HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19770216RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves
rcnv w c, c. xoecrcc~ e. e. a c
A joint meeting of the City a.nd County Planning and Zoning Commissions
was held on February 16, 1977 at 5:00 in the Council Chambers of City
Hall. Those members present were Olaf Hedstrom, Roger Hunt, Thomas Isaac,
Chic Collins, John Schuhmacher, Peter Guy, Henry Pedersen, P4ichael
Gassman,
The purpose of this joint meeting is to discuss the
Growth Management Proposal. Bill Kane stated that the
City P & Z is under a very specific mandate from the
City Council to come back with a plan adopting in some
form a growth controling proposal and some plan for
its implementation, to be created through an Ordinance
establishing a system that will make this work. The
City has identified three components of growth 1) permanent
residential development 2) tourist accomodations and lodging
and 3) commercial and office growth. There should be a
ratio established between nermanent residential, commercial,
and tourist accomodations. These three components should be
reinforcing and developed into some reasonable relationship.
They are looking at buildout of 80g of existing zoning over
a 15 year period. This means 11 tourist units per year;
39 single family units; and 24,000 sq. ft. of commercial
space. This would be around a total of 50 units per
year in the City of Aspen. This would be a pretty sub-
stantial decline in growth over the past years. Various
areas such as Woody Creek, Stanwood, Snowmass and growth
restrictions by County P & Z were discussed. Comparisons
between the City growth and County were pointed out.
Kane stated it was hoped that the Councy might come up
with some type of growth restriction also, not necessarily
modeled after the GMP. Kane began to discuss a range of
possibilities the County might explore to achieve this.
1) adopt the GMP as proposed with an implementation ord-
inance setting an annual building system based on subdiv-
ison review criteria 2) adopt the plan as proposed with
implementation for the Roaring Fork Valley and not consider
the Redstone and Frying Pan areas under the GMP 3) adopt
the plan with implementation for the Aspen/Snowmass area
excluding down valley/Woodycreek 4) adopt the plan simply
as policy (no quota system or Ordinance) 5)do not adopt
either of two extremes, either take it as it is or with
several alternatives. In addition, there are ways to change
or soften this overall proposal 1) exemption for units
2) establishment of independent citizen review board
3) employee housing 4) try to change sections of the code