Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19850716 REGULAR MEETING RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING Jl,Nn ZONING COMISSION JULY 16. 1985 Chairman Welton Anderson called the meeting to order at 5:03 p.m. with Commissioners Roger Hunt, David White, Mari Peyton, Ramona Markalunas (arrived late), and Jasmine Tygre (arrived late) present. COMMISSIONERS' COMMBR'l'S Hunt said he had asked Chic Collins, Council Member, why the funds for the trolley study had been withdrawn. Mr. Collins told him they had been withdrawn because nothing had been done and that this Commission should have followed up on the process. Hunt had drawn up a draft Resolution on the trolley system study which he read to the Commissioners. Hunt said he would like for the Commission to adopt thi s Resol ution and take it bef ore the next City Council meeting, on July 22, 1985. White commented that he was the City Planning and Zoning member of the trolley task force and that the task force had thought it would also be a very important link to Lift lA. White thought this was an important link and suggested adding it to the Resolution as a part of the first Whereas. Motion: Hunt moved to adopt Resolution 85-15 as amended; White seconded. All in favor; motion carried. Mari Peyton asked about the roof ducts at the remodeled Chart House and whether they were going to be screened. Alan Richman, planning director, asked if the matter should be taken up with the building department to find how the were ducts approved. Peyton replied yes. White asked what process the Epicure building went through to paint the building its current color. Steve Burstein, planner, said they had received Historic Preservation Committee approval of all intentions they had in renovating that building, including the paint. MINUTES June 18. 1985: Page 5 was missing, therefore, the minutes were tabled until the next meeting. Anderson corrected page 4 the first sentence of the Cantina Outdoor Dining Special Review, to read "for conflict of interest". 1 REGULAR MEETING RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 16. 1985 PRE-APPLICA'l'ION CONFERENCE COMMERCIAL GNP APPLICAR'l'S PRE-APPLICATION CONFERRliCZ Alan Richman, planning director, told the members of the commission the reason this was before them was because the applicants are proposing to submit a GMP application on August 1, 1985. The planning office felt strongly enough to let the applicant speak to the commission and get broad, general, guidance from the commission about the direction they are going. Richman suggested that the commissioners keep their comments very broad. There is no reliance on what is said today, they are coming to see if they are on the right track, a step below the conceptual level. Don Fleisher gave a brief review of the proposed project. He stated the concept of the building is centered around the potential uses that would go in the building. The 3 elements of this building would be: n a retail level, #2 possibility of office space, #3 possibility of employee housing. Because of problems associated with a corner like this, with so much traffic, no back to the building, and no alley creates constraints that have to be dealt wi tho We felt the most important thing was that we include in the uses tourist oriented things. We felt, after studying this, that office use in this area was not the best use, that we would end up with a dark upper level during the evening hours. If we could get retail space throughout the entire building that would be the best approach. We have also taken employee housing out of the site and will purchase in another site because we felt this was not a good place for employee housing. Mr. Fleisher said they have tried to do the best plan possible in creating excellent retail space, in both an upper and lower level. We did that by trying to determine the appropriate set back from the sidewalk, how far down to go, and how far up to go. We think we have the perfect relationship between up and down. Mr. Fleisher explained the drawings submitted to the Commission. Mr. Fl eisher added they were thinking about increasing the height of the building. Mr. Fleisher said they will have to get conceptual HPC approval in order to submit a GMP application. White asked what HPC would be approving. Steve Burstein, planner, replied that HPC will be looking at the compatibility with the surrounding buildings and essentially an architectural review. Peyton said she would rather see more of a diagonal orientation on the space and higher. Hunt agreed and commented he was 2 REGULAR MEETING RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 16. 