HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19650309
r
Regular Meeting of Aspen Planning and Zoning Connnission
March 9, 1965
City Council Chambers, Aspen, Colorado
Present were Jack Walls, King Woodward, Richard Lai, Francis Whitaker, Mayor Pabst
and others.
l1eeting lias called to order at 9:10 P.H.
Woodward moved that the subdivision regulations be approved as read and oorrected.
I'lotion was seconded by Lai.
Roll Call Vote
Woodward - Aye
Lai - Aye
Mli taker - Aye
Walls - Aye
McEachern - Absent
Agenda:
1. Election of Officers. Richard Lai nominated Jack Walls as chairman. He was
unanimously elected.
Mr. Woodward nominated Mr. Whitaker as secretary and vice-chairman. He was
elected unanimously.
2. Building Review:
(1) Coachlight Chalet Addition. Commission recommended that parking arrangenent
be reworked for Block 75 lots F, G, H, I. and plan be resubmitted.
(2) Snowflake Apartments. Recommendation to Building Inspector that the plans
are acceptable with the exception for parking requirements and that a
building permit not be issued. Moved by Whitaker, seconded by Woodward.
J1otion carried.
(3) Ulfelder Building: Block 113, Lots E,F,G,H,I. Recommendations to the
Building Inspector. Overall height should be shown, plot plan for parking should
be corrected to provide 10 foot wide spaces. Moved by Woodward and seoonded
by 1iIhitaker that the Building plans be revised in accordance with the above
recommendations to Building Inspector in order to comply with Zoning Ordinance,
and resubmitted for building review.
(4) The Lodge - Block 61, Lots K,L,I1,M,O, P and Q. Recommendation to the
Building Inspector, that applicant clarify the parking arrangement on West
Cooper street, that the distance between buildings is less th an the 10 foot
requirement, and that room use be indicated in all cases. Hoved by h'oodward,
seconded by Whitaker that the Building plans be revised in accordance with above
recommendations to Building Inspector in order to comply with Zoning Ordinance,
and be resubmitted for building review.
(5) Galena street East Canopy - It was moved that Planning and Zoning Commission
recommend to the Council to postpone action until a scale drawing is submitted,
and that the canopy be of permanent construction. Seconded by Woodward.
Motion carried.
Nr. Gerald Brmffi presented his first steps in organizing a Cit)i:zens Committee,
and his preliminary map work.
Meeting adjourned at 11:45 P.M.
Respectfully submitted
Francis \mi taker, Secretary
pn
,
ASPEN PLANNING AND ZONING CONl1ISSION
PUBLIC HEARING
SUB-DIVISION REGULATIONS
March &, 1965
Hearing was called to order by Planning Connnission Chairman Jack Walls.
Hr. Whitaker, Secretary for the Connnission was asked to read the proposed Sub-
division Regulation.
Mr. Whitaker read the regulation in its entirety.
Mrs. Goodnough asked if there were not fairly stiff requirmments for survey markers
on both front and back of lots.
Mr. 1iIhitaker said he felt these requirements necessary and of a nature what they
should never need to be replaced. He felt also that they would probably be less
expensive thana total survey each time measurements were needed.
Mrs. Goodnough asked how they arrived at an Be foot width for streets. She felt
this to be excessive.
Mr. Walls explained that this wasnot just street width but was the entire width of
the right of wa:y, which would include sidewalks etc.
Question was asked, how do secondary streets and minor streets differ.
Mr. Walls explained that anything up to 600 feet would be a secondary street.
anything under 600 feet would only include four or so homes and would be considered
a minor street.
Mr. Anthony asked if any septic tank regulations had been approved.
Mr. Walls explained that only that it must be acceptable by the Colorado Department
of Public Health standard which is set out in that section of the regulation.
Mr. Thurston explained about the Septic Tank Specifications as published by the
U. S. Department of Public Health. He hoped that it would become a departmental
policy to adopt the",if not in fact then by policy.
