Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20070206 Aspen Plannin!! & Zonin!! Commission Meetin!! - Minutes - February 6. 2007 COMMENTS ............................................................................................................ 2 MINUTES ................................................................................................................. 2 DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST ...............................................2 SMUGGLER RACQUET CLUB .............................................................................2 LODGE AT ASPEN MOUNTAIN FINAL PUD .................................................... 2 ASPEN HIGHLANDS VILLAGE SUBSTANTIAL PUD...................................... 6 1 Aspen Plannin!! & Zonin!! Commission Meetin!! - Minutes - Februarv 6. 2007 Ruth Kruger opened the regular meeting at 4:35 pm in the Sister Cities meeting room. Members John Rowland, Brian Speck, Steve Skadron and Ruth Kruger were present. Dylan Johns was excused from the Lodge. Staff in attendance were Joyce Allgaier and Jessica Garrow, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. COMMENTS Ruth Kruger stated that the lights on the Sardy House tree were an outstanding addition and she asked if a letter could be written to Mr. DeVaney from the Planning Commission. Joyce Allgaier stated that she would draft a letter from P&Z. MINUTES MOTION: Steve Skadron moved to approve the minutes from January 2nd and January 16th; seconded by John Rowland. All in favor, APPROVED. DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Dylan Johns stated a conflict on the Lodge at Aspen Mountain. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING SMUGGLER RACQUET CLUB Ruth opened the continued public hearing on the Smuggler Racquet Club. MOTION: Steve Skadron moved to continue the hearing on the Smuggler Racquet Club to February 20'h, seconded by John Rowland, All infavor, APPROVED. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: LODGE AT ASPEN MOUNTAIN FINAL PUD Ruth Kruger opened the continued public hearing on the Lodge at Aspen Mountain final PUD. Notice was provided at the previous meetings. Joyce Allgaier summarized the project and tonight the applicant would address the street parking in the neighborhood, detailed landscape plan, energy conservation plan, exceptional project status recommendation for GMQS Multi-year and construction management plan summary. Allgaier said that in section 14 of the revised resolution was included a condition that pulled together the Canary Initiative and was a step above what has been seen for energy conservation. There was a summary of the construction management plan included in the packet as Exhibit D. Allgaier said that staff recommended approval because it took in a good use of the base of the mountain and a use that benefits the city and implements the AACP. 2 Aspen Plannin!! & Zonin!! Commission Meetin!! - Minutes - Februarv 6. 2007 John Sarpa said that they were excited to break new ground with this application with the staff from the Canary Initiative (Dan Richardson) and the building department (Stephen Kanipe). Sarpa said there was a good reason that not that many neighbors were attending this meeting because the notice was given and many of the neighbor's issues were addressed. Sarpa stated that the no parking on Juan and Garmisch was a result of the space required. Sarpa presented the drawing, which was included in the packet that showed 2 new on-street parking spaces and retained the sidewalk on Juan Street; on the Garmisch side the sidewalks were moved but retained and added back 3 spaces. Sarpa said that did not solve all the parking problems but gave some relief because Juan Street and Trainer had parking on site. Sarpa said that there was inefficient parking around Koch Park and their construction management plan would not allow their trucks to park around Koch Park. Steve Skadron asked if the 2 Juan Street parking spaces were restricted. Sunny Vann replied the spaces were "sticker B". Vann added that the new city engineer was more flexible and there were items such as tree preservation, planning strips and emergency vehicle access. Sarpa said they asked themselves how they could generally be above the cut in the energy plan and they agreed to obtain real data from big hotels finding out how they were managing these areas of data and do better than they were doing in those areas of energy consumption. Sarpa committed to 30% above the average energy conservation; this was a real number based upon the data collected. Sarpa said if the threshold was missed they would buy the energy credits through CORE; they will measure their numbers over the next 20 years. If they go above the 30% they would be able to apply the credits to the next year or sell the energy credits; there would be some kind of cap on the amount that would have to be paid in any given year. Allgaier said there would be an annual energy audit. Vann noted that the energy conservation also takes into account the energy used by the street related issues as well. Skadron said the energy audit will be in place for 20 years; he asked once the project was completed and the flag is in place what management procedures will ensure that actually happens. Vann replied when the project was completed they would adopt a PUD Agreement, which would set forth specific procedures on which the audit would be implemented; they would be required to be in compliance with all of the requirements under the PUD Agreement. Vann stated that the conditions of approval run with the land, whoever owns the property even into the future would be encumbered by the conditions of approval. 3 Aspen Plannin!! & Zonin!! Commission Meetin!! - Minutes - February 6. 