Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19730830 ..- . RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM5G C.F.HOECKELB.O.llL.CO. Continued Meeting Aspen Planning & Zoning August 30, 1973 Chairman Jim Adams called the meeting to order at 5:15 p.m. with Barbara Lewis, Bryan Johnson, Jack Jenkins, and Geri Vagneur. Also present City/County Planner Herb Bartel and Assistant Planner Donna Baer. Strandbourg Residence Ms. Baer submitted the plans for the Strandbourg residence on West Bleeker. Further explained that this was exempted from Ordinance #19 review, but felt Commission should take a look at the plans. Ms. Baer pointed out that Clayton Meyring, City Building Inspector, had reviewed the plans thoroughly and they had met with his approval. Barbara Lewis made a motion to approve the plans as sub- mitted, seconded by Johnson. All in favor, motion carried. Apex Building - Ordinance #19 Review Ms. Baer pointed out that the Commission had 30 days from August 9th to make a conceptual decision. Ms. Baer explained that the Commission had been concerned with the intensity of the project at the previous presen- tation. L. B. Sherman was present, and explained that he originally had suggested the sub-basement be a health club or a night club, but was now suggesting it be a storage space with a street elevator where large trucks could back in without obstructing alley traffic. Explained that a number of businesses in the core area had expressed a need for this storage space. Chairman Adams pointed out that one thing which he was objecting to was the fact that the project had seven floors. Felt there was too much going on in that small of a space. Did not want a huge traffic generator. Sherman suggested small electric trucks. Further pointed out that Windes, the architect for the project, had worked with the Building Department on the building and had planned it within the City Code. Jenkins stated that he felt the project was too over- whelming. Randy Wedum that the top floor would have one major room, the next floor would have 6 offices, the next would have probably I sandwich restaurant, the next would have 4-6 shops of boutique size, and the last would have 4-6 larger shops. Windes suggested that possibly the City should some type of rent control. Felt this building solution to that problem. consider is a Chairman Adams suggested they scale the project down. Jenkins read a letter submitted by the Historic Preservation Committee objecting to the size, bulk and scale of the project. Reitterated the idea of scaling down the project. Lewis stated that didn't feel the storage area should be in the core area. Sherman pointed out that moving it out would face the same problems that now exist. ___"""_~_"~___,,,,,,___......_..,,_c_....,_....___ '. / FORMSI C.F.HOECKELB.a.&L.Co. t"" .,."'. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves Continued Meeting McEntyre Apts. - Ordinance #19 Review Trueman Property Aspen Planning & Zoning August 30, 1973 Chairman Adams suggested the possiblity of 4 floors rather than 7, or possibly dropping 2 stories off the building. Suggested they design something imaginative that would be more apt to meet the approval of the Commission. Ms. Baer explained that this project would be located at 324 W. Hopkins, next door to the A-Frames. Explained that it was a proposed II-unit studio apartment building on 9,000 square feet, which is 3 lots. Under Ordinance #19 is mixed-residential. Jim Gibbons, representing McEntyre, pointed out that their first thought was to build a restaurant, later decided that would rather build apartments. Gibbpns pointed out that they were qualified for 12 units. Further pointed out that they had applied for a building permit prior to Ordinance #19, but due to a technicality, they were not in time. Gibbons stated that this was to be quality, low-cost housing with off-street parking, and access by the alley only. POinted out that there was no view problem and that the project was directly in line with the Applejack. Stated that the project would clean up the area and eliminate the burned out building that is now present on the site. Jim Breur stated that there would be less than 50% site coverage with 12 parking spaces, 4 of which would be semi-enclosed. Ms. Baer explained that the Planning Office recommendation for this site was 4 units or 2 single-family dwellings for the following reasons: (I) general growth control; (2) II units too dense; (3) that block has no multi-family units. Chairman Adams gave a brief background of the reasons why the Commission is sitting on:that area and the transpor- tation problem. Gibbons stressed the advantage and the extreme need in Aspen for low-cost housing Commission agreed to take a field trip to the Norway Shadows site on Tuesday at 4:40. Bartel recommended that the Commission give the uses for the lst phase of the project, and then the square footage for the lst phase. Then recommended that the Commission set up some procedures for the project. Questioned the Commission's position on starting point for the project. Bartel stated that the second task would be the Agreement of Understanding that would set up procedures for the remaining steps. Schottland gave financial details for the cost of the units. Stated that busimessman could put either 10, 20, or 30% down. POinted out that it is less expensive to buy the units than to rent and they would then have a saleable commodity and a return on their investment. . ,- RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM," C.F,HOECKELB.B.IllL.CO. Continued Meeting Aspen Planning & Zoning August 30, 1973 Schottland pointed out that the Sinclair Gas Station had expressed an interest in moving to the project. Jenkins pointed out that the intensity of the project seemed too high for light industrial uses. Bartel suggested the Commission make a list of those uses which they have questions on, and pointed out that there must be some flexibility in the range of uses for the site. Jenkins stated he didn't object to any of the uses, but felt the intensity and the size are too much. Would like to see less of everything due to the large impact. Chairman Adams expressed approval of the Planning Office recommendations on uses. Bartel stated at this point, only want to work with the lst phase. Further explained what the neighborhood center concept was. Chairman Adams discussed the advantage of neighborhood centers as far as circulation is concerned. Bartel stated that the Planning Office would work on the lst phase concept and format for a Memorandum of Understanding. Felt the soonest the Commission could get together on this again would b~L~Tuesday, September 6. At this point, Chairman Adams welcomed new member Geri Vagneur to the Commission. Commission tentatively scheduled a study-luncheon for Thursday, September 6th at 12:00. Institute Proposal Bartel explained that the Institute had proposed two new buildings on the site: (1) a physics building; and (2) a chalet-type building. Questioned the Commission on what type of constraints they will.have. Bartel suggest that since the two buildings were on the 1971 Master Plan, they not review under Ordinance #19. Further suggested that the Institute update their plans and that the Commission set a time limit on the updating. Pointed out the necessity for some check point. Bartel questioned if the Commission would like to see the specific plans for the buildings. Jenkins stated that the more the Commission saw, the better. Johnson moved to adjourn the meeting at 7:15, seconded by Lewis. All in favor, motion carried. c