Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20150519Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 19, 2015 Ryan Walterscheid, Chair, called the Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) meeting to order at 4:30 PM with members, Stan Gibbs, Jasmine Tygre, Keith Goode, Brian McNellis, Skippy Mesirow and Jesse Morris. Also present from City staff; Debbie Quinn, Chris Bendon, Jessica Garrow, and Becky Levy. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Ms. Tygre referred to a recent article in the paper which reported high occupancy rates for the winter season. She asked Staff if it would be possible to obtain the details of the report. Ms. Garrow thought Mr. Bill Tomcich may be able to provide the report. She stated she will look into it. STAFF COMMENTS: There were no comments. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments. MINUTES March 17, 2015 Minutes – Ms. Tygre moved to approve the minutes, seconded by Mr. Mesirow. All in favor, motion carried. April 7, 2015 Minutes – Mr. Goode moved to approve the minutes with the modification requested. The motion was seconded. All in favor, motion carried. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST Mr. McNellis stated he would need to recuse himself from the 200 S. Aspen St public hearing. Mr. Walterscheid stated he would have to recuse himself from the 200 S. Aspen St public hearing. 200 S Aspen St, Hotel Lenado, Planned Development – Continued from 4/7/2015 Mr. Goode opened the hearing for the 200 S Aspen St public hearing. The applicant is working on revisions to the proposal and was not ready to present to P&Z. Staff recommended tabling the application until the applicant is ready to present. Ms. Tygre motioned to table the application, seconded by Mr. Gibbs. All in favor, motion carried. Mr. Goode closed the hearing. Page 1 Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 19, 2015 Other Business – Code Amendment Discussion Ms. Garrow informed P&Z there is no set timeframe yet for the potential code amendments to be in front of City Council. In preparation, Staff is gathering feedback regarding the items being discussed at tonight’s meeting. Elevators in Commercial / Mixed-Use Buildings Ms. Garrow stated there are two possible additions regarding elevators in commercial buildings. a) Add a requirement for elevators to provide access to all floors in a commercial or mixed-use building. Currently, there are no requirements. b) Add a requirement for separate elevators for residential and commercial uses. Mr. Bendon noted the Gap building as an example of item a). The elevator does not serve all units on all floors. Mr. Walterscheid commented the elevator in the Gap building does reach the basement, but the tenant modified the basement space which eliminated access to the elevator for the ground floor commercial tenants using the basement for storage. Mr. Walterscheid agrees there should be access provided to the trash, recycle and utility areas for commercial tenants. Mr. Bendon stated Staff would prefer to avoid situations requiring retrofits to address ADA requirements or changes in use for a building. Ms. Tygre noted there are existing buildings without elevators. Mr. Walterscheid agrees with the intent of the change requested. Mr. Goode feels requiring multiple elevators may require significant space and cost. The commission generally agrees with the requirement of elevators to ensure access, but questioned the requirement of physically separate elevators for residential and commercial uses. Certificates of Affordable Housing Ms. Garrow reviewed the six proposed modifications as listed below. 1) Public Sector Limits Staff is proposing to codify Council’s previously provided direction that no public sector or non-profit entity may use the program. Mr. Walterscheid asked about the exclusion of non-profits. Mr. Bendon stated the idea was to not allow entities who utilize public dollars, especially local public dollars, to utilize the program. P&Z felt the change sounded reasonable. 2) Dormitory Units Staff is recommending dormitory units not be eligible for credits. They want to avoid people creating dormitory units for credits. Page 2 Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 19, 2015 Ms. Tygre and Mr. McNellis felt this was acceptable because dormitory units do not satisfy the long term needs of the housing program. Mr. Mesirow would like to see if the units could somehow be included. 3) Fractional Credits Staff is recommending codifying the ability to provide credit for any overage created as units are built to satisfy a requirement. Staff believes this may encourage owners to build more units onsite. Mr. Goode asked how the City deals with past situations when owners had an overage they were not compensated for at the time. Mr. Bendon replied the change would only impact applications moving forward from the date approved. P&Z supports the proposed change. 4) Sales Limitations Staff is proposing only for sale units be allowed for housing credits. Mr. Goode would like further investigation to determine if rentals could possibly be included. 