2007 Sarpa said that construction management plan was worked out very well with a new set of criteria (Swinerton Construction Management Plan) was included in the summary sheet Exhibit D. Sarpa commented traffic was a big part of the problem and they have said that their workers will have to stop at Brush Creek and be bussed by the project's own buses or through RFTA buses; there would be a system in place with a huge impact on traffic to bus the workers and their equipment to the project, which would save a lot of traffic and was not required. Sarpa stated that they would have regularly scheduled meetings with the neighborhood to talk about what was happening and what was about to happen; so that the neighbors could give input. Sarpa said the meetings would be twice a month (not required anywhere) but this was an input and communication issue that they were addressing. Sarpa said the staging of the trucks was a big issue and the trucks would be instructed not to go to Koch Park and there would not be any deliveries; the actual staging area would be located on South Aspen Street. Vann said that the construction management plan was being reviewed by the building department and those recommendations would be binding under the terms of the PUD Agreement. Ruth Kruger asked what happens if a worker misses the bus and how the enforcement of workers riding the bus would happen. Mark Hughes, Swinerton, stated that he has had conversations with RFTA and they have a pending meeting to discuss RFTA; because RFTA was a federally funded public transport they can't designate a specific bus for their workers but they will increase route service from Brush Creek into town. Hughes said if a worker misses that first bus they would have to wait for the next bus. Vann said the manager of the project would have someone on staff to maintain this plan. Hughes said there would be a traffic coordinator to work directly with the police and engineering departments to enforce the requirement in place. Hughes said there were other projects that these restrictions on workers were in place with lock boxes for the workers tools to remain on the job. Allgaier suggested a percentage of employees that would actually use public transportation or a shuttle; she said this was an incredible effort and goal to attain. Skadron asked if the self imposition was a product of the project size. Sarpa replied that one of the biggest problems in town was traffic and if they can reduce some of the traffic would be useful and they have to be an exceptional project. Kruger said that she was glad that they were making the process exceptional. Kruger asked how they were going to have a project free offood waste. Hughes said it takes one guy at 3 o'clock and all he does is gather the food waste and puts it in the bear-proof containers every day; the police department will fine them for any food scrape found. 4 Aspen Plannin!! & Zonin!! Commission Meetin!! - Minutes - February 6. 2007 Sarpa stated that landscaping was wanted in detail; he presented a landscape plan and drawing. Sarpa said the trees proposed now were lower than the original for Mary Barbee's perspective. Dave Carpenter from DHM Landscape Architects said they have been in contact with the Parks Department to make sure the landscape fits within its context. Sarpa stated that 2 ofthe criteria were in the energy area. Kruger noted that the commission was not that impressed with the exceptional criteria. Sarpa answered that was why they were going over and above the criteria. Vann said be that as it may those were the only criteria that they have and it requires a recommendation from the Planning Commission to City Council to make the final decision. Vann said there was an insufficient amount of growth management quota for accessory commercial uses in this building from the 2006 quota; they need to apply for an unknown number for accessory commercial uses from growth management. Vann said that one of the conditions in the AACP was a task force for the deteriorating lodge facilities and the out right loss of tourists beds in the community; the task force recommendation was that the city adopts regulations that would facilitate the approval of new lodging facilities. Vann said the city eliminated the annual quota on lodging. Sarpa said that this was the first new pure hotel in 20 years. Vann said they were adding 80 new lodge rooms and 21 fractional ownership units, which were also available for nightly rental. Vann said they were putting this building in the appropriate place for lodging. Vann said they were proposing housing for 115, which was 22% more than what was required. Vann said that APCHA approved the housing plan with a variety of housing units from studios to 3 bedroom units with rental and for sale units. Vann said that they would accept as a condition that the residents of the Mine Dump Apartments would have the right of first refusal and they will incorporate that into the PUD Agreement as well. Skadron asked how they collected the energy data from similar properties to set the benchmark. Sarpa replied that he contacted the general manager of each of the hotels for the information on gas and electric for spas and garages over a 2 year period. Allgaier stated that Dan Richardson worked closely with the applicants on energy. Public Comments: 1. Mary Barbee asked if the resolution included the little house on the comer. Sarpa responded that the right included anyone living on the property. 2. Alex Biel stated that he lived at 809 South Aspen Street; he said that he heard a lot about traffic on Juan and Garmisch and what he heard about South 5 Aspen Plannin!! & Zonin!! Commission Meetin!! - Minutes - Februarv 6. 