Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19810113 - RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM" C.F.HOECKELa.a.&l.C:l. SPE C IAL MEETING ASPEN PlANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 13, 1981 Olof Hedstrom, Chairman, called the meeting to order with members Hunt, Klar, Pardee, Tygre, and Blomquist present. LITILE ANNIE'S SKI AREA Olof announced this was a special meeting for further consideration of Little Annie's Ski Area. Joe Wells, Planning Office, said the goal for this meeting was to begin to narrow down the list of concerns in regards to Little Annie and see if these concerns could be resolved. In order to help the commission to focus on some of these concerns, Joe included a list of issues that were identified by Little Annie. Obviously, there rray be additional concerns on the part of P & Z.' However, the best way to begin the process would be to begin with those issues identified on that list. Wells said the commission should try to get through as many of the items as they were capable of doing but he didn't think they would be able to wrap it up at this meeting. Olof thought it would be appropriate to take the concerns in the order they appeared on the list. A consultant to Little Annie said they would like to go down through the list, give the P & Z an indication of what they have done with regard to each of those items and what they would like to do, with direction from the commission as to if these ideas are appropriate. Another consultant, Ted, said he would like to talk about the lower terminal and the subplan that is related only to the lower tenninal and the transportation building. He said that one of the significant things they have done is to reduce the footprint which each member of the commission had in front of them. It is a simplified copy that shows only the property lines, with red lines that shows the building the way it was before and in black lines the way they have changed the footprint. It results in a reduction of the footprint of 6,469 sq. ft.. This will be accomplished by putting a good deal of the monocable storage underground rather than above the surface. Ted said this would simplify the circulation pattern and perhaps take care of the problem the Gant owners had with the proj ect. Prior to this, they had the buses stopping right next to the property line and exiting back out on Ute Ave. What they have done is push the transportation building up closer to the property line. This has the buses coming in off of Ute Ave. with the buses, the buses stop between the transportation building and the tenninal building, letting off the passengers where they can get their tickets and come across the bridge and load on the monocable car and go on up. They have further simplified it by having taxis and limosines come in and use the same entrance and exit. This has eliminatec the need for a separate ticket building on Ute Ave. The simplification of the footprint and relocating the building on the site should make the neighbors happy and still provides Little Annie's with a very effective transportation plan. Ted said they tried to keep the same character they had in the previous design. They building now, at its highest point, is 44 feet high. Part of the reason for the heigth, which they could reduce, is because one half of the roof, a small portion, is peircing into the viewplane 6 feet 8 inches. The other part of the roof peirces the viewplane 5 feet. These figures come from TriCo. They are very small roofs, and its /,," ...., RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM ~I C. F. H OECl(El B. 8. '" l. CO. SPECIAL MEETING ASPEN PlANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 13, 1981 not like the whole building peirces the viewplane. One of the significant reasons why this was cone is because it rratches the buildings in the neighborhood. They tried to keep the character of the Gant and the Clarendon with a concrete building being covered with wood. Another reason for projecting these roofs was to create clear story areas which would let the south sunlight come into the back areas of the building. If they didn't have the clear story, that area would remain a dark, cold area. Ted said a variance would be in order because it is an insignificant portion of the building that is peircing that viewplane. Roger Hunt asked if this is the final size of the building with no future expansion of the building anticipated. Ron Garfield said the building is being constructed so that if the second phase would ever be approved, there would be no construction on the site would be required. Ted said this plan does take care of the full operation right now. Lee Pardee asked about the total square footage and Dave said it is 25,000 ft. above the ground, not counting the storage area underneath, which is substantial. Ted said the footprint is 20,247 sq. ft. This is a reduction of 6,000 sq. ft. The total square footage is one floor that is 20,247 sq. ft., and the other floor is 18,791 sq. ft. Joe Wells said he believed the circulation is an improvement and the Gant