MEETING DATE: Monday January 22, 2018 MEETING TIME: 6:00 PM MEETING LOCATION: City Council Chambers, 448 E. First Street, Suite 190, Salida, CO Present: Mandelkorn, Follet, Denning, Thomas, Farrell, Bomer, Judd, Van Nimwegen, Franklin Absent: Jefferson AGENDA SECTION: I. CALL TO ORDER BY - Mandelkorn: - 6:00 PM II. ROLL CALL: III. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES September 25, 2017 and November 27, 2017 - Follet made a motion to approve the minutes as written. Motion was seconded by Thomas. All voters were unanimous and the motion carried. IV. UNSCHEDULED CITIZENS Paige Judd 834 Crestone Avenue announced a countywide IGA, HPAC meeting coming up on Tuesday January 30, 2018. V. AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA- None VI. UPDATES: VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Limited Impact Review- Teller Street Properties - Multiple Principal Structures - The request is to receive limited impact review approval to construct a second primary structure on the property located at 239 Teller Street within the medium density residential (R-2) zone district. A. Open Public Hearing - 6: 05 PM B. Proof of Publication Yes C. Staff Review of Application Franklin gave an overview of the limited impact application for multiple principal structures located at 239 Teller Street. Staff recommends approval with two conditions. D. Applicant s Presentation The applicant is Teller Street Properties, LLC 4017 Crest View Road NE, Solon, IA 52333, represented by Phil Gamache and Sarah Whittington of Architectural Services. The current structure sits in the back of the property. Gamache believes these lots suit well to place a secondary structure. The properties will match in materials and complement the existing neighborhood. Mandelkorn asked if there were any sidewalks currently. Follet inquired if we were requiring sidewalks for both Teller and Maxwell. Bomer confirmed that the front door will face Teller Street, and the back property faces Maxwell Street. Page 1 of 8
E. Public Input Cory Scheffel - 233 Teller Street Lives next door to proposed property and wants to maintain the character of the neighborhood. He would like to have a height limit and condo restriction put on the property, as well as minimizing the use of windows on the north side of the structure. F. Close Public Hearing 6:16 PM G. Commission Discussion Dan Thomas asked if this property is classified as an ADU and does it meet the standards or is it a non-conforming structure and lot? Mandelkorn believes the house is the primary structure, as it is the only one on the lot. Van Nimwegen the property is conforming by the commission accepting this approval, as such, either unit could potentially be sold as a condo. Bomer confirmed the height of the new structure was less than 35. Gamache confirmed the structure will match the pitch of the existing structure, as to complement one another. Commission Action A motion was made by Thomas to accept the limited impact review application with the recommended two conditions. Follet seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion carried. 2. Limited Impact Review- Bunnell- Multiple Principal Structures - The request is to receive limited impact review approval to construct a second primary structure on the property located at 603 Hunt Street within the Commercial (C-1) zone district. A. Open Public Hearing 6:30 PM B. Proof of Publication - Yes C. Staff Review of Application Franklin gave an overview of the limited impact application for multiple principal structures located at 603 Hunt Street. Staff recommends approval with three conditions. D. Applicant s Presentation The applicant is Dale Bunnell, 603 Hunt Street, Salida, CO 81201. Feels there is a need for rental housing. Can meet all zoning setbacks and provide eight parking spots. He will be contacting public works and provide a drainage plan. E. Public Input Paige Judd Thanked Bunnell for adding more rentals to the neighborhood. She wants to make sure that the apartments will not be short term rentals. Van Nimwegen did state that the applicant or future owner could potentially condominiumize the property allowing for a short term rentals. F. Close Public Hearing 6:39 PM G. Commission Discussion Denning asked the applicant how he will be able to get to the existing garage. The applicant will eventually change the location of the garage doors to face the alley. Van Nimwegen stated the applicant is meeting the parking requirements without the use of the garage. Page 2 of 8
Bomer asked questions about the staircases on both sides of the new building and wants to make sure they meet the required setbacks, as well as not blocking the applicant access to the garage. Judd questioned if the back door from the alley would block access for the future tenants parking. Bomer is concerned with the traffic on the alley; Judd stated that it is actually Caldwell Street. Commission Action A motion was made by Follet to accept the limited impact review application with the recommended three conditions. Bomer made an amendment to the motion; that at the time of building permit application submission for the second principal structure the applicant show on the site plan seven (7) additional parking spaces to be accessed from the alley, excluding the garage and meeting the standards of 16-8-80. Farrell seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion carried. 