Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20180306 Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Regular Meeting March 6, 2018 Chairperson Skippy Mesirow called the meeting to order at 4:35 PM. Commissioners in attendance: Skippy Mesirow, Ryan Walterscheid, Scott Marcoux, James Marcus, Ruth Carver. Absent: Kelly McNicholas Kury, Rally Dupps, Spencer McKnight Staff present: Linda Manning, City Clerk Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Planning Director Jeannine Stickle, Records Manager Sarah Yoon, Historic Preservation Planner Jack Wheeler, Capital Asset Director Jim True, City Attorney COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Mr. Mesirow welcomed the new commissioners and thanked them for applying. He commented that it’s nice to have a full commission back. STAFF COMMENTS Ms. Phelan commented that we will need to continue the public hearing on rezoning. Ms. Manning introduced Jeannine Stickle, the new Records Manager for the City of Aspen, who will be taking minutes for the Planning and Zoning Commission going forward. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Walterscheid motions to approve the minutes February 20, 2018. Mr. Mesirow seconds, approves. Mr. True commented that the commissioners need three to adopt the minutes. New members can vote to adopt the minutes. Mr. Walterscheid asks if one of the new commissioners would vote to adopt the minutes. Mr. Marcoux votes to adopt the minutes. All approved. Motion carried. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST None. PUBLIC HEARINGS Ms. Phelan introduced herself to the commission and introduces Sarah Yoon, Historical Preservation Planner. She states that we need to continue the 465 and 557 North Mill Street Rezoning - Public Hearing - to the 4/3/2018 meeting. Mr. Walterscheid motioned to continue to the Mill Street rezoning to the third. Mr. Mesirow seconded. All in favor. Motion carried. OTHER BUSINESS Pedestrian Mall Update (no packet material, presentation only) Mike Albert from Design Workshop introduced himself and his colleague Darla Calloway. He gave the background on the pedestrian mall project for the benefit of the new commissioners. They recapped the topics of their previous two meetings with the Planning and Zoning Commission. Tonight, we will present the refined conceptual design along with a series of framework strategies. We request that Planning and Zoning make a recommendation to move the project forward to the next phase of design, and they would welcome any comments you have. Previous feedback from Planning and Zoning was around: the information kiosk, the water level and edge condition of the Kai Davis Fountain, opening up the park’s edge at the Wagner node, an idea for a misting fountain and a notion to create a new activity node within the mall. We talked about intersections. There were a couple of topics outside of the project’s scope that revolved around public art and food and vendor carts. There were some things on which additional studies or information was needed, including the trees, bricks, Sister Cities Node, outdoor dining, the future of an outdoor fire feature, and questions around phasing and budgets. Ms. Calloway stated that Design Workshop is approaching this project through the lens of historic preservation through three categories: chronology, principals and guidance, and early visioning. Ms. Calloway gave a history of the construction of the mall. She stated that they think about the mall in sections: the urban park, the urban plaza, and the nodes. The bricks are a big part of what give these areas a unifying character. Problems with infrastructure regarding water mains and electrical services is the main reason this project became a priority. Reconstructing right down the center of the mall would have a significant impact on the trees. Instead, our plan is to push the utilities as close to the buildings as possible making a loop around the mall and the trees. Sewer, gas, cable, and primary electric services are still under review from the individual utility owners and will be discussed at a future meeting. Regarding storm water, we are looking for strategies that take water that hits the mall and moves it through the soil system below. These systems would not impact the historic character of the mall. In our last conversation, we talked a lot about the bricks. We don’t have enough of the original bricks to do the project with those again. The current bricks are also unable to meet today’s ADA code. We will salvage as many bricks as we can that meet the ADA standards and can be used in non-ADA areas and custom bricks are going to be developed. As much as possible the new bricks will match the color, texture, and patterns of the original bricks. We were directed by council to make as much of mall as accessible as possible. Initial studies suggest that we can get the majority of the mall’s cross slopes to be ADA accessible, there are a couple of areas that have existing constraints that will make it difficult to achieve. Emergency access. Today