HomeMy Public PortalAboutPlanning Commission Minutes 06-27-2018Minturn Planning Commission
June 27, 2018
Page I of 7
MEETING OF THE MINTURN PLANNING COMMISSION
Minturn, CO 81645 • (970) 827-5645
Wednesday June 27, 2018
Regular Session — 6:30pm
CHAIR—Lynn Teach
COMMISSION MEMBERS:
Jeff Armistead
Lauren Dickie
Burke Harrington
Greg Gastineau
Gree Snarhawk
These minutes are formally submitted to the Town of Minturn Planning Commission for approval as the official
written record of the proceedings at the identified Council Meeting. Additionally, all Council meetings are tape-
recorded and are available to the public for listening at the Town Center Offices from 8:30am-2:00 pm, Monday
through Friday, by contacting the Town Clerk at 970/827-5645 302 Pine St. Minturn, CO 81645.
Work Session — 6:00pm
• Site Visit — 541 Main Street— Gotthelf Residence Accessory Apartment Addition
Regular Session — 6:30pm
1. Call to Order
Lynn T. called the meeting to order at 6:30pm
• Roll Call
Those present: Lynn Teach, Jeff Armistead, Lauren Dickie, Burke Harrington, Greg Gastineau
and Greg Sparhawk.
Note: As all were in attendance, Lauren D. did not vote as an alternate.
0 Pledge of Allegiance
Minium Planning Commission
June 27, 2018
Page 2 of 7
2. Approval of Agenda
® Items to be Pulled or Added
Motion by Greg G, second by Jeff A, to approve the agenda as presented. Motion passed 5-0.
3. Approval of Minutes
• June 13, 2018
Changes: Lauren D - Referred to Page 4, # 6, regarding Chapter 16 Revisions Update — There
was some confusion / gray area as to the scope of the project (to clean up AND fix loopholes)
Motion by Greg G, second by Greg S., to table the minutes of June 13, 2018 to 7/11. Motion
passed 5-0.
4. Public comments on items, which are NOT on the agenda (5min time limit per
person)
Mr. Tim McGuire of Crave Development presented an overview of the Bolt's Lake concept
development plan for PUD and distributed initial conceptual plan information packets along with
visual presentation. This was presented during public comments, as the file was still being
reviewed by staff for sufficiency.
The Battle Mountain PUD project was initially approved in 2008, but the project has changed
significantly. Also discussed EPA changes / cleanup to allow for the future residential and
commercial development.
4 major areas of development:
Bolts area, Maloit Park, OTP, and Highlands (Maloit Park would be first phase — phase IA).
Single family to multi -family, community, park, mixed use.
Full presentation is on the July 11`" agenda.
5. Planning Commission Comments
6. Design Review Applications
e 221 Main Street — Warzecha Residence Garage Addition and Variance Request (to
be tabled to 7/11/18)
Scot H. introduced the application but asked for more time for staff to review due to issues with
non -conforming lots / setback requirements. Also, within conceptual review of 221 Main St —
discussion occurred as to whether there would need to be a variance for the deck that was being
built over the non -conforming structure; Scot H. will confer with the Town Attorney.
Minhnn Planning Commission
June 27, 2018
Page 3 of 7
Motion by Greg S second by Burke H, to continue to July 11, 2018 221 Main Street — Warzecha
Residence Garage Addition and Variance Request. Motion passed 5-0.
0 562 Taylor Avenue— Tisler Residence Final Plan Review (Tabled from 5/9/18)
Notes from Scot H Staff Report:
Scot H. recapped from last meeting and reviewed the issues with caused a table from 5/9.
See notes below from Staff Report:
Scot H Staff -Report:
The Applicant, Matt Tisler, requests continued review of a new single-family residential
structure located at 562 Taylor Ave. Plans were first reviewed at the May 9, 2018 Planning
Commission meeting.
Similar designs were approved for the same lot in or around 2008 under a different owner.
Shortly thereafter, a building permit was issued, and a foundation was completed and
inspected prior to the project being abandoned for a number of years. The previously
approvals are now void and the Applicant desires to complete the project.
The design shows a three-story, three-bedroom home with a one -car garage and two
additional parking spaces in the driveway. Parking spaces are sized in accordance with the
Town Code and the proposed (maximum) building height is shown at approximately 26 feet
above existing grade. The structure (form and mass) generally steps up the site and materials
usage around the structure appears to conform with the Town's Design Standards.
The revised plans submitted 6122118 appear to comply with Chapter 16 development
standards, dimensional limitations and parking is provided on-site. However, the plans were
reviewed by the DRB on May 9, 2018 and the Applicant was asked to come back to the DRB
for further review of a chimney element that was proposed on the north elevation, and to
address (provide further clarity regarding) building height calculations. The DRB also
expressed concerns regarding an existing concrete foundation and proposed patio to be
constructed on the south side of the residence.