1985 assuming there would be a fence around the area which will change the visible character and open space appearance. White said he did not mind the height but to come out to the corner, as proposed, bothers him. Anderson commented that this does not respect its corner situation from the standpoint of existing pedestrian traffic through there, this seems to eliminate any kind of diagonal circulation. Anderson added from the typical Aspen viewpoint all corner buildings in that part of town have some sort of access in the corner of the building. This just does not seem to react at all to the surroundings. Dick Fallin, project architect, asked Markalunas what had been in that space in the past. Markalunas replied originally it was a grocery store which came out to the corner in a very squared off . fashion, covering the whole corner. Fleisher said they were considering a sit down area or bench to be used as a transition from the sidewalk into a landscaped area. White asked if the basement level would be for storage to which Mr. Fleisher replied yes. NEW BUSINESS FERGUSON (McGILL) Pun AMBRDMER'l' Steve Burstein, planner, told the Commission that Lot 4 is the subject property, seeking a lot split, a PUD exemption, and an addition of 400 sq.ft. to the western house. To the north of the lot there is single family housing and to the east is the Alpine Lodge. Burstein said there were several issues in this proposal, the main one being that the easterly cabin was intended to be an employee unit and when the platt was accepted by the Board of County Commissioners the resolution specified that it should be an employee unit, however, the BOCC never specified what instrument should be used and no deed restriction was ever filed on the cabin. The other problem is that the easterly lot that would be created is non-conforming in several aspects, it is a lot of 5,800 sq. ft. in the R-15A zone which requires 15,000 sq. ft. , and there are set back problems with the front and side yards on both sides. It is also possible there would be an encroachment of the addition but it does not appear there will be. The third issue is that this improvement certificate is not adequate as a platt With the agreement of the applicant, as well as the Engineering Department, the appropriate thing to do would be to submit an adequate platt prior to City Council's review. 3 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS REGULAR MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 16. 1985 Burstein discussed further the employee unit situation. The Housing Authority has agreed that it would be reasonable for the applicant to discuss with them what the appropriate deed restriction to be placed on the house would be. This has not yet been done, but will be done prior to City Council's review of this item. with regard to non-conformity of the smaller lot, the size could be increased, however, he didn't believe it could be made a 15,000 sq.ft. lot. If you were to extend the smaller lots area into the two story house's lot you would be crossing a burm and due to the vegetation and topography this would not be a good solution. Burstein said the planning office's recommendation is for approval of this request with the conditions stated in the Planning Off ice memorandum dated July 16, 1985, and the appl icant' s compliance to these conditions prior to City Council's review. Barbara Purvis, applicants attorney, explained the history of the lots to explain why there is an oversize lot with 2 structures on it. She explained originally this was the Riverside Addition which contained 17 lots owned by Larry Ferguson. In January of 1980 Ferguson obtained a subdivision exemption approval. Under that Resol ution he combined the 17 lots into no more than 5 lots and designated the cabin at that time as an employee unit. City Council annexed 4 lots, and actually never platted 5 lots, on May 10, 1982 and zoned them R-15 A. The current owner does not want to continue in the rental business and would like to divide the lot up. He may eventually sell off the employee structure to a Pitkin County employee. The owner does want to enlarge the main structure which is also part of this application. Ms. Purvis said she had consulted with the Housing Department and they suggested that a proposal be made in terms of what we feel is feasible for the cabin and what price guide lines might be feasible. It is currently a three bedroom cabin and there are no plans at this time to enl arge it. Ms. Pu rvi s added they will comply with, and agree to, the conditions set forth in the Planning Office memorandum dated July 16, 1985. Anderson asked Barry Edwards, City Attorney, what the status of taking a lot that is conforming and making it a non-conforming lot was. Edwards replied the situation here is a conforming lot with non-conforming structures. There is no legal impediment in doing this platt amendment but they will come out with a 5800 sq.ft. lot, which is clearly non-conforming, with a structure on it. Mr. Edwards said he thought the applicant was aware that they will not be able to enlarge, alter or expand that non-conforming 4 REGULAR MEB'l'ING RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 16. 