The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink Aboutminutes.apz.20021210ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 10, 2002 Jasmine Tygre, chair, opened the special meeting at 4:35 pm at the Library with Jack Johnson, Ruth Kroger, Bert Myrin, Eric Cohen, Roger Haneman, Ron Erickson and Dylan Johns present. Staff in attendance: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney; Chris Bendon, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk. COMMISSIONER, STAFF and PUBLIC COMMENTS Ron Erickson resigned; this would be his last meeting since he was moving to the county. Jasmine Tygre read his letter into the record; Ron will be missed. Bert Myrin stated that the Frost project went back to HPC for a lot split rather a duplex on the lot; another garage space was added. Myrin stated that the concern was safety in the alley and now there will be more cars. P&Z did not review the same proposal that HPC did; it goes before Council on Monday. Myrin invited any P&Z members to voice the P&Z concerns at the Council Meeting. David Hoefer noted that it was not appropriate for P&Z to take an official position but individual concerns should be voiced if desired. Ruth Kruger expressed her thanks for the wonderful food and gift from the City for the boards and commissions party. The commission agreed. David Hoefer stated that City Council adopted the new board rules; he will distribute these rules to P&Z at a later date. Dylan Johns will move up as a regular member. MINUTES MOTION: Ron Erickson moved approve the minutes from November 19, 2002; seconded by Roger Haneman. APPROVED 7-0. DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTE~ST None stated. PUBLIC HEARING: INFILL LAND USE CODE AME~MENTS Jasmine Tygre opened the public hearing; David Hoefer stated that it was re- noticed. Chris Bendon stated that the draft resolution reflected the comments and work. All the residential zone districts were not discussed; density with a certain number of units as the minimum on site to achieve higher FAR or height limit also needed to be addressed. ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 10, 2002 The two views that were not decided were Wagner Park and the Wheeler with redefinition to south of the Wheeler and height restriction. The RMF Zone with increases in FAR and whether or not those ~ncreases have to have affordable housing. The powers and duties section for Council, P&Z, Com Dev Director. The process for commercial design review to go through P&Z review for all or HPC when necessary also needed to be finalized. Bendon stated that the lodge district began on page 129 of the draft resolution with the desired density; one lodge unit per 500 square feet of lodge area was a comfortable threshold to accommodate a 12,000 square foot lot, which would be about 24 lodge rooms with hallways and common areas. A larger parcel would probably go though a PUD. The commission was in agreement to modify the section of the code and tie height to density. Bendon said that the RMF Zone District was on page 113 of the draft resolution. Bendon asked the commission that if the floor area was increased in the RMF and multifamily zone di'stricts should the affordable housing mitigation be increased. Bendon explained the commission directed staff that in demolition of multifamily units, as long as the units were replaced with the same number of units and the same number of bedrooms, they would be exempt from growth management and could be expanded to whatever the zoning allowed. There was an incentive for higher density projects to have a higher allowable height. Bendon said that the last requirement on page 114 of the draft resolution was the floor area for multifamily depending upon on the project's density. The commission agreed that as long as the same number of units and bedrooms were replaced there would be no mitigation required. This would help the re-development of smaller lots to be more economically viable. Mary Ellen Sheridan, public, stated that the community was looking for flexibility for replacement of a project that was currently falling down; she questioned the PUD overlay. Bendon replied that the PUD overlay was a different issue and would be submitted as a different review. John Werning, public, stated that there were 13 properties with the PUD overlay; 2 were lodges (1 was the Pines Lodge) and a great many of the remaining were between 4 and 6 units. Werning said there needed to be the flexibility for this to work when the projects were re-built. The commissioners reiterated the replacement theory, which was if you replace the number of units and the number of bedrooms and have additional square footage, and then it would be a better project. Any additional units would have to go through Growth Management. 2 ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 10, 2002 Bendon stated that the next section on page 80 of the draft resolution addressed the housing rePlacement requirements, which had oPtions of 100% and 50% replacement of the number of units and bedrooms. The commissioners reviewed numerous options for redevelopment replacement. Bendon stated that all Commercial D~s~gn Reviews would go through Planning & Zoning Hearings, even historic projects; there could be joint work sessions with P&Z and HPC. The design review criteria were fairly general described on page 11 of the draft resolution. Bendon provided slides of the view planes from the Wheeler and Wagner Park; the language was on page 25 of the draft resolution. There were survey descriptions of the view planes. The commission directed staffto provide regulated building heights from the Wheeler view plane; Chris provided those possibilities. The commission questioned the legality of restricting the heights in the described view planes; anyone in that deScription would have to go through a PUD. The Wheeler view plane was different from other places in town. Ron Erickson stated that this view plane seemed to be working. Jack Johnson asked if the language could be rewritten to delete the survey language without height restrictions; everything on that block would have to go through a PUD with the boundaries set at Durant Street, Mill Street, Monarch Street and behind the Wheeler. Eric Cohen asked the effect of reigning in the depth. Bendon replied that if you were on the other side of Durant Street you would not have to go through the view plane review. If the view plane were "pulled back in" the Regis, Top of Mill and Grand Aspen for example would not have to go through this process. The commission agreed to limit the depth with the exception of 2 commissioners. 2 commissioners wanted to leave the east/west view planes as they currently were described, 1 commissioner wanted to pull-in the view plane width on both sides and 5 commissioners wanted to pull the view plane in on the east side. Janver Derrington, public, asked why the view plane mattered because it was vested in the old philosophy keeping the downtown low and the new thoughts were to increase density and heights. Derrington said that he did not think that the view plane from the Wheeler was that important. Eric Cohen explained that many people might agree or disagree but the commissioners agreed to delete most of the other view planes from the protected historic mountain view planeS. Bendon posed the Wagner Park view planes. The commission discussed options with potential surrounding development parcels; Wagner Park view planes protected from Durant, Mill and Monarch Streets. Tygre, Myrin, Cohen and ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION DECEMBER 10, 2002 Johnson wanted to keep the original view planes; Kruger, Erickson, Haneman and Johns wanted to get rid of the view planes all together. Erickson asked for clarification on what ,'j" meant on the powers and duties of the Planning Commission section of the draft resolution. MOTION: Ron Erickson moved to continue the Infill Public Hearing to December 17, 2002; seconded by Eric Cohen. APPROVED 7-0. The mee~ng adioumed at 6:45 p.m. ~c-kie Lothia~j Deputy City Clerk 4