Loading...
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