Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20151215Regular Meeting Minutes Planning & Zoning Commission December 15, 2015 Mr. Goode, Vice Chair, called the Planning & Zoning Commission (P&Z) meeting to order at 4:30 PM with members Keith Goode, Brian McNellis, Kelly McNicholas Kury, Skippy Mesirow, Spencer McNight and present. Ryan Walterscheid, Jasmine Tygre, Jason Elliott, and Jesse Morris were not present for the meeting. Also present from City staff; Debbie Quinn, Jennifer Phelan and Sara Nadolny. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS There were no comments. STAFF COMMENTS: Ms. Phelan wanted to make sure the commissioners were aware that based on the City Council meeting from the previous evening, the City Manager’s office will involve both the Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) and P&Z in some aspects of the hiring process for the new Community Development Director. PUBLIC COMMENTS: There were no comments. MINUTES – December 1, 2015 Mr. McNellis moved to approve the minutes for December 1st and was seconded by Mr. Mesirow. All in favor, motion passed. DECLARATION OF CONFLICT OF INTEREST There were no declarations. 360 Lake Ave, - Hallam Lake Bluff Review – Public Hearing Mr. Goode opened the public hearing and turned the floor over to staff. Ms. Quinn stated she had reviewed the affidavits of notice as presented as Exhibit E in the agenda packet and found them appropriate. Ms. Sara Nadolny, Community Development Planner Tech, noted the hearing was to request an amendment to an approved development order regarding Hallam Lake Bluff Review. Specifically, section one of Resolution 12, Series 2013. She then reviewed the location of the property within the R-6 zone district. The current home overlooks ACES and is very close to the edge of the bluff. Part of the bluff was dug away when it was first developed and it would not be incompliance with what could be built today. The existing home was built in 1990, prior to the adoption of the Hallam Lake Bluff Review protection standards. She identified three points within the Hallam Lake Bluff Review standards to keep in mind when reviewing the proposal. 1 Regular Meeting Minutes Planning & Zoning Commission December 15, 2015 1. Top of Slope Definition – The City Engineer defined the top of the slope in the 2013 approval and the applicant is not contesting that approval. 2. All development within 15 ft of the top of slope should be developed at grade. 3. All development not within 15 ft of the top of slope is to be developed under a 45 degree progressive height limitation angle measured from the top of the slope. Ms. Nadolny provided a brief history of the lot. In 2013, the applicant underwent the Hallam Lake Bluff Review with P&Z and received an approval as outlined in resolution 12, series 2013 which was included as Exhibit B in the agenda packet. The plan was to improve upon the nonconforming structure. The first part of a two-fold plan involved reconstructing the top of slope and bring it back to the pre-construction standards. The second part was to remove some sections of the house closest to the bluff and replace them with sections in front of the property. Although this did not bring the entire structure into compliance it was a favorable improvement. There were still issues with the height limitation. The current request does not include any changes to the improved restoration plan. The applicant has been working closely with the Parks and Engineering Departments since the 2013 approval. The applicant is proposing to move the structure approximately 24 ft to the west away from the slope from the location approved in 2013. Ms. Nadolny stated shifting the structure 24 ft would bring it into compliance with the Hallam Lake Bluff Review. All the structure within the 15 ft setback including a portion of the patio would be at grade and compliant. All the structure outside the 15 ft setback, including the proposed hot tub, will fit within the 45 degree angle measured from the top of slope. Staff has review application and finds it meets criteria. This proposal brings the structure into compliance rather than just making it better. Staff fully supports the application and asked if there were any questions. Mr. Goode asked if a site review had been conducted. Mr. Wilson and Ms. Phelan answered that P&Z had visited the site. Mr. Goode asked if the piece discussed at the meeting has been moved. Mr. Wilson stated they just received the permit and it has not been moved yet. Ms. McNicholas Kury asked wanted to confirm there was an approval in 2013, then nothing was put into effect and now this would be a new set of approvals. Ms. Nadolny stated work has been done with the Engineering Department regarding the drainage plan and nothing with the Parks Department. Ms. Phelan stated the big components were to re-stabilize the bluff because it had been changed by previous construction. There were also a lot of drainage issues they were working on with engineering as well. Parts of the structure were still within the 