HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19900320
A .(U
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
MARCH 20. 1990
Chairman Welton Anderson called meeting to order at 4:00pm.
TROLLEY STUDY
WORK SESSION
Harry Nichols involved with the new Riverfront Trolley Line in
New Orleans and the McKinney Avenue Transit Trolley System in
Dallas, Texas also involved with planning systems in Memphis,
Charlotte and in Ashville, North Carolina and Rod Kelly with the
Barton, Ashman Engineering Firm and past director of
transportation for the City of Dallas.
These men are currently involved in the feasibility study for the
Aspen trolley project and presented four different options for a
trolley system in Aspen.
There was also a video presentation.
COMMENTS
Bruce: I don't have a strong opinion on these options. Don't
interpret what I say as being negative. I am not anti-trolley.
But there are some real threshold questions that I haven't even
come to yet and that is why we want or need the trolley. Are we
talking about an effective cost effective way of really moving
people or are we talking about a tourist cutsie attraction kind
of thing or maybe some combination of those. I haven't even
reached those threshold decisions yet about whether this is
really something that we need for Aspen. So I am not ready to
make a decision yet about options.
Graeme: I have some of the same considerations Bruce does. I
would think it would be important for proponents of the trolley
to stack how a trolley would perform against some kind of a very
modern very efficient system. I don't know what that is even.
You are talking about restored cars. Does there exist a modern
car, whether it looks historic or not, that would be more cost
effective, more fuel efficient. Does it exist or are you limited
to historic cars.
Nichols: Galviston, Texas decided they wanted a new car body to
look old. They put a diesel generator in that thing which has an
average life of 3 to 6 years. You still have a noisy, stinky
diesel generator going down the street. That car cost $600,000
apiece. They built 4 of those and plus the parts was a pretty
tidy piece of their grant money they got from the government.
They have a lot of problems with them and the manufacturer
decided not to build any more.
PZM3.20.90
...k....'
Lowell, Mass. had 3 cars built now with new bodies but utilizing
the technology and the parts availability of used parts out of
Australia. They are still reliable. Parts can be purchased off
the shelf. Their cars cost $350,000 to $400,000 apiece.
A refurbished old car today has retail value of $125, 000 to
$500,000 depending on what you do with them and what kind of
condition you get into and how you go through it. There are all
levels of refurbishment. New, used, half and half. It is a
matter of choice.
The problem with battery operated streetcars is the batteries are
not available to give you long life without making them so heavy
and so many. The battery costs actually ends up being more than
the cost of putting up the other system with the life cycle and
recharging cycles. They used them in Brooklyn, New york for
quite a few years but most systems sooner or later took them out
and converted back to electric.
,.'-
Alternating: You can put a generator on. Demonstration projects
using electric streetcars where there was not overhead have had a
trailer behind it with that generator on. Again you still have
the pollutants. You are still using a fossil fuel. So you have
the noise and everything else along with it. You haven't really
eliminated anything.
The benefits received by the community are better with the wire
than any alternate form we have.
~
ROLL CALL
Answering roll call were Graeme Means, Richard Compton, Bruce
Kerr, Michael Herron, Mari Peyton, Jasmine Tygre, Roger Hunt and
Welton Anderson.
COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS
'''''''"-,
Roger: The Independence Building: I attended a Historic
Preservation Committee meeting concerning that building. At this
point they have passed on the developer's proposal on that
building with the exception at this point of the additional
doorway on the Galena Street side. I have real problems with
that additional doorway and before some of the public and I
appeared before HPC it looked like they were heading for approval
of that doorway. If the Commission members have some attitude
about that doorway and the ramifications of what it does to that
building as far as its use and potential problems as far as
servicing the building, cutting up the building into smaller
pieces which is their right but by the same token I don't think
,-
2
.
PZM3.20.90
it is their right to add a doorway and additional vehicles on
that mall area to service that extra doorway because it is
probably not going to be serviced by the alley. So if the
Commission members individually have feelings about that if they
would express it to the HPC members, I would appreciate it.
Welton: It is creating a new glass storefront where a brick wall
has always existed.
Mari: Is that a doorway replacing a storefront?
Welton: No.
but placed in
doorway.
Mari: Where on the building is that to be located?
It is a new storefront like any other storefronts
a wall where it is bricks--a storefront including a
Graeme: North of the hotel entrance.
STAFF COMMENTS
Leslie: Fred Gannett will be here at your next meeting to talk
about the enforcement issue.
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were none.
MINUTES
MARCH 6. 1990
Bruce made a motion to approve minutes of March 6, 1990.
Mari seconded the motion with all in favor.
