Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19791218 FOIUl!G C. F.HOECKEL B. B. & L. co. r'"' RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission December 18, 1979 The Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission held a regular meeting on December 18, 1979, at 5:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers. Members present were Olof Hedstrom, Lee Pardee, Nancy McDonnell, Parry Harvey, and Joan Klar. Also pre- sent were Karen Smith, Richard Grice and Sunny Vann of the Planning Office, and Dan McArthur, City Engineer. Commissionmember Comments Captain's Anchorage Expan- sion Olof Hedstrom opened the meeting and made a motion to change the meeting dates in 1980. Lee Pardee seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Olof Hedstrom stated since the TDR Ordinance is not ready and need to move to table the TDR's until January 8, 1980. Nancy McDonnell seconded, all in favor. Motion carried. Sunny Vann of the Planning Office introduced the Captain's Anchorage, Conditional Use Expansion, Policy Determina- tion which requires the review and approval of the P & Z. He explained the applicant wishes to modify and expand the Captain's Anchorage Restaurant, a conditional use in the Ll Zone, and the submitted proposal appears to exceed the zone's allowable external floor area ratio, as refer- red to in his memo dated December 13, 1979. The Planning Office feels the consideration of this application before a variance is approved through the Board of Adjustments is in compliance with the code and to have the P & Z give approval of zoning first would not be inconsistent and could prejudice the decision of the B of A. We can not find this procedure to be similar to any other request and no clear cut policy concerning such. Ashley Anderson commented that the dilemma we face is that we want to do something that would be good for the city and Captain's Anchorage. We are under a conditional use in that zone and what the P & Z looks at is, should the conditional use be allowed and should we be allowed to expand. He feels all they have to have is an okay for the zone area to expand from 3,000 sq.ft. to 4,500 sq.ft. without a drawing then we present plans to Board of Ad- justment for variance approval. Sunny Vann noted the code is very explicit as far as ex- pansion of a conditional use, and without sufficient in- formation to determine whether it complies with the code. Olof Hedstrom stated the question before us is not on the merits of this request but, primarily a policy and pro- cedural decision to how the application shall be consi- dered and what order by the appropriate governing bodies. Hedstrom then asked to open the public hearing. Jack explained the cost and maintenance problem is under a hardship and the expansion is mainly for sto- rage and kitchen facility, 50 to 75% would go to the kit- chen area and storage. We are aSking for this so as not to have to move for business reputation reasons and need this added area. Olof Hedstrom commented the P & Z is involved in the de- termination not an opinion, does the proposed use comply. and the answer is either yes or no. Secondly, is deter- mination of proposed use consistent with the code as to specifics and is left to judgment and so is the rest. FORM 10 C.F.HOECKELB.B.&l.CO. ,~ -2- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves December 18, 1979 Regular Meeting Conditional Uses in the S/C/I Zone Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Parry Harvey felt the commission can approve the expansion as long as it meets code requirements and all they want to do is get approval without violation and felt Sunny Vann feels there is not enough information to see if there is a violation or not. Olof Hedstrom felt that they could come before the P & Z with their plans showing that they are not in violation the requirements of the zoning code. In effect there are two questions, first is the expansion of 1,500 sq.ft. to satisfy as to appropriate expansion of the conditional use, second is how that is done is to be con- sidered at this point. If they stay within the code then they will be okay. Karen Smith recommended the alteration of the language of the code. It should state that it assumes a permitted use will comply with conditions. As is the code asks for a further determination of conditional uses and they are catagorized for good reason. Sunny Vann summarized that the need is to expand the res- turant and in reviewing the code he knows he must comply with the criteria and compliance with all the requirements of the code and the other criteria outlined and has a hardship to present to the Board of Adjustment. The appli- cation should come before P & Z with the criteria already being obtained. Joan Klar felt that information should be obtained before- hand. Lee Pardee felt everyone is in favor and that more information should be required to make a decision. Nancy McDonnell agreed with requiring compliance with the code and procedure beforehand. Parry Harvey felt compliance with the code then a review by this board would be his recommendation. Lee Pardee felt we have a responsiblity as Karen Smith pointed out. Olof Hedstrom asked for a motion. Lee Pardee moved that the application for expansion of a conditional use includes data such as bulk and area re- quirements and sufficient information to insure knowledge to make a determination as required in the code. Joan Klar seconded. All in favor, Parry Harvey, opposed. Motion approved. Olof Hedstrom made a motion to continue the public hearing, McDonnell seconded. All in favor, motion carried. Richard Grice introduced the amendment to the conditional use list for the S/C/I zone, which would allow some flex- ibility by adding the words, "Uses other than permitted uses may be allowed provided they are accessory to permit- ted uses and provided adequate safeguards are offered to guarantee the accessory status". This wording may be opening the door for higher rent (mixed uses), there is no one to administor or enforce this, and we open the door to hihgly subjective arguments and doesn't recom- mend approval. Olof Hedstrom suggest motion to be made by the commission. Nancy McDonnell moves that the commission does not add any other uses to the S/C/I zone, permitted or accessory, for the fOllowing reasons; it has the potential of rais- ing the rent in that area, it is to ambiguous and will FORM!D C.F.HOECKELB.B.