Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19800617 f ORM \~ C. F. HOECKEL B. B. ill L. co. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission June 17, 1980 The Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission held a regular meeting on June 17, 1980, at 5:00 P.M. in the City Council Chambers. Members present were Olof Hedstrom Welton Anderson, Roger Hunt, Lee Pardee and Joan Klar. Also present were Sunny Vann of the Planning Office, City Attorney Ron Stock and Assistant, and Bill Dunaway of the Aspen Times. Approval of Minutes Commissionmembers Comments Red Onion Subdivi- sion Exemption ~.. / Roger Hunt questioned the wording of minutes of April 22, 1980 for the can, then of the minutes of May 06, 1980 page 2, is Peter Guy and in paragraph mechanizium, should be corrected. Olof Hedstrom corrected obstained to abstained in all minutes and with those corrections he entertained a motion to approve with corrections noted, the minutes of April 22, 1980 and May 06, 1980. Lee Pardee so moved, Welton Anderson seconded the motion, all in favor, motion carried. Olof Hedstrom noted the letter for a Special Meeting to be held July 1, 1980. Karen Smith commented there will be a discussion on the Condominiumization Policy, and the purpose Council has initiated an Ordinance for Subdivision which would repeal the Condominiumization Review and repeal that section, which has the P & Z and Council look at displacement for the reason that it is rewarding the person who has gouged their tenants over the years and penalized the person that has been fair. Roger Hunt commented that if the City Council wants to be the policemen of paperwork then let us do the planning and maybe we should streamline the subdivision procedures so it goes directly to Council. If they are not interest- ed in our recommendations then we could be just doing the planning. Most of our regular meeting times is spent being a rubber stamp and the planning takes special times. Karen Smith commented that the Planning OFfice is also spending more time on administrative matters and with more of a streamline process that they should be able to do more planning themselves. As far as the Pro Shop, it is proceeding along the lines that you have approved and it has been painted and to be landscaped and to be refer- red to the City Engineer for approval by the Parks Direc- tor as recommended by you. The Aspen Institute will come up for its second reading on July 14, 1980. Sunny Vann of the Planning Office introduced the Red Onion Subdivision Exemption and stated this is in the packets again and the discussion on employee housing is before you again. Ashley Anderson commented that the points of interest are concerning the description of the units and the unit I, is the old resturant, unit 2 is the old bar, unit 3 are the units on the second floor, and unit 4 is the old Gormet Room and the night-club. The units on the second floor consist of 6 rooms, one being an eighth of the space is an office and has been, the other 5 were used for employee housing and not rented but used for the employees working there. It is not our intent to use this space for residential space and if we did we would sub- mit to any reasonable employee restrictions. These units are not legal housing units but just rooms. fORM~' C. F. HOECKrL B. B. ill l. C J. -2- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves June 17, 1980 Regular Meeting Stream Margin Review- Visual Arts Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Welton Anderson moved to recommend approval of the Red Onion Subdivision Exemption subject to the owner/appli- cant complying with the stipulations outlined in the Engineering Department's memorandum dated May 21, 1980, sUbject to the compliance with the provisions of Section 20-22 concerning deed restrictions for employee housing, if occupied. Lee Pardee seconded the motion. Roger Hunt strongly urged the members to vote against this motion as there is no obligation on the part of the developer to maintain employee housing units as has been recorded in the past and further the splitting of this property is such that it appears that they are dividing all these in such a way to be profitable for no one except the bar and loose the resturant future. I believe it is not in the best interest of the community to allow this condo- miniumization. Welton Anderson then stated he would like to amend his motion to include reference in the condomi- niumization recorded deed, a subdivision exemption state- ment noting the existing present uses or prior uses of unit 3, which has a previous history of residential housing and now that the use is modified to commercial in the future, that Growth Management Plan approval is necessary, (suggested by Ron Stock). Lee Pardee seconded the motion as amended. Lee Pardee, Welton Anderson and Olof Hedstrom voted aye. Joan Klar and Roger Hunt voted