Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19801202 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves REGULAR MEETING ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 2, 1980 FORll ~ C. F. HOECKEL D. B.II: L co. Olof Hedstrom called the meeting to order with members Anderson, Harvey, Hunt, Tygre and alternate member Al Blomquist present. Commissioner's Comments Aspen Metro Sanitation Dist. Employee Housing Karen Smith introduced Alan Richman, the new planner, replacing Jolene Vrchota. Roger restated his point concerning the bus stoppage last week due to slippery roads. He expressed his concern as to how this halt in the transportation system can affect the GMP and application's such as the Aspen Metro Sanitation District Employee Housing ap- plication. He asked what the Commission would like to do about it. Olof asked for comments on this subject. The Commission members commented on this issue and came to the conclusion that the issue should be made known to the City. Perry suggested making the City enter into an agreement as a condition of approval that they will uphold their end of the bargain. ie. A condition not only on the applicant but also on the City. Karen agreed with this suggestion. Karen further suggested the Commission prepare a resolution and communicate the problem to Council, today, by citing examples from previous history where the P&Z has attached conditions and where these conditions have not been upheld by either the City or the applicant. Also, to demonstrate through those examples, the plan- ning impacts that the Commission perceives occuring. ie. the de- terioration of the Master Plan. Olof commented that the meeting of 11-18-80 was a disaster. The agenda was outrageous. It couldn't possibly be accomodated in a decent evenings work. Olof put the Planning office on notice that the Commission will examine every agenda before starting to work through it. He put a maximum time limit on the meetings of ap- proximately 2 and one half hours. Karen Smith, Planning office, stated that the focus of the public hearing would be on the two zoning actions. These would be followed by numbers 2, 3, and 4 of the 12-1-80 Planning office memo. Karen proceeded to orientate the Commission to the parcel on the zoning map. She answered general questions from the members. Following the outline of the Planning office memo, dated 12-1-80, Karen then set up issues for consideration in the form of advantages and dis- advantages. Also, a summary of the pros and cons was stated. Olof asked the Commission if they feel comfortable with receiving the information in this packet at yesterday's late date? Olof suggested in the interest of fair and adequate consideration for this application, the Commission have a site inspection. Olof entertained a motion to continue the public hearing at a special meeting next week, 12-9-80. Olof then opened the public hearing for those who had come to speak tonite. Attorney for the applicant stated that the Aspen Metro Sanitation District is applying for four housing unit~ for employees of the district, and that they are doing everything to follow the City's recommendation. There were no further public comments. Welton moved on Clof's motion. Roger seconded. All in favor. This application was tabled until the Special meeting of 12-9-80. Arthur's Restaurant Request for Ex- pansion of a Conditional Use. Castlewood/Headgate Preliminary P.U.D. Subdivision Review Public Hearing Cont. Welton Anderson stepped down for Arthur's Restaurant application. Sunny Vann, Planning office, stated that this is a public hearing pursuant to Section 24-3.3 of the Municipal Code to consider the applicant's request to renovate and expand Arthur's Restaurant, a conditional use in the O/Office Zone district. The Planning office has reviewed the applicant's preliminary plans and has determined that the proposed renovation and expansion is consistent with the objectives of the O/Office Zone district. It appears to comply with all requirements imposed by the zoning code. The required number of parking spaces is 16, and sixteen have been provided. Similarly, the square footage of the new facility is well within the zone district's permissible FAR. The Planning office recommends approval of the applicant's request to renovate and expand Arthur's subject to the following: 1. The renovation and expansion complying with all requirements imposed by the Zoning Code, a final determination of compliance to be made at such time as the working drawings are submitted for a building permit. 2. Receipt of HPC final approval prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. No utilization of the second floor of the relocated ARI building without prior approval of the Planning and Zoning Commission via the Expansion of a Conditional Use process. 