UTE PARK AH ZONE
WORK SESSION
Leslie:
to--
Made very brief presentation then turned session over
Torn ?: Part of the land use operation of the proj ect is the
rezoning from its current rural residential zone district to the
newly adopted Affordable Housing zone district. This project
represents one of the first projects for the affordable Housing
Zone District.
,,-...
We are meeting tomorrow with the Housing Authority. The plans
are very conceptual. We need as much feedback based on the
information you can give us.
-
3
,
PZM3.20.90
The site sits right at the end of ute Avenue directly across from
the Aspen Club, Aspen Club Townhomes and the Benedict Building.
It is approximately 3.8 acres and currently zoned rural
residential. Access to the project is by way of ute Avenue for
automobile and pedestrian. One advantage to this site is that in
terms of residents they probably already have the closest parking
spot to town. So the walking access from this parcel to town is
really good.
The physical characteristics to the site--the lower portion of
the site is generally sloping at a 10 to 15% range and begins to
get steeper and steeper as you move up the site. Existing
vegetation is primarily Aspen and Spruce. One of the more
prominent characteristics on the site are the geologic hazards.
The site has avalanche and rock fall danger. To this extent we
have met with a guy named Art Wiers who is an international
avalanche ___M___. He has got over 100 projects to his credit
that he has consulted on and we had him look at this site and
make recommendations to us on what the avalanche danger is and
also mitigation techniques that are available to us.
..,~, ' ,--"
Art has played an instrumental roll in the actual location of the
buildings. They are where they are because of those constraints.
The actual architecture has taken form based on mitigation
techniques that Art has recommended.
'-
The area in the center of the site is M clear of any
avalanche danger and that is why the majority of the development
is in that area. The area to the left is in an area that is a
very low frequency avalanche path but there is a possibility of
it. So that area in particular we have to mitigate.
The proposed development calls for 7 free market units and 16
deed restricted units. This program is in compliance with all
requirements of the AH zone district. The free market units
represent 3 bedroom configuration approximately 3,000 to
3,500sqft each. All the parking is located underground. Again
that is really a reflection of the constraints on the site. We
don't have the surface area to park cars so we are parking them
underground. The units have been designed to step up the
hillside and provide for an internal courtyard.
The deed restricted units--there are 16 units and 2
bath configuration averaging approximately 1, 100sqft.
are parking cars in underground garages which is
underneath the deed restricted units.
bedroom, 2
Again we
located
The deed restricted units need to be designed so that they fit
with the free market units. The deed restricted units cannot
'-
4
PZM3.20.90
detract from the value of the free market units. Therefore the
materials have to be the same. The design character has to be
the same. The outdoor amenities, the landscaping really has to
be the same.
The Housing Authority response is that they are looking to
private developers in the course of the next year or so to put
inventory on the market in the middle income category. The
Housing Authority will concentrate over the next year or so on
the development of low and moderate income categories. So we are
seeking middle income designation which will put the sale price
of these units at a ceiling price of $124 per square foot. That
is essentially $135,000 for a 2 bedroom unit including the
underground parking garage, 2 bedroom, 2 bath.
Compton: Where is the ute Trail in relation to this parcel.
Torn:
(Showed on map.) It is completely off site.
Graeme: I question what you say when you talk about the deed
restricted units needing to have the same character and materials
as the free market units. I think it is a benefit that they are
not similar. When you make them similar you create this need for
subsidy. But then you make this whole thing look like a project
so to speak.
'-
I think if you had 2 different architectural characters they
would not only be more true to what they are doing and being used
for but I think it would lend a more varied kind of feeling to
the whole development.
Tom: By virtue of the fact that this set if buildings are
running parallel with grade and deed restricted units run
perpendicular to grade the buildings are going to be different to
begin with. We are looking at a marketing call that the client
has made that with the proximity of these units to each other,
although they don't need to look the same and look like a project
the overall quality level of the deed restricted units needs to
be a level to where it doesn't detract from the free market
units.
The benefit to the employee is that he is getting a subsidy from
the free market that would otherwise not be there.
Roger: One concern I have is the avalanche problem--what this
tells me here is there is probably no avalanche threat for the
free market project but the deed restricted townhouses are right
at the base of an avalanche shoot by virtue of it all being Aspen
instead of Evergreen.
5
PZM3.20.90
-'...-
Tom: The best we can do is to engineer this site as well as the
architecture to mitigate potential dangers of an avalanche. To
that extent we need to rely on our consultants.
Welton: This is 23 units. And it is essentially on a street
that has been building out to single family and it is now
experiencing a second wave with the combination of fairly high
density employee and free market.
