HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.gmc.min.121697 MINUTES
of the Aspen and Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commissions
Special Meeting
Tuesday, December 16, 1997
City Council Meeting Room, City Hall
Aspen, CO
INDIVIDUALS PRESENT:
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commissioners
Sara Crarton
.lasmine Tygre
Roger Hunt
Timothy Mooney ,~,
Robert Blaich
Marta Chaikovska
Steve Buettow
Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commissioners
David Guthrie
Charlie Tarver
Doug Unfug
Peter Martin
Patti Clapper
Steve Whipple
Aspen and Pitkin County Staff
Cindy Houben, Start Clauson, Julie Ann Woods, Lance Clarke, Tamara Pregl,
Bud Eytar
Applicants and~or Representatives Regarding:
Aspen Mountain Master Plan
PRELI34INARY BUSINESS
David Guthrie opened the meeting for discussion and suggested they discuss time
constraint issues. Doug Unfug and Steve Whipple suggested the meeting end at 7:30 pm.
There were no objections.
CONTINUED DISCUSSION
Aspen Mountain Master plan
The City and County Planning and Zoning Commissions met on November 19,
1997 to discuss the Aspen Mountain Master Plan proposal. This continued meeting is
intended to be the last joint meeting for formal referral purposes.
The County's intent is to leave this meeting with some conclusions of the issues
and concerns of the City of Aspen. David suggested that they follow the outline provided
in Cindy Houben's memo in order to facilitate the meeting. Start suggested an addition to
the outline to address staff's comments and conditions with respect to the
recommendation of conceptual approval for the proposed lift changes. He added for
clarification that when those lifts are to be changed there will be a land use application to
the City for those changes.
Snowmalong/£arly Season Opening
An outline for this meeting is contained on page two of Cindy's memo. Although
this is the final joim meeting for referral commems, Cindy invited the City to attend any
of the County Planning and Zoning Commission meetings. There~is imended to be one
more Pitkin County Planning and Zoning Commission meeting on this application, which
is scheduled for January 20, 1998. A dral~ resolution will be created for that meeting,
which will be distributed re the City for review and then forwarded to the BOCC. There
are three meetings scheduled before the BOCC, one in February and two in March.
Sara Garton asked for clarification on Stan's statement that this is a "conceptual"
master plan. Stan explained that this master plan may be considered by the Aspen Skiing
Company as representing conceptual approval for some of the improvements that would
later require a land use application. Cindy added that'master planning Is conceptual in
nature; when the specifics get implemented they require a land use application to work
out the details, Stan further explained that, for example, with the respect to the town lift,
although the Commission may agree that it's a good idea, it will be subject to a detailed
land use application if and when they decide to go forward with it.
Cindy suggested the issues as oudined in the memo are the issues remaining to
discuss at this meeting. At the last meeting/t seemed that the majority of the City
Planning and Zoning Commission were leaning toward not wanting snowmaking on
Aspen Mountain until the Aspen Mountain drainage plan is completed. Cindy felt it was
important to bring back more technical information on a review of what the Skiing
Company has presented in their application. Nick Adeh has reviewed that information
and has included a memorandum in the packet, as well as an e-mail explaining his
comments. Cindy summarized that his preference is to have the drainage plan completed
before any additional snowmaking is al/owed; however, if its found to be appropriate,
there is a certain minimal level of things that have to occur. She enumerated the
additional elements that he felt are necessary to allow for adequate review.
Bud Eylar also reviewed the report fi.om the Skiing Company, as well as the
recently received U.S. Geological Survey Report of the Keno Gulch landslide debris flow
area. Bud's comments were not included in the packet but basically stated that there is
concern that snowmaking may cause additional debris flow in the Keno Gulch area and
that further study is necessary. The County is looldng for a clean statement fi.om the City
of whether or not they would support additional snowmaking on Aspen Mountain; and
whether they would require the drainage plan prior to g/ring their support or agree that
whatever happens would have to comply with that drainage plan.
