The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutminutes.apz.20020219ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION-Minutes-February 19, 2002 COMMISSIONER, STAFF and PUBLIC COMMENTS, ..................... ................. 2 MINUTES ................................................................................................................. 2 DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ............................................... 2 FARMER'S MARKET DEFINITION DISCUSSION, ....... ~ ................................... 2 216 EAST HALLAM REZONING .......................................................................... 2 LOT 4A ALPINE ACRES SUBSTANTIAL PUD AMENDMENT~..~i~.~...~ ......... 13 DISCUSSION OF FRACTIONAL FEE OWNERSHIP ........ 21.~ .............................. 4 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSiON'Minutes-February 19, 2002 Jasmine Tygre, chairperson, opened the regular Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission Meeting at 4:30 with Pon Erickson, Bert Myrin, Ruth Kruger, Roger Haneman and Eric Cohen present. Steven Bncttow was excused. Staff in attendance: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney; Chris Bendon, James Lindt, Joyce Ohlson, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. COMMISSIONER, STAFF and PUBLIC COMMENTS Bert Myrin said that the editorial in the weekly paper on the In-fill study cOncerned him because there were 2 discussions but only one side was focused upon. Myrin said that he wanted more discussion of In'fill. Erickson responded that the In-fill project was supposed to take 6 months with the emphasis placed on urban sprawl; Council provided the goal of figuring out how to bUild more housing~ EricksOn said the fact that there would be growth if the goals to house people in the Aspen Area Community Plan were to be met. Erickson stated that the question was posed where was the best place to put the growth/housing? Was downtown a better place to put the housing than say Burlingame. Erickson said that after 18 months of working on the In-fill Committee the fact came up that there hasn't been any growth in the downtown area because of the current zoning regulations being prohibitive from an economic point of view. Jasmine Tygre stated that before the commissioners got too far on this, there should be a Scheduled work session on In- fill to bring out the different points of view. Erickson stated that he did not start out where he ended up in his thinking on In-fill; it was a metamorphosis. Chris Bendon said that he was setting a follow-up work session with council on In-fill. Joyce Ohlson stated that she would set up a work session for P&Z prior to a work session with Council. MINUTES MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to approve the minutes from 01/29/02. Roger Haneman seconded. APPROVED 6-0. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST None. FARMER'S MARKET DEFINITION DISCUSSION Chris Bendon presented the discussion of the Farmer's Market for approximately a half an hour. PUBLIC HEARING: 216 EAST HALLAM REZONING Jasmine Tygre opened the public hearing. David Hoefer stated that the notice was provided. Joyce Ohlson stated that there was a vital piece of information missing that staff has received. 2 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSiON-Minutes-February 19, 2002 MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to continue the public hearing for 216 East Hallam Rezoning to March 5, 2002. Roger Haneman seconded. APPROVED 6-0. PUBLIC HEARING: LOT 4A ALPINE ACRES SUBSTANTIAL PUD AMENDMENT Jasmine Tygre opened the public hearing for Lot 4A Alpine Acres Substantial PUD Amendment. David Hoefer stated that the legal notice was provided and the commission had jurisdiction to proceed. James Lindt presented the application by Alan Becker and represented by Alan Richman, which requested a substantial PUD amendment to Alpine Acres PUD Subdivision Lot 4A. The request was for a 500 square foot HPC bonus, which could be granted for an outstanding Historic Preservation effort. The Alpine Acres PUD was established in 1987, which limited the floor area on Lots 4A, 4B and Lot 5 to 2,486 countable square feet per dwelling unit. Lindt explained that the parcels can receive exemptions like abatement or garage but not eligible for a FAR bonus. Lindt stated that Lot 4A was approximately 8,000 square feet with a single-family residence plus a garage and an ADU; the applicant requested amending condition A of the approved PUD (Exhibit C). The amendment would read that each dwelling unit in Alpine Acres shall be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2486 square feet plus any floor area bonus that might be awarded by the HPC on Lot 4A for an outstanding preservation effort pursuant to the City Land Use Code Section 26.415. Staff felt that allowing a bonus on this lot would still be compatible with the underlying zoning. Lindt said that they were under the FAR allowed in the R-6 zone district for this size lot. Lindt noted that HPC reviewed and approved the conceptual for this project; staff recommended approval. David Hoefer asked why the request was restricted to Lot 4A for the historic property additional square footage. Lindt replied that the circumstances were different on Lot 5; that lot was about 16,000 square feet. Alan Richman introduced Alan Becker; Becker stated that he has owned the property for almost 6 years. Richman stated that this was a simple request for the Planning & Zoning Commission and City Council to give the legal authority back to HPC to be able to award the 500 square foot bonus. Becker utilized drawing illustrating the views of the house from the front yard; the house was about 1040 square feet. The neighboring house that was rebuilt in the 1980's so it wasn't historic. Becker included some pictures of the foundation that needed to be replaced and the architect's computer rendering with the considered addition on the 3 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSiON-Minutes-February. 19, 2002 back. Richman stated that the finding that HPC was required to make was that this was an exceptional restoration project and a compatible addition. P,.ichman stated that back in 1986 when the 2,486 square foot limit to the property was established there was no floor area bonus and this request was to allow for what the code allows today with the incentive for historic properties. Richman said that the main house was abOUt 1,000 square feet; adding the garage and the ADU there would be about 2,000 square feet of floor area today. An employee occupied the ADU. Richman said that ffthis addition was approved, the property would still be about 15% below the allowable floor area in the R-6 zone district. Richman stated that this property stayed compatible with the neighborhood. Roger Haneman asked about the voluntary restriction of 2,486 square feet and why it was done. Richman replied that it was a tortured history beginning with the annexation of the subdivision into the city; Lot 4 was split under the assumption that the zoning was R-6 but staff discovered that the property had been annexed at R-15 and was not eligible for the 10t split. Richman stated that there was a great deal of cun~usion and the applicant at that time offered a lower floor area as a way of saying that the floor area would be no larger than ½ a duplex FAR in R-15. Richman noted that this property had more of the character o£R-6 to keep the houses small. MOTION: Bert Myrin moved to approve P&Z ResolUtion #05, series 2002 recommending that City Council approve a substantial amendment to the Alpine Acres PUD Condition A, for the purpose of allowing each dwelling unit to be restricted to a maximum countable floor area of 2486 square feet plus any floor area bonus that might be awarded by the HPC on Lot 4A for an outstanding preservation effort pursuant to the City Land Use Code Section 26.415. Ruth Kruger seconded. Roll call vote: Erickson, yes; Haneman, yes; Cohen, yes; Kruger, yes; Myrin, yes; Tygre, yes. APPROVED 6-0~ DISCUSSION OF FRACTIONAL FEE OWNERSHIP Joyce Ohlson lead the discussion with P&Z on Fractional Fee Ownership. Meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m. ~tckie Lotl~an, Deputy City Clerk 4