emergency vehicles move through on the southern section of Hyman and Cooper and move through the center of the mall on Mill and Galena and we’re going to maintain those points of access going forward. A conversation we’re going to be having with Council at the next meeting is what is the criteria for design regarding security. We would love your thoughts on what’s right for Aspen on that topic. Mr. Albert stated that the plans today have been driven by the historical analysis and technical data. The third pillar that’s just as important has been engaging our community. A stakeholder engagement started sixteen months ago. Our takeaway was three items. One is that people do understand and believe that we need to improve infrastructures including the utilities, ADA, potential areas of snow melt, and bike storage. The second was keep it similar to what it is today. The third is encourage vitality. That brought us to conceptual design alternatives. Three plans were presented. The first, was entitled “Stay the Course,” which was most closely aligned with today. The second started to tweak a couple of areas and try to find ways of creating activity in these areas. The third took that a little bit further and began to rethink the edge of Mill street and the park. The Historic Preservation Commission, Planning and Zoning, and the community all weighed in. There were several key takeaways. The first was maintain historical and character. The second was to realign or simplify the edge of Wagner park. Integrating a fountain at Sister Cities, building in flexibility for outdoor dining. Connect to Durant with a plaza-like setting. Narrowing the intersection crossings. Removing and going through a process of editing to better organize and remove clutter. Increase bike storage and relocate it off the mall. Snowmelt was seen as acceptable but in very limited areas and connected to improving accessibility. There are a few areas where we didn’t have consensus. One was the right configuration of outdoor dining. The replacement of crabapple trees with non-fruit bearing trees. The third is the idea for a community table and water feature over by the Independence node. The fourth was public art. That one is a policy-based aspect. We can identify locations for it but the selection and the details is a different topic. That brings us to the refined conceptual plan. We have spent our last month after the last meeting with the Historic Preservation Commission coming up with a plan that balances everyone’s ideas and desires. There are three strategies we are trying to achieve in this master plan. The first is retain the design as closely as possible. The second is, improving the pedestrian connection to Rubey Park and the base of the mountain. The third is strengthening the edge along Wagner Park. In the Hyman and Cooper area, we want to preserve the historical feature. We need to level out the paving in several areas to get to 2% cross slope. It is believed that we can take the side pitches and lift them up to 2% and it will not be detrimental to the trees. Also, we need to reinforce the historical tree intent. The designers were hoping to achieve a mixed informal forest with a few outliers. Because the utilities are going to be located on the perimeter of the mall’s edge, those trees would be removed and the middle ones would be preserved. As they do not meet historical intent, they would not be replaced. We would repair and preserve the memorial benches. The plan is to remove, refurbish, and replace in same location. The Kai Davis fountain is as relevant and important as the dancing fountain from a historical perspective. The change from two lanes to one gives us the opportunity to expand the curb, moving it out five feet. This would allow people to walk around it and congregate around it. The main essence of fountain and the sculpture would remain. Onto outdoor dining. The mall is successful because of its messy vitality, especially from the outdoor dining part of it. There are two camps: the businesses depend upon that space to improve their bottom dollar, especially during the off season. Many feel that the middle of the mall has been compromised and it’s no longer a pedestrian thoroughfare. We want to better configure the outdoor dining without reducing or expanding it. We spoke about three options for the dining. One was: keep it as is, a mixture of locations. The second option was: let’s just consolidate all of that chaos in the middle of the mall and leave the sides. The third received the most votes from the various groups. Pedestrian circulation down the middle would be restored through the middle of the mall. The majority of the dining would be located along the northern side. Instead of occupying 15 feet in the middle, the single rowed dining options would allow pedestrians to walk in front of the store fronts. Restaurants on the Southern side would be allowed a 1/3 section of the middle to be occupied with tables and chairs. This is not a new idea to outdoor dining, it would be similar to Lincoln Road in Miami or European