HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.lu.rz.Physics Center.1976 iz
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves
FORM 19 C.F.HOECKEL B.B.B L.CO.
` ORDINANCE NO. .DSO
(Serices of 1976)
AN ORDINANCE REZONING THE APPROXIMATELY 2 . 3
ACRES OCCUPIED BY THE/ASPEN CENTER FOR PHYSICS
ACCORDING TO AN APPROVED SPECIALLY PLANNED AREA
14ASTERPLAN FOR THE SITE; THE ELEMENTS OF WHICH
MASTERPLAN WILL CONSTITUTE THE DEVELOPMENT
REGULATIONS FOR THE AREA, ALL AS PROVIDED BY
ARTICLE VII OF CHAPTER 24 OF THE ASPEN MUNICIPAL
CODE
WHEREAS, the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies
and Aspen Center for Physics have presented to the City Council
a request to rezone approximately 2. 3 acres within the City of
Aspen according to the Specially Planned Area (SPA) procedures
of Article VII of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code, and
WHEREAS, the Council has reviewed the proposed master-
plan presented and wishes to approve the same all as provided
in said Article VII,
_TOW, THEREFORE, DE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO,
Section 1
That it does hereby rezone approximately 2 . 3 acres
occupied by the Aspen Center for Physics according to the SPA
Masterplan submitted, a copy of which is attached hereto
and incorporated by this reference. The area rezoned is more
specifically described as:
A tract of land situated in the SW4
NE4 of Section 12 , Township 10 South,
Range 85 West of the 6th Principle
meridian, in the City of Aspen, Pitkin
County, Colorado, being more fully
described as follows:
3eginning at a point whence the NW corner_ of
said SW4NE4 Section 12 bears N 25°11145" W
1041. 20 feet; -thence N 17°34 ' 00" E 344 . 04
feet; thence east 253. 12 feet; thence south
328. 00 feet; thence west 357 . 26 feet to the
point of beginning, containing 2.299 acres,
more or less.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves
FORM'F C.F.HOFCKEL S.B.C L.CO.
All development in the above-described area shall be in con-
formance with the elements of the approved masterplan,' and
the definitional, regulatory and other general provisions
- - - - of Chapter- 24 of -the Aspen Municipal- Code shall; when not
in conflict with the approved plan, continue with equal force
and effect within such area. Subsequent to the effective date
of this ordinance a copy of this approved masterplan shall be
recorded in the Office of the Pitkin County Clerk and Recorder
and remain of public record; and constitute . the development
regulations applicable to the Specially Planned Area unless
and until amended by authority of the City of Aspen.
Section 2
If any provision of this ordinance or the applica-
tion thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid,
such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applica-
tions of the ordinance which can be given effect without the
invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions
of this ordinance are declared to be severable.
Section 3
That a public hearing on this ordinance be held
on �_ . f'�-�`< ' , 1976, at 5 : 00 P.M. in the
City Council Chambers, City Hall, 130 South Galena Street,
Aspen, Colorado, fifteen days prior to which hearing public
notice of the same shall be published once in a newspaper of
general circulation within the City of Aspen.
INTRODUCED, READ AND ORDERED published as provided
by law by the City Council of the City of Aspen, Colorado,
at its regular meeting held at the City of Aspen on the
day of 1 e t, j .° 1976.
Stacytx Standlev III
Mayo.t _
r'
i
-2-
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves
FORM a C.F.NOECKEL B.B.B L.CO.
A
ATTEST:
Kathryn Iauter
City Clerk
FINALLY adopted, massed and approved on the
day of , 1976.
Stacy Standley III
Mayor
ATTEST:
Kathryn. S. F Sauter
City Clerk
-3-
s
E
RESOLUTION OF THE ASPEN PLANNING
AND ZONING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING
THE REZONING OF THE ASPEN_ .FNTER_FOR
PHJ YSICS TRACT ACCORDING TO -A=-PPVED
- ---- OMSTERPLAN SUBrMITTED PURSUANT
TO ARTICLE VII OF CHAPTER 24 OF THE
ASPEN MUNICIPAL CODE
f
WHEREAS , there has. been submitted for Planning and
Zoning Commission consideration a masterplan for the 2 . 3 acre
tract presently occupied by the Aspen Center for Physics, all
according to the Specially Planned Area procedures of Article VII
ww
of Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code, ' and
h
WHEREAS, the procedures for adoption of any such plan
require that, subsequent to conducting a public hearing on
a proposed plan, the Commission forward to the Aspen City
Council a report and recommendation with respect to any such
proposal, and
WHEREAS, the Commission, after proper notice of the
same, did hold the required public hearing at its meeting held x
September 7, 1976, and is prepared to issue a recommendation
with respect to the proposed masterplan,
NOW, THEREFORE, DE IT RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING AND
ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ASPEN, COLORADO:
Section 1
That it does hereby recommend to the City Council
f
that it finally approve and adopt, as the development regulation
S
for the site, the masterplan prepared by Jaclo M. Walls, a copy
of which is attached hereto and incorporated by this reference, !
for an area presently occupied by the Aspen Center for Physics, `
and more particularly described as follows:
A tract of land situated in the SW;NEk of Section 12 ,
Township 10 South, Range 85 West of the 6th Principal ''
p ;
Meridian in the City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colo- ;
rado, being more fully described as follows : >
r :
Beginning at a point whence the NW corner of said
SWaNE34 Section 12 bears N 25011 ' 45" W 1041. 20 feet;
thence N 17°34 ' 00" E 344. 04 feet; thence east 253 . 42
feet; thence south 328. 00 feet; thence west 357. 26
feet to the point of beginning containing 2. 299 acres,
more or less
- - - - - - - - - - - -
F
f
all as provided by Article VII of Chapter 24 of the Aspen
Municipal Code entitled "Specially Planned Areas" .
Section 2
That the Commission recommendation for approval is
conditioned in the following manner (all conditions being
designed to mitigate the potential for undermining the City' s
pending requirement that the balance of the lands owned and
controlled by the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies be
developed only according to a masterplan for the entire site) :
E-
1. That the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies
e
assure the City Council (to the satisfaction of the
City Attorney) that the approval of the attached j
i
masterplan will not be used to argue against applica-
tion of the SPA requirements to the balance of the
adjacent Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies
owned and controlled properties; either during
administrative proceedings to acquire development
permission for Aspen Institute for Humanistic
Studies lands, during litigation affecting the Aspen
• t
Institute for Humanistic Studies lands, or in any
r
4
A
other context or for any other purpose;
2. That prior to final Council approval there be 1F
R.
presented to the City Council a fully executed long
c
term or perpetual lease agreement between the Aspen
Institute for Humanistic Studies and the Aspen Center
i
for Physics (a) covering the entire area included in
the attached masterplan, (b) providing for ownership
of the existing and proposed building within the
masterplanned area in the Aspen Center for Physics,
and (c) naming the Aspen Center for Physics as the
primary (although not necessarily the exclusive)
lessee of the premises.
3. That it is understood that the preservation of
-2-
v
the existing buildings (or their replacement) and
construction of the third library/office structure
constitute the maximum build out proposed for the
masterplanned area; and
4. That the working drawings for the proposed library/
office building be. incorporated into the masterplan,
i
by reference, and constitute the building regulations
with respect ther`eto..
Section 3
And that the Commission makes this affirmative
recommendation with the understanding that the parcelling of
the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies lands into individually
masterplanned areas does not enhance the overall masterplanning
of the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies lands; but the fact
that the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies has announced
its intention to withdraw its pending SPA application; that
the Aspen Center for Physics proposes only one additional struc-
ture for its site and the introduction of no additional uses in
the future; that the Aspen Center for Physics has, historically,
localized its needs to the masterplanned site and has made
little demand for outside support services and facilities in
the area; and that retention of the Center within the community,
because of the educational and cultural opportunities it creates,
is a desirable objective, all of these reasons compel the action
of approval herein taken.
Dated
Charles T. Collins
Chairman _
I, deputy city clerk,
do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and accurate
copy of that resolution adopted by the Aspen Planning and Zoning
Commission at its continued meeting held Friday, September 10,
1976.
Deputy City Clerk
-3-
t
2, `,,,^a.,��d'+.yc,n:, �• /__ter------' `�
.r�.~~�T s - f� � �i �_ 3 .__ 1 - "�..; � h� a,:N`�- p,;,..._. __ ,.__•'K -- rs4�'-� '."'._"�'/ -�--+..--�-.ene- --�;t'�__i �u:>
..�;C"�y�<�r�P�'Y 0/ (.�TF� w...��� _ r ,•� .Y11—"' �'a-/ ,wit t.,, `� ,,� _.! ..V i,•,:
•1 ✓^•'- :'�'t�e'.l'$.-n.. v�r S inw..A.•.-..- r �,� ti� _ I�,MIi , ¢lL .t
`'� %� � •J 1, �,d '�,',./�'�'y7i�, �,� 'v � ,P��x
•j t��
,sC �
ASOitNi �,- CENTER '_FOR PHYSICS
J q;CK M. WALLS /ARCH`IT,ECT
1
j
k
i1
e a
{
NoaTfl
1
4}
t
1--1 -
LAW OFFICES
OATES, AUSTIN $ MCGRATH
600 EAST HOPKINS STREET
LEONARD M. OATES ASPEN,COLORADO 81611
RONALD D.AUSTIN
J. NICHOLAS MCGRATH,JR.
WILLIAM R.JORDAN III
AREA CODE 303
JOHN THOMAS KELLY TELEPHONE 925-2600
ROBERT W. HUGHES October 8, 1976
The Mayor and the City Council
The City of Aspen
City Hall
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Aspen Center for Physics
Council Members :
This is to advise you that by the time of the
proposed public hearing on Tuesday, October 12 , 1976 , the
Aspen Center for Physics will be unable to comply, or sub-
stantially to satisfy, either of the first two conditions
imposed upon its rezoning and precise plan approval by the
Planning and Zoning Commission, which conditions presumably
the City Council would require satisfaction of, in whole or
in part. As you will recall, the first two conditions,
summarized briefly, were that the Center obtain the waiver
of the Aspen Institute of any claim of discrimination with
regard to this separate treatment of the Physics Center' s
application, and that the Center obtain a long-term lease
from the Institute.
We are still hopeful of being able to obtain a
lease. We do not believe we will be able to satisfy the
other condition, substantially or otherwise.
We do not wish the Council to take the unnecces-
sary time of holding a public hearing if we are unable to
satisfy these conditions. It was our first thought simply
to withdraw the present application. Upon further reflec-
tion, we would request that the City Council table our
application indefinitely, so that it would remain pending,
in the event that the Institute, whose prior submissions
we believe are also in a tabled and pending status , should
wish to incorporate the Physics Center ' s "precise plan"
for the 2. 3 acres, into its plans at some later date.
OATES, AUSTIN S, MCGRATH
The Mayor and the City Council
The City of Aspen
Page Two
October 8, 1976
Our application has recommendations for your approval
by the planning staff, the Planning and Zoning Commission, and
the recommendation of approval of subdivision exemption for the
proposed Institute-Physics Center lease from the P&Z (as of -its
last meeting on October 5) . Thus, if ultimately the Institute
submits or processes a "precise plan" or rezoning change with
the City, and if it includes virtually no changes in the plans
for these 2. 3 acres, then it would seem a shame to waste these
recommendations of approval, the time and expense of the Physics
Center, as well as the time of the City staff and agencies in
having processed this application. Our request, therefore, is
simply to table this application and the public hearing thereon
indefinitely and our feeling is that that action would benefit
the Physics Center, the City, and the Institute, with prejudice
to none.
The Physics Center is regretful it won' t have this com-
ing year its much needed library-office building, and perhaps
may lose some foundation grants for construction, through circum-
stances beyond its control and for reasons other than the merits
of the particular building proposal, but it understands the
problems preventing its proceeding further at this time. We are
hopeful the City and the Institute will resolve their differences
in a mutually satisfactory manner, and that that resolution will
result also in favorable treatment of the Physics Center' s prob-
lem and application.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
OATES , AUSTIN & McGRATH
L,a�') - o"
J. Nicholas McGrath, Jr.
JNMJr/lh
cc: Mr. Donald C. McKinlay, Esq.
Ms. Sandra Stuller
Mr. Bill Kane
ly
• �'y�re�.ha w+a .vS'Y.r .. s . ..Fyat✓ ���N.�:.��aw •�
130 � �� E street
A L,
S e ; g _ .
MEMORANDUM
DATE: September 8 , 1976
TO: Members of City Council
FROM: Sandra M. Stuller
RE : Physics Institute Rezoning Request
Members of City Council :
At their Tuesday meeting the P&Z requested that I
prepare a resolution, `or their consideration at noon on Friday,
approving the Physics Institute SPA rezoning request. The Com-
mLission gave a hesitant approval, remaining somewhat concerned
that they are defeating the masterplanning of the entire site
by their approval , but nonetheless feeling compelled to authorize
construction of the library/office facility. I hope to have a
copy of their resolution in your box on Friday afternoon.
In any event, Steve Wishart, at the noon council
meeting when the Physics Institute proposal was first discussed,
asked me for a memo describing the difficulties that may arise
by reason of any localized SPA approval on Institute owned land.
This is both a planning strategy and legal question, but let
me give you sortie thoughts on the subject, anyway.
It is important to know, initially, the status of the
different arrangements the AIRS has with DU, I4AA and PI (Physics
Institute) . They can be summarized as follows :
M.A.A. Leas
This lease became effective in September of 1964 for
a term of 99 years and includes the tent area and west gravel
parking area., \w=ith a right to use (jointly with the Institute)
the present paved parking area and access road to the north and
east of the tent. (The attached map outlines the leased. area. )
The lease also authorizes "to continue to use for parking
purposes the Institute real property situat- between the east line
of the demised premises and the road leading to the Institute
parking area, until such time as the Institute in its sole dis-
cretion shall otherwise direct" . 'rent is $1. 00 per year and the
Memorandum to Member, of City Council
September_ 8 , 1976
Page 2
M.A.A. is limited to using the area solely for cultural uses
(music festivals , concerts , theatrical performances, operas ,
cor)ferences) without the Institute ' s prior approval. Exterior
changes to the tent and the constrtic.tion of other structures
or fences in the leased area are prohibited without permission
from the Institute. In addition, is needed to sub-
let any of the leased area or assign the lease itself. Improve-
raents made by M.A.A. (including the tent) remain the property of
M.A.A. and must be removed within one year from the end of the
lease term. The .lease may be terminated by the Institute in the
event either (1) that the M.A.A. fails to use the property for
a period of more than 24 consecutive months , or, (2) Mi.A.A. fails
to cure any default under its lease after 30 days notice of the
same.
Denver University Deed
f
There has been no conveyance to D.U. of any interest
to date, inasmuch as this would constitute a subdivision of land
for which an exemption (or full compliance with Chapter 20)
would be required. Ho,,'ever, the Institute has prepared (and is
holding in escrow) a deed which, although not effective , gives us
an idea of the Institute ' s present position with respect to _'_ts
control over the future use of the "academic" area and facilities.
The deed conveys to D.U. reserving to the Institute
the right to exclusive use of the area for a period of three
months (June 5 to September 5) every year, in perpetuity, with-
out charge to the Institute for ":cent, insurance, maintenance ,
utilities, taxes, or any other costs incident to operating and
maintaining the land or facilities thereon.. "
i
The deed contains what is known as a "reverter" , i. e. ,
it states conditions upon which the land may "revert" to the
Institute. Specifical.._ly, the land c•.ill revert if, subsequent
to the conveyance to D.U. , (1) D.U. or the Institute records
an instrument stating that the parties have not agreed upon
"the architectural , aesthetic or environmental aspects , the
general quality and character_ , or the maintenance and upkeep
of the property" , and (2) this notice remains of record for
six (6) months without the party who filed the notice stating
in a second instrument that the disagreement has been resolved.
Once agreement has been reached with respect to these conditions,
the land is also subject to reverter if there is "any change in
the status of (D.U. or the Institute) relating to the property
or regarding the conditions (described above) " and D.U. and the
Institute "have failed to agree upon alternate uses which satis-
fy the basic purposes and intentions" of both D.U. and the
Institute. This proviso concludes :
Memorandum to Members of City Council
September 8 , 1976
Page 3
1
The reservation of use and the possibility of
a reverter hereby retained by the Grantor (the
Institute) shall be extinguished automatically
if the Grantor shall cease to exist as a legal
entity or shall. fail to use the property in any
manner for a period of three consecutive years .
Given the broad language in the reverter clause I
would suggest that there is a substantial chance of a reverter
of the property to the Institute, and a good. indication that
the Institute will continue a strong supervisory control over
the use and maintenance of the property (at least in the near
future) . The possibility of reverter terminates only if the
Institute abandons its summer use of the area or terminates its
non-profit corporation status .
Physics Institute
There exists no formal documentation of the arrangement
between the Physics Institute and Aspen Institute , and the only
evidence of their understanding that I am aware of is contained
in a letter to Paul Fishbane , dated August 7 , 1976 , from Joe
Slater. (a copy of which is enclosed in the PI ' s application
materials) . Vie PI occupies the area under a perpetual "license"
from the Institute, i. e. , an open-ended but revocable permission
to occupy the land and buildings, with ownership of both remaining
in the Institute. The letter goes on to state :
T. The buildings and land must remain available for AI-
HS use when not being used by the PI ;
2. The premises will revert to the Institute if the
PI fails to use them for two consecutive years;
3. Althougl; the PI area is included in the deed to
D.U. , a condition of the deed is that the PI be per-
mitted to continue its operation as in the past;
4 . The PI "must consult with and "advise the Aspen
Institute for Humanistic Studies regarding any
changes in architecture , aesthetic quality or character
which conforms to the agreement which the Aspen
Institute for Humanistic Studies and the Aspen Center
for Physics have had from the beginning" ; and
t
i
5. Permission to use the facilities other than during
the summer and permission to construct on the site
must be procured in advance from the Institute.
t
E
Consequently, the Aspen Institute has reserved the right
to complementary use of the area, a. strong right of review over
Memorandum to Members of City Council
September 8 , 1976
Page 4
construction on and improvements to the area by the PI and a
right of reverter in the event the PI should abandon use of the
facilities for two years.