1985 structure without applying for, and receiving, a variance from the Board of Adjustment. Anderson said they could enlarge it as long as it is within the set backs. Edwards disagreed stating it is a non-conforming structure on a non-conforming lot, nothing can be done to it unless they go before the Board of Adjustment. Ms. Purvis said they understand they can not expand the structure. Prior to purchasing the property they inquired with the housing authority as to whether they would rather see a 4 bedroom employee structure. At that time, which was agreed to by the current owner, they did not recommend expansion of the cabin. Anderson asked how long the burm had been on the property. Harry Mayer, the builder, commented that the burm was created when the home was constructed, in 1981 or 1982. Hunt said he had a problem with the fact that they are creating a non-conforming lot under 6,000 sq.ft. He could see justification in making the lot size less than 15,000 sq.ft. but not less than 6,000 sq.ft. Ms. Purvis responded when this was first brought to the attention of the planning office they made the determination that this proposal was less non-conforming than the situation that exists now. It is in a PUD which allows us to vary the lot size from the full lot size required. Ms. Purvis reviewed the proposed lot lines on the plans. Hunt suggested finding another 200 sq.ft. to add to the cabin lot. Mayer said the burm had not been built up on the property and has some trees on it that are hundreds of years old. The ground inside was actually taken out and the house was built at a lower level. Anderson said, assuming the property had the cabin on it, someone bought the property and built a house which made the property non-conforming. It had 2 structures on a lot too small for 2 structures. Now they are trying to subdivide the property in to 2 lots and 2 structures. Actually it should have been a condition of the original building permit that one structure be removed since the property is only large enough for a single family house or duplex with an employee unit. Ms. Purvis said there weren't records to explain what transpired. When the resol ution was passed they said there could not be more than 5 lots so apparently they intended to platt 5 lots and we do not know when the restrictions came in to play that required them to instead platt only 4 lots in the subdivision. Whi te asked where the entrance to the cabin was to which Ms. Purvis replied off of Highway 82. White said he did not like making 5 REGULAR MEETING RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 16. 1985 non-conformities. He would I ike to see the lot size increased to at least 6,000 sq.ft. Markalunas agreed with the 6,000 sq.ft. per dwelling unit because that is the minimum lot size in the city. Ms. Purvis said they would be agreeable to that but the City's Engineering Department felt that the placement proposed was the best arrangement, based on the topography. Anderson said he could not vote to approve this unless he can determine, #1 how you end up with 2 houses on a piece of property that is not big enough for 2 houses, #2 how you justify splitting that non-conf ormi ty into another non-conf ormi ty, and #3 how the non-conformity got through in the first place. Was this approved this way, or was there a condition saying that once the new house is buil t the or iginal house has to be torn down. Bil Dunaway, Aspen Times, commented there had been a house in the same area the 2 story house now occupies before. Mr. Mayer said that basement and fireplace still exist within the new 2 story struct- ure. Anderson said he felt more comfortable, if there were 2 existing structures on the property before, and withdrew his objection as it now becomes a pre-existing non-conformity. Motion: Peyton moved to recommend approval of subdivision exception and PUD amendment with conditions outlined in the planning office memorandum dated July 16, 1985, with a time limit of 3 months on condition #2, and an added condition (#5) that the minimum lot size be 6,000 sq.ft.; White seconded. All in favor; motion carried. PLANNING I'l'EM - PUBLIC HEARING ASPEN AREA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: PARKS/RECREATION/OPEN SPACEI'rRAILS BLEMER'l' Anderson said he and other members of the Commission had been to look at the Sawmill property to see how it fit in to the overall trail system. We came out with the conclusion that this is a vital piece of property. Right now our pedestrian linkage across Castle Creek is awful. To connect town into the center of our largest passive area of open space is a goal that the city should set high on its priorities. There are several ways to acquire the property or the easement that is necessary. Craig Ward, Aspen Nordic Council, reviewed the trail easements on the plans. He stated the desire would be to get bridges over both Castle and Maroon Creeks so in the winter people could go all the 6 REGULAR MEETING RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 16. 