Compton: It is presently zoned rural residential which requires
2 acres per dwelling unit. You have 3.8 acres which would mean 1
residential dwelling unit. And here we have 23 units. And
before I would want to pass on something like this--it looks to
me like we are using the affordable housing zone to subsidize
several more free market units. I question the use of the
Affordable Housing in this kind of area basically.
Jasmine: I would like to address this because it is my
neighborhood. In the years that I have lived on Waters Avenue I
have seen tremendous changes going along on ute Avenue which was
basically empty space except for the Gant which is very high
density.
',~
.
There was just like the Virden House on one side and then Aspen
Chance where they had--then of course we have everybody's
favorite structure--the steel Mill--which has changed the face of
ute Avenue as far as I am concerned that nothing else you could
possibly do to ute Avenue would have the impact of that one
building.
Mari: You left out 1010 ute.
.,...r,.....
Jasmine: 1010 ute actually is not quite as visible from certain
parts of Ute Avenue as it is from others. But to try to
characterize this as a single family rural residential
neighborhood anymore is ridiculous. It hasn't been for the last
4 or 5 years. And most of the excrescencies that have popped up
on there I think are much more obtrusive and revolting than this
development.
We are talking about density--we talked about this when we
started thinking about the affordable housing zone because the
only way to make it possible for there to be affordable housing
is to allow greater density. And our only hopes in that is that
you come up with projects that don't look like rabbit warrens,
that don't look like chicken coops. And I think this project for
the kind of density that it has is making a very serious attempt
to provide affordable housing in an area which would minimize the
use of the automobile. It provides for the automobile by giving
underground parking in an area which is close to the amenities of
-
6
PZM3.20.90
town. To me this is a wonderful location for this kind do of
project.
I can understand the applicant's desire to make this project look
acceptable as far as the free market is concerned and as far as
what is undoubtedly happening. 1010 ute is going to be in here
screaming if you try to make these look different.
My only concern with this would be that it might be possible to
reduce somewhat the size of the affordable units to keep the
prices down just a little bit more.
Tom: without the rezoning this project doesn't go.
Leslie: One concern that staff has would be the potential of
avalanche and the fact that the access driveway to the free
market units and the underground parking which is right across
the avalanche.
,'"'
Welton: If an avalanche comes down that shoot getting your car
out of the parking garage is going to be the last thing you are
going to be concerned with.
Roger: I think the driveway is an appropriate use in the
avalanche zone. I would rather see that than a house right in
the center of it.
'-.-
Welton: Does anybody have any objection at this point that they
feel so strongly to the rezoning that it would cause them a
problem when they corne back through in the real process?
Roger: We probably going to have to look at, in the future,
improvement of ute Avenue as a result of this.
Tom: As part of this application we are doing a traffic analysis
of the entire area and the impacts this project will have on the
area.
Welton: Well, Tom, in wrapping this up you are not getting any
negative feedback and that is positive.
I am not quite comfortable with this many units. Although this
could be a planning process that goes on' and on. I would be
interested when it does corne back for the Planning Office to do
for our information an analysis of what the better mix is, the
unit mix is, the square footage mix is and how it relates
specifically to the exact formula of the AH zone.
-
7
PZM3.20.90
~"....-
GORDON/CALLAHAN FINAL PUD/SUBDIVISION APPROVAL
STREAM MARGIN REVIEW. AND CONDITIONAL USE
Welton opened the public hearing.
Michael Herron excused himself from this hearing because of
conflict of interest.
Leslie made presentation as attached in record.
Sunny: The conditions which Leslie has set forth are generally
acceptable.
Stan Mathis: Addressed the trail issue.
Welton: without regard to the fact that--the Centennial Circle
that is the loop road that goes around the parking lot of the
Aspen Club--with regard as to whether that is public or privately
owned. It's a trail link that I use every day in the summer
time. And having a different route other than going out at
Crystal Lake Drive or going through the Cemetery would seem to
make some sense. Why given the proximity of the end of this
bridge and the end of your private road--why is that link is one
that cannot be established between Lot 2C and 2B.
Mathis: The traffic is one-way around the parking lot. The
asphalt area is about 11ft wide. We think and Parks Dept agrees
with us--they don't like the idea of corning up to this point.
Plus in order to make this a public use area you have got to have
100% consensus of all the homeowners in here.
It is going to be an easier time to convince the homeowners to
give you access along this road without interfering with the
parking lot. It might be wise to look at the alternative of
coming over the front of the Aspen Club which is the historic
link over the river, come up here , get on the street where you
are then in the one way flow of traffic out to the highway.
