Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19991207ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 7, 1999 COMMISSIONER, STAFF AND PUBLIC COMMENTS ................................................................................. 1 DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST .......................................................................................... 1 MOLLY GIBSON LODGE MINOR PUD .......................................................................................................... 1 $10 PARK CIRCLE MINOR PUD AMENDMENT ........................................................................................... $ CODE AMENDMENT ......................................................................................................................................... 6 7 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 7, 1999 Bob Blaich opened the regular meeting at 4:30 p.m. in the Sister Cities Meeting Room with Commissioners Tim Mooney, Steven Buettow, Roger Hunt, Ron Erickson and Roger Haneman. Jasmine Tygre arrived at 5:00. Staff present: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney; Joyce Ohlson, Nick Lelack, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. COMMISSIONER, STAFF and PUBLIC COMMENTS Joyce Ohlson, Community Development Deputy Director, invited the commissioners to a site visit for Snyder and the County Inn at noon on Friday. Ron Erickson asked when another member would be appointed to P&Z. Steven Buettow said that the SkiCo should do a study of the natural snow and the snowmaking snow. Tim Mooney said that the SkiCo stated the only time there would be a problem would be during a 100-year event. He said that the snowmaking would not cause that type of drainage problem. Buettow said there was a study being done for the City by a geologist as part of the drainage master plan for Aspen Mountain. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST None PUBLIC HEARING: MOLLY GIBSON LODGE MINOR PUD Bob Blaich opened the public hearing. David Hoefer noted the list of mailing was missing (the list was supplied to the City Clerk's Office on 12/08/99). Nick Lelack, staff, provided the GIS map of the proposed addition for the employee dwelling unit. He said that it was about 828 square feet, approximately 238 sq. ft. were existing in the lodge, which would become the kitchen, dining and bathroom facilities for the unit. An additional 590 sq.ft, would fill in the corner of the building including 3 layered bedrooms with a spiral staircase; the footprint was about 186 sq.ft. Lelack stated that the dimensional requirements went with the underlying zoning and in this case there was an established 4 ft. setback, flush with the existing building. He also said there was an established 28 ft. height limit on the north side of the building to allow the building to capture some of the southern exposure. Lelack stated there were 51 rental units with 18 parking spaces provided. He said that City Streets Department did not think that this addition would be a problem because the residents of this unit would be able to apply for residential parking permits. He noted that the lodge provided shuttle service. ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 7, 1999 Lelack said the transformers could be relocated on site with a condition of approval requiring the location on the final plat prior to building permit issuance. He noted that the Housing Office and Board strongly endorsed this creation of in-fill affordable housing in town. He said that it met all the land use code requirements. Francis Krizmanich, planner for applicant, introduced himself and the manager of the Molly Gibson, David Tash. Krizmanich explained that David began the project about 2 years ago and the change in process along with staff's recommendations will make this project possible. Roger Hunt asked where the pedestals and transformers were located. Krizmanich responded that they were behind the fence and would have to be relocated. Tim Mooney asked if there should be a condition that read "prior to the certificate of occupancy the deed recordation must be accomplished". He requested that be made clear for the fully deed-restricted mandatory occupancy. Mooney said that he was in favor of the unit but said that the design was not that well conceived. He noted the practical need for a bathroom in each unit; he suggested adding a ½ bath or powder room. Mooney said that he was concerned for the livability of the unit. He said there should be some kind of egress windows on the second and third floors because the spiral staircase would not be sufficient. Steven Buettow noted that a ladder could be fastened into the building as an emergency egress. Ron Erickson asked where the kitchen was located on the floor plan. He said that the unit was small. Tash responded that the intent of the unit was a dormitory-style living space, not permanent long term housing but rather seasonal. He stated the rooms would be given free to employees and he said that the bedrooms were small to begin with and did not think that adding the bathroom would add to the quality of life. Hunt stated that at least a sink and toilet should be added to the second floor bedroom as an amenity. Blaich noted the plumbing would already be in the walls for the 3rd floor so that would not be that difficult to add a bath to the 2nd floor. Tash stated that the space was engineered to the square foot because it was such a small area but he said that he would go back to the architect. Tash said they were trying to accomplish a lot in a small space. Mooney and Hunt agreed that they had accomplished a lot but it could get even better by adding a ½ bath. Krizmanich stated that David would be happy to look at the possibility but did not feel it should be a requirement because it might not work. Lelack suggested that the commission could recommend to council that the additional sink and toilet on the 2nd floor be explored. Blaich noted the footprint was exactly the same on the 2nd and 3rd floor so the space would not be a problem. Buettow agreed that