Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19730904 " r RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FOR'" 10 C.F.HOECKELD.B.&L.CD. Regular Meeting Aspen Planning & Zoning September 4, 1973 Chairman Jim Adams called the meeting to order at 5:15 p.m. with Barbara Lewis, Bryan Johnson, and Jack Jenkins. Also present City/County Planner Herb Bartel and Assistant Planners Fred Wooden and Donna Baer. OLD BUSINESS Bartel stated thatithe Transportation Plan was complete and distributed copies to the Commission. Stated that the County Commissioners and the Council also received copies. Commission luncheon was rescheduled for Tuesday, September 11th at 12:00, and Commission should meet at City Hall. PUrpose of the luncheon is to discuss the Transportation Plan. Chairman Adams stated that he felt it would be better not to have an attorney on the proposed Advisory Board. Felt it would be best not to try to satisfy the legal counsel by Planning & Zoning Commission appointments. Commission agreed. Arcade Bldg. - Preliminary & Final Approval Ms. Baer stated that they could find no problems with the water or the fire protection. Chuck Vidal arrived. Ms. Baer stated that the Planning Office was recommending that parking be purchased rather than provided. Further suggested that the Commission develope some new criteria for determining how many parking spaces should be re- quired, such as: (1) use on the site; (2) geographical location of projects. Ms. Baer recommended 300 square feet of shopping space/ space, which would mean 14 spaces for the 4200 square feet. Under existing regulations, only 6 are required. Vidal stated there should be classifications for deter- mining parking spaces. Felt the categories should be somewhat broad. Commission discussed the parking re- quirements and the criteria for determining how many. Wooden stated that research had been done, and that Aspen made their determination entirely by square tootage, which was more lax than most cities. Chairman Adams stated that he would like to see some sort of compromise on the parking. Vidal stated that he felt 1.5 spaces per thousand feet was too lenient. Doesn't know if you could justify the other extreme either. Commission agreed that 6 spaces was too few and that 14 spaces was too many. Further agreed that they would rather see the parking purchased. Felt that they would approve the plan based on 2 spaces per thousand square feet. Ms. Baer stated that the Wright-McLaughlin study, which set up guidelines for adequate water retention, should also be followed. Vidal made a motion to approve the preliminary and final plan under Ordinance #19, contingent on the parking (2/ 1000) and approval by the City Engineer of the water --_.",~-~,.~~~"., , ,... .-""'" RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves fORM" C.F.HOECKELB.a.ftl.CQ. September 4, 1973 R~qul"r Meeting Joint Public Hearing - Crystal Palace - HIstoric Zoning- Carl Bergman - Ordinance #19 Review Aspen Planning & Zoning retention, seconded by Jenkins. All in favor, motion carried. Chairman Adams opened the Joint Public Hearing with the Planning & Zoning Commission and the Historic Preser- vation Committee on the Historic Zoning of the Crystal Palace. The Historic Preservation Committee had a quorum present at the Hearing. Wooden pointed out that this was the first private site they had initiated hearings on. Stated that he would be asking for a directive to draw up a resolution for recommendation to Council. Wooden pointed out the location of the Crystal Palace, and stated that it was built in 1891. Further gave a brief history of the building. Wooden stated that it personifies a type of commercial building built in the downtown area during Aspen's early mining days. Pointed out that it meets the standards and criteria,important historically and architecturally, and is being put to good present day use. David Finholm, Chairman of the Historic Preservation Committee, stated that Florence Glidden had done the necessary research. Finholm submitted a letter Metcalf, owner of the Crystal Palace, requesting historic zoning, which was received by the Historic Preservation Committee. Vidal questioned if some type of preservative had been used for the owl sign. As there was no further discussion, Chairman Adams closed the public hearing. Johnson made a motion to authorize the Resolution recom- mending Historic Zoning for the Crystal Palace, seconded by Lewis. All in favor, motion carried. Carl Bergman was present and stated he was submitting the same plans he submitted to the Commission for the view plane consideration. Ms. Baer stated that the Planning Office was satisfied with the building and felt it would satisfy the view plane. Ms. Baer further recommended that the drainage require- ments be in line with the Wright-McLaughlin Study and satisfy the City Engineer. Commission discussed the parking requirements for the building. Under the old requirements, the old building was required to have 11 spaces and the new building was required to have 14. Bergman pointed out that he has provided for 12 spaces underground. - '.