45 degree height limitation, but it was reducing the nonconformity from 2013. This proposal maintains the bluff, handles the drainage, creates more of a back yard and moves the building. Mr. Wilson, Forum Phi, represents the applicant. He stated the proposal this time is much more aggressive application than last time. He provided an image to describe the location of the property in relation to surrounding features. They feel they comply with the bluff review standards and the previous resolution permits them to do what they wish to do which is to re construct the original portions of the bluff and bring the rest of the structure into compliance with the bluff review standards. Mr. Wilson provided an image of the existing structure and lot. He pointed out the area engineering approved to be reconstituted. He showed where the existing home protrudes over the top of bluff line established in 2013. The project them moved part of the house back. The current proposal will move the house back even further, almost an entire house length from the original position. 2 Regular Meeting Minutes Planning & Zoning Commission December 15, 2015 He next displayed a 3D model based on the topographic map received from the surveyor and indicated the piece of the bluff that is missing. This piece will be put back and restored. The drainage issues will also be addressed. He then displayed an image of the original home as it sat on the bluff. He pointed out a lot of the house sticks up though the 45 degree bluff line. The new home moves back considerably and will be under the plane. He provided images of how it had been and what the current application proposes. The owners are excited to have a back yard. He displayed a number of perspectives from around the property demonstrating the house is not protruding above the angle. Mr. Wilson agrees with staff they comply or what they plan was approved in 2013. Mr. Goode asked if there were any questions for the applicant. Mr. Goode asked if it is a demo and complete rebuild. Mr. Wilson replied it was difficult to rebuild the slope without raising the entire house. The house was just in the way. Ms. Nadolny added the former approval in 2013 triggered the technical definition of demolition. Mr. Goode then opened for public comment. Mr. Chris Lane, Chief Executive Officer of the Aspen Center for Environmental Studies (ACES), apologized for being late to the game. From their standpoint, they are seeing this for the first time. He continued stated there is a lot of big development around Hallam lake and it has a big impact on ACES. ACES is a nature preserve and is more sensitive than the usual neighbor. He stated in an ideal world it would be nice to not have the impact of construction and it is nice it will be moving out of the setback from the bluff. He asked if the timing and duration of construction, duration of demolition, noise constraints has been determined. He also asked if anything could be adjusted in regards to the needs of ACES. Ms. Phelan stated the City has noise ordinances and complaints will be followed up on. There are also construction standards for the timing of construction defining what hours during the week construction is permitted. There are standards of when construction can occur. The City also requires a construction management plan which defines where and how construction occurs, where materials are stored. Mr. Lane stated they teach birding classes in the morning so hammering at 7 AM is problematic for ACES. Ms. Quinn suggested that he meet with the applicant and work through these issues because they do not seem to be related to what P&Z has purview over at this meeting. Mr. Goode stated he understands his concerns but it is not part of their parameters to approve this application. He reiterated ACES should approach the applicant. Mr. Lane then mentioned there trees on the property being removed. Ms. Phelan stated the Parks Department manages any removal of trees. Mr. Wilson stated they are not suggesting to cut down any trees on the bluff side. The original approval required they keep all the trees. Mr. Lane asked where they are sourcing the revegetation. Mr. Wilson stated it will be sourced from the bluff, grown offsite and transplanted back. Mr. Lane then asked how he could get more information about the phasing of the construction. Mr. Wilson stated they are working with the contractor to establish schedules and he will be happy to keep them as part of the process. Mr. Goode then asked if the commissioners had questions or discussion. Ms. McNicholas Kury motioned to approve resolution #22, series 2015. The motion was seconded by Mr. Mesirow. Mr. Goode requested a roll call. Roll call vote: Mr. McNight, yes; Ms. McNicholas Kury, yes; Mr. Mesirow, yes; Mr. McNellis, yes; and Mr. Goode, yes. The motion passed with a total five (5) yes – zero (0) no. 3 Regular Meeting Minutes Planning & Zoning Commission December 15, 2015 Mr. Goode then closed the public hearing. Mr. Goode then adjourned the meeting. Cindy Klob City Clerk’s Office, Records Manager 4