examples that align tables and chairs along the storefronts. Moving to strategy two: reinforcing the connection to Durant and Mill Street. When we presented various options, people gravitated towards extending a more hardscape plaza connection between the mall and down to Durant street. When they come across Durant street, people would be greeted by a bosque, a bike & ski storage area, and spruce trees that would remain. Along the Eastern edge, additional street trees would be planted. The existing curb would stay in place. The four spots, two handicap and two city, would be relocated to the other side of Durant Street. Mr. Mesirow asked if there would be any change to the sidewalk on the Belly Up side. Mr. Albert said we could make a change, but there would be an issue with the Belly Up bus parking. Moving it in front of someone else’s business didn’t seem right. Mr. Walterscheid asked if this was raising the paved area within the street right away. Mr. Albert answered that it is not, there would still be a curb especially on the Rubey Park side. When we move to the opposite end, we talk about narrowing Galena and Cooper, from a two way to a one way. It would be a concrete intersection similar to Gondola plaza. We’re really trying to build consistency at intersections so that pedestrians and drivers know what to do. The kiosk would be rebuilt in the same location. The brick patterns and paving will be maintained. At every intersection, one parking space will be removed for bike parking, waste receptacles, ski racks, etc. There are many issues with the existing fire pit. This is the area that police and emergency personnel get called to the most. People come out of the bars and gather there, then it ends up in a brawl. Also, it generates lots of complaints from land owners and the Independence building. Third, Aspen is an environmentally-focused town and should not be burning fossil fuels. The plan does remove the fire pit. When looking back through historical drawings, there was an idea for a water feature in this node. Instead of the fire pit location, the water feature would go into grove of crab apple trees. The space will remain similar to today. It would include flexible tables and chairs, a place where Ducky Derby can set up their inflatable, concerts, all of those flexible uses. It would be a new gathering point that we’re calling the Community Water Table. It is a new water feature and a new place to get away in the mall. The water can be turned off and the space can continue to be used. Mr. Marcoux asked if the water will be recirculated. Mr. Albert replied that it will. From an environmental perspective, not all water features are created equal. Still pools and even the dancing fountain, there is so much activity that the water evaporates. Strengthening the edge within Wagner Park: There is an overwhelming sense that people believe that is our central park, but there are currently lots of obstacles in front of it. We want to create a connection. Additional toilets would be beneficial for the number of special events that happen there. We would like to open the view from the park across Sister Cities Plaza so that you could start to see Wager Park all along Cooper avenue. We would add removable tables and chairs and bring new action through the existing water feature. We would add recessed spray nozzles that would mist and could be turned off. The entire area would be uninterrupted during events. People could set up tents and occupy that space. The restroom building would be relocated to the south and shade trees would be added to frame view. This would add a new edge to the park. Moving to the north, people have asked to disperse activity and increase vitality. The Community Water Table, misting fountain, and enlargement of the playground would disperse the programming. The nature-inspired playground would be increased by 25% and would eat into existing location of restrooms. There would be a shade structure along the northern edge for parents and people to gather underneath. The outdoor dining on the eastern side would be maintained relatively in its same location and configuration. Similar options for outdoor dining. These are not restaurants today, but in the future could be accommodated. A new restroom building could be occupied on the Southern end of this. The bathroom relocation would be 100 feed door to door. We would double capacity of the stalls. One final thing: restoring the deciduous trees. Historically, all of Mill Street was envisioned as monoculture plantings, not the mixture that happens on the East/West side. Some of the ash trees have been replaced with a wide variety of species and the monoculture idea has been lost. The idea is to reestablish the same species planting which was originally intended. Trees that do not need to be removed from the infrastructure would remain and we would fill in between those. Mr. Mesirow asked if there was any further determination made on playground area and which sort of aesthetic we’re going with. Mr. Albert said not really. There were three