Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19731106 -- / ' RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM" C.F.HOECKtLB.B.!l L. co. Regular Meeting Aspen Planning & Zoning November 6, 1973 Meeting was called to order by Chairman Jim Adams at 5:10 p.m. with Charles Vidal, Bruce Gillis, Bryan Johnson, and Jack Jenkins. Also present City/County Planner Herb Bartel and Assistant Planner Donna Baer. Bruce Gillis made a motion to correct the minutes of October 23rd, 1973 as fol- lows: Topic - 100' Setback - "It was the general concensus of the Commission that all public and private projects come before the Commission for approval as relates to the 100' stream margin setback", motion seconded by Jenkins. Johnson made a motion to approve the minutes of October 16th and October 23rd as amended, seconded by Gillis. All in favor, motion carried. OLD BUSINESS Schottland Agreement Bartel submitted the signed agreement and stated that the agreement the Planning Office gave Schottland stated that the floor area (52,800 sq.ft.) included employee housing. After a discussion with Schottland, the agreement now submitting makes the change that the employee housing is in addition to the commercial floor area space of 52,800 square feet. Bartel pointed out that the employee housing is still sub- ject to building permit review, but felt that in order to provide the employee housing, must be in addition to the commercial square footage. Bruce Gillis made a motion to approve the change in the agreement, seconded by Johnson. All in favor, motion carried. Special Meeting Bartel requested that the Commission hold a special study session on Tuesday, November 13 to discuss the following: (1) continuation of view preservation program; (2) the amendments to the zoning code. Urban Run-Off Plan Chairman Adams opened the public hearing on the Urban Run~Off Plan. Bartel stated that he had requested Ken Ash, of Wright- McLaughlin, to outline the plan for the Commission. Bartel stated that the purpose of this presentation was to consider adoption of this plan as a guide for subdivi- sion reviews, and would be used as City"' s effort to deal with the pollution of the Roaring Fork River as required by the Federal Water pollution Control Act. Ash discussed the scope of the plan, the contents of the report, and the actual Master Plan for drainage and treat- ment of drainage. Ash pointed out that the plan includes the area within the ASpen city limits and those tributary areas that have flows entering the Roaring Fork through the Aspen area. Report included consideration on vehicular population and detailed description of various sub-basins. Pointed out that the Aspen Metro Plant could best deal with the treat- ment of run-off. Geri Vagneur arrived. Ash gave a brief background of the report and discussed the Master Plan itself. Submitted a map of general areas with tributaries to the Aspen area. -- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves fORM" C.F.HOECKELB.e.llL.CO. Regular Meeting Aspen Planning & Zoning November 6, 1973 Ash pointed out the three major areas for concern in the report: (1) Spar Gulch and up; (2) above Galena street over to Shadow Mountain; (3) West Shadow Mountain and West Aspen. Ash stated that the problems encountered included the flood problem from the Aspen Mountain area - the need to carry it through or around town without mixing it with the urban run-off, the need to collect, transport, and treat urban run-off, and the need to collect, transport and treat residential area run-off. Ash discussed the possibility of detention ponds and debris basins being created, and the possibility of a depressed mall being used to transport the mountain run-off through town and to the river. Discussion of existing storm sewers and their location followed. Recommend that under the mall, a conduit be placed for urban run-off and that it be carried down in- to detention ponds. Recommended for the west end of town that various swails be improved along the roads connected to ponds in the W. Aspen area. Recommended that new developments should take care of their own run-off with private containment systems. Gillis questioned if the Roaring Fork was an A or B stream. Ash stated that the standards were close, but would try to keep it an A stream. Adams questioned why the Aspen Sanitation plant was con- sidered unsatisfactory. Ashe stated that it was sched- uled to be phased out at some future d~te and that the operation of that plant was a trickl~ng filter plant and those systems do not work without a constant load. Bartel stated that the next step would be careful engin- eering studies. Stated that the Planning Office had requested Council budget for developing drainage fee schedule and programs. Stated that the City is not ready for construction at this point, and that the plan was flexible. Ash stated that the recommendations for the depressed mall was extremely important, and they must determine if the malls were to be permanent. Gillis questioned whether they had considered any tempo- rary solutions with the Ski Corps and the Forest Service through planting. Ash stated that planting would not solve the problems and that there was a necessity for detention facilities. Ash pointed out that the alternatives to a depressed mall would be either to grant a conduit under the street, or provide a surface hard-line channel. Gillis questioned what the future plan for the effects of run-off from Red Mountain and Hunter Creek would be. Ash stated that the solution would be similar. -2- ._._.~_.~~,...,.",_.,.,.,._"",.ri"'~",,,,,,,,,^'-"'__' - - RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM" C.F.HOECKELO.B.IlL.CO. Regular Meeting Aspen Planning & Zoning November 6, 1973 Dick Pratt from the Aspen Institute was present and stated that the Board of Trustees had not had time to review the plan, and the Board did not want to take a stand be- cause there were too many qualifications. Institute submitted questions to Ash. Ash stated that most of the questions were final design problems. Stated that Wright-McLaughlin had looked at the most feasible and economic alternatives. Chairman Adams closed the public hearing. Stream Margin Review - Schiffer Residence Ms. Baer explained that the Schiffer Residence was located at 645 Sneaky Lane. Further stated that it was a single family residence on Lot 1 of Snobble Subdivision. Schiffer submitted a map of the area and photographs show- ing the dense cottonwood growth. Ms. BAer stated that the Planning Office felt that the vegetation had not been accurately described and wanted provisions made for a pedestrian easement if applicable. Schiffer pointed out that the proposed residence would be located 7' over the recorded high water mark for Castle Creek. Vidal made a motion to approve the stream margin request, seconded by Johnson with the stipulations that as few trees be removed as possible and the drive be relocated. