Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLanduse Case.ZO.West End Neighborhood.1975-ZO-4 , ~ ^ f"""\ SONNENSCHEIN CARLIN NATH & ROSENTHAL 69 WEST WASHINGTON STREET CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60602 LEO J.CARLIN BE:RNARO NATH THOMAS CARLIN SAMUE:L R. ROSe:NTHAL CI-IARLE:S D. SATINOVER JEROME: S. WEISS FRANK C. BERNARD ABRAHAM FISHMAN EOWIN A. ROTHSCHILD SIDNEY M. PERl.STADT SHERMAN P. CORWIN EARL E. POLLOCK HAROLD O. SHAPIRO JAMES M. GOF"F C. HARKER RHODES. JR. e:OWARD L. LE:MBITZ PAUL.,J. MILLER ROee::.RT N. GRANT JULIUS LEWIS DONALO G. LUBIN WAYNE; R. HANNAH, JR. BERNARD J. NUSSBAUM SHE:LDON r. FINK DONALD M. SCHINDI;;L FREDERIC S. LANE MARC LEVENSTEIN DANIEL R. SWETT RICHARD HARRIS GERALD J. SHERMAN OTIS H. HALLEEN ERROL L. STONE: ALAN H. SILBERMAN RICHARD L. E:PSTEIN TERRY M. SCHLAOE: THOMAS C. HOMBURGER (312} 443-5000 MILDRED J. GIESE: STAN LEY J. AOt::I.MAN ROBERT M. F'AROUHARSON ....RNOLO B. KANTER MICHEL J. F'ELDMAN DUSTIN E. NEUMARK MAROLD C. MIRSHMAN ARNOLO H. ORATT ROGER C. SI$KE DUANE C. OUAINt GARY SENNER LOUIS S. F'REEMAN CARL L. RUSSO KENNE:TM H. HOCH MITCHE:LL L. HOLLINS ERIC M. SCHILLER STEVEN W. SWI BEL GLORIA M. MICHELOTTI MARIAN S. B....DGER JE:F'F'REY I. BtNDE:R TELEX 25-3526 of Counsel RICH'ARO M. GUDEMAN EOWARD SONNENSCHEIN (1881-t93S) HUGO SONNENSCHEIN (IBB3-1956) DENNIS N. NEWMAN MIRIAM B. STEINBE:RG K. BRUCE STICKLER MARK F'. MEHLMAN ERIC A. OESTERLE RALPH I. HUBLEY m PHILIP A. HABER ROBERT C.JO"'N50N F'RUMAN JACOB.SON LAWRENCE S. BAUMAN GLADYS N. BRYEFl LAWFlE:NCE A. MANSON F'RED E.GLICKMAN P....TRICK J. ALLEN JEF'F'REY 5. GREENBEFlGER PETER M. WElL LEON Z. "'ELLER BAFlFlY .... BRAITt,llAN JACK RICHTER March 21, 1975 WRITER'S OIRECT OIAL NUMaER 443-5043 Mr. Spencer Schiffer City of Aspen P.O. Box V Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Mr. Schiffer: We represent Mr. Noel M. Seeburg, Jr., who is the owner of a house at 334 West Hallam Street in Aspen, Colorado. Mr. Seeburg recently forwarded to us a copy of the proposed Zoning Code of the City of Aspen. Of particular interest is Article III, ~ 24-3.7 I entitled Limitations on Leasing: 2. In the R-6, R-15, R-30, R-40 and RR zone district, no residential unit shall be let more than twice within any calendar year, provided nothing herein shall limit the term of any such lease. 3. Within the R/MF, 0, NC, or N/C/I district, no unit within a multi-family structure shall be let for any term less than six (6) months. We trust you are aware of the serious constitutional questions raised by this section of the proposed Zoning Code. Moreover, there appears to be no statutory provision empowering the City to impose restraints on alienation, of this nature. Article 60, ~ 139-60-1 of the Colorado Revised Statutes grants to each city, among other things, the power ..to regulate the "use of buildings, structures and land...." Proposed ~ 24-3.7 I of the Zoning Code does not regulate the use of property, but rather restricts its alienability. ,",.. ~ ~ ~ SONNENSCHEIN CARLIN NATH & ROSENTHAL Mr. Spencer Schiffer .March 21, 1975 Page 2 We urge that you delete this objectionable provision from the proposed Zoning Code of the City of Aspen, so as to avoid