2007 Aspen Street was not very encouraging with regards to traffic. Hughes responded that this project would be in a 3 year period with 6 month phases of construction; there will be access to South Aspen Street. Hughes said there would be a significant amount of utility work with only 3 intersection closures at 3 independent times during the summer period and the road will be open at all times while they worked in the right-of-way or during the structural phases. Hughes said when they do the road itselfthey have a plan to keep half of the road open with traffic control, which was contained in the construction management plan. Skadron said that exceeding the exceptional review criteria was a considerable attempt to pioneer new approaches to problems in projects like this and will result in a good project and more importantly for projects coming in behind this one. Skadron supported this project and appreciative of all of the efforts. Kruger reinforced what Steve said and she was delighted to see the last stage of the final approval; this was the most important location in town because it was the original lift and gateway to the mountain. Kruger was pleased that they were going above and beyond in the construction management plan, above and beyond in the housing requirements and in the environmental requirements. Rowland said that the points that his fellow commissioners hit on for the exceptional project was great on a challenging site with a charming building. MOTION: Steve Skadron moved to approve the Resolution #003, series of 2007, recommending that City Council approve with conditions, the Lodge at Aspen Mountain Final PUD and associated land use actions, seconded by John Rowland. Roll call: Speck, yes; Rowland, yes; Skadron, yes; Kruger, yes. APPROVED 4-0. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: ASPEN HIGHLANDS VILLAGE SUBSTANTIAL PUD Ruth Kruger opened the continued public hearing for the Aspen Highlands Village PUD. Jessica Garrow said this was the public hearing for the conversion in use for a condo space and commercial space to a free market unit in Highlands PUD. Garrow said the applicant proposed changing the condo space to a commercial space and the commission asked for staff and the applicant to return with more information. Garrow said unfortunately there were no growth management allotments left for the commercial space from the 2006 growth management year. Garrow said now we were back to the original request to convert the condo space and commercial space to a free market unit. Staff still recommended against this conversion in use because it does not meet the Aspen Area Community Plan, does not meet the intent of the base village and the conversion to a free market unit has 6 Aspen Plannin!! & Zonin!! Commission Meetin!! - Minutes - February 6. 2007 a long term negative impact on the vitality of this area; it does not meet the PUD review criteria. Garrow explained the resolution was to deny this project. Dylan Johns asked why they need the growth allotments because these were not new spaces. Garrow replied that the condo space was not net leaseable space so the allotment was needed. Allgaier clarified that the year starts out with a certain allocation, which gets whittled away by various applications that were pending but by the time this project would be allocated there would not be any square feet left in that allocation. The Commissioners agreed that this was not growth because the space already existed. Bob Daniel stated the space was built over four years ago and was fully mitigated for as was the balance of Aspen Highlands as it related to the principal matrix, which was affordable housing in the community. Daniel said an audit showed they were in excess of mitigation for the number of employees. Daniel understood that they were caught in a rule situation but to pay for another process would not be right. Glen Horn stated there was a flaw in the exemption in change in use and minor additions to a commercial building that should never be deduced from the quota because the basis for those exemptions was that there was no impact on the community. Johns said that the project before P&Z was not what he expected to see; he thought that there would be some conversion to some free market residential and still have a commercial component to it. Garrow said that the best solution for the applicant would be to continue this hearing to March 6th. Garrow said that the applicant could amend the application on March I st requesting the number of square feet to be converted into the commercial space and on March 6th hold the public hearing. Johns asked ifP&Z could approve pending allotments opening up. Garrow replied they were in a current growth management allotment year and they would have to qualify as an exceptional project to be eligible for those allotments. MOTION: Dylan Johns moved to approve Resolution #34, series of 2006, to deny a substantial PUD amendment for the conversion of commercial/condominium meeting space in Building 2 to one (1) free market residential unit at 133 Prospector Road. The resolution further recommends to the City Council the denial of the requested subdivision associated with the conversion of office/retail space to free market residential. Steve Skadron seconded. Roll call: Rowland, no; Speck, no; Skadron, yes; Johns, yes; Kruger, no. DENIED 3-2. 7 Aspen Plannin!! & Zonin!! Commission Meetin!! - Minutes - Februarv 6. 2007 Discussion of first motion: Kruger said that she was still very much in favor of this conversion to residential space because there was no parking and to her it was the only logical use was for residential. Garrow requested a motion to reconsider the motion so that a yes would approve the request and a no would mean to deny the request. MOTION: Steve Skadron moved to reconsider the motion just taken; seconded by John Rowland. All infavor, APPROVED. MOTION: John Rowland moved to approve Resolution #34, series of 2006, to approve a substantial PUD amendment for the conversion of commercial /condominium meeting space in Building 2 to one (1) free market residential unit at 133 Prospector Road. The resolution further recommends to the City Council the approval of the requested subdivision associated with the conversion of office/retail space to free market residential unit. Steve Skadron seconded. Roll call: Johns, no; Rowland, yes; Speck, yes; Skadron, no; Kruger, yes. APPROVED 3-2. Meeting adjourned at 7 pm. . kie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 8