Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19821116 .'"",- , RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves fORM '0 C.f.HO(CKELB.B.8cL.CO. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 16, 1982 Perry Harvey called the meeting to order with members Al Blomquist, David White, Roger Hunt, Pat Fallin, Jasmine Tygre, Welton Anderson and Lee Pardee. COMMISSIO}lliRS COMMENTS Pat Fallin said that last Spring the P&Z gave a conditional use to Arthur's Restaurant to put tables up outside. Fallin said that part of the conditional use was that he use the parking in the rear of the building and to put a sign up advising patrons that there is parking in the rear. Fallin wants to see this enforced. Roger Hunt comments on the Police parking on both sides of the street which is not in compliance with the decision from Council on where the Police should park. Welton Anderson said that after the last meeting concerning the Smuggler Area Master Plan it was suggested to get together with some County P&Z members and get a study session together. Perry Harvey introduces the Planning and Zoning Commissions new alternate David White. PUBLIC HEARING Pitkin Reserve Amendment to PUD Alice Davis, of the Planning office said that this is a request for an amendment to the Pitkin Reserve PUD. The applicant is requesting is that the twelve attached zerto lot line housing sites,with a private access road in front of the houses through the middle of the property, be amended. The applicant wants to do a different combination which will be determined at a later date. The applicant would like the option of doing whatever the market calls for, different combinations of duplexes and single family dwelling units. The Planning Office recommends that the P & Z recommend~the approval of the requested amendments to the Pfttkin Reserve pun subject to the following conditions: 1. The final development plan must be one of the three alternative combinations of single family detached units and attached, zero lot line units requested by the applicant. 2. The Planning Office must review and approve the final mix of unit types. The final plan must then be recorded, amending the original Pitkin Reserve's PUD plan prior to issuance of a building permit. 3. The Engineering Dept. must review and approve the revised detailed drainage and utility plan for the site prior to issuance of a vuilding permit. 4. The gatehouse must be a minimum of five feet from the front property line. S. There are representations made in their application, their revised PUD amend- ment al so be made since they did list a few things that they promised to do such as open space going to be changed. Al Blomquist asked what the provision for the trail connection from Pitkin Green to the Rio Grande Trail? Michael Lipkin said that there is no provision because at the time they attemptea to resolve that the applicant met with resistance on most fronts. Perry Harvey asked Lipkin about the attached unit in the second proposal where they haveseven free standing, two attached, is that two duplexes? Michael Lipkin said that it is two units. Bill Dunaway asked if all of these units that are represented include or exclude employee units. Michael Lipkin said that is excluding employee unit. Perry Harvey opens the Public portion of the Public Hearing. Kay Reed said that she has many question because she cannot tell from the drawings exactly what is happening. Reed asked that if in the new plan the applicant is using more of the 26 acres. Michael Lipkin said that the development takes place in the same development parcel that has been established. Lipkin said that the applicant started this process well over two years ago and received final approval from this body about a year ago , in that time the apllicant has had a chance to go study the site and hear what many neighbors have had to say during the Public Review process and also understand a little bit more about the market. Lipkin said that the changes the applicant is asking forare directly in response to that. Jack Kruemena said that he is not here to object but he would like to know what is going on by seeing a complete map of the elevation etc. '___n~,.,.o".... -- ,,4>.'. - 2 - Perry Harvey asked Alice Davis of the Planning Office what the height restriction would be. Davis said that it is 25ft. Jack Krueman asked about the fill. Perry Harvey said that when the road was on the downhill side of the residences, it required a large amount fill to put the road in, now by putting the road in above the homes and just below Willougbyway, it is more of a cut into the hill and it does'nt require it to be built up to the level of the homes because the homes are on an angle. Virginia Cronin, neighbor in the Pitkin Green section, she wonders about the road and how people get into the drive and how far the road will extend. Michael Lipkin said that it is a dead end road, a private road and it stops where it stops. Lipkin