Charlie suggested that anything approved at conceptual still has to go through the
basic process of getting to detailed. For example, they could not go forward with
snowmaking if the engineering report indicated potential problems. Cindy stated that the
Skiing Company submitted a report that they feel is a satisfactory report to allow the
Commission to make a decision. The City and County Engineers are suggesting that
additional information is needed to make that decision. Ultimately, in a condition of
approval, she's looking for what information is needed to make that technical finding that
it's appropriateto have additional snowmaking.
Doug Unfug suggested utilizing the same philosophical discussion structure as
was used at the last meeting. Sara added that it is philosophical because k will extend the
ski season, which wasn't really discussed at the laat meeting. David asked if there were
any objections to having the philosophical discussion contingent on detailed engineenng
studies. Cindy suggested there are two levels in terms of reviewing snowmaking. One is
the philosophical level of whether or not it should be approved. If the answer is yes, the
next level is that they have to meet all of the technical considerations.
David suggested that a philosophical discussion is not necessary because there is
conflicting engineering. He's looking for an answer from City P&Z Commissioners as to
whether it's a good idea or nor. Stan responded that there is a lack of engineering at this
point, not conflicting engineering. They are requesting to either have the comprehensive
study complete or some further material from the Skiing Company satisfying the
Engineering Department. If either of those conditions are satisfied, it can go forWard
from an engineering standpoint.
Doug questioned whether a drainage plan will get them any closer to knowing
what's going on. He stated that he tends to lean more toward the philosophical because
he's not sure that they'll be able to understand the complexity of What's going on with
either study, Stan responded that Nick feels that additional information can be provided
such that there's a reasonable oppommiry to be satisfied with the technical issues. Sara
asserted that it's important to question technical information. She disagrees with
conditioning the approval of snowraaldng in the master plan contingent only on satisfying
engineenng repons.
Tim Mooney noted that at the last meeting the applicant stated that it was
'~defmitive' that there was no relationship between the Keno slide and snowmelt. He
questioned how, based on the repons, they could give conceptual approval of
snowmaking in a master plan. He suggested it be set aside and that they continue with
other aspects of the master plan until they find out what is definitive.
Bill Kane, representing Aspen Skiing Company, clarified his use of"definitive" at
the last meeting. He explained what his' statements were based on and the context in
which "definitive" was used. His statement was it's definitive that if surface drainage is
introduced below the landslide area, there is no 'causal relationship between the two
activities.
David sated kis thought that there was a general liking of the idea of snowrnaking
at the last meeting. Matra agreed that the extended ski season was discussed and they
generally thought it wasn't a bad idea. Tim thought that they were talking about
snowmaking from the Sundeck to Lin 3 at the last meeting. With the focus of this
discussion being on Keno, he questioned if there are two systems being debated. He
suggested that philosophically talking about enhancing snowmaking fi'om the Sundeck to
Lint 3 so the top of the mountain can open November 1a really doesn't affect the Ruthie's
side. Charlie's understanding was that the water from the upper I/3 of the mountain
drains across the summer ditch and empties offthe western slope toward the Castle Creek
drainage, as opposed to coralng down the front of the mountain. He enumerated the
benefits ofsnowmaking and the impacts on the town. Discussion ensued between
Charlie and Sara regarding the importance of having an engineering report reviewed by
appropriate County and City people prior to giving conceptual approval.
Cindy suggested that they move around the table and allow each Commissioner
the opportunity to state their opinion of snowmaking and its implications (extended
season, water use and water drainage). Tim Mooney stated that there are a number of
factors that play into an early season opening. There are lites that aren't being run now.
He's o.k. with snowmaking. Iasmine stated that she has mixed feelings about it, but not
strong enough to not support it. Roger feels the same as Jasmine, perhaps a little
stronger, but suggested the important factors to consider are the consequences on police
and transportation, in terms of cost. if the season starts earlier. Sara does not have a
problem with extending the season. Bob is in favor of extending the season. The staffing
problems, housing, transportation, etc. are there whenever the season begins. The
economic value to the community would be positive.
Bob also suggested, relative to the water issue, that the studies look at the
maximum amount of snow years verses the minimum amount of snow years. If they
don't exceed the maximum amount they should have historical information in terms of
the runoff problems. His assumption is that the Skiing Company doesn't continue to
make snow on top cfa maximum year. Sara clarified that they do make snow to let the
natural snow hold.