1985 way from Aspen to Snowmass. We are looking at a very critical linkage here. Because the owner of the property in question does not have an easement anywhere on the platt, and thinks it would compromise the property severly, he does not want to have anything placed on it, or sell or give an easement. The property is listed now for $395,000. There are 3 options available: to condemn the easement; buy the property, put the trail in, and then resell the property; or buy the property and keep it. Because the property is being looked at seriously by a number of other buyers it is our hope the Commission will come up with a resolution to City Council to go ahead and obtain the easement through one of these options. White commented that the 2 acre parcel would certainly be enough, and possibly we could arrange it in a way to only use I acre and resell the other. Markal unas said because general planning is being done for the MarOlt/Thomas property and the approach of Highway 82 in to Main St. we should look at a pedestrian bridge in conjunction with the highway rather than putting the bridge 100 yards to the south. Hal Clark, PCPA, said the pedestrian experience would be enhanced by having the bridge separate from the highway. The proposed bridge would be a great pedestrian bridge whether we get a new highway or not and could still be a major planning feature for the town. Peyton said she felt this was a critical piece of land. She also liked the idea of having a separate pedestrian bridge. She added this could be an emergency situation. Hunt said if there were unlimited funds this would be great, however, he saw the original bridge as an expensive luxury. He agreed with Markalunas in the coordination with the central highway bridge because in the near term that is more practical. Hunt said if he had a desire it would be some other transportation system to help support the cost of building this proposed bridge. Ward said they have people who are willing to put up money to build both the Castle Creek and Maroon Creek bridges and explained they are planning on building another short bridge below (outlined on plans) which could be done this year. This short bridge would connect the system and at that point see if there is value in doing the long, overhead bridge. The point is that we need to connect the system. The planning of a bigger bridge and how it coordinates with the highway, esthetics, etc. would be something to think about. 7 REGULAR MEETING RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING AND ZONING COMISSION JULY 16. 1985 Markalunas said the City Council was authorized to purchase several small pieces of land at the base of Aspen Mountain and she questioned where those were located on this plan. Ward outlined the parcels on the plans stating they were in the Midland area. Ward added they had been working with several land owners to get easements all the way in to Koch Lumber. Fritz Benedict asked if it was true that the owner of the lot that is being requested for the easement has raised the price from what was quoted at an earl ier time? Mr. Ward repl ied that the City would have to go to the MAl appraiser and he would appraise the property at its value then we would have to go with that val ue. Markal unas added that bef ore the Ci ty can purcha se anything they have to get an appraisal. Tygre said she was not in favor of the long bridge. She said she would like to see a small bridge there. It seems the most practical way to deal with this and get a linkage accomplished, quickly and efficiently, would be to condemn and buy the easement. White said he didn't mind the long bridge. He also liked the idea of buying the property, taking the easement necessary, and then selling the property. White fel t the connection between Marolt/Thomas and town was critical. A bridge as soon as possible, even a small one, is a good idea. Anderson said the question before the Commission was not which bridge size, but whether this is a critical piece of property or not. He thought the Commission had agreed that it was and in one way or another it is in the City's best interest not to let it go on to future ownership without some easement going through it. The question is how to do that. Markalunas said she did not understand why this was being discussed tonight. Glen Horn, planner, said this is part of the Comprehensive Plan as a trail al ignment. Hunt said he did not see the property as crucial as the trail easement. Tom Baker, planner, said this underlines the issue of the constr- aints on the Sixth Penny and perhaps the Resolution should address the fact that those constraints are boxing us in. Anderson suggested that other kinds of financing might be invest- igated in relation to acquiring open space 50 that once the purchase is made the area that is left over would not have to go 8 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS REGULAR MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 16. 1985 for a citizens vote for disposal. Options in obtaining the property were again discussed. Motion: White moved to adopt a Resolution to create a trail easement through: condemnation and buy the easement, negotiations, or buying the property putting an easement in place and then reselling the property, to be done in a timely manner with intent that the Chairman sign; Tygre seconded. Markalunas said she would option rather than second. the options as important. like to see negotiations as the first Hunt said he did not see the order of All in favor; motion carried. Baker summarized the process in that the Planning and Zoning Commission will submit a Resolution to City Council for their endorsement and it will then come back to the Commission for a public hearing prior to adoption. This Commission will have the final approval. Baker reviewed the plan maps and the