the powder room should be echoed on the 2nd floor. He said there could be a 45° closet 2 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 7, 1999 added in the corner behind the spiral stairwell, which would provide a sitting area as shown on the ground floor level. Erickson stated that the safety issue should be a condition. Ohlson stated that the chief building official could give some good input. David Melton, public, stated that the Molly Gibson has been a good neighbor but he provided photographs (exhibit 4) of the proximity of the buildings to the street and alley. He said there were setback variances allowing the buildings to be right next to alley. He said there was a lot of foot traffic in the alley between the 2 buildings. Melton stated that adding another 3 people living here was adding a lot more activity to an area with safety and parking problems. Susan Melton, public, asked where they were going to move the dumpster; it was always overflowing right into the alley. She said that the footprint of the proposed unit was where all of the furniture and equipment for the pool was stored now. She said there was no extra parking for the Molly Gibson now; the guests parked in front of their house. Susan stated objections to raising the height of the building. Krizmanich noted this was a very urban area, nearly the center of town and all of the things mentioned were part of living in the middle of town. He said that he wasn't aware of variances granted; this was located in the LP zone, which created some non-conformity with setbacks. Krizmanich said that there might be some more shading in the alley from the addition, but it was already shady. Tash said that the roof would not be visible from Hopkins, but only from the alley. Krizmanich stated that housing employees in town next to their work was the best thing to reduce traffic. He said that this proposal met the intent of the code amendment. He said that the dumpster would comply with the Engineering requirements. Tash stated that there would be no additional parking in front of this addition in the alley. Hunt gave a history of the property. MOTION: Roger Hunt moved to adopt Resolution #99-40 approval of the Molly Gibson Lodge Minor PUD with the conditions of approval: 1. A PUD Agreement shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval by City Council and shall include the following: (a) The information required to be included in a PUD Agreement, pursuant to Section 26.445.070(C). 2. A Final PUD Plan shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval granted by City Council and shall include: (a) A final plat meeting the requirements of the City Engineer and showing easements, encroachment agreements and licenses with reception numbers for physical improvements and parking spaces within City rights-of-way, location of utility pedestals, and a note stating that a witness corner will be installed 3 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 7, 1999 on the north east corner of the property after completion of construction. (b) An illustrative site plan of the project showing the proposed improvements, landscaping, parking, and the dimensional requirements as approved. (c) A drawing representing the project's architectural character. (d) A drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer which maintains sediment and debris on-site during and after construction. If a ground recharge system is required, a soil percolation report will be required to correctly size the facility. A 2-year storm frequency should be used in designing any drainage improvements. 3. The PUD Agreement and the Final PUD Plans shall be recorded prior to an application for a building permit may be accepted by the Building Department. 4. The building permit application shall include: (a) A copy of the final Ordinance and recorded P&Z Resolution. (b) The conditions of approval, for both the lodge expansion and the Minor PUD, printed on the cover page of the building permit set. (c) A completed tap permit for service with the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. (d) A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval from the Parks Department Director for off-site replacement or mitigation of removed trees. (e) A completed curb, gutter, and sidewalk agreement. (f) A completed agreement to join any future improvement districts formed for the purpose of constructing improvements in adjacent public rights-of-way.$. The building plans shall demonstrate an adequate fire sprinkler system and alarm system for the new portion of the structure. 6. There shall be 150 or greater net livable square feet of living area per person, including sleeping and bathroom. 7. At least one bathroom shall be provided for shared use by no more than four persons. 8. A kitchen facility or access to a common kitchen shall be provided. 9. The maximum rental rate should not exceed $350 per person for this unit. 10. Prior to issuance of a building permit: (a) The primary contractor shall submit a letter to the Community Development Director stating that the conditions of approval have been read and understood. (b) All tap fees, impacts fees, and building permit fees shall be paid. If an alternative agreement to delay payment of the Water Tap and/or Parks Impact fee is finalized, those fees shall be payable according to the agreement. 11. No excavation or storage of dirt or material shall occur within tree driplines. 12. All construction vehicles, materials, and debris shall be maintained on-site and not within public rights-of-way unless specifically approved by the Director of the Streets Department. All vehicle parking, including contractors' and their employees', shall abide by the 2 hour residential parking limitation of the area. The applicant shall inform the contractor of this condition. 13. The applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. 14. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or Certificate of Completion for the employee unit, a member of the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority shall inspect the units to determine if the units comply with the representations made in the application. 