Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19990406ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 6, 1999 Jasmine Tygre, Vice-Chairperson, opened the regular Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting at 5:50 p.m. after an AD'U work session with City Council. The following Commissioners were present: Steve Buettow, Tim Mooney, Ron Erickson, Roger Hunt and Jasmine Tygre. Bob Blaich and Tim Semrau were excused. Staff in attendance were: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney; Chris Bendon, Julie Ann Woods, J0yce Ohlson, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. COMMISSIONER AND STAFF COMMENTS Ron Erickson said now that snow has left the s'treets, the cars at AutoTech were parked in the right-of-way again. He said that iMill Street was also a problem with the 400' crane and construction trailer. Julie Ann Woods replied the trailer would remain until the construction was complete. Tim Mooney said that Streets and Engineering were having an East End planning session and thought that P&Z should have an idea about what they were doing prior to the contracts being accepted. Woods said an update could certainly be given to the commissioners. Roger Hunt noted the buses that stand in the al~ey behind Rubey Park encroached into the alignment and asked ~hat was to keep them from rolling into the alley. He said that he was receptive!to RFTA needs, hut noticed some diesel from the buses overflow and go into the drain on Mill Street. Hunt said the newspaper racks would be placed at the post office again, but in a new spot. They requested input from the city on placement. Three commissioners said to replace them where they were; two had no opinion. Woods stated that lunch meetings were scheduled for this commission to meet with the Housing Board on the 8th, 15th and 22nd. Chris Bendon noted that HPC would review staff's DEPP r~commendations on the utility re-location. Bendon stated there was no qhorum for DRAC again which was discouraging for applicants. This was a problem not being able ilo proceed. Steve Buettow, DRAC Chair, stated with only 3 mer¢bers present, all must vote positively for approval. David Hoefer noted these variances shouldn't be easily granted therefore the higher requirement. He stated that an additional P&Z or HPC member was needed for this week's contin ~ed DRAC meeting. ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 6, 1999 Jackie Lothian stated CCLC invited P&Z to join them tomorrow morning at 9:30 a.m. to review DEPP and in-fill housing in the commercial core. MINUTES MOTION: Roger Hunt moved to approve the minutes from 03/16/99. Ron Erickson second. APPROVED 5-.0. DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST None. PUBLIC HEARING: 855 BAY STREET - STREAM MARGIN REVIEW, CONDITIONAL USE- ADU and VARIANCES FROM RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS Staff requested this public he~ring be continued to April 13, 1999. David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney, statqd there was proof of notice but the list of mailing was not attached. The mailirlg was included in the packet materials for the continued public hearing on April 13~. MOTION: Roger I-lEnt moved to continue the public hearing for the ADU Conditional Us~, Residential Design Standards and Stream Margin Review to Apl'il 13, 1999. Ron Erickson second. APPROVED 5-0. PUBLIC HEARING: MELVILLE, 1290 SNOWB UNNY LANE - CONDITIONAL USE - ADU Jasmine Tygre, Vice-Chairpe :son, opened the public hearing and requested proof of notice. David Hoefer, Ass !stant City Attorney, stated the notice was sufficient for the commission to procee t. Chris Bendon, staff, explaine ~ the property owner, Ralph Melville, for a 600 square foot Accessory Dwelli ng Unit. The property currently has a single-family residence, which would be re .developed into a ,duplex with the ADU in the basement. A stairway would access the unit with storage space under the stairs and a crawl Space access to t~ e mechanical room. Bendon noted the ADU had a 2 ASPEN PLANNING & ZOI' lING COMMISSION APRIL 6, 1999 full kitchen, dining room ltv! ng room, bathroom and bedroom. There was the possibility of adding more li~ ht wells to the plans. Roger Hunt inquired about tl te snow shedding into the stairwell. Bendon replied condition #2F addressed thal issue. Craig Melville stated there would be drainage under the stairs for melt!ng snow. Ron Erickson asked if the railed walkway was an over-hang for protection. Melville responded that there was a 10' easement but the entry way would be made safe with the possibility of an over-hang. Erickson asked if all of the light was from the east side. Melville stated there would be light wells for the other two bedrooms of the addition. Tim Mooney inquired about the parking for the ADU and new unit. Bendon said the ADU parking was by itself and not stacked with the primary residences. No public comments. MOTION: Roger I-Iu~t moved adopt Resolution #99-05 for the Conditional Use for an Accessory Dwelling Unit of approxim~tely six hundred (600) net livable square feet to be located in the proposed Melville Duplex, 1290 Snowbunny Lane, with the following conditions: 1.) The building application shall include: a.) a current Site Improvement Survey indicating the nature of ali easements of record indicated on the property, title commitment, b.) a completed and recorded sidewalk, curb, and gutter construction agreement and an agreement to joiu any future improvement districts for the purpose of constructing improvements which benefit the property under an assessment formula, c.) a completed apd recorded ADU deed restriction on the property, a form for which may be obtained frown the Housing Office. The deed restriction shall be noted on the building permit plans, d.) ~ drainage report and a drainage plan, including an erosion control plan, prepared by a Colorado licensed Civil Engineer which maintains sediment and debris on-site during apd after construction. Ifa 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 i~designing any drainage improvements, e.) a tree removal or relocation permit from the ~i~ Parks Department for any trees to be removed or relocated. f.) a completed tap permit With the Aspen Consolidated Sanitation District. The applicant shall connect the ADU to tte sanitary sewer in a manner acceptable to the ACSD superintendent. 