As is apparent the Institute, in its dealings with
all its "satellites" , maintains (1) control of future construc-
tion, (2) a right of joint use , and (3) at least to date , with
respect to the PI , ownership of the improvements on the land.
In any event, it is clear that the Institute maintains ultimate ,
unqualified authority over the development of what is known as
the "Institute" property although it has delegated the use and
maintenance functions to its lessees and d.onees.
Nature of SPA Zone District
The Institute land is presently zoned Specially
Planned Area (SPA) which anticipates that the entire tract will
be masterplanned (and the master.plan approved by the P&Z and
City Council in the same manner as zoning is adopted) before
any development (requiring issuance of a building permit) occurs
on the tract. 'essentially, SPA procedures provide for the
adoption of a very precise plan for the area (designating uses ,
densitites , cuff-street parking, height limits , et cetera) which
will act as a miniature zone code for the area; and once adopted ,
building permits may issue only for development recognized in
the plan.
The rationale for and benefits of the SPA designation
were well spelled out in the P&Z resolution dated November 11,
1975, which denied the institute ' s request that its land be
parcelled into traditional zone districts. The Commission con-
cluded not only that the zone districts proposed were inappro-
priate, but that the SPA designation for the entire site be
retained because
1. SPA is a zone designation created by the American
Law Institute, incorporated in its Model Land Develop-
ment Code, and suggested for relatively undeveloped
land where there is anticipated some demand for develop-
ment in the near future but where it is desirable to
discourage small, scattered and uncontrolled develop-
ments.
2. The SPA designation precludes premature develop-
ment and assures that an entire site will be developed
in a compatible manner. This development technique
permits as much flexibility as possible in determining
the content of a precise plan , but once the precise
plan has been adopted it becomes the development regu-
lation for the specifically planned area, precluding
inconsistent future development. S
Memorandum to Members of City Council
September 8 , 1976
Page 5
i
3 . If zoning is ever to be a tool of effective and
rational, planning it is essential that it be future-
directed in cases where the present status of the land
.gives no indication as to its ultimate best use.
I think these conclusions , as well as anything, spell
out the objectives of an SPA designation.
The difficulty with approving different SPA plans for
each lessee or donee of the Institute lands is that (1) we lose
the ability to require simultaneous and integrated development
of the entire site , (2) we lose the ability to require joint and
complementary use of new structures and facilities, and (3) we
subject the City to the argument by each separate lessee or
donee that it must satisfy all its needs within the land area
under its control (with a possibility of duplicating functions) .
The SPA designation was designed to (1) force the Institute to
define itself, and (2) produce the most efficient use of the land.
Neither of these objectives are reached by establishing a series
of masterplanned areas within the boundaries of the Institute
lands.
SMS/mc
cc Mick Mahoney
Bill Kane
t
is
i
E
f
t
r
t
.� \gyp. _ `'F,` ,'... .. ___ -_- ,\• ` .._ __._ '
FITY
I�ti�S c� tr Fly iu o� fT 1 f
• r 1, _\ i _ �, ,�_. _ ;`� ------ti,� ,
r
, r
,
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen City Council
FROM: Planning Staff (HC)
RE: Physics Center Subdivision Exemption Request
DATE: October 6, 1976
This is an application for Subdivision Exemption by the Aspen Center
for the Physics for a long term lease to it from the Aspen Institute
for Humanistic Studies of the 2.3 acre parcel that is the subject
of the Physics Center's rezoning and S.P.A. precise plan application.
The condition of subdivision, 'i .e. , by their lease, was imposed by
the Planning and Zoning Commission as a condition of rezoning and
S.P.A. approval .
The applicant will appear before the City Council on October 12, 1976,
for rezoning, S.P.A , and Subdivision Exemption approval .
The Planning Office recommends approval of the Physics Center Subdivision
Exemption request. The Planning and Zoning Commission recommended
approval of the exemption request at their October 5, 1976 meeting.
LAW OFFICES
OATES, AUSTIN 8, MCGRATH
600 EAST HOPKINS STREET
LEONARD M. OATES ASPEN,COLORADO 81611
RONALD D.AUSTIN
J. NICHOLAS MGGRATH,JR
WILLIAM R.JORDAN III
-_ AREA CODE 303
JOHN THOMAS KELLY September 10, 1976 TELEPHONE 925-2600
ROBERT W. HUGHES
Mr. Bill Kane
Aspen/Pitkin Planning Office
City Hall
130 South Galena
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Re: Physics Center
Dear Bill,
At Sandy' s suggestion, this is to apply on behalf of
the Aspen Center for Physics for a subdivision exemption for a
long-term lease to it from the Aspen Institute for Humanistic
Studies of the 2. 3 acre parcel that is the subject of the
Physics Center' s rezoning and SPA precise plan application.
This application is necessitated by the P&Z ' s condition
of approval of the rezoning and SPA precise plan approval that the
Physics Center have a long-term lease so that its responsibility
to the City for compliance with the rezoning and SPA requirements
is assured.
We believe a subdivision exemption is warranted for the
following reasons :
1. The condition of subdivision, i.e. , a long-term
lease, was imposed by P&Z itself as a condition of
the rezoning and SPA approval.
2. This "subdivision" is not within the intents and
purposes of Chapter 20 of the Municipal Code for
reasons herein indicated.
3. Given our submittals on the rezoning and SPA
precise plan, virtually all of the subdivision
substantive requirements have been satisfied:
there is no increased density beyond the mere physi-
cal increase of a building; there are no internal
OATES, AUSTIN 8, MCGRATH
Mr. Bill Kane
Page two
September 10, 1976
streets to be paved; all utilities are in; landscaping
is in place; and the plot plan previously submitted
will, if the rezoning and SPA are approved, be recorded;
it satisfies virtually all of the requirements for a
vicinity map and a subdivision plat under the Code.
4. Unlike the usual "subdivision" created by a
conveyance and potential new ownerships -- one
where planning concerns are the greatest -- this
"subdivision" is created only by a leasehold
interest. Thus, e.g. , no consumer protection for a
purchaser (Section 20-2) is needed.
We would appreciate your submitting this to the Planning
and Zoning Commission at your earliest convenience.
Once again, thank you for your prompt consideration.
Sincerely,
OATES , AUSTIN & McGRATH
By
J. Picholas McGrath, Jr.
JNMJr/le
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Q1--- rm i en
FROM: Planning Staff (HC)
RE: Physics Center Subdivision Exemption Request
DATE: October„$, 1976
This is an application for Subdivision Exemption by the Aspen Center
for the Physics for a long term lease to it from the Aspen Institute
for Humanistic Studies of the 2.3 acre parcel that is the subject
of the Physics Center's rezoning and S.P.A. precise plan application.
The condition of subdivision, i .e. , by their lease, was imposed by
the Planning and Zoning Commission as a condition of rezoning and
S.P.A. approval .
The applicant will appear before the City Council on October 12, 1976,
for rezoning, S.P.A. , and Subdivision Exemption approval .
The Planning Office recommends approval of the Physics Center Subdivision
Exemption request.
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen City Council, City Manager
FROM: Planning Office, Bill Kane
RE: Aspen Center for Physics - Separate S.P.A.
DATE: September 9, 1976
By Monday's meeting time you will have received a P & Z resolution
recommending the creation of a separate S.P.A. of some 2.3 acres for
the Aspen Center for Physics. Two memo's are attached which summarize
our evaluation and recommendations on the subject. In its simplist
terms the application represents a possible tradeoff between maintenance
of an comprehensive view of the entire Institute versus a single building
which represents a high public value. As you will gather from the
correspondence we have consistently recommended an overall S.P.A. as a
prerequisite to any further development on the Institute tract. However,
in all honesty we must admit that the building as proposed would not
be something totally obnoxious to the ultimate development of the tract
and the unique funding constraints involved indeed make this a special
case.
As pointed out in our memo to P & Z we find the building to be well
designed, sympathetic to the surrounding environment and one without a
substantial additional traffic impact.
Again from a narrower planning and administrative point of view an
approval could result in an erosion of our ability to derive an overall
Institute plan. The Council will have to decide whether a special
overiding public interest is at stake.
Should the Council decide in favor of this application, we fully support
the conditions enumerated in the P & Z resolution to specifically include:
1. Guarantees against leverage by Aspen Institute for Humanistic
Studies.
2. Provision of a satisfactory long term lease arrangement.
3. Plan constitutes maximum buildout as proposed.
4. Final drawings for new building be part of master plan for
separate S.P.A.
ti
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen City Council , City Manager
FROM: Bill Kane
RE: Physics Institute
DATE: July 23, 1976
As you may know we have been discussing the problem of the expansion of the
Physics Institute with respect to the larger question of adoption of a
master plan for the entire 130 acre Institute property. The Physics Institute
has received grant money from the Kiesge Foundation which would allow them
to build a new building to include a library and seminar room (copy of general
plans attached). We have consistently agreed that any improvement to the
Physics Institute property be tied in with an overall S.P.A. master plan for
the Aspen Institute lands. The Physics building must be started before Oct-
ober 15 of this year in order to qualify for grant money. To this point
they have been waiting for the Aspen Institute to submit an overall master
plan. With Fall approaching and no plan submitted yet the physics group is
obviously getting nervous.
I was approached by Paul Fishbane, Physics Institute PresidCont and Jack Walls
the architect for the project with a request to investigate the possibility
of separating the Physics and Aspen Institutes to allow the physicists to proceed
independently of the Aspen Institute. In response to this question I recited
our traditional thinking on the subject but admitted that technically the
seperation sought could be accomplished. Such a seperation would require,
as a minimum the following:
1) A formalized long term written lease for lands immediate to the
proposed Physics expansion.
2) A description of a seperate S.P.A. for the Physics Institute
leased land. This, of course, would require the amendment of
the zoning map and would have all the notice and hearing re-
quirements of a rezoning.
3) The development and approval of a seperate S.P.A. Master Plan for
the Physics Institute lands .
Of course there are points to be made on both sides of this question. On
one hand, the Aspen Institute insists that the City's intransigence with
respect to zoning institute lands serves only to frustrate, disappoint and
ultimately discourage the aspiring cultural and education groups in the
city. However, the approval of an overall plan by granting building permits
on a building by building basis erodes the concept of an overall , integrated
balanced plan.
I have given Mr. Fishbane our more or less standard response and we continue
to hold out for an overall master plan. We will continue with this policy
position unless otherwise directed by Council . You may expect some serious
lobbying by the Physics group and we will stand by to impliment any policy
you choose.
Under normal circumstances I would not raise this issue but felt it to be
of such significance as to warrant Council consideration.
cc: Sandy Stuller
t
MEMORANDUM
TO: Aspen Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Staff (BK)
RE: Aspen Center for Physics Request for Separate S.P.A.
Designation.
DATE: September 2, 1976
On September 7, a public hearing will be conducted to consider
the question of the creation of a separate S.P.A. for the Physics
Institute to facilitate the construction of a new library and seminar
room. If approved, this proposal would allow the Physicists to plan
their site of some 2.3 acres independently of the overall Aspen
Institute. Accompanying the request for creation of a separate
S.P.A. is the S.P.A. master plan which basically reflects the existing
buildings and the new library and seminar room. It is our belief
that if approved, the new building would exhaust the development
potential of the 2.3 acre tract and any future expansions would have
to be reviewed by P & Z and Council. From the information submitted
to date we find the building to be well sited, well designed, and
sympathetic to the surrounding area. However, we still have our
concern for the successful master planning of the entire Institute
tract and stated our reasons at the last meeting.
The Board is being called upon to weigh the long range planning
concerns represented by this project against the more immediate
benefit to the Physicists and the community.
Before the Planning and
Zoning Commission of the
City of Aspen
-must 17 , 1976
1
ASPEN CENTER FOR PHYSICS '
Application for rezoning of 2 . 3 acres from SPA in a
larger tract to SPA for the specific 2 . 3 acre tract;
and application for approval of a "precise plan" for
such tract.
Paul M. Fishbane, President,
Aspen Center for Physics
Jack M. Walls , Architect
Oates, Austin & McGrath
J. Nicholas McGrath, Jr. ,
Counsel
NJ
j
it
y LU J
p
s ,
LAW OFFICES
OATES, AUSTIN a MCGRATH
600 EAST HOPKINS STREET
LEONARD M. OATES ASPEN,COLORADO 81611
RO":ALD D. AUSTIN
J. NICHOLAS MCGRATH,JR.
V.'1'_LIAM F2.JORDAN ][I
AREA CC 303
JOHN THOMAS KELLY August 16 , 1976 TELEPHONE 925-2000
RODEPT W. HUGHES
The Planning and Zoning Commission,
City of Aspen
City Hall
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Commission Members :
The Aspen Center for Physics is a Colorado non-profit
corporation, and has been since 1968. It has a license in
perpetuity to use approximately 2. 3 acres of land owned by the
Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies (in the so-called
"academic area") ; its offices and academic buildings are located
at Sixth and Gillespie Streets , and it has conducted its academic
business there in the summers for the last fourteen years . It
is our understanding that to any extent necessary to satisfy
the City' s requirement that the "owner" of land join in an
application for rezoning, the Institute joins this separate
application (see Tab "A" ) .
The Physics Center is badly in need of a new building;
the building and the need therefor is discussed below. How-
ever, it now finds itself unfortunately caught up in the larger
planning and development differences that appear to exist be-
tween the Institute and the City. This application is an
attempt (a) to extricate the Physics Center from those larger
problems, and (b) to persuade you and the City Council that, for
the reasons below, the 2. 3 acres of the Physics Center (which
is "owned" by the Institute (see Tabs "A" and "B") , ought to
be dealt with separately and independently from the rest of
the Institute ' s approximately 120 acres.
The Physics Center is described more fully in materials
attachr_�•d hereto as Tabs "C" and "D. " It is a totally indepen-
dent entity from the Institute, although two Institute officers
do sit on the Physics Center' s twenty-member Board of Trustees.
The Center ' s annual budget is only about $70, 000. 00 , and it has
no paid staff except secretarial and maintenance. While it is,
even by academic standards , low. budget and low keyed, it is
nonetheless unique in the world. Its trustees and current
participants include at least one Nobel winner in physics, as
OATES, AUSTIN $ MCGRATH
The Planning and Zoning Commission,
City of Aspen
Page two
August 16 , 1976
well as several physicists on the staffs at the Institute for
Advanced Study, Princeton, New Jersey, and at the Los Alamos ,
New Mexico, Scientific Laboratory of the University of Califor-
nia. All of the participants are prominent physicists; they
come to the Physics Center to research and to communicate with
other physicists on questions ultimately essential to us all .
Given that, historically for almost a decade, the Physics
Center has been independent and has had virtually autonomy con-
cerning its 2 . 3 acres at Sixth and Gillespie; that the Center has
always had total control in its development, raised its own funds ,
and the like, we hope you will agree a persuasive case can be made
that you should deal separately with its 2. 3 acre site -- despite
the undeniably appealing planning position that all of the
Institute ' s land should be handled as a whole. For if the
Physics Center is viewed as part of the Institute' s proposals,
the Physics Center will in all likelihood not be able to begin
its needed building this year, and will in that event jeopardize
or lose needed foundation grants for construction.
The Physics Center has raised approximately $120, 000. 00
for its proposed new building (Tab "E" is a list of contributors) .
A grant of $50, 000 . 00 from the Kresge Foundation must be committed
by October 15, 1976 (i.e. , in Kresge ' s present apparent view,
having a construction contract signed and building to begin by
then) . A grant ($40 , 000. 00) of the Fleischmann Foundation must
be similarly committed by June 1 , 1977 .
The proposed 3, 666 sq. ft. building is to house the
Physics Center' s highly specialized library (sharing a library
with others is thus unrealistic for the Center) ; it provides an
all-weather seminar room (the only present seminar "room" is
out-of-doors) ; and it will provide some needed office space,
so that two,_ rather than three,- physicists will share an office.
(One can readily surmise it is difficult to do theoretical
equations -- let alone concentrate -- when three physicists
share one small blackboard in an office! ) The building con--
templates no expansion in the Center' s activities; it has
already decided its present size is optimal (see Tab "C" ) .
Thus, this application involves no new housing, transportation,
or parking impacts .
OATES, AUSTIN a MCGRATH
The Planning and Zoning Commission,
City of Aspen
Page three
August 16 , 1976
The building is low in profile, architecturally compatible
with adjacent buildings , and situated so that, given existing
landscaping, buildings, and topography; the new library- virtually
could not be seen from adjacent residential streets, and indeed
would be visible at all only from the Music Tent, Red Mountain,
and the sky. (See the map accompanying this material . )
The Physics Center has been a good neighbor even in land
use terms. It has spent much more in landscaping than its low
budget would otherwise justify, and its existing plantings in
large measure lessen any visual impact of the proposed library.
The present building and rezoning plan has been presented to and
has the approval of, its neighbors, the West End Improvement
Association (see Tab "F") . It has even purchased some 50 bicycles,
which it makes available to its participants at a nominal rental,
to lessen dependence on the automobile and attendant impacts of
cars on the neighborhood.
From a planning standpoint, it is always logically better
to deal with a larger whole (e.g. , all of the Institute' s 120
acres) , than with smaller pieces -- but sometimes (a) the small
piece has a history of being dealt with separately, (b) is
autonomous, and (c) is so small and insignificant in relation to
the larger whole, that given its clear need for separate treat-
ment, the otherwise valid planning considerations should yield.
We hope you will agree this is such a case; and that you
will set a prompt public hearing to rezone the 2 . 3 acres on which
the Physics Center sits to its own Specially Planned Area, and
upon the Center' s "precise plan" for that area. The technical
requirements of this submittal follow this letter (Tab "G") ,
and other background materials are set forth at Tab "H. "
Sincerely,
OATES , AUSTIN & McGP.ATH
J. Nicholas McGrath, Jr .
JNMJr/le
Aspen 1n _,tu1Xe for lain an'll>ilir Studies 1000 North Third St.
