HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19790731
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO., DENVER
,.__,_ __"'_~.^.___"'___' ,_._,.., _______.~,,_.._,,__m-,~
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Aspen Planning and zoning Commission
July 31, 1979
Special Meeting
The Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission held a special meeting on July 31, 1979,
at 5:00 PM in the City Council Chambers. Members present were Olaf Hedstrom,
Welton Anderson, Nancy McDonnell, Lee Pardee, Perry Harvey and Roger Hunt. Also
present were Karen Smith and Richard Grice of the Planning Office and City Attorney
Ronald Stock.
L-l Code Amendment
Reconsideration
Smith introduced the item. The P&Z is to consider an
amendment to the L-l zone district to add duplexes, single
family and multifamily residences as a permitted use. The
request is being brought by Rich Sabbatini who asks that
the P&Z sponsor this amendment. Smith felt that the last
consideration by the P&Z was not clear on their support.
She asked that they consider the impacts in the L-2 district
since an amendment allowing single family and duplexes in
that zone. She noted a map showing the potential buildout
in the L-l and L-2 district. Currently, the potential in
the L-l district is for 9,000 square feet which translates
to 18 lodge units; this property is owned by Mr. Sabbatini
who wishes to convert the existing residential units to
duplex condominiums. She noted that this code amendment may
encourage conversions from lodge uses to condominium multi-
family uses which is not the intent of the district. The
P&Z would have control over this with the condominiumization
reviews. She also noted that if kitchens were added, this
would put it under the GMP. She said there have been two
duplexes either built or proposed in L-2 since the amendment
and she knows of very little other land that has that poten-
tial. She asked for the P&Z's opinion of this amendment.
Hedstrom asked if the amendment to L-2 opened the way for
condominiumization of the lodges. Smith said no, the
amendment merely added single family and duplex. She
suggested adding single family and duplex and not multifamil~
thereby avoiding that potential for conversion. She
introduced Rich Sabbatini.
Sabbatini stated that he owns Lots K-O, Block 77, which used
to be the Pines Lodge. When he purchased the property five
years ago, he converted it to apartments and has rented it
as apartments since. He lives there himself. His intent
in buying the property was to improve it but never intended
to operate it as a lodge. They are a nonconforming use in
their district. He submitted a list of uses in the L-l zOne
which showed a SO/50 split between lodge units and condomin-
iums or townhouses. They wish to build 5-6 townhouses,
sell three or four, live in one and rent one. There are
presently 6 units on the property. Smith asked if they
wish to construct three duplexes. Sabbatini said they have
not decided yet. Harvey asked the potential of the property
Smith said he could build 18 lodge units going through the
GMP. Harvey asked if he would have to go through GMP for
the duplexes. Smith said no since he would not be convertinc
the use. Pardee said the intent of the L-l zone is to en-
courage short term uses. He would be in favor of single
family or duplexes if there were a deed restriction for
short term. Sabbatini noted there are 250+ condominiums
within the L-l district with no rental restrictions.
Joan Klar entered the meeting.
Anderson asked if they would see this application if the
amendment passed. Smith said if he wished to construct
single family dwellings or duplexes or reconstruct the
multifamily, he would not need the review. If he wished to
condominiumize, he would go through the review. She noted
a dilemna in the code; it encourages the construction of
lodges in the L-l district and discourages the conversion
of lodges uses but the condominiumization regulation dis-
courages displacement of Low, Moderate and Middle income
families. Historically, this property has rented to this
-2-
Special Meeting
July 31, 1979
8040 Greenline
Yarbrough Single
Family House
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
income bracket.
Hunt felt they were whittling down the intent of the zone.
Hedstrom said a part of the GMP is to limit the increase in
the number of lodge. He felt this followed this intention
of the GMP. Hunt felt the intention was to space out this
growth over the years. Pardee felt they were opening the
door for many of the lodge units to be taken off that market.
Hedstrom agreed with this. McDonnell noted that there are
many lodges in need of repair. She felt this would en-
courage these lodges to convert to apartments.