ideas: a nature inspired playground, an adventure playground, and an imagination playground that is a create your own with plug and play. The plug and play and nature ideas rose to the top. That will be further explored. Mr. Walterscheid excused himself and left the meeting. Ms. Calloway brought the topic back to the trees. Tree preservation is one of the highest priorities of how we’re going to organize infrastructure on the mall. Some trees are at risk going forward because of the infrastructure movement. The replacement will be as a grove, not just a tree here and there. The proposed trees on the mall would bring consistency to Mill Street that has been lost over time. We are looking to replace the crab apple trees with a non fruit-bearing species with the same base shape. The plan is to grow trees in advance so they have mature trees to be put back into the mall. Elements that have been added over time would not be put back into the mall. These include the fire pit, concrete planters, planter pots, the circular bench around sister cities, and some stationary seating that’s around the playground. In terms of site furnishings, people are concerned that bikes are everywhere and are being chained to trees. Bike storage will not be accommodated in the mall footprint but are in those parking spaces that Mr. Albert mentioned before. We’re looking to double capacity there. The memorial benches will be refurbished and put back, but there will be no more stationary seating. We will use flexible tables and chairs. The waste and recycling will be maintained in the same quality and locations. The planter pots won’t be done the same way. We will concentrate hanging baskets on the lamp posts. In thinking about lighting, the feedback we’ve heard is no extra lighting on the mall. The current lighting is a big contributing factor to character and feel. We will maintain the light posts in their current locations. We will paint and retrofit them with additional outlets. We will use LED fixtures and improve the quality of light, but not the quantity. Mr. Mesirow asked if the color and temperature will be the same. Ms. Calloway responded that the lighting will be a warm LED. We have also heard requests to get rid of the mix of colors and unify a warm tone across the mall. Ms. Calloway stated that, when the mall was originally constructed, there were a series of low level bollards that were on Hyman and Cooper. They were constructed of wood and were removed sometime in the ‘90’s. Should those be brought back in? They would be made of a different material that could stand the test of time. Mr. Mesirow asked if they had light elements on the top of them. Ms. Calloway said yes. They were t-shaped. Mr. Albert stated that light would cast down on all 4 sides of the bollards. They were right along rolled curbs. Ms. Calloway stated that their lighting analysis said that the mall could benefit from more light, but that has not been our community’s values. Last, signage. When the mall was originally constructed, there were street vents that told you what street you were on. That would be brought back into the existing light posts. The information kiosk and information panel would be rebuilt. Moving ahead, there are a couple of topics to focus on based on last conversation. Confirmation that the lighting and signing strategy, the approach to Sister Cities Plaza, and the tree succession strategy are moving in a good direction. And then we want to make you aware of the multiple phases of design should this project go forward. We would be coming back to you with very specific details of how we treat them. We talked about architectural features on the mall. That would be going out to a public RFP process. Construction phasing and cost edging, we know that that is an integral part to this discussion. With that, we’re going to open up for questions. Mr. Marcoux stated that his biggest concern is construction around the mall with other buildings. He asked if there will there be a halt to all other construction during the mall construction. He asked how we will know what other permits are submitted at the same time as the mall. Ms. Calloway answered that that’s a big part of why this project is happening now, because we know there’s redevelopment planned on the mall, and the two have to be working together. Mr. Marcoux stated that, if one construction project of the other is delayed, it could have a big impact. Ms. Calloway responded that, thinking of construction and sequencing down the road, we’re going to have some choices to make. We know it’s an expensive and multi-season project. There are going to be some approaches for how to do this. We’re going to come back with options so we can decide as a community what the right approach. Jack Wheeler commented from the audience. He introduced himself as the Capitol Asset Director. As we go forward, one of the opportunities we’re trying to capitalize on to lessen the impact of the construction on the community. If there is development happening on a building on the mall, it would be a great