Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19790821 BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO., DENVER RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS August 21, 1979 Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission The Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission held a regular meeting on August 21, 1979 at 5:00 PM in the City Council Chambers. Members present were Olof Hedstrom, Lee Pardee, Nancy McDonnell, Perry Harvey, Joan Klar and Roger Hunt. Also present were Karen Smith, Richard Grice and Jolerte Vrchota of the Planning Office. Approval of Minutes Rezoning Smuggler Enclave Property Reconsideration of Alternate Members to P&Z Hunt moved to table approval of the minutes, Pardee seconded All in favor, motion approved. Smith explained that the annexation has occurred but the zone that they are aSking P&Z to recommend for this land has not yet been adopted as a zone in the Aspen Municipal Code. Harvey asked if they could recommend this zoning conditioned upon the adoption of this zone district. Smith said Stock intended to have p&Z hear both the adoption of the MHP zone and the designation of this area as MHP. She recommended they follow this procedure. The Commission began to discuss Ordinance 57, 1979, an ordinance creating a MHP zone. Smith said this ordinance creates a zone named "Residential Mobile Home Park". The permitted and conditional uses are stated so as to allow for mobile homes and be compatible with the kinds of uses that are permitted in the R-6 zone. Section 3 provides for area and bulk requirements. The minimum lot area per dwelling unit is 3000 square feet as opposed to 6000 square feet in R-6. Hunt asked if this is consistent with what exists there now. Vrchota said it is close, there could be some requirement for a few trailers to be relocated.or exist in nonconformance. She noted that they could not zone any single piece of property MHP. Hedstrom opened and closed the public hearing. Vrchota noted that the 20' setback recommended did not comply with the existing situation at Smuggler. She noted this setback is primarily for fire and utility access. She recommended reducing this setback. Pardee questioned if they wish this smaller setback for future situations. Smith noted the requirement in the County is 15,000 square feet per mobile home but this is for rural areas and this propo- sal is for an urban area. Pardee preferred to accept that they would be creating nonconforming structures and set the requirements for what they wish for the future. Smith noted that if any trailer were removed, the next would have to conform with the setbacks, etc. Smith suggested tabling this issue to a special meeting. Linda Cherry, President of the Homeowners' Association at Smuggler, noted that her parents live in a trailer park ,in California where the setback is 5' including the hitch. She said it is a very nice park and the setbacks work. She did not feel the 20' setback as proposed was reasonable. Hunt moved to table action on the adoption of zoning of the Smuggler enclave and all matters pertaining thereto and continue the public hearing to 5:00 PM, Thursday, August 23, 1979, McDonnell seconded. All in favor, motion ap- proved. The Commission reconsidered the advantages of having alter- nate members to the P&Z. The consensus was alternates were not necessary. Hunt moved to have the Planning Office prepare for the Planning and Zoning Commission a resolution to City Council explaining the reasons we feel that an alternate member to the Planning and Zoning Commission is not necessary: 1) it does not appear necessary to add one or two more discussing parties to further prolong the discussions as all points -2- Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission August 21, 1979 l4iller Subdivision Exemption Sierra vista Joint Venture Subdivision Exemption seem to be adequately brought up and covered by the seven members already, 2) from any history that we can determine, in the last six years, there has been one case where there was not a quorum and that was due to two of the members becoming elected to the City Council and therefore, there was an unusual vacancy, Pardee seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Grice introduced the application. The applicants wish to split off two 3000 square foot lots from five total lots. A single family house exists on the three lot parcel and the other two would be available for single family development. This application qualifies for an exemption from the Growth Management Quota System. The Engineering Department rec- ommends approval subject to a sidewalk improvement agree- ment being signed by the City of Aspen. The City Attorney recommends approval. The Planning Office recommends ap- proval subject to the preparation and recording of a sub- division exemption agreement which would include a commit- ment to a sidewalk improvement and a restriction that development of Lots P & Q will be limited to single family development. Hunt noted that the zone would not allow a duplex. He also asked what would be done with the trees that would have to be cut down if a sidewalk were built. Grice noted that the Engineering Department inspects the property and the placement of the sidewalk. Hunt moved to recommend exemption from strict application of subdivision regulations for the Miller Subdivision of Lots M-Q, Block 35, Original Townsite.of Aspen,aonditioned upon the applicant ente:ringinto a,sidewalklltlprovement agreement for all parcels if a district is created, inasmuch as the application meets the criteria for exemption and there are no significant impacts on land use or detriments to the public good, Harvey seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Perry Harvey stepped down for this application. Grice introduced the application. The applicant requests subdivision exemption for condominiumization. There is an existing single family unit and a proposed second unit. The Engineering Department has recommended approval subject to two conditions: 1) the property owner agree to join a curb, gutter and sidewalk improvement district, 2) the parking problem be addressed in accordance with the code. The City Attorney questions if this property has ever fallen within the low, moderate or middle income price bracket. The present unit, 3,000+ square feet, has been rented to the Windemullers for $l,OOO/month plus utilities, which comes to .33/square foot. The Planning Office defers to the p&Z judgment on this matter. Bob Hughes, representing the applicant, did not feel the unit fell in the guidelines. He explained that when the Hopkins moved temporarily to Utah to pursue a business opportunity, they