HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19871117
A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PLANNING & ZONING
NOVEMBER 17. 1987
Chairman Welton Anderson called the meeting to order at 5:15 pm.
ROLL CALL
Answer ing roll call were Welton Ander son, Mar i Peyton, Ramona
Markalunas, and Michael Herron. David white, Jasmine Tygre, Jim
Colombo and Roger Hunt were excused.
COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS
There were none.
STAFF COMMENTS
There were none.
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 22. 1987
Mari made a motion to approve the minutes of September 22, 1987.
Michael seconded the motion with all in favor.
FLANIGAN STREAM MARGIN REVIEW
Steve Burstein: This is a request for a renovation and addition
of the house at 1020 East Hyman. All of the improvements are
taking place above the garden level grade. The garden level
grade is just adjacent to the 100 year flood plain but nothing is
changing on that elevation. Therefore, there are no real issues
with regard to stream margin.
Welton: What is the garden level? Is it a window well?
Steve: No. As you go towards the river the garden level is all
exposed. As you are at the grade of Hyman Street, you arc at
first and second levels. So it is not just a window well, it
really dr ops off and then goes down to thE flood plain of the
river.
The Engineering Department and Planning Office did not really
identify any issues except that the construction document should
reflect that they would not be disturbing vegetation or the bank
of the river.
1
".".."
PZMll.17.87
Welton asked for questions from the Commissioners.
There were none.
MOTION
Michael: I make a motion to accept the Flanigan Stream Margin
Review with conditions as stated in the Planning Office memo
dated November 11, 1987 as follows:
Construction techniques shall be specified in the Building Permit
application to ensure to the satisfaction of the Building
Department that stream pollution will be minimized and no erosion
or grade change in the stream bank will result.
Mari seconded the motion with all in favor.
RED ROOF RESOLUTION
Tom Baker: We think it would be a good idea to have a nl~ereasn
statement in there stating that the Commission realizes that the
parcel is not zoned for this use and that the zoning should be
changed to accommodate.
Alan: Right now it is required that anything that goes there be
in support of the golf course. We have identified that to the
Council. The main problem with employee housing does not mean it
can't occur but it is going to take some rather ingenious work to
determine how this belongs in the golf course.
Mari: Well how does a lodge support the golf course?
Alan: Golfers stay there.
guests stay there.
Plus in the winter with the skiing
Michael: Since the substance of what we are recommending is a
temporary use, should we not be recommending a temporary change
as opposed to a permanent change? I don't know if we want to
recommend that that becomes a change permanently.
Alan: I don't know that you want this to be changed at all. I
think that the Commission recognizes that there may be a zoning
problem and if there is, it should be addressed.
MOTION
Welton: I would entertain a motion to approve Resolution 87-10
with the modification as suggested by Alan to be signed by the
chairman.
2
PZMll.17.87
Mari: I so move.
Michael seconded the motion with all in favor except Ramona.
PUBLIC BEARING
CODE CLARIFICATION
Welton opened the public hearing.
Alan: Let's start with the Articles. We will try to get to the
first 4 which really only #3 has any meat to it so it is not that
ambitious to try and get to the first 4. Then I thought we could
have a meeting on the 1st for the main issue on 5 is the new
Residential Zone District Regulations for R-15, etc. and see if
you have any support for those ideas. And then we will move the
summary to the 22nd. This may be ambitious for case load. I
don't know if we will be able to get through all this but I am
trying to stay with our regular meetings. The only special
meeting shown right now is December 1st.
We kind of have a deadline out there which is January 5th for
good reason and that reason is that on December 1st, we are going
to receive a lot of residential GMP applications. The work is it
looks like about 1/2 dozen. Your second meeting in January 19th
will probably the next Tuesday to do scoring and subdivision like
we did last year. And then the first meeting in February is the
Hadid application.
What you have got before you is essentially the changes 1 through
6 which includes everything you saw the fir st go ar ound--yo u r
work session with Council plus any changes that you and Council
or the task force that I worked with on a weekly basis for about
6 weeks.
Essentially this is an effort to try and get this thing off the
dime and through the induction process. This is a public
hear ing. We have been sending letters. We have been put ting
notices out. We have been doing everything that we can and it is
not working.
In any case Articles 1 and 2 are essentially the same as what you
had seen in the earlier versions. There is no change in sub-
stance. There are a couple of changes of format but there is
really nothing I need to mention. Are there any questions?
Michael: Why doesn't it say "and vice versa?".
Alan: The whole thing has become irrelevant because we have
taken all of the "he and she". It should say "and vice v'~rsa".
3
PZMll.17.87
Mari: On the very first page where it says "congestion in the
street and enhance the vehicular movement". That choice of words
seems to me--you could invert it into "cater to vehicle", I
think.
Alan: I don't think there was any magic in the choic. of words.
I think the language is essentially what is in the statement
right now. And it is just the general kind of statement in the
zoning code.
The new portions of the code where we made changes since the last
version. In some of the cases these are things you have already
seen. They haven't changed at all since the last version but I
feel that it is important right now to let you know everything
that is going on with this code.
Some of these things we will be able to go through rather
quickly.