Then there is this other link down the river further that serves
the Club and comes out at the highway.
Sunny Vann: There is another reason and that is in order to
bring the trail through the middle of the Gordon Subdivision we
had to use our access driveway because of the limitations of the
width below the ditch. You can't eliminate the ditch. The side
of the hill is very sloped and so the trail experience would not
have been very desirable. You would have been corning across the
bridge from 1010 Ute and driving up the driveway up the 3 lots of
Gordon Subdivision to get to the Aspen Club and Centennial
Circle.
8
PZM3.20.90
That was our original proposal which Parks didn't like because it
crossed on the driveway and it wasn't a dedicated trail. And
then the whole issue of stopping the trail at Centennial Circle
and not being able to restrict people's use of Centennial Circle
and the liability questions that that raises.
Mathis: At issue is the width of the building envelopes. My
contention is that we are trying to make the river corridor have
less--appear to have less density. Were I hired to do a house
here would be to have as many rooms as possible with the river
and view experience. And I think that is going to lead to 2
story. It is going to force 2 stories on some parts of the lot.
If we were able to have 15ft greater width in our envelope then I
promise you there is not going to be 2 story units but at least
it gives you the latitude to place it on the site and also gives
people the latitude to do 1 story structures.
You agreed with us to have 4 lots along the river. City Council
didn't. Now all we are asking for is to increase our building
envelopes that additional 15ft so we can make things feel less
dense in there and the quality of the project goes up.
sunny: The FAR does not change.
Mari: We are being asked to accept that there probably won't be
any 2 story buildings?
Mathis: We are not saying that. There probably will be. There
may not be.
Mari: I am just worried that if we have a wider envelope then we
are going to have a wider and maybe still a 2 story. It looks to
me like all of the houses are going to be along the side that is
closest to the river and it might go up but they will be pUShing
that one boundary of the envelope.
Welton: On the properties at 1010 ute they came in with these
nice little circles when it was time for GMP and we said "Oh
aren't those nice round little circles". And then when the lots
actually had lines drawn between them they had these really fine
little lines drawn right up to the edge of them that were the
setback lines. And they said "Oh well we are just getting the
maximum amount of flexibility on each lot to design a house for
each of these 1010 ute Properties so that we don't have to go to
2 story houses and we can have ins and outs and then really make
them feel like they aren't on top of each other".
Mathis: This doesn't even resemble that project.
9
PZM3.20.90
Welton: You can say that but we bought the premise that making
for a bigger building envelope was going to make for somehow more
breathing space between the properties.
Mathis:
up with
They go
We ended up with 5ft
not 2 story buildings
down the hillside.
side yard setbacks. We also ended
but what are perceived as 4 story.
Welton: No, they go through the hillside.
Mari: They took away the hillside.
Mathis: This zone district requires a 10ft side yard setback.
We have 15. 30ft in lieu of 20ft between each house. The zone
district requires 15, OOOsqft lots. In this total property not
including Lot 9 which was preexisting we have 2.3 acres and we
are asking for 3 dwelling units. We are allowed 5 dwelling
units. We have a TDR for 1 of those. We have taken that out. So
I don't believe we have any kind of similar situation here.
Granted you might get a house that is 1 story that stretches all
the way across there.
Jasmine: Or a 2 story that stretches all the way across there.
Mathis: But it is going to be pretty thin because of the FAR.
Jasmine: To me what the problem is caused by is the facade. We
don't know what goes on in the back of the lot. We don't see
what goes on in the back of the lots. We see the facade. It
might as well be Hollywood sets for the most part from the
perception of the person on the river or the person trying to
walk on the trail.
What I am trying to get at is a way of evaluating the facade.
This may not be the architecturally correct way to perceive this
but this is the way women perceive it. So what would be the
length of each facade?
Mathis: We have 70, 75 and 75 across the face of those.
Jasmine: So technically each one of those could be 70 or 75 feet
across on that facade.
Mathis: That is correct. We haven't seen any double decker
trailer houses here. But that is what you are saying might
happen. Functionally a structure 75ft long and 15 feet wide and
2 stories--we haven't corne to that yet in town. I hope we don't.
-
10
PZM3.20.90
Welton: I
Aspen Club,
the block.
people had
else.
am upset with the density of the housing--that whole
Crystal Lake Drive. And you are the last people on
So you are facing more scrutiny than any of those
to. It is going to be harder on you than anybody
Mathis: We are trying to retrieve the loss of that one lot. We
lost big time on that lot. We are willing to do it but we are
also asking that you work with us some.
