Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19830504 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM" C,f.HOECKEla.8.&L.CO. May 4, 1983' Regular Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission Perry Harvey called the meeting to order at 5:05 p.m. with members Pat Fallin, Lee Pardee, and Alan Blomquist present. commissioner Comments Change in Use Amendment Subdivision Exception Golden Horn Harvey congratulated Blomquist on being elected to the City Council. Alan Richman asked P & Z to meet May 10, 1983 at 5:00 p.m. on the growth management policy plan update. Glen Horn said the P & Z should meet on the smuggler area for the final road desingations and the open space parcels. This is scheduled for May 24 at 5:00 p.m. The Council and Commissioners have met to discuss the Mill street bridge and the drainage situation. Alan Richman, planning office, said the P & Z and planning office have discussed whether change in use should be a competition or should be exempted from GMP. Richman said the planning staff recommends the exemption route with guidelines. Richman pointed out that growth management is designed to deal with growth impacts, and if a change in use has a growth impact, it ought to go through the competition. Richman said if an activity does not have a growth impact, or it meets a community goal - like employee housing - there is a good reason to exempt it from the competition. Richman said converting a business to a long term residence may not have any growth impacts. Richman said changes in use which have impacts should go through the competition. The question is whether that applicant could be successful in competing. The approach in the past has been when some small change come through GMP, to give 2 points in all categories where there was no effect. Pardee said if there is growth, but it is mitigatable, it should be exempt. Richman said this has been discussed and felt it was not appropriate. Pardee said if an applicant can mitigate any impact on growth, or the growth is so minimal, a person should not be required to go through this lengthy process. Blomquist said no impacts should be defined in measurable terms. Richman said these changes in use will be added or subtracted from the appropriate category. Harvey opened the continued public hearing. Richman said the purpose of this code amendment is to give the P & Z the right to determine whether there are growth impacts and whether someone should go through the competition. Harvey continued the public hearing. Richman told the Board he w~ll refine this and bring it back to P & z. Colette Penne, planning office, said the Code does not address condominiumization of commercial buildings to a large extent. This building has had no residential uses, so there is no reduction in the employee housing. The units are #1, the basement, the Golden Horn restaurant; units #2 and 3 are commercial facilities; unit #4 has been an office for years. Regular Meeting Street Vacation 8th and North '-"-'--""-'"",,"-~",,......,....,_. Planning and Zoning Commission May 4, 1983 The building department has made an inspection, some deficienci were noted and must be corrected prior to transfer of owner- ship of any of the units. There are some conditions requested by the engineering department. Ms. Penne said the planning office recommends approval with conditions. Anderson moved to recommend approval of subdivision exception for the purpose of condominiumization of the Golden Horn building into four units with the following conditions; (1) titling, required approval certificates and any changes result- ing from the review of the documentation requested by the engineering department, be added to the condominium plat prior to recordation; (2) the life, health and safety deficiencies listed in the building department in their inpsection report dated April 25, 1983, be corrected prior to the transfer of any units; (3) filing of a statement of subdivision exception in a form acceptable to the city attorney (4) the owners shall join any improvement district in their area in the event one is formed; (5) the plat should note the existing encroachments into the city rights-of-way and indicate the book and page of the recorded license; (6) the plat should indicate the bearings and dimensions of the lot line adjacent to Aspen Sports as reflected in the deed recorded in bokk 203, page 92; seconded by Pardeed. All in favor, motion carried. Colette Penne, planning office, told the Board this is a request to vacate portions of Eighth and North streets in the vicinity of the Institute. Ms. Penne told P & Z that street vacations usually just go to Council; however, in this case the P & Z should have input because of the land use impacts associated with request. Ms. Penne said this request has come up previously. Ms. Penne said the applicant has cited a report of the Aspen Meadows Advisory Board, which was a group that studied the use of the Aspen Institute property and reported to Council. There are three important things in this report; the main access to the Institute be 7th and 3rd streets; the bus route should use 7th for entering and exiting the area; the Meadows road should be closed except for emergency use. Ms. Penne told P & Z the report from the Meadows Advisory Board has never been adopted as the plan for the Institute. Ms. Penne said the recommendations of the Board mayor may not be followed, depending on the use of the Institute. The applicant states this is not premature, and also states that if Eighth street were opened, it would closely and uselessly parallel Meadows road and intrude directly upon the race track. Ms. Penne pointed out the report has recommended that Meadows road be closed. Ms. Penne has listed the easements that should be given if this is to be approved. The city is the entity to hold onto the streets in case they are needed. The city as a whole should be considered over the desires of a neighborhood. Ms. Penne said the planning office feel since the city is the public