Accessory structures--a new definition entirely. It is not in
the existing code at all and it is one that everybody felt needed
to be defined. The one important change since the last discuss-
ion that we had with the Planning Commission is about 3 lines
down where it talks about being devoted primarily t the principal
use. I think the previous language was devoted exclusively to
the principal use and during the discussions we were able to come
up with an examples of reasonable uses that might not be devoted
exclusively to the principal use and to eliminate and so we
broadened the definition a little bit so that we have a wider
variety of accessory uses that would be acceptable.
One of the key things here is that accessory use can't use that
is prohibited in the zone district. So you couldn't have an
accessory use to a restaurant.
Affordable housing is al so a br and new def ini tion. The pr esent
code uses many terms for employee housing. This was the best
terminology we could come up with. The use of the work afford-
able housing means that housing is deed restricted to the
guidelines and hopefully used or abused for office space and
other matters as in the paper today. I think it is a real
straightforward definition.
Ramona: I don't qui te unde rstand "and/or" appr oval of the City
Council.
Alan: There are cases where a unit might be deed restricted but
it might be deed restricted to other than the guidelines. We
have had cases of units approved which are not deed restricted
but they are considered employee housing. And so approval by the
4
PZMll.17.87
City Council outside the guidelines has occurred.
Ramona: So that would take pretty much a special approval.
Alan: I wonder if the City Housing built along Cemetery Lane
would fit those guidelines. Those are units restricted solely to
certain employees of the City but in no way would the house
occupied by the Manager fit the guidelines. I could be wrong.
Alan: It should probably say "Guidelines or appr oval".
Michael: Housing Designee--you have used that a lot.
Alan: That is the housing authority.
to be used. The housing author i ty is
making recommendations.
Paul wanted that language
the designee in terms of
Michael: I was thinking why we had to have a def ini tion as to
the housing designee--
Alan: The only place it might have said it would have been under
growth management or affordable housing section. Maybe we could
just add it here.
Michael: Is it a separate definition or just a line there?
Alan: I thought it was just a separate line but--
Michael: It is in a couple of them but--there is a couple of
definitions that referred to housing designee.
Alan: So to say housing designee means the Aspen/Pitkin County
Housing Authority.
Mari: Bandit--is that not only meant for residential structures?
Alan: It is kind of a colloquial term. Bandit was never in the
code. It is a term that has come up through common usage to
people have always associated it most closely with residential
but there are examples of commercial--I have known examples of
commercial developments that--essentially a bandit unit is a term
to mean anything that was built to --
Mari: I thought we were using it specifically for the resident-
ial units which were built.
Alan: Well it is not using the code in that respect. It is
really not even used in the code. The term is used more in--
Mari: If the term is not used in the code.
Alan: Well, it certainly used in Planning and Zoning Commission
5
PZMll.17.87
actions. It is used in Planning Office memorandum and it is kind
of something that--i t is one of those that a lot of pe ople say,
you know--you use this term all the time. And even though it
doesn't appear in the code, it wouldn't surpr ise if it does at
some point. It is just helpful for people to understand what you
mean by it.
You know sometimes we started finding things in the early stages
and found that we did not use the term and we eliminated them in
many cases. The definitions were written over a long period of
time. We did an early draft to see where the holes were--then we
put them aside until very late in the process. And then as we
started to work through the draft over the summer, we found a lot
mor e things--since it doesn't have to be in there because it is
not used ever. And it is up to the Commission whether you think
the definition is really necessary. Since it isn't used in the
code, certainly it is a well used term in the vernacular around
here.
Bed and Breakfast is a def ini tion which came down from Histor ic
Preservation. There is no new concepts in it from what you have
nor is there a difference in boarding house. City Council
approved. They bought the recommendations with respect to code
but we just cleaned up some words.
Breezeway is a brand new definition. I think it is probably--
Paul Taddune and I tal ked about this. It is pr obably not as
important these days as it was 10 years ago. It is one of those
where I think we are catching up to something that people maybe
abused in the 70s trying to connect the duplexes like breeze-
ways and it just doesn't happen anymore. We are finally catching
up to it now in the code and saying that you can't do that.
The next 2, character and compatible, both come from the Historic
Preservation. It is not the incentives but the original review
procedures and standards for Historic Preservation. And there
were no changes there.
Contiguous is new. And contiguous is one that we have had a lot
of made over the years. Contiguous comes into play when we deal
with merger and with the desire of people to do pioneer develop-
ments across multiple property. And we are trying to define the
contiguity is not simply when 2 properties are on opposite
corners and they might have a touching point but the contiguity
is really when two things touch. This one was written entirely
by the consultant.
Alan: I am sure it would. I think this is one where they really
went to the way the way the word contiguous is used in other
code s .
6
PZMll.17.87
Daycare center is one that I was asked to define by the City
Council and this is brand new since the last draft that you have
seen. What I tried to do, I looked into some new materials that
we received in the Office from a Planning Advisory Service on
daycare centers. And you know that we are adding daycare centers
to a lot more zone districts as part of this re-writing. Most of
residential zones, its in several commercial zones and we are
trying to establish some basic standards here for what we want to
see in daycare center.
Ask P&Z if they want me to continue putting these discussions
into the minutes.
Welton continued the public hearing to December 1, 1987.
Meeting was adjourned at
6:54. '~Jl ~
' i 1
---'--"-' ?' - '/, ------
Jan' e M. carne~, City D~ Clerk
7