Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19830426 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM ~O c. r. H DECK EL B. 8. a. l. CD. Special Meeting planning and Zoning Commission April 26, 1983 Vice Chairman Anderson called the meeting to order at 5:08 p.m. with members Jasmine Tygre, Lee Pardee, Roger Hunt, and Al Blomquist present. Rubey Park Rezoning Ms. Tygre said there should be some protection for the city as far as the control of the public space is concerned. Ms. Penne said she had added that "operations that may be commer- cial or public, depending on details of operation may apply through conditonal use review to be included in the public space." Monroe Summers told P & Z Council's position on this is an agreement in writing, the terms of which can be put forth on the ballot question. Pardee said the P & Z is recommending to Council this should be a Robin Hood approach; the free market development will allow the city to have the transportation and public space at no cost. Ms. Tygre agreed this is important to be included in the resolution. Sunny Vann, planning director, said the question is at what point does space become "public". Vann said the rent has something to do with it, but also it is a decision as to whether to exempt this from growth management as truly a public space. Pardee said one of the reasons the P & Z is doing this rezoning and zoning the land public/SPA is because they think the city is going to get a free ride. Pardee said he wants Council to know they are doing this rezoning based on information from the applicant, the city being one, that the city will get free public space at no cost. Pardee said he would like a whereas to that effect in the resolution. Blomquist said he would like to add to number 2 on page 2, "including a contractual commitment by the developer that all public space shall be free to the City at all times". Ms. Penne agreed that should be added somewhere in the resolution perhaps not as a condition but as a recommendation. Blomquist asked what the city was getting for the land for for permission to build outside the GMP quota. This was initiated by the city, not the developer. Summers said the city is getting 9,090 square feet of space to be used as a public facility. Summers said it is not possible for no money to change hands associated with this public space. The intention is to have the use of the 9,000 square feet come out a wash for the city. The city has maintenance and landscaping costs and keeping the building in shape. There will be some revenues derived from the public space. City Attorney Taddune said the concern of the commission is that they do not want to approve a private project but some- thing that is of public benefit. Taddune said this will be submitted to the voters. Pardee suggested these approvals should be contingent upon voter approval. Pardee said this is rezoning on a "what if" basis. Pardee said the recommenda- tion to Council is contingent upon a vote. Taddune suggested putting language in the resolution that the P & Z has a concern that this remain as a public project both in use and economically. Richman said the planning staff will redraft the resolution with this amendment. ".-"..'."...""--......- Special Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission April 26, 1983 Pardee moved to approve Rubey Park resolution 83-3 as amended in this meeting and granting approval for Welton Anderson, our chairman of vice, to sign the resolution; seconded by White. All in favor, motion carried. Shapery Downtown Storage SPA Plan Welton Anderson stated he would run the meeting but will abstain from voting because of some prior involvement. Ms. Penne, planning office, said this meeting is to review the specific plan for the Shapery project. Ms. Penne out- lined the project breakdown, the number of units, square footage, corridors, on-site management and office. If P & Z adopts this, it will constitute an amendment to the SPA master plan for the Trueman project. The underlying zoning is SIC/I. Regarding compatibility with surrounding land uses, it depends on which direction the building is fit. To the south and east are N/C uses, which are compatible; the north and west are the river, A.C.E.S., and the Roaring Fork greenway and the compatibility is questionable. Ms. Penne said the appli- cant has responded to this sensitive areas; one is to give the rear 120 feet closest to the river for use as park and to landscaping in this area. Another response is the proposal to move the trail from the east side of the property to the west side. This is a better alternative for the trail. Ms. Penne told P & Z the applicant has said he will fence the project with natural materials as well as to limit the hours of operation. Ms. Penne saod one of the problems with the development at this site is that the Trueman SPA was four lots and all attention was given to lot 1. When lot 2 was conveyed to the post office, there