trustees for rights-of-way and for good circulation, and since it is not known how the Institute will develop, there is no reason to vacate at this time. Ms. Penne said the owners have put some improvements in the rights-of-way, which will hamper fire protection. The fire department has requested that the fire hydrant be moved to be more accessible. The planning office recommends that P & Z deny the request, and that a substitute fire hydrant be provided. - ~ ' RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM \, C- F. ~OECKEL B. a. It l. LJ. Regular Meeting planning and zoning Commission -3- May 4, 1983 Chuck Brandt, representing the applicant, said he would lead the Board through the exhibits. Mark strotsky will discuss the traffic circulation. Brandt said five years ago, he approached the planning office and said these streets have never been opened and suggested an application for vacation. The planning office said no because the Institute may come in with a plan. Then Bill Kane informed the applicant that the Institute has come in with a plan. Brandt said a land use application for the Institute property is only one aspect of the application. Another aspect is to look at the cir~ulation. Brandt said it is his position these streets will never be used. Exhibit C is an aerial photograph showing the proposed vacation. Exhibit A is a formal vacation petition signed by the adjacent property owners except Cantrup. Exhibit B is a map of the proposed vacation, showing the area to be vacated is 33,000 square feet. This also shows the adjacent property owners. Exhibit D is a certification from the title company. There are some photographs in exhibit F showing the area. Brandt explained where they were taken. Exhibit E was intended to be an excerpt from Resolution #35, 1981, setting up the Aspen Meadows Advisory Board, and excerpts from their report. Exhibit F is a letter from John Doremus, who concurred with the application providing some matters are addressed. There is an informal pathway to the music tent, and if the area is vacated, this path should be maintained. The applicant has agreed to this. Brandt told P & z that the city Code specifically prohibits vacated areas to count towards density, so there will be no additional units. The Code does not address the enlargement of a residence using the vacated area for floor area ratio calculations. Brandt said he is willing to stipulate that the 32,000 square feet will not be used for FAR calculations. Exhibit G is a letter from the fire marshal discussing the fire hydrant situation. Exhibit H is a letter from Jim Markalunas, discussing the fire hydrant as well as the easements to be reserved by the city. Exhibit I is a warranty deed from the paepcke Trust to the Marquesses, showing a covenant from building of any kind on these fractional lots. Exhibit J is a list of city ordinances relating to vacation of streets and alleys. Brandt showed the Board a map with all the vacated land colored since 1959. Brandt said in his research he could only find one instance when fair market value was discussed for vacated areas. The engineering department states it is city policy that fair market value be paid for vacated area. Brandt said it is not clear to him that paying fair market value is a city policy. Brandt said in the question of public good versus private good, he does not see any public good existing now. Brandt said if they were vacated, they could be landscaping and in terms of their beauty would be of public good. Brandt outlined the conditions his client is willing to do; (a) provide a fire land access over North street; (b) pave the alley in block 8, (c) reserve utility easement; (d) provide a footpath over the area to be vacated; (e) relocate the fire hydrant to Smugger Regular Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission May 4, 1983 (f) Mr. Marqusee will give a portion of the property in block 7; (g) the vacation will be subject to the no density requirements under the Code. Brandt submitted a report to the Board from Skrotsky on the traffic circulation Mark Skrotsky said he looked at this vacation request from the conceivable uses that might be made of the land to be vacated from a transportation point of view. Skrotsky said two things affect this area; the traffic going to the music tent in the summer, and the traffic turning off highway 82 to get to the Meadows. Skrotsky said the roads in the area are adequate to handle the traffic. None of the potential solutions have anything to do with Eighth or North streets. Skrotsky said the expansion of the Meadows would decrease traffic because the attendees would be housed on the campus and not be driving back and forth. Neither North nor Eighth streets are being used to handle these people. The access to the Institute should be Seventh street. There is no reason from a traffic circulation point of view that these streets will ever be used. Ms. Penne noted an alley is a secondary access to property and all lots should front on a street. The access to these houses is the alley. Pardee said he felt strongly if there is any chance these areas may be used, they should not be vacated. Pardee said he felt this application was premature; the Board does not know who will own the Institute nor what will have there. Pardee said the logic to approve this is not there. Pardee said the plan should be put away until the city knows what will happen at the Institute. Pardee said if he knew the Institute's plan, he would be more positive about granting this vacation. White said he feels the same way. White said there is not a city-wide benefit in granting the vacation at this time. Ms. Fallin agreed. Richman told the Board that Roger Hunt told him this is a premature action, and the Board may be giving away options they need in the future. Anderson said this area could be improved; however, he does not want it to be permanent. Harvey said he agreed with the above comments. Harvey said there is a public good served by maintaining the options and