HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.20030325ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION March 25~ 2003
COMMISSIONER, STAFF and PUBLIC COMMENTS ...................................................................................... 2
DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST ............................................................................................. 3
PARCEL 4. TOP OF MILL 8040 GREENLINE and DRAC VARIANCES ....................................................... 3
TIPPLE LODGE GNIQS EXEMPTION, SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION and TIMESHARE EXEMPTION .4
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION March 25, 2003
Jasmine Tygre opened the special meeting at 4:35 pm in the Sister Cities Meeting
Room. Dylan Johns, Ruth Kruger, Roger Haneman and Jasmine Tygre were
present. Eric Cohen arrived at 4:40 p.m. Jack Johnson was excused. Staff in
attendance: David Hoefer, Assistant City Attorney; Chris Bendon, Scott
Woodford, Community Development; Jackie Lothian, Deputy City Clerk.
COMMISSIONER, STAFF and PUBLIC COMMENTS
Jasmine Tygre asked about new P&Z members, lackie Lothian replied that the
City Clerk requested a date for review with council, but that date was not set.
Roger Haneman said that he watched the progress of a house at 1470 Red Butte;
he questioned the proximity of the addition to the 100-year flood plane. Rich
Pavczech responded that was the old flood plane.
Ruth Kruger asked if the rock playground around the bathroom at Wagner Park
would remain rocks. Haneman replied that he thought that would be redone in the
spring. Bendon said that the rocks were temporary. Eric Cohen said that the old
playground was totally out of date with safety problems; the new one was not
completed.
Eric Cohen asked how Council granted Harley Baldwin a temporary use for the
illegal permanent structure in the Caribou Alley; P&Z recommended it not be
kept. Bendon replied that there was more flexibility in the proposed infill with
regards to HPC; there was not as much concern for the enclosed ceiling but the
closed doors were a problem, which were off. Bendon said that council found that
the standards were met and a temporary use was granted for six months. Dylan
Johns noted that the roof seemed to be acceptable but the doors were excessive.
Eric Cohen asked if multiple applications on the same property were considered a
bad idea. Bendon stated that the code was silent on the issue; it should be
addressed for what the approvals were vested for. Cohen voiced concern for the
amount of time spent by the applicants, staff and boards reviewing processes; the
multiple applications were a tool for the private planner to apply for many
different proposals on the same property at the same time. Bendon said that the
infill growth management approvals would only allow one application at a time.
MOTION: Eric Cohen moved to not allow multiple applications on the
same property without some sort of check or consent from Community
Development for the need or reason; seconded by Dylan Johns.
APPROVED 6-0.
2
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION March 25~ 2003
The order of the agenda was changed to allow the continued public hearing
priority.
DECLARATION OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
None.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING (02/18/03):
PARCEL 4~ TOP OF MILL 8040 GREENLINE and DRAC VAR/ANCES
Jasmine Tygre opened the continued public hearing for the Top of Mill parcel 4
8040 Greenline variances and DRAC variances. Scott Woodford said that Rich
Pavczek from John Galambos Architects was present. Woodford stated that the
application was continued and the commission directed the applicant to redesign
the project to comply with the secondary mass requirement and the one-story
street-facing element. Woodford noted the new drawings redesigned the building;
the secondary mass was met with a one-car garage and ADU with a 6 foot wide 10
foot long connecting element to comply with the secondary mass requirement. In
addition the porch roof on the front faqade complies because the code states that
the element could be a porch roof. Staff felt that the requirements were met for
those 2 variances. Woodford said that staff recommended approval of the 8040
Greenline.
Woodford stated that the building orientation variance was still requested. The
size of the house was reduced from 6200 square feet to 5689 square feet.
Rich Pavczek said that the ADU was added when the secondary mass was added.
Pavczek said that because of the orientation of the lot with the tangent off of the
arc of the curve of the street in relation to that street, the proposed orientation
addresses the street more effectively. Pavczek provided illustrations for the
orientation. Cohen asked if staff felt that this orientation met the spirit of the
code. Woodford replied that they could meet the standard better. Cohen said that
if the representation by the applicant was correct with the dash line as the accurate
tangent, no matter how big the structure was, then the side of the house would be
facing that line. Jasmine Tygre clarified that the inclusion of the above grade
ADU, which was separated from the main structure, did not have to be occupied.
Woodford replied that was correct.