Sabbatini supported the amendment and noted this is the only
underdeveloped piece of property in this zone. Anderson
suggested allowing this as a conditional use rather than a
permitted use. Pardee asked if the applicant could renovate
his building. Stock said he can repair up to 10% of the
replacement cost of the structure in any calendar year.
Anything further must be heard by the Board of Adjustment.
Harvey added that he can apply to the GMP for a lodge.
Anderson again suggested the conditional use approach.
Stock said they could not consider the displacement of
certain income brackets in a conditional use hearing.
Bil Dunaway asked if this is a public hearing, Smith noted
the public hearing was held June 5th and was closed.
Hunt moved not to reconsider the L-l code amendment at this
time primarily because the L-l area has historically been
an area designated for the accommodation of tourists and to
allow a significantly lower use in that area puts the
tourist pressure in other zoning areas in the community,
Klar seconded.
Harvey agreed with the intention of Hunt's motion but felt
they were keeping nonconforming, long term rental, low
density units in the L-l where Sabbatini was attempting to
upgrade his structure. He noted that any other lodge would
go through GMP to convert. Smith corrected her previous
statement to,: say the public hearing was not held since this
is a request to set a public hearing on the amendment.
Roll call vote: Anderson, nay; McDonnell, ayei Pardee,
aye; Harvey, nay; Klar, aye; Hunt, aye; Hedstrom, aye;
Motion passed.
Smith introduced the application. The current access is
from the ski slope in the summer. The Engineering Depart-
ment noted this was the result of a subdivision that was
approved in 1959 and it was annexed without condition.
The Planning Office recommends that P&Z give special atten-
tion to the questions of visual impact and integration
with the natural terrain from an area and bulk standpoint
and considerations of slope stability. She submitted
photos from the applicant drawn to scale showing how the
building integrates with its surroundings. Smith noted
that they have not accomplished the soils review and asked
that they table action for this input. Hedstrom asked
what they could do for the access, parking and fire access
problems. Hunt felt they could approach this problem by
limiting the number of people affected. Stock noted that
on the Bliss approval, adjacent to this property, the p&Z's
conditions of approval were that they use fire resistent
materials or a sprinkler system, place a fire hydrant near
the structure and store a fire hose in the area and a
covenant of indemnity to not hold the City responsible for
any damage, personal or property, in case of fire.
'-'
'wII
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO., DENVER
-3-
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
July 31, 1979
Special Meeting
Pinball Palace,
Conditional Use
Public Hearing
Tim Hagman, representing the applicant, stated that he
worked with Willard Clapper of the Fire Department to find
the best solution to the fire access problem. They propose
a 2" dry line from Galena to the northern property line.
They would install a fire cabinet with necesSary equipment.
Clapper felt the hydrant installed for the Bliss dwelling
is too far to be any good to this property. He also did
not feel a sprinkler system was necessary, He was agreeable
to installing one hour fire protection. He noted they would
retain the grove of Aspen trees on the property. Hunt
suggested a site inspection and the Board agreed. Hagman
said he would stake out the structure with one stake showing
the height of the roof.
Anderson moved to postpone action on 8040 Greenline Review
for the Yarbrough single family house to the regular meeting
next Tuesday, August 7, McDonnell seconded, Smith noted
there would soils information at that meeting. All in favor,
motion approved.
Grice introduced the application. He noted that this was
approved on July 20, 1978, with the condition that the P&Z
has the right to re-review the application after one year.
One June 19, 1979, the P&Z voted to exercise this option and
set a public hearing. The Planning Office solicited comment
from John Goodwin of the Aspen Police Department, Pete
Murphy of the Sheriff's Department, Alice Falkenstein of
the Youth and Shelter Program and the Pitkin County Youth
Board. Falkenstein feels it is a well run business. She
did discuss this with some kids and they said there are
drugs there. She felt there could be better supervision,
She felt it should be a part of a larger youth activities
program that is well staffed. She noted it is one of the
only places for children in Aspen. The Pitkin County
Youth Board also felt it is one of the only places for kids
and felt it needed help instead of closing it down, Vicki
Clark, a family planning specialist with the AVVNA, feels
the kids should be able to continue to enjoy it. She
would like to put family planning posters on the walls.
