HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19741105
_M"..."____""-.-..~~~,~~,,,.~..~_..<,,,.,...~_.,_~._~~____-~..~--"'.-._~.~...~.-.~-'-
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
1 00 Leaves
FORM Ii C.F.HOECKELD.D.!l!L.Co.
Reqular Meeting
Aspen planning and Zoning
November 5, 1974
The meeting was called to order by Chairman Spencer Schiffer with members Bryan
Johnson, Jack Jenkins and Dr. Barnard. Janet Landry and Chick Collins had
excused absences. Also present was John Stanford and Yank Mojo.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Since members did not have enough time to look over all
the sets of minutes, the minutes were tabled by the
Chairman.
OLD BUSINESS:
Member absenteeism
Schiffer signed the amendment to the by-laws voted in on
September 19, 1974.
In conjunction iwth this, the Chairman noted that Chick
Collins had four unexcused absences since September 26.
He thought that they should direct John Stanford to bring
this to the attention of the Council and that they recom-
mend that Collins be removed. Barnard agreed that if they
make these rules, the members should have to abide by them.
Jenkins reiterated his position that if the people can't
afford to give the time to the P & Z, then they shouldn't
take the job. Johnson agreed that they should enforce the
rule and that a memo should be sent to Council.
Motion
Johnson moved that they recommend to City Council that
Chick Collins be removed from the Commission because of
a number of unexcused absences in excess of allowed.
Barnard seconded. All in favor, motion carried.
King & Gibson
Schiffer brought up the situation over King and Gibson
Streets which had been discussed in a previous meeting.
He said that Planning had sent a memo to the City Manager
and that Mahoney wanted a memo from the P & Z. Schiffer
thought that while the City and County are working out a
plan for that area, they should recommend at least a stop
or yield sign be put in temporarily. Barnard said that
the area was a blind corner and Schiffer agreed saying that
children were in danger there. Johnson said that he had
no objection to sending a memo on their feelings to
Mahoney. Barnard thought that that spot should be made
into a cul-de-sac but Schiffer said that Planners were
working on it and until it is worked out they should con-
sider the options available now.
Motion
Barnard moved that they send a memo to the City Manager
regarding King and Gibson Streets and Johnson seconded.
All in favor, motion carried.
Mall Extension
Barnard also brought up the fact that there had been no
notification to the P & Z of an extension to the Mallon
Galena Steet. Jenkins questioned why the Mall hadn't come
under their jurisdiction anyway since a building permit
needed to be issued. Barnard was especially concerned
because of the Aspen Mine Company's approval by the Mall
Commission for an outdoor extension had not been approved
b y the P ~ Z. Barnard thought that at that time they had
made a motion to Council that they be notified on anything
having to do with the Malls, but Johnson pointed out that
they had taken the position of no more restaurant extensions
without their approval.
Schiffer entertained a motion to adopt a resolution setting
forth to the city Council their position that any planning
done in the City with respect to the Mall or anything else
first come before the P & Z.
-1-
Motion
Droste Rezoning
Application
Motion
Brinkman Parking
Lot
-......._......~.,,-."'
Jenkins thought that they should specify a requirement of
anything presently planned be continued with their
approval only.
Barnard moved that they adopt a resolution setting forth
to the City Council their position that any planning matter
including and without limitation any extensions or addition
to the Mall first come before the P & Z. Jenkins seconded.
All in favor, motion carried.
Mojo brought to the attention of the P & Z a request for
rezoning in the County. Under County P & Z regulations,
any planning development within a 2 mile radius of the
City limits be sent to the City P & Z for recommendations
and comments. This was a rezoning application for Red
Mountain Meadow in which the applicant wished to have the
current zoning of 1 unit per 10 acres changed to 2 acres
PUD. The area would encompass 65 acres with an application
of 35 or 36 homesites plus common land.
Mojo said that the Planning Office's position was against
the project for the following reasons: the Red Mountain
Road is unbearable now and with the addition of 75 to 100
more cars would would compound the problem; the proposed
area sets up on the base of Red Mountain and if a fire
starts there, there wouldn't be adequate access, plus in
the case of fire, there would only be two ditches and
according to the Forest Service, these ditches would not
hold a fire; finally the Planning Office was opposed becausE
they felt it was too dense an application of the land.
Mojo mentioned that Benedict, in selling the land to Droste
made a condition that Droste retain the common land and
that with this application it appeared that Droste was
trying to draw off this common land for density purposes.
Schiffer noted, that there were probably water problems also
and Mojo ,affirmed that according to Marky of the City
Water Department, there presently isn't enough of a water
supply and that the City would have to build more pumping
stations. Mojo mentioned that Droste has water rights to
adjudicated Hunter Creek water but Barnard noted that it
would be too expensive for him to clean up the water.
Schiffer said that if Red Mountain were to burn, it would
most definitely affect Aspen aesthetically. Barnard said
that they didn't have to do anything with the knowledge,
just be aware of the situation, but in terms of disapproval
he felt that the road consideration was most valid. He
did not want to vote on anything because of lack of enough
time to study the problem.
Johnson moved that they approve a motion recommending to
the County P & Z disapproval because of potential problems
with the water supply, traffic and congestion and increased
fire hazard. Jenkins seconded. All in favor except for
Barnard who voted nay because of the principle that they
hadn't had sufficient time to study the matter. Motion
carried.