should be pleased with the change. He said it rerrains to be seen how the Gant will respond to having a building so close to the property line and he will leave that to Nick to comment on. Joe said he has had some discussions with Jim Reeser about the viewplane and he is confident that his calculations about the viewplane are accurate. Olof asked Nick, representing the Gant, if these changes were new to him. Nick said they got some rraterials earlier in the day and since he represents a board across the country he obviously hasn't consulted with them but he can tell the commission his reaction. The circulation plan is clearly better from the standpoint of the Gant. Also, the reduction in heigth of the building also pleases them. One thing Nick said he needs to do is go out to the site and have someone measure the 28 feet so he can see which Gant owners are involved. It appears to him that the placement is sufficiently far from the building and it is not a major problem, but he'll have to take a look. Olof thought that for the benefit of the applicants, the commission should give their reactions on an inforrral basis. Blomquist - improvement Tygre - improvement Hunt - improvement, no problem with it Hedstrom - definate improvement and they have addressed some of the concerns of the commission in a positive and constructive 1IlaIlor. Klar - improvement Pardee - improvement Ng 68 __,..."'",.~,,_ ......_"'~.~_'''''...~''"'~w_,,,...,,,.~______~ - RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM ~G C. F. H OrCKEl a. a. I> L. co. SPECIAL MEETING ASPEN PlANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 13, 1981 The second item on the list of concerns was Impact on Ute Cemetary. Bill Kane addressed this and said they have not begun to resolve anything on it yet. He said their " proposal at this point is to meet with the Aspen Historical Society and the Cemetary Core of the City of Aspen which is technically responsible for the cemetary. Kane said some of their thoughts are to try and improve the land- scaping the area and try to provide some security for the area since the biggest problem for the cemetary has been vandalism. Kane said they may offer some fencing or some other type of buffer techniques that may preserve the identity of the cemetary. Bill Kane again addressed the third item on the list which was Pedestrian/Vehicular Conflict. He said that at the last meeting there was a general concern that the people located in the lodges on the West End and Waters Street would be going through the Gant in an unchannelized, random fashion. He said the thought is to develop a trail network that would channelize the flow of pedestrian traffic. They would identify one key route that would get people to the trail system on Ute Avenue and get ultimately up to Little Annie's. He said that what they have to propose now is a trail that would go through Glory Hole Park. There is also a pedestrian easement on the back property line, on the back of the Clarendon parcel. So, there is legal access between West End Street and Glory Hole Park. He said some design modifications are in order to minirnumize the impact on both the Gant property and the Clarendon property. The thought is to try to berm up with railroad ties and implantings to create a sort of grade separation for the pedestrians who flow through. There is a plan for a serpentine plan and a lot of land- scaping materials to create a physical and visual separation for the pedestrians. Kane said that the legal status of this trail came into question at the last meeting. He said originally West End Street was a plated public right-of-way that came straight through Ute Avenue and when Clarendon was subdivided, there was an agreement and a reservation set aside for a 40 foot right-of-way for the construction of West End Street. As it stands right now, the plat calls it a reservation so the land is identified as separate parcels, and that land is reSeTVed until a point in time when the City of Aspen will require the dedication of the land for public access. Therefore, the land is essentially held in trust until the City of Aspen dedicates it. Lee Pardee asked how far the trail would be from the point where people would be dropped off the their destination. Kane said it was approximately 2,000 feet. Jasmine Tygre said that she seemed to remember from the original plan that the idea was to stop vehicular access at the corner of Durant and Original. She was told that is still correct, that is for private vehicular access. This would mean there would be no private vehicular access from that point toward Ute Avenue. Tygre asked what about the people who want to go east on Ute Ave. and turn up West End? Joe Wells said that is why they are arguing that the permit program is an essential part of any approvals because obviously there is going to be a tendency to do that and people will want to park on those streets. N~ 52 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM '.~ C. F. HOECK," B. 9. II l. Cl. SPECIAL MEETING ASPEN PlANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 13, 1981 Roger Hunt said that people like to take the shortest line between two points. What would happen when people tend to head straight towards the Little Annie's terminal? What method of control will there be for that? One of the consultants said the Gant has requested a security buffer so they could just extend that to go totally around the area and make it extremely difficult to cut through. Lee Pardee suggested they continue talking about this after #7, skier IIDving, because one of his concerns is people in ski boots walking a half a mile. Gideon Kaufinan, representative of Peter and Judith Hoyt, who own property in Calderwood Subdivision on Waters Ave. He said the point has been mentioned, but it is a very large concern of people who own property in that area, as far as pedestrian access. He thinks it is corrmendable they work something out as far as pedestrians with the Gant, but he also thinks there is still a very large unresolved area ;as to how they are going to mitigate the impact of pedestrians walking through Calderwood off of Water Ave., both people getting to the Little Annie area and employees walking through trying to get to town. He said it is already a problem without the ski area even being there. Olof suggested the commission move on to the next concern. was Size of Base Building. The commission agreed that this had already been covered. No.4 point No. 5 was Zoning for Employee Housing. Bill Kane said they had done some research on the various options available. At the last meeting, he said there was a desire on the part of P & Z to look at a mixture of alternatives. The original concept was for 67 units of free standing apartments. There were some questions raised about the possiblity of doing some dormitory style housing or doing a mix of free standing apartments and dormitory style housing. Kane said they have looked at what would be permitted in the R-6 zone and then looked at what changes might necessitate another rezoning. Kane said that, on the property, 131,000 sq. ft. of land would be elegible for density calculation purposes, that is, after slope reduction. With employee housing bonus and overlay, one unit of 3375 sq. ft. would be permitted, allowing a total of 38 units. Conceivably within the 38 units, there could be some dormitory units with multiple bedrooms, and still, within R-6, define those as units. The problem with that concept is that dormitory housing is not permitted within the R-6 district. Kane said they are looking to the P & Z for some direction. Kane said the thought here would be to stay within the same bedroom count. He suggested for a starting part in the discussion, a mix of four dormitory buildings, which would allow nine rooms per unit and eighteen pillows, which would provide 36 rooms and 72 pillows. Then, there would be sixteen clustered townhouses at 16 bedroom units each and eight two-bedroom units. However, dormitory units would require some redefinition of R-6 and if that didn't work there would have to be a rezoning. Ron Garfield wanted to add that if Little Annie's did go the dorm route, units that would be eliminated would be those closest to the Calderwood subdivision and to the Gant, so that would reduce some of the problems of the people in the area. Lee Pardee asked how many units and pillows were in the original plans. He was told 67 units and 106 bedrooms. In the new concept, there would be 104 pillows. /"- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM!O C.F.HO!CKELB.O.&l.CO. SPECIAL MEETING ASPEN PlANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 13, 1981 Joe Wells said that in the original concept, they can't tell the commission exactly how many employees would be housed, but the commission should conclude how many employees they would like to see housed in the area, and send the consulants off to come up with a site plan to house that many. A consultant to the plan said that with four dorms and eighteen separate rooms would end up with 72 dorm rooms. Lee Pardee asked why they were calling them dormitories. He said he looked at the plans and he didn't see anything that looked like dormitories. Joe said it can't be defined as a dwelling units because it houses IIDre than six unrelated individuals. Finishing up what he had to say, the consultant said there would be 72 separate rooms, sixteen one-bedroom units would be 16 separate rooms, and then 8 two-bedroom units would be sixteen separate rooms. Therefore, the total would be 104 separate rooms, the original proposal having 106 separate rooms. He said it is pure speculation as to how many people would occupy each room. He said the net number of people occupying the area would probably be less with the dormitory because the rooms are very small and it probably would not work to have two people in each room. However, with 106 apartment rooms, there would be IIDre people because there are good chances that each room would be larger. Ted Mularz went to the charts and explained about the dormitories. He said they are within the 25 foot heigth limitation. It is a building with a COIIUIl::m entry, storage