tacks up one of the plans on the wall to clear up some ~f these questions. Walter Mueller asked if there is any time limit to the whole project? Michael Lipkin said that everyone is anxious to see it built and completed as quickly as possible but there is not a deadline set on completion. Mueller said suppose that this things drags for the next ten years? Alan Richman said that there is a construction schedule in the original subdivision agreement and if it is of interest to Mueller the Planning office can pull this out and tell him what the schedule consists of. Kay Reed asked if the original plan showed clustering of the houses? Michael Lipkin said yes. Perry Harvey closes the public portion of the meeting and asks for questions and com- ments from the Board members. Roger Hunt said that he has not seen sufficient information to amend the PUD. Hunt said that the Commission does not have a PUD before them with specified foot- prints. Al Blomquist takes the opposite position of Roger Hunt. Blomquist thinks that this idea of downzoning as options from what was approved before is a real nice concept. Jasmine Tygre said that although this is a PUD, one of the things that was attractive at the previous submission was that it was going to be more open space and that the units were going to be joined now the applicant is going to separate single family units. Tygre does not understand how much space is going to be between the three standing units and how that will compare. Michael Lipkin said that the steepness of the hill makes it very desirable to keep a certain width as narrow as possible. Perry Harvey said that Tygre's attempt to understand this is similar to the rest of the Board understanding and that they would all like to see this in in its next step. Harvey is not that comfortable either even though he understands what they are doing and understands the restrictions that are imposed upon it but given the fact that the Engineering Dept. has to review and approve and the Planning Office must review and approve and the representations and the original PUD must be carried over and it would be a little easier for this Board if we could see it again. Michael Lipkin said that the last alternative on the Planning Office memo is what the applicant would like to fly off as a final plat and what they would like to come back and ask for is anyone of the three downzonings above that and that requires the applicant to come back before the P&Z to do it. Perry Harvey said that at some point during this marketing the applicant will come to grips with what the market wants and the applicant wants. Jasmine Tygre thinks that the Board should see a liitle outline of where each house is going to be on each lot on these plans. Michael Lipkin said that there is a front line of construction that designates where one can build and this represents that. Welton Anderson thinks that looking at these plans in a more specific form would be nice but he can visualize it by seing the buildings transposed and that by making up a new plan, Anderson is not sure it is really going to be that productive. Roger Hunt states that he wants to see specific plans. David White said that he likes what he visually sees and one of the first things the memo says is "the right to develope" and Whites first concern is that he doesn't know what it is going to look like. White likes it conceptually but he needs to see speci- fic plans. Al Blomquist feels comfortable with the plan the applicant has presented. Alice Davis said that the Planning office recommendation is to approve this and the other three alternatives. Michael Lipkin said that the applicant has spent an incredible amount of time in this review process and to have the P&Z ask us to go back and prepare showing the Board the four alternatives and taking that kind of time with the applicants need now in this market to be able to attempt to market these things it is a cost that becomes very difficult for the applicant. Lipkin said he understands what the P&Z is asking for but he doesn't see what they think they will see differnetly because ~"-' I RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves fORM 10 C. F. HOECKfL B. B. B- L. C~. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING NOVEMBER 16, 1982 - 3 - one of the things the applicant is designing into this process is a degree of flexi- bility to work with each of these people so you don't stand up and see six identical duplexes or eight or nine similar single family houses. The applicant is trying to design in a richness and a sophistication into this process. Lipkin feels that the P&Z is asking for the kind of review and approval that makes it impossible for the applicant to design the quality into this project and the flexibility we would like to give these subsequent owners. Perry Harvey said that at some point the applicant is going to go to the planning office and present to them the final mix of the unit