Aspen,Colorado 31*i11 U.S.A.
3039257010
Gable:Aspeninst Colorado
12 August 1976
C. Anderson Chairman
Slater Presidnl Mr. Bill Kane
Planning Office
City of Aspen
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Bill:
As owner of record, the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies
joins with the-Aspen Center for Physics in the accompanying-request
for rezoning and master plan approval of the approximately 2. 3 acres
shown herein. This request is made by us only in order to satisfy the
technical requirements of the zoning ordinance.
Because the Aspen Center for Physics for more than a decade
has been the tenant of the buildings and immediately adjacent land, it
will continue to have such rights in the event of a transfer to the Univer-
sity of Denver of the academic area. We understand that the Physics
Center may use this letter in connection with its request for permission
for the construction of a new library.
In view of the funding deadlines faced by the Aspen Center for
Physics, we join with them in hoping you can give their request your
immediate favorable attention.
Sincerely yours,
i
i E. Slater
i
H
Aspen 11,ISW—ic! for Huitl:u-lis"ir, '3itodic-'s 1 ON)flo(th 1 hind S1.
A. ;1)r-I I,C(i I u,r3,1 V 16 11 U.S,A.
303 925 7010
7 August 19YG
Dr, Paul M . Fishbano
Aspen Center for Physics
1208
A-spon , Colorado 81611
Dear Dr, Fishban�:
The Purpose of this letter is to confirm the arrangements which
the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies has had with the Aspen Cener
for Physics for more than a decade . In addition, we formally wish to
express the hope that the Aspen Center for Physics will be pe=itted to
construct its needed library facilities .
'"re would appreciate it if you would please sign this letter and
the' following resume , which conforms to the existing arrangements that
are as follows:
The buildings and immediate area of land kno,,%,n as "The Aspen
Center for Physics" and used by the Aspen Center for Physics be made
available to the Aspen Center for Physics in perpetuity to the extent
their needs to carry out the Physics Program require , The buildings and
grounds remain the property of the Aspen Institute for Humanistic studies
and shall be made available for other uses during the period when acti-
vities of the Asp--n Center for Physics are not in progress .
If the facilities and lands are not utilized by the Aspen Center
for Physics for two consecutive years , all of their rights will be terminated
and the Property will revert to the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies
and/or to the University of Denver. (As you know, a donation of the
Institute's academic core , including the Physics Center area, is being
made to the University of Denver with certain reversionary clauses . In
this donation , the rights of the Physics Center to continue their program
on the basis they hava had with the Aspen Institute is assured and has
been agreed to by the University of Denver .)
The Aspen Center for Physics must consult with and Eldvise the
Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies regarding any changes in archi-
tecture , cvesthctic quality or character which conforms to the agreement
which the A,,:i-.)en Institute for Flurl'anistic Studies and the. Aspen Center
for Physics 1-tiv(, ft-om� the
The Aspen Center for Physics must notify the Aspen Institute for
ITurnanistic Studies and/or the University of Denver a year in -advZ!n-.O of
their needs in other than the summer period in order to facilitate the 1-3
Dr. Paul T"' Fishh-Jrw 2 7 A,I-Pmt 1976
proper schOCII-1.1inq of the facilities, and lands currently user], by t,
G"Inter for Physics , and aliv nevv construction would I)o C011-7-red the
requirements for Prior approval zinc], consultation and other provisio")s
outlined in this letter
Sincerely,
E Slater
I
Preddlent
Jill Davis, Assistant &-cretary
APMOVED:
Paul M . Fishbane Date
ASPI,I,1 CENTER FOR PHYSICS
Fact Sheet
The institution
.;__at is the Aspen Center for Physics?
The ACP is an independent scientific-educational institution
which runs a 13 - 111 week program in theoretical physics
and astrophysics each summer. It is incorporated in the
state of Colorado, and is recognized as a non-profit insti-
tution by the U. S. Internal Revenue Service.
Is the ACP part of the Aspen Institute?
Ito. The ACP is completely independent legally , financially ,
and adminstratively . The ACP started under the auspices of
the Aspen Institute in 1962 , but was incorporated as an
independent institution in 1968. It operates uder its own
board of trustees , plans its own programs , and finances these
programs and its facilities with funds raised specifically
for these purposes . It was also operated and funded indepen-
dently of the Aspen Institute in the early years , 1962-67.
-r _ ere did the facilities come from?
The two physics buildings at 6th and Gillespie Streets were
built with funds raised specifically for the physics program.
Because of the early connection with the Aspen Institute, the
buildings are on land which belongs to the Aspen Institute ,
and formal title is with the Institute. However, the ACP was
given use of the buildings and land in perpetuity for the
physics program when the Center was incorporated in 1968.
`rro maintains the physics buildings and grounds?
The ACP maintains the buildings and grounds , and has put sub-
stantial effort each year into upgrading the buildings , im-
proving the landscaping, and so forth. The Aspen Institute
does not contribute to maintenance , improvements , operating
costs , etc.
-.inert facilities are available?
The two build=ings have office space in two-person offices
for 58 participants , plus two administrative and secretarial
offices . There is a small research library , and an outdoor
patio area used for seminar/lectures .
CP P1Ogram.
'v,'%_at is the ACP program?
The ACP runs a program in theoretical research in physics and
astrophysics June - August each summer. The program is
relatively unstructured, and provides scientists from dif- y
ferent institutions a chance to get together to talk about
n
2 .
and work intensively on problems at the forefront of r)i,ysics
and astrophysics . The organized activit=ies consist of
lectures and discussions of special subjects . About 150
research papers a year result from work done at the Center.
Is it important?
The Center' s program is the largest and most successful of
its kind in the world. The work done at the Center has
been of very high quality , and many of the most product=ive
physicists and astrophys:icsits in the U. S. and abroad try to
spend time here.
Who comes to the ACP?
Participants are selected by the trustees on the basis of
their scientific abilities . They are professors and research
scientists from universities and research laboratories in
the U. S, and abroad. Most come with their families for an
average stay in Aspen of four weeks .
How b=ig is the program?
There will be 250 part=icipants in the 1976 program, repre-
senting 90 institutions . They were selected from over 450
applications for the program. There are about 70 partici-
pants at the Center at a time . We have experimented with
the size, and had 80 - 90 participants at a time in 1973 .
This was too large for the kind of informal contact the
program is designed to facilitate , and the size was deliber-
ately cut back: to the present average of 70 .
Who funds the ACP program?
The physics-astrophysics program is funded by grants from
the National. Science Foundation, the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration, by registration fees charged to
participants , and by contributions from our Corporate
Associates . The total operating budget for 1976 is $70, 125
comprised of $46 ,500 for the NSF, $8825 from NASA, $10 , 800
in registration fees , and $4000 from the Corporate Associates
(Xerox and Bell Laboratories ) .
Where does the money go?
Roughly two-thirds of the $70 ,000 budget goes into operating
funds for the program: secretarial and administrative
services , books and journals , supplies , upkeep , etc. The
ACP does not pay participants , and provides only very minimal
support for travel and other expenses (an average of $100
per person in 1976) . Rentals for ACP participants and
their families are taken from the general Aspen market and
total an additional $85 ,000 in 1976. Other living expenses
of the participants and the=ir families should be added to
this total _t_i"? assessing the eC:l)t1;bmic i_mpaci, OL the ACP on the
Aspen community . It is a measure of the value of the pro,ra1
that so many sc=ientists want to participate despite what
is usually a considerable personal expense.
J-1--ave the -pl,o6rai.ri in Aspen?
Bec�ul._�e Aspen is such an attractl-ve place for
r'�i_r 4 *1 ,7
' cipants are �%,illlng to c,,(.)1rI here at th(-.�ir own e1-,,r)e1-.,:,-1-_' .
They tynl cally ti%,ot-k very intensively-Is Jvely duving the I tl qpej-' and
get into the mountains on veekc>n( s . The physicists scorn LC
be particularly well-known -in local sporting goods shops
and restaurants ., and as music festival patrons . Some 2 0
physicists now own houses or apartments in Aspen.
TJew Physics Building,
,71
Y build a new building?
Thc-, ACP urcrently needs more library space ,,
an indoor sem] -riar
room, and a few r.-iore, offices to relieve present overci-o-v.rding.
?'.Thy not use Aspen Institute facilities?
The ACP and the Aspen Institute are completely independent.
The ACP has never used the Institute facilities ,, which are
co-iripletely devoted to Institute programs . Moreover,
'D these
facilities would not be suitable for ACP needs if they
_L
were available. (For example , physics seminars requi-re a
small lecture- or el-assroom-type seminar area and are quite
different from the round-table discussions typical of In-
stitute programs . Physics office space ,, with the reouirement
of blackboards , etc. ,- is Quite different from the Institute
L-L u
offices , and a research library , to be useful, must be ir-,,-
mediately accessible from the offices . )
by does the ACP need a new library?
The present library occupies two offices (opened up) and a
storage room and has completely outgrown this space . The
library budget is roughly $101,000 a year for the highly
specialized journals and books necessary for a successful .
program. The collection grows at the rate suggested by this
figure a-rid the well-known information explosion in sciencle.
The new library will have roughly 1000 square feet of stack
and reading spa-e , compared to 330 square feet in the present
library . This will enable us to keep all our books , current
research journals , and back issues for ten years . read-ily
accessible.
..hy a seral-nar room?
The ACP does not have an indoor seminar room. Seminars are
held outdoors on a patio adjacent to the Stranahan building,
vl,eat-her permitting. The seminar room will be lecture-style ,
with seating for about 60,
ri-,Ore offices?
C)-r-,(7a to ac .,c oua' e 70 -'L e ro
niost suitable in ensuring a wide variety of interests among
the participant-' without losing the possibility of -l'i-iformal
(D -
cc.ntacts ) , the Center has to put three participants in all
the t1.,;o-r)_-rSon offices in one building, and to use a r--arby
house for overflow office space. The tripled offices are
4
noisy and uncomfortable, and not conducive to concentrated
work. The overflow space is inconveniently far from the
library and the center of activity . Both problems will be
eliminated when the new building is available .
YDn ' t more offices just lead to a bigger program?
T0 . There is no intention to increase the size of the program.
Quite the contrary . Past experiments with larger sizes
were unsuccessful , and the program was deliberately reduced
to its present size . It was resolved by the trustess--a-g--a-5-
in 1976 to hold the program to its present size , and in fact ,
to cut back if necessary in 1977 to avoid tripling offices .
How large will the new building be?
Approximately 3300 square feet , with a library, seminar room,
6 two-person offices , and an administrative office .
What will it look like and where will it be?
It will be a partially sunken low-profile concrete block and
wood building located between and north of the existing
buildings . The exterior will be compatible with the exist-
ing buildings . The new building will be very inconspicuous
from Gillespie Street .
hat about parking?
There will be no change in the size of the program, so the
present parking area will continue to be adequate . The ACP
provides approximately 50 bicycles for participants at a
small rent, and is on the present City bus route . OverfloT.�i
parking is available in the music lot on the rare occasions
when it is needed.
"'hat about the land?
The new building will be on land totaling 2 . 1 acres owned by
the Aspen institute in the so-called "academic area" . The
ACP has use of the land and the existing buildings in per-
petuity for the physics program.
What about funds for the building?
The ACP has received grants from the Fleischmann Foundation
( 140, 000) , the Kresge Foundation ( $50 , 000) , past participants
and their families ( $15, 000) , and its Corporate Associates and
others ( $10 , 000) toward the cost of the building, and is ready
to proceed with construction.
The Kresge grant must be committed by October 15, 1976, and the
Fleischmann grant , by June 1 , 1977 .
-.-:ould the building be. available?
The building As urjently needed for the 1977 program, There
is literally no space in the library for our next orAor of
books and journals , and cutting back the size of the pponr"ir.
to avoid tripling up offices might endanger the funding and
effectiveness of the program. In addition the f and inZ fro----
the Kresge Foundation earmarked explicitly for the bulldin7,
will be in danger without an autumn start . The building s4ould
be available if the present zoning problems can be resolved in
time for a start on construction this fall .
r
I's-PEN CEN'Tj-"'13 -WOR PHYS-ICS
TO EXPI-11E,
Eli-hu Abrahams , Rutgers University
Philip Anderson, Bell Laboratories
Fe-jix Boehm California Institute of Technology
Peter Carruthers , Los Alaimos Scientific Laboratory
Benjamin Lee , Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
L.M. S-11r!j-nons ., Jr . , Los Alamos Scientific Laboi at,ory
Frederik Xachariasen, California Tnsti-tute of Tecl-moloF-y
S
TO EXPIRE IN 1978
Stephen Adler, Institute for Advanced Study
Stirling Colgate, Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory
David DeYoung, National onal Radio Astronomy Observatory
Paul Fishbane , University of Virginia
Sydney !',Ieshkov, National Bureau of Sthndards
Heinz PaQ7els The Rockefeller University
TO--E t,..-STO EXPIRE IN 1977
R .O. Anderson, Atlantic Richfield
A. G . W. Cameron, Harvard University
Loyal Durand , University of Wisconsin
hurray California Institute of Technology
Murray Gell-Mann,
Peter Kaus, University of California
David - Pines, University of Illinois
Joseph Slater, The Aspen Institute
! ').'.ORARY TRUSTEES
Hans Bethe, Cornell University
1,7ichael Cohen , University of Pennsylvania
Robert W. Craig, Keystone Center
Daniel Fivel , University of Maryland
George Stranahan, Aspen
C3
Robert R . Wilson, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory,,-,
n rp TRUSTEES
Julius Ashkin, Carne-,,j-e-Mellon University, 1968-1972
Michel Baranger Carne University,
ID I Carnegie-Mellon 1968-1974
?-.arrison Brown, California Institute of Technology , 1971-1972
Richard Ferrell , University of Maryland , 1968-1972
George Field, Harvard University , 1972-1974
Pr-, ,eo, Un 1�_Very r s-.t v
I
Alan Heeger, University of Pennsylvania, 1973-1976
,,-nry Primakoff, University of Pennsylvania, 1968-1972
Frederick Seitz , Rockefeller University , 1968-1972
Lincoln 1,11olfenstein, Carnegie-Mellon University , 1968-1973
Who Are The Participants?
In the summer of 1976 , 240 physicists and 40
astrophysicists from 90 different institutions and 10
different countries attended the Aspen Center for Physics .
The average length of stay of these physicists is 4 weeks
fror? May 31. to September 5 , and the average size of their
families is two children and two adults . Twenty of them
own property and/or homes in Aspen and many visit again
during the winter months to ski . Most of the physicists
are ardent hikers , fishermen and tennis players and they
spend much of their free time in these endeavors .
The Center trys to attract a wide variety of
participants . Approximately 60% were junior faculty or
the ecuivalent , and each year approxi.mately 407 visit here
for the first time. It is not atypical to have several
Nobel Laureates in attendance.
H
tzi
d
f
,port on BuildinU Fund
-.s-jen Center for Physics
Pa gels
=uildin Fund C airman
nrantS
C . Fle ishmann Foizndat ion X40 ,000 . 00
'rues e Foundation 000 . 00
Total Grants 90 , 000 . 00
Gifts
Atlantic Richfield S 1 , 000. 00
T4azor Foundation 5, 000. 00
iii 5, 000 . 00
-ell Labs 2 , 000. 00
X13 , 000 . 00
Individuals (names attached ) 14, 221 . 73
T-i'terests on Deposits __.,72•_2
Accumulated Total 27, 994.48
Architect Fees - 5, 123.48
Fund Raising Ex-oense s
mo tal Cash on Hand (Au-ust 12 , 1970 ) $22 , 274- 74
H
m
M
to �
o U
--D N �A a
C) x 0
�
P S, ho, -P e.) Cr,
n) s~ - • `� s~ s~ fa 4-:' Sa a) t~ cd ..H t:D
S O S-4 a) b 3 H ls: S,
S~ : �D cu C) M C) N Xn a) c O o r+ � o >>' (t
cU o i r cn r o c �� •r+ ra ai e) > 0 N o -P 4--" an S, b C) - o cd a p - cd m o N o
r-+ 4-' C) U) U) U] Q) Co •rA 1--1 10 •, •rl U) 'H M N p (D p C) t S 4- :� rl r-1 r{ 1-3
U r
M ,-{ N N O ? r) �; S >: o ra C, p CH , U? p f cd O a) N Q,•r{•r{ f •r+ o ? U �a 5 S� o rt CON N 3 �+
P- ���. c ? r O � (d N ("I cd N N C) N C) o O O O O O N N cd r-{ --1 _4 s: O c� ) r♦ Q U (cf �' �; •H R'i c rl a)
6 C--6C7C-�) 6 C-� :L,
�O
,H
G r-1 r--1
w a (1) r+
• 4-1 c)
CJ U) O N O C) �-r C
i~ S~ J �4 •r--:� • • •r{ C) Cn r {
m F; U) r♦ o �-+ (1) (1) (t �Z H a) h .` ` o t:0 a) � o
£ c a) C) •ri C) U c In f' S 4-1 S:: o c--)
CO p C1 O 1-) r{ ctS •• (C$ N « - « H �a O ri O -1-3 S71 'O (i)
S� •rl �y C (L G7 '� a) i� 4: S� N p U] S •rl bD hf) is b �' {' C) C) a) -,ti C7 C) G) U) Ci •rl c) a) P t7 41 ,SJ
l'. C.) C) �: C) cl` 'C7, S~ f a L S U =" �Q R r{ 1� �; :� S a) a) a) O a) N O U) r 5 O S S; f - .0 .f". E? 5 U
-{--1 U) (10 ti C> r) r-1 .� -C; C: C) E:;S N �• S-; (:i (`> >� CJ U1 U) (li 0.? CJ •�-1
O o O o o C) aS a) a� o �, C',
nc=ic=a
(/] Ul (A U) U) Ul Ul (n U) GO U) U) Cn (n U] Lo Cn (n U) Cn '1 ''1 '11 't1 'U '(1 ;S O C) C)
C-F c('CJ .� r1. �. N. ��. �• :� :_T :3 (U (D (7 �) i1> P) N O O j1) 5::
(D (D P) �i :_3 1 f— c+ r-,. CD �O P) (it's Uq :3 c-I'-'d ;'i F-' (r) (!) 0 U S F
� (D G: .3 f-� :.:� ;U rYi O �� � y 'd �'1 � = (� (p }-�• A) �S (D O '� 7 c-F .� rj �� n (D c-F G• cF
3 F () m H• O N• (D r ' N � 'S c1 GL (D � � � Sl) C+U ca N• m (D
�" (D � :5 � (D �T N h-' ri iJ co N• �-1 CJ. C) CD lD H. (n
�G O) O N (D cF
N » (D �»
(D r• .b
ri C-4 .