flexibility in response to possible development on the Institute property. If this were vacated and maintained as open space, it might give a developer the argument he could build up to the property line and not provide open space. Anderson said the intent of the application is that the applicants want a big backyard. Anderson suggested an encroach ment license, which could be a compromise between the applicant and the City. Pardee moved that the vacation application for Eighth and North streets be denied; however, a recommendation to Council from P & Z state the P & Z would be in favor of a licensing agreement similar to that of the Aspen Alps for a portion of Ute Avenue, whereby publi c access on North would be maintain, the emergency vehicle access would be maintained, that no improvements be allowed; the applicants be responsible for landscaping, and the term of this license shall be terminable at 15 days notice by either party; Pardee said the reason for the denial is that the very large piece of property zoned SPA, the future is undetermined and the Board does not want to give up any options; seconded by Ms. Fallin. All in favor, motion carried. - , , RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves fORM 'a C.F.HOECKElB.a.lll.GO. Regular Meeting planning and Zoning Commission May 4, 1983 Discussion of Quota Options L-3 Alan Richman, planning office, reminded P & Z last year the L-3 zone was not dealt with in context of the GMP quota but treated as L-l and L-2. Richman presented a buildout table for the L-3 zone; there are 500 rooms in the L-3 zone with a potential of 225 room buildout. Richman said the purpose of the L-3 zone is for flexibility and capability to upgrade. Richman said currently for an L-3 owner to add rooms, they would have to compete under GMP against the L-l and L-2 zones. Richman said L-3 zoning is only available to existing lodges; it will not be placed on vacant lots. These facilities are builtout to 75 to 90 per cent of their capability. Therefore, most applications to P & Z will be small addition, and the lodge owner will be constrained by the existing facility. These applicants will not be competitive with a vacant lot or a conforming lodge. This is the rationale for doing something different for the L-3 zone. Richman said whatever the P & Z designs for the L-3 zone should be kept in mind how this might apply to the small lodges in L-l and L-2 zones; these are just in need of the opportunity to upgrade. Richman pointed out last year the size of the lodge quota was doubled; if the L-3 zone gets a separate quota, P & Z should not consider increasing again the quota but splitting the existing quota between L-l, L-2 and the L-3 zone. Richman said there is sufficient lodge quota to deal with the existing ski area. Blomquist said there has been a growth of lodging in west end duplexes and single family houses. Blomquist said this is an unregulated segment of the lodging community. Harvey said the Commission formed the L-3 zone to encourage the upgrading of existing lodges. The community might not need more rooms, but the economic reality is in order to upgrade, expansion becomes one of the tools. The planning office has pointed out the the growth management quotas should become more flexible and changed more frequently than in the past. Harvey suggested having a larger quota for the first one or two years to get some stimulation in the L-3 zone. This may achieve an immediate upgrading and then cut the quota back. Gideon Kaufman pointed out the basis for the increase in the lodge quota was the realization there was need in town for a larger facility. At the same time, the community realized the need to do something for the small lodges. Kaufman said the 35 units is intended for the larger lodges. The L-3 should have the ability to build out also. If the quota is taken from the 35 units, it will defeat the purpose and not get a large facility or upgrading of the small facilities. Kaufman suggested a separate 5 or 10 unit quota for the L-3 zone. Anderson said he agreed with Kaufman's views. Anderson said he felt four to ten rooms would not be a major stress on the community. Pardee said exemption of these rooms should not be the method, exemptions are for public policy. Pardee said he would like a separate, reasonable quota for the L-3 zone. Pardee said he felt this would end up with better quality product than going through an exemption process. This would encourage applicants as they would be going against their own kind. The P & Z also has the option of going into future year's quota. Pardee said he would like the process to be as simple as possible. Regular Meeting Planning and Zoning Commission May 4, 1983 The Board told Richman they felt the scoring system as used in L-l and L-2 was fine. Blomquist said he wants a separate quota and a simple procedure with the lowest possible costs. Blomquist said he would like to see 10 unit quota a year. Ms. Fallin said she wants a separate quota, but has problems with the L-3 being scored under the same criteria as L-l, L-2. Richman said the existing criteria works very well for the L-l, L-2 zones. Richman said the P & Z has already agreed in expansion for L-3 applications, the applicant does not have to make up for all the problems of the existing building. White said he wanted a separate quota, of about 18 to 20 units. Richman pointed out an annual simple growth rate of 2 per cent would get 10 lodge rooms; 20 rooms would be a 4 per cent growth rate which is above all the other sectors. Harvey said the consensus of the Board seems to be a separate quota over and above the 35 for L-l, L-2. A quota of 10 has been mentioned; Harvey would like 15 for the first year to get people started. The P & Z requested staff to look at the language in terms of simplifying and explaining. Richman told P & Z the staff will work on this with the direction of P & Z and bring the concept back. Anderson moved to adjourn at 7:18 p.m.; seconded by Ms. Fallin All in favor, motion carried. Kathryn ~ , I