HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19740523
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
FORM!I C.F.HDECKEl8.8.aL,!,:O.
Special Meeting
Aspen Planning and Zoning
May 23, 1974
Meeting was called to order by Vice Chairman Spence Schiffer at 5:07 P.M. with
Commission members Bryan Johnson, Jack Jenkins, Janet Landry, and Robert Barnard.
Also present City/County Planner Herb Bartel, Assistant Planners John Stanford
and Yank Mojo and City Attorney Sandra Stuller.
PUBLIC HEARING
Parking
Vice Chairman Schiffer explained that at this public
hearing they were expected to consider some recom-
mended amendments to the zoning code in regards to
parking and recommendations to City Council on
administrative actions regarding parking. He stated
that first, the Planning Office would be presenting
their recommendation, and then the meeting would be
opened up for public comment. He further stated that
all ideas and recommendations from the public would
be considered.
Vice Chairman Schiffer opened the public hearing on
parking.
C. T. Collins and Geri Vagneur arrived.
Assistant Planner Yank Mojo outlined five alternatives
the Planning Office had addressed in trying to solve
the parking problem:
(1) Continue present off-street parking re-
quirements,
(2) Create a parking district,
(3) Increase on-site parking requirements to
meet demand,
(4) Increase in buy-out parking concept,
(5) Eliminate private off-street parking.
The Planning Office recommended Alternative 5 as being
the best, stating that it provides a long term solu-
tion to the parking problem. Alternative 5 does not
ban existing off-street parking, and in fact does not
change current parking construction trends in the
downtown area. More equitable leasing, by use, could
be established. Alternative 5 has minimal potential
environmental impact, and strengthens the pedestrian
atmosphere of the downtown core area. Car oriented
transportation, under Alternative 5, would have the
greatest potential for being changed, and would there-
by maintain the dominance of the downtown area as the
central commercial area.
Vice Chairman Schiffer opened the meeting to public
comment.
Theodore Mularz stated that the Planning Office had
ignored the fact that some on-street parking does
exist, which is provided by the City for parking
generated. Mularz also noted that the biggest busi-
ness in Aspen, the Aspen Ski Corporation, was not
required to provide any parking off street.
Mularz stated that he did not object to the City pro-
viding off-street parking, but he did feel that devel-
opers in the downtown area should be given the option
to provide parking for himself and his employees.
These comments were in addition to a letter submitted
to the Commission.
Anthony Scheer of the Aspen Board of Realtors sub-
mitted a letter to the Commission for its considera-
-1-
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
FORM 10 C.F.HOECKELB.8.8l l. CO.
Special Meeting
Aspen Planning and Zoning
May 23, 1974
Parking, continued
tion. The letter objected to the prohibition of
off-street parking, due to the fact that Aspen is
a tourist town, and that guests should be able to
make use of downtown parking facilities, while
residents use outside parking facilities. New busi-
nesses should be required to have off-street parking.
Curt Baar stated this parking recommendation was
simply a continuation of a policy pursued by the City
to further restrict parking and increase the conges-
tion in the downtown area. He felt that this was
not strengthening the downtown area as the commercial
district, but in fact driving people to use the
shopping centers.
Robert George, President of the Aspen Chamber of
Commerce, submitted a letter of objection to the
Commission. Felt that there were too many in-
consistencies in the proposal, and felt many down-
town businesses would be affected adversely by such
a decision. Stated he was not objecting to the park-
ing proposal per se, but was not necessarily the first
step that should be taken. He stated that the letter
was from the Chamber of Commerce, but that his com-
ments were his own.
Jim Moran objected to Alternative 5 as a solution.
He stated that the other alternatives address them-
selves to meeting the need for parking, while Al-
ternative 5 does not address itself to meeting the
need, but is based on the premise of eliminating the
automobile. If Alternative 5 is based on such a
premise, then it is not a solution, but only an
opening step in some larger plan. Where is the lar-
ger plan?
Fred Smith stated he did not find Alternative 5 a
solution. Alternative 5 seems to say eliminate the
car from Aspen. How can encouraging commercial
construction within the area, but prohibiting parking
decrease the congestion and solve any of the prob-
lems?
