HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20100803City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes — August 03, 2010
Comments
Minutes
Conflicts of Interest
15 Harbour Lane Residential Design Variances
2
2
2
2
City Planning & Zonine Meeting — Minutes — August 03 2010
Stan Gibbs called the regular meeting of August 03, 2010 in Sister Cities Meeting
Room to order at 4:35pm. Commissioners present were LJ Erspamer, Cliff Weiss,
Jasmine Tygre and Stan Gibbs. Jim DeFrancia arrived at 4:40 pm. Mike
Wampler, Brian Speck and Bert Myrin were excused. Staff in attendance: Jim
True, Special Counsel; Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Community Development
Director; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk.
Comments
LJ Erspamer said in the newspaper he saw that the planning and zoning
commission declined to review the Wienerstube and wanted some clarification.
Jennifer Phelan asked which paper. Erspamer replied the Aspen Times. Jim True
said Bert asked if P &Z wanted the Council to review it and nobody supported it.
Erspamer said once there's litigation it doesn't go through the channels again; it
goes directly to Council. True replied that was correct; the settlement of litigation
was done at Council. Erspamer asked if P &Z had a right to ask Council. True
replied that you can ask them anything you want; the comments were that anybody
could go to Council and speak. Cliff Weiss said the context why Bert didn't get
support was that it was nothing binding and the legal thing took precedent.
Erspamer asked if they could walk into the Council Meeting and make a
representation from P &Z. True answered that you couldn't make a comment that
is the position of the Planning & Zoning Commission Recommended but you
could go into the meeting and say that you were on the commission and this is my
thought about it and that's what came out of the discussion with Bert and talk to
the Council. Erspamer said that as an individual he could go in and discuss
anything.
Minutes
The minutes from July 6` and July 20 were postponed for approval until the next
meeting.
Conflicts of Interest
None stated.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING:
15 Harbour Lane — Residential Design Standards
Stan Gibbs opened the continued public hearing on 15 Harbour Lane — Residential
Design Standards. Jennifer Phelan explained the reason the hearing was continued
was for the residential design standards; the July 6` meeting reviewed the stream
margin and PUD amendment to develop a building envelope for the property
which ends up shifting where the location of the addition would be located. Phelan
2
City Planning & Zoning Meetin¢ — Minutes — August 03, 2010
said the size of the covered porch meets the minimum depth and dimension
required.
Phelan said there were 2 variances being requested, one is building orientation
which requires a building's front facade to be basically parallel to the street and
staff is recommending approval of this design variance with the existing constraint
of the house and the building addition can't be made parallel to the private road or
it would create a really odd shape of the addition. Staff is recommending a
variance from the building orientation requirement so they can build perpendicular
to the existing house.
Phelan said the second variance being requested was for build to lines and this
basically says that on a lot that's less than 15,000 square feet in size, which this lot
is, 60% of the front fagade will be within 5 feet of the minimum front yard setback.
Phelan said again the way the existing house is orientated from a construction
stand point they really don't meet that 60 %. Staff is recommending that this
variance be approved. Phelan said the neighborhood character allows for this
design solution for the house addition.
Cliff Weiss said there was an issue with carport versus garage from the last
meeting. Dona Stuart responded that they did away with the whole thing. Weiss
asked if they were going to see plans. Phelan answered the revised drawings were
in your packets and the full size were displayed showing the addition was shifted
forward towards the street.
Jasmine Tygre said that they were dealing with the residential design standards
today and she wasn't at the previous meeting and asked if she shouldn't participate
in these actions. True said that you can participate. Phelan said the last review
was Stream Margin. Stan Gibbs said that there was a resolution for Stream
Margin.
Dona Stuart, applicant, summarized that they noticed for a PUD Amendment,
Stream Margin Review and Residential Design Standards and based on the Stream
Margin Review they moved the proposed addition back from the river and were
allowed a variation for the height for the 45 degree angle from the stream margin
review. Stuart said that they were allowed a 5 foot setback from the traveled way
which is Harbour Lane so we moved the proposed residential towards the road.
Stuart said they eliminated the garage and carport all together.
3
City Plannine & Zonine Meetine — Minutes — Aueust 03 2010
Erspamer asked if there were any comments from the neighbors. Phelan said that
they haven't received any since the first hearing which were all positive. Stuart
asked her other neighbor (Curt Gregory) across the street about the height and he
said he didn't care.
No public comments.
Dona Stuart said this was directly across the river from the proposed hydroelectric
plant.
Motion: Jim DeFrancia moved to approve Resolution 917, series of 2010,
approving two Residential Design Variances. Specifically Subsection
26.410.040A1 Building orientation and Subsection 26.410.040A.2 Build -to Lines of
the Land Use Code for 15 Harbour Lane based on the design presented and the
recommendations of staff; seconded by Jasmine Tygre. Roll call vote: Weiss, yes;
Tygre, yes; DeFrancia, yes; Erspamer, yes and Gibbs, yes. APPROVED 5 -0.
Discussion prior to vote: Jasmine Tygre said that very often in the past when we
have specific standards that staff has attached P &Z will say because it fulfills the
standards in Exhibit A, which gives you the grounds on which you can grant this
variance. Tygre said that both A & B apply in this case. Stan Gibbs said that B
would apply because of the constraints of the site. Jim DeFrancia said it would be
reflected in the minutes. Gibbs asked in the future could staff put the grounds to
go forward in the resolution. Phelan stated that they can do that in the resolutions
but also if you bring up the review criteria during the public hearing and it's on the
record that's important.
Weiss and DeFrancia commended the applicant for the flexibility. Dona Stuart
said it was nice for long time locals to see what Planning & Zoning was trying to
do but was not possible. Erspamer said it was more than the criteria that P &Z
uses. Tygre said that there were problems with the Residential Design Standards
in certain neighborhoods that don't fit the pattern.
Adjourned at 5:OOpm
�-4
ackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
0