was not a look at parking, traffic, landscaping. Ms. Penne said as far as the use of this facility, people in Aspen who need quick access to stored goods will use this facility, renter will use a private vehicle to access this, and a trip to this location will probably be multi-purposed. In the S/C/I zone, a storage facility is a relatively low impact uses. Other uses could be a lumber yard, vehicle sales, car wash. Ms. Penne said she felt the site plan was inventive, and this is a nicer warehouse facility than usual. The area and bulk requirements in the S/C/I zone will be met by this project. Ms. Penne said there are pros and cons in the issues of land use compatibility, Rio Grande trail, traffic and the site plan. The planning office weighed the pros and cons and recommdns approval with conditions outlined in the April 25, 1983, memorandum. Gideon Kaufman, representing the applicant, reiterated this is the review of the precise plan for the SPA for lot 3 of Trueman subdivison. There is no enquiry into the uses are permitted on this lot; that was set when the underlying S/C/I zoning was adopted. Kaufman said this applicant has a due process right to have his application for adoption of a precise plan heard in a timely fashion. Kaufman said by the city adopting the S/C/I zone for the parcel and the applicant agreeing to be bound by SIC/I, many items of the SPA review process were predetermined. A mini- warehouse is clearly a permitted use in the S/C/I zone. The area and bulk requirements are predetermined by the S/C/I zone and are being applied to this lot. The only variance sought is a 5 foot setback to accommodate the best location for the Koch lumber building to line up with other buildings. '-" "",", fORM" C. f. HOECKf~ B. 6. It l, Cl. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves Special Meeting Shapery SPA Plan planning and Zoning Commission -3- April 26, 1983 Kaufman said he takes exception to the traffic assumptions made by Ms. Penne in the planning office memorandum. Kaufman told the Board because of the traffic concerns, they hired an engineer to do a traffic analysis of this project. The traffic engineer stressed the multi-purpose trip, which is a positive factor. The traffic engineer states that of all the permitted uses in the s/e ~ zone, miniwarehouse generates the least amount of traffic. Kaufman pointed out the applicant has the right to relocate the trail to any place on his property; therefore, this is not germaine to discussion. There may be no discussion of this as long as the trail is provided for. Kaufman reminded P & Z the applicant has successfully competed in the GMP. Kaufman addressed the eleven conditions. *1 has been done on the site plan there is no problem for retaining the existing easements for storm drainage and access to Jenny Adair park. Number 2, letters from Holy Cross and the San District have been given to the engineering department and will be placed in the record. Number 3, assurances from adjacent property owners, the appli- cant does not need to grade any adjacent property owners property. Permission has been received from the San District to move their trail and grade on their property. Number 4, the engineering department and applicant has compromised on a 5 foot setback. Number 5, no problem, as number 6 is no problem. Kaufman told Council he felt number 7 was unnecessary but did not have a problem with. Number 8 through 11 they have no problems with. Kaufman entered letters and reports into the record. Tom Wells presented the maps and plans, showed electrical easements, transformers, trail easement, the Koch lumber building, etc. Taddune counseled P & Z to ignore the conclusions of law and to decide on the basis of their feelings as to whether or not this application is in conformity to the standards of the SPA review criteria. Pardee said the original subdivision said 1.24 acres would be recreation and 1.99 would be open space. Pardee questioned where this land is, and should the city be suing Trueman for not providing that open space and that recreation. Taddune said he has been concentrating his research on whether or not lot 3 is a developable lot. Ms. Penne said the only evidence regarding the land Pardee is questioning is in a memorandum about the preliminary plat, and there is no recorded preliminary plat. These conditions were not carried over to final plat. Ms. Penne told the P & Z that Sandy Stuller has been doing research on this subdivision and the entire file. Taddune said he and Ms. Stuller can find no basis for even thinking any illegality happened along the way. Kaufman said this is putting the burden on the applicant to prove the zoning, which the city has never done before. Taddune stated he cannot find any evidence that this application is not properly before the P & Z. Special Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission April 26, 1983 Anderson asked how many times this application has been before the P & z. Kaufman