Aspen Area Comprehensive Plan: Parks/Recreation/Open Space/Trails Element Draft contents. In the inventory there are over 700 acres of open space, not including the federal lands, the City and County owning 650 acres. Baker said they looked at different national standards which were used to determine what deficiencies exist in our system. We also looked at the population breakdown in the community and saw there was quite a difference between the national average and Aspen. Aspen is a young, vigorous community. Therefore, we took a cautious approach in using the methodologies that were developed by national organizations because we could not count on them to meet all of our needs. We were able to determine that one of the deficiencies was in park space. We were also deficient in softball fields. After talking with the Parks and Recreation Department it was determined they needed approximately 3 more fields to meet their current needs. Baker said, through discussions with Trail maintenance personnel that had worked when the trails were in the county, we were able to discover that there has been deferred maintenance on the trail system over the past couple of years. The maintenance was 9 REGULAR MEETING RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 16. 1985 "...10, inadequate in terms of the condition of the trails as well as the equipment available to do maintenance. Baker commented there were missing links in the trail system. There is also inadequate access and information about the trails. Access from Aspen proper is uncertain, there is no information, no signs, no brochures. There is also a potential short term and long term funding problem for maintenance of the parks and trails. In the short term we are worried about how we are going to get the system up to par and in the long term where the money will come from for maintenance. One of the major concerns of the plan was to develop a priority list, as a guide for decision makers in acquiring parks, open space, trails, and recreational facilities in the future. This is in essence the major findings, from the analysis and needs section of the plan. Baker said in the opportunities section of the draft the staff brought in various concepts on how to deal with the issues. Initially we propose developing new softball playing facilities at Marolt/Thomas, Rio Grande, and at Molly Gibson. There has been concern expressed that wasn't really doing what we wanted to do. After public meetings and debate the Commission decided on 3 guidelines to follow in developing parks: #1, to consolidate as much as possible active playing fields; #2 that the MarOlt/Thomas parcel should function as a large passive park without any obtrusive recreational hardware; and #3 that Molly Gibson and Koch should be flexible in their designs, more passive in function. In terms of the maintenance problems with the trails the Commission and staff agree that there has to be a combination of capital improvement money and operation budget money put in to remedy the problem. In terms of the access problem and the lack of information in town there is the concept of pedestrian corridors, which include bike lanes and routes, sidewalks, and developing a brochure that describes the trail system. In terms of funding the Commission advocated that there was a need for a short term shift in spending from open space acquisi tion to trail maintenance and park development. Baker reviewed the concept plan maps. There were 2 different exhibi ts for the Marol t/Thomas parcel because of the highway alignment which will affect the ul timate shape of the parcel. However, it affects very little the function of the park which is a large passive park, open space area. 10 REGULAR MEE'l'ING RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JULY 16. 1985 '...~- Baker said the Recreation Department has a good cooperative arrangement with the School District and they use their gymnasiums and facilities. This plan encourages that kind of cooperation in the future. Additionally there have been discussions about enclosing the pool and expanding or relocating the Ice Gardens. Al though we don't call those priori ties in the plan they may be appropriate for a resort community. If the City is going to pursue those items they should do so in a fashion like to Recreation Department works with the School District, in a collaborative eff ort. Open space is an amenity that makes Aspen unique. The open space, trail system that we have developed calls for 2 rings of open space and trails. One ring being the National Forest area that surrounds Aspen, and closer in another ring owned by the City and County of an open space trail corridor type. One of the more critical links in making this concept work would be the "radial connectors" (outlined on the plan). Baker also reviewed the missing trail links on the plan. In the implementation element we talk about the need to prioritize and give City Council an effective tool to guide them in their decision making. The action called for in Trails maintenance is for the Parks department to develop a phase program which addresses the maintenance required to bring the trails system to acceptable