The Applicant's representative, Michael Pukas, has since met with staff to discuss each of the
above issues and has provided revisions to the plans. The revisions include:
e Removal of the cantilevered chimney element — the chimney which was previously
proposed to encroach into side yard setback (permitted under previous code in 2008)
was essentially removed or redacted to a 3 " projection to maintain some architectural
reliefalong the north elevation while eliminating the encroachment.
0 Roof overhangs around the structure that previously encroached into side yard
setbacks have been reduced so that no roofs project more than 1 '-6" into setbacks as
permitted by the Code.
Minturn Planing Commission
June 27, 2018
Page 4 of 7
0 Clarification of building height calculations.
IL Summmy of Process and Code Requirements:
As noted above, the Applicants are requesting review by the Design Review Board of
proposed development plans for a new single-family residential structure and the completion
of a project that was originally approved in 2008.
No variances are required or proposed, however the Applicant is requesting that an existing
(constructed and inspected) window well element and proposed patio be permitted within the
side yard setback as a pre-existing, non -conforming structure. "
Michael Pukas of Gypsum (MMP Design Shop Inc) — designer for the project, discussed the roof
height and how it is defined in the code.
Discussion ensued regarding how the roof height is calculated, based on different interpretations
of current code.
Comments from commission:
Scot H. reviewed the code during discussion and stated that it does direct users to measure to the
mid -point of a roof using existing or proposed grade around the structure; but that it also could
be more clear as to how to calculate using the example where a roof form projects over another
building and roof form He further stated in his review that he feels that the code is being met.
Greg S. asked to review the code as it pertains to calculation of building height.
Mr. Pukas explained that in all areas, including proposed grade of perimeter, is still within the
guideline / max of 28 ft.
Additional discussion took place re: how roof measurement should take place in the future and
additional review of the code will take place.
Greg S. motioned to accept the application as presented, with the stipulation that building height
measurement is based on grade height at perimeter of building (not interior of building), second
by Jeff A. Approved.
However, Greg S did ask that the code be reviewed as it needs to be more clear.
Motion by Greg S, second by Jeff A, to approve 562 Taylor Avenue — Tisler Residence Final
Plan Review as presented. Motion passed 5-0
• 541 Main Street — Gotthelf Residence Accessory Apartment Addition Conceptual
Plan Review
Scot H. introduced the application, and provided a staff report (See notes below for staff report)
Minturn Planning Commission
June 27, 2018
Page 5 of 7
The Applicants, Eric Golthelf and Lauren Horan, request revierP of a second story Accessory
Dwelling Unit (ADU) addition to an existing one -car garage structure located at the rear of
the subject properly, with direct access from Boulder Street Existing conditions include a
paved parking area in front of the garage between the edge of (Boulder Street) pavement and
the existing garage structure, as well as adjacent parking for 1-2 vehicles on the side of the
existing garage.
The existing garage has two garage bays, but only one single bay garage door; plans call for
remodeling the garage to allow for a lwo-car entry. Additionally, the southeastern side of the
existing garage currently violates the rear- and side yard setbacks. As part of the project, the
Applicants propose to remove a portion of the garage structure on the south side of the lot —
to remove an existing encroachment into the side yard setback.
The design shows a two-slory, two -car garage with a proposed building height of
approximately 23' feet above existing grade. The ADU complies with Chapter 16 size
limitations and parking is provided on-site.
Additionally, the project Architect, Eric Johnson, AIA, has re -designed the project to ensure
that the second level addition (face of building) is pulled back to meet the 10 foot rear
setback line, while proposing a deck structure over the existing garage face that currently
encroaches into the rear setback. The existing remodeled garage will continue to encroach in
to the setback but the new second story will be pulled back from the setback to allow for the
deck on lop of a portion of the existing garage roof.) Town staff, inclusive of the Town
Attorney, advise that this design will NOT exacerbate any pre-existing non -conformities as
the removal of a portion of the existing garage roof will reduce or lessen an existing non-
conformity and the proposed addition (second level of Accessory Apartment) is proposed
outside of the setback.
The plans show the new roofform encroaching no more than 18" into the rear setback, as is
permitted by the Code.
IL Summary of Process and Code Requirements:
As noted above, the Applicants are requesting review by the Design Review Board of
proposed development plans for an addition to the existing garage structure. No variances
are required or proposed.
Comments from commission:
Scot H. noted that this area was the subject of a site visit during the work session. The area
requires not more than 50% impervious surface, and currently falls at 55%.
Lynn T asked about snow storage.
