Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19740806 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORIIIO C.F.HOtCKELU.B.&L.\;(l. Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning August 6, 1974 The meeting was called to order by Vice-Chairman Bryan Johnson at 4:05 P.M. with members Janet Landry, Geri Vagneur, Robert Barnard and Jack Jenkins present. City/County Planner John Stanford, Donna Baer, Yank Mojo and Sandy Stuller were also in attendance. Old Business: H.P.C. Johnson set the date of the study session with the HPC to be tuesday, August 13, at 4:00 p.m. Also in that meeting will be presentation by the students from Colorado State University who did an environ- mental study of pitkin County. Street Lighting Plan Yank Mojo gave the Commission a look at the progress made in construction of the antique lights. Mojo stated that the lights will be two per intersection along Galena and Main and surrounding the historic core of and within the Mall. It was suggested by the HPC that two be put on either end of Castle Crk. Bridge and also at the 7th and Hallam intersection. They would also like to put the lights in the center of the blocks on Main Street but Mojo was uncertain as to how many lights would be useable of the 96 given to the City. Mojo stated that he hoped to have at least half dozen of the lights up and operating by mid-month. Stream Margins - Pace garage Situated in the Black Birch area off Red Butte road and along the Roaring Fork, the house had already been constructed 22 feet from the river. Applicant wished to build a garage inside the house. Vagneur made a motion to approve the stream margin and Jenkins seconded. All in favor, motion carried. Subdivisions: Vroom Building Applicant requested exemption from the definition of subdivision for a building on platted lots and blocks to be able to condominimize the office building's upper floors. Approval had been given already under Ordinance 19 review. Barnard moved to approve the exemption under 20-C and Vagneur seconded. All in favor, motion carried. Castle Creek resubdivision Applicant wished to subdivide part of their lot into a separate parcel, retaining an access road. It was noted that this was an advertised public hearing and the Planning Office had received a letter from members of the subdivision protesting because of protective covenants barring them from resubdivision. These people realized that it was a civil matter but wished to appraise the members of the P & Z of their feelings. Ms. Baer advised the members that the application was incomplete since no letter of recommendation had been received. Jenkins moved that they officially table based on the fact that the submittals were not in order and Collins seconded. All in favor, motion carried. Woerndle subdivision Applicant had received PUD approval and on the final plat there were no changes. Jenkins moved to give final plat approval and Barnard seconded. All in favor (Landry abstaining), motion carried. -1- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM" C.F.HOECKELB.B.&L.Co. Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning August 6, 1974 P.U.D.: Mountainedge The City Attorney informed the Commission that negotiations for annexation before the City Council would be on next week's Council Agenda but she advised them not to take official action at this time due to uncertain validity. Chuck Vidal advised the members that their decision would be at his own risk. At that time he went over the memorandum put out by the Planning Office in an attempt to convince the members of his good intentions Ms. Baer sited sections d and f under Intentions as the major objections. She stated that the density and resulting congestion were not in harmony with the rest of the neighborhood and that under proposed rezoning the area of Garmisch and Juan streets would be used as boundaries for high density tourist devel- opment. Jenkins moved that they deny Mountainedge PUD for the same reasons as under Ordinance 19 and Barnard secondec All in favor, motion carried. Ordinance 19 Review: K.S.N.O KSNO asked for an exemption for a building permit so that they could move to the white house on 600 E. Hopkins and make some external changes to the building such as moving the door from one side to the other. Under the parking memorandum sent out by Yank Mojo, three parking spaces would have to be provided for the eleven employees. Collins moved that exemption be granred on the proviso that three parking spaces be provided and Barnard seconded. All in favor, motion carried. Tom Merrill This was a one level duplex in which applicant would like to build a bedroom and bath in a proposed second level. Members only objection was that it could at some time in the future be made into a triplex simply by adding external stairs but Merrill assured them that his sale contract would have a stipulation against that. Vagneur moved that they grant exemption under the condition that final plans be made available to them and Landry seconded. All in favor, motion carried. Christiania Preliminary and final plans were submitted for a proposed duplex. A discrepancy was noted between the plans and the official survey in which a cabin was supposed to be ten feet away from the duplex is in reality only three feet away. Barnard moved to table until stakes were put in the ground and an on-site inspection could be made and also accurate plans were submitted. Jenkins seconded, motion carried. Limelite Conceptual approval had been granted to add fourteen units to the Ski view Lodge but a height variance had already been turned down by the Board of Adjustments. -2- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM 50 C.F.HOECKELB.B.!ll.Co. Regular Meeting Aspen Planning and Zoning August 6, 1974 Limelite, continued Ms. Baer reiterated the concern over the parking situation and said that since the building had gone up in 1955 before any parking requirements, the Planning Office had originally believed that no spaces had to be provided. Since then the City Attorney had ruled that it was to be considered abandonment of a non-conforming use and that not only would they have to maintain the present lot as a parking area but also provide additional space for the new units. Johnson stated that the Commission would have to see new plans because they couldn't accept the old ones based on Ms. Stuller's legal opinion. Architect Don Ball attempted to point out to the Commission that the parking area was not legally considered a parking area but rather open space and that the owner could use it as he chose. Johnson advised the applicant that he could either wi thdraw his plans or they would !.have to turn them down officially. The applicant withdrew his plan for resubmission as modified. 620 Hyman Applicant did not show for his presentation. Jenkins moved to adjourn the meeting and Barnard seconded. Meeting was adjourned at 5:41 p.m. ~~{'.~ Recordlng S retary -3-