Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20110503 City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes — May 3, 2011 Comments 2 Minutes 2 Conflicts of Interest 2 Aspen Walk — 404 Park Ave and 414 Park Circle — Subdivision, Final PUD, Growth Management for multifamily replacement 2 1 City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes — May 3, 2011 Stan Gibbs called the regular meeting, Tuesday, May 03, 2011 to order at 4:30 at the Library. Commissioners present were Michael Wampler, Cliff Weiss, Bert Myrin, Jim DeFrancia, LJ Erspamer, and Stan Gibbs. Staff in attendance: Jim True, Special Counsel; Jennifer Phelan, Deputy Community Development Director; Sara Adams, Community Development, Reed Patterson, Municipal City Clerk. MINUTES MOTION: LJErspamer moved to approve the minutes of continuation; seconded by Mike Wampler. All in favor, APPROVED. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING: Aspen Walk — 404 Park Ave and 414 Park Circle — Subdivision, Final PUD Growth Management for multifamily replacement Stan Gibbs opened the Aspen Walk continued public hearing. Sara Adams stated that the applicant updated the site plan with 2 options. Staff prepared 2 separate draft resolutions as requested by the Planning & Zoning Commission to separate the final reviews that are under the Commission's authority from the recommendations to City Council. Sara Adams explained condition 6, the landscape plan, which addressed guest parking for the project and does not include on street parking spaces; condition 7 landscape plan LA 1.0 recommended with the condition the applicant work with the Midland Park Association to insure proper shielding between the 2 properties and the different landscape options are included in the packet for this meeting. Adams said overall the Planning Department's recommendation is what they have been saying over the past 4 meetings; they are generally supportive of this project. The livability of the affordable housing units could be increased with meeting conditions 3 and 4 and agree that the design of the project should have more one story elements to better relate to the neighborhood and create a positive pedestrian experience. Stan Gibbs asked a clear understanding that we have a building that has affordable housing in it, multi - family housing; how much affordable housing is going to end up on the site. Sara Adams replied there will be 17.5 FTEs (full time equivalents) on site and 11 affordable housing units on the site. Bert Myrin asked on the landscaping plan was the sidewalk eliminated and there are trees added on LA1.0. Sara Adams replied in both LA1.0 and 1.1 eliminated the rear walkway to minimize the impacts on Midland Park. Bert Myrin asked if 2 City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes — May 3, 2011 the trees were planted on the property line. Sara Adams responded that the trees were supposed to be planted on their property and the Parks Department will review the landscape plan at building permit and provide more comments. LJ Erspamer asked if a traffic study was done with this project. Sara Adams replied there was a traffic study submitted with this initial application maybe 10 to 15 pages long including trip generation and talked about existing conditions. LJ Erspamer said it went into the current traffic conditions and asked when the study was done. Sara Adams replied yes. Stan Clauson replied the study was done in 2007 as part of the initial application. Stan Clauson, Stan Clauson Associates, said he was representing the applicant and introduced Ken O'Brian, architect, and Tom Solomon, applicant representative. Stan Clauson had a power point and the previous power points including the fly over. Stan Clauson said the original application requested floor area of 1.56 or 51,000 square feet of construction and there was a reduction to 46,725 square feet approved by Planning & Zoning 2006. Stan Clauson said the City Council development approval was set at 40,968 so 9,000 square feet has been cut from the project and based on that they are moving forward with Landscape Plan LA1.0 that shows the current plan. Stan Clauson said they have been able to put in a little more landscaping and the outlet for the garage exhaust has been relocated to above the roof so they could vent, fan and outflow in an area on the roof away from any adjacent buildings or open space. Stan Clauson noted the concern for guest parking so each of the modules within the garage has 2 spaces to be dedicated to guest and service vehicle parking. Stan Clauson said the roof deck patio shows the access and is quite a ways away from the Midland Park open space and requested that this roof deck patio space be considered once again as something that can be considered an amenity with no impact on the adjacent properties. Stan Clauson reiterated that the garden level apartments have a lot of glazing and are the same (free - market and affordable units). The applicant