• e
Cl yH -3 }3 -3 ti y �-3 U) (n Cn Cn (2 U)
O • �• F F . W W p W N �t n n c O :D- (D A) s C cf C+
c+ �5 t p `< ct F-+ (D � (D D :-]� (D �-i c< -I (D
UR G4 cF ice• CO 2.. :3• c+ :S Y• O7 ri (D P O � S � t n �? � po r S
(D i. 0 CD a m O c+ � 0 ci- ti 1-3 (D �
r3 W
r� CA
Yr_,ST Slv'E' T ASSOC IA`1'IOP4
701 N . Ti r. d Street
Aspen
4 August, 3-976
The Hon. Stacey Stanley, 14ayor
"`.embers of the City Council
The Board of the West Side Improvement Association
supports the Aspen Center for Physics in their request
for specially planned zoning for their 2. some acres of -
land.
;'le approve the plans of their proposed building, and
support their no-growth policy , i . e . maintaining their
operation at 70-75 participants at a time . We also encour-
age them to use the parking area of the M.A .A. , and thus
avoid on--street parking on Gillespie and 6th Streets.
We understand that it is important that they break
-.round this summer for their new building or possible
lose their grants . We concur in their eXDeniency.
We further suGgest that as soon as feasible that the
Aspen Center for Physics make a committment to replace
the present wooden structure .
The physicists , many of whom are property owners in the
'��est Side are a positive asset to the community - economi-
cally as well as socially.
We have contacted as many of the property owners in the
immediate vicinity of The Center as was possible in such a
short tune . All those contacted were favorable :
AJreed : Mrs. tv;ary McCarten
625 Gillespie
Mr. and Mrs. James 14'arkalunas
624 N. 6th Street
Mx. and Pars . Kurt Bresnitz
715 `. ., 117orth
Mrs. Elli Islen
707 1,7est North -
F-3
a
r7
o.-f Town t Tdrs. Elaine Hi g b
y 1;,r,� . L.Ocy Hibbard
615 W. Gillespie 521 W. North
For Sale _ -i_
let 1;rs . Ivy Pap; L 14r. and Mi s . David 0 ' T`eara f
635 W. Gillespie 603 I9. Gillespie
Yours Very Truly
Ann Schwind
Chairman
`rest Side Improverneni- Assoc.
a
- R
H
p)
tt
t'.
f3
f((3zzss
vp
• �i
LJ
t?
GS
" ta:
(�4
SF�
4�
Outline for Precise Plan for
Physics Center ' s 2 . 3 Acres
1. Uses. Academic .
2. Setbacks. Side : 10 feet; rear: 15 feet; front-- - 20 feet - -
(in minimums) .
3. Height. Maximum of 25 feet.
4 . Open space. At least 250. The per cent of actual open land
is more like 870 . The total land area is approximately
100, 145 square feet. Building coverage is as follows :
Hilbert Hall 5 , 558 sq. ft.
Stranahan Hall 4 , 219 sq. ft.
New .library, etc. 3 , 666 sq. ft.
Total land coverage : 13, 443 sq. ft.
It is proposed that Hilbert Hall, a wooden structure, be
replaced eventually, but that would not change these figures
for purposes of the precise plan. The timing of the replace-
ment of Hilbert Hall is of course dependent upon the exigencies
of fund-raising and foundation grants.
5. Site location. In the City of Aspen, served by and adjacent
to Sixth and Gillespie Streets , and is more fully shown on
drawings accompanying this application.
6. Utilities. All necessary utilities are at the site (as is
also more fully shown on the drawings) .
7. Adjacent landowners. The names and addresses of landowners
within 300 feet are on an attached list.
y
tzi
G�
Property Own, 8 within 300 feet of Aspan jenter for Physics
7r. A Mrs. Charles J. CollinsRobert W,Fullin
Box Hi, 825 North St.
Ms. Ida Vail Pabst
635 W. lillesnie
or Pox 3015
Mary MuCarten
05 Gilles-ole
Ms. Elaine C . HQbee
1200 Amer. Natl. Bank Bid;. D?nvgr , co, 80202
or 615 W. Gilles&e
Tamzin P. O'Meara
603 W Gillesnie
or Box 10457-
Mr. & Mrs. James J. Tarkalunas
624 N. 6th St
or Box 542
Thomas 0. Wells
614 W. North
or Box 3199
Mr. & Mrs. Irvin Bur kee
610 W. North
or Box 544
Vs. Greta R. Lure
600 North
or Box UU
Mr. and Mrs. Robert langenkamp
633 W. North
or 4403 Center Ave. Apt. 5D
Pittsburgh, Pa. 15213
Mr. & Mrs. Kurt Bresnitz
715 W. North
or Box 70
Mrs. Fred Iselin
707 W North
Box 418
Lucy R. Hibbard
Roberta P. Dickson
521 W. North
or 1937 East Alamo% Denver 30209
Mr. A Mrs, Bill Block
Box 1832
1-1 L110PANDUM
l
TO: Aspen City Council , City Manager .
FROM: Bill Kane
RE: Physics Institute
DATE: July 23, 1976 1
As you may know we have been discussing the problem of the expansion of the
Physics Institute with respect to the larger question of adoption of a
master plan for the entire 1.310 acre Institute property. The Physics Institute
has received grant money from the Kiesge Foundation which would allow them
to build a new building to include a library and seminar room (copy of cneral
plans attached). We have consistently agreed that any improvement to the
Physics Institute property be tied in with an overall S.P.A. master plan for
the Aspen Institute lands. The Physics building must be started before Oct-
ober 35 of this year in order to qualify for grant money. To this point
they have been waiting for the Aspen Institute to submit an overall master
plan. With Fall approaching and no plan submitted yet the physics group is
obviously getting nervous.
I was approached by Paul Fishbane, Physics Institute President and Jack Wfalls
the architect for the project with a request to investigate the possibility
of separating the Physics and Aspen Institutes to allow thephysicists to proceed
independently of the Aspen Institute. In response to this question I recited
our traditional thinking on the subject but admitted that technically the
separation sought could be accomplished. Such a seperation would require,
as a minimum the following:
1) A formalized long term written lease for lands immediate to the
-proposed-Physics expansion. - - - - - -
2) A description of a seperate S.P.A. for the Physics Institute
leased land. This, of course, would require the amendment of
the zoning map and would have all the notice and hearing re-
quirements of a rezoning.
3) The development and approval of a seperate S.P.A. Master Plan for
the Physics Institute lands.
Of course there are points to be made on both sides of this question. On
one hand, the Aspen Institute insists that the City's intransigence with
respect to zoning institute lands serves only to frustrate, disappoint and
ultimately discourage the aspiring cultural and education groups in the
city. However, the approval of an overall plan by granting building permits
on a building by building basis erodes the concept of an overall , integrated
balanced plan.
I have given.Mr. Fishbane our more or less standard response and Wle continue
to hold out for an overall roaster plan. We will continue with this policy
position unless otherwise directed by Council . You may expect some serious
lobbying by the Physics group and we will stand by to impliment any policy
you choose.
Under normal circumstances I would not raise this issue but felt it to be
of such significance as to wirrant Council consideration.
Cc: Sandy Stuller
H
tzt
x
As,,,-_-N CENTER Pf iY511-5
B(]X 12CE3 A.;PEN, 1-11 (U NADLJ 131611
9 August , 1976
;-!r . Charles Collins
Chairman , Planning and Zoning Commission
City Hall
Aspen , Colorado 8161.1
Dear Mr. Collins :
Upon the recommendation of the City Planner , the City
Manager and the City Council , the Aspen Center for Physics
respectfully requests that the property as shown on the en-
closed survey be rezoned a separate S . P . A. so that we can
build our new library building . Also enclosed is the master
plan for this property. The Aspen Center_ for Physics has
rights for first use in perpetuity to this land whose title
holder is the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies . The
property consists of approximately 2 . 1 acres and is presently
zoned S .P . A.
Because of funding contingencies , we would appreciate
your immediate attention regarding this matter.
Sincerely yours ,
PMF/ss Paul M. Fishbane , President
Aspen Center for Physics
CAI A
707 North Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 m
r
r
N
r
Before the Planning and
Zoning Commission of the
City of Aspen
State of Colorado )
) ss.
County of Pitkin )
Ann Salter being first duly sworn, deposes and says :
1. She is a secretary at the Aspen Center for Physics.
2. On Wednesday, August 18 , 1976 she personally
prepared envelopes addressed to those on the attached list
marked as Exhibit A; that separate envelopes were prepared
by her for each person that on the attached list has both
a street and box address; that she placed a copy of the
public notice as published in the Aspen Times on Thursday,
August 19, 1976 in each of the envelopes; and that on Friday,
August 20 , 1976, she mailed each of the envelopes , first-
class postage prepaid.
Dated:
Ann ilter
Subscribed and sworn to before me this C;�C�day
of 1976.
My commission expires: - - 7 -
Notary P lic
.i /. kyl
�roper. iy O:.r raithir! 300 -F-�: t of Asps Cori-'ter for Physics
r. ° !sirs. Charles J. Collins Robert vJ. Pullen
Sox H 82.5 1`.or th St.
,rs . Ida Vail Pabst �126 6,V76 °'
635 `d. rrillesoie ,, J 7707-7
Mrs. Walter Paepcke
or Box 8015 Box 1032
T`ary McCarten
625 U'illesoie
ii:s . Elaine C . Ili-,bee
1200 Artier. Natl . Bank Bldg. Denvur , co . 80202
or 615 W. Gillespie
larcz in P. 0°i%:tiara
503 w Gillesrie
or Box 1.0457
Mr. & Mrs. James J. Markalunas
624 N. 6th St
or Box 542
Thomas 0. Wells
614 W worth
or Box 3199
T,ir. & ,:rs . Irvin Burkee
510 i`I. North
or Box. 544
T?s . Greta T:'. Lum
600 North
or Box UU
11'r. and Mrs. Robert Iano-enkarnp
633 N. North
or 4403 Center Ave . Apt, 5D
Pittsbur-h, Pa. 15213
Mr. & Mrs . Kurt Bresnitz
715 W. North
or Box 70
Yrs. Fred Iselin
707 ;tJ North
Box 418
Lucy R. Hibbard
7:1 --a P. Dickson
"21 .J. North
o 1 937 East Alameda Den-.r�,. ,80200
I�.rs. Carol Block
lox 1898
ASPEN CENTER FOR PHYSICS
BOX 1213B ASPEN, COLORADO 61611
public notice
re:Physics Center Rezoning
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that a public
hearing will be held before the City of
Aspen Planning and zoning Commission at
5:00 o'clock P.M.,September 7,1976 upon
the application of the Aspen Center for
Physics for a rezoning of 2.3 acres of land
owned by the Aspen Institute for Humanis-
tic Studies and licensed to the Physics
Center,located generally at 6th and Gilles-
pie streets,from a Specially Planned Area
of the larger tract belonging to the Institute
to a Specially Planned Area for the specific
2.3 acres, and for approval of the Physics
Center's "precise plan" for the 2.3 acres,
which plan envisions principally the con-
struction of one additional building to
house a library,seminar room and offices.
The 2.3 acre parcel at 6th and Gillespie
Streets is legally described as follows:
A tract of land situated in the SW V.NE
of Section 12,Township 10 South,Range 85
West of the 6th Principal Meridian,in the
City of Aspen, Pitkin County, Colorado,
being more fully described as follows:
Beginning at a point whence the NW
Corner of said SWV.NE5',Section 12 bears
No 25 degrees 11'45" W. 1041.20 feet;
thence N 17 degrees 34'00"E 344.04 feet;
thence East 253.42 feet; thence South
328.00 feet;thence West 357.26 feet to the
point of beginning;containing 2.299 acres,
more or less.
Copies of the plan are available for re-
view at the Aspen-Pitkin County Planning
Office, City Hall, 130 S. Galena Street,
Aspen,
CITY OF ASPEN
By:Kathryn S.Hauter,
City Clerk
Published in the Aspen Times Aug 19,-
1976.
Before the Planning and
Zoning Commission of the
City of Aspen
August 17 , 1976
ASPEN CENTER FOR PHYSICS '
Application for rezoning of 2 . 3 acres from SPA in a
larger tract to SPA for the specific 2 . 3 acre tract;
and application for approval of a "precise plan" for
such tract.
Paul M. Fishbane, President,
Aspen Center for Physics
Jack M. Walls , Architect
Oates, Austin & McGrath
J. Nicholas McGrath, Jr. ,
Counsel
r:
IL W
r
N
ti-c i
-
_ t� ":fit ,. � LV ''b. 1 � F ✓,'1
✓{.� �j / ,mil r.x Z A {\.
LAW OFFICES
OATES, AUSTIN 8, MCGRATH
600 EAST HOPKINS STREET
LEONARD M. OATES ASPEN,COLORADO 81611
RONALD D.AUSTIN
J. NICHOLAS McGRATH,JR.
WILLIAM R.JORDAN III
AREA CODE 303
JOHN THOMAS KELLY August 16 , 1976 TELEPHONE 925-2600
ROBERT W. HUGHES
The Planning and Zoning Commission,
City of Aspen
City Hall
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Commission Members :
The Aspen Center for Physics is a Colorado non-profit
corporation, and has been since 1968. It has a license in
perpetuity to use approximately 2. 3 acres of land owned by the
Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies (in the so-called
"academic area") ; its offices and academic buildings are located
at Sixth and Gillespie Streets , and it has conducted its academic
business there in the summers for the last fourteen years. It
is our understanding that to any extent necessary to satisfy
the City' s requirement that the "owner" of land join in an
application for rezoning, the Institute joins this separate
application (see Tab "A") .
The Physics Center is badly in need of a new building;
the building and the need therefor is discussed below. How-
ever, it now finds itself unfortunately caught up in the larger
planning and development differences that appear to exist be-
tween the Institute and the City. This application is an
attempt (a) to extricate the Physics Center from those larger
problems, and (b) to persuade you and the City Council that, for
the reasons below, the 2. 3 acres of the Physics Center (which
is "owned" by the Institute (see Tabs "A" and "B") , ought to
be dealt with separately and independently from the rest of
the Institute' s approximately 120 acres.
The Physics Center is described more fully in materials
attached hereto as Tabs "C" and "D. " It is a totally indepen-
dent entity from the Institute, although two Institute officers
do sit on the Physics Center' s twenty-member Board of Trustees.
The Center ' s annual budget is only about $70, 000. 00, and it has
no paid staff except secretarial and maintenance. While it is,
even by academic standards, low budget and low keyed, it is
nonetheless unique in the world. Its trustees and current
participants include at least one Nobel winner in physics, as
OATES, AUSTIN $ MCGRATH
The Planning and Zoning Commission,
City of Aspen
Page two
August 16 , 1976
well as several physicists on the staffs at the Institute for
Advanced Study, Princeton, New Jersey, and at the Los Alamos,
New Mexico, Scientific Laboratory of the University of Califor-
nia. All of the participants are prominent physicists; they
come to the Physics Center to research and to communicate with
other physicists on questions ultimately essential to us all.
Given that, historically for almost a decade, the Physics
Center has been independent and has had virtually autonomy con-
cerning its 2 . 3 acres at Sixth and Gillespie; that the Center has
always had total control in its development, raised its own funds,
and the like, we hope you will agree a persuasive case can be made
that you should deal separately with its 2. 3 acre site -- despite
the undeniably appealing planning position that all of the
Institute' s land should be handled as a whole. For if the
Physics Center is viewed as part of the Institute ' s proposals ,
the Physics Center will in all likelihood not be able to begin
its needed building this year, and will in that event jeopardize
or lose needed foundation grants for construction.
The Physics Center has raised approximately $120, 000. 00
for its proposed new building (Tab "E" is a list of contributors) .
A grant of $50, 000 . 00 from the Kresge Foundation must be committed
by October 15, 1976 (i.e. , in Kresge ' s present apparent view,
having a construction contract signed and building to begin by
then) . A grant ($40 , 000. 00) of the Fleischmann Foundation must
be similarly committed by June 1, 1977.
The proposed 3, 666 sq. ft. building is to house the
Physics Center' s highly specialized library (sharing a library
with others is thus unrealistic for the Center) ; it provides an
all-weather seminar room (the only present seminar "room" is
out-of-doors) ; and it will provide some needed office space,
so that two, rather than three, physicists will share an office.
(One can readily surmise it is difficult -to do theoretical
equations -- let alone concentrate -- when three physicists
share one small blackboard in an office! ) The building con-
templates no expansion in the Center' s activities; it has
already decided its present size is optimal (see Tab "C") .
Thus, this application involves no new housing, transportation,
or parking impacts .
OATES, AUSTIN 8, MCGRATH
The Planning and Zoning Commission,
City of Aspen
Page three
August 16 , 1976
The building is low in profile, architecturally compatible
with adjacent buildings, and situated so that, given existing
landscaping, buildings, and topography, the new library virtually
could not be seen from adjacent residential streets , and indeed
would be visible at all only from the Music Tent, Red Mountain,
and the sky. (See the map accompanying this material. )
The Physics Center has been a good neighbor even in land
use terms. It has spent much more in landscaping than its low
budget would otherwise justify, and its existing plantings in
large measure lessen any visual impact of the proposed library.
The present building and rezoning plan has been presented to and
has the approval of, its neighbors, the West End Improvement
Association (see Tab "F") . It has even purchased some 50 bicycles,
which it makes available to its participants at a nominal rental,
to lessen dependence on the automobile and attendant impacts of
cars on the neighborhood.
