Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19930202RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 2, 1993 Vice Chairman Bruce Kerr called meeting to order at 4:30 pm. Answering roll call were Tim Mooney, David Brown, Sara Garton, Richard Compton, Roger Hunt and Bruce Kerr. Jasmine Tygre was excused. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS There were none. STAFF COMMENTS There were none. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were none. TEXT AMENDMENT FOR TRELLISES IN OPEN SPACE Bruce opened the public hearing. Kim made presentation as attached in record. After discussion which lasted an hour: David: I agree with Bruce that I don't think it is necessary to have this on the agenda with HPC. Two of us are suggesting that HPC could review similar applications within historic areas. But I share with Tim the --reading this 11Penetrating landscaping of garden oriented structures" --that opens the door for a greenhouse immediately. 10910000 David: I move to approve this with the following as recommended by staff with the following changes: That in the first paragraph after the word garden structures within the same parenthesis to add "Temporary, non -glass or plexiglass". Then where it says "Open space area", --"subject to annual review, for development shall application shall only be approved if the following conditions are met. The motion died for lack of a second. MOTION David: I move to table to date certain of February 16, 1993 and PZM2.2.93 -- also to continue the public hearing to that date. Sara seconded the motion with all in favor. Discussion -- Bruce: I think the majority feels there needs to be work done on the definition of open space. I think the majority feels like there needs to be a level of review beyond staff. I don't know if that needs to be just HPC in certain cases and just P&Z in certain cases so you need to figure that out. And there is a clear feeling that if HPC reviews it then it may not be necessary for us to review it and vice versa. I think everybody is kind of open to the idea of trellises in open space. Tim: I like the courtyard idea but I am very suspect that it should be a permanent fixture on the building. I think if it is open space it shouldn't be a permenant fixture on the building and I basically think that if it is for patio dining it should be under the same direction and review as all the other patio dining. And it should be set up and taken down according to what Mezzaluna does, what Harley Baldwin does and everybody on the mall does. I don't think it is a special text review to all of a sudden create now a new way for commercial development in the open space. Everyone then voted in favor of tabling and continuing the public hearing. RIO GRANDE SUBDIVISION David stated he had a potential conflict of interest on this hearing. The rest of the members made the decision that he stay for this hearing. Leslie presented the affidavits of public notices. Attached in record. Bruce opened the public hearing. Leslie made presentation as attached in record. What we want to accomplish with this is we wanted to get on the map all of the easements, all of the right of ways, all of the boundaries because you can see here Klaus Obermeyer's building encroaches over into Lot A. And he has never really had that mapped. i� PZM2.2.93 David: Why wasn't this done as part of the development of the Library and the Youth Center? How could they get bonds without legal -- John Worcester, Assistant City Attorney: All of this property belongs to the City and it was purchased over a period of time. The largest being the Truman mumble The deed that the City got was not perfect in fact there is a gap up here of about 35 feet. There is a lot of property along the river here it is not clear who owns it. We are taking the position that it belongs to the City because no one else has claimed it since day one. The only one who has claimed anything along the shore is this property here. It was filed many years ago. But by doing this subdivision we are going to get title to this entire land and get title insurance. Right now there are small sections in here that the deed does not cover. The other large parcel called Aspen One that we purchased back in 1978. The rest of this was the O' Dane property, the Stable property --there are a lot of small chunks in here and a small piece here that the County --we entered into an agreement with them back in 1982 that said we can have this parcel here primarily for the ? and if the City didn't build on that within 10 years the land would revert back to the County. The County would pay the City all the money the City paid for this land. So that is still up in the air. In the mean time the County has built the Library on it. The Youth Center on this side here. You can see the footprint covers part of the land that is owned by the County and part of the land that is owned by the City. Technically that couldn't happen because you can't do that without subdividing. So now we are going to subdivide after the fact. The County also has an interest in placing the County jail here. So we have got a whole bunch of agreements with the County. And they include that we would give them the Library parcel in order to do that we need to subdivide. They will give us the parking garage. They also want the Youth Center to be on one lot. They have agreed to subdivide to do a lot line adjustment of the Courthouse Subdivision so that this property will be all within the City. In exchange for that we will give the County an opportunity to have Lot 5. And in case they ever want to extend the jail. But we retain the right to have the ROW for the trolley in case it ever goes through. 3 PZM2.2.93 These 4 lots here we don't have any plans for. We just know that they belong to the City and if the City wants to do something with these lots we might as well define them now. The Library wants the deed to their property. They have got a big structure that sits on land that they don't own. And in fact I am no sure whether the City owns that because of that ? . So that is primarily the reason why the Attorney' s Office got involved in this because there are all these legal issues in terms of ownership and title. PUBLIC COMMENT Lance Luckett, representative for Obermeyer: I manage the building for Obermeyer. Using the drawings showed the Obermeyer property line and the use of the parking area. He would just like to just do a swap with the City. He would like to re -develop his property eventually. He would like to keep the same kind of use --light industrial. MOTION Roger: I move to recommend approval of the Rio Grande subdivision with conditions #1, 2, and 3 as listed on Planning Office memo dated February 2, 1993. Sara seconded the motion. Chuck Roth, Engineering: The parcel isn't fully monumented. We have agreed to monument it this Spring but it would be nice for posterity here --on the condition that the property shall be in the Spring of 1993. Roger: I will add that as condition #4. Sara agreed to this for the second. Everyone voted in favor of the motion. Bruce closed the public hearing. There being no further business meeting was adjourned. Janice M. Carney, City Deputy Clerk 4