&l.CO. - -3- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves December IS, 1979 Regular Meeting Stege Subdivision Exemption Horan Subdivision Exemption Oliver Subdivision Exemption Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission bring in arguments, it is much to subjective and inade- quate safeguards. Joan Klar, seconded, all in favor, mo- tion approved. Richard Grice of the Planning Office introduced the Stege Subdivision Exemption of Lot 17, Block 2, Snowbunny Sub- division at 820 Cemetery Lane consisting of an existing duplex. The upper unit is owner occupied and the lower unit rents for $650 per month, which exceeds the low, moderate and middle income guidelines. The Engineering Office recommends approval subject to three conditions. The City Attorney recommends approval sUbject to the notice and option provisions, as well as the six month minimum lease provisions. The Planning Office recommends approval subject to all the above as in my memo dated December 12, 1979. Joan Klar moved to recommend approval subject to the de- dication of road/utility easement, 10 foot drainage ease- ment and agreeing to enter into the sidewalk improvement district in accordance iwth the Engineering Office's memorandum of November 28, 1979 and furthermore, sUbject to the lower unit being deed restricted for a period of three years with a base rent of $650 per month, subject to the notice and option provisions of Section 20-22 and subject to the six month minimum lease provisions of Section 20-22, (add) approval of subdivision exemption. Nancy McDonnell seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Richard Grice introduced the Horan Subdivision Exemption of Lot 6, West Aspen Subdivision at 805 Cemetery Lane consisting of an existing house. The upper unit has historically been owner occupied. The lower unit has been rented by a relative at a special rental rate and causes it not to fall within the low, moderate and mid- dle income housing price range. The Engineering Office recommends approval sUbject to three conditions. The City Attorney recommends approval subject to the notice and option provisions, as well as the six month minimum lease provision of Section 20-22 of the Code. The Plan- ning Office recommends approval subject to all the above as in my memo dated December 14, 1979. Nancy McDonnell moves to recommend approval of Lot 6, 805 Cemetery Lane, sUbject of approval of the revision and resubmittal of an improvement survey, agreement to enter into a sidewalk, curb and gutter improvement dis- trict, and the provision of a 10' wide overhead utility easement, all in accordance with the recommendation of the Engineering Department's memorandum of December 7, 1979. Furthermore, approval should be conditioned upon the notice and option provisions as well as the six month minimum lease provision of Section 20-22 of the Code. Parry Harvey, seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Richard Grice introduced the Oliver Subdivision Exemption of Lot 8, Block I, Pitkin Mesa Subdivision consisting of a duplex presently under construction with no rental history. The Engineering Department recommends approval subject to three conditions being corrected prior to being placed on the next Ctiy Council agenda. The City Attorney recommends approval sUbject to the six month minimum rental restriction of Section 20-22 of the Code. FORMIG C.F.HOECKElB.B.&l.Co. -- -4.,- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves Reqular Meeting Latta Subdivision Exemption Zoning Enforce- ment Officer Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission December 18, 1979 The Planning Office recommends approval subject to all the above as in my memo dated November 15, 1979. Joan Klar moved to recommend approval of Lot 8, Block I, Pitkin Mesa Subdivision subject to the Engineering Office memorandum of November 9, 1979 and subject to the six month minimum lease restrictions of Section 20-22 of the Code. Parry Harvey, seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Sunny Vann of the Planning Office introduced the Latta Subdivision Exemption of 1225/1227 Mountain View Drive, consisting of a duplex. One-half of the Latta duplex has been owner occupied since 1973 and the other unit has been leased by the current tenants for approximately five years. Due to the property never being platted the Eng- ineering Department recommends exception from full subdi- vision compliance rather than subdivision exemption. The City Attorney recommends approval subject to the same and conditioned upon the compliance with the six month minimum lease restriction of Section 20-22 of the Code. The Housing Director has no objections, impact negated by pro- posed sale to the current tenant with additional safeguard in the form of proposed three year deed restriction. The Planning Office recoramends denial of request for subdi- vision exemption and approval of exception from full sub- division review, and subject to the above as in my memo dated December 14, 1979. Parry Harvey makes motion to deny exemption from subdi- vision for the Latta property. Nancy McDonnell, second- ed. All in favor, motion approved. Parry Harvey moved to recommend approval of exception on Latta subdivision compliance, exception from conceptual review before City Council and preliminary plat before the P & Z Commission, said property being located at 1225/ 1227 Mountain Veiw Drive. Property is subject to the Engineering comments in memorandum dated December 17, 1979, and subject to the compliance by the applicant of the six month minimum lease restriction of Section 20-22 of the Municipal Code and subject to the imposition of a three year deed restriction based upon price and occupancy guidelines for the low, moderate and middle income hous- ing pool. Joan Klar, seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Karen Smith and the commissionmembers discussed the spe- cifics as to where this office is to be located and the City Council has shown no allowable budget for a sepa- rate department. This position maybe included with sev- eral different departments and no decision has yet been made by the City Council, but will be on the January 14, 1980 City Council Agenda. Joan Klar moved to approve the Zoning Officer Resolution with the wording added in the last whereas, on the second page; "within the appropriate department". Nancy 1'1cDonnell, seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Olof Hedstrom moved to adjourn the meeting, Nancy McDonnell, seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Meeting adjourn- ed at 7:00 P.M. ~~ Sandi Meredith, Deputy City Clerk