From a planning standpoint, it is always logically better
to deal with a larger whole (e.g. , all of the Institute' s 120
acres) , than with smaller pieces -- but sometimes (a) the small
piece has a history of being dealt with separately, (b) is
autonomous, and (c) is so small and insignificant in relation to
the larger whole, that given its clear need for separate treat-
ment, the otherwise valid planning considerations should yield.
We hope you will agree this is such a case; and that you
will set a prompt public hearing to rezone the 2. 3 acres on which
the Physics Center sits to its own Specially Planned Area, and
upon the Center' s "precise plan" for that area. The technical
requirements of this submittal follow this letter (Tab "G") ,
and other background materials are set forth at Tab "H. "
Sincerely,
OATES, AUSTIN & McGRATH
By 111 JIL,,' Ili
J. Nicholas McGrath, Jr.
JNMJr/le
Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies 1000 North Third St.
Aspen,Colorado 81611 U.S.A.
303 925 7010
Cable:Aspeninst Colorado
12 August 1976
R.O.Anderson Chairman
J. E.Slater President Mr. Bill Kane
Planning Office
City of Aspen
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Bill:
As owner of record, the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies
joins-with the-Aspen Center for Physics in the accompanying request
for rezoning and master plan approval of the approximately 2. 3 acres
shown herein. This request is made by us only in order to satisfy the
technical requirements of the zoning ordinance.
Because the Aspen Center for Physics for more than a decade
has been the tenant of the buildings and immediately adjacent land, it
will continue to have such rights in the event of a transfer to the Univer-
sity of Denver of the academic area. We understand that the Physics
Center may use this letter in connection with its request for permission
for the construction of a new library.
In view of the funding deadlines faced by the Aspen Center for
Physics, we join with them in hoping you can give their request your
immediate favorable attention.
Sincerely yours,
E. Slater
H
Aspen In •-te for Ffurnani;tic Studies 1000 Nord,Third St.
Aspen,Colorado 81G11 U.S.A.
303 925 7010
Cable:Aspeninst Colorado
7 August 1976
Dr, Paul M . Fishbane
Aspen Center for Physics
;. 0.l�ndersonCt.liriTlBn I 1208
1, E. Slater President I Box.
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear Dr, Fishbana:
The purpose of this .letter is to confirm the arrangements which
the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies has had with the Aspen Center
for Physics for more than a decade . In addition, we formally wish to
express the hope that the Aspen Center for Physics will be permitted to !
construct its needed library facilities .
We would appreciate it if you would please sign this letter and
the following resume , which conforms to the existing arrangements that `
are as follows:
The buildings and immediate area of land known as "The Aspen
Center for Physics" and used by the Aspen Center for Physics be made
available to the Aspen Center for Physics in perpetuity to the extent
their needs to carry out the Physics Program require . The buildings and
ground:i remain the property of the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies
and shall be made available for other uses during the period when acti-
vities of the Aspen Center for Physics are not in progress .
If the facilities and lands are not utilized by the Aspen Center
for Physics for two consecutive years all of their rights will be terminated
and the property will revert to the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies
and/or to the University of Denver. (As you know, a donation of the
Institute's academic core , including the Physics Center area, is being
made to the University of Denver with certain reversionary clauses . In
this donation, the rights of the Physics Center to continue their program
on the basis they have had with the Aspen Institute is assured and has
been agreed to by the University of Denver.)
The Aspen Center for Physics must consult with and advise the
Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies regarding any changes in archi-
tecture , aesthotic quality or character which conforms to the agreement
which the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies and the Aspen Center
for Physics have had from the beginning, {�
The Aspen Center for Physics must notify the Aspen Institute for
Humanistic Studies and/or the University of Denver a year in advance of I
their needs in other than the summer period in order to facilitate the y
tv
I i
Dr, Paul Fishbane - 2 7 August 1976
proper scheduling of the facilities and lands currently used by the Aspen
Center for Physics , and any new construction would be covered by the
requirements for prior approval and consultation and other provisions
outlined in this letter .
Sincerely,,
!(
E. Slater
President
Jill. Davis, Assistant Secretary
APPROVED:
Paul M . Fishbane Date
ASPEN CENTER FOR PHYSICS
Fact Sheet
The Institution
What is the Aspen Center for Physics?
The ACP is an independent scientific-educational institution
which runs a 13 - 14 week program in theoretical physics
and astrophysics each summer. It is incorporated in the
state of Colorado, and is recognized as a non-profit insti-
tution by the U. S. Internal Revenue Service.
Is the ACP part of the Aspen Institute?
No. The ACP is completely independent legally , financially ,
and adminstratively. The ACP started under the auspices of
the Aspen Institute in 1962 , but was incorporated as an
independent institution in 1968. It operates uder its own
board of trustees , plans its own programs , and finances these
programs and its facilities with funds raised specifically
for these purposes . It was also operated and funded indepen-
dently of the Aspen Institute in the early years , 1962-67.
Where did the facilities come from?
The two physics buildings at 6th and Gillespie Streets were
built with funds raised specifically for the physics program.
Because of the early connection with the Aspen Institute , the
buildings are on land which belongs to the Aspen Institute ,
and formal title is with the Institute. However, the ACP was
given use of the buildings and land in perpetuity for the
physics program when the Center was incorporated in 1968.
Who maintains the physics buildings and grounds?
The ACP maintains the buildings and grounds , and has put sub-
stantial effort each year into upgrading the buildings , im-
proving the landscaping, and so forth. The Aspen Institute
does not contribute to maintenance , improvements , operating
costs , etc.
What facilities are available?
The two buildings have office space in two-person offices
for 58 participants , plus two administrative and secretarial
offices . There is a small research library , and an outdoor
patio area used for seminar/lectures .
The ACP Program
What is the ACP program?
The ACP runs a program in theoretical research in physics and
astrophysics June - August each summer. The program is
relatively unstructured, and provides scientists from dif- y
ferent institutions a chance to get together to talk about
0
2 .
and work intensively on problems at the forefront of physics
and astrophysics . The organized activities consist of
lectures and discussions of special subjects . About 150
research papers a year result from work done at the Center.
Is it important?
The Center' s program is the largest and most successful of
its kind in the world. The work done at the Center has
been of very high quality , and many of the most productive
physicists and astrophysicsits in the U. S, and abroad try to
spend time here .
Who comes to the ACP?
Participants are selected by the trustees on the basis of
their scientific abilities . They are professors and research
scientists from universities and research laboratories in
the U.S. and abroad. Most come with their families for an
average stay in Aspen of four weeks .
How big is the program?
There will be 250 participants in the 1976 program, repre-
senting 90 institutions . They were selected from over 450
applications for the program. There are about 70 partici-
pants at the Center at a time . We have experimented with
the size , and had 80 - 90 participants at a time in 1973 .
This was too large for the kind of informal contact the
program is designed to facilitate , and the size was deliber-
ately cut back to the present average of 70.
Who funds the ACP program?
The physics-astrophysics program is funded by grants from
the National Science Foundation, the National Aeronautics
. and Space Administration, by registration fees charged to
participants , and by contributions from our Corporate
Associates . The total operating budget for 1976 is $70 , 125
comprised of $46 ,500 for the NSF, $8825 from NASA, $10 ,800
in registration fees , and $4000 from the Corporate Associates
(Xerox and Bell Laboratories) .
Where does the money go?
Roughly two-thirds of the $70 ,000 budget goes into operating
funds for the program: secretarial and administrative
services , books and journals , supplies , upkeep , etc. The
ACP does not pay participants , and provides only very minimal
support for travel and other expenses (an average of $100
per person in 1976) . Rentals for ACP participants and
their families are taken from the general Aspen market and
total an additional $85 ,000 in 1976. Other living expenses
of the participants and their families should be added to
this total in assessing the economic impact of the ACP on the
Aspen community. It is a measure of the value of the program
that so many scientists want to participate despite what
is usually a considerable personal expense.
3.
Why have the program in Aspen?
Because Aspen is such an attractive place for families ,
participants are willing to come here at their own expense.
They typically work very intensively during the week, and
get into the mountains on weekends . The physicists seem to
be particularly well-known in local sporting goods shops
and restaurants , and as music festival patrons. Some 20
physicists now own houses or apartments in Aspen.
The New Physics Building
Why build a new building?
The ACP urgently needs more library space , an indoor seminar
room, and a few more offices to relieve present overcrowding.
Why not use Aspen Institute facilities?
The ACP and the Aspen Institute are completely independent.
The ACP has never used the Institute facilities , which are
completely devoted to Institute programs . Moreover, these
facilities would not be suitable for ACP needs even if they
were available. (For example, physics seminars require a
small lecture- or classroom-type seminar area and are quite
different from the round-table discussions typical of In-
stitute programs . Physics office space , with the requirement
of blackboards , etc. , is quite different from the Institute
offices , and a research library, to be useful, must be im-
mediately accessible from the offices . )
Why does the ACP need a new library?
The present library occupies two offices (opened up) and a
storage room, and has completely outgrown this space. The
library budget is roughly $10 ,000 a year for the highly
specialized journals and books necessary for a successful
program. The collection grows at the rate suggested by this
figure and the well-known information explosion in science.
The new library will have roughly 1000 square feet of stack
and reading space , compared to 330 square feet in the present
library. This will enable us to keep all our books , current
research journals , and back issues for ten years . readily
accessible.
Why a seminar room?
The ACP does not have an indoor seminar room. Seminars are
held outdoors on a patio adjacent to the Stranahan building,
weather permitting. The seminar room will be lecture-style ,
with seating for about 60.
Why more offices?
In order to accomodate 70 scientists (the size we have found
most suitable in ensuring a wide variety of interests among
the participants without losing the possibility of informal
contacts ) , the Center has to put three participants in all
the two-person offices in one building, and to use a nearby
house for overflow office space. The tripled offices are
4 .
noisy and uncomfortable, and not conducive to concentrated
work. The overflow space is inconveniently far from the
library and the center of activity . Both problems will be
eliminated when the new building is available .
Won' t more offices just lead to a bigger program?
No . There is no intention to increase the size of the program.
Quite the contrary . Past experiments with larger sizes
were unsuccessful , and the program was deliberately reduced
to its present size . It was resolved by the trustess again
in 1976 to hold the program to its present size, and in fact ,
to cut back if necessary in 1977 to avoid tripling offices .
How large will the new building be?
Approximately 3300 square feet , with a library, seminar room,
6 two-person offices , and an administrative office.
What will it look like and where will it be?
It will be a partially sunken low-profile concrete block and
wood building located between and north of the existing
buildings . The exterior will be compatible with the exist-
ing buildings . The new building will be very inconspicuous
from Gillespie Street .
What about parking?
There will be no change in the size of the program, so the
present parking area will continue to be adequate. The ACP
provides approximately 50 bicycles for participants at a
small rent, and is on the present City bus route . Overflow
parking is available in the music lot on the rare occasions
when it is needed.
What about the land?
The new building will be on land totaling 2 . 1 acres owned by
the Aspen Institute in the so-called "academic area" . The
ACP has use of the land and the existing buildings in per-
petuity for the physics program.
What about funds for the building?
The ACP has received grants from the Fleischmann Foundation
( $40, 000) , the Kresge Foundation ($50 , 000) , past participants
and their families ( $15, 000 ) , and its Corporate Associates and
others ( $10, 000) toward the cost of the building, and is ready
to proceed with construction.
The Kresge grant must be committed by October 15, 1976, and the
Fleischmann grant , by June 1 , 1977 .
5 .
When would the building be available?
The building is urgently needed for the 1977 program. There
is literally no space in the library for our next order of
books and journals , and cutting back the size of the program
to avoid tripling up offices might endanger the funding and
effectiveness of the program. In addition the funding from
the Kresge Foundation earmarked explicitly for the building
will be in danger without an autumn start . The building should
be available if the present zoning problems can be resolved in
time for a start on construction this fall .
6.
TRUSTEES, ASPEN CENTER FOR PHYSICS
TERMS TO EXPIRE IN 1979
Elihu Abrahams , Rutgers University
Philip Anderson, Bell Laboratories
Felix Boehm, California Institute of Technology
Peter Carruthers , Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory
Benjamin Lee , Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
L.M. Simmons , Jr . , Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory
Frederik Zachariasen, California Institute of Technology
TERMS TO EXPIRE IN 1978
Stephen Adler, Institute for Advanced Study
Stirling Colgate, Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory
David DeYoung, National Radio Astronomy Observatory
Paul Fishbane , University of Virginia
Sydney Meshkov, National Bureau of Standards
Heinz Pagels, The Rockefeller University
TERMS TO EXPIRE IN 1977
R .O. Anderson, Atlantic Richfield
A.G .W. Cameron, Harvard University
Loyal Durand , University of Wisconsin
Murray Gell-Mann, California Institute of Technology
Peter Kaus, University of California
David Pines, University of Illinois
Joseph Slater, The Aspen Institute
HONORARY TRUSTEES
Hans Bethe, Cornell University
Michael Cohen, University of Pennsylvania
Robert W. Craig, Keystone Center
Daniel Fivel, University of Maryland
George Stranahan, Aspen
Robert R. Wilson, Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory
PAST TRUSTEES
Julius Ashkin, Carnegie-Mellon University, 1968-1972
Michel Baranger, Carnegie-Mellon University, 1968-1974
Harrison Brown, California Institute of Technology , 1971-1972
Richard Ferrell , University of Maryland, 1968-1972
George Field, Harvard University, 1972-1974
Marvin Goldberger, Princeton University, 1968-1973
Alan Heeger, University of Pennsylvania, 1973-1976
Henry Primakoff, University of Pennsylvania, 1968-1972
Frederick Seitz , Rockefeller University , 1968-1972
Lincoln Wolfenstein, Carnegie-Mellon University , 1968-1973
Who Are The Participants?
In the summer of 1976 , 240 physicists and 40
astrophysicists from 90 different institutions and 10
different countries attended the Aspen Center for Physics .
The average length of stay of these physicists is 4 weeks
from May 31. to September 5 , and the average size of their
families is two children and two adults . Twenty of them
own property and/or homes in Aspen and many visit again
during the winter months to ski. Most of the physicists
are ardent hikers , fishermen and tennis players and they
spend much of their free time in these endeavors .
The Center trys to attract a wide variety of
participants . Approximately 60% were junior faculty or
the equivalent , and each year approximately 40% visit here
for the first time. It is not atypical to have several
Nobel Laureates in attendance.
H
GU
d
r'
August 12 , 1976
Report on Building Fund
Aspen Center for Physics
H. Pagels
Building Fund Chairman
Grants
max C . Fleishmann Foundation $40 ,000 .00
Kresge Foundation 50 , 000. 00
Total Grants 90 ,000. 00
Gifts
Atlantic Richfield S 1 , 000. 00
T�iazor Foundation 5, 000 . 00
TBV 5, 000 . 00
Bell Labs 2 , 000. 00
X13, 000 . 00
Tndividuals (names attached ) 14, 221 . 73
Tnterests on Deposits ---7 I-L--75
Accumulated Total 27, 994.48
Architect Fees - 5, 123.48
Fund Raising_Ex-Denses -X96- 0
Total Cash on Hand (August 129 1976 ) $22, 274.74
H
b7
tai
Building Fund Contributors
Abrahams Gallagher
Adler Gasiorowicz
Anderson, R. 0. Ge11- �ann
Ashkin Gittleman
3aierlein Gladney
Baranger, N Glasser, M. L.
3ardasis Good , R. H.
Baym Guralnik
Beg Halperin
Bernstein Hammer
Berry Harms
3ethe Harrison
Boynton Hartle
Brickwedde , F. Haymaker
Brown, R. Heeger
Brog an Hellwarth
Campbell , D. Henneberger
Carlson Herczeg
Carruthers , P. Hobson
Castillejo Hofstader
Chakkalakal Holstein
Chang, N. P. Hoyer
Cheng, T. P. Huang
Coleman Joss
Colegate Kabir
Cohen, Judith Karl
Cohen, Michael Kaus
Cohen, Morrell Klauder
Connell Klein
Daehnick Kleinman, L.
DeFacio Knasel
Dexter Kopf, Carol Ann
Domokos Krisch
Dresden Krizan
Engler Lamb, F.
Erenson Leiobowitz
Esposito Lieb
Farrar, S. Lowe , I.
Fearing McCray
Feenberg Marshak
Feynman Martin
Field Merzberger, E.
Fisher Michel , F. C .
Fishbone Nntllin
Frampton Nagle
Frauenfelder Neal
Freund Nieto
Fricke Newman
Norton
Oertel Sterns
Okubo Strauch
Oput Sucher
Pagels Suranyi
Peccei Suura
Pines Swift
Poirier Taylor
Prange Terhune
Pratt Theimer
Pr imac k To mk in
Quinn To mo z awa
Ramond, P. Treat
True
Rosen, P. Truran, J.
Rosner Uzes
Saladin Wali
Sakita Warnock
Saperstein Watts
Satchler ,Alayhmar
Schwarz , J. Widdenthal
Segall , B. Wilson
Segre Winik
Shapiro , M. . Witten, T.
Shave, G. Wong, T. F.
Shen Yang
Shimizu
Shtokhamer
Silk
Simarek
Simmons
Sirlin
Slansky
Spruch
Steele
Sternheim
WEST SIDE IMIPROV7rFNT ASSOCIATION
701 N. Thrid Street
Aspen
4 August, 1976
The Hon. Stacey Stanley, Mayor
Members of the City Council
The Board of the 'Jest Side Improvement Association
supports the Aspen Center for Physics in their request
for specially planned zoning for their 2. some acres of
land.
-We approve the plans of their proposed building, and
support their no-growth policy, i . e . maintaining their
operation at 70-75 participants at a time . We also encour-
age them to use the parking area of the M.A.A. , and thus
avoid on-street parking on Gillespie and 6th Streets.
We understand that it is important that they break
ground this summer for their new building or possible
lose their grants. We concur in their expeniency.
