HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20010220ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2001
COMMISSIONER & STAFF COMMENTS ........................................................................................................... I
MINUTES .................................................................................................................................................................... 2
DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST .............................................................................................. 2
CODE AMENDMENT - 26.510.040 (F), PROHIBITED SIGNS ................. ; ......................................................... 2
510 PARK CIRCLE PUD AMENDMENT .............................................................................................................. 3
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2001
Bob Blaich, chairman, opened the regular meeting at 4:30 p.m. in Council
Chambers. The following commissioners were present: Jasmine Tygre, Eric
Cohen, Ron Erickson, Roger Haneman, Steven Buettow and Bob Blaich. Staffin
attendance were: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney; Joyce Ohlson, Nick
Lelack, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk.
COMMISSIONER & STAFF COMMENTS
Jasmine Tygre suggested that the City Council and Housing Stafftake a tour of
some of the properties that were for sale in Aspen which have "ADUs" located in
them. She said that if some of the officials actually saw what was being called an
ADU, regardless of what was approved, it might change some people's thoughts on
the benefits of the ADU program. Tygre said that it was something to see after
what was approved as an ADU and what was actually being used as a media room
or something else. The commissioners agreed that the ADU program was not
working as it was supposed to, without any deed-restrictions. They said that
currently the ADU was used as an extra bedroom, gaining exemption from GMQS
or a 500 square foot bonus on the house.
Run Erickson asked if there was clarification of the number of seats in the new
Music Tent. Erickson noted that the Caribou Alley was supposed to be open space
and there were now doors. Roger Haneman noted that there was also a roof and
that it was heated. Erickson asked if it still conformed to the open space rules.
Eric Cohen apologized for leaving the GMC especially because he was probably
most empathetic with Dave Bruton's point of view. Cohen stated that he was glad
that the Iselin project passed because it was what the community wanted. Cohen
stated that the parking and transportation were poorly designed for this project.
Bob Blaich inquired about the progress on the long-term remote parking study. He
said that the answer was needed for the projects that were coming up. Blaich also
asked what was happening on the DEPP project; maybe a position statement on the
results. Erickson stated that he thought waiting until May, which would be a year
after completion may provide more information. Joyce Ohlson replied that from
DEPP the following information was needed: (i) what the next steps were for DEPP
(continuity, implementation & phases), ® a questionnaire or survey on the
acceptability ® feedback to the committee members.
Nick Lelack asked if the commissioners would like to go on a site visit for 505
Sneaky Lane, there was a stream margin review on March 6th. The commissioners
agreed to a site visit.
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2001
MINUTES
MOTION: Jasmine Tygre moved to approve the minutes of January
30, 2001. Roger Haneman second. APPROVED 6-0.
DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
None.
PUBLIC HEARING:
CODE AMENDMENT- 26.510.040 (F), PROHIBITED SIGNS
Bob Blaich opened the public hearing on the code amendment, 26.510.040(F).
Nick Lelack did not provide the public notice at the time &the hearing. David
Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney, stated that not providing public notice was
problematic.
MOTION: Ron Eriekson moved that the approval would be
conditioned that the clerks receive the public notice. Jasmine Tygre
second. APPROVED. 6-0. Notice was received.
Lelack explained that the Historical Preservation Commission requested that the
code allow signs that were at least 50 years and older as long as they provided
historical significance. He said that the language in the code was very specific
with historical signs defined to be signs prior to January l, 1945.
No public comments.
MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to approve ReSolnfion #8, series 2001,
recommending City Council approve SECTION 26.510.040 (F), Land
Use Code Amendment making said Section read as follows: Obsolete Signs.
A sign which identifies or advertises any activity, business, product, service or special event
no longer produced, conducted, performed or sold on the premises upon which such sign is
located. Such obsolete signs are hereby declared a nuisance and shall be taken down by the
owner, agent or person having the beneficial use of such sign within ten (10) days after
written notification from the Community Development Director, and upon failure to
comply with such notice within the time specified in such order, the Community
Development Director is hereby authorized to cause removal of such sign, and any expense
incident thereto shall be paid by the owner of the property on which the sign was located.
That an obsolete sign is nonconforming shall not modify the requirements of this
paragraph. Signs of historical character shall not be subject to the provisions of this section.
For the purpose of this section, historical signs are defined to be those signs at least fifty (50)
years in age or older. Jasmine Tygre second. Roll call vote: Cohen, yes;
Buettow, yes; Tygre, yes; Haneman, yes; Erickson, yes; Blaich, yes.
APPROVED 6-0.
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2001
PUBLIC HEARING:
510 PARK CIRCLE PUD AMENDMENT
Bob Blaich opened the public hearing on the PUD amendment for 505 Park Circle.
Nick Lelack introduced Greg Karaus, applicant who requested the addition of 537
square feet to his affordable housing unit. Lelack noted with this expansion there
was still about 835 square feet of floor area available for the other townhomes
within this building and not affected by Ordinance 56. He said that 52% of the lot
was still open space on this site.
Ron Erickson asked if this application was the same as presented in 1999. Lelack
replied that it was identical. Roger Haneman inquired that about the setbacks
(attachment #2) going from zero to five-foot setbacks. Karaus responded that the
original recorded plat had no setbacks indicated and the applicant wanted the
setbacks defined on the plat at five-foot.
Erickson inquired about the roofline going out over what appeared to be open
space below. Karaus responded that it was dead space against the boulder wall
with the floor insulated.
No public comments.
MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to approve Resolution #9, series 2001,
approving the Aspen Electric Subdivision/PUD amendment for a 537
square foot addition for an affordable unit at 510 Park Circle with 7
conditions. Jasmine Tygre Second. Roll call vote: Buettow, yes; Cohen,
yes; Haneman, yes; Tygre, yes; Erickson, yes; Blaich, yes. APPROVED
6-0.
Erickson said that it would have been helpful to see the minutes from the last
meeting on this project.
The regular Planning and Zoning Commission adjourned at 5:15 p.m. and resumed
as the Growth Management Commission.
~fi'~/ci-e Lothian, Deputy City Clerk
3