Bill Kane pointed out, in order to help the discussion, that regardless of what the
City and County decide, they have to go through an environmental assessment with the
U.S. Forest Service, He also pointed out in response to comments regarding the affect of
weather on early season opening, that the proposal is above 10,000 feet, and while it's
pretty warm in town, they get pretty cold temperatures early on in October at that level.
They're typically shoofmg for completing snowmaking operations by this time of year.
Ideally, they operate for 200'hours of total snowmaking time. Unlike eastern areas, they
don't do a lot of patching and firing the system back up. They hasically make snow~
establish the base and shut the system down. That would clearly be the case above
10,000 feet.
He agreed that their engineering analysis is nor a complete analysis of what the
groundwater behavior may be and that will be required by the Forest Service. Also, this
is an initial proposal and areas could be eliminated if the conclusion is that the
application of snowmaking on certain trails is, from a groundwater standpoim,
attributary. The proposal is flexible to that extent. Brent Gardner-Smith added that they
are cooperating and working with the consulting finn hired by the City to do the Aspen
Mountain drainage plan..They would like to see it complete and to understand it.
Steve Buettow stated that he has mixed thoughts on the proposal. Making snow
on the top of the mouraain is one thing but early snowmaking on Little Nell is another.
Marta stated that she made her comments last time and has no objection. Stan concluded
that there's consensus that does not oppose earlier seasoning opening, but they would like
to see an expert analysis brought before the County prior to any final decision.
Road Issues
Cindy explained that the issues are the use of Summer Road, Little Annie and
Midnight Mine Road. She identified the issues with the use of those roads in the memo.
She had an earlier memo from Bud Eylar, which supported use of the front side. He has
since met with the Skiing Company and has submitted a new memo, which is included in
the packet. His memo talks about the majority of the equipment necessary to build and
maintain the master plan proposals can be handled on Summer Road, but certain types of
eqmpmem cannot access the mountain by way of Summer Road and will need to use the
Little Annie Road.
Them are concerns with that from a Plarm/ng Department perspective from the
inmgrity of the Rural/Remote zone district. In the memo, Cindy suggested they should
ensure that development is scheduled to avoid the use of Little .annie Road until the
natural snowmelt has occurred on the roadways. Also, they should ensure that it's a safe
time re be running trucks and that the use will not deteriorate the road according to the
County Public Works Department. One of the toughest pans in coming up with a road
agreement is that both sides feel that there's no assurance as to what might happen. The
levels to which the impacts might occur in any given year aren't understood yerl
Cindy suggested that the Skiing Company supply a development plan every two
years, in conjunction with the master p/an, outlining what improvements have to be made
so there could be an assessment of what needs to occur on each road in renns of the level
of traffic. Also, adjoin that with the normal level of maintenance that would take place
on the mountain to provide a little more assurance, She suggested that they don't have
the level of detail at this point to predict the impacts m each area. She added that they are
embarking on the Richmond Hill Management Plan that has a lot to do with what occurs
in the Rural/Remote zone district..any plan. fi.om a road solution perspective, will have
to do w/th what comes out of that plan,
Stan offered a different staff perspective, stating that the potential for an impass
does exist under the circumstances. There is the need to get some heavy equipment up
that cannot be accommodated on Summer Road and the need to do it with/n a season that
will not be accommodated by waiting until snow melts on Little Annie. He suggests
there needs to be some compromise. There are gill studies to do on the entrance to
Summer Road with respect to its actual carrying capacity and the appropriateness of that
road for heavy equipment.
While City staff supports the objectives of Rural/Remote, they can see that there
are times when the nature of the development to occur in a given year may require that
Little Annie Road be opened in advance of natural snowmelt so as to provide a full
construction season. The roads cannot be declared to be absolutely unavailable when
they are the only way to access the full construction season. While they're not suggesting
an early opening of:Little Annie every season, they are suggesting there be a compromise
re target some appropriate years when heaw construction would necessitate the early
opening.