We further suggest that as soon as feasible that the
Aspen Center for Physics make a committment to replace
the present wooden structure .
The physicists , many of whom are property owners in the
West Side are a positive asset to the community - economi-
cally as well as socially.
We have contacted as many of the property owners in the
immediate vicinity of The Center as was possible in such a
short time . All those contacted were favorable :
Agreed : Mrs. Mary McCarten
625 Gillespie
Mr. and Mars. James Markalunas
624 N. 6th Street
Mx. and Mrs . Kurt Bresnitz
715 W. North Street
Mrs. Elli Islen
707 West North
H
Out of Towns Mrs. Elaine Higby hers. Lucy Hibbard
- 615 W. Gillespie 521 W. North
For Sales Mrs. Ivy Papst Mire and bars. David O ' Meara
635 W. Gillespie 603 W. Gillespie
Yours Very Truly
Ann Schwind
Chairman
West Side Improvement Assoc.
Outline for Precise Plan for
Physics Center ' s 2 . 3 Acres
1. Uses. Academic.
2. Setbacks. Side- - 10 feet; rear: 15 feet; front: 20 feet
(in minimums) .
3. Height. Maximum of 25 feet.
4. Open space. At least 250 . The per cent of actual open land
is more like 87% . The total land area is approximately
100, 145 square feet. Building coverage is as follows :
Hilbert Hall 5 ,558 sq. ft.
Stranahan Hall 4 , 219 sq. ft.
New library, etc. 3 , 666 sq. ft.
Total land coverage : 13 , 443 sq. ft.
It is proposed that Hilbert Hall, a wooden structure, be
replaced eventually, but that would not change these figures
for purposes of the precise plan. The timing of the replace-
ment of Hilbert Hall is of course dependent upon the exigencies
of fund-raising and foundation grants.
5. Site location. In the City of Aspen, served by and adjacent
to Sixth and Gillespie Streets, and is more fully shown on
drawings accompanying this application.
6. Utilities. All necessary utilities are at the site (as is
also more fully shown on the drawings) .
7. Adjacent landowners. The names and addresses of landowners
within 300 feet are on an attached list.
H
bi
Property Own._s within 300 feet of Asper. .:enter for Physics
Mr. & Mrs. Charles J. Collins Robert W.Pullen
Box HH 825 North St.
Ms, Ida Vail Pabst
635 W. Gilles-oie
or Box 8015
Mary McCarten
625 Dillesaie
Ms. Elaine C. Higbee
1200 Amer. Natl. Bank Bldg. Denver, co. 30202
or 615 W. Gillespie
Tamzin P. O'Meara
603 W Gillespie
or Box 10457
Mr. & Mrs. James J. Markalunas
624 N. 6th St
or Box 542
Thomas 0. Wells
614 W. North
or Box 3199
Mr. & Mrs. Irvin Burkee
610 W. North
or Box 544
Ms. Greta M. Lum
600 North
or Box UU
Mr. and Mrs. Robert Ia.ngenkamp
633 W. North
or 4403 Center Ave. Apt. 5D
Pittsburgh, Pa. 15213
Mr. & Mrs. Kurt Bresnitz
715 W. North
or Box 70
Mrs. Fred Iselin
707 W North
Box 418
Lucy R. Hibbard
Roberta P. Dickson
521 W. North
or 1937 East Alameda Denver 80209
Mr. & Mrs. Bill Brock
Box 1832
MEMORANDUM
• TO: Aspen City Council , City Manager -
FROM: Bill Kane
RE: Physics Institute
DATE: July 23, 1976 t
As you may know we have been discussing the problem of the expansion of the
Physics Institute with respect to the larger question of adoption of a
master plan for the entire 130 acre Institute property. The Physics Institute
has received grant money from the Kiesge Foundation which would allow them =
to build a new building to include a library and seminar room (copy of general
plans attached). We have consistently agreed that any improvement to the
Physics Institute property be tied in with an overall S.P.A. master plan for
the Aspen Institute lands. The Physics building must be started before Oct-
ober 15 of this year in order to qualify for grant money. To this point
they have been waiting for the Aspen Institute to submit an overall master
plan. With Fall approaching and no plan submitted yet the physics group is
obviously getting nervous.
I was approached by Paul Fishbane, Physics Institute President and Jack Walls
the architect for the project with a request to investigate the possibility
of separating the Physics and Aspen Institutes to allow the physicists to proceed
independently of the Aspen Institute. In response to this question I recited
our traditional thinking on the subject -but admitted that technically the
seperation sought could be accomplished. Such a seperation would require,
as a minimum the following:
1) A formalized long term written lease for lands immediate to the
proposed Physics expansion.
2) A description of a seperate S.P.A. for the Physics Institute
leased land. This, of course, would require the amendment of
the zoning map and would have all the notice and hearing re-
quirements of a rezoning.
3) The development and approval of a seperate S.P.A. Master Plan for
the Physics Institute lands.
Of course there are points to be made on both sides of this question. On
one hand, the Aspen Institute insists that the City's intransigence with
respect to zoning institute lands serves only to frustrate, disappoint and
ultimately discourage the aspiring cultural and education groups in the
city. However, the approval of an overall plan by granting building permits
on a building by building basis erodes the concept of an overall , integrated
balanced plan.
I have given.Mr. Fishbane our more or less standard response and we continue
to hold out for an overall master plan. We will continue with this policy
position unless otherwise directed by Council . You may expect some serious
lobbying by the Physics group and we will stand by to impliment any policy
you choose.
Under normal circumstances I would not raise this issue but felt it to be
of such significance as to warrant Council consideration.
Gc: Sandy Stuller
x
ASPEN CENTER FOR PHYSICS
BOX 1206 ASPEN, COLORADO 01611
9 August , 1976
Mr. Charles Collins
Chairman , Planning and Zoning Commission
City Hall
Aspen , Colorado 81611
Dear Mr. Collins :
Upon the recommendation of the City Planner , the City
Manager and the City Council , the Aspen Center for Physics
respectfully requests that the property as shown on the en-
closed survey be rezoned a separate S . P . A. so that we can
build our new library building . Also enclosed is the master
plan for this property. The Aspen Center for Physics has
rights for first use in perpetuity to this land whose title
holder is the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies . The
property consists of approximately 2 . 1 acres and is presently
zoned S .P . A.
Because of funding contingencies , we would appreciate
your immediate attention regarding this matter.
Sincerely yours ,
PMF/ss Paul M. Fishbane , President
Aspen Center for Physics
71A
nv r, 7 1_ Cl P 11✓e f � 11d v
' LAW OFFICE-3
OATES, AUSTIN 8, MCGRATH
600 EAST HOPKINS STREET
LEONARD M. OATES ASPEN,COLORADO 81611
RONALD D. AUSTIN
J. NICHOLAS MCGRATH,JR.
WILLIAM R.JORDAN III
AREA CODE 303
JOHN THOMAS KELLY August 16, 1976 TELEPHONE 975-Z E,OU
ROBERT W. HUGHES
The Planning and Zoning Commission,
City of Aspen
City Hall
130 South Galena Street
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Commission Members :
The Aspen Center for Physics is a Colorado non-profit
corporation, and has been since 1968. It has a license in
perpetuity to use approximately 2. 3 acres of land owned by the
Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies (in the so-called
"academic area") ; its offices and academic buildings are located
at Sixth and Gillespie Streets , and it has conducted its academic
business there in the summers for the last fourteen years. It
is our understanding that to any extent necessary to satisfy
the City' s requirement that the "owner" of land join in an
application for rezoning, the Institute joins this separate
application (see Tab "A") .
The Physics Center is badly in need of a new building;
the building and the need therefor is discussed below. How-
ever, it now finds itself unfortunately caught up in the larger
planning and development differences that appear to exist be-
tween the Institute and the City. This application is an
attempt (a) to extricate the Physics Center from those larger
problems , and (b) to persuade you and the City Council that, for
the reasons below, the 2. 3 acres of the Physics Center (which
is "owned" by the Institute (see Tabs "A" and "B") , ought to
be dealt with separately and independently from the rest of
the Institute' s approximately 120 acres. '
The Physics Center is described more fully in materials
attached hereto as Tabs "C" and "D. " It is a totally indepen-
derit entity from the Institute , although two Institute officers
do sit on the Physics Center' s twenty-member Board of Trustees.
The Center ' s annual budget is only about $70, 000. 00, and it has
no paid staff except secretarial_ and raai.ntenance. While it is,
eves by acadomLC standards , low budget and low keyed, it is
nonetheless un .que in the world. Its trustees and current
participants include at least one Nobel winner in physics, as
GATES, AUSTIN 8, McGRATH
The Planning and Zoning Commission,
City of Aspen
Page two
August 16 , 1976
well as several physicists on the staffs at the Institute for
Advanced Study, Princeton, New Jersey, and at -the Los Alamos ,
New Mexico, Scientific Laboratory of the University of Califor-
nia. All of the participants are prominent physicists; they
come to the Physics Center to research and to communicate with
other physicists on questions ultimately essential to us all.
Given that, historically for almost a decade, the Physics
Center has been independent and hashad virtually autonomy con-
cerning its 2 . 3 acres at Sixth and Gillespie; that the Center has
always had total control in its development, raised its own funds ,
and the like, we hope you will agree a persuasive case can be made
that you should deal separately with its 2. 3 acre site -- despite
the undeniably appealing planning position that all of the
Institute' s land should be handled as a whole. For if the
Physics Center is viewed as part of the Institute ' s proposals,
the Physics Center will in all likelihood not be able to begin
its needed building this year, and will in that event jeopardize
or lose needed foundation grants for construction.
The Physics Center has raised approximately $120, 000. 00
for its proposed new building (Tab "E" is a list of contributors) .
A grant of $50, 000 . 00 from the Kresge Foundation must be committed
by October 15, 1976 (i.e. , in Kresge ' s present apparent view,
having a construction contract signed and building to begin by
then) . A grant ($40 , 000. 00) of the Fleischmann Foundation must
be similarly committed by June 1 , 1977 .
The proposed 3, 666 sq. ft. building is -to house the
Physics Center ' s highly specialized library (sharing a library
with others is thus unrealistic for the Center) ; it provides an
all-weather seminar room (the only present seminar "room" is
out:-of-doors) ; and it will provide some needed office space,
so that two, rather than three , physicists will share an office.
(One can readily surmise it is difficult to do theoretical
equations -- let alone concentrate -- when three physicists
share one small blackboard in an office! ) The building con-,
templates no expansion in the Center' s activities; it has
already decided its present size is optimal (see Tab "C") .
,us , this a-pp-lication involves no new housing, transportation,
of parking impacts .
OATES, Au STI N a M CG RATH
The Planning and Zoning Commission,
City of Aspen
Page three
August 16 , 1976
The building is low in profile, architecturally compatible
with adjacent buildings , and situated so that, given existing
landscaping, buildings, and topography, the new library virtually
could not be seen from adjacent residential streets , and indeed
would be visible at all only from the Music Tent, Red Mountain,
and the sky. (See the map accompanying this material. )
The Physics Center has been a good neighbor even in land
use terms. It has spent much more in landscaping than its low
budget would otherwise justify, and its existing plantings in
large measure lessen any visual_ impact of the proposed library.
The present building and rezoning plan has been presented to and
has the approval of, its neighbors, the West End Improvement
Association (see Tab "F") . It has even purchased some 50 bicycles,
which it makes available to its participants at a nominal rental ,
to lessen dependence on the automobile and attendant impacts of
cars on the neighborhood.
From a planning standpoint, it is always logically better_
to deal with a larger whole (e.g. , all of the Institute ' s 120
acres) , than with smaller pieces -- but sometimes (a) the small
piece has a history of being dealt with separately, (b) is
autonomous, and (c) is so small and insignificant in relation to
the larger whole, that given its clear need for separate treat-
ment, the otherwise valid planning considerations should _yield.
We hope you will agree this is such a case; and that you
will set a prompt public hearing to rezone the 2. 3 acres on which
the Physics Center sits to its own Specially Planned Area, and
upon the Center' s "precise plan" for that area. The technical
.requirements of this submittal follow this letter (Tab "G") ,
and other background materials are set forth at Tab "H. "
Sincerely,
OATES , AUSTIN & McGRATH
FI
By J. Nicholas McGrath, Jr.
JNMJr/le
Aspen L._,titaie for Hurnanisfic Studies 1000 North Third St.
Aspen,Colorado 3161'1 U.S.A.
303 925 7010
Cable:Aspeninst Colorado
12 August 1976
?. O. Anderson Chairman
_. E. Stater Pre
Mr. Bill Kane
Planning Office
City of Aspen
Aspen, CO 81611
Dear Bill:
As owner of record, the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies
joins with the Aspen Center for Physics in the accompanying request
for rezoning and master plan approval of the approximately Z. 3 acres
shown herein. This request is made by us only in order to satisfy the
technical requirements of the zoning ordinance.
Because the Aspen Center for Physics for more than a decade
has been the tenant of the buildings and immediately adjacent land, it
will continue to have such rights in the event of a transfer to the Univer-
sity of Denver of the academic area. We understand that the Physics
Center may use this letter in connection with its request for permission
for the construction of a new library.
In view of the funding deadlines faced by the Aspen Center for
Physics, we join with them in hoping you can give their request your
immediate favorable attention.
Sincerely yours,
I
/. E. Slat/er
� 1
i
i
H
1 � �
Aspl-n for llui�-izinlslii; fluilhl hir,f
t,!;j)o-n,Col C)r'l'!0 f c,11 U.S.A.
303 925 1010
7 August 1976
Dr, Paul M . Fishb<ine
Aspen Center for Physics
i" --:B o, 1208
Aspen , Colorado 81611
Dear Dr, Fisliban--:
The purpose of this letter is to confirm the arrangements which
the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies has had with the Aspen Genter
for Physics for more than a decade . In addition, we formally wish to
express the hope that the Aspen Center for Physics will be permitted to
construct its needed library facilities .
We would appreciate it if you would please sign this letter and
the, following resume , which conforms to the existing arrangements that
are as follows:
The buildings and immediate area of land known as "The Asp-an
Center for Physics" and used by the Aspen Center for Physics be made
available to the Aspen Center for Physics in perpetuity to the extent
their needs to carry out the Physics Program require . The buildings and
ground.; remain the property of the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies
and shall be made available for other uses during the period when acti-
vities of the Aspen Center for Physics are not in progress .
If the facilities and lands are not utilized by the Asp-en Center
for Physics for two consecutive years , all of their rights will be terminated
and the property will revert to the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies
and/or to the University of Denver, (As you know, a donation of the
Institute's academic core , including the Physics Center area, is being
made to the University of Denver with certain reversionary clauses . In
this donation, the rights of the Physics Center to continue their program
on the basis they have had with the Aspen Institute is assured and has
been agreed to by the University of Denver-)
The. Aspen Center for Physics must consult with and advise the
Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies regarding any changes. in archi-
tecture , raesthetifl- quality or character which conforms to the agreement
which the Aspen Institute for F1L1r[1HniStiC Studies .11'ld the As',-)en Center
for Physic-.,-� ht-lvo had from thr,
The Aspen Center for Physics must notify the Aspen Institute for
Ilumanistic Studies and/or the University of Denver a year in advance of
their needs in other than the summer p^riod in order to facilitate the
�71
Dr, Paul _ _ Plshh;me 7 1, Lust 191 7 G
prop,�r schodulling of the fe'C'flitics and lands currently used by the, Aspen.
Center for Phy�--ics , and mly, construction vvould he co-v--rccl !-),, the
rcqLIirC,M,,'ntS for Prior appMvcll and consultation and other p--ovisi-),,is
Outlined in this Jetter ,
Sincerely,
E . Slater
President
Jill. Davis, Assistant Secretary
APPROVED:
Paul M . rishbane Date
ASPEi� CENTER F'OR PHYSICS
Fact Sheet
Institution
at, is the Aspen Center for Physics?
The ACP is an independent scientific-educational institution
which runs a 13 - 14 week program in theoretical physics
and astrophysics each summer. It is incorporated in the
state of Colorado, and is recognized as a non-profit i?zsi;i -
tution by the U. S. Internal Revenue Service.
Is the ACP part of the Aspen Institute?
No. The ACP is completely independent legally , financially ,
and adminstratively. The ACP started under the auspices of
the Aspen Institute in 1962 , but was incorporated as an
independent institution in 1968. It operates uder its own
board of trustees , plans its own programs , and f=i_nances these
programs and its facilities with funds raised specifically
for these purposes . It was also operated and funded indepen-
dently of the Aspen Institute in the early years , 1962-67.
.,:_sere did the facilities come from?
The two physics buildings at 6th and Gillespie Streets were
built with funds raised specif=ically for the physics program.
Because of the early connection with the Aspen Institute , the
buildings are on land which belongs to the Aspen Institute,
and formal title is with the Institute . However, the ACP was
given use of the buildings and land in perpetuity for the
physics program when the Center was incorporated in 1968. .
Who maintains the physics buildings and grounds?
The ACP maintains the buildings and grounds , and has put sub-
stantial effort each year into upgrading the buildings , im-
proving the landscaping, and so forth. The Aspen Institute
does not contribute to maintenance , improvements , operating
costs , etc.
,-;hat facilities are available?
The two buildings have office space in two-person offices
for 58 participants , plus two administrative and secretarial
offices . There is a small research library , and an outdoor
patio area used for seminar/Lectures .
he ACP Program
What is the ACP program?
The ACP .runs a program in theoretical research in physics and
astrophysics June - August each summer. The program is
relatively unstructured, and provides scientists from dif-
ferent institutions a chance to get together to talk about
2.
:.nd work intensively on problems at the forefront of physics
and astrophysics . The organized activities consist of
lectures and discuss=ions of special subjects . !:bout 150
research papers a year result; from work done at the Center.
Ts it important?
The Center' s program is the largest and most successful of
its kind in the world. The work done at the Center has
been of very high quality , and many of the most productive
physicists and astrophysicsi.t,s in the U. S , and abroad try to
spend time here.
'ho comes to the ACP?
