Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19930824 v ~x RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING , ZONING COMMISSION AUGUST 24. 1993 Meeting was called to order by Chairman Bruce Kerr. Answering roll call were David Brown, Sara Garton, Roger Hunt and Bruce Kerr. Jake ViCkery, Tim Mooney and Jasmine Tygre were absent. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS David: I would suggest we have discussion on designating certain si tes in the community to AH as a way to preserve some of the historic cottages as a means of providing inexpensive single family detached homes. STAFF COMMENTS There were none. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were none. UTE PARK GMOS EXEMPTION AMENDMENT Kim Johnson, Planning: Made presentation as attached in record. ,/ MOTION Roger: I move to recommend amendment to a 1992 GMQS exemption for the ute Park Affordable Housing Units to raise the category 3 units to category 4 and to support the Housing Board request that the new category units be specified to sell for a maximum of $135,000 and preference be given category 3 households. Sara seconded the motion. Bruce: I have 2 comments I want to make. I am a little concerned about the possible perception that somehow we are doing something to help bailout the private developer. Secondly I understand the logic behind bumping them into category 4 but I am just wondering if we couldn't have achieved the same thing by leaving the 3 units in category 3 and just raising the price a few thousand dollars more. It is not raising them that much more. My calculations show it raises them to $186,750.00 instead of 180,000.00. It seems to me rather than going through the hoops and trying to change the categories, the same thing could have been accomplished this way. Roll call vote: David, no, Sara, yes, Roger, yes, Bruce, yes. tI"" MEMORANDUM TO: Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission FROM: Kim Johnson, Planner RE: Ute Park Affordable Housing Subdivision: Amendment of GMQS Exemption Approval of Deed Restrictions DATE: August 24, 1993 ================================================================= SUMMARY: Staff recommends approval of an amendment to the restrictions for three of the seven affordable townhomes. request is supported by the Housing Board. BACKGROUND: The Applicant, James Martin, received approval for this first AH (Affordable Housing) zone development in 1992. The subdivision/PUD consists of three free market lots and seven deed restricted bownhomes located at the far east end of ute Avenue. As part of the entire review, Growth Management Exemption was granted by City Council (upon recommendation by the Planning Commission) for the affordable units as allowed within an AH zone. deed The APPLICANT'S REQUEST: The Applicant seeks to amend the 1992 GMQS /" Exemption approval to change the deed restrictions on three townhome units from Category 3 to Category 4. The remaining four ,~, units will remain at Category 4. This request is necessitated by increased costs associated with the project which have arisen since its approval. Please refer to the memo dated August 13, 1993 from Tom Baker of the Housing Office for more details, Exhibit "A". STAFF DISCUSSION: Staff has determined that the proposed change is substantial enough to warrant a replication of the original review process via P&Z and city Council. Because the entire project is blanketed by a PUD approval, the Planning Director will be able to process a staff-level PUD Amendment upon approval of the revised GMQS Exemption by Council. GMOS Exemption for Affordable Housinq: Pursuant to Section 8-104 C.1(c) the Council shall exempt deed restricted housing that is provided in accordance with the housing guidelines. The Commission shall review and make a recommendation to Council regarding the housing package. According to the Code, the review of any request for exemption of housing pursuant to this section shall include a determination of the city's need for such housing, considering the proposed development's compliance with an adopted housing plan, the number of dwelling units proposed and their location, the type of dwelling units' proposed, specifically regarding the number of bedrooms in each unit, the size of the dwelling unit, the rental/sale mix of the proposed development, and the proposed price categories to which the dwelling units are to be deed restricted. '- 1 \ PLANNING~ONING COMMISSION EXHIBIT , APPROVED 19 BY SOLUTION ".... r MEMORANDUM '- FROM: Kim Johnson, Planning Office Tom Baker, Housing Offi~ TO: DATE: August 13, 1993 GMQS Exemption: Amending ute Park Affordable Housing Development Category Mix RE: PURPOSE: The purpose of this memorandum is to initiate a GMQS Exemption amendment to the approved category mix of the ute Park AH project. The Housing Board has directed its staff to apply for a change in the unit mix on behalf of the developer, Jim Martin. Jim was the first person to use the City'S AH Zone. /" The current approval allows Jim Martin to construct seven (7) affordable housing units: four 3-bdrm, category #4 units; and three 3-bdrm category #3 units. As you are aware, attached 3-bdrm units can be sold for a maximum of $193,500 (category #4) and $126,000 (category #3). -, Jim Martin originally priced these units as follows: o category #3.......$126,000 o category #4.......$162,500 During pre-construction Jim discovered his costs had increased substantially for two reasons: first, interest rates had increased since the time he started the development review process; and tap fees (primarily sewer) were significantly higher than expected. Apparently the sewer tap fee is high due to down stream line improvements which are necessary in this portion of the city. Due to these cost considerations Jim Martin requested that the Housing Board grant him the ability to increase his prices $91,000. Jim proposes to do this by increasing the sale price of his category #4, 3-bdrm units to $180,000 and increase the sale price of his category #3, 3-bdrm units to $135,000. Therefore, the new unit pricing will be as follows: o category #4.......$135,000 o 'category #4.......$180,000 1 -;. -' r~ PZM8.24.93 '- ASPEN MEADOWS TRAFFIC MITIGATION PLAN REVIEW Bruce opened the public hearing. MOTION Roger: I move to continue the public hearing and table action to date certain of September 7, 1993. Sara seconded the motion with all in favor. KASTELIC PUD/SUBDIVISION Leslie turned in affidavit of mailing. (attached in record) There was discussion regarding incorrect address in the mailing. It was decided between the 3 attorneys present, the applicant's representative and the Commission to proceed with the hearing. /""' Bruce opened the public hearing. Leslie made presentation as attached in record. After discussion-- "............' MOTION Roger: I move to recommend subdivision and PUD review for the creation of 2 residential parcels at the Kastelic property with conditions to be hereafter listed in the Planning Office memo dated August 24, 1993. They are conditions #1 amended to read "Only a single family home is permitted on each lot because of lot size in the R-15 Zone District. The deletion of Planning Office condition #2. The inclusion of condition #3, #4 and #5. The deletion of condition #6. The inclusion of condition #7 through #16 inclusive with and additional binding note that would encourage the City to request a 14 foot trail easement along the Roaring Fork River through the property. David: I second the motion. I would modify the condition slightly to allow condition #12 to read "A drainage analysis performed by an architect or engineer registered in the state of Colorado". 2 " PZM8.24.93 ,,-'"', Leslie: Can we say "If I can include it". I will add that if we can add it. Bruce: I have a problem with this. By us adding it in we imply that somehow we know that an architect is qualified to do that. We don't know that. If the state has issued standards that say it must be a registered engineer and that is what staff puts in their memo I think we need to accept that. I am not prepared to say whether you or any other architect is qualified to do this. If you want to go to staff and go to the state to get them to change the standard that is fine. But I am not prepared to change the condition of approval at this point. I don't think this the form to deal with that issue. Roger decided to leave the motion as stated. David then withdrew his second of the motion. Sara then seconded the motion. Roll call vote: David, yes, Sara, yes, Roger, yes, Bruce, yes. "."'~., . MOTION Roger: I make a motion to recommend consolidation of the PUD review for the Kastelic application to a 2-step process. Sara seconded the motion with all in favor. Roger moved to adjourn. Sara seconded the motion with all in favor. Time was 5:35 P.M. """"", 3