When asked if there were many places in the city where these subdivision regulations
would apply Mr. vlalls answered that there were actually very few but it is necessary
to have these regulations before the new imporvement district can come into effect.
Mr. Roy asked if subdivisions outside the city to be annexed to the city wonld have
to come up to these standards before being annexed. Mr. Walls expalined that
nothing in the regulations could be retroactive. Mr. Dunaway asked if subdividers
who want to be annexed to the city must comply. Mr. Walls explained that this would
depend on whether improvements had already been started and also that the Coup.ty
is also considering these regulations for adoption, but that they would have to be
discussed with the County Commissioners and The County Planning and Zoning Commission.
Question was asked about tiein-g in with City streets. Mr. Whitaker explained that
this ,;as also covered under streets in the regulations.
When asked if these regulations would extend beyond the City limits Hr. WaIls read
from the Colorado Planning and Zoning statutes that these regulations could be
carried as far as three miles out from the City however he hoped that the County
Planning Commission would also adopt these same regulations with ;the necessary
variations, and that they would be able to work togjlther on all subdivisions.
Rob Roy asked if the Connnission thought the County would cooperate with the City
Planning Commission. Mr. Walls answered yes, he felt that after the discussions
they have had with ;the County Planning Commission th at they will adopt these
regulations with certain variations of course.
Mr. Ken Hoore asked if the annexation of certain subdivisions and lodges would
effect their liquor licenses.
Mr. Walls explained that this was not a problem for the Planning and Zoni!lg Commission
but rather for the County and The City Council.
Mr. Dunaway asked how long it would be before these regulations could be in effect.
""~''^~''.'""'''''_'._'_" ,_,_,_, __""'"".,~ ,a. '_"'"'___'_""~_"";'~""~_""~_~'''''''''_"_''''_'''__
...
...
Page 2
JIIinutes of Public Hearing - SubDivision Regulations, March 9, 1965
Hr. vJalls explained that this was the Official Public Hearing and tliat: a meeting
of the Planning and Zoning Commission would immediately follow this hearing. If
there is no extreme opposition offered he hopes that the Commission will adopt the
regulations in fact. He explained that the regulations would need to be published
the necessary number of times consecutively before becoming lawful and put into
pamphlet form for public information. The will then be processed as a City Ordinance
and become a part of City Ordinances. The commission will have no authority until
this procedure is completed.
Mr. Hoore asked if Condiminiums would come under subdivision regulations.
111'. Walls anSlier. no.
Hr. Dunaway asked if tests of subdivision regulations had ben met by any subllivioon
around town.
Mr. vlalls answered by saying that in certain respects they would conform because
they had minimum setback requirements, water and sewer regulations and 6000 foot
building area regulations as already imposed, However it was unlikely that they
would meet all of the regulations requirements.
Mr. Hoore asked if the City would annex substandard subdivisions. Mr. Walls
explained that he did not know since the Planning Commission has no control over
annexation.
Hr. Dunaway asked if they thought the majority of the annexation would be of
substandard subdivisions.
Mr. Walls answered, Haybe. However it must be considered that the County and City
have different standards of building specifications therefore those in the City and
thoRe outside would have slight variations.
Question was asked how street paving specifications would be arrived at.
Mr. Walls explained that this would be decided decided by the City Engineer.
lihat kind of specification was made for open space.
Mr. Walls read from the regulations concerning this.
Hr. Jerry Brown of ihe Leo Daly Compny inquired about the portion of the regulation
concerning payment for openspace by the City, and whether or not it specified the
cost as to the value unimproved or improved.[t.4AJoJ
Jack read from the Section of the Regulation and found it to be adequate.
Hr. Thurston asked if specific expansion of the seHer district should be mentioned.
He also suggested that the sanitation specification be adopted.
Hr. Walls explained that in as much as they Here using the standards set up by
the present Sanitation District they could always change these specifications if
necessary by an ammendment at a later date.
There being no opposition to nor any more questions concerning this regulation
hearing Has adjourned.
Recorded by
/)
... ifi/!:;:;J