5) Category Limitations Ms. Garrow stated the Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) identified the need for lower category units at this time. Staff recommends limiting the credit program to units defined as category 4 or lower. Ms. Tygre agrees with the recommendation. Mr. Walterscheid feels there may be unintended consequences. Mr. Mesirow stated a recent study conducted by the Next Generation Advisory Commission found there was a shortage of higher category units. Mr. Morris stated he understands Mr. Mesirow’s concerns but wants additional information to confirm the need. P&Z supports the proposed change but feels additional information may be helpful to confirm the exact need. 6) Location Limitations P&Z feels it is best to limit the locations to the City of Aspen only at this time to limit sprawl. At some point in the future, it may be necessary to consider the Urban Growth Boundary. Mr. Walterscheid asked staff if any discussions with the county has occurred. Mr. Bendon replied at this time no, but they would welcome a discussion. Timeshare Code Amendment Ms. Garrow reviewed the proposed code changes. Page 3 Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 19, 2015 Mr. Gibbs added that allowing houses to timeshare may encourage higher occupancy which he supports. Mr. Mesirow added he would support changes to allow higher occupancy as well. CC / C-1 Clarifications Ms. Levy provided the background regarding the impacts to free market residential units located in CC and C-1 zone districts with the enactment of Ordinance 25, series 2012. Permitted uses on the fourth floor are not addressed in the code, despite the existence of several buildings with four floors above ground level in both districts. The City has received requests from owners of the fourth floor units who wish to upgrade or expand their units. The current code allows the units to continue to exist, but consider them units of non-conforming use and therefore subject to the non-conforming portion of the code. The owners of the units experience difficulties obtaining financing and building permits based on the non-conforming status. Staff is proposing to amend the code to clarify the free market residential units established prior to Ordinance 25, series 2012 continue in CC and C-1 as conforming as long as they do not expand. Currently there is a 10% cap for a 12 month period to improve or maintain a non-conforming unit. One of the properties impacted is the Concept 600 building located at 600 E Main St. Mr. Bendon explained the non-conforming portion of the code needs a complete review and upgrades. He also explained at the time Ordinance 25, series 2015 was approved, emphasis was placed on reducing height to 28 ft and eliminating new penthouses and not necessarily realizing the impacts to existing units. He is aware there is a substantial number of units impacted by this ordinance. He also feels the 10% cap does not make sense for the residential units. Mr. Bendon then stated this was not technically a public hearing but was aware of members of the public at the meeting who may want to provide comment if allowed. Mr. Walterscheid then asked for members of the public to provide comment if they wished. Mr. Jim Smith lives at the Concept 600 building is also president of the homeowners association. He stated he became aware of the issues when he attempted to obtain a building permit six months ago to expand their porch. He stated they would like to see the long existing free market resident units recognized as conforming. He reviewed old meetings in an effort to determine the focus of the efforts to approve Ordinance 25, series 2012 which he feels focused on future development instead of the existing units. He also feels it was an unintended consequence. He would like the code to be clarified to allow units to be maintained, upgraded and improved as needed as well as allow other provisions available prior to the ordinance. Ms. Lindsey Smith also lives at the Concept 600 building. She described the type of tenants in the building including long term renters, short term renters, and locals. The free market units are not separated from the renters. She feels the building represents a cross section of the visitors and residents of Aspen. Many improvements have been completed to the building to meet safety and ADA requirements. She reiterated the same requests as Mr. Smith. Mr. Bill Sterling is a commercial user of the building as of 1978. He is troubled by the non-conforming status and feels it may negatively impact the real estate market values and impede financing. He would like the ordinance to be amended to allow flexibility to maintain and upgrade the units. He feels the ordinance had unintended consequences. Page 4 Regular Meeting Planning & Zoning Commission May 19, 2015 Mr. Jody Edwards represents the unit owners and feels Staff’s proposal is a good first step. He is concerned the owners will not be able to expand their units. As examples, he stated owners may want to expand their deck to the near wall, combine w adjacent units or extend the top roof to cover their deck. He noted some owners had completed similar projects in the past. Mr. Walterscheid then closed the public comment portion of the meeting. Mr. Walterscheid asked Staff for rebuttal. Mr. Bendon stated Staff wants to focus on making the units conforming to stay with the intent of the ordinance. The owners have other mechanisms to utilize to pursue expansions or changes in use for the units. Mr. Walterscheid then asked for comments from the commissioners. Ms. Tygre does not like to change code that only affects one property but feels the ordinance was over- reaching. She feels it is best to keep the scope narrow at this point in time. Mr. Gibbs agreed. Mr. Mesirow asked if the intent of City Council was to cease development of larger penthouses. Mr. Bendon stated he doesn’t expect the units to amortize away and feels at the time the ordinance was approved, the focus was on the impact the penthouses had on the commercial use of the buildings along with height, mass and scale. Mr. McNellis asked how the 10% cap was determined. Mr. Bendon stated it is an outdated percentage and Ms. Levy added that she found other cities are eliminating the cap altogether. Mr. Bendon stated Staff will present options to City Council to consider to move forward. Land Use Code Applicability Ms. Garrow described the proposed code amendments to address minor amendments, major amendments and multi-step processes. P&Z supports staff’s recommendations. Mr. Walterscheid then adjourned the meeting. Cindy Klob City Clerk’s Office, Records Manager Page 5