nay. Motion is carried 3 to 2. Karen Smith introduced the Stream Margin Review for the Aspen Center for the Visual Arts by the City of Aspen, for landscaping work done on the old Holy Cross property. In the memorandum Karen had tried to review what the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan says about this area, because one of the criteria the P & Z is charged to looking to, is consistency with the Roaring Fork Greenway Plan. In the 1972 Greenway Plan this site was recommended for Public Aquisition and is being used in consistence with this Plan. The landscaping program only inhances its consistency with that plan, if done under criteria that are consistent with the plan. The only recommendation the Planning Office would make is that the sodding of the area be limited to an area very close to the building and the rest of the area be seeded with a grass mixture that is recommended in the plan. The tree planting that is proposed is very consistent with the vegetation designated with that area. The addition of the berm is the only thing that conflicts with flood plain but, the County Engineer has recommended that it would not increase the flood hazard either to this property or up stream, and if plans consistent with the Roaring Fork Greenway are implimented to rechannel the river to its original coarse, the flood hazard on this property would be mitigated. Your recommendation, we would suggest, be conditioned on the eventual paving of the trails linkage and construction should be overseen by the Building Inspector and sodding be limited to the area immediately surrounding the building and that a seeding mixture consistent with that recommendation in the appen- dices of the plan and consistent with the recommendation of the County Engineer, there should be no placing of improvements or materials that could float in the circum- stance of a flood and non of those improvements should be placed anywhere on this property. Olof Hedstrom entertained a motion to recommend approval of the Stream Margin Review to the Building Inspector . . FGR"'~O C.F.HOECKELB.B.illl.CJ. -3- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves June 17, 1980 Regular Meeting City of Aspen Duplex Special Review Landow Subdivision Exemption Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission and recommend careful note in following of the provisions #2, #3 and #4 of the Planning Offices memorandum dated June 12, 1980, and cooperation with the County in respect to trails linkage to the property. Roger Hunt so moved. Welton Anderson seconded the motion, all in favor. Motion carried. Sunny Vann introduced the City of Aspen Duplex Special Review and stated that the P & Z had approved both a sub- division exception and a subdivision exemption and now we have a private application by Wayne Chapman and Anne Freers, requesting special review approval for their low and moderate income housing project, to build two deed restricted employee housing units. Ron Stock represented the parties mentioned and stated the real issue here is the determination of Employee Housing needs for the community, and explained the plats being shown and explained that unit #1 is a four-bedroom 2,000 sq.ft. structure and unit #2 is a three-bedroom 1,500 sq.ft. structure. Wayne Chapman and family will occupy unit #1 and Anne Freer will occupy the unit #2. The applicants agree to deed restrict the property and owner/applicants will occupy the residential duplex as their primary residence. The city has the option to at time of termination of the employee, to purchase the property back at the same price as sold to the employee. Roger Hunt moved to recommend to City Council to grant special approval to City Condos and include the further stipulations as in the Planning Office memorandum dated June 13, 1980 and the City Attorney's comments in his letter dated May 22, 1980. Lee Pardee seconded the motion, all in favor, motion carried. Sunny Vann introduced the Landow Subdivision Exemption which was a single family unit that has been removed and applicant proposes to construct a duplex. The Engineering Department recommends approval provided the owner/appli- cant complies with the conditions stated and the Planning Office recommends approval subject to their conditions as stated in their memorandum dated June 9, 1980. After some discussion it is shown that there maybe a conflict and would like the rental history checked and then be brought back for approval. Roger Hunt moved to table the action of subdivision exemption for the Landow Subdivision, for further infor- mation of the rental history and proposal. Lee Pardee seconded the motion, all in favor, motion carried. Olof Hedstrom entertained a motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:00 P.M. Welton Anderson so moved. Joan Klar seconded the motion, all in favor, motion carried. ~ ~O~,", Sandi Meredith, Deputy City Clerk