standards. Additionally the City should adopt an annual operating budget for ongoing maintenance of the trail system. In terms of trail signs the Parks department should review and revise the trail sign improvement program developed by PCPA and implement that prior to the summer of 1986. The Parks department, in cooperation with the Planing office, the ARA, the Aspen/Snowmass Nordic Council, PCPA should develop a brochure that is suitable for distribution to residents and tourists. In terms of park development we are calling for development of the Molly Gibson parcel, the Iselin extension, the Marolt/Thomas parcel and Koch Lumber. The Rio Grande parcel was brought up as a very important parcel, however, we have to deal with land use and transportation issues as well. It is being added to the short term priorities list but we haven't developed a concept plan as yet. The reserve fund should be kept to acquire open space that becomes available. The Sawmill property is an excellent example. The City Council, during its annual budget process, should appropriate a certain percentage of the Sixth Penny money to a special reserve which would be called upon only in the event of 11 REGULAR MEETING RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING AND ZONING COMISSION JULY 16. 1985 an emergency expenditure. Also discussed in past meetings was the need to analyze what the future costs of acquisitions and development would be. The action for that would be that City Council should institute a step in the open space acquisition and development process that analyzes how each new parcel will affect the City's future annual operation budget. Gifts and donations is an issue that was raised because there is a possibility there may be some money available for building some bridges that are not in our short term priority list. If the gift of money or land becomes available, we should react to that. The Red Roof Inn is owned by the Ci ty and currently vacant. The Ci ty should investigate the possibility of selling the Red Roof facility and using the revenues to finance these short term priorities proposed. The missing components in the trails, open space network is what will be focused on for the long term priorities. Markal unas said she did not recall the Red Roof Inn discussion and asked if the Commission was recommending this proposal to Council. Baker replied that it was not discussed as a Commission but it was brought up in house. Markalunas said there was an election, at one time, on this and it was denied to sell it. Markalunas added it is a well known fact that the City needs that facility to service the golf course. Markalunas commented that the MarOlt/Thomas property was purchased as open space and once something is designated as a park it is very difficult to alter anything in it there after. She felt it was a mistake for the Commission to refer to this parcel as a park. Baker suggested referring to it as the MarOlt/Thomas open space parcel. The plan is so passive in nature that open space or park could be interchangeable, if open space is the more appropriate term it could be changed. Markalunas suggested inserting the term open space where park is being used. White said part of the Thomas property was purchased with transportation funds so it should really be called the Marolt/Thomas parcels. Anderson opened the public hearing. Stewart Edgley, a hang glider pilot, commented they have a number of people that use the Marolt/Thomas property. Their use is probably more than any other individual groups. The area is a perfect landing site for the takeoff site on Aspen Mountain. He said they would like to see, in the development of this parcel, their needs addressed. Baker said he had talked with the hangliding group and they have submitted a graphic outlining their needs. Baker explained to them that this was conceptual in nature and that the landscaping could probably be moved to accommodate their needs. In addition one of 12 REGULAR MEETING RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING AND ZORING COMMISSIOR JULY 16. 1985 \\;~., the things that would be done when the park is developed would be to underground the utility lines which would be an obstacle that would be removed. Anderson asked if anything should be incorporated in the description of the activities. Baker said he could add some wording to the Marolt/Thomas development section. Fri tz Benedict asked if there were any plans to bury the utility wires in the approach to town area in connection with this program. Baker replied that he was unsure and would check with the Engineering Department. Anderson closed the pUblic hearing. White said he would 1 ike to see the wording changed in table 9, page 35, first heading, to read: "Radial open space connectors from the downtown ~ of Aspen". Motion: Hunt moved to approve Resolution #85-17 as amended; Peyton seconded. All in favor; motion carried. Glen Horn, a t tend the considered. p.m. pI anner, suggested that someone from the Commission Council sessions when this Resolution will be That meeting will be held on July 29, 1985 at 5: 00 Anderson adjourned the meeting at 7:28 p.m. ~~~ Kim Wilhoit, Deputy City Clerk 13