3. Limited Impact Review- Seven West Minor Subdivision- The request is for approval to subdivide one (1) parcel into three townhome lots at 511-513-515 Davidson Way. A. Open Public Hearing 6:44 PM B. Proof of Publication Yes C. Staff Review of Application Franklin gave an overview of the limited impact application for a minor subdivision located at 511, 513, and 515 Davidson Way. Staff recommends approval with two conditions. D. Applicant s Presentation The applicant is Seven West, LLC 6017 Archery Lane, Salida, CO 81201, represented by Brad Price. E. Public Input - Doris German 540 west 7 th Street, spoke in opposition of the Davidson way project with regards to the height 35. F. Close Public Hearing 6:51 PM G. Commission Discussion Mandelkorn believes this is a simple subdivision since the applicants have met all the requirements of the code. Thomas asked the applicant if the highest points of the roof include the railing around the deck, Price confirmed it does. Bomer appreciates the neighbor s concerns, but realizes that they have met the conditions of the code and have built within the Industrial zones regulations. Judd confirmed that the short term rentals are allowed within the Industrial Zone. Commission Action A motion was made by Thomas to accept the limited impact review application with the recommended two conditions. Follet seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion carried. Page 3 of 8
4. Limited Impact Review- Major Impact Review- Salida Crossings Planned Development- The request is to receive major impact review to approve Planned Development overlay zoning over 3.15 acres currently zoned C-1 (Commercial District) for the purpose of revising standards for building height, residential density, parking and related standards as part of the Salida Crossings Development Plan located at 1520 Highway 50, Salida, Colorado. The proposed project is a mixed-use development including retail, office and residential uses. A. Open Public Hearing 6:54 PM - Judd recused himself B. Proof of Publication Yes C. Staff Review of Application Van Nimwegen gave an overview of the limited impact application for Major Impact review of the project known as Salida Crossings mixed-use planned development including office, retail, and residential located at 1520 Highway 50, Salida, CO. The two main requests are density and height (134 units/48.1 ). Van Nimwegen has provided a table outlining the allowances that are being requested. Staff recommends approval with seven conditions. D. Applicant s Presentation The applicant is Duane Cozart managing member of Salida Crossings 134, LLC. Instead of a presentation Cozart asked the commission what questions they had. E. Public Input - Lornie Lowry 625 Illinois Avenue Confirmed she is the neighbor that will lose her mountain views. She feels as though the building will not blend in with the surroundings and believes there are better locations. Lawton Eddy - asked if the fee in lieu fees would be imposed on the deed restricted properties. Partial to the idea of having mixed income buildings and see s this project as a public benefit. Jessica Smith 505 apartments grew up in Salida and feels that the height is a fair compromise for this type of project that is severely needed. She appreciates the location and feels that it connects to the City and is a good start to revitalize the Hwy 50 corridor. Walt Harder Would like to see more of these types of developments where the developers can achieve higher densities with height allowances. Katie Server- Has lost employees because they could not find affordable housing. Paige Judd- She would like to see the deed restricted properties throughout the development. She doesn t like the mass or bulk, but does like the AMI. Tom Pokorny- 218 Scott Street supports the project and feels that this type of development is appropriate for the Hwy 50 corridor. We are either going to have to choose between densities or sprawl. Thinks this may be the time to re-evaluate the code for the Hwy 50 corridor and increase the height limitations allowing for more developments and less public meetings. F. Close Public Hearing 7:47 PM Page 4 of 8
G. Commission Discussion Mandelkorn praised Cozart for the professional level of material within the presentation, especially liked the shadowing study. Cozart explained the results, and clarified the only property losing views would be Lowry s. Follet questioned the shared parking and peak-use rule (25% less) but believes this project will be an improvement aesthetically. Cozart stated they have proposed 203 parking spaces. Denning asked how many residents they expect; approximately two hundred was Cozart s reply. They are proposing no VRBO units, but would like to see long term rentals or have HPAC manage some of the rentals. Mandelkorn asked about traffic flow and the ingress/egress for the properties. Cozart C-DOT controls the entrance and they currently have an application in with the State. Bomer is concerned about resale values; she would like the deed restrictions to include rental units for the 20 units. Mandelkorn acknowledged that the ability to provide for less than 80 percent AMI rests on the applicant s height of the structures. Denning cannot get past the size of the back to buildings and opposes the project. Thomas agreed with Pokorny, and that our code should accommodate what we might all agree is reasonable upward expansion. Commission Action A motion was made by Thomas to recommend that city council make the recommended findings and approve the proposed plan development subject to the recommended eight conditions. Farrell seconded the motion. Denning opposed; Thomas, Farrell, Mandelkorn, Follet, and Bomer were in favor and the motion carried. 