and a COJJllllOn kitchen that has two of everything and a little living area with a t.v. and a dining room. This was a proposal how they might utilize the space for maximum effeciency. Each bed would have storage areas all around it wmcfi would make it very comfortable for whoever was there. On the outside they would try to keep it as simple and basic as they can because of cost. Lee Pardee said that the floor plan does not give nearly enough COJJllllOn area. No one would want to spend too much time in their rooms because they are so small. Ted said they were going under the assumption that all eighteen people will not be eating at the same time. Lee said that if they are all going to be working for Farney, they will be eating at the same time. Pardee suggested taking out one bunk room and giving the tenants IIDre common space. He said he likes the idea of this kind of living and it is certainly what tfiey need. Ted said they could add twelve feet to the building and each person could have his/her own room, and it would also add another twelve feet to the COJJllllOn areas. Jasmine asked if there was any thought given to having the dormitory style housing with no IIDre than six people so there would not have to De a zoning change? Joe Wells said that would not be possible since there could only be 38 units and they could not accommodate the number of people they would want to. Jasmine asked if the commission ever came to a determination as to how many people they would want to accorrmodate? Olof said there was one very substanstial improvement acheived by this approach. It reduces the impact in heigth, ground coverage and closeness to adjacent properties. N~ 67 -_--.."'_...,>~ ........ RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM 'I C.F.HOECKfLB.B.a.l.CJ. Olof questioned at this point whether they want to get too deeply into room size and accorrunodations. Lee Pardee said the commission should give as much imput into Little Annie's as possible. Roger Hunt said he thought this plan with the mix of dormitories and free standing apartments is definately better than the original plan. He is not against improvement of the COmIIDn elements of the dormitory style housing. Joan Klar agreed with Roger but she had a small corrnnent about the bunk rooms. She thought they were an okay size for two if they were not built exactly to the configurations shown. However, she did say the idea of the mix was totally necessary and totally appropriate to what they were trying to do. She also didn't think they needed much of a common area. Olof summarized what the commission had said. He said some had expressed a need for a larger COmIIDn area, perhaps a different arrangement on the bedroom. He said that at this point, that is as far as they really need to go. Ron Garfield said they did need to walk away from this meeting with a real good understanding of what the commission would want from Little Annie's on employee housing because of the commitment it requires on planning and designing and also because they may have to initiate a code amendment. Olof said the consultants most certainly have gotten the impression from the commission that they definately like the new concept. It is a big improvement in land use, impact and serving the employees. He said there is some feeling that the addition of 12 feet to the Building for the comm:::m area would be advantageous. Roger said that sort of means they would have to get the mechanism necessary so they can do it. Olof said the next question is the mechanism to accomplish it and the suggestion from Bill Kane was to initiate a conditional use in the R-6 zone for dormitory style housing. Al Blomquist said they have to get away from the dormitory definition. It must be defined somehow as a group house or something. And, when they do it, they must look at all the residential zones and not just single Qut R~6. Joan Klar disagreed and said she thought they should single it out. To keep the code clear, if it has been called dormitory housing to this point, call it exactly that. Joe Wells clarified that point by saying that in other words the use is allowed under the REO in basically all of the zone districts including RMF but is not allowed in the R-6, R-15 and R-30. Blomquist said he supposed that what makes these buildings dormitories :i::s that there is not a bathroom in each room. Wells said it is the unrelated persons living in the building. Olof suggested the commissiol leave the definitions and construction of revision to the Planning Office but could the commission agree in general terms as to the approach they want to take to make possible this type of employee housing for Little Annie's. Roger wondered if there was a mechanism of doing this under the residential bonus overlay for projects exceeding a certain number. Wells said they had no legal council at the meeting to clarify that. Olof said there seemed to be a consensus that it should be by special review as a conditional use. ......... RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves rOIl~" C. F. HOECKcl B. B. &: l. CJ. SPECIAL