- - ,".,-~.._~,.,-",~~~ -- ,_.=--,--;--............~...,,.,...."'"'~.>'~~,,-...,..~...."",'~"'....~.,.-..~ . "'" 1 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM," C.F.HOECKElB.a.IIl.Co. Regular, Meeting' Aspen Planning & Zoning September 4, 1973 Ms. Baer felt that the new building was for extremely intensive use, and therefore felt that there should be provisions for more parking. Bergman pointed out that there would be no food or clothing sales in the new building. will be for sporting goods, appliances, etc. Did not feel this was too intensive. Vidal stated that he felt 2 parking spaces per 1000 and an additional 3 spaces from the old building should be required unless Bergman could show less intensive use. Ken Hubbard, attorney representing Bergman, stated that they would like a compromise on the parking spaces. Chairman Adams stated that he felt approval was in order conditional that at some future date the Commission could determine the parking requirements. Jenkins stated that he would like to see them use the parking spaces in the basement for storage and buyout their parking. Vidal stated that he felt the price for parking could be negotiable. For approximately $48,000 over a 20-year period with no interest, could buyout parking and use the basement space for storage. Felt Bergman should consider this alternative. Chairman Adams stated that the uses weren't established, and the Commission couldn't make a decision until the uses were approved. Felt Bergman should come back to the Commission with the uses for the preliminary and final review. Jenkins made a motion to approve the preliminary plans on the condition that uses would be supplied and could negotiate the parking requirements, seconded by Vidal. Lewis stated that she would like to have the categories well-defined. Main Motion All in favor, motion carried. Christiania Lodge - Ordinance #19 Review Commission reviewed letter submitted by Steen Gantzel, owner of the Christinia Lodge. Ms. Baer pointed out that the planning Office had re- commended cottage-style structures suitable for the site. Gantzel submitted a counter-proposal, which consisted of two 2-story chalet buildings, each containing 2 units. Gantzel stated that the 2~story chalet would occupy an area approximately 36 feet in depth by 48 feet in width. Structure', would be located on Lots E and F. Ms. Baer stated that the.Planning Office was satisfied with this plan, but could not commit itself to a building in the distant future, which Gantzel had pro- posed. Vidal suggest treating the project like a PUD, and then could give Gantzel the guaranteee if he submits plans, would allow some flexibility. ~"~---"-""",-,,,-~,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,-~-,,,,-,--~,,~,~,--~,,,,~,-~,-""-,,,"~.,-,"'~ . "'" - . RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM" C.F.HOECKELB.B.&L.CO. Regular Meeting Aspen Planning & Zoning September 4, 1973 Chairman Adams pointed out that the Commission had decided that they didn't want lodge expansion in the West End. Lewis and Johnson stated that they agreed with the PUD concept, but felt that a legal opinion from City At- torney Sandra Stuller was necessary. Les Rochueses Kit Mason was present representing the project. Pointed out that they had asked to be treated as if proceeding under Ordinance #19, and the subdivision had been ap- proved. Council tabled the final approval. Did delay project to get Commission approval. Mason explained that the project consisted of 10 units, on 5~ lots, and that 10 parking spaces were to be pro- vided. Would be long-term housing with restrictions against short-term rentals. Leases would be no shorter than 6 months. Ms. Baer pointed out that this was in a mixed-residential area just outside of the core area. Jenkins questioned the density of the project. Vidal stated that he felt density should be addressed on a project-to-project basis at this point. Further stated he felt that one of the purposes of Ordinance #19 was to determine if a reduction in density is valid, and if so, where. Chairman Adams stated that this project fights suburb in sprawl. Further felt that he had a problem as far as selling units to out-of-town buyers. Vidal questioned when someone becomes a resident. Lewis stated that she felt concern with the density of the project. Mason pointed out that from the economic point of view, if you want people to be able to afford the units, you can't cut the density. After further discussion, Johnson suggest that the developer withdraw the request at least for this meeting, and give the Commission time to review the project. As there was no further discussion, Johnson made a motion to continue the meeting to Thursday, September 6, seconded by Lewis. All in favor, motion carried. Meeting ad- journed at 7:40.