She feels the palace concept should be expanded. Andrean
Richmond Parker, a therapist with the Aspen Mental Health
Clinic, said she has read of drug use there and feels the
kids need a place that is well supervised. Glen Ellis,
youth educator with the Catholic Church, feels it is a
gathering place for rowdies, drugs and drinking and has
negative influence on kids. He feels it has no community
purpose. May Brazzleton, school psychologist, thinks it's
a good place for younger kids and is not aware of drug use
or other serious problems. Glen Alpern, a psychologist,
feels it is a horror with drugs and money exchanges, He
felt they could move it to the Community Center, Paul
Tippido, acting director of the social services, feels the
youth need a place to gather and the Pinball Palace is better
than a secluded hangout. His observation has been that
the behavior is rowdy, nothing bad but obnoxious behavior.
He has heard of drug deals and feels it should remain as a
gathering place with more supervision unless some better
alternative in town develops. Barbara Torbit, an Aspen
High School counselor, is glad that the kids have a place
to go but feels the management should be more responsible,
Kids who skip school are often found there. She does not
wish to see it close. Donna Fisher of the Roaring Fork
Building said she has had problems with the management of
her building which she attributes to the Pinball Palace.
Since the opening of the Palace, there has been repeated
vandalism in the arcade. She says the Police Department
feels the problem is the result of the Pinball Palace and
agrees. Some of the problems have been matchbox fires
burning the carpet, ink poured over white walls, pictures
which were bolted to the walls were stolen and beer bottles
-4-
Special Meeting
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
July 31, 1979
have been found on the premises. The Planning Office feels
the children are as much a part of the citizens of Aspen
as adults and downtown is meant for the enjoyment of the
citizens. They feel it irresponsible on the part of the
adults to ignore the needs of the teenagers in the downtown
area. He noted that State law requires that young people
may not be refused the right to enter bars.
Hedstrom opened the public hearing.
Gary Plumley
Plumley owns Of Grape and Grain, a liquor store in the
neighborhood. He feels it is unfortunate that the City
cannot do anything for the children other than this establish-
ment. He said kids hang out in the alley and streets and
felt this is contrary to what they were trying to achieve
with the Mall. He said there is loud music coming from the
Palace. He felt it was a good experiment but felt they
need an establishment for the kids rather than a hangout.
He spoke with some parents that are not happy with the
establishment. His main concern is the atmosphere of the
downtown area of Aspen. He strongly objected to this
conditional use. He had heard the business was for sale.
Alan Kupchinski
Kupchinski manages a business within 50 feet of the Pinball
Palace. He agreed with Plumley's comments, He is strongly
opposed to the use because of the rowdy nature of the kids
that hang out there. He did not think the use compliments
the Victorian flavor of Aspen and the mall, He is harassed
by kids asking for change. There is a garbage problem in
the mall. He called the operation "juvenile gambling",
Bert Bidwell
Bidwell owns a business within 250 feet of the Palace,
He agreed with the first two gentlemen's comments, He said
Marty Hershey spoke at the first hearing and represented
he is a third partner in the business. He felt he used
his reputation and personality as ex-Chief of Police to
sway the P&Z into giving the permit, He did not feel it
ever should have been granted. He felt they would have
increasing problems with the Palace if it continues.
Roy Griffith
Griffith owns Aspen Jewelers, He said he has received many
complaints from the tenant about the Palace, they use the
alley for a bathroom, the kids run around on the roof, he
felt there is a lack of supervision. He thinks the kids
should have a place to go. He did not think there are
adequate restrooms for the kids. He felt they should set
an example for the kids.
Margaret Albouey
Albouey has lived in Aspen for a long time and has had two
children grow up here. She has worked for over two years
with different committees and task forces talking over
alternatives for the kids. She felt that facilities that
will be used by kids have to be public and run by a private
enterprise. She felt the previous efforts have failed
because they have not received the necessary support from
the City and community. She felt this is the most urgent
need in Aspen and agreed that they have a right to be in
public and was concerned they have been denied access to
public places.