Participants are selected by the trustees on the basis of
Cheir nci_entific abilities . They are professors and research
scient=ists from universities and research laboratories in
the U. S. and abroad. I✓Iost come with their families for ajn
average stay in Aspen of four. weeks .
How big is the program?
There will be 250 participants in the 1976 program., repro-
senting 90 institutions . They were selected from over 450
applications for the program. There are about 70 partici-
pants at the Center at a time . We have experimented with
the size , and had 80 - 90 participants at a time in 1973 .
This was too large for the kind of informal contact the
program is designed to facilitate , and the size was deliber-
ately cut back to the present average of 70.
Who funds the ACP program?
The physics-astrophysics program is funded by grants from
the National Science Foundation, the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration, by registration fees charged to
participants , and by contributions from our Corporate
Associates , The total operating budget for 1976 is $70, 125 -
comprised of $46 ,500 for the NSF, $8825 from NASA, $10 , 800
in registration fees , and $4000 from the Corporate Associates
(Xerox and Bell Laboratories ) .
Where does the money go?
Roughly two-thirds of the $70 ,000 budget goes into operating
funds for the program: secretarial and administrative
services , books and journals , supplies , upkeep , etc. The
ACP does not pay part=icipants , and provides only very minimal
support for travel and other expenses ( an average of $100
per person in 1976) . Rentals for ACP participants and
their families are taken from the general Aspen market and
total an additional $85,000 in 1976. Other liv=ing expenses
of the participants and their famil=ies should be added to
this toi;c"'1 in a2sessing the economic impact of the ATP on the
Aspen community . it is a <measure of the value of the program
that so many scientists want to participate despite .,hat
is usually a considerable personal expense.
3.
have r tii
L in A,_3pen?
Pecau,-,e As( n Ls such an attractive place for faml! Ii es
participants are to cciinie here at their own
They WO"k ve`Y irlt(_'i1sively during the i,,,oe-k., and
get into the mc)-unt.! Ins on weekends . The phys!_c:!,,Ij,s o
be pa..rticularly well-hiiovin -in local sporting goods, shops
and restaurants , and as Music festival patrons . Some 20
physicists now o,%-,ii houses or apartments in Asp-en.
fJi_-e New Physics Building
"- Y build a new building?
TI-ie ACP urgently needs more library space , an indoor sern.-Inar
room,, and a fe-vIr more offices to relieve present oveccro-,.-iding.
C�
Wiry not use Aspen institute facilities?
The ACP and the Aspen Institute are completely independent.
The ACP has never used the Institute facilities ., which are
completely devoted to Institute programs . Moreover, these
facilities would not be suitable for ACP needs even if they
were available. (For example , physics seminars require a
small lecture- or classroom-type seminar area and are quite
different from the round-table discussions typical of in-
stitute programs . Physics office space , with the requi -.-,ement
of blackboards , etc. is quite different from the Institute
offices ,- and a research library , to be useful, must be im-
mediately accessible from the offices . )
Why does the ACP need a new library?
The present library occupies two offices (opened up ) and a
storage room,- and has completely outgrown this space . The
library budget is roughly $10 ,,000 a year for the highly
specialized journals and books necessary for a successful ,
program.- The collection grows at the rate suggested by this
figure and the well-known information explosion in science.
The new library will have roughly 1000 square feet of stack
and reading space , compared to 330 square feet in the present
library . This will enable us to keep all our books , current
research journals ,, and back issues for ten years . readily
accessible.
'.111hy a seminar room?
The ACP does not have an indoor seminar room. Seminars are
held out-doors on a patio adjacent to the Stranahan building
weather permitting. The seminar room will be lecture-style ,
with seating for about 60 .
Whv more offices?
I Ii '. __ 1, LI __ -i I,
Tn or-,d._r to acco-ol-Late 7" s c I-e r-)t "s 01 s -,Ie
most suitable in ensuring a wide variety of interests among
the participants without losing the possibility of lfnfonmal
contacts ) ., the Center has to put- three participants in all
the two-person offices in one building, and to use a neati,10y
house for overflow office space . The tripled offices are
no '_ sy and uncomfortable, and not conducive to conawntva= ed
WCrk. The overflow space is inconveniently far from t`1e
library and the center of activity . Both problems will be
eliminated when the new building is available .
T gin ' t more offices just lead to a bigger program?
.0 . There is no intention to increase the size of the program.
Quite the contrary . Past experiments with larger sizes
were unsuccessful , and the program was deliberately re6aced
to its present size . It was resolved by the tru-stes-s--a-g-aYn
in 1976 to hold the program to its present size , and in fact ,
to cut back if necessary in 1977 to avoid tripling offices .
Kn� large will the new building be?
Approximately 3300 square feet , with a library , seminar room,
6 two-person offices , and an administrative office .
What will it look like and where will it be?
It will be a partially sunken low-profile concrete block and
wood building located between and north of the existing
buildings . The exterior will be compatible with the exist-
ing buildings . The new building will be very inconspicuous
from Gillespie Street .
What about parking?
There will be no change in the size of the program, so the
;resent parking area will continue to be adequate . The ACP
provides approximately 50 bicycles for participants at a
small rent, and is on the present City bus route . Overflow
parking is available in the music lot on the rare occasions
when it is needed .
What about the land?
The nei-i building will be on land totaling 2 . 1 acres owned by
the Aspen institute in the so-called "academic area" . The
ACP has use of the land and the existing buildings in per-
petuity for the physics program.
What about funds for the building?
The ACP has received grants from the Fleischmann Foundation
( 0,L0, 000) , the Kresge Foundation ( 150 , 000) , past participants
and their families ( $15, 000) , and its Corporate Associates and
others ( 0,10 , 000 ) toward the cost of the building, and is ready
to proceed with construction.
The Kresge grant must be committed by October 15 , 1976, and the
Fleischmann grant , by June 1 , 1977 .
Yhon would the building be available?
The building is urgently needed for the 1977 program . There
is literally no space in the library for our next order of
books and journals , and cutting back the size of the ppogi-arm
to avoid tripling up offices might endanger the funding and
effectiveness of the program. Tn addition the funding froi�i
the KresZe Foundation earmarked expl-i citly for the building
will be in danger without an autumn start . The building s' ould
be available if the present zoning problems can be resolved in
time for a start on construction this fall .
ti
j�ojj T JjYS
F C S
I N 19'(9
T O EXPIIRE
E',lihu Abrahams , Rut-,f:rors University
Philip Anderson, Bell Laboratories
Felix; Boehm, Califo*rnia Institute of Technolo-;u
C,
Peter Carruthers , -�os Scientific Labor=atory
Los Alaril
Benjamin Lee , Fermi National Accelerator Labr)--�I-111-ory
L.M. Siii-,rrions , Jr . , Los Alamos Scientific Lai-.oratory
Frederik Zachariasen, California Institute of Technology
T 0 'P
'XI'E TN 1-978
Stephen Adler, Institute for Advanced Study
Stirling Colgate, Los -Alamos Scientific Laboratory
David DeYoung, National Radio Astronomy Observatory
Paul Fishbane , University of Virginia
Sydney Meshkov , National Bureau of Sthndards
Heinz Pagels, The Rockefeller University
7.1 TO 1977
EXPIRE IN 19
R .O. Anderson, Atlantic Richfield
A.G . W. Cameron., Harvard University
Loyal Durand , University of Wisconsin
Murray Gell-Mann, California Institute of Technology
Peter Maus, University of California
David Pines, University of Illinois
Joseph Slater, The Aspen Institute
RARY TRUSTEES
Hans Bethe , Cornell University
Michael Cohen, University of Pennsylvania
Robert W. Craig, Keystone Center
Daniel Fivel, University of Maryland
George Stranahan, Aspen
Robert R. Wilson, Fermi. V :.1ional Accelerator Laboratory
E rf '1P R U S T ES
S
Julius Ashkin, Carnegie-Mellon University, 1968-1972
.`:chef Baranger, Carnegie-Mellon University, 1968-197"
-5-=Jlson Brown, Institute of Technology ,
i�-- -- California-L I b 1071-1972
RI.chard Ferrell , University of Maryland, 1968-1972
georo-e Field Harvard University ,
1972-19741
C71 n
Alan Heeger, University of Pennsylvania, 1973-1976
CD
-L b of Pennsylvania, 1968-1972
Henry Prilm-akoff, University
Frederick Seitz , Rockefeller University , 1-968-1972
Lincoln Vlolfenste-in, Carnegie-Mellon University , 1968-197J
Who Are The Participants?
In the summer of 1976 ,240 physicists and 40
astrophysicists from 90 different institutions and 10
different coup-tries attended the Aspen Center for Physics .
The average length of stay of these physicists is 4 weeks
from May 31 to September 5 , and the average size of their
families is two children and two adults . Twenty of them
own property and/or homes in Aspen and many visit again
during the winter months to ski . Most of the physicists
are ardent hikers , fishermen and tennis players and they
spend much of their free time in these endeavors .
The Center trys to attract a wide variety of
participants . Approximately 60% were junior faculty or
the eouivalont , and each year approximately 40% visit here
for the first time. It is not atypical. to have several
Nobel Laureates in attendance.
F-3
y
C
Au�Tu st 12 , 1 76
;port on Building Ft.nd
-s-;en Center for Physics
. Panels
=adding Fund Chairman
?rats .
'.;ax C . Flei shmann Foundation ��O , 000 . 00
'rues-�
e Foundation --59-j--9-0 0 . 00
^otal Grants 90 ,000 . 00
Gifts
Atlantic Richfield S 1 , 000 . 00
;razor Foundation 5, 000 . 00
iBIN 5, 000 . 00
Be11 Labs 2 , 000 . 00
$13 , 000 . 00
individuals (names attached ) 14, 221 . 73
Tnterests on Detoslts _____772!_75
Accumulated Total 27, 994.48
,,- chitect Fees - 5, 123.48
Farad Raisin.g_ xtienses
Total Cash on Hand (August 12 , 1976 ) $22 , 274. 74
ti
a
r_y
Building Fund Contributors
Ablahams Gallagher
Wer Gasiorowicz
An Verson, R. 0 . Cell-Mann
Ashkin Gittleman
3nierlein Cladney
laranZer , M Glasser, M. L.
hardasis Good , R. H.
Taym Curalnik
Seg Halperin
3ernstein Hammer
Berry Harms
3ethe Harrison
Boynton Hartle
Brickwedde , F. Eaymaker
Brown, R. Heeger
Erogan Hellwarth
Camobell , D. Henneberger
Carlson Herczeg
Carruthers , P. Hobson
Castillejo Hofstader
Chahkalakal Holstein
Chang, N. P. Hoyer
Cheng, T. P. Huang
Coleman Joss
Colegate Kabir
Cohen, Judith Karl
Cohen, Michael Kaus
Cohen, Morrell Klauder
Connell Klein
Daeknick Kleinman, L.
DeFacio Knasel.
Dexter Kopf, Carol Ann
Domohos Krisch
Dreson.-I Krizan
Engler Lamb , F.
Erenson Leiobowitz
Esposito Lieb
Farrar , S. Lowe , I.
Fearing McCray
Feenberg Marshak
Feynman Martin
Fie!' Merzberger, E.
Fisher Michel , F. C .
Fishbone IN'lu 11 i n
~ramp ion Nagle
•'rauenfelder Neal
Nieto
riche N e w m ar i
Norton
h cd H
cd ,�
i~ cU v cd
CJ C] Ri 4--) O •r N 4---� O to 2. () O .'-� CU r
S CL .C=: iJ t 4 i rl ri C W W fl M •r4 4' .C' ",7 Cr •r{ bjO bQ
v to U >) 1--4 H E C) ::5 W r-{ 4-' 5--: -f--� !:�, 1;
I� y _r (j1 Cil O C f a i N CU{ cd (CS b •rl .r{ . { .r{ O CCI
UaMU) UOU U) G--i PE HE- G—iE-+ �:D
S -P (1) N O C7 a Cd 5 N
rl !� •r{ Q) Q) U C� �a •r' Cd (n rl S-1
C) o ra CD CO -4-) �-I N • 0
�+ _ {
�, O (U C� •r{ Cll U :� �a �� O CA U r{
=a n; c> c� ,I aS (C -, •,-{ -P cil) tip (d N all •,-1 +3
al
C) / \{ •r{ C �y �I ;ti 5 ckj C) C ('J (11 (li (r U C) C) .C; �. ( •C .0 •rl •ri .ri .r-1 r-{ Q,-1 -P C)
0 C.) i:, f)� (I, U) U) U) U) (p v? U) U1 to U) U) U) U) (n U) U) U) U) Cn U)
W S S ASSOC' IA`i'ION
701 N. Thrill Street
Aspen
4 August , 1976
The Hon . Stacey Stanley, Mayor
?Fembers of the City Council
The Board of the Vv'est Side Improveyment Association
supports the Aspen Center for Physics in their request
for specially planned zoning for their 2. some acres of
land.
-I e Dprove the plans of their proposed building, end
support their no-growth policy, i .e . maintaining their
operation at 70-75 participants at a time . We also encour-
afe them to use the parkin; area of the M.A .A. , and thus
avoid on-street parking on Gillespie and 6th Streets.
We understand that it is important that they break
ground this summer for their new building or possible
lose their grants . We concur in their expeniency.
We further sug-est that as soon as feasible that the
Aspen Center for Physics make a cornmittrnent to replace
the present wooden structure .
The physicists , many of whom are property owners in the
','Iest Side are a positive asset to the community - economi-
cally as well as socially.
We have contacted as many of the property owners in the
immediate vicinity of The Center as was possible in such a
short time . All those contacted were favorable :
A-reed : Mrs. Mary McCarten
625 Gillespie
Mr. and M;rs . James 14arkalunas
624 N. 6th Street -
Kr. and Mrs . Kurt Bresnitz
Tl5 Yi. Stree-t.
Mrs. Flli Islen
707 West North
F-3
b
Out of Town : Mrs. El.aiiie HigbV tars . Lucy Hibbard 615 w. Gillespie 521 W. North
For Sale : iF'rs . Ivy Papst Tyr. and ?ors . David G ' ',: ara
635 W. Gillespie 603 W. Gillespie
Yours Very Truly
Ann Schwind
Chairman
West Side Improvem; int Assoc.
f4
3
�F
t
L3
ea
1
Gt
Aa
Outline for Precise Plan for
Physics Center ' s 2 . 3 Acres
1. Uses. Academic.
2. Setbacks. Side : 10 feet; rear: 15 feet; front: 20 feet
(in minimums) .
3. Height. Maximum of 25 feet.
4. Open space . At least 25°. The per cent of actual open land
is more like 870 . The total land area is approximately
100, 145 square feet. Building coverage is as follows :
Hilbert Hall 5 , 558 sq. ft.
Stranahan Hall 4 , 219 sq. ft.
New library, etc. 3 , 666 sq. ft.
Total Land coverage : 13, 443 sq. ft.
It is proposed that Hilbert Hall, a wooden structure, be
replaced eventually, but that would not change these figures
for purposes of the precise plan. The timing of the replace-
ment of Hilbert Hall is of course dependent upon the exigancies
of fund-raising and foundation grants.
5. Site location. In the City of Aspen, served by and adjacent
to Sixth and Gillespie Streets , and is more fully shown on
drawings accompanying this application.
6. Utilities . All necessary utilities are at the site (as is
also more fully shown on the drawings) .
7. Adjacent landowners. The names and addresses of landowners
within 300 feet are on an attached list.
F3
W
G1
Ironerty 0',,,,n�- i-thi.1-1 300 feet of Asper "er for llhysl4cs
r r S • ha r I C-; i C 0� -L i n!-7,
.'-Iobert `,%Pullan
'?ox 71H 825 Nortlh St-v
Ms. Ida Vail Pabst-
635 V1. f-3illo-so-i-
or Sox 9015
ry
Mcc,cI.rten
621
,7 Elalne 1".
1200 Amer. Natl. Dank Bldg. D��nvur, Co. 80202
or 615 ',,is Gillesole
Tamzin P. 0",(1-ara
603 W Gilles-oie
or Box 10457
& �Nlrs. James J. Markalunas
624 N. 6ti, St
or Box 542
Thomas 0. Wells
614 W. North
or Box 3199
D,"Ir. & 'Mrs. Irvin Burke
610 w. North
or Dox 544
I("ss Greta M. Lum
600 1,11orth
or Box UTJ
Mrs and Mrso Robert Iangenkamp
633 W. North
or 41403 Center Ave. Apt. 5D
Pittsburgh, Pa. 15213
Mrs & Mrs. Kurt Bresnitz
715 We North
or Box 70
Mrs. Fred Iselin
707 W North
Box 418
Lucy R. Hibbard
Roberta P. Dickson
'J21 W. North
or 1-9"," 7Ea,�--, Danv
Mir. ?c Mrs. Bill Block
Box x 1.8 322
hiLhiOi:Ai;DU?•1
r
TO: Aspen City Council , City Manager .
FROM: Bill Kane
RE: Physics Institute
DATE: July 23, 1976
As you may know we have been discussing the problem of the expansion of the
Physics Institute with respect to the larger question of adoption of a
master plan for the entire 130 acre Institute property. The Physics Institute
has received grant money from the Kiesge Foundation which would allow them
to build a new building to include a library and seminar room (copy of general
plans attached). We have consistently agreed that any improvement to the
Physics Institute property be tied in with an overall S.P.A. master, plan for
the Aspen Institute lands. The Physics building must be started before Oct-
ober 15 of this year in order to qualify for grant money. To this point
they have been waiting for the Aspen Institute to submit an overall master
plan. With Fall approaching and no plan submitted yet the physics group is
Obviously getting nervous.
I was approached by Paul Fishbane, Physics Institute President and "lack Walls
the architect for the project with a request to investigate the possibility
of separating the Physics and Aspen Institutes to allow the physicists to proceed
independently of the Aspen Institute. In response to this question I recited
our traditional thinking on the subject -but admitted that technically the
separation sought could be accomplished. Such a seperation would require,
as a minimum the following:_
1) A formalized long term written lease for lands immediate to the
proposed Physics expansion.