types. JasmineTygre said that every time the P&Z trys to short-cut something on a PUD sooner or later a year down the line or two years later all the sudden we have a prob- lem. Alice Davis suggests that the P&Z give approval to this one; one duplex and seven single family, nine total units. AL Blomquist said that it seems to him that what the applicant is doing to reduce the impact by whatever means. Blomquist said that we know he has to file one plat and he can pick anyone of those four. Welton Anderson recommends that the Planning and Zoning Commission give approval of the request for amendment for Pitkin Reserve PUD for no more than II units, comprising five single family pre-standing units and six attached duplex units comprised in three buildings subject to following conditions; 1) The Engineering Dept. must review and approve the revised detailed drainage and utility plan for the site prior to issuance of a building permit and landscape design. 2) The gatehouse must be a m1n1mum of five feet from the front property line. 3) That all the representations of the original PUD are carried over to this revised PUD. Gary Esary said that the recommendation was for the representations of the application letter of Oct. 12, 1982. Welton Anderson adds the letter of application to his motion. Perry Harvey asks for a second to the motion. The motion fails for lack of a second. Perry Harvey entertains a motion to table this pending more detailed site planning from the applicants. Pat Fallin seconds. All in favor. Motion carried. CODE AMENDMENT A. Permitted and Conditional Use Tables Alice Davis said that this is basicly a work session. Davis said that the first thing is that there are five items that are listed in the P&Z memo. 1) Elimination of the R-40 Zone District. The Planning Office suggests that the the R-40 zone be eliminated. The Planning and Zoning Commission is in agreement with the Planning Office recommendation. 2) Office Uses in the RM-F Zone District. The Planning office feels that it is pretty much a consensus that it is listed as a conditional use as long as it is specified that it is a low impact office. 3) Long Term Residential Zone Districts. The intent section of the use tables only specifies residential uses as long term uses in the R-MF zone district. Since the R-6 through R-30 zone districts are also intended to provide for resi- dential uses which are long term in nature, the Planning Office and P&Z agreed that long term should also be specified in the intent sections of the R-6 through R-30 zone districts. 4) Combining the L-l and L-2 Zone Districts. The only difference between the L-I and L-2 zone districts is that the L-2 district allows residnetial uses while the L-l district does not. Since there is no known reason for the difference, the combination of these districts into one lodge zone district (L-l) was recommended by the Planning Office and agreed to by P&Z. P&Z also decided that residential uses should be allowed in the new lodge district, but a qeustion still remains as to whether the residences should compete through the Lodge or residential GMP process. Currently multi-family units in the L-2 - 4 - zone compete through the residential GMP competition until the issue of kitchens in lodges is decided or until the lodge GMP is revised to reflect kitchen uses in the lodge competition. P&Z indicated that the residential GMP was appropriate, at this time, for residential uses in the combined L-l/L-2 zone district. The newly created L-3 zone would become the new L-2 zone district. 5. Conditional Use Requirements - P&Z expressed the need for revisions in Section 24-3.3 of the Code regarding conditional uses. Currently the Code requires additional approval from the P&Z for any modification, structural enlargement or expansion of a conditional use. P&Z suggested that only substantial changes be required to go through an additional conditional use approval process while minor modifications be limited to staff review and approval. The Planning Office recommends the attached amendment to Section 24.3.3 (Table I) to allow this staff level approval for minor changes in the conditional use. Lenny Oates, is here on behalf of Block 106 Associates, they would support a direction which went towards a C-l zone, as a matter of fact they would love to have CC. Perry Harvey said that he thinks what they are asking the paz is that would they be in favor of combining these two zones and yet you will come back to the P&Z with an intent a set of permitted and conditional uses that will probably be a mix of the NC and C-l zone uses and could be closer to NC. Harvey said that he doesn't really know how the P&Z can deal with this issue... Alice Davis said that the Planning Office wanted to re-raise the issue and discuss, etc. Lenny Oates said that he would really like to see an analysis of this thing that trys to get away from the conditional use aspect of commercial uses. Perry Harvey agrees. '-' , ,