Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19720502 ....'''.... RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves ~OR" 'I C. F. HOECKEl B. B. It l. CD. Regular Meeting Aspen Planning & Zoning May 2, 1972 Meeting was called to order by Chairman Robin Molny at 5:00 p.m. with James Adams, Charles Collins, Victor Goodhard, Anthos Jordan and Charles Vidal. Also present City/County Planner, Herb Bartel and Assistant Planner, Fred Wooden. Minutes Minutes - April 4th - Commission request the list of priorities at the end of the minutes be eliminated from the minutes. Adams moved to approve the minutes of April 4th as corrected and prepared and mailed by the Secretary. Sec- onded by Collins. All in favor, motion carried. James Breasted arrived. April 18th Minutes - Correction Paragraph 4, Page 2, - City/County Planner Herb Bartel, told the Commission the problems of access to this area. Final plat on record shows the use of BLM land for access. COMMISSION FELT THAT THE WEST PORTION OF LOT 3 WOULD BE BUILDABLE IF THE DANGER OF AVAlilANCHE IS SOLVED, PROBLEM WITH THE EAST PORTION OF LOT 3 AS RELATES TO ACCESS. Paragraph 3, Page 2 under J. R. Williams Annexation - RMF ZONING IS A CONDITION BY THE LANDOWNER OF THE ANNEX- ATION. Paragraph 6, Page 3 - COMMISSION AGREED THE AREA ALONG THE RIVER SHOULD BE ZONED P-PARK, WEST OF THE RED MOUNTAIN ROAD. Paragraph 4, Page 1 - DISCUSSED THE EXISTING RIGHT OF WAY, THE PLANNED WIDENING OF GIBSON AVENUE AND THE LAND WEST SIDE OF ROAD HAVING A POSSIBILITY OF BUILDING 6 UNITS, 5 UNITS ON EAST SIDE OF RIGHT OF WAY AND THAT THE RIGHT OF WAY WAS 2% OF THE TOTAL AREA. Paragraph 1, Page 1 - Change Tom Daily to ART DAILY. Change resor to RESER. Goodhard moved to approve the minutes as corrected. Seconded by Jordan. All in favor, motion carried. April 25th - Breasted moved to approve the minutes as prepared and mailed by the secretary. Seconded by Jordan. All in favor, motion carried. West Aspen Sub Filing 113, Lot 3 Annexation West Aspen Subdivision, Filing 113, Lot 3 Annexation - Chairman Molny opened the public hearing on the zoning of the annexation. Planner Herb Bartel stated the lot_meets the requirements of R-15 zoning, map was reviewed. Chairman Molny closed the public hearing. Breasted moved to recommend R-15 zoning to the City .....--;....;"""""-.--....---.-"'--,....,..,." .. '" RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM" C.F.HOECKElB.a.&l,CO. Regular Meeting, Aspen P & Z, 5/2/72 Council. Seconded by Adams. All in favor, motion carried. J. R. Williams Ann-exation J. R. Williams AnneEBtion - Memorandum from the Planner was submitted to the Commission outlining the criteria the Commission should consider on this annexation. Proposed resolution was also submitted by James Breasted. City Manager Leon Wurl was present and discussed with the Commission proposed staged annexations to the City. Chairman Molny stated he felt most of the Commission was for the annexation but feel it should be zoned R-15 rather than the condition of annexation of RMF-PUD zoning; feel the burden on the intersection of Mill and Main will be increased; do not feel the monies that would go towards the Mill and Main intersection shQuld be transferred to the bridge on Mill Street; and also feel there will be a burden on sanitation by the developments in this area. City Manager Wurl stated he did not feel one developer should be held responsible for the bridge when the benefit would be city wide. Developer should bear such burdens as water extension, street improvements etc. The problem of sanitation will exist anyway and feel that it is better to have concentration of people in this area rather than spread out. Mr. Bartel explained this land is presently zoned for 9 units in the county. City Manager Wurl stated the Commission should make their feelings known, as relates to the bridge or major con- struction projects of this type, to the Council at budget time. Discussed who should bear the burden of the construction of the improved bridge. Mr. Adams pointed out that the .j.' Cetl'l ~,de-...... ,CI} entire circulation in this area should be under CQnstrHct- ion, not just Mill Street. Mr. Bruce Kistler pointed out not all untis would be built this summer. Would agree to contribute to a district if such were formed. Further stated access to the development could be put on the other side of the development so that traffic would not go near the junction of the hospital and Red Mountain Road. Breasted moved to recommend annexation to the City Council of this property. Seconded by Goodhard. Commission request the list of criteria be attached to the motion when sent to the City Council. Verbatim (See attached sheet) Roll call vote - Goodhard aye; Breasted aye; Jordan aye; Vidal nay; Collins nay; Adams M nay; olny aye. Motion -2- .'.......... RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves FORM'(, C,F.HOECKHB.B.