Terese David
David felt that children are more impOrtant than adults
to her. She did not feel anyone cared anymore about the
children and said if we don't care about them, they won't
care about us when we get old. She felt they'should help
the owner and suggested a coop of parents to help supervise
the operation.
Hunt felt that
Hedstrom noted
and they would
the kids should have a say at the hearing,
that there were kids coming to the hearing
be arriving soon.
'-'
....",
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO., DENVER
-5-
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Aspen Planning and Zoning commission
July 31, 1979
Special Meeting
Bert Bidwell
Howard Fineberg
Bert Bidwell
John Holmbeck
Steve Keinast
Anonymous
Michelle McEwen
Jeff
Carl Weiner
Jeanine Babcock
John Holmbeck
Bidwell said he spoke with Fritz Lindner and Uncle Willy
who could not attend the meeting. They both expressed a
great amount of concern about the Palace and wish that
the P&Z will close it or move it away from the center of
town. They feel it is a bad influence on the community.
Lindner feels the Palace could be a forefront of a numbers
place opening in Aspen in the next two years. He compared
this with the City of Manitou Springs which has many arcades.
Fineberg, owner of the pinball Palace, noted he spoke with
Uncle Willy who had a problem eight months ago with a kid
driving his car in the alley. He spoke with him yesterday
and the day before and Uncle Willy had no objection to the
Palace. Fineberg had a petition signed by local businessmen
that Uncle Willy did not want to sign but said he would not
take any position against the use.
Bidwell said he talked with Uncle Willy twenty minutes ago
and that was not what Uncle Willy told him. Hedstrom asked
that they drop this issue.
A group of about 15 kids entered the meeting. Hedstrom
asked the people who had spoken in the public hearing to
reiterate their complaints for the children. Plumley noted
his problems in the alley, noise and music, etc. Hedstrom
informed the children that not all the comments were negative
but wanted them to know of the complaints on the conduct
of the patrons. Kupchinski said he was bothered by kids
aSking for change, noise and trash. Hedstrom felt the
rest of the comments were similar and asked the applicant
to proceed.
Ashley Anderson, representing the applicant, asked if the
kids could comment on the issue.
Holmbeck works at the Palace, He did not feel the pilferage
was due only to the Palace. He felt if they close the
Palace or move it outside the City, there will be more
problems.
Keinast felt it was a good place to meet friends and did not
think there were all the bad things happening there that
people were hearing. He felt Fineberg ran a "tight ship"
and noted he kicked them out for spitting and swearing, etc.
He felt Fineberg had the operation together and did not
think anyone runs out for change.
McEwen felt they should move to another location and add
a bowling alley and a disco,
Jeff liked the Pinball Palace and felt it is a fun place
to be.
Weiner works at the Palace. He said there are bad kids in
any community and did not think closing down the Palace
will stop these kids.
Babcock said kids like somewhere to "hangout" <lnd if there
wasn't a Palace, they would hangout somewhere else and get
in trouble.
Klar noted that they closed Aspen Mountain because of the
problems and formed a club to monitor the mountain. She
suggested a similar club might help the kids,
Holmbeck said he
than it used to.
minority.
felt the Palace was working much better
He also noted that the bad kids are the
-6-
Special Meeting
Margaret Albouey
Bert Bidwell
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
July 31, 1979
Albouey agreed with one of the kids' comments that they
cannot attribute all the problems downtown to the Palace.
These things have always gone on.
Bidwell guessed last year when this was granted that they
would have juvenile problems. He said he has been in
business on that corner for 27 years and has never experi-
enced these problems until now. He felt they should move
the operation somewhere out of town.
Hedstrom closed the public hearing.
Ashley Anderson felt they were serving a benefit for the
community and the kids. The adults have plenty of places
to go. He objected to adults that do not want kids downtown.