MEETING ASPEN PlANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 13, 1981 Olof said they need to initiate a code amendment to be prepared by the Planning Office and the City Attorney. Wells asked the commission to make a motion to that effect. Blomquist made a motion for the staff to prepare an amendment to the zoning ordinance defining in a consistent sequence, group house, dormitory, single family, duplex, multi-family, lodge, short-term and long-term in a coherent amendment, distinguishing between the type of building and the type of use or occupancy so that the code is consistent throughout with recommendations as to which will be as use by right and which will be a use by condition. Roger Hunt seconded the IIDtion. Lee Pardee thought the motion was far to broad and it will take six IIDnths to get done. This would be a very large code amendment affecting every area of the code. He agrees it should be done but he thinks there should be no IIDtion at this time. Pardee thought the City Attorney and the Planning Office should come back to the commission with a recommendation as to the vehicle and then they can get on with it. Blomquist said there can be no definition as to what it is they're talking about without knowing how it's different without knowing how its different from the other things that are defined. He said the cornmssion could go ahead and do it for just R-6 and for just this case, but before the commission does it they should know the implications to the rest of the definitions in that code. Olof wanted the advice of the Planning Office as to how to do this. What about Al' s amendment for all of these definitions? Will that impede? Wells said that historically, it has, but he wasn't sure if it would in this case. In other words, the IIDre definitions that have to be drafted very carefully, the more difficult the task. Olof asked if there was in existence a definition that will serve the purpose the commission is after this evening? Wells said he believed they did by virtue of the way dwelling unit is defined so that once IIDre than six unrelated persons are living in a unit, it is no longer a dwelling unit, it becomes something else. Olof agreed with Al' s point that they should redefine the definidons of dwelling units but if its going to delay what they were trying to accomplish at this meeting, he was not in favor of proceeding in that way. He would like to see the commission initiate a code amendment sufficent to allow Little Annie group housing by special rev;i:ew as a conditional use. Al said he did not agree to that and he thought it would simply be a days work for someone. Pardee said they didn't even have a City Attorney and Olof said with the change- over in personnel in the Planning Office, they definately could not do it in such a short time. Roger Hunt withdrew his second. He re-moved along those lines but instead of redefining each item he would IIDve that all group housing and dormitory be the one group they consider when it comes this rezoning. Therefore, he moved to sponser a zoning amendment to consider all units in excess of a dwelling unit, in other words group house, boarding house, dormitory, for consideration as a conditional use in the R-6, ROO overlay zone. Wells thought that would be sufficient. AI Blomquist seconded the motion. ....... RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FOJlM'O C.F.HOECKELB.B.&l.CJ. SPECIAL MEETING ASPEN PlANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 13, 1981 Ted Mularz asked if they should not somewhere, in the motion, include the fact they may want to have another facility such as a laundry building that may have a meeting room or party room in it that would help in taking some of the people out of the common areas. It would not really fall in the category of housing. Olof said they were talking only about the housing portion of the area and they would not include that in the IIDtion. All in favor of the motion, none opposed. Motion carried. Before leaving the subject of employee housing, Gideon Kaufman wanted to make a cOITment. He said the location of the employee housing is very important to the people in the Caulderwood subdivision and while they are certainly in favor of flexibility, he would ask that the Little Annie's consultants look at the possibility of decreasing the size of the building closest to the subdivision and possibly remove some of the parking and putting it somewhere else. He would like to minimize the impact of some of the owners in the subdivision having to look at all of the large buildings and all of the paved area. He also said that since he has seen the P & Z sponser conditional changes and then change their mind as in the C-l district, he would ask that in the event that does happen, if this amendment is not passed to allow them the flexibilty, he would like to see if its possible to IIDve one building over behind the employee parking. This would accomplish two things: 1) It would change some impact and 2) It might change the impact of employee parking. Wells said he didn't think it had been resolved