said five. Kaufman said it is time to get on with the SPA application. Taddune pointed out at one time lot 3 was offered to the city as a donation and the city rejected it. Anderson opened the public hearing. Hal Clark said he felt the city ought to purchase this property Blomquist said this project has to be approved because it meets the criteria, the design is superior to other designs the Board has seen, the trail will be moved, there will be berming and landscaping to screen the project. Blomquist asked a representative of A.C.E.S if they would help the city negotiate to buy this property or at least the trail easement. Clark told P & Z the property Blomquist is talking about is not owned by A.C.E.S. but is owned by Mrs. Paepcke, and they have been discussing this two years. Clark said Mrs. Paepcke will look at this warehouse as another major project in her backyard. The city is buying property in this area to accommodate a trail. Hunt said there is already a traffic problem in the area and this may cause cross traffic interference. Kaufman said there is a four page report from a traffic engineer. Hunt said that dealt with volume, he is talking about the site specific and the wide turns. Hunt suggested moving the road. Kaufman showed the road plan, with a 28 foot standard road, showing also the entrance and exit. There will only be 3.5 cars/hour. Anderson closed the public hearing. Pardee moved to recommend to City Council approve of the specific SPA plan as submitted of the Shapery downtown storage with the 11 conditions outlined on page 5 of the planning office memorandum of April 25, 1983; seconded by Ms. Fallin. Hunt said he would like it indicated to the Council because of what the P & Z thought should happen to this property, this project is not appropriate. However, because of how the property is zoned, the P & Z must approve it. Hunt said he is forced into voting for this. It some other location it would be a perfectly good project. Blomquist added that the city either buy or negotiate a trail easement along the west boundary as condition 12 and as 13 urge that the city, at its discretion, consider approving the full 21,056 square feet of construction in one construction season so as to minimize the negative impacts of construction on the environment. Taddune suggested these be recommenda- tions rather than conditions. Blomquist pointed out the P & Z has a resolution stating the city should buy it all. All in favor of the motion on the floor, Anderson abstained. Motion carried. Pardee said he would like the resolution to Council to indicate this project was approved because it met all require conditions it went through all required steps and met all minimums, although the P & Z unanimously feels the project is in the wrong place. Second, the P & Z recommends the city should buy the project. Blomquist moved the P & Z recommends to Council (1) the previous resolution recommending purchase of the entire property for park and open space purposes be considered, (2) should purchase of the full property not be considered ....." , j RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM'~ C. F. HOHKEL a. B. I> l. CO. special Meeting Planning and Zoning commission -5- April 26, 1983 by Council, the P & Z recommends that Council purchase or obtain easements sufficient land on the west to permit full berming, landscaping, and trail construction for the project, (3) P & Z recommends should the project go forward, that in order to avoid undue construction drag out, that Council approve the full 21,856 square foot project as provided in an earlier resolution from this commission. Kaufman said if Shapery is able to do the project at once, the applicant would be willing to pay for the moving of the trail, grading, and landscaping to alleviate the city having that expense. This would save Shapery the expense of having to do the project piecemeal. Hunt requested this be included in the motion. Ms. Penne noted that both the planning office and P & Z recommended to Council to give an allotment to the entire project. Council deliberated and decided not to do that. Blomquist added "upon hearing this resolution, the applicant agreed that should Council allow construction in one construc- tion period, the applicant will pay the full cost of construc- tion of the trail, berming and landscaping". Ms. Tygre said she would prefer to vote on condition *3 separately from conditions 1 and 2. Blomquist said he does not want condition 3 severed. Blomquist stated the city either buys the property or gets a finished project with minimum disruption to the environment as his position. Blomquist reiterated his motion with his above amendment about building the trail. White seconded. Hunt, Blomquist and Anderson in favor, Pardee and Ms. Tygre opposed. Motion carried. Hunt moved to adjourn at 6:45 p.m.; seconded by Pardee. All in favor, motion carried. ,,_.'~'''''~'-''''''-'--' -".-....~--_. -. .-.,.,~,~_.,_._---~.~~.,.