He did not feel the impacts are that great. He noted a
petition signed by property owners in the area. He noted
signatures from Werner Kuster and Wendy Morss who signed
against the Palace last year. He did not feel the complaints
could be directly related to the Palace and its operation.
He felt they have lived up to the conditions set up last
year. The Chief of Police said there have been complaints
but they do not relate them to the Palace in particular.
He felt there were very stringent conditions set up that
no other business in town has to abide by. He felt they
should have to live under the same conditions as other
businesses like the noise ordinances, sign ordinances, etc.
Pardee asked what the hours of operation are and what type
of adult supervision exists, A. Anderson said it is very
difficult to get an adult th<lt w<lnts to supervise this type
of operation. The owner presently supervises. Fineberg
said they had two or three adults in constant supervision.
When these adults left, he hired the kids to help supervise
and feels the kids respond much more to this type of
supervision. They are much more <lware of the problems now
and wish to keep the Palace open. Harvey did not feel it
fair that the management keep an eye on the kids in the
Mall also. W. Anderson did not think the noise is any
worse than the Paragon. He also Objected to all the blame
of trash, etc. being placed on the P<llace. He suggested
three conditions: 1) increase the supervision, 2) put the
rules on the wall and 3) install a restroom. Harvey noted
the public restrooms are across the mall in Wagner Park.
Hunt felt there is a problem with the establishment, He
felt it is extending outside the Palace and felt the kids
should be warned. Hedstrom felt the kids could learn a
sense of responsibility from this. A. Anderson said there
are laws for control of nuisances and felt it unfair to
place extra conditions on this business. Hunt felt they
should be put on notice and if the operation does not follow
their wishes they should be closed down. A. Anderson said
they could not live with that condition.
Fineberg wanted to know on what basis this business should
be treated any differently than any other business. The
laws protect the property owners in case this operation
becomes a nuisance. The original approval gave them a
permit SUbject to a review in one year, He said he would
not have invested in this operation if he knew he would be
tested each year. He could not be gUaranteed that the com-
mission would have the same people next year. . He said he
has felt like a criminal since the beginning and feels it
unfair. It is a clean operation with no problems,
McDonnell felt they should give them full support. She
felt they are discriminating against kids and they should
be made to feel like a part of Aspen. She suggested getting
support from the schools. She felt it should come under the
same guidelines as any other business.
........
.....,
BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO., DENVER
#'!'-',
'....
-7-
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
July 31, 1979
Special Meeting
Herndon Subdivision,
Preliminary Plat,
Public Hearing
Tipple Lodge
Subdivision
Exemption
Don Helmick
Anderson moved to approve the extension of the conditional
use of the Pinball Palace with no further conditions,
Harvey seconded. All in favor with the exception of Hunt,
motion approved.
Grice introduced the item. The property is located at the
west end of Francis Street. There is in excess of 12,000
square feet of level land. The parcel being created will
have at least 6,000 square feet of developable land. The
subdivision is in accordance with the GMP exemption, The
Aspen.Water Department has commented that they willallQw
only one connection of water service to the existing 14"
steel main. Aspen Metro Sanitation has no problem, Rocky
Mountain Natural Gas has no problem. Mountain Bell has
requested that a condition of approval be that all streets
and driveways be dedicated to the use of public utilities.
The Fire Marshal stated that, while the access does not
comply fully with the AMC, it should be adequate in case of
emergency. The Engineering Department has requested clari-
fication regarding several easements and boundaries. The
Planning Office recommends approval subject to the comments
listed in the Planning Office memorandum of July 25, 1979,
Hedstrom opened the public hearing, There were no COmments.
Hedstrom closed the public hearing,
Gideon Kaufman, representing the applicant, said that the
City Engineer was concerned about a possible adverse
possession claim. Kaufman asked that P&Z not condition the
approval upon the resolution of the boundary question,
Hunt moved to approve the Herndon Subdivision Preliminary
Plat and included in the motion are the comments of the
Water Department, City Engineering, if any, further that
any development of the parcel be prior to settling the
dispute of property will be on the basis that setbacks will
be from the fence as opposed to the property line we saw
and excluding item 6&7 of the City Engineer's comments,
McDonnell seconded. All in favor, motion approved.