whether or not some of the buildings were sited within one hundred feet of the river and if it was an issue to the board. Blomquist said he felt strong about staying away from the river. Ted Mularz said that if they were on flat land, it would make a considerable difference but the bank is so steep and the buildings are so high above the river that the closeness is not nearly as significant as if it were reasonably level and flat. Olof said they have the Stream Margin Review for that purpose. Olof said they were approaching their goal of adjourning by 7: 00 PM. He suggested they look through the remaining items and see which ones were of IIDst importance. On item #6, Differnces in Population Projections Used to Construe Demand for Additional Skiing, Joe Wells made a report. He said that Brian Stafford has generated a couple of memos in regard to disagreements in population projections. He thought Brian's points were valid points, however, he believed they go after the issue not of whether ski expansion is needed but rather the level of expansion anticipated as being needed in the WRT reports is necessary. He said the suggestion still seems to be that expansion at this end of the corridor is appropriate from a numbers standpoint but that perhaps Burnt Mountain or expansion at the other end of the corridor is perhaps not needed within the time frame given by the WRT report. Whether or not that resolves the question, he doesn't think so. However, he has yet to see anyone challenge the numbers in regards to the need for additional capacity at this end of the corridor. Olof said he thought that satifies the commission and he didn't want to get into a discussion on that tonight. ...... RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM" C.F.HOECKElB.B.&l.C.l. SPECIAL MEETING ASPEN PlANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 13, 1981 Al Blomquist asked Ray if Little Annie were operating today, how many could they accorrm::Jdate. Would the quality of snow be better? Ray said there would be about four feet of snow on the area and the portion that would face the Roaring Fork Valley area would be equivalent to the size of Snowmass' total development. Getting on the #7, which was Travel Impact, Transportation Mode and Parking. Bill Kane said he wanted to sUJl1IlBI'ize why they got to where they are. He said there was a great interest on the part of the corporation to try to develop a transportation system that would integrate as painlessly as possible with the overall valley transit, particulary in the way that has been accomplished with the Ski Corp in providing integrated transportation system to Snowmass and Buttermilk. Some of the reasons cited for that are to, as in a few years ago, there were several different colored buses for the skiing corporations and the city and it was hard at Ruby Park to try to decide which one of those buses to get on to get to the destination. He said the Bluebirds do have some drawbacks. They are deisal and they are buses. He believed they are better looking than transit buses but they do carry that stigma. Kane said that in the course of reviewing transportation alternatives, Dave Farney made a personal visit to Copper Mountain to look at a very unique kkier IIDver system that was designed by Free Hop Corporation. It is an articulated two car system that can carry a hundred skiers at a time. Th3 c=s have huge accordion doors on the side , with the concept that the skier can get on board with his poles and skies and sit down on a bench. This would offer savings on loading time and the actual time the buses are sitting there idling. They are pulled by a typical diesal tractor-type vehicle. Therefore, the interest in the Bluebirds was simply integration and economy. From the corporations' point of view, it is extremely expensive to own and operate a transportation system. Kane said there was a willingness to look at some other systems and to hear what is on the commission's minds. He asked Duane Fengel to say a few words on the transportation system. Duane apologized to Little Annie's because he really didn't become too concerned with it. He said he received their study last summer and talked with Bill Kane and tried to give Bill a proposal for a bus system. He said that as far as the Little Annie's situation is concerned pertaining to transportation, he thought they did a very comprehensive job on the layout, access and the problems of loading passengers with skis and equipment. He said they gave the City adequate space if they were running the system for them. Their scheduling was good and they also emphasized the fact they wanted to utilize the Rio Grande parking lot which is supposedly where the transportation building is going to be of the City and County. Duane said this is something that has to be worked out between the City and County and the UMPTA people. He hopes to have this accomplished wi thin the next two years. Fengel said the impact on Ute Avenue will be tremendous. However, these noisy and large buses will not be utilized all day long. The basic time of use will be from 8:30 - 10:30 in the morning and 3:30 - 4: 30 in the afternoon. At the time of completion of the area, there will be a UMPTA facility at the airport. This will be where the buses are stored during the day, what Fengel calls dead time. They will be IIDved from Ruby Park during this time and they won't be ....... RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves F()~M ~I c. r. HO~CKH B. a. II L, CJ. SPECIAL MEETING ASPEN PlANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 13, 1981 sitting around town. They will be out of site and back on the road on demand.. He believes that is one of the things that people are used to seeing now and he believes that people on Ute Avenue probably have that in mind. They don't want to hear the constant rattle of the buses going up and down the road but it won't be as bad as they think. Other than that, he feels Little Annie's put together a pretty good system and he hopes also to someday put together better and finer equipment and they are applying for that through UMPI'A also. Dave Farney said they also have the option of the trolley system. However, Little Annie will follow the direction that P & Z, the City Council and the people of Aspen ask for. They are not trying to say that they want one system over another. Olof asked for committee corrnnents. Lee Pardee asked Dave's reaction to the Copper Mountain people IIDvers. Farney said it is not a fast moving vehicle, going along at a maximum of 20 MPH but it is very easy for people to hold their skis and get on and off. It carries 120 people. He said it is difficult for him to say that he would like to use anyone type of conveyance because he would very much like to have the City integrate this within their program. Pardee said he is concerned about the ease of getting to Little Annie and going on the assumption that most people will get on at Ruby Park, it is probably not IIDre than a five minute ride, even at 20 MPH. He thinks that on the Bluebirds , it would take four times as long to load the skis and people on than it would take to get to the destination. Bluebirds would only carry 50 people and this vehicle Farney talks about would carry twice as many. He really likes the idea of these people movers, sight unseen. Joan Klar totally agreed also. She thinks this would be a nice alternative in terms of impact on the city. Al Blomquist thought it could be integrated in to the city transportatiol by going to Aspen Institute and going through the lodge areas and then back to Little Annie's. It could have a summer use by going to the Music Festival. Jasmine Tygre believed that every effort should be given to exploring the alternative transportation approaches for a number of reasons. Mostly, because having a lot of buses rambling up and down Ute Avenue is not aesthetically pleasing and because they are trying to discourage any kind of automobile use and pedestrian access to the extent that the people IIDving vehicles are attractive and desirable to use. Roger Hunt said that any vehicle as wide as a bus would require the widening of Ute Avenue to about double the existing pavement as it now sits. Also, the peak bus transits are once ever 62.07 seconds which by itself is unacceptable noise and odor to a primarily residentia] area. He said there is just no avoidance of that. He thinks that most of the residences on the south side of Ute Avenue basically unlivable because the setbacks are not very great from the road already and if the road is doubled there will probably not be any setbacks on those residences. He said that if he was the only one who would be making a recommendation to the City Council, he would say that the whole proposal would have to fail just because of the impossible impact on Ute Ave. in the residential neighborhood. - RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM., t.F.HOtCKElR.B.Ill.CJ. SPECIAL MEETING ASPEN PlANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 13, 1981 Olof said he would like to sum up for the Little Annie people the corrnnents of the P & Z and interject his own. He believes that it is clear that the commission thinks that the use of Bluebird buses and an integrated system with the city bus system is totally unacceptable. The impact and the undesirable aspects of these buses are enoUX'lIDUs. He believed that the positive conclusions are 1) a vehicle must be as quiet and odorless as possible 2) the number of trips required to IIDve the skiers in and out must be reduced to an absolute minimum 3) the loading time must be at a minimum, not only in time and convience, but in attractiveness to the skier 4) the resulting stacking of vehicles must be reduced to a minimum 5) the right-of-way improvements to Ute Avenue should be kept to a minimum and, finally 6) the system and equipment incorporated should be capable of integration into the City system for use both for the ski area and for other uses during the summer. Parking was also included on item #7. Bill Kane said there was a letter included in the packet from Steve Lockwood who took some exceptions to what was stated in the TDP report which