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #19 REVIEWS - CONCEPTUAL PRESENTATIONS Meat Market Ms. Baer pointed out that the Meat Market would be located in a portion of the old Post Office Annex location, and that the other portion would be occupied by an antique shop. Ms. Baer explained that the Planning Office had no pro- blems with the proposal. Stated that they had received a letter from the Manager of Aspen Square and that they had the required number of parking spaces. Ms. BAer pointed out that the Commission must adhere to the current parking requirements due to the Stroud case. Gillis made a motion to approve the conceptual presentat- ion, preliminary and final sta~es, seconded by Vagneur. All in favor, motion carried. Mrs. Alma Beck - Duplex Ms. Baer pointed out that the proposed site for the duplex was at Smuggler and Third. Stated that this was located in a single-family land use area. Pointed out that the lot (6,000 sq.ft.) was located in R-6, and that now du- plexes in that area must be reviewed by the Commission. Adams stated that he felt the Commmission should not make too many compromises with Ordinance #19, and felt he was not ready. to deviate from single-family dwellings at this point. Mrs. BEck's Attorney pointed out that approximately 50% of the dwellings on that block are duplexes. -3- - " RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM 10 C.F.HOECKELB.B.l!. L. co. Regular Meeting Aspen Planning & Zoning November 6, 1973 Vidal stated that he felt Ordinance #19 did not except the building of duplexes, but just made them subject to review. Jenkins stated he would like to see a Master Plan for the five lots owned by Mrs. Beck. Feel that in that area since there is a mix, should continue the mix of duplexes and single-family dwellings. Chairman Adams stated that he felt the West End was al- ready over-developed. Mrs. Beck pointed out that one of the five lots would re- vert to her brother, 2 lots would be used for a single- family unit, and the other two lots would be used for the duplex on the corner. Stated that she would be living in one side of the duplex and anticipated relatives living on the other side. Dick Kienast was present and stated that the neighbors in that area would like to see the area go back to single- family units. Vidal made a motion to approve on the five lots one du- plex on three lots, a single-family unit, with no fur- ther construction allowed on the duplex lots. Seconded by Gillis. All in favor, with the exception of Chair- man Adams who was opposed. Motion carried. Durant-Galena Building Ms. BAer explained that the proposed building was on the site of the old swimming pool and included 2 lots in the central area. POinted out that there would be 9,000 sq.ft. of floor space and the building would be 28' high. Vidal stated that he would like to see a Master Plan for the entire ~ block rather than just the 2 lots. Further pointed out the flexibility of this site. Ms. Baer stated that the Planning Office felt this should be referred to the City Council for intentions on that site for parking. General concensus of the Commission was for applicant to withdraw his request at this time and meet with the owner of the other lots on that ~ block. Perhaps could come to some agreement for development of the entire ~ block. Applicant withdrew his request. Sherman Hotel Larry Windes and Randy Wedum were present representing the developer. Submitted a letter which: stated their pro- posal. Explained that the proposal included 8 lots of Block 94. Stated the buildings cover 8,121 square feet which leaves 33% open space. Stated that he density had reduced 36.8% from previous proposal. Further stated there would be three buildings, one five story building, a two story building and a three story building. Stated these build- ings would not interfere with the view planes. Windes stated that the devloper wished to buy-out all of his parking requirements. -4- ro' c ..~, RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM 10 C.F.HOECKELB.B.!lL.CO. Regular Meeting Aspen Planning & Zoning November 6, 1973 Vidal stated that he felt the developer could not elimi- nate 100% of the parking, and should provide some. Commission discussed height and massing of the buildings. Felt that they had tried to keep the height on the north side down. Vidal stated that the 1-1 ratio is low for the core area. Chairman Adams stated he would like to see some other alternatives. Windes stated that they planned to handle transportation for guests in lieu of guests bringing their own vehicles. Ms. Baer stated that the Planning Office considerations for this project were: (1) density in terms of people - impact in numbers must be evaluated; (2) transportation plan needs to be evaluated; (3) recommend tabling for further consideration by the Commission Vidal pointed out that the developer had reduced com- mercial space for hotel units and that the floor area ratio proposal was low. Pointed out that this repre- sents a trade-off. Further, subject to validation of AR and density before the Commission could proceed. Geri Vagneur left the meeting. Commission suggest applicant return with better massing plans, which would also designate heights of surround- ing buildings. McClain Stream Margin Request Ms. Baer explained that this was a request to add an additional room of 10' x 15'. Stated the residence was located in Calderwood. Applicant submitted photographs of the site. Johnson made a motion to approve the proposed stream margin request on the condition that if there is a trail on the river plan designated, applicant must donate the easp.ment. Motion seconded by Jenkins. All in favor, motion carried. ORDINANCE #19 AMENDMENT Bartel explained that the amendment included the follow- ing: (1) makes clarification on what is exempted and permitted; (2) allows Planning Office to make deter- minations on remodel-type proposals, with the concurrence of the Commission. Explained that this would be interior remodel only; (3) includes provision for setting density. Bartel pointed out that the amendment would require a public hearing by the City Council, but would like to have a recommendation from the Commission. Johnson made a motion to recommend the in the amendment, seconded by Gillis. carried. changes included All in favor, motion Gillis made a motion to Jenkins. All in favor, at 8:00 p.m. adjourn the meeting, seconded by motion carried. eeting adjourned /,1 ,..""_._.__"0,,,,,,,, r ,.__"_._" _.., ,..,,_. ..,....~..~,.~".'...~.d.