4. Any disposition of the remaining vacant portion of the applicant's four and one half lots also being subject to Planning and Zoning Commission review via the Conditional use process. Olof opened the public hearing. Steve Weiss, neighborhood resident (Bleeker and First), stated his concern about the parking problem. He feels there is already a severe parking problem in that neighborhood. There is no provision for a drop-off or pick-up point, which would help alot. Sunny entered a telegram into the record from Harry Weiss expressing a negative feeling for this application. There were no further public comments. Olof closed the public hearing. The Commision discussed the customer parking situation and the necessity of a loading zone. Roger moved to recommend approval of the renovation and expansion for a conditionsl use of Arthur's Restaurant subject to the follow- ing: #1-4 being the same as (above) #1-4 of the Planning office memo dated 12-1-80 #5 - applicant make necessary application to provide for passenger loading zone, preferably in the existing bus loading zone. #6 - applicant provide direction signs as necessary to on-site parking for customers. Perry seconded. All in favor. The motion was unanimously carried. Sunny Vann, Planning office, refreshed the Commission's memory as to the concensus of opinion on the Planning office's recommendation. Essentially, they concurred in a straw vote with the Engineering Dept. conditions outlined in the original memorandum. The Commission did not concur with the Planning office recommendation for deletion of the Marolt single family residence, or the lot from the P.U.D. plan. The Commssion concurred that a minimum of one parking space per bedroom should be provided for all residential development, however, there was agreement to allow the applicant only 2 spaces per unit on the free market portion of the project, provided however, they demonstrate sufficient parking on the final plat with the overall requirement being one space per bedroom. t""" ~......, '-' '- ,.....'-.... RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM II C.F.HOECKELO.D.ItL.Ca. REGULAR MEETING ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 2, 1980 P&Z did not concur that the Midland Right-of-way should be re- tained, nor that appropriate trails easement be provided across Lot 2. P&Z did concur that the Main St. Extension should be dedicated, and that the free market portion of the project should be subject to the 6 - month minimum lease restrictions of Section 20-22. The Commission expressed concern over the proposed size and subsequent cost of the employee housing units. Jim Otis, architect and developer for the Marolt family, explained that by reducing the employee units in size (to reduce rental costs) the townhouse units had to be redesigned. He stated they made these changes with the understanding that the City stated, during the Conceptual submission, that this was a viable project and worth pursueing. Knowing this, they redesigned the units, creating a new site engineering plan, new land plan and a new footprint, all of which contributed to a large time delay. He said the applicant would like to submit the new design plans, if possible, at the 12-16-80 meeting date. Sunny stated that the Planning office had recommended the first meeting in January, since the 12-16-80 agenda was currently overloaded. He further said if it can be worked out the Planning office will be accomodating, as usual. Don Ensign gave an outline of what the developer had done. He stated that through the redesign of the units, from townhouse to regular type apartment units, they not only decreased the rental rates, but changed the size and configuration of the buildings, which reduced the footprint by almost 40%. Also, this increased the setback from Hwy. 82 to 120 feet. Lastly, the developer now thinks all of the units can be kept away from the shelf by the river. Car lie Wood, further explained the hand-out given to the Commission members. She said the proj ected 1982 rental rate remains at $. 70 per square foot. Al Blomquist asked if the Commission should consider the possibility of moving the employee housing to the South end/up against the Water Plant Housing, so that the approach to Aspen would be free and clear. Al also said he thought the original intent of the Design Workshop was to have the employee housing next to the Water Plant Housing. Then, the Commssion requested that site be changed. Al asked the applicant to consider such a proposal; would it cost them much more, since they already have to re-engineer the site? Jim Otis answered by saying they would withdraw their application first. A proposal so involved would mean a total re-engineering. They have already, based on conceptual approval from the City, spent well over $100,000.00. Currently they are readjusting units without readjusting the basic engineering plan. Further, that when they had originally suggested the employee housing be in the location Al spoke of, there were several reasons why it wouldn't work in that location. For instance, available sewer and water would not provide the proper pitch, the Open Space Commission did not want it down there, etc. Jasmine expressed agreement with AI. It seemed that many conditions were deferred, at the applicant's request, to the preliminary plat stage. Roger stated he has no problem with the site, he was party to the process of putting it there. His only question was, what was the rationale behind 2 baths in the 2 bedroom apratments? Jim Otis said for the minimal, additional cost it seemeddlike a worthwhile idea. It would make it a nicer, better unit which would, in the long run, maintain it as a better rental property. Perry asked what the height of the new buildings was now compared to the previous design? Jim Otis said currently the buildings are 2 and one half stories out of the ground instead of 2, or 30' above grade. Perry asked what the setback was from the Main St. extension? Carlie answered 80 feet. Perry said it was his opinion that the density is too great for that parcel of land. Welton stated he feels the same way about this