Grice introduced the application. The proposal is to
condominiumize the Tipple Lodge,. a ten bedroom/bath and
two studio unit complex. The Engineering Department has
no problem with the application. The Planning Office and
City Attorney have had discussions regarding whether or not
condominiumization of a lodge unit turns these units into
dwelling units, a lodge unit intended for short term and
a dwelling unit intended for long term occupancy. Comments
were solicited from the Aspen Skiing Corporation, Aspen
Square Condominiums, the Stonebridge Inn, the Condominium
Managers' Association. The Managers' Association was in
favor of the exemption provided they can be guaranteed it
will remain in the short term market. The City Attorney
concluded there is no realistic legal mechanism to maintain
these units in the short term market, The GMP does not
allow for the construction of any additional short term
units in Aspen outside the Lodge zone. The Stonebridge Inn
said out of 94 units, 3 units have been taken out of the
short term market. Grice said if any of the units are taken
out of that market, they must recommend against condominiumi-
zation.
Hedstrom opened the public hearing.
Helmick, representing Aspen Square Condominium Association,
noted that he did not indicate a pro or con position in his
meetings with Grice. He felt tourist accommodations in
Aspen are an endangered species. He defined a "tourist" as
one who comes to Aspen on vacation, does not own real estate
or pay taxes. He felt they must establish a policy on
-8-
Special Meeting
July 31, 1979
Andy Hecht
Alternate Members
to P&Z Commission
'-
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
condominiumization of lodges because of the potential of
removing these units from the market. If they decide they
wish to allow these condominiumizations, they must decide
where they wish these units to move. He suggested requiring
the purchaser to rent his unit a certain amount of time per
year. He noted the Stonebridge Inn in Snowmass condomini-
umized, the units went from $20,000 to $90,000 and people
lived in the units year round without kitchens.
Hecht, representing Ralph Melville, asked the P&Z to con-
sider what flexibility they want to give lodges to upgrade
their structures. He also warned against removing these
units from the tourist market.
Hedstrom closed the public hearing.
JD Muller, representing the applicant, agreed that they
should establish a policy on these condominiumizations.
There is no present ordinance covering this application.
They are not adding kitchens.
Stock noted there have been many requests for information
on the condominiumization of lodges. The difference
between this application and the other requests is this
application does not include construction of kitchens.
This applicant also claims there is no change in use and
therefore does not need GMP approval. They have talked
about a change in the code which Stock supports. He
recommended a change in the nonconforming status of a lodge
in the O-Office and R-6 districts. Muller offered to
assist in arriving at the necessary policy but noted they
would be exempt anyway. Stock noted that if p&Z and
Council deny this application and the legislation is passed
on the policy, they can then come in for full subdivision
approval.
Hunt recalled a similar application years ago where they
conditioned approval upon an on-site managing office. Stock
said they can enforce the on-site management but cannot
enforce short terming. Hedstrom asked if the Tipple Lodge
presently has a lodge office. Muller said yes, they have
separate phones with their own numbers in each unit.
Hedstrom asked if they consider this application unique and
separate from the necessary policy. He noted they are not
in favor of the general condominiumization of lodges and
questioned if they could act contrary to that attitude.
Grice again noted they cannot find a vehicle to insure these
will stay in the short term market. Pardee felt it is up
to the applicant to attempt to draft language that will
satisfy the P&Z and the City Attorney.
Hunt moved to postpone action and continue the Tipple Lodge
Subdivision to the next regular P&Z meeting, McDonnell
seconded. All in favor, motion approved,
Harvey moved that the p&Z recommend to Council the denial
of the possible appointment of two alternates to the P&Z
as there is no real need, McDonnell seconded. All in favor,
motion approved.
Klar moved to adjourn the meeting, Pardee seconded. All in
favor, motion approved. Meeting adjourned at 8:00 PM.
'-41t/~A--Y1ruJ
Shery ~mmen, Deputy City Clerk
...,./