2) A description of a seperate S.P.A. for the Physics Institute
leased land. This, of course, would require the amendment of
the zoning map and would have all the notice and hearing re-
quirements of a rezoning.
3) The development and approval of a seperate S.P.A. Master Plan for
the Physics Institute lands.
Of course there are points to be made on both sides of this question. On
one hand, the Aspen Institute insists that the City's intransigence with
respect to zoning institute lands serves only to frustrate, disappoint and
ultimately discourage the aspiring cultural and education groups in the
city. However, the approval of an overall plan by granting building permits
on a building by building basis erodes the concept of an overall , integrated
balanced plan.
I have given .Mr. Fishbane our more or less standard response and sae continue
to hold out for an overall master plan. We will continue with this policy
position unless otherwise directed by Council . You may expect sortie serious
lobbying by the Physics group and we will stand by to impliment any policy
you choose.
Under normal circumstances I would not raise this issue but felt it to be
of such significance as to warrant Council consideration.
Cc: Sandy Stuller
H
i-iJi-� PF�Y Tics
HUX MOO A`. PFN, COl_CJf2ADO UIG11
9 August , 1976
Mr_ . Charles Collins
Chairr• an , Planning and Zoning Commission
City Hall
Aspen , Colorado 81611
Dear Mr. Collins :
Upon the recommendation of the City Planner , the City
Manager and the City Council , the Aspen Center for Physics
respectfully requests that the property as shown on the en-
closed survey be rezoned a separate S . P . A. so that we can
build our new library building . Also enclosed is the master
plan for this property. The Aspen Center for Physics has
rights for first use in perpetuity to this land whose title
holder is the Aspen Tnst:itute for Humanistic Studies . The
property consists of approximately 2 . 1 acres and is presently
zoned S . P . A.
Because of funding contingencies , we would appreciate
your immediate attention regarding this matter.
Sincerely yours ,
PMF/ss Paul M. Fishbane , President
Aspen Center for Physics
t,
ASP 'S / PITK �l rung apartment
130 soy:: a street
aspen , , . _'_ roe v 81611
January 7 , 1976
Aspen Center for Physics
% Jack Walls
Box 29
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear Jack,
I have discussed your letter of December 19, 1975, inquiring about
the new building for the Aspen Center for Physics , with Bill Kane
and Sandy Stuller. We all agree that it would be proper for the
Center to proceed with development review separately from the con-
siderations involved with the Aspen Institute. We would sug est
that the Center apply for a zoning change on their property leased
from the Institute) from Specially Planned Area to Academic (A).
A plan for development will then be reviewed by the Planning and '
Zoning Commission and Council . We would suggest that you refer to
the City of Aspen Zoning Code for appropriate procedures to accom-
plish the rezoning.
Please call us if you have additional questions on these matters.
Very truly yours,
Hal Clark
City/County Land Use Administrator
HC/cwk
jack m. walls architect aspen, coloracio
p.o.box 29/zip cocle 81A11/phone 303-825-3218
December 19, 1975
Mr. Hal Clark
City Of Aspen Planning Dept.
130 S. Galena St.
Aspen, Colorado 81611
Dear Hal :
As a result of our conversation this last week, concerning
the Aspen Center For Physics new building, I am writing you
to see if we can start some action with the City of Aspen
so that the Physics Center can start construction for their
building early this spring.
I realize that the Aspen Institute is in the process of
working out zoning for all of their property, which includes
the area that the Physics Center occupies. However the Aspen
Center For Physics is not a part of the Institute, and should
not be considered in the same light. In the past the Center
has had a verbal lease arrangement with the Institute for the
use of the land for their complex of buildings. This verbal
lease was to run without end. However, the Physics Center has
asked the Institute for a written lease which would spell
everything out. This lease draft was drawn up this fall and
submitted to Joseph Slater for review, but as yet has not been
finalized. The basic terms of the lease indicate that the
term shall be for 99 years starting Jan, 1, 1976, and ending
December 2075. The use of the property was spelled out that
the lessee (Aspen Center For .hysics) will be limited soley
to educational and scientific research uses. This would
seem to fit in with the proposed use of this land, and would
cause no conflict.
As I mentioned to you the Center has a grant of money for use
in the construction of this new building. However, this grant
will end in June of 1976. TTeedless to say the Center is greatly
concerned that because of the Institute zoning it might cause
them to loose this grant money. Therefore we would like to
request a variance from the Special Planned Area classification,
so that our construction will not be delayed. I would greatly
appreciate your help in this matter.
I an also enclosing with this letter a legal description
of the area concerned, and a copy of the site location
map for your information. I would appreciate it if you
could let me know how to proceed. Thank you.
S*M ' s
ASPEN CENTER FOR PHYSICS
.LEGAL, DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
A tract of land being part of S`.^T1/4 of NE1/4 of Sec.
12, T. 10S. , R. 85 11T of the 6th P.M. , -more- fully
described as follows :
Beginning at a point whence the Nlv°T corner of the Sid 1/4 NE
1, 4 of said Sec. 12 bears North 520 11 ' j^Test 1017.07 ft. , said
point being the point of beginning:
Thence South 318 ft. to a point on the northerly edge of
Gillespie Street;
Thence ',,,,rest 80 ft. along the north edge of Gillespie Street
and its extension;
Thence Nest 100 North 269.09 ft. ;
Thence North 160 26 ' East 282.81 ft. ;
Thence East 265 ft. to the point of beginning, containing
2.13 acres more or less.
NORTH`
PROPOSED BLDG.
INS
r
y' t,
J
STRANAHAN BLDG.
CIS
HIBERT BLDG.
El
Jj)
�.
i
ASPEN CENTER F0P'--PH*Yl81 CS LJ
LOCATION PLAN
= 50'
GILL PIE ST,
C3 C3
I i
i
The attached are comments written by a
nationally respected planner. He has , obviously ,
reviewed the current Institute proposal and
Bill Kane 's eight point recommendation to the
city Planning and Zoning Commission.
Local persons who share both Institute and
community concerns for the proposal , solicited
i
this review. The remarks address four of the eight
points in the planning office recommendation.
i
Copies to :
Bill Kane Chick Collins
City Council Members Planning Commission Members
Sandra Stuller Aspen Institute
i
2 . Removal of future development rights and preservation
of open space:
We accept the contention that the area of the Institute
grounds would, in any ordinary course , be zoned in residen-
tial R 15 and R 30 zoning. We are also not opposed in
principle to a shuffling , or reshuffling , or redistribution
of the potential residential zoning within the tract as a
whole.
However, this game cannot be played several times around,
it can be played only once . In ordinary cases , if the land
were vacant, the residential density/according to ground
rules or formulae established by the Department of Planning
would be established by a hypothetical subdivision or some
I
theoretical yield of lots per acre, after subtracting streets ,
or what ever the rules may be* A number would be established , �
s�d. I for one do not accept the rules that the Planning
Department, so far, has established but that is beside the
point. Once that number has been established, the residen-
tial units - by dwelling units or bedrooms - would be disposed
on the tract and the rest would remain vacant and be planned
constructively for various categories of open space from
passive to recreational.
i
In this case we are dealing with an institutional use
in which extensive non-residential facilities already exist
in the form of lodgings , a health club , various villas ,
meeting and conference rooms , the physics institute , the
A
music tent , etc.
If the Institute is given the full benefit of residen-
tial density, assuming the land to be vacant It is receiv-
ing as a bonus the non-residential structures already pre-
sent. In this respect we will have exceeded coverage of
the land and we will have exceeded traffic generation above
that which would have been present had the land developed in
a traditional residential pattern.
We are , therefore, very much concerned not only with
the number of residential units eventually established,
but- particularly with the limitation on future construction
not only of a residential , but also of an institutional
nature. It is , therefore, simply not good enough to settle
on room counts, now and worry about the master planning of
the remaining lands at some future date. If there is going
to be a transfer of density , then the whole must be
i
settled now asad That most certainly would include the area
to be eventually deeded to Denver University or any other
institution.
There is certainly enough precedent for ways and means
with which to transfer density and to protect the lands from
which such density has been transferred. It is unthinkable
that the planning board, '+ -,:i+ + and its professional 4
i
staff should not insist on such contractual means , whether
by f4AQ-. -
these beAzoning I=F Asite plan approval or by covenants running !
15
"any the land, or�Yany other legal and safe means .
I have been surprised at the contention that the present
submission constitutes a proper first stage application .
i
Such first stage application certainly should show (at
least in schematic form) areas which will be committed to
future building, areas which will be created for permanent
open space of active or passive nature and additional or
supplementary traffic circulation.
I submit that this application is not, in fact, a pro-
per first stage application. Since the number of rooms
which are asked for greatly exceed the present requirements
4cep F00 , it at least stands to reason that the Institute
or its successor also have plans for expanding conference
facilities . I am sure the planning board would want to
know where the Institute or its successor plan such con-
ference facilities .
If the planning board is inclined to be so generous
as to permit the institute a full residential count, plus
the non-residential improvements , &Prd the planning board
has a right to know and must insist upon knowing whether
any further bonuses or benefits are asked of the City of
Aspen.
I would further like to submit that it is not suffi-
cient simply to label areas 'open space '. let I would pre-
fer to see that these open areas are labelled as to func-
tion, and with respect to functions I would particularly
ask that there be ample reservation of open space around
the music tent and that there be preservation, either of
v
the existing track or a revised track layout adjusting to
some changes in road alignment , etc. (-7 5
I particularly request that the planning board not
consider any first stage approval of any kind) or even the
acceptance of these documents as a first stage application/
until the areas for present and future development have
been clearly delineated, the open spaces have been esta-
blished and identified, and the method of density transfer
and the permanent protection of the open spaces generated
has been settled to the full satisfaction of the planning
board and the city attorney.
Thank you.
• I
3 . "No further subdivision of the land. "
We do not believe that it is terribly critical whether
any lands to be deeded to Denver University or the Physics
Institute are deeded outright or conveyed on longterm leases ,
as long as the development status of these lands has been
clearly established by deed restrictions , site plan appro-
vals or other means, prior to such conveyance .
The Institute has assured the planning board that
any deeds to Denver University carry a provision that no
structure may be erected on the lands without the approval
of the Institute. The Institute is here setting itself up
as a planning board
f It seems obvious that once the trans-
fer of density has taken place and once the final status
of these lands has been established, the only thing there-
after of any interest to Denver University would be the res-
trictions running with the land and the interpretation or
variance of these restrictions by the planning board. Cer-
tainly the institute thereafter no longer has any further
function, other than to work within the parameters esta-
blished in connection with the density transfer. It is
my personal view that if sufficient land has been set aside
to satisfy the requirements of the Physics Institute�.as�
the open space screening necessary for the continued via-
.
owc.e_
bility of the music tent andathe residential room count has
been converted to lodging accommodations , tUat there should
be very little future building of any kind, other than in
very restricted and specifically identified areas.
I would suggest that any klease or conveyance to Denver
I S [ r re{(_V a.-*
University in connection with this
application, for thAsi are not parties interest at this
time. Neither the board nor I nor the people here have any
intimate knowledge of the negotiations or legal documents
.� 2.o v i
exchanged ,�3 one asxa=, whatever this be , will have to
be worked out with the institute and no-one else . The
final result must then, indeed, be final and the Institute
must be prepared to live within its confinements . Any
such arrangement certainly can leave not a single acre of
this tract subject to any future use determination.
i
ttE
t
i
I
f
P
i
t
t
i
A
5 . "Phasing requirements ,
I think the sentiment
c y m , at this time is that there is a great
desire to make possible ways of meeting the Institute's
needs for accommodations in connection with its conference
programlOK There is an equally aversion to having
such an accommodation result in the establishment of a
s�
w motel or hotel complex in this residential area. To the
extent , therefore, that the facilities will be a bona fide
and genuine conference center there will be cooperation,&Pp*
the extent that the conference facilities are a pretext
for the establishment of a large commercial hotel complex,
the opposition will be ferocious .
In my opinion, there is only one way to assure that
the conference objectives are primaryrand that is to coordi-
nate the phasing with the demonstrable needs of the Insti-
tute or any party to which the Institute may make its
facilities available during the off-season.
Even at the height of need, the Institute has required
only 300 beds of accommodations in the City of Aspen. Of
those, a certain number will always prefer to be quartered
away from the Institute, with friends or in commercial
establishments. A generous interpretation would probably
indicate a need for no more than 200 beds (not rooms) ini-
tially. That would mean the start of the program with 100
rooms and not 200 rooms. Certainly it should be possible
64,1-44 e%. IL"f .lnr�,w:cam.
to develop some statistical input here which we would
s
strongly recommend to the planning board.
E
The Institute has taken the position that an operator,
which they apparently have in mind, will not take over unless
there be 350 rooms , or that a lender will not lend money un--
i
less there be at least 350 rooms .
c
F
b
Not only has the planning board quite properly taken k
the position that that is not pertinent to' the matter at
k
hand and to the deliberation over the disposition of a resi-
dential area, but it also -is- rather vague economics . -Since
Y
the conference facilities are already available, the estab-
lishment of rooms is a rather cut and dried economic affair,
F
and the first increment of rooms will be there simply to
supply the rooms to feed the existing conference facilities .
That means that the large overhead spaces , such as big
meeting halls , etc. will not be necessary certainly for the
first stage and there would appear to be no economic neces-
sity , nor is there any justification on the part of the
Institute to require a full-blown facility. -
It is nice of the Planning Department to have been ahle
to stretch the interpretation of room count to fit the Insti-
tute ' s objective' .In retrospect it may find it has establi-
shed some poor precedents for future use and it may wish to
be a little more objective and conservative in the final es-
tablishment of the room count, hat So far I have personally
seen nothing, and I hope the board will agree, that would
make it either functionally or economically necessary to do
anything but meet the first stage of demonstrable demand.
6 . "Car free development ."
In assuring us of car free development for a conference
center complex I believe the Planning Department has made
the wish the father of the thought. I honestly do not
think that this has been thought through and I wish the
planning staff would direct their attention to experience
in general. I believe they will find it very difficult to
come up with demonstrations or examples anywhere in the -
country that would support the contention that a complex of
this nature cant, , be car free .
Let us assume the most favorable circumstances, Jet us
assume that the vast majority of the conference participants
will be housed on the grounds of the conference cen=ter and
will make their few trips into Aspen by some public or sub-
sidised conveyance. It would still be optimistic to think
that there would not be at least one-third to one-half of
the guests who would wish to have some private means-6f
-transportation such as an automobile . Certainly the Insti- `
tute has been around long enough to establish traffic counts
and parking lot counts which would determine the number of
"cars as a percentage of total guests at any one time..
That would, however, be true only during the height
of the conference season. Were these rooms to be made
available to guests during off-season periods , a much larger
percentage of the people would bring their own automobiles
or rent them. If no parking facilities were present on
the grounds of the conference center then off-street park-
ing facilities would have to be established somewhere outside
the grounds of the conference center to store the vehicles of
conference participants. This is patently unreasonable and
also difficult , for there are no such grounds available in
the vicinity that could be rented by the Institute or the
conference center. Universally , throughout the country,
any conference center which may double as a hotel/motel or
be supplemented by hotel/motel use would have in its ordi-
nance provisions for a mandatory minimum parking space ratio.
To establish such a facility and to deny this facility a
parking lot, would be to render it economically unviable .
It is my opinion that if the operator of such a facility
would go into court afterwards , that the court would find Opt
highly unreasonable and grant the applicant the right to
establish such parking lots . I think the planning board and
its staff must quite frankly face the fact that considerable
automobile traffic will be generated here , regardless of
the amount of subsidized transportation which, after all ,
cannot be guaranteed and permanently written into any plan-_
ning board approvalifOr The planning board cannot permanently
mandate the need for an expenditure for such transportation
if no-one cares to foot the bill. I sincerely suggest
that this car free development is an idle dream. In esta-
blishing the relative impact of residential versus quasi
commercial development, the planning board must honestly
face the fact that these traffic realities must be properly
evaluated. It=is , of course, obvious that the traffic pat-
tern here would be one of high concentration whereas the
development -of these grounds along standard residential. lines
would'- dissipate such traffic movements over a great number
of residential streets. The development of adequate
--
-traffic :.circulation and revised and improved traffic access
patterns , as well as the demonstration of adequate parking
areas , must become an integral part of the overall considera-
tion of this application.
I
G
0
S
i
f
I
E
t
6
[1
{
f
i
i
1
r ;
, y r
. � ���^^� .� �, .L 1;,
�.
\ �.�
�' ,, i�
� 4
4' � � \�
�`ti t� � t,' � � � '� � t
�� �
,:
. -. � �`�
,,
v
�' _. v. �t i 2 Y ...
���
-. � 1
< < ��
.__., S q. ,y ., �,.;
i�� _ � ,... �ti -�.
_. ,:
-,_ _ ,
_ _... �
-.<
-_�`_-
��.
i
9 ',`3d .,,�.
�:
� .. �; *v
��.� l: `
,� � �,
r t``���� � �, ��� '�'
i
�.
.,. � �,
..- .,
1 ,�t, � t , ', l
`�
•.
M
y� : �
a
�, A ��� ,'
_� � r
�,
E
__ ,.
i � � .
, ..
��
-�
��� �,
,_ - ,,
a
�` ...�
I
i
I i t;
� (';.'� �
,..
3 .
� � _ ,
t - � s
v ;,,
5._ a
/ t 7` .�''"'_. ! l
� aY' `` _ � � e� � _.
E'
"�f H t �..
"' .. �._ 1.., _iF
, -
i .
fi
i
._ -_ ;� r
I ,_. . , �.�. �
�, � f c:- �f//�/
(�-���y .may {- � � '! F '�/Dx� 'c
i � � ✓-
��� f
� I � � � i r _
"� .=�
�` e - ��. :, �_ E
I ;�
� t f r ��..�I�
F,'
I f
ff� 1 w
/ t s� 1.'��' W' "� r�
.� y � .:
.-
n
> �
r
l I
' /^ • � _v /
� .d
i C
�"�%- .�
j
_C' l a-.
r"i
,.- ,�
„<
,_ �,
,��' _, ,�
I