2.) The bi tiding permit plans shall reflect/indicate: a.) Conformance with all aspects of the City' Residential Design Standards. b.) The proposed ADU is labeled as such and meets t .e defin.ition of an Accessory Dwelling Unit. c.) The ADU will contain a kitchen (having a a~inimum ora two-burner stove with oven, standard sink, and a 6-cubic foot refrigerator phs freezer) and a bathroom (having a minimum of a shower, sink, and a toilet), d.) The. kDU has the minimum one (1) off-street parking space provided. The ADU space mst have clear access and cannot be stacked with a space for the primary residence, e.) ['he ADU meets all applicable UBC requirements for light and air. f.) The roof and stain* ay are designed to prevent snow and ice from falling on, or building-up on, the entranc~ ~ to the ADU. The applicant is encouraged to use open grate style stair steps for the exte! ior stairway accessing the ADU. g.) Coaformance with the City's requirements for driv ~ways. Driveways must be separated by 25 feet or more 3 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 6, 1999 (including neighboring driveways), and must be paved from the edge of the street to the property line. Paving altergatives may be approved by the City Engineer. h.) A fire suppression system if the gr~ss square footage of the structure exceeds 5,000 square feet. i.) A five (5) foot wide pedestriau usable space with a five (5) foot wide buffer for snow storage at the edge of the street paving. 3.) The applicant should provide separate utility taps and meters for each residential mit. 4.) All utility meters and any new utility pedestals or transformers must be instal [ed on the applicant's property and not in any public right-of- way, Easements must be p~ ovided for pedestals. All utility locations and easements must be delineated on the site im ~rovement survey. ~M[eter locations must be accessible for reading and may not be ol tructed. 5.) The applicant must receive ~pproval for any work within public rights-of-wa from the appropriate City Department. This includes, but is not limited to, approval fo a mailbox and landscaping from the City Streets Department. 6.) All construction vehicle ~, materials, and debris shall be maintained on-site and not within public rights-of-way unless specifically ap]proved by the D~rector of the Streets Department. The applicant shall inform the contractor of this condition. 7.) The applicant shall abide by all noise ordi mnces. Construction activity is limited to the hours between 7 a.m. and 10 p.m. 8.) Before applying for a building permit, the applicant shall record this Planning and Zoning Resolution with the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder located in the Courthouse Plaza Building. Fhere is a per page recordation fee. In the alternative, the applicant may pay this fee to the City Clerk who will record the resolution. 9.)Ail material representations made by the applicant in the application and during public meetings with the Planning and Zoning Corem ssion shall be adhered to and considered conditions of approval, unless otherwise amended b3 other conditions. Ron Erickson second. Roll call vote: Mooney, yes; Buettow, yes Erickson, yes; Hunt, yes; Tygre, yes. APPROVED 5-0. Erickson asked if another window could be installed into the bedroom. Tygre asked if the unit would be ren~ed. Melville stated that it would be rented. He felt it was a livable space and the ~dditional window well would take away living space from their unit. Bendon stated that a neighbor, John Reese, was opposed to the project because Snowbunny Lane was already too dense. PUBLIC HEARING: LAND USE CODE REVISIONS Jasmine Tygre, Vice-Chair, ol~ened the public hearing. David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney, prepared a crosl-reference chart (included with staff memo). He requested proof of notice. Juli Ann Woods did not have the notice. Hoefer stated that the notice must be receive in the City Clerk's Office no later than 5pm on April 7, 1999. The Deputy City Clerk received tJ~e notice. Woods stated the simplificatioi~ was reviewed against the procedural requirements to meet the review standards f9r the commission to make a finding. She referred to John Worcester's March 1, 1999 memo regarding the major changes. ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 6, 1999 Woods noted that P&Z requested modification.s to the non-conforming structures section of the code that would require conformity to the code when re-developing a previous non-conforming bpilding. This was not in the memo but included in the code 26.312 page 71. If they do not wish to conform to the code, then a special review would come irt front of this commission. Woods stated there were 2 ot~erdtems not included. The first one was the ability of P&Z or HPC to serve as D~AC. Heeler noted the applicant would either go before DRAC, P&Z or HPC but not all three boards, only one. This would hopefully eliminate the p. robl~m obtaining a DRAC quorum; this would fall under the duties and responsibllitie~of. HPC and P&Z. Hoefer noted this change woUld streamline the review proces~wlth DRAC. Roger Hunt commented that a P&Z DP, AC member could possiblV attend the HPC meeting