 18. 1995 MOTION Hunt moved to recommend to City Council to decide regarding on site housing versus and/or cash-in-lieu, and if decision is that housing shall not be placed on the property and City Council accepts cash- in-lieu instead, that one unit be allocated from the 1995 Lodge Growth Management Allocation. This Commission recognizes that this is a small lodge project and is at a disadvantage with the present growth management quota system; so, therefore, it would be very burdensome for this applicant to have to return to compete. Tripodi seconded, vote commensed, eight favored, Krazoff opposed, motion carried. MOTION Guthrie moved to recommend to City Council to not accept cash-in- lieu, but that they decide to convert housing; recommends Category 2 or 3 also, and accept an on-site unit number 7 as mitigation. Krazoff seconded. Roll call vote commensed; motion was split, 4 approved, 4 opposed (Caskey, Tripodi, Hunt, Mooney), with one abstention (Harper). Motion failed to carry. - -- Chairman Kerr adjourned the first meeting of the Joint Growth Management Commission. Sharon M. Carrillo, Deputy City Clerk 6 "'.~....~. ., RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS "_.c'" PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 1995 Meeting was called to order by Chairman Bruce Kerr. In attendance were: Roger Hunt, Sara Garton, Tim Mooney and Steve Buet tow. Excused were Jasmine Tygre, Robert Blaich and Marta Chaikovska. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS There were none. STAFF COMMENTS There were none. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were no comments. MINUTES There were none. L'AUBERGE TEXT AMENDMENT AND CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW PUBLIC HEARING Leslie Lamont, Staff Planning Office, made presentation. The applicants are partially zoned office, and are proposing to keep the property zoned office, however, they are proposing a text amendment to the office zone district to allow a lodge as a conditional use on Main Street. Lamont stated her memorandum had two sections: a Text Amendment for lodge as a conditional use and also the Conditional Use Review, and recommends approval of the text amendment, but recommends tabling the Conditional Use Review. Chairman Kerr asked why not table the whole proposal as he was reluctant to draft text amendments on this one particular lodge when it may effect other lodges. Gideon Kaufman, representing the applicant, stated the importance of the approved text amendment and Conditional Use Review in terms of the time element and the goal to start construction before next year. Garton and Mooney voiced concern about more kitchens in the new units and Lamont informed Garton decisions would come under Conditional Use Review. " PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 18, 1995 Chairman Kerr asked for any public the land use code to allow lodges office zone district. There were no the public hearing. comment in regard to amending as a conditional use in the comments; Chairman Kerr closed MOTION Garton moved to recommend to City Council approval of the text amendment, amending Section 24-5-213, to allow a lodge, and a lodge unit with kitchens as a Conditional Use Review in the Office Zone District. Hunt seconded, roll call vote commensed; vote was split 2 approved, 2 opposed (Kerr and Mooney). Motion not carried. MOTION Garton moved to recommend to City Council approval of the text amendment, amending Section 24-5-213, to allow a lodge as a Conditional Use Review in the Office Zone District. Mooney seconded, roll call vote commensed; 3 approved, 1 opposed (Kerr). Motion carried. Chairman Kerr brought forth item of Conditional Use and Lamont recommended tabling as she has not seen, nor has the engineering department, the revised site plan for the project. The applicant is proposing to reduce one of the parking spaces on site and that needs to be addressed with some form of special review. Neither Lamont or the parks department has seen a landscape plan, and Lamont felt the project has been very rushed and to approve as a conditional use, she reiterated tabling. MOTION Hunt moved to table action on the L'Auberge Conditional Use Review to May 9th, hopefully at the beginning of the agenda, to allow applicant and staff to work out solutions to the application; to continue the public hearing. Garton seconded, vote commensed and was unanimously in favor. Motion carried. OFFICE ZONE DISTRICT TEXT AMENDMENT Chairman Kerr opened the public hearing. Stan Clauson presented staff initiated text amendment. Clauson recommended to amend the office zone district to expanding retail as a conditional use in Historic Landmarks. Mooney voiced opposition to the proposal stating he was concerned about losing 2 PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 18. 1995 the historic value as "retail" is so wide open. Garton asked if there were any other areas other than Main Street that have historic landmarks in the office zone district. Lamont answered that the majority of the historic landmarks were in the C-1 zone district. Parking issues, foot-traffic along Main Street. were also concerns of the commission. Buettow questioned if the commission should be placed in position to judge this application, and Hunt stated their were difficulities, and sited pierre Famille Jewelry as inappropriate for C-1 zoning, as an example. Hunt felt it was becoming more difficult to deny such applications for the commission. Mooney stated he felt that the application was pushing growth into an area where it is not needed and not in the best interest of the community. Chairman Kerr closed the public hearing. MOTION Mooney moved to recommend to City Council that we deny the proposed text to allow retail commercial establishments, and as an amendment to allow retail commercial establishments as a conditional use in historic landmark and office zone district. Buettow seconded, vote commenced, 3 in favor, 2 opposed. Motion did not carry. MOTION Hunt moved to forward the office zone text amendment forward to City Council with a recommendation that in Paragraph IC-l, instead of retail commercial establishments being a separate enity in that group of established commercial activities, that it be placed at the end after visual arts gallery and similar retail establishments. It was not seconded. Motion did not carry. PITKIN COUNTY JAIL EXPANSION FINAL SPA REVIEW AND GMQS EXEMPTION Mary Lackner, Planning Office, presented. Temple Glassier represented the pitkin County Board of County Commissioners. The applicant is seeking to add approximately 1,500 square feet onto the Pitkin County Jail to provide more space for the communication and police departments. The Commission viewed the Site Plan and Hunt agreed that the communications space is definitely cramped and an absolute essential for expansion, with currently only 456 square feet. Hunt felt his only problem with the application was the flat roof with no depression with three major air handling units there. He felt that would be very unsitely and recommended blending the roof treatment into the new building and it would also create screening 3 .. . PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 18. 1995 of all the equipment on top of the roof. Garton agreed, but voiced concerns on possible spoiling of the "plaza experience", and how close it would be to the Courthouse. Glassier stated that the site was the only feasible place to put the addition to the jail. Buettow stated he felt the addition was poorly thought out and being next to the Library, Courthouse,. it needed more work. MOTION Buettow moved to table the application until the earliest date possible, when the commission can view some thorough drawings of the adjacent buildings and if the proposal would fit into that entire plaza area. Garton seconded, vote commensed, all were in favor; motion carried. Chairman Kerr adjourned the meeting at 9:00 P.M. Respectfully submitted: 6ho.x.on '--(Y) . ~a Sharon M. Carrillo, Deputy City Clerk 4