opportunity for us to come in and do that part of the mall. I don’t know what the phasing is going to look like, but we want to partner as much as we can with the developments that are already going on. Ms. Carver commented that she thinks it looks very nice. Design Workshop has done a good job. I would like to see you do something about the sidewalk in front of Belly Up because it is heavily used and not wide enough. Maybe RFTA doesn’t need that much turnaround space. If you can’t plant trees, maybe make the sidewalk interesting, because it’s very unattractive. We need to get rid of the fire pit because it causes trouble. It’s not just people coming out of the bars at night, there are lots of homeless people who hang out there. If there’s a fire, make it high like an Olympic torch. Get rid of crab apple trees as much as possible. The bear issues are terrible. They are attracted by the crab apple trees and the restaurants. Mr. Marcoux asked about the impact of limiting snowmelt on the mall regarding repairs. The snow and ice will get in the patio and could cause cracks. If we have snowmelt, maybe that would prolong any repair and save money for the City of Aspen. Mr. Albert stated that it’s a balance of maintenance costs versus energy costs. Mr. Marcoux asked if we can use solar somewhere in this project, maybe for lighting. Mr. Albert replied that they have talked about that. What is being discussed regarding snowmelt is a five-foot band directly in front of businesses. Mr. Marcoux suggested a lane going down each side for maintenance. As time progresses, the part under the snow could look older than the snow melt. Mr. Mesirow proposed that business owners to have a six-foot awning, as long as it’s in continuity with HPC guidelines. Mr. Albert said that we can look into that. Some of the awnings are already on the south side currently. We have to be careful on the south side because of emergency access because we need to maintain a 20-foot width. The building to building special relationship is critical, if you alter that it might be compromised. That is the potential problem. Ms. Phelan commented that you have to look at historically, how awnings were traditionally used. Mr. Mesirow asked for more information about the complaints about the fire pit. He acknowledged that Belly Up being there is a part of the problem, but people will be there anyway because it’s a nice seated environment. Is this about the homeless individuals? Mr. Albert mentioned complaints from the neighboring home owners and Independence Square. I am concerned about a couple of wealthy homeowners kicking out the most needy amongst us. Mr. Albert replied that it is being approached from a lot of different angles. Ms. Calloway commented that she did an emergency access walk with police and fire. They have requested that the fire pit is removed or managed in a different way. The thing about security on the mall is that it’s flexible. But fire keeps coming back. We could do it in a flexible way that could be used as part of special events on a seasonal basis. Mr. Marcoux asked about the possibility of installing cameras around the fire pit. Mrs. Calloway replied that she doesn’t think so. Mr. Marcoux mentioned that if we had cameras, people might be on better behavior because they they’re on camera. Mr. Wheeler commented that City Council and the current Police Chief are not excited about the fire ring that’s there. They have been vocal about us not burning fossil fuels. The problem isn’t the Belly Up. It doesn’t matter where it is. The fire pit attracts people because it’s cold eight months of the year. If it attracts a group after 10:00 or midnight, people get sketchy sometimes. Mr. Mesirow commented that it’s a public space, not a space for the three adjacent home owners. Mr. Wheeler commented that he has heard from a lot of who like the fire. Burning fossil fuels is the main issue, given who we are as a community. A portable fire ring that they can bring out might be a good idea. It could burn wood, beetle kill or whatever would be much cleaner and more sustainable than fossil fuels. Mr. Marcus asked about the minimum threshold for what needs to be ADA accessible. Ms. Calloway answered that the focus is on access to buildings. The threshold is: have you provided access to every experience in a public space? Mr. Marcus asked if we need to make the entire mall be ADA accessible, or if it can just be the spaces where people access the buildings. Ms. Calloway replied that that is one approach but not the one being given by Council. Their approach is to make as much of the mall as accessible as possible. Mr. Wheeler stated that if it’s a walk around surface, it should be ADA compliant. If we’re going to re- develop the entire surface, shouldn’t we make it accessible? Council is having that conversation with us. I think it can be done and not lose the feel or the historic integrity of the mall. Mr. Marcus commented that, as far as the access, he appreciates the way the plan opens up the area that goes towards the park and removed the bathrooms. The