or the HPC DRAC member would attend the P&Z meeting. Heeler noted the DRAC review would occur at the HPC or P&Z meeting. Half of the DRAC meetings occurred with only 3 members or without a quorum (6 out of 112 meetings in 1998). Woods stated that hopefully the standards would be amended which would alleviate some of these meetings. Heeler said the details needed to be worked out regarding'the number of members voting or by a simple majority. The secon.d item was under st~bdivision 26.480. Woods stated the first exemption was a lot line adjustment. Sh~ said a common lot line adjustment must relate to a hardship because of"c". The applicant must ge through a full-blown subdivision process in order to adjust a coynmon lot line and[ staff felt it onerous to go through the subdivision process for a gimple lot line adjustment. Woods requested that "hardship" be eliminated; the word "hardship" had not been defined. The commission stated caution must be taken for this amendment. Hoefer stated that was a valid point and the chal~ges made with re-organization have significantly improved the code. Tygre no~ed from past experience, it was better to leave something in the code, even though onerous, because it was much harder to close the door than open it. Heeler noted that "hardship" should be defined under this portion of the code. Woods stated if the community development director did not feel comfortable with the review, then P&Z would take on the review process. Joyce Ohlson noted the lot lin~ adjustment couht be a technical difficulty amended on the plat, purely administrative by nature, not a hardship associated with the lot line adjustment. Ron Ericksop stated that this could happen only if the hardship did not exist, then the community development director would review. The following language would be ~nended: it is demonstrated that the request is to address a specific hardship or is in the best interest or not adverse to the spirit of the code. 5 ASPEN PLANNING& ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 6, 1999 Tim Mooney asked who woz ld review an applitcation for a lot line adjustment to add square footage in order t, > accommodate a duplex. Steve Buettow noted that people ask him about that tyt,e of adjustment all the time. Woods replied that would be covered under "e" tevelopment rights or permitted density. Tygre noted that many lot line adjustmem s "fall through the, cracks" after the fact; years later a development application con res in for a duplex now that more square footage was added. She said that FAR w~s the "name of the game" and applicants would do that in two or three steps to add square footage. Mooney said the lot line adjustment would be include~t on an amended plat. Tygre stated the recordation must be included on the plat with specific language regarding FAR. MOTION: Roger Itu nt moved to adopt P&Z Resolution 99-06 with the revised amendments .o. the Land Use Code: Section i: That the Commission formally recommends that Aty Council amend Section 26 Land Use Code, of the Aspen Municipal Code to read as l ,resented in the reformatted document attached as Exhibit B. Section 2: That the additio~ ~al changes be made to Exhibit B: Chapter 26.212 Planning and Zoning Commission, Si ction 26.212.010 Powers and Duties, adding items (P) and (Q); and Chapter 26.220 IIPC, S~ction 26.220.020 Powers and Duties, items (J) and (K), both of which would read as followg(consistent with DRAC duties): The hear, review and approve variances to the Residential Design Guidelines, pursuant to Chapter 26.410; To hear and decide appeals from, and re, iew any order, requirement, decision, or determination made by, any administrative officid charged with the enforcement of Chapter 26.410, including appeals of interpretation of he text of the Residential Design Standards. The Commission may only grant relief from tle Residential Design Standards. A variance from the Residential Design Standar~J s does not grant an approval to vary other standards of this Chapter that may be provid ~d by another decision making administrative body. And Section 26.480.030 Exempti~ ns, Subsection (A) (c). be deleted and condition (e) be modified as follows (new language in i IOLD): e. It is demonstrated that the lot line adjustment will not affect the development rtghts, including any increase in FAR, or permitted density of the affected lots by providin; the opportunity to create a new lot for resale or development. A plat note will be added to :he corrected plat indicating the purpose of the lot line adjustment and the recogni! ton that no additional FAR will be allowed with the adjustment. Buettow se, ond. Roll Call wore: Buettow, yes; Mooney, yes; Erickson, yes; Hunt, es; Tygre, yes. APPROVED 5-0. Tygre asked the commissioners to review the re,solution prior to adoption. The meeting adjourned at 7:15 p .m. kie Lothmn, Deputy C~ty C~erk ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION APRIL 6, 1999 COMMISSIONER AND STAFF COMMENTS ...................................................................................................... 1 MINUTES .................................................................................................................................................................... 2 DISCLOSURE OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST .................................................................................................. 2 855 BAY STREET - STREAM MARGIN REVIEW~ CONDITIONAL USE- ADU AND VARIANCES FROM RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS .................................................................................................................. 2 MELVILLE~ 1290 SNOWBUNNY LANE - CONDITIONAL USE - ADU .......................................................... 2