has provided a number of street facing entrances intended to provide more of a relationship to the street and the bulk and massing has been broken up. Stan Clauson stated that there were a few conditions that he wanted P &Z to take a look at on page 2 of the second resolution 1. was the elimination of the roof top deck and the roof top deck affords an amenity to the free - market units that will help finance the project; 2. the relocation of the sub -grade garage ventilation was done; 3. as you heard in previous testimony the APCHA board did not believe that adding balconies to the affordable units was a good idea; 4. has been done adding private patios to the partially sub -grade affordable housing units to increase 3 City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes — May 3, 2011 livability; 5. the perceived mass has been broken up by architectural elements; 6. has been done with the 4 guest parking spaces; 7. Landscape plan LA1.0 has been recommended. Stan Clauson reviewed the letter from Midland Park Condominium Association. Tom Solomon reiterated that the partnership that they have with APCHA is a very strong benefit to the community and hoped the project move forward. PUBLIC COMMENTS: 1. Tom Griffiths said that there was an interesting decision to make tonight and this will forever change the nature of the community. Griffiths opposed the roof top deck because of noise and parties that they will have no control over. Midland Park applauded the applicant for moving the ventilation system and agreed with the developer for eliminating the decks for the affordable housing component. They would like to add one condition to the muted lighting in the stairwells and they like the dark skies to see the stars. 2. Jeff Bestic thanked Stan Clauson for addressing some of Midland Park's concerns and said there was a real workable compromise here. Jeff Bestic agreed with Tom Griffiths and still had a problem with the roof top deck. 3. Kathryn Hagan said there were no dogs allowed at Midland Park and what would be their recourse if dogs were allowed and barking. 4. Judy Kolberg said that she realized this was a redesign but if the free - market building could be made into 2 buildings it would cut up the mass. 5. Mary Ellen Sheridan stated she was an owner at Hunter Creek and the buildings being replaced were falling down and having those eyesores replaced would be good. 6. Tom McCabe said he was here for questions. Stan Clauson said that the stairwells would not have any windows and would be solid masses. Jim DeFrancia asked if the roof terrace goes away would the stairwells and the elevator go away. Ken O'Brian responded they will still need a roof access by code so they will need at least 1 stairwell. Cliff Weiss said a stairwell access requires a covered roof but access for work would not require a covered roof. Ken O'Brian replied they could put in a roof cover with a ladder below. Commissioner Comments: 4 City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes — May 3, 2011 Jim DeFrancia strongly endorsed the last comment from the public that this was replacing an eyesore building and because the affordable housing portion that was being built at no cost and the architecture has been well conceived. Jim DeFrancia said he had sympathy with removing the roof top deck; roof top decks were not popular most anywhere; lighting, control of rules on use and there seemed to be some sentiment previously in this body to not include the roof top deck. Jim DeFrancia supported the conditions proposed by the staff with the elimination of 3 (balconies) and 5 (one story element). Michael Wampler wouldn't be opposed to not allow dogs. Jennifer Phelan said there were rules in the City and the HOA should have that decision for dogs or not. Cliff Weiss said that he is still not for the roof top deck; he liked the landscape plan and didn't need any more one story elements. Cliff Weiss said that he still was not comfortable with the parking so he referred to the memo with 17 affordable housing spaces and this was his problem that the City does not want on street parking and there are still 12 spaces allocated to 14 free- market units for people that are not here full time which doesn't make sense to him. Cliff Weiss said it wouldn't take much for the visitors and service people to take up the 4 spaces; this project has to accommodate itself. Cliff Weiss said that he was not thrilled with mass and scale but you have come a long way and design wise it is seemingly less intense. Cliff Weiss said that his last comment was dogs and Centennial allows them and Hunter Creek does not so it is up to HOAs. LJ Erspamer said that we talk about the parking and snow problems and promised not to take away the 12 spaces and there is a parking resolution on this street that is need and the applicant is not doing it but the neighborhood should. LJ Erspamer said if the parking is an issue it is not your fault because the community has not