& l. co. Regular Meeting, Aspen P & Z, 5/2/72 carried. RMF - PUD Condition of Annexation RMF-PUD condition of anneEation - Collins moved that the Commission recommend to the City Council that RMF zoning be denied on the basis that the increased density will increase the already critical traffic problem. Seconded by Adams. Breasted moved to amend the motion that the Commission recommend to City Council that it be zoned R-15 as it is in the County until ach time as traffic congestion problems are solved. Seconded by Jordan. All in favor, motion carried. Main Motion - Roll call vote - Breasted aye; Jordan aye; Vidal aye; Collins aye; Goodhard nay; Adams aye; Molny nay. Motion carried. Woerndle Subdivision Woerndle Subdivision - Surveyor was present and showed plat to the Commission of how the lots are presently subdivided and could be sold at this time. Mr. Wooden pointed out the land is presently zoned R-15 in the County, some lots do not meet the 1500 square foot requirement, open space along the ditch has been provided which would be utilized to meet the 1500 square foot re- quirements on those lots lacking same, still a problem with seepage from the ditch into three lots and it's questionable if those lots are buildable lots. Commission suggest a PUD concept be used. Breasted pointed out the access to Highway 82 is dangerous. Mr. Wooden pointed out the roads are intended to be private roads and would be only 30' rather than the required 60' for public roads. Chairman Molny pointed out this area abuts on Aspen Grove which is R-15 and does not allow for duplexes, therefore feel these lots should be reduced and condition should be that duplexes be excluded. Commission request the Planning Office send a letter to the applicant outlining the following comments of the Commission and deficiences of the subdivision: substandard roads, substandard lots, ditch seepage, access to Highway 82, duplex use excessive, too many lots on the site. Commission recommends applicant pursue a PUD type develop- ment. Breasted moved;:to adjourn at 7:00 p.m. and go into study session, seconded by Vidal. All in favor, meeting adjourned. l-;()Vvl ~ ~ 4~ Lorra ~ne Graves, . ecre ary RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves ~OR"'1 C.F.HOECKHe.B.& l.CO. VERBATIM DISCUSSION - PLANNING & ZONING MINUTES - May 2, 1972 Collins - Personally I don't favor annexation at this time. I feel there are too many problems with traffic and circulation in that area. I think that if we annex and hold the problem of the bridge and intersection and what have you, it becomes a responsibility of the City. I don't think this is fair because most of the traffic and biggest generator is going to be Red Mountain and other areas that are still out in the County. I feel at this point the County has taken the right steps in trying to solve the circulation problem and setting conditions on any further density increases over there. So I feel they are on the right track and all of this is on the north side of the river and I think it is something the County should work out. Goodhard - I was wondering that if we do annex it it would be more or less a conditional zoning throughout the City and County unless there are abligations of the County to protect ourselves. Jordan - My comments are very similar to Chick's, with the ex- ception of the developer agreeing to the problem or adding to its getting worse, that without any plan from them or without any district being formed to solve the problem, I feel that annexation at this time is pre- mature. Vidal - I was just talking to Herb about the possibility of a major annexation from that whole area where you have all the people that are involved that are creating the prob- lem. It would take petitions to make that happen but if you got all those people and all those developments that are going to happen that are creating the problem to come in at one time and try to solve this. Maybe it makes some sense, I don't know. There is a problem and it's quite a conflict, if you let it go back to the County that doesn't solve the problem or you assume the burden ourselves. I personally don't have a conviction on which way is better. I would like to see the problem solved and I am not sure the City is financially capable of solving it once we bring all these in. Molny - I feel this parcel of property should be in the City. If the vote is to annex, then I would push hard on the zoning part of it under PUD to limit what is built this year and some guarantee from the applicant that he would participate and also pressure on the City to solve the problem one way or another. Collins - In answer to what you said, Robin, the time to put on pressure on cooperation is before development starts. This is the time to get the nail down and get it resolved. I feel this is a big problem over there. Somewhere you are going to have to say there is a problem and what's the solution. How much engineering has been done? They '...... RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS 100 Leaves ~OR"" C.~. HOECKEl 8. 8. 1\ L co. Verbatim Discussion - Planning & Zoning Minutes Collins - have made promises (McCullough). Everyone makes promises but there are no guarantees. Breasted - No one has come up with purse in hand to say we are putting up so much. Molny - If we vote on this annexation we should look at it objectively and then vote on the zoning, if you want to turn down the zoning we can. Vida 1 - It's hard to be objective when zoning is a part of the annexation.