Graeme: I am pretty firmly with the applicant on the building
envelopes. I think that an architect is going to be able to do a
better job if he has more flexibility. And I don't think we are
going to wind up with the 2 story buildings everybody is
concerned about.
Compton: I agree with Graeme on that subject. I think that
given the setbacks for each to still maintain and the extra
flexibility and the floor area it seems like a reasonable
allowance. My question is on the necessity of that rock wall.
It seems to connect the houses into one mass.
Mathis: It is meant to separate what is man made from what is
supposed to be natural and requiring any sort of stream margin
review other than our agreed upon stabilization and revegetation
along that area.
Sunny: As a practical matter these lots won't be fenced. So
when somebody comes off the trail when you come across the bridge
it is just a flat open meadow area adjacent to the river. We
might have people picnic down by the river and this would
separate the lawns from the public area.
Mathis: Regarding our septic or sewer system not being accepted
by the city. That is true. It is a--we don't have the fall
required from Lot 2A, 2B, and 9 to get into the standard city
service we don't believe. We are proposing a system that has to
be maintained by the homeowners association to pump up hill and
then into the City'S system. We will work with the Engineering
Dept until they are happy with our system.
The other item is there is not in the code a provision for 6%
grade on driveways. The issue with all the people putting
garages below their houses off of alleys. Even a city street is
allowed to be 11 or 12% grade. So we are going to keep our
driveways within that I hope.
Leslie: When they left council under conceptual council required
them to provide an accessory dwelling unit for every unit. They
are still only proposing to do 2.
-
11
PZM3.20.90
Sunny: I suspect Council will require us to comply with Ord #1.
Welton: I am a real pain when it comes to trails in this part of
town and when I see natural linkage like what is between the end
of that bridge and that roadway whether or not it takes a
thousand people's OK to legally be able to go down Crystal Lake
Drive on your bicycle I hate to see an opportunity like that
linkage go by the wayside and never happen.
So understanding the grave problems with connecting with the end
of Riverside Drive that linkage is something that I would require
and want to see dotted in on the plats even though it is not on
the master plan. Through the middle.
Roger: I agree.
Sunny: We had originally shown the trail that carne up as you
suggested, gained our access driveway--all of our access driveway
and the irrigation ditch to Centennial Circle. The concern was
its proximity to the building envelope between 2C and 2B. We
were very much concerned about getting a similar situation that
you have across the river. We can provide an alignment. In fact
we have shown it dotted in but it is 15ft from the adjacent
building envelopes on both of those lots. But it is right
between 2 houses.
Welton: That's right. And that gets to the other area I think
council whether they knew it or not were right when they said
eliminate that lot without any discussion of expanding other lots
to fill in the void. I am not in favor of expanding the
envelopes.
Sunny: Even if you leave the envelopes the way they are it still
right between 2 houses. It is not the best trail experience.
Wel ton: Right now the envelopes are ink on paper. Those
building lines can be moved to accommodate the trail in a better
fashion.
Sunny: There has to be some give and take. The whole idea is
not to reduce it to an undevelopable site simply to get a trail
through the middle of the property when there are other
reasonable alternatives around the property that are shown on the
Trails Masterplan and to everyone's advantage.
The applicant has offered to construct a bridge which is a very
desirable component of the system. He thought it was a
reasonable representation since he had agreed originally to try
and put a trail through his property but it proves that it really
--
12
PZM3.20.90
doesn't work the best of everyone's interest including the people
who are going to be living here.
There are other accesses to the Club that Engineering prefers,
that the Parks Dept prefers and the Planning Office appears to
prefer.
Andy Hecht: There is a Master Trail system and we are not
creating the impacts that caused the necessity for the trail. We
are willing to work with you to try and link the trail system. I
don't think it is fair for you to ask the project to assume that
kind of burden and diminish it's value so much to take the
position that if we don't agree that the whole project fails. If
the project fails you still don't get your trail.
Roger: My problem with this trail thing is that right now it
appears that that is connecting to a dead end.
Mathis: It goes down further right into here and then we have at
least one lot to get across to Helger Anderson's property.
Leslie: We have for sure that we know of 2 easements along the
river up to hwy 82. We know that we need 1 more.
.-
Bruce: I really have a problem with us trying to re-create the
trail system just because there appears to be an obvious link
through this property owner's property. I think we must outline
a trail system and we can require them to do what they have got
to do to fit in with that system but I don't see that we can in
fact re-design our masterplan trail system when we have got an
applicant in front of us.