Cindy responded that County staff is adamant that the Rural/Remote zone district
integr/ty be upheld and it is a major premise in Rural/Remote that plowing does not
occur. They do, however, feel that there are ways to design the master plat/and create
development in such a way that plan for that.
Bob Blaieh reiterated the concerns of accessing Summer Road. He suggested
they need to be clear on the condition of that access easement and determine practical
ways to allow development m occur. Steve suggested that the Siding Company build a
new access from the Lift lA side and totally avoid that access to the east of the gondola,
Brent Gardner-Smith pointed out that there are also neighbors there that would be
impacted, Also, the physical constraints to Summer Road aren't necessarily at the
bottom. Steve responded that it's still their property and they can fix their own road.
Sara agreed with Cindy stating they fought too hard for Rural/Remote and added
that there are imaginative ways to build. She suggested the use of the gondola and
helicopters to transpor~ items to the top There are ways to build the improvements
without compromising the very important wilderness area.
Jasmine agreed very strongly with Sara. They are encouraging people to limit
development in Rural/Remote areas and can't turn around and say that it's a
Rural/Remote area until someone wants to build beyond a certain area; there's a real
fairness issue there. She added that they're talking about a number of years of
construction, which is going to create impacts on the town and surrounding areas. The
applicant is well aware that this is going to be a sensitive issue regardless of who the
neighbors are. She added that it's in their best interest to find a construction solution that
will minimize the impacts on the neighbors.
Bob stated that he's heard at previous reviews that the traffic on the back roads is
not all due to Skiing Company development. A lot of the traffic is from building in the
general vicinity. He stated that there should be some consistency. Cindy clafif'~ed that
it's an issue of early season plowing verses use of the road. Use of the road is currently
only allowed aftei' the snow melts. Bud Eylar responded that the kinds of things he
outlined in his memo and anticipated the Siding Company would do for development will
be the same irrespective of who the developer is.
Charlie suggested that it's obvious that there's not one solution to any building
season or any one project. One of the big issues that the Little Armie homeowners and
Rural/Remote have in their favor is that the Skiing Company will ask fi-om rime to time
to plow Little Annie Road, which will in mm make them incredibly good neighbors for
the other years. He added that it is Rural/Remote but the County Road that services AF-
Ski goes through it.
The Skiing Company could wait until the day the road opens and mn trucks every
day, all day long. Or they could request that once every five years they need to ploa( it
early, use it ear/y, and then cut offall their other access to it so the net trips will be less:
The same goes for Para Cunningham, there are times when it works to have traffic there
and it's less impactive. It would behoos;e the Skiing Company to come up with a
construct/on plan. The approval for the Sundeck was there way before Rural/Remote.
While he believes in Rural/Remote, th/s is a ski area and they have to make physical
improvements to a ski area. Sara agreed that the improvements need to occur but again
stated that there are imaginative ways to get it done without that kind of truck traff',c. She
believes that it should occur mostly on the fi-ont,
Mama feels that an occasional compromise, whether nature melts the road or it's
plowed, is necessary. She doesn't believe in being so dgld on a certain topic that you
can't see the exception. Ii'it alleviates Summer Road, then in certain years it has to be
looked at, She doesn't care if nature melts the road or people melt it. Cindy pointed out
that tlxe implications of plowing are what are important in Rural/Remote. Marta stated
that she understands that but this isn't going to be something that happens every single
year and suggests they be a little flexible.
Doug stated that the issue of plowing is that of access to the back-country to
people's private land on the back-side and questioned whether plowing the road twice in
the course often years will really affect the intent of that. Cindy responded that they
don't know yet what will be necessary. Charlie asked if the City's opinion is that k not
all occur on Summer Road. Stan agreed stating that they are in favor of some level of
compromise.
Tim suggested that the question is whether or nor this is the proper land use. Do
they really need to commercialize the top of'the mountain with things they can't even get
up there? Are they compromising eveuone's lifestyle to enhance the commercialization
of the top of the mountain? He's not convinced that it's the right land use there. Summer
Road does have to be improved and he hopes that when it is they have a plan and a
design for it.