Eloise lIgen submitted a letter of objection to the
Commission.
Peter Stone stated that the Prospector Lodge, because
of its age, did not have any off street parking. Many
tourists do drive cars, and although two hour parking
would serve the shops, restaurants, and other esta-
blishments, this would not adequately serve the pur-
poses of the guests in Aspen. The City would be dis-
criminating against him, if it did not allow over-
night parking for guests. He stated that the first
priority that might be considered would be under-
ground parking under Wagner Park. He also submitted
a letter to the Commission.
Bill Dunaway stated that he would like to speak up in
favor of change. He noted that, instead of restricted
parking in the core area stimulating shopping areas
outside this district, the increase of cars in the
downtown area have contributed to their development
in that people wish to avoid the confusion and un-
-2-
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
FOlINII C.F.HOECKELB.B.&l.CO.
Special Meeting
Aspen Planning and Zoning
May 23, 1974
Parking, continued
pleasantness of the downtown area.
Baar observed that a positive approach was needed to
stop the congestion in the downtown area. Taking
away parking is not a positive approach, adding
parking is a positive approach.
Eloise lIgen suggested a different approach in her
letter. She suggested parking the tourist and letting
them use the mass transit system. Allow the lodge
owners to have parking on their properties. Local
residents should have first priority on parking
spaces in town.
Anthony Scheer asked Herb Bartel if the basic phil-
osophy of the Planning Office was to eliminate the
car from Aspen. Bartel replied that the position of
the Planning Office is that they felt they must shift
modes of transportation because Aspen is a resort.
Robin Molny stated that he felt the proposal has
merit, in that Aspen, like any other large, growing
city, does not have enough room for the automobiles.
He stated that he agreed with Jim Moran, and asked
where the plan was? But, however, he felt that maybe
the step should be taken before the plan is adopted.
Discourage the car, and then work on the solution.
Ground space for any other solution was limited.
vice Chairman Schiffer stated that the Commission
had received letters from Robert A. George, President
of the Aspen Chamber of Commerce; Eloise lIgen,
Theodore Mularz, and Ruth Mularz, Peter Stone, Francis
Whitaker, and from Anthony Scheer, President of the
Aspen Board of Realtors. All letters were objecting
to the proposal of prohibiting off street parking
in the downtown area. Curt Baar had also printed a
letter of objection in the Aspen Today.
Vice Chairman Schiffer closed the public hearing.
He then stated that he felt the Commission members
should have an opportunity to read all the material
presented to them before making a decision, and sug-
gested setting a special meeting to make a decision.
Bryan Johnson made a motion that the Planning and
Zoning Commission hold a special meeting Thursday,
June 6th to discuss the parking problem. Jenkins
seconded the motion.
It was suggested that the meeting be held Thursday,
May 30, 1974 in the District Court Room at the Pitkin
County Court House.
Commission members Landry, Vagneur, and Johnson, yes.
Jenkins, Barnard, Collins, and Schiffer, no. Motion
NOT carried.
Barnard made a motion that the special meeting be
held Thursday, May 30, at 5:00 P.M. in the District
Court Room at the pitkin County Courthouse conditioned
on agreement with the County for use of the room.
Landry seconded the motion. All in favor, motion
-3-
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
100 Leaves
fORN\O C.r.HOECKElB.B.aL.Co.
Special Meeting
Aspen Planning and Zoning
May 23, 1974
Parking, continued
carried.
Schiffer stated that the Commission had received a
memorandum from City Council stating that the League
of Women Voters would like to present their Land
Use Proposal to a joint meeting of the City Council
and Planning and Zoning.
Johnson made a motion that a
at June 6, at 5:00 P.M. with
consider the League of Women
Jenkins seconded the motion.
carried.
study session be held
the City Council to
Voter's presentation.
All in favor, motion
Johnson made a motion
Seconded by Collins.
at 6:30 P.M.
that the meetinq be adjourned.
All in favor, meeting adjourned
.~~-&:L -;( &vJ/
Recording Secretary