rented their place to the Windemullers for $l,OOO/month with the understanding that if they re- turned, they would reassume the unit. The opportunity was successful and the Windemullers bought the unit. He" felt that this rental period could be considered,housesit- ting. He noted that this rental price was above'the ceiling for the price guidelines. The Board discussed this issue and decided they did not feel it fell in the guidelines. Hunt moved to determine that the Sierra Vista Joint Venture property has not been part of the employee housing supply based on the history of its rent and rental activity, McDonnell seconded. All in favor, motion approved. '-' ..,) BRADFORD PUBLISHING CO., DENVER -3- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS August 21, 1979 Regular Meeting Hyman Street Duplex Subdivision Exception Resolution 79-13, Recommending Approval of Tipple Lodge Condominiumization Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Hunt moved to recommend exemption from strict application of the subdivision regulations for the Sierra Vista Joint Venture condominiumization of a duplex on Lot 31, West Aspen Subdivision #1. It has been determined that the dwelling is not part of the employee housing supply, and this approval is conditioned upon, 1) property comes under Municipal Code Section 20-22, six month minimum lease and is so deed restricted, 2) provided that one adequate parkin~ space per bedroom is supplied, 3) provided the applicant enters into a sidewalk, curb and gutter agreement if a district is created. Otherwise, there are no significant adverse impacts on land use or detriments to the public good, Pardee seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Harvey stepped up to his position on the commission. Vrchota introduced the application. She stated the appli- cant wishes to split five lots into two parcels, necessi- tating a redrawing of lot lines. The Engineering Depart- ment requests a plat for the subdivision. There is an existing house on one lot and a duplex being constructed on the other lot. There is a request that the'.duplex be condominiumized with this application. This is exempt from the Growth Management Plan. Engineering has recommended approval with the condition that the shed not be divided by the lot line but instead be moved. The applicant wishes to move it to the single family lot. The City Attorney recommends approval with the six month minimum lease re- striction. Vrchota noted that the P&Z did approve by special review an employee unit in the basement of the duplex. There is no rental history of the duplex under construction. The Planning Office recommends approval subject to the six month minimum lease restriction on the duplex. Hunt moved to recommend exception of the Hyman Street Duple~ condominiumization from full subdivisionregulationre.. entering the procedures with final plat to the City Council and recommend approval of conceptual subdivision conditioned on 1) the property comes under the Aspen Municipal Code Section 20-22 which is the six month minimum lease and is so deed restricted applying to all dwelling units, 2) that the shed is moved from the property line prior to certifi- cate of occupancy of the new dwelling. Otherwise, there are no significant adverse impacts on land use or detriments to the public good, McDonnell seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Hunt moved to allow condominiumization of the new duplex placed on the subdivision of Lots CDEF&G of Block 61, Aspen, provided that that duplex comes under the Aspen Municipal Code Section 20-22 which is the six month minimum lease and is so deed restricted, Klar seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Klar noted that she had dinner in one of the units the night before and it did have a kitchen. She was very concerned about this and was not in favor of voting for the condomini- umization. Hunt was concerned that it did not state in the covenants that it must be managed by one entity. He was not in favor of the resolution. He felt it would have negative impacts on the supply of tourist accommodations. He also felt it was a bad precedent to set and felt they should state that they were not in favor of condominiumization of lodges. Hedstrom asked the commission to look away from this application in particular and consider the broader aspects of this type of condominiumization. He agreed it was a dangerous precedent and was not in favor of any type of lodge condominiumization. Harvey agreed with this. He -4- Regular Meeting August 21, 1979 "Commissionmember Comments" added to Agendas Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission was in favor of finding an avenue for the remodeling and upgrading of lodge facilities. Hedstrom felt the P&Z should take a more positive role in making suggestions and propo- sals to City Council in areas in which they are experienced. Pardee agreed and felt they should find vehicles to enforce their recommendations. Hedstrom asked that they create a committee to work on this problem. He asked that Harvey chair this committee. Klar asked if they were in favor of including various agencies and groups involved with this problem. Hunt agreed to work with Harvey. Klar volunteered also. Hunt moved to have the Planning Office draft a resolution denying the Tipple Lodge for condominiumization for the following reasons: 1) the application opens possibilities for reducing the supply of tourist accommodations, 2) it further opens the possibilities for abuse of the units due to disintegrated ownership such as illegal kitchen units, 3) it reduces the lodge aspects of a particular lodge in that it also disintegrates the management so that a lodge no longer has one site for booking, maintenance of the physical facilities and that reduces the benefits to the tourists in the lodge, 4) if condominiumized, there is no restriction that can guarantee avoidance of these dangers, 5) the disintegration of ownership has adverse land use consequences, 6) to allow this to happen puts adverse pressures on other districts of the community to supply tourist lodging, however, it should be known that the P&Z is forming a committee to find ways to improve the lodging facilities, Pardee seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Pardee suggested adding an item called "Commissionmember Comments" to the agenda for discussion of ideas, problems, etc. The Board was in favor of this suggestion. The Planning Office agreed to add this item under "Approval of Minutes" to all agendas hereafter. Klar moved to adjourn the meeting, Pardee seconded. All in favor, motion approved. Meeting adjourned at 7:00 PM. ~~t)At ;; Sheryl en, Deputy City Clerk - '-"