Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.council.19640513R L Aspen, Colorado Joint Meeting Aspen City Council and Aspen Planniog and Zoning Commfssion May 13, 1964 Joint Meeting Zoning Proposals. The joint meeting originally called for May 7th was postponed. The meeting of May 13, 1964,was called to order by Mayor Pabst at 4:45 P.M. Present were Councilmen McE~chern and Stapleton, also 3ack Walls, Chairman of the Planning Commission, and Commission members Richard Lai, Francis Whitaker and Mrs. Andrea Lawrence. City Administrator Kerrigan came in later. The Mayor then turned the_meeting over to Mr. Walls, who referred to matters pending, i.e.; 1- Zoning for R-15 within Aspen 2- Interim Zoning - to provide for 25' height restriction within the tourist area - with deletion of proportionate heights. Discussion on #2 covered - that there is no provision in Colorado Statutes for such interim zoning - possibility of using expiration date in ordinance. 3- Density control in tourist area. Discussion on No. 3 covered - tying in with area of land to decrease density about 25% - suggested that 600 square feet of land be provided for each living unit; whether it would be wise to await the planning report from Mr. Wiener; economics and growth of community and effect on business area. Also discussed - having City and County ordinances combatible - need for off- street parking. - whether to enlarge business district or restrict density in tourist zone. 4. Building Review ordinance. 5, Curb cut control ordinance. Mr.~Walls read proposed curb cut ordinance and discussion followed on ser- vice stations tying curb cuts to size of lots, and provision for unusual cases. Mr. Walls then m~ad proposed building review ordinance, providing for the review by the Planning Commission of plans - and recommendation of the Commission; also providing that plans, after approval, should be filed in the office of the City Clerk, to avoid changes at a later date. Discussed - need to provide off-street parking when places are partially built that plan should indicate complete development before approval is given. Mr. Kerrigan felt that such procedure would undermine administrative pro- cedure, and that it would lean toward aesthetic control. He felt plans should be processed through Building Inspector's office and filed there. Considerable discussion on proposed buildin~ review ordinance followed. Council indicated they were in accord with suggestions, but felt that plans should first be referred to the Building Inspector. Discussed - annexation and Commission's reco~endation to Council that petition of Dorothy Shaw be accepted. Annexation petition on area in Block 2, Eanes Addition, still pending. The proposed ordinances are to be redrawn and again presented for Council consideration. The meeting was adjourned at 6:18 P. M.