Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20250507 REGULAR MEETING ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MAY 7TH, 2025 Commissioners in attendance: Charlie Tarver, Maryann Pitt, Tom Gorman, Ken Canfield, Eric Knight, and Teraissa McGovern Staff present: Ben Anderson, Com Dev Director Haley Hart, Senior Long-Range Planner Jim True, Special Counsel Tracy Terry, Deputy City Clerk Commissioner Comments: Ms. McGovern requested they vote for a new Vice Chair. All agreed. Ms. McGovern nominated Mr. Canfield, and he accepted. Ms. Pitt nominated Mr. Gorman, and he agreed. They did secret ballots and Ken wo7n with five votes. Staff Comments: Mr. Anderson introduced Dan Folke, the new Planning Director. Mr. Anderson let the board know that HPC will be looking at the Armory project very soon to give their recommendation to Council. Public Comments: None. Minutes: Mr. Gorman motioned to approve the minutes for December 17th, 2024, and the motion was seconded by Mr. Knight. Ms. McGovern asked for a roll call vote. Roll call vote: Mr. Tarver, yes; Ms. Pitt, yes; Mr. Gorman, yes; Mr. Canfield, abstain, Mr. Knight, yes; Ms. McGovern, yes. Motion passes 5-0. Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest: None Submission of Public Notice for Agenda Items: Notice provided Public Meeting, item 1: 727 E Bleeker, Special Review, Stream Margin Review, and RDS Staff Presentation: Haley Hart, Senior Long-Range Planner Ms. Hart went over the project and said that this is in review because the entire lot is within the 100 feet high water line and is subject to Stream Margin Review. The existing improvements are within the existing top of slope, and they are looking to bring lot into compliance. The redevelopments are removing 8 trees, interior expansion, new exterior deck, relocation of spa to proposed new deck, demo of existing 3 level deck and roofing, new exterior materials and siding, and replacement of windows. The special review is to bring down the top of slope so it’s not encompassing the whole property. The city found the new top of slope met the site-specific constraints. Board Questions: Mr. Gorman asked if the top of slope was factually incorrect or if they were giving into the owners’ wishes. Ms. Hart replied that the previous top of slope was done by lidar and was not site specific. Ms. Hart said moving onto the stream margin review because they are within the 100 ft they will always be subject to stream margin review if there is redevelopment. Staff find that all stream margin review criteria have either been met or are not applicable. This is all contingent on the special review being approved. The one condition included by planning is lighting and there was no new lighting in the REGULAR MEETING ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MAY 7TH, 2025 application. The Residential Design Standards are the last piece, and staff find all the criteria have been met. Staff recommends approval of this resolution. Ms. McGovern asked if the deck within the building envelope is being rebuilt. Ms. Hart replied that the spa is being moved off that existing deck onto the western side deck, but the deck is staying and will not be rebuilt. Mr. Gorman asked how many situations there are likely to be where the lidar is incorrect. Ms. Hart replied that she does not know. Mr. Gorman said it is a time-consuming process to go through if the city knows there are inaccuracies. Ms. Hart replied that it is less about the inaccuracies as the lidar data is an overlay and didn’t look at site specific constraints so coming in for a top-of-slope review gives the property owners opportunity to question if the data is correct. Mr. Anderson stated that with most properties the survey is correct, but the places where it is off it is because the grading has changed. He said engineering is aware of this and they have got some long- term plans to address it. Ms. Pitt asked if there was any opposition to the removal of the trees. Ms. Hart replied no. Board Discussion: Mr. Tarver is for the project. Mr. Canfield said he thinks it is a straightforward application and if the engineering department is ok with it, so is he. Mr. Gorman said if the city is satisfied with the project, he is too. Motion Mr. Knight moved to approve resolution 5 series 2025 granting approval; Mr. Canfield seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Tarver, yes; Ms. Pitt, yes; Mr. Gorman, yes; Mr. Canfield, yes; Mr. Knight, yes; Ms. McGovern, yes. Motion passes 6-0. Other Business: 2025 Q1 Fee in Lieu Request Ms. Hart said 1380 Riverside Dr asked for 0.1 FTE. The resolution allows for up to 2.0 FTE’s to give flexibility. They have secured .46 FTE’s so they are asking for .65 FTE’s therefore are seeking approval to pay for the remaining .19 FTE’s Mr. Tarver asked if it is that there are no FTE’s or that they are expensive. Ms. Hart said both, there are a few that have not been extinguished, but developers are holding onto them for their own projects. Ms. Hart said all the criteria have been met and they recommend approval to City Council. Board Discussion: Ms. McGovern said she thinks this is going against the spirit of the code and asked for the resolution to be amended. REGULAR MEETING ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION MAY 7TH, 2025 Mr. Canfield said the ordinance that allows the fee in lieu says the fee in lieu is allowed if the applicant has made good faith effort to obtain credits. Mr. True said that the reason this option is allowed is so that the credit holders are not in an overly powerful position. Mr. True gave Ms. Hart the language for the resolution. The Planning & Zoning Commission recommends that the following project be required to extinguish .46 FTE’s and allowed to pay up to two, via cash in lieu prior to building permit issuance. Motion Mr. Gorman moved to approve resolution 6 series 2025 as amended; Mr. Canfield seconded. Roll call vote: Mr. Tarver, yes; Ms. Pitt, yes; Mr. Canfield, yes; Mr. Knight, yes; Mr. Gorman, yes; Ms. McGovern, yes; Motion passes 6-0 Adjourn: Mr. Canfield motioned to adjourn; Mr. Gorman seconded. All in favor. Tracy Terry, Deputy City Clerk