identified it. LJ Erspamer said it is big in mass and scale and this is where we are setting the trap or it is a public private partnership and he didn't know how to make it any different; you have to make this work but seems like a big building up to the sidewalk and looks large in a neighborhood that has things set back a little bit. LJ Erspamer stated the parking thing is an issue for him and doesn't believe in recommending to City Council he believed in memorializing issues and the deck (roof top) is one that is not in character in the neighborhood with noise and fire pit and the ladder with roof cover if memorialized would help. MOTION: Jim DeFrancia moved to make a motion to approve Resolution #8, series of 2011 and is 6 pages in length with the section that delete condition #3 and 5 City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes — May 3, 2011 #5; seconded by Bert Myrin. Roll Call vote: Myrin, no; Weiss, yes; DeFrancia, yes; Erspamer no; Wampler, yes; Gibbs, yes. APPROVED 4 -2 Discussion by the Commissions prior to the vote on Resolution #8: Cliff Weiss said number 6 basically passes the buck and says not to include off street parking and if we are making a recommendation that this move forward to Council then we say the Landscape Plan LA1.0 is inadequate or make a more specific recommendation. Stan Clauson said he understands your concern but there is more parking provided on site and the land use code provides for a certain number of parking spaces per unit; the provision for the way those parking spaces are used is not really provided for and has been up to those Homeowners Associations but there is more parking provided on site with the ratio of units in the neighborhood. Stan Clauson said the HOA will have to deal with these issues. Stan Gibbs asked Cliff if he wanted to make an amendment to the motion. Cliff Weiss wanted to know the logic and on page 2 it stated there were 14 dedicated spaces instead of 12 and he recommended 7 and the other 5 would go to the affordable housing and visitors or service. Cliff Weiss was concerned with 13 spaces and it was code to have 1 per unit. Stan Gibbs asked how he would change that. Cliff Weiss replied instead of 12 undedicated spaces for free - market there would be 7 and the other 5 would be used for visitor, guest, service and some additional affordable housing. MOTION: Jim DeFrancia moved to approve Resolution #009, series 2011 as presented by staff, Bert Myrin seconded. Roll call: Myrin, no; Weiss, yes; DeFrancia, yes; Erspamer, no; Wampler, yes; Gibbs, yes. APPROVED 4 -2. MOTION: Cliff Weiss amended the motion to include instead of 12 free- market parking spaces there would be 7 and the other 5 spaces would be used for visitor, service and affordable housing parking; seconded by Mike Wampler. The vote was 3 -3, NO ACTION. Continued discussion by the Commission: Cliff Weiss suggested the language be more specific; there will be 2 HOAs not 1; affordable housing HOA and a free - market HOA. Cliff Weiss asked what makes you think that there will be any level of cooperation unless we spell it out rules here and that Council approves. Cliff Weiss stated the parking as laid out here specially doesn't work and wanted Council to know #6 doesn't give that guidance. MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to amend the resolution by adding to restudy the allocation of the parking spaces with less to the free market and more to the 6 City Planning & Zoning Meeting — Minutes — May 3, 2011 affordable housing and the free- market landscaping all fits within the Aspen Walk property; no second. Motion dies for lack of second. Bert Myrin said he thought the applicant proposed that the stairwells will not have any windows and will not expose any light to the Midland property and the free - market building will be pulled back along the Midland Park side as in LA1.0 and all fits within the Aspen Walk property. You can see here the mass and scale are so massive that you can't even landscape on the property itself as needed to accommodate that. Cliff Weiss asked where did Bert see property that is not past. Bert Myrin said the property line is right here and this hangs over and this hangs over. Stan Gibbs said when you define planting you define planting as being on the property, the truth is but the canopy overhangs. Bert Myrin said the canopies are hanging over using their neighbor's property. Jim DeFrancia noted it was permissible to have a canopy hang over. Bert Myrin said it was permissible but it was in a way using your neighbor's property. LJ Erspamer stated that recommendations don't fly and he wanted something more firm and wanted to change the wording on #6 to say the Planning & Zoning Commission requires the following during final PUD and Subdivision Review. Sara Adams said it was a recommendation to City Council. Jim DeFrancia replied that P &Z can't require. Adjourned at 7pm. cAs I kie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 7