Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19731002 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves ,OR"'" C.F.HOECKElB.8_&L.CO, Regular Meeting Aspen Planning & Zoning October 2, 1973 Meeting was called to order by Chairman Jim Adams at 5:15 p.m. with Chuck Vidal, Barbara Lewis, Bryan Johnson, Jack Jenkins, and Geri Vagneur. Also present City/County Planner Herb Bartel and Assistant Planner Donna Baer. Barbara Lewis made a motion to approve the minutes of September 18, 1973, second by Geri Vagneur. All in favor, motion carried. Resolution #23a, Series of 1973 Chairman Jim Adams read Resolution #23a, a resolution passed by Council and submitted to the Commission: "WHEREAS, the City Council has a constant concern for the housing needs of the employees in and around the Aspen Area; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to impress the seriousness of this concern on the minds of the members of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission so that in their planning deliberations and review of construction projects they give adequate consideration to the cre- ation of moderately priced housing; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO: 1. That the concern of the City Council for the needs of Aspen Area employees for adequate housing be expressed and, by copy of this Resolution, be directed to the chairman of the Aspen Planning and Zoning Com- mission. 2. And that said Commission in all deliberations be and hereby is directed to give adequate consideration in formulating planning recommendations or approving building developments to the need for the creation of moderately priced housing for employees of the Aspen Area." Apex Building Disapproval Assistant Planner Donna Baer asked Commission members if they had all received copies of the Planning Office Memorandum on the disapproval of the Apex Building. Jenkins made a motion to accept the disapproval sub- mitted by the Planning Office, seconded by Vidal. All in favor, motion carried. Oklahoma Flats Rezoning Bartel explained that the Resolution for the rezoning of Oklahoma Flats had been drafted and forwarded to the City Attorney, due to the fact that it comes under Ordinance #9 and will have legal status for one year. Further stated that Commission would receive copies of the Resolution with the next agenda. City Property - 1ll.J Acre Site Plan Bartel request that the Commission make a site inspec- tion of the 11l.J Acre parcel. Stated that the Engineer- ing Department had staked the boundaries. Request the Commission view: (1) extent ion of Bleeker Street; (2) property along river; (3) general configuration of property. Site inspection was scheduled for October 3rd at 12:15 p.m., and Commission would meet in the Planning Office. Bartel stated that the Planning Office had received a schematic plan of site requirements of the Post Office. Discussed the size and parking. Further stated that Post office had not been receptive to a 2-story building. .....,~.~_'~4~ ".'M' .,....... -, RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM't C.F.1l0l'CKEtB.B.8:L,CO. Regular Meeting Aspen Planning & Zoning October 2, 1973 Drainage Plan Bartel request the commission set a date for a public hearing for final P & Z position of drainage plan. Stated that this was a significant document for Sub- division review and Ordinance #19 review. Would like an adopted plan. Public hearing date was set for November 6th meeting. Sagewood Condo. - Exemption from Subdivision Regulations Ms. Baer explained that the Sagewood Apartments were located on Highway 82, across from the Villas (corner of 8th Street and 82). Stated that these were present- ly apartments and owner wants to condominiumize. Ms. Baer pointed out that the Planning Office had de- termined that certain design qualifications were not met: (1) approved drainage plan; (2) 2 required parking spaces are accessed by 82 and people must back out, and the remainder of the parking was off an un- improved alley; (4) no submitted and approved landscape plan. Ms. Baer explained that the 2 parking spaces located in front were partially on the City right-of-way. Mr. Beck, attorney representing the owners, stated there were two considerations for the Commission: (1) tax base is higher for condominiums; (2) owner would be divested of a considerable property right without the exemption. Beck further stated that he felt the exemption status clearly covers this project. Dorothy Rutherford, partner in the project, stated she would like to have local residents, but did not want to limit herself to that. Further stated that they did have a Resident Manager. Chairman Adams stated that the Commission could either deny the project, approve the project, or approve it with conditions. Stated he would like to leave the problem of parking to the Engineering De- partment. Stated conflict with present density as compared to proposed density. Ms. Baer stated that since there was no land left to be dedicated to the City, should consider cash dedi- cation. Further stated that under Ordinance #19, have recommended mixed-residential for this area. Vidal stated that he would agree to the project if owners met the Planning Office requirements. Lewis stated she would like to see parking on the east side of the property. Johnson stated he would like to see the 4% cash dedi- cation. Lewis stated she would like to see the project become resident housing. Pointed out the prices appeared to be very reasonable. Ms. Baer stated the Planning Office would like to see the contract approved by the City Attorney. ___.._'".._., ft,~"",__~, .h"'" "~,',,.."'