Compton: There is a bicycle link that goes back by the Benedict
building around to the Aspen Club and as to where somebody might
be going--if you are corning out of the Aspen Club and headed into
town this might be slightly more direct to corne through
Centennial circle and that drive area there and then continue on
down the river. I couldn't see corning through there and then
going back up to ute Avenue.
Welton: You could see going through there and connecting over to
Calderwood into Waters Avenue.
Mathis: Unless the trail breaks through over into Waters Avenue
someplace, you don't have a link into Waters.
Welton asked for public comments.
stephan Edlis: We are one of the victims of Skip Behrhorst plan
because we own Lot 10. The only thing we can say in our defense
13
PZM3.20.90
is ours is the smallest house. So there we have it. I am a
director of the association. The trail issue of course is of
interest to us. The trail that Greg Mogun is going to design
with the approval of the people that were working on that issue
to a general degree have a concern is going to be a fisherman's
trail--a footpath and not intended for bikes. And the only
concern that we have as far as trails are concerned about our
area which is supposed to be paved along the fence is if it
doesn't go anywhere why pave it? I would like to have this to be
known as our concern.
Larry Frederick: My concern is with the trails as well. I live
on the east end of town and I agree with ute. I use the Aspen
Club. We lost part of that already. There are 4 houses now
sitting right here where there was a bike path. Now we use this
street. It really would be nice to get to town not having to
take the CrestaHaus hill which is not adequate. It is dangerous.
It is a dead end. It doesn't go anywhere.
-
Why can't we connect to Riverside Drive or why can't, we connect
over here where people can use it so that people can funnel off
of 82 from the east end of town. We are trying to have auto
disincentives. We are trying to get people to use their bikes.
I am sorry this is on your land. But this is our last chance at
trying to increase--now you are talking about a masterplan. This
doesn't exist. It is going to be a foot path. You can't expect
people to use it in all weather. It would be nice if you could
come off of ute Avenue and come down here and make a loop. That
would be real nice. It is not going to happen. This doesn't
exist. It might if the 1010 ute people's money is used by the
City within 2 years by the city. So we have got to get the city
on it. We have got these things in motion but nobody ever
connects them.
Mathis: I would point out to you that the theory is good and I
agree with you that is the only link you have. However Crystal
Lake Road is a private drive. And that is the problem we have.
You have once again a dead end trail.
Frederick: I would like to see you either connect to Riverside
or connect to circle.
Lennie Oates: I own Lot 12 in Riverside. What you propos~ to do
is to cut through a vacant lot, the only one left ~n the
subdivision that is owned by Bob Murray and where that would come
out would be on a blind corner on Riverside Drive where there are
accidents all the time. There is no curb and gutter. There is
no room on the lots for a trail so you would be directly
competing with traffic on Riverside Drive and I think all the
-
14
PZM3.20.90
property owners over there would, to a T, object to the
introduction of a lot of bike traffic on that vehicular street.
Frederick: We had a nice head-on right over there on ute Avenue
right there. You can't use that bike trail in the winter time.
You have got to walk on the street. They crash all the time
there too. We have got a dangerous situation there too.
Welton asked if there was any more public comment. '
Leslie: The 2 trails over at the 1010 ute--with this whole
fiasco with the wall, the city was able to create a fairly OK
situation. The trail going behind the homes along the fence is
going to be paved. An escrow account is being set up for the
construction of the Riverside trail and for the paving of the
trail behind the homes.
The reason I feel it is really important that we pave that trail
now is because everybody knows it is going to be paved. 10 years
from now or 5 years from now when we corne back through and want
to pave it when we have an ability to connect it to something we
are going to go through the same headache of convincing people
that we had the ability to pave it.
"-
Our original idea of eliminating the trail easement to the middle
of the Callahan/Gordon subdivision and up along the northern edge
is because we would have the ability eventually we thought to use
that access easement to cut over to Centennial Circle or we would
have the ability in the future to cut right through to Riverside;
The Enloe access agreement.
Sunny: There is no public access across Enloe.
Leslie: I know that but that--going up to that point gives us
that potential future option for that. We have very little money
right now to build the bridge. The applicant seems to be
offering to pay for the whole construction of the whole bridge.
To use Centennial Circle and Crystal Lake Road this subdivision
becomes the burden of the homeowner's association to do that. If
push came to shove you would use Crystal Lake Road. It is a
private road and you would need approval from the homeowner's
association. I would hope that if the trail is eliminated
through the Gordon/Callahan we would have their approval to use
Crystal Lake Road in the future.
We are approximately 2 easements away from getting from where the
bridge is down river up to Hwy 82.
