Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.20000208Special Meeting Aspen City Council February 8, 2000 Councilmembers Jim Markalunas, Tom McCabe, Tony Hershey, Terry Paulson and Commissioners Leslie Lamont, Dorothea Farris, Shelley Harper and Patti Clapper are present. ASPEN AREA COMMUNITY PLAN Julie Ann Woods, community development director, said this plan is ready for Council adoption and there is a resolution to accomplish that. Attached to the resolution are the goals and policies associated with the community plan and the action plan, work program priorities. Ms. Woods said the county P & Z has the authority to adopt master plans and they approved it on January 25th. Ms. Woods reminded the Boards that this process started in March 1998 with 8 focus committees and a character committee that created a mission statement. In December 1998, the comments from the committees were fowarded to the oversight committee which consisted of 2 county P & Z members, 2 BOCC and 2 Council members with a representative of each focus committee. In May 1999, the oversight committee sent a draft on for P & Z's consideration. The P & Zs felt more work was necessary in order to verify some assumptions, to confirm the numbers in the plan, to review growth management and to look at the carrying capacity of the valley. The P & Zs felt it was important to put together landuse maps before the AACP was adopted and these maps are on display at these meeting, including the open space and parks and composite future land use map. Ms. Woods said the maps were on display at an open house held at the Wheeler Opera House in January. The comments received at that open house are summarized for the Boards. The maps will be part of the final document. The changes from the 1993 AACP are the idea of containing growth and the establishment of a community growth boundary. This is to encourage more growth within the boundary and discourage strong development outside the boundary. The 2000 AACP also includes a future landuse map as well as a open space, parks and trails greenfrastructure map. Ms. Woods pointed out the plan acknowledges that housing 60 percent of the work force in Aspen is not an achievable goal. The plan recommends 800 to 1300 additional affordable housing units within the growth boundary. The 2000 AACP recognizes the important of arts, culture and education to the community and Special Meeting Aspen City Council February 8~ 2000 recognizes some ways to sustain these assets. Economic sustainability is a new section of the 2000 ACCP and looks at ways to strengthen locally owned businesses. The 2000 AACP recommends the governments count and capture all growth impacts, including a re-evaluation of the current GMQS. Staff feels the 2000 AACP will provide more clear direction for future growth and development and identify where the growth should occur. Ms. Ferris asked how the final urban growth boundary was determined. Ms. Woods said the boundaries reflect actual physical constraints, used actual parcel lines, provision of existing services and their adjacent areas were all used in determining these boundaries. Ms. Woods said the community growth boundary should not be looked at as the ultimate city build out but rather an area beyond which the city will not go. Cindy Houben, county community development department, said the area outside the growth boundary is where the county should be looking at their developments. Ms. Harper asked if this leaves the city open to annexing the airport area with it included in the growth boundary. Worcester said marking a boundary and naming it growth boundaries has no legal consequences. In order for a parcel to be annexed, it has to be contiguous and the Council has to go through the annexation procedure with the consent of the property owner. Ms. Houben noted each the city and county will have to adopt the urban growth boundary as defined by a description. Mayor Pro Tern opened the public hearing. Charlie Tarver, county P & Z, urged the Boards to change specific parts of the plan. Tarver said overall the plan is good and changing specific parts at this point excludes public input, reduces the value of the lkong public process, and changing specific parts will have impacts on other areas of the plan. Tarver encouraged the Board to adopt the AACP. Connie Harvey urgec the Boards not to make the urban growth boundary all the way out to Burlingame. It would be a mistake to do that without having more information. Joy Caudill stated she does not want the Zoline property included in the urban growth boundary. The boundary should end at Maroon Creek. 2 Special Meeting Aspen City Council February 8~ 2000 Jane Dinsmoor told the Boards the focus groups had specific recommendations on when the growth numbers start - at the 1993 plan. This was not to start in 2000 and add the growth numbers plus whatever is in the pipeline. The focus groups spent months discussing the cap of 30,000. The groups recommended commuting employees be part of that count. If the Board wants a broad overview, the numbers should not be put in the AACP. Tarver said throughout the precees, the different committees would say they needed different things from no more growth to X units for employees. Tarver said this cannot be put into the plan but the plan was the melding of all viewpoints into something workable. Leslie Lament said through many oversight meetings, the groups went over and over what makes up the 30,000 and did not come to a conclusion. Ms. Lament suggested the number not be in the plan unless it can better be refined. Ms. Woods noted under the current growth management system, the community cannot accommodate the 1300 additional housing units. There will have to changes to the growth management system. P & Z agreed the growth management system should be reevaluated. 3