~, - ...__.. >._,_..~.......~,..,,,-~ ._~-_."~"._. ".,,~-_.. '"' , . RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves Regular Meeting Aspen Planning & Zoning October 2, 1973 FORM'c' c.r.HQECKELB.B_ft L. CO. Ute Avenue Condo - Preliminary Plat & Ordinance #19 Review Caribou Condo. - Preliminary Plat & Ordinance #19 Review Jenkins made a motion to approve the project on the following conditions: (1) owners pave the alley; (2) negotiate an acceptable parking plan subject to City Engineer's approval; (3) supply drainage plan to be approved by the City Engineer; (4) supply a landscaping plan that also meets with the approval of the City Engineer; (5) write into sales contract a covenant restricting rental to not less than six months. Motion seconded by Lewis. All in favor, motion carried. Mr. Murphrey, developer for the project, was present. Chairman Adams stated that he would like to see the review under Ordinance #19 go to the newly formed Advisory Board. Ms. Baer pointed out that the Planning Office had critical concern with the drainage. POinted out that the ditch presently feeds the Glory Hole Park. Ms. Baer further pointed out that the Planning Office was requesting a setback of 20 feet. Murphrey stated that they already were set back 18 feet, and there would be no problem with a setback of 2 additional feet. Attorney Bruce Kistler was present, representing Mr. Murphrey. Felt the rerouting could be approved by the City Engineer. Discussion followed on the preservation of trees on the project. Murphrey stated that construction would cause minimal removal of trees, and stated that trees would be added to the site. Murphrey stated that on their final plan, would sub- mit a detailed landscape plan. Johnson made a motion to approve the preliminary plat for the Ute Avenue Condominiums with the following conditions: (1) dedicate 10' of south side of the property for future street widening; (2) agree to affiliate with future street and drainage improvement districts; (3) require an agreeable ditch maintenance and lease arrangement be made with City Engineer; (4) City Engineer approve the drainage plan. Motion was seconded by Geri Vagneur. All in favor, motion carried. Ms. Baer pointed out that this project was located on South MOnarch street, just below the Mountain Queen Development. Stated that it was a 6-unit project, of which four units have already been constructed. Ms. Baer further pointed out that the building permit had not been signed by a licensed contractor. Chairman Adams questioned the Commission as to whether or not they would like to consider the project under two seperate phases. ..._....__ ~......__....~_.__~.._______.._'_.o ,-----_.,,-_..---_.,,~_.=...~...._~..-' ",-.~..~~ - , . RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves Regular Meeting Aspen Planning & zoning October 2, 1973 FORM'C, C,'.HOECKHB.B.8: l.CO. Bergman Building - Ordinance #19 Review Steve Wendell, owner and builder of the project, was present and stated that from the conception of the project, all 6 units had been contemplated with regard to the sewer taps, height variance, etc... Wendell further pointed out willingness to give 4% cash dedication to the City. Vidal pointed out his concern for the literal inter- pretation of the building permit. Stated that he felt this was an administrative problem, and that possibly the permit was valid. Ms. Baer stated that they proposed to add 2 units of 2,000 square feet per unit. Further pointed out that Aspen Metro Sanitation had already hooked up for 6 units. Geri Vagneur made a motion to approve the preliminary and final plat for the Caribou Condominiums on the following conditions: (1) owners agree to future transit, street, and drainage districts; (2) land- scape and drainage plans meet with the approval of the City Engineer; (3) offer a 4% cash dedication to the City. Motion was seconded by Johnson. All in favor, motion carried. Chairman Adams pointed out that the project would still have to go through Ordinance #19 Review by the Advisory Board. Ms. Baer distributed a letter from Ken Hubbard, at- torney representing Bergman. The letter contained information concerning uses and parking for the building. Bergman pointed out that the commission had given approval of everything but the parking at a previous meeting. Discussion followed concerning the cost of buying out the needed parking spaces. Commission concensus was that $4,000/space was reasonable. Jenkins made a motion to approve the building on the condition that they covenant the uses and that the City Council could negotiate the parking cost. Seconded by Johnson. All in favor, motion carried. Johnson moved to adjourn the meeting, seconded by Jenkins. All in favor, meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m. L ,~"--,-~,-",,~-~'''''- '-'1-> ...,--'--...........--,_.~.~_.~'_.