proposal as he has from the beginning. He did, however, prefer the initial plan to the current plan. Olof opened the public hearing. Olof entered into the record a letter from Richard Meeker which stated concern with the entire process as well as a general negative opinion. Ed Suzaki, resident, feels it is a horrible concept, there are no guarantees that the rental rates will remain what they are currently stated as being, and is in total opposition to this project. Gayle Addleson, Castle Creek resident, is in opposition to this project because of increased traffic congestion. She suggests waiting until the Water Plant houisng project is completed and see what the impact of it will be. Dave Brearly, Meadowood resident, thinks the project is ill- conceived. He said there just doesn't seem to be enough information to make a good decision at this time. He is opposed to the project. Olof closed the public hearing. Olof asked the Commission for their comments regarding the changes with respect to the size, plan and cost of rental of the employee units. Olof suggested taking a straw vote, first on the rentals. He asked if they met with the members approval. Welton said no, they do not. Perry concurred with the reduction in the prices, but simply feels the density is too great for that small piece of property. Roger stated there is positive direction in the cost reduction, but expressed concern with raising the height of the building. He also agreed with Perry about the density, but further stated he is more receptive to the project than most other Commission members. Jasmine has felt from the beginning that density was too great for the particular parcel. She feels the rent reduction is good and would like to see the rental rates lower still. Al stated the smaller units are fine. His central issue is location. Olof made a personal statement that covered the following six points: 1- the present approach to Aspen is psychologically and aestheti- cally right and beautiful. 2- any development on this parcel would be a "carbuncel" on the face of Aspen. 3- a project in this location would be opening a wedge for Aspen to look like West Vail. 4- this project will provide insufficient amounts of affordable housing for employees in Aspen. 5- ~e're) in great danger of stepping on employee housing tread- mill making GMP totally ineffectual. 6- the sacrifices and concessions are too great and the benefits too small. Further, Olof stated he has had doubts and reservations about this project from the beginning. He has, nevertheless, continued to support the project because it was intended to supply a sub- stantial amount of employee units, and because of the positive manner in which the developer responded to the many diverse demands and requirements imposed by various groups. In looking at all points together, Olof stated he is regretful of this project. He questions it's desirability. He also stated he agrees with the Open Space Advisory Board that the entire area should remain open space. - ~"" ....) - -'~ RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves rOIlM'<I C.F.HOECKELB.e.ft L. CO. REGULAR !1EETING ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 2, 1980 At this point Sunny Vann recommended taking a straw vote to see how this Commission would review any resubmission along the lines that have been suggested. As follows: Could you (member of the Commission) approve a revised prelim- inary plat submission containing the revisions in employee houisng as the applicant has indicated and proposed tonight? Welton - No Perry - No Roger - Yes, with a revision of density. Olof - No Jasmine - No Al - No Roger Hunt stated he thinks it terribly improper for a com- munity to string a developer on and on through a process and then at this point he has no way out. Further, another problem with this is that if the Commission passes on the current plat, re- commending denial - that is what the City Council sees. The City Council is not compelled to follow this Commission's recommendations, therefore they will act on the plat that is submitted. Roger stated he feels this action could put the Com- mission in a situation that something could be passed that will be far worse than what should be there. Olof asked the Commission if they wished to let this go to Council indicating approval by failure to act? The general concensus was no. Bob Edmundson, City Attorney, stated that his interpretation of the Code is that this issue will not go on to Council if this Commission stops it here. Council has delegated this authority to P&Z. Sunny Vann agreed. Roger said he disagrees with stopping it here and now. The Commission took a 5 minute break. Bob Edmundson recommended the motion that this Commission table this issue for one week to allow for continued research because of lack of correct information supplied to Commission members. Al Blomquist so moved. Perry Harvey seconded. All in favor. The motion was carried. Olof entertained a motion to reopen the public hearing and to continue it at the next Special meeting which will be held on December 9, 1980 at 5:00 P.M. Al so moved. Perry seconded. All in favor. The motion was carried. Roger Hunt then moved to continue the New Business on tonite's agenda until the Special meeting 12-9-80. Perry seconded. All in favor. The motion was carried. Perry moved to adjourn the meeting. Roger seconded. All in favor. The meeting adjourned at 7:45 P.M. cr:.u"h J~, ~. Denise P. Elzinga Deputy City Clerk