Mr. Eric Johnson (architect) addressed the question and discussed surface area. Lynn T asked
about the specific location of where specifically snow would be stored and how it would get
there (concern was expressed about getting the snow to the appropriate storage areas without
Minturn Planning Commission
June 27, 2018
Page 6 of 7
cutting into required parking space). Lynn T asked if the project moves forward, she wants to
see specifics re, snow storage — location and plan.
Discussion also took place re. meeting the 50% (impervious surface). Mr. Johnson feels that they
can meet the snow storage requirements, but not sue about the 50% impervious, due to existing
limitations. Feels they can get really close. It was discussed that if every effort is made to get to
the 50%, in conjunction with the efforts already being made to improve existing non -
conformities, that the project would be further reviewed.
It was also stated / confirmed that a separate tap would be required.
Burke H. stated that he feels the project is making improvements to the property, and the
footprint of the garage is being reduced (not increasing), also not taking away any current snow
storage. Also, an improvement that they are removing the one parking space on Main, as that is
a safety concern.
Jeff A. also stated the project is an improvement to the property.
No motion required yet, as this is a conceptual plan at this stage.
7. Projects
• Chapter 16 Code Revisions Update
Waiting on comments from Mike Sawyer, Town Attorney.
Scot H. suggested a work session to get this project re -started and review progress with
the Planning Commission (possibly in August)
Asked commission to start malting a list of loopholes / unclear areas
Scot H. also asked for feedback re. the new staff reports. Feedback from the group was positive,
very informative and helpful. Lynn T. asked that the reports / drawings include the # of
bedrooms. Lauren D asked that Scot H include more detail on any agreements with applicants.
Water Source Options:
A discussion took place regarding Water Source Options. Council is looking for
recommendations. Lynn T. has requested that the PC members try to attend the next council
meeting to learn more about this.
8. Planning Director Report
. Accessory Apartments/ADU Regulations
Minium Planning Commission
June 27, 2018
Page 7 of 7
Scot H. reviewed a recent situation where a property owner who already had two units (primary
residence and one accessory apartment, or ADU) had approached the town to request a variance
for a third dwelling unit which is not permitted. Scot H. clarified that one cannot apply for a
variance for a use; only for development standards and dimensional limitations. Scot H.
suggested that the Town needs to decide how to deal with existing illegal units documented by
Code Enforcement throughout town and that more discussion needs to take place. Lynn T asked
about status of the fishing grant — Lauren D said we should have an update by July 10`h. Lauren
D. will follow up if we don't hear by then.
Jeff A. met with Holy Cross Energy to re -open communications / reset — the discussions re.
possible high-power transmission line to the area (Dowd Junction to Gilman). Holy Cross has
submitted their application forms to the forest service. The NEPA process has started, but the
public process may not start until October.
The project would cross some of the USFS, and town (6 — 8 miles), and significant Battle
Mountain land.
RFPs are out to contractors. Another meeting to take place in a couple of weeks, with both Holy
Cross and Xcel.
9. Future Meetings
• July 11, 2018 (DRB first, then Bolts presentation after) — big agenda, suggested
starting 30 minutes earlier.
• July 25, 2018 — Lauren D. will not be here. Jeff A. may also not be available.
• August 8, 2018
10. Adjournment
Motion by Greg G, second by Burke H., to adjourn at 8:45 pm. Motion passed 5-0.
Lynn Teach, Commission Chair
ATTEST:
I
Scot Hunn, Interim Town Planner
Minium Planning Commission
June 27, 2018
Page 7 of 7
variance for a use; only for development standards and dimensional limitations. Scot H.
suggested that the Town needs to decide how to deal with existing illegal units documented by
Code Enforcement throughout town and that more discussion needs to take place. Lynn T asked
about status of the fishing grant — Lauren D said we should have an update by July 10t11Lauren
D. will follow up if we don't hear by then.
Jeff A. met with Holy Cross Energy to re -open communications / reset — the discussions re.
possible high-power transmission line to the area (Dowd Junction to Gilman). Holy Cross has
submitted their application forms to the forest service. The NEPA process has started, but the
public process may not start until October.
The project would cross some of_the _USFS,_and_ town- (6___8_miles),_and_significant -Battle
__
Mountain land.
RFPs are out to contractors. Another meeting to take place in a couple of weeks, with both Holy
Cross and Xcel.
9. Future Meetings
• July 11, 2018 (DRB first, then Bolts presentation after) — big agenda, suggested
starting 30 minutes earlier.
• July 25, 2018 — Lauren D. will not be here. Jeff A. may also not be available.
• August 8, 2018
10. Adjournment
Motion by Greg G, second by Burke H., to adjourn at 8:45 pm. Motion passed 5-0.
Teach, Commission Chair
ATTEST
F
Scot Hunn, Interim Town Planner