HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19791129
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
FORI\! '.' C, F_ HOECKE'L B. B." L Cl,
Special Meeting
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
November 29, 1979
The Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission held a special meeting on November 29,
1979, at 5:00 P.M., in the City Council Chambers. Members present were Welton
Anderson, acting Chairman, Roger Hunt, Lee Pardee, and Nancy McDonnell. Also,
present were Karen Smith of the Planning Office, and interested parties.
COllunissionmember
Comments
Welton Anderson called the meeting to order and stated
the items for this Special Meeting involved the rezoning
and annexation of the Opal Marolt Property and the
Housing Overlay District.
Karen Smith of the Planning Office commented that this
is a continued Public Hearing from the November 20, 1979
regular meeting and felt with the number of people pre-
sent for the Public Hearing, that it would be appro-
priate to take their input first and then have the PUD
discussion since it has not been discussed before this
time.
Public Hearing
Opal Marolt
Rezoning
Jan Mulford, Chairman of the Open Space Advisory Board,
introduced for record a written recommendation outlining
the reasons for permenant preservation of open space.
Recommendation is that the city seek to purchase all or
part of the property for open space purposes, and as to
the property that can't be purchased, that at least a
PUD Overlay be included in zoning designation and third-
ly upon consideration of final development approvals
that the open space areas be dedicated permenantly to
the public or provided the conservation easements to be
held by the ci-ty or other legal devises that would keep
the areas open that are involved.
Richard Cummins, Attorney representing the owners of
adjacent property to said property. He stated that
he had been retained this morning and asked for a
continuance of the public hearing to allow him time
for examination and preparation for counciling the
people owning land near the Opal Marolt property.
Karen Smith stated the questions before the commission
for public hearing is the rezoning and would recOlr--
mend that the P & Z's recommendation on the zoning be
containing conditions and sees fiO reason for not con-
tinuing the hearing until next regular meeting.
The commissionmembers felt they should procede with all
other matters concerning the application except for the
comments from R. Cummins and vote after hearing those.
Don Ensign, Attorney representing the applicant, Opal
Marolt and wanted to state that this process is a long
one and since the employee housing question and pro-
visions in the project proposed by Opal Marolt cause
a long process that any delay in this matter would just
compound the problems in this issue.
Ed Suzaki commented on the annexation of the property
as questionable and the value created to the property
by annexation and ending any possible purchase by the
city.
Elli Belmar an adjacent property owner wanted to make
her objection to building on Castle Creek and also
spoke for her brother, another land owner and others
-2-
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
FORiIl" C. F_ HQfCKEL B. B.II: L Cl.
Special Meeting
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
November 29, 1979
who all acknowledge the need for the building of units
for housing, but strongly object to the impact and
possible effects such adverse changes would have to the
area and other property owners personal views.
Welton Anderson agreed with the adjacent owners and Ed
Suzaki concerning the objective of concentrating from
a planning point, on grouping the employee housing and
felt that spreading it out throughout the town area is a
much more attractive objective.
Jim Breasted commented concerning the creation of addi-
tional value to the Opal Marolt property and the objec-
tion to the changing of the urban edge-country approach
to the westend of the city as being a serious problem
that should be examined extremely close.
Karen Smith introduced the Colorado State University
Enviromental Resources Analysis Maps of 1974 as part
of the record showing an area of moderate visual vul-
nerablity, which is approximately everything from the
ridge down to the river and back and everything from
the ridge down to the creek bottom and the other side
is shown as a high visual vulnerablity, and all of the
same is in a protected land catagory as designated by
the land suitablity map, showing extreme hazardous or
fragile ecosystems exist. The remainder of the pro-
perty is catagorized as best suited for agricultural
uses and in levels of priority it goes from a level 3
to a level 6; 3 being the highest productive and 6 being
the least productive use. This land has been desig-
nated level 6 and has been previously used for horse
and cattle grazing. There is critical wildlife habi-
tat range on Shadow Mountain but not on Opal Marolt's
property and at the same time the Rye perian Zone that
is along the creek and the vegetation along the creek
is important to that Zone and the habitat that is in
that area.
McDonnell questioned concerning the president set for
annexation and how far could it be carried to other
properties.