in turn was included in WRT's report. Significant differences exist over the call for the parking facility at the Rio Grande property. To summarize Lockwood 1 S comments, Kane said he points out that the ll9 spaces were calculated by assuming 2500 skiers were on the lIDuntain. In short, Steve disagrees that there is an instaneaous demand for 119 spaces, he believes it would be IIDre like 50 or 60. His point was also that there is nothing in the design of Little Annie which was geared toward attracting downvalley skiers. The realities are that Little Annie will be replicating a lot of the skiing that is at Snowmass and therefore, his theory is that people will probably not past Snowmass to go down to Little Annie and even if they did they would probably go on the weekend when utilization of the parking lot that already exists at Rio Grande is not being used. Lee Pardee said those 119 parking spaces may not be used in the beginning, but he would like to know where they are going to be when they are needed, even if it wouldn't be for five years. He wants them dedicated and platted. Kane said what they are arguing is that there are already 100 spaces down there. The commission agreed they are pretty full during the week but Kane said that is not when they would be utilized as much by Little Annie's. The downvalley people are workers and they would ski only during the weekend, when the lot is not full. Olof said the commission agreed that the City is going to be faced with some additional concerns for parking. Hunt said maybe that could be handled under a contractual basis with the City where the Little Annie's Corporation would participate in the helping of the development of that parking. Gideon Kaufman said he has an issue with parking that is slightly different. He wanted to know about the impact on the surrounding neighborhood. He said the way it is proposed right now, there would be a guard placed on the entrance to Ute Avenue. He feels that it would be important on Waters Avenue to have both the guard from 7:00 in the morning to 7:00 at night, as well as a permit system because the proximity of Waters Ave. to the area will cause a tremendous parking problem. He said there are two types of - RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FOR"''' c.r.HQECH1.9.B.llL.CJ. SPECIAL MEETING ASPEN PlANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION JANUARY 13, 1981 of parking problems: there will be the daytime parking, when people will want to come in and ski the area, and the evening time, when the employees who live there, might want to park in that particular area. He would like to see some type of restrictions placed on Waters Ave. for the parking during the day and night and parking permits for the people who live there. Also, he would like to see some sort of berming or visual blocking from the Calderwood subdivision of the tremendous parking lot that borders the employee area. Al made a motion that all on street parking within a quarter of a mile from Little Annie base be limited to two hours. There was no second to the IIDtion. Jasmine didn't think there could be two hour parking in a residential area without parking permits for the residents. Lee thinks it is sufficient to say that a permit system should be evaluated but the commission should not be writing it. He also is not 100% convinced that the parking problem is totally the city's. He thinks a great portion of the problem is the city's but Little Annie's should take on a portion of the problem also. A consultant said Little Annie would be willing to contribute to helping with the problem. Olof suggested they take a quick look at item #8, Street Improvements to Ute Ave. because Jay HamJIDnd sat through the whole meeting. Jay said he would basically like to repeat that they are working with Jim Reeser on the Ute Ave. question and Little Annie's has been very cooperative so far. He said that in their original proposal they suggested improvements to Ute Ave. from the location of the facility up to the intersection with Original St. and suggested a cooperative financial approach to that. Engineering feels that the impacts and the conditons of the street out there warrant improvements of Original St. from Ute to Durant, which has no curb and gutter and poor pavement at this time. He said that Little Annie pretty much agr'ee with that. Harrim3nd said they also felt that the pavement width out there should be widened from roughly 30 feet in their original proposal to around 40 feet, which would give them the flexibility to create either two bus lanes and a parking lane or simply close the parking and create two wider lanes. Right now, the streets vary between 25 feet to 35 feet. Olof asked about Roger's concern that you can't get 40 feet out of Ute without really going up to people's front doors. Jay said the majority of the right-of-way runs to around 60 feet. He said that is part of what they're doing right now, is putting together adequate right-of-way inforrration to know what they have to work with. Olof adjourned the meeting at 7: 30 PM. Rob~<~~A:? .8L1Aj_