-;<,"';~,
Welton: This just looks to me like it is one length that would
take one easement from that one owner to connect a paved area
-
l5
PZM3.20.90
that is the access road to this subdivision to the end of that
bridge.
sunny: How do you use it if you don't have--you could trespass--
but how do you use it.
Welton: Crystal Lake Road is used by all kinds of people all the
time and I have yet to see anybody--
Frederick: There has been some discussion as to the increase of
traffic through that area. The condominium association people
are concerned with the homeowners and the owners of the Club and
I think you would find very strong opposition to more public
access through there. I think you are making a very serious
mistake if you are trying to re-design the master trail plan.
Mathis: I can tell you to the degree that we are able--we are
members of the association. And an alignment with--go down to
the face of the Aspen Club over the existing bridge and go up
Crystal Lake Road. But we are only one small part. So we are
not going to stand in your way of doing that but I think it is
usually city policy that we don't have to pave and build the
trail until there is a full public alignment to Hwy 82. So I
doubt that even if we were required for that easement through
there, we are not going--it is going to be an easement but it is
not going to be paved.
Welton: I didn't say a paved road. I said just an easement
connecting. If it never works out, it never works out.
Welton: Those members of the commission that would be inclined
to vote in favor of doing this little bit of trail connection,
please raise their hands. An easement only.
Bruce: with no bridge.
Mathis: No bridge.
Welton: I am saying an easement with the bridge.
the vote would be for.
That is what
Jasmine: start allover again.
Welton: The proposal before us is for a bridge going across the
river. That bridge should at least have an easement if not a
paved trail any time soon.
Jasmine: So you are saying "Do we want a bridge plus an
easement".
-'-
16
PZM3.20.90
Welton: That is what I am saying. Yes.
Roger: The bridge will eventually be there.
Welton: Whether the City builds it or--
Welton then counted to 5.
Wel ton: Those people not in favor of this option easement
through the middle of the property.
There were 5 people that were in favor of it and there is 2
people that are not in favor of it. So that one way or another
is going to end up being in the text of the conditions.
Mathis: The paying for the bridge was not a part of the memo.
This is something we realized at the last moment when we tried to
take a look at--
Andrew Hecht: I think that what you are saying is you are going
to impose that easement wherever it goes, whatever it interferes
with and we can't stop you from voting that way if we think it is
not appropriate.
Welton: You can take it to city council.
',~
Hecht: I know. But then you have money for the bridge and I
assume that is what you will do. You will build your bridge.
And it is creating--I think the trail system should be
constructed through co-operation of land owners and not this
imposition. It is not going to work. In the end you are not
going to get your connection and it will hurt us terribly.
Roger: I think in the end what is going to happen is you are
going to go to city Council and they are probably going to drop
that easement. But at least they had the benefit of a
recommendation of connecting that. It is such a close and
convenient link it seems logical to connect it.
Welton: And frankly having taken part in writing, drafting and
going through the design of this masterplan we probably didn't
spend this amount of time talking about half of the trails on
this as opposed to this 300ft long piece of easement.
The outstanding issue is whether or not it is appropriate after
City Council eliminated one of the parcels of land to allow the
other parcels of land to sort of billow out and the envelopes
respectively for those parcels of land to billow out along with
them to create a larger footprint.
17
PZM3.20.90
Is the Commission inclined on a straw vote basis to make as a
condition of the approval that the building envelopes stay the
same as they were or they be allowed to expand.
Should the building envelopes stay the way they were?
Three were in favor of this.
Those in favor of allowing the building envelopes to expand to
the proposal with no increase in FAR.
Five were in favor of this.
Welton: The step back configuration along the river frontage was
another question. Does anybody have a problem with that?
Compton: May we arrange the lot lines? Is that the applicant's
prerogative?
Leslie: The lot line adjustment is reviewed by city council.
And staff doesn't have any problem with it.
sunny: I think C then will stay as Leslie has drafted.
.....,.....
Welton: Yes.
-
sunny: #1K would be eliminated since the majority of you felt
the flexibility on the envelopes would be desirable.
We would prefer that #L specify that the additional accessory
dwelling units would be provided on Lots 2A and 2B.
Welton: That is fine with us too.
sunny: #2, Leslie, I think we have agreed that prior to the
~ssuance of building permit for those parcels for those lots
which have accessory dwellings the deed restriction has to be
submitted. If we sell a lot that does not have accessory
dwelling unit and the person wishes to construct, we can't do a
deed restriction if we don't have it.
Condition #5 was the one that stan asked that this simply reflect
that we would adhere to the grade requirements imposed by the
city street standards as opposed to a mandatory 6%.