Pardee commented to the president not having to be set
and the real issue is waiting for a project which will
assist employee housing and not have the problems of
transportation, open space, ecological, landscaping and
visual opposed to no one wanting employee housing next
to them. He feels that we are at the stage where we
are giving incentives and need to look at this proposal
from a standpoint of the benefit to the community and
to the impact on ecological systems and the neighbors.
In answer to questions from the public to the extent
of concern, Pardee stated that the commission is making
a determination that if annexed by City Council, what
zoning they would recommend, but they can attach a re-
commendation with some reasons that mayor may not be
listened to by the City Council.
Karen Smith felt that after listening to the concerns
of many persons involved with or effected by the deci-
sions made by the commission that, by going through
the pros and cons of this site and other alternative
-3-
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
FORM '.~ C. F. HOECKEL B. S. It L. <';.).
Special Meeting
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
November 29, 1979
sites would be a recommendation made in examining the
rezoning aspects and the designation of employee housing
to this area.
Welton Anderson asked for additional comments and then
for a continuance to the next meeting.
Roger Hunt moved to continue the Public Hearing to the
regular meeting time on Tuesday, December 4, 1979.
Nancy McDonnell seconded. All in favor. Motion approved.
Celia Marolt
Rezoning
Welton Anderson opened the Public Hearing for the Celia
Marolt Rezoning and continuing this also to the next
regular meeting on Tuesday, December 4, 1979, Pardee
seconded. All in favor, motion approved.
Housing Overlay
Ordinance
Karen Smith introduced a cover memo pointing out modi-
fications to the redraft of the Housing Overlay and the
TDR provisions but does not seperate to which ordinance
they are contained within. In the Housing OVerlay on
page 5-p6 a techinical paragraph of the Office Zone
providing the minimum lot area and the circumstance for
~ or more of the dwelling units are deed restricted to
employee housing has been added. On page 6, paragraph
H-l, has been redrafted to deal only with the RMF, SCI,
and neighborhood commercial zone districts. One other
recommendation to this paragraph is to delete the word
(required) before external floor area ratio. Under H-2,
same page, the O-office district bonus floor area ratio
is .75 to 1 instead of 1 to 1. Paragraph 6, page 7, has
been added to accommodate the L-l, L-2 zone seperate and
provided for a bonus FAR in these zones, .25 to 1.
Pardee questions the increase to floor area ratio if they
add what does that exactly mean to what and how many
employee units are deed restricted. Smith stated that
in order to be excepted from the GMP competition, you
have to do at least 70% of the units that are being
added to employee housing. Smith questioned whether
the commission wanted to apply the housing overlay to
lOdges uses in the lodge other than anymore than cur-
rently in this district? The commission and Karen Smith
agreed the questions to the bonuses allowed in the
existing ordinances and being redrafted should be re-
considered and examined at the next Tuesday meeting.
The next section with a problem is Section 24-10.9,
subsection B-a, page 9, pretaining to districts of
service commercial, industrial and neighborhood com-
mercial, and that is when you have that kind of enternal
floor area ratio bonus and allow housing overlay to
apply in a mixed use situation, there is no answer to
how to allocate the units over and above existing pre-
sently.
The members and public discussed the questions to units
being deed restricted and there being no authority to
examine the consistence to owners carrying out the
approvals and conditions given by the boards. Hunt
suggested the establishment of a Housing Authority and
or a Rental Authority Pool to govern and examine all
property to statis of conditions and availablity. The
other members felt this would be the only way to make
sure the properties in question are handled according
to legislation and laws and conditions imposed by the
city authorities.
-4-
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
FORM" C. F. HOtCKn. B. B." L Cl.
Special Meeting
Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission
November 29, 1979
Welton Anderson moved to in an effort to enforce the
deed restrictions to guarantee bonified low, moderate
and middle income housing and other conditions imposed
by this board for approvals for other applications that
this commission respectfully request that City Council
appropriate the money to hire a fulltime Zoning Officer
to enforce the conditions and restrictions placed by
this board for approvals. Pardee so moved, Hunt
seconded. All in favor, motion approved.
Hunt moved to continue the Public Hearing on Tuesday,
December 4, 1979, McDonnell seconded. All in favor,
motion approved. Meeting adjourned at 7:00 P.M.
~.,.I: mJJ4~tL
Sandi Meredith, Deputy City Clerk