5. Major and Minor Impact Review Angel View Town Homes Development The request is to receive major impact review to approve Planned Development overlay zoning over 5.46 acres currently zoned R-3 (High Density Residential District) for the purpose of revising standards for building setbacks, lot size, lot coverage, parking and related standards as part of the Angel View Town Homes Development Plan generally located at the southwest corner of County Roads 141 and 140; and Minor impact review to approve the Replat of Lot 3, Angel View Minor Subdivision, to split the 2.62 acre lot into new Lots 3A and 3B, each consisting of 1.31 acres. The Lots are located on the west end of proposed Angel View Town Homes Development Plan at the southeast intersection of County Road 140 and new Shepherd Road. A. Open Public Hearing Major Impact Review 8:07 PM/Minor Review 9:21 PM B. Proof of Publication Yes, Yes C. Staff Review of Application Major Impact Review Van Nimwegen gave an overview of the Major impact review application for the project known as Angel View Townhomes planned development located at County Road 140/141, Salida, CO. Van Nimwegen has provided a table outlining the R-3 deviations that are being requested. Staff recommends approval with seven conditions. Staff recommends approval with eight conditions. Page 5 of 8
Minor impact Review Van Nimwegen stated this application is to split the lot known as Lot 3, Angel View subdivision from 2.62 into two 1.31 acres lots. Staff recommends approval with four conditions. D. Applicant s Presentation Jon Diesslin/Walt Harder 5440 Long Branch Road- They would like to be able to include land with the properties, changing them form condos to townhouses. Diesslin is concerned about offering the properties at below the 80% AMI and not sure if the market is out there. Changing the development is just as much for the purchaser because then they are not tied to a HOA and potentially have better finance rates, as well as owning the property underneath them. Harder mentioned the deed restricted units will not have HOA fees associated with them and they would like the fence requirement altered. Minor Impact Review - None E. Public Input Major Impact Review Paige Judd- in opposition the public benefit doesn t outweigh the exceptions the developers are asking for. Minor Impact Review None F. Close Public Hearing Major Impact Review 8:47 PM/Minor Review 9:22 PM G. Commission Discussion Major Impact Review Thomas asked about public utilities under a private drive. Van Nimwegen stated they will have a public water and sewer line with an easement allowing the city to maintain. Mandelkorn- asked if the project was originally apartments, Diesslin said they had entertained the idea, but they were approved as condos. Judd believes the 80% to 100% is a good mix regarding AMI units and is concerned with the density and landscaping. Bomer was pleased that the HOA dues would not be required from the deed restricted units; however she does not want to change the short term rental guidelines for this development, Judd and Follet agree. Judd would like to find out what exactly the AMI is and who defines it, Mandelkorn agrees we need to find a standard chart for everyone to use. Commission Discussion - Minor Subdivision Commission confirmed this is only the splitting of lot 3, to 3A and 3B. Commission Action Major Impact Review Bomer made a motion to recommend the City Council make the recommended findings and approve the proposed Planned Development subject to the conditions outlined by staff limiting short term rental to comply with City policy 5 units at 80% to 100% and 4 Page 6 of 8
units at 80% or below the fence should be worked out between developer and council. Denning seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion carried. Minor Impact Review Bomer made a motion that the proposed Minor Subdivision meets the requirements of Section 16-6-120 and therefore approve the subdivision subject to the conditions as recommended by staff. Follet seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion carried. 6. Amendment to Chapter 16, Land Use Code- The proposed request is for an amendment to Section 16.5.60 Highway 50 Corridor Overlay to add new paragraph (6)(iv) to add a process and criteria for which additional building height may be requested for properties within the corridor adjacent to Highway 50. A. Open Public Hearing 9:26 PM B. Proof of Publication Yes C. Staff Review of Application Van Nimwegen explained that staff would like to show consistency in the code specific to Hwy 50. D. Applicant s Presentation None E. Public Input- Tom Pokorny 218 Scott Street The City should encourage development along the Highway 50 overlay district. Rather than giving variances council should look at changing the code to allow for these types of developments. F. Close Public Hearing 9:28 PM G. Commission Discussion Judd confirmed this will not be giving a use by right in the Hwy 50 overlay and applicants will need to ask for the variance within a planned development. All commission agrees that if the height is going to be increased it would be preferable to come up with a number, rather than case by case. Commission Action Judd made a motion to recommend the City Council approve the proposed changes to section 16.5.60 Highway 50 Corrridor Overlay. Thomas seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion carried. VIII. UNFINSHED BUSINESS None IX. NEW BUSINESS Study session with Cirsa, council would like for all of you to be there in March, as well as a joint work session on February 20, 2018. X. COMMISSIONER S COMMENTS- None Page 7 of 8
XI. ADJOURN: With no further business to come before the Commission, the meeting adjourned at 9:38 PM. Page 8 of 8