Mojo explained that when Ms. Brinkman was originally
granted Ordinance 19 approval, it was made conditional
that the land not be used as a parking lot. He said that
she was there to ask that they rescind that condition.
Barnard questioned why they had not required the parking
and Mojo explained that at that time the Planning Office's
position was that parking not be provided in the core area
--
-2-
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
FORM Ii C.F.HOECKELD.D.!l!L.Co.
Aspen Planning and zoning
November 5, 1974
Regular Meeting
Brinkman, cont'd
Motion
SUBDIVISION -
Benedict exemption
and that the P & Z had accepted that premise. He said that
because of the recent changes in the Planning Office's
position towards parking, they recommended that Ms.
Brinkman be allowed to have the parking lot.
Dr. Barnard asked Ms. Brinkman if she had provided off-
street parking for her restaurant and when she said that
she had not been allowed to, Schiffer explained that when
her project came up before them, they were just getting
into the problem of parking and the Planning Department
recommended no off-street parking. Barnard said it was one
thing to say you'll do a building and not have to have
off-street parking but another thing when the parking is
to be a paying situation. Jenkins explained that Council
went from one position on parking to another saying that
they were going to "accomodate the car while trying to
deemphasize the car". Jenkins said that his feelings were
positive at that time towards this positon and that if that
is their objective still, then the building should provide
parking.
Ms. Brinkman said that when she had remodeled the building,
she had offered 21 free parking spaces and the rest to
be paid parking. The City would not let her give the
spaces. A year later, she still has the unimproved lot
which looks bad and she can't pay the taxes on it. She
said that she could have had it landscaped buy that it took
4 months to get in front of the P & Z and she lost her
investors because of it. Now she wanted to get her money
back by charging for the parking. She said that it would
not always be a parking lot and she had talked to Jerry
DeFries of the Motherlode about a "greenbelt" in that area.
Barnard felt that the situation had changed and that she
should have to provide the parking just as he had to do
when he allowed a restaurant into his building. Schiffer
said that he would like to see her new tenants comply with
new parking requirements in terms of buyout parking from
her or from the City. Ms. Brinkman protested that all the
people in her building had already signed leases and she
didn't know how she could make them comply.
Jenkins said that the game had changed and wondered when
they would have a study session on the parking problem.
Schiffer said that it had been scheduled for a past meeting
but they had had a study session with Council instead.
Barnard moved that they remove
that the building complies with
requirements of the recommended
seconded. All in favor, motion
the condition
the permanent
zoning code.
carried.
provided
parking
Jenkins
Mojo explained that when the Benedict Land and Cattle Co.
sold to Benedict and his wife the land on Riverside Placer,
it was noted that a mistake had been made. A line became
a forced boundary line as opposed one through the river.
The Benedicts were aksing for an exemption from subdivision
to correct the records.
Schiffer asked Ms. Maddalone, who was representing the
Benedicts, if a plat were recorded and if the description
on the deed didn't conform with the plat. Ms Maddalone
explained that there was not plat, just a metes and bounds
description which had been done by Buchanan's Office.
When they had the land resurveyed by Trico a year ago, the
-3-
~'r 11
surveyors found several discrepancies.
Motion
Barnard moved that the Benedict exemption be granted on
the grounds that they are not within the intents and
purposes of subdivision. Johnson seconded. All in favor,
motion carried.
Maddalones, located next to the Benedicts, were also in
need of an exemption to correct the deed.
Motion Johnson moved that the Maddalone exemption be granted on
the grounds that they are without the purpose of the
definition of subdivision. Jenkins seconded. All in favor,
motion carried.
P. Brinkman Duplex Request was made to condominimize an existing duplex on
Lot 1, Block 23, West Aspen Subidivision. Mojo felt that
it should be exempt from the definition of subdivision
because of platted lots and blocks.
Motion Barnard moved to grant an exemption from subidivision and
Jenkins seconded. All in favor, motion carried.
Redwood Condominiums Attorney Jon Mulford represented the Redwood Condominiums
and Anthony Castel lack who would like to be exempted
from Subdivision regulations because the building has
existed for years and has utility and water hookups. There
would be two potential owners, John Prosser and Dwight
Shellman, who would use it for employee housing. Barnard
questioned whether it was on platted lots and blocks and
Mr. Mulford explained that the portion Castellack owns
he purchased from the Railroad years ago. Barnard stated
tha the law was clear that if it is not on ,lots and blocks,
then it comes under Subdivision. Mulford argued that the
definition refers to concerns over access and utilities
and they have taken care. of both of those problems.
Mojo said that the Planning Office didn't really understand
about the access o,f the road. Johnson asked if there was
an easement to the road and Mulford said that there wasn't
one.
Mojo said that the Planning Office co~ldn't recommend
approval since it is without the intents and purposes of
Subdivision and Stanford said that the purpose of those
regulations is to make sure any devlopment that happens
happens according to certain standards.
Schiffer suggested tabling the action until the road ease-
ment problem is worked out with the Planning Office.
Motion
Barnard moved to table the motion until the Planning Office
has a chance to research the road access problem. Jenkins
seconded. All in favor, motion carried.
Motion
Barnard moved that they have a study session
problems for after the next regular meeting.
seconded. All in favor, motion carried.
on the parking
Johnson
Stanford said that another subject the Commission should
discuss would be the housing problem.
Jenkins moved to adjourn.~nd Johnson seconded. All in
favor, meeting adjourned at 5:30 p.m.
~~~ ~ ~~L-
Deputy City C erk
"'."
-4-
,