Dylan Johns asked when the design guidelines could be reviewed because many
projects came under the guidelines for review. Chris Bendon responded that the
residential guidelines were not on the work schedule for community development;
he said the commissioners should place that on the next joint session with council.
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION March 25, 2003
Kruger asked ifDRAC existed. Bendon replied that P&Z acted as DRAC. Tygre
stated that the standards were regulations that were to prevent the applicant from
coming up against arbitrary and cupreous that had to do with subjective judgment,
Tygre stated that the current design guidelines did not accomplish what needed to
be done; perhaps the council wish list could include what might make the
regulations more effective.
Cohen asked if the redesign included the elimination of the 20-foot mudflow
encroachment. Pavczek replied that it did and almost everything in the redesign
met the standards. Woodford responded that condition #6 in the approval was
from the city engineer.
The commission discussed the road in relation to the driveway and the house;
nothing was parallel because of the curved road and flag shaped lot. John noted
that if the comers of the houses on the adjacent lots had a straight line drawn
between them, this proposed building would fall on the straight line.
MOTION: Ruth Kruger moved to approve Resolution 7 approving the
8040 Greenline Review and variance to the residential design standards
for Top of Mill, Aspen Mountain Subdivision, Parcel 4, (#2737-182-85-
003); seconded by Eric Cohen. Johns, yes; Haneman, yes; Cohen, yes;
Kruger, yes; Tygre, yes. APPROVED 5-0.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING (03/04/03):
TIPPLE LODGE GMQS EXEMPTION, SUBDIVISION EXEMPTION and
TIMESHARE EXEMPTION
Jasmine Tygre opened the continued public hearing for the Tipple Lodge GMQS
exemption, subdivision exemption, timeshare exemption. Sunny Vann provided
the notice.
Scott Woodford stated that Sunny Vann, Brooke Peterson and John Galambos
represented the applicant, Aspen Land Fund. Woodford said the proposal was to
demolish the existing Tipple Lodge Condominiums (10 unit lodge and 2
residential dwellings) and redevelop with 2 free-market condominium units (2400
and 2500 square feet) and 1 affordable housing unit (640 square feet) With a
courtyard in between. The access was off of Galena and down the ramp for a
proposed shared garage (13 spaces) with the already approved Tipple Townhomes
Subdivision and Tipple Woodsi Woodford said that the units would be
condominiumized and timeshare; the 2 Tipple Lodge units and 4 free market units
were a 1/6 fractional share; the 5 affordable units (category 2) were also to be
condominiumized and rented out by the Association.
ASPEN PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION March 25~ 2003
Woodford stated that the land use approvals for the proposal were for the growth
management quota system exemption that carr)e fi.om the 2 Tipple Lodge
demolished units, which had 950 square feet with 1 bedroom in each unit; 50% of
the square footage and bedrooms had to be replaced and would be replaced with a
650 square foot above grade 1 bedroom unit. The affordable unit met the
requirements including parking. There was an insubstantial amendment to the
Tipple Townhomes Subdivision to remove the wall in the parking structure for
access resulting in a better design.
Sunny Vann stated that the design was an extension of the previously approved
Tipple Townhomes; it will appear as one homogenous project if it is ever built and
complies with LTR zone district regulations. The only change to the previously
approved Tipple Townhomes was the shared access to serve this project, which
triggers an insubstantial amendment to the prior approval otherwise this was a
stand alone project in its entirety. Vann explained how this project applied to the
exempt provision of the recently adopted time share regulations at 1/6 shares.
Vann stated that if the Residences was approved this project would not be built.
Public comments:
Steve Falender, public, said that he was still hopeful for the developer to work out
the differences with the Little Nell project so that it will be built and this one will
not be built. Falender stated no objections to this project. (Steve Falender's letter
was included in the packet.)
MOTION: Roger Haneman moved to approve Resolution #8 GMQS
exemption, insubstantial amendment and subdivision for the Tipple
Lodge (#2737-182-73-079) with a soils investigation condition added;
seconded by Ruth Kruger. Cohen, yes; Johns, yes; Kruger, yes;
Haneman, yes; Tygre, yes. APPROVED 5-0.
John requested that the soils be monitored on this project. Vann said that they
would not object to a condition that included a soils investigation be provided to
the city engineering department prior to the issuance of a building perrmt.
Woodford stated that it could be included in the submittal package.
Meeting adjourned at 5:35 p.m.
jckie L~t~ian, Deputy City Clerk