15. Before issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall record the Planning and Zoning Resolution with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder located in the Courthouse Plaza Building. There is a per page recordation fee. In the alternative, the applicant may pay this fee to the City Clerk who will record the resolution. 16. That the applicant shall explore the addition of a powder room (sink and toilet) on the second floor prior to City Council's final consideration of the ordinance. 17. That safety egress windows and a ladder escape mechanism be shown on the ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 7, 1999 building permit plans. Such safety features shall meet with the approval of the Chief Building Official. 18. That a deed restriction which meets with the Housing Authority approval be filed in the records of the County Clerk and Recorder prior to the building permit. Ron Erickson second. Roll call vote: Buettow, yes; Haneman, yes; Mooney, yes; Erickson, yes; Hunt, yes; Blaich, yes. APPROVED 6-0. Tash said that he would be happy to add another day of service for trash pick-up and keep the area around the dumpster cleaner. He said that he had a 4 person front desk staff and this unit would house 3. Tash stated that it was a plus housing the employees on site. PUBLIC HEARING: 510 PARK CIRCLE MINOR PUD AMENDMENT Bob Blaich opened the public hearing. David Hoefer stated that for the record the public notice was provided. Nick Lelack, staff, introduced Gregory Karaus, the owner and applicant of 510 Park Circle. Lelack stated that the property subdivision was created in 1992 with 2 other affordable units. He said that this proposal was to add about 537 square feet to this 4-bedroom unit, adding a family room and increasing the size of an existing bedroom. Lelack commented that this amendment to the PUD ended with the P&Z review. Lelack said that another condition of approval was to obtain a tree removal permit and mitigation. He said that there were no neighbors with comments. Karaus said there were not many issues from the DRC. Ron Erickson said that usually there was an engineering report in regards to the back slope. He stated concern for any soil erosion because a deck was different from a building. Joyce Ohlson responded that the building inspector would require analysis from the code if necessary. Erickson requested a copy of the deed- restriction prior to any approval to an addition to a deed-restricted property. MOTION: Roger Hunt moved to approve Resolution/t99-41, the Aspen Electric Subdivision/Planned Unit Development amendment, consisting of a 537 square foot expansion to the third level of a fully deed restricted triplex located at 510 Park Circle, subject to the conditions of approval: (1) A PUD Agreement shall be recorded within 180 days of the final approval by City Council and shall include the following: (a) The information required to be included in a PUD Agreement, pursuant to Section 26.445.070(C). (2) A Final PUD Plan shall be recorded within 180 days of the final 5 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 7, 1999 approval granted by the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission and shall include: (a) A final plat meeting the requirements of the City Engineer and showing easements, encroachment agreements and licenses with reception numbers for physical improvements and parking spaces within City rights-of-way, location of utility pedestals, and a note stating that a witness corner will be installed on the north east corner of the property after completion of construction. (b) An illustrative site plan of the project showing the proposed improvements, landscaping, parking, and the dimensional requirements as approved. (c) A drawing representing the project's architectural character. (d) A landscape plan. (3) The PUD amendment and the amended PUD Plans shall be recorded prior to an application for a building permit may be accepted by the Building Department. (4) The building permit application shall include: (a) A copy of the recorded P&Z Resolution. (b) The conditions of approval printed on the cover page of the building permit set. (c) A tree removal permit as required by the City Parks Department and any approval from the Parks Department Director for off-site replacement or mitigation of removed trees. (5) Prior to issuance of a building permit: (a) The primary contractor shall submit a letter to the Community Development Director stating that the conditions of approval have been read and understood. (6) No excavation or storage of dirt or material shall occur within tree driplines. (7) All construction vehicles, materials, and debris shall be maintained on-site and not within public rights-of-way unless specifically approved by the Director of the Streets Department. All vehicle parking, including contractors' and their employees', shall abide by the 2 hour residential parking limitation of the area. The applicant shall inform the contractor of this condition. (8) The applicant shall abide by all noise ordinances. Construction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. (9) Before issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall record the Planning and Zoning Resolution with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder located in the Courthouse Plaza Building. There is a per page recordation fee. In the alternative, the applicant may pay this fee to the City Clerk who will record the resolution. Jasmine Tygre second. APPROVED 7-0. Mooney complimented the applicant and planner on the streamlined information in the packet. INFORMATION ITEM: CODE AMENDMENT Joyce Ohlson stated that this was an information item, which indicates community development has embarked upon establishing a process for how the code amendments would be handled. She stated that in January P&Z members would be needed to participate in a series of meetings regarding code amendments. Meeting adjourned 5:55 p.m. Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk 6