connection to Durant street is a huge improvement. Full disclosure, my family owns the Belly Up building. Obviously, I have a vested interest in that area specifically. Ms. Carver was on point that that’s a highly trafficked area and crappy sidewalk. There is a lot of action in that area. Equipment is moved in and out of that area on a daily basis. Anything on both ends that you can do to create the connection to the mountain on that side would be good. That is the focal point of our town. Ms. Carver commented that she wasn’t clear if Design Workshop was suggesting heated sidewalks. I believe that is a huge waste of money and energy. If you’re thinking about safety, it’s the ice, streets, and curbs where the problems are. Mr. Mesirow asked if there are any other questions. In terms of feedback, they’re looking for specific areas. Mr. Marcoux stated that a lot of questions he had were answered. I loved the mono tree species. Mr. Mesirow asked if the commissioners all agreed with that. I would tend to agree with that. Mr. Marcus agreed. Mr. Marcoux stated that he doesn’t know how RFTA would look at Rubey park. Has RFTA given their opinion on this matter? Ms. Calloway responded that they are not changing how busses move through. We are maintaining all of circulation and the radius. Mr. Marcus stated that he likes how the plan expands the playground area. That area creates a lot of activity and a lot of parents congregate along that area. Mr. Marcoux asked if they looked at winter features that would keep people in town past 5:00 when looking into the models of Miami and Paris. It’s nice to keep people in the mall rather than have them retreat into galleries and pizza restaurants. Did you do research on European mountain towns? Mr. Albert stated that they have worked with sixteen consultants on this project. One is Project for Public Spaces. That firm was built after William White who studied successful public spaces in urban conditions. Some of their recommendations were around creating an enclosed space that could be used for events like winter farmers markets. They would be pretty detrimental to the mall and core. Mr. Marcoux agreed that they would be too large. Mr. Albert stated that the goal is to provide the canvas for future things. A portable fire pit, lawn games, we are creating a space for things like that to be constructed. Mr. Marcoux stated that with the amount of money going into it, restaurants shouldn’t be able to bolt into the ground. No business should be able to have temporary mounts. Mr. Mesirow stated that the most critical thing going forward is to keep the current location of the fire pit as an active space for the community. Regarding security, 2018 profiles are different than they were. We haven’t had any security incidents yet, but building security in is a good idea. It should be invisible, don’t change the look or feel. Perhaps we could put in the bollards that had been previously removed as they were part of the historic intent and we could use those as a security feature. Mr. Albert stated that there are different ways of tackling security. There are permanent features like the bollards, additional personnel, additional cameras, which would not prevent something that happened in Spain. Bollards are just one tool. Mr. Mesirow wondered if this is just a matter of law enforcement. In the case of a vehicular-based attack like in Spain, you can’t have a permanent feature because emergency vehicles have to get through. Mr. Wheeler stated that the council said they don’t want bollards. We’re going to be very thoughtful about it. This plan is going to be in front of you at every step of the way. Mr. Mesirow asked if there were any other thoughts on security issues. Outdoor dining? I would stress strongly that policy may be for a subsequent policy discussion, but I think it’s critical from an infrastructure standpoint to make sure that we’re not curtailing that conversation later by not having adequate infrastructure. Mr. Albert said that the universal feedback is to build in flexibility. This is a 50-year plan. Mr. Mesirow asked if there was anything that the commissioners missed that Mr. Albert and Ms. Calloway particularly wanted feedback on. Darla stated that the commissioners had concerns about the tree succession strategy. Are we on track? Mr. Marcoux stated that he likes the idea of growing them offsite and bringing them in mature. Mr. Albert clarified that by “mature trees,” they don’t mean they’re going to be the size that they are now. Mr. Wheeler thanked the new members for joining the commission. Ms. Calloway stated that the new commissioners could look on their website if they are interested in more background and to see the three alternatives. In general, are you supportive of moving forward? Mr. Mesirow said that they are. The direction we’re going is great. I just want to officially end the meeting. I would like to thank the new commissioners. Great first meeting. Mr. Mesirow motioned to adjourn the meeting. Ms. Carver seconded at 6:15 PM. Jeannine Stickle, Records Manager