Welton: Right.
sunny: And then #11 I believe would be deleted based on the
straw poll and that we revise it to reflect what was represented
-
18
PZM3.20.90
here today. That is we squared off the building envelopes to
stagger the front facades.
Leslie: However that is reflected in #M so just eliminate that.
Sunny: I guess #14, if you want to recommend that we be required
to pay for the bridge would stay in there but I think since we
(much rattling of papers) trail that 14 would be eliminated
because there is no mandatory requirement as part of the
subdivision that requires us to build a bridge on City property.
Roger: I think #14 should be changed that if the City council
decides that the trail easement is not essential then #14 should
be appropriate.
Leslie: Essentially that is your way of saying you want the
easement first but if the easement doesn't happen then you want
full payment of the bridge.
Roger: Yes. If they are willing.
Welton: Prior to this whole trails discussion you were going to
not have a problem with condition #14. Is that correct?
-
sunny: If the trail was to be eliminated then #14 would be fine
to establish conditions under which we would build the bridge. I
really didn't think that P&Z would require the trail through the
middle of the project. If that is your preference then I would
like #14 eliminated or as an either/or situation.
Roger: Yes. I suggest we make it an either/or so the council
can end up deciding this issue. So we will modify #14 to read
"If city council should eliminate the trail easement through the
subdivision then prior to issuance of a building permit an escrow
account should be established for the bridge construction
contributions.
Welton asked if there was any further public comment. ,There was
none and he closed the public hearing.
MOTION
Roger: I move to approve the conditional use and the stream
Margin Review and recommend to city council to approve final PUD
subdivision of the Gordon/Callahan Subdivision with the following
conditions:
condition #1 being the same as on Planning Office memo dated
March 20, 1990 with the exception that paragraph K is eliminated.
,,.....
19
PZM3.20.90
In addition C is modified that the trail easement through the
subdivision and language dedicating the trail to public use.
Leslie: L language is modified to provide adus on #2A and #2B.
Roger: L is so modified.
Conditions #2 through #4 remain in tact.
condition #5 is modified to indicate that street standards shall
be used instead of spelling out 6%.
condition #6 through #10 are in tact.
condition #11 is eliminated.
condition #12 through #13 are in tact.
Condition #14 is modified to indicate that if the City Council
should eliminate the trail easement through the subdivision then
prior to issuance of a building permit an escrow account should
be established for the bridge construction contributions.
Condition #15 is in tact.
,~,
Mari seconded the motion with everyone in favor except Jasmine.
---
Jasmine: I would like
opposition is because I
building envelopes.
to
am
state that the
opposed to the
reason I
expansion
am in
of the
MAU CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW FOR AN ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT
PUBLIC HEARING
Welton opened the public hearing.
stan Mathis: I have a number of clients who are willing to do
these units in their homes. They are coming forward to offer
them. Down the road if they want to sell them, they could be a
hindrance of some sort. So even though this client is willing to
put this in his home now, they would like the ability to
eliminate it if it should ever become a problem.
We are discovering a difficulty with financial institutions on
twofold. #1 the appraisals are coming back and we are somewhat
harmed by this and #2 it is very difficult to get permanent
financing when we have restricted unit in a mixed use.
So we are asking for the ability at any time in the future that
20
PZM3.20.90
that unit be eliminated if so necessary by the owner with the
proviso that the kitchen has to be removed.
Kim Johnson, Planner: That way it won't become a bandit unit.
Mathis: And we would have an easier time down the way convincing
clients to do these units if they know they are not being __M__.
Welton: That is the sort of thing that should be the substance
for an amendment to the code.
Kim: The code provides you can remodel your home and take away
an accessory dwelling unit.
Mari: As long as there is no extra floor area involved.
Welton: Actually in the code without putting a condition on this
approval or even amending the code you have to get a conditional
use approval for conditional use. But for permitted use, you
don't. So if you converted from a conditional use back to a
permitted use it would not necessarily, I don't think, require
any approval one way or another.
Jasmine: On the other hand suppose somebody expanded their house
with a conditional use?
Welton: That's where the difference would be. If there is no
benefit to an applicant for doing the conditional use by virtue
of extra FAR, then they can convert back to permitted use as long
as they are converting to a permitted use that is conforming by
virtue of floor area.
Jasmine: But what happens if somebody expands and then decides
they want to convert back?
Mari: Then they have to pay something.
MOTION
Jasmine: That being the case I would make a motion to recommend
approval of the conditional use for the Mau accessory dwelling
unit subject to condition #1 in Planning Office memo dated March
9, 1990.
Welton asked for public comments. There were none and he closed
the public hearing.
Roger seconded the motion with all in favor.
21