Brent commented that they asked to plow Little Annie Road this spring to
facilitate the construction ofthe'Ruthie's lift. It was imperative that they use the road to
remove the old lift from the top of the mountain in a timely fashion. They then had to
bring up the top terminal of the lift. which was a big piece of equipment. He submitted
that the Ruthie's lin bas only benefited the community and improved people's lives and
that it was not a question of commercialization of the mountain or use of the road. He
also pointed out that runmng everything up Summer Road does impact the City of Aspen
and will impact a lot more people than going up the back. In general, they have to adopt
a model to annoy as few people as possible. He added that asking to plow Little Annie
Road isn't a pleasant experience and they will only ask when it's absolutely imperative.
Cindy pointed out that staff supported the Skiing Company's request to plow
Little Annie Road this year. They are nor as inflexible as it might seem in that regard.
They felt that the Ruthie's lin was an existing condition that they couldn't turn their back
on. However, they think the Skiing Company can do a better job in desigmng the
development in such a way that it doesn't preclude a lot of the other goals in this
community in terms ofRurabrRemote. Brenr responded that they did an excellent job
with the Ruthie's lift and isn't sure that they could have done a better job.
Jim Albert, Little Annie homeowner, pointed out that there is a short season and
the Skiing Company has very ambitious plans as Brent s/med. In that situation, the first
thing to do is request to plow Little Annie Road. Brent responded that Jim's statement is
an unfair characterization of what he said and attempted,to clarify his statements. Stan
brought the discussion back to the table and summarized the City comments made during
the discussion.
~ Mile Impact
Cindy discussed the results of the staff analysis of the ¼ mile impact. Bob had
raised the question about who would be affected and what the ratio was. From his point
of view, the analysis was sufficient.
Visible Changes from the City of Aspen
Cindy described other areas that the A,spen Planning and Zoning Commission
may wish to review based on their visibility from Aspen. The Skiing Company stated
that the fuel tanks are to be located underground and are therefore invisible. Most of the
work is done on the fi-out side.
In respect to the terrain changes, Bill explained that they don't have anything
significant in mind in the way of terrain modification or significant vegetation clearing
there. This was part cfa whole conversation about trying to lead to better skier access to
and from the southwest quadrant of the town. They have nothing definitive at this point.
Stan stated that from a staffperspective they don't see anything inherently wrong with
7
this idea. They would ask that the specific plan of the activity be forwarded to them.
One of the reviewing bodies would be the Parks Department.
Cindy discussed the lites that are visible from town pointing out that the City will
be able to see ail of the revtews for the changes for the town lifts. Doug suggested they
discuss the circulation patterns that will result from the new town lift and Shadow
Mountain lit~ and indicated that he'd really like to hear the City's comments on that.
Stan reiterated the staff.recommendation that the town lit~ would have benefits in
increasing pedestrianization, making it more accessible by people accessing the lifts on
foot, and it would encourage small lodge development in the Shadow Mountain area.
Staff feels that in general Aspen Street is able to handle additional traffic for drop-offif
that were to occur. Staff.has expressed some concern about the access point of the
Shadow Mountain lift. They do not believe that Mill Street is capable of accommodating
additional traffic, so the lift terminus needs to be designed in such a way that it does not
encourage automobile drop-off. There needs to be some careful design there. Beyond
that, it's difficuk to comment more absent any specific detailed plans.
Charlie asked if it's possible to have a Shadow Mountain lit~ without the town lift.
Bill explained the options. He stated that without a town lift they would probably rebuild
Lit~ IA in its current aiignment. Charlie clarified his thought that Stan indicated that
there could be no Shadow Mountain lif~ without the town lift. Bill agreed that it would
worsen the situation to have one without the other.
SMer N~tmbers and Lift Capacity
The last thing on the outline is an item that carried over from the Octobe~ 7a~
meeting that was never addressed. Cindy asked how lin capacity was actuaily calculated.
Bill explained that the 4,200 number includes skiers and non-skiers. Anyone who
purchased a 12 ticket is included. He indicated that non-skier numbers would increase
the initial 3,700 number but the increase would be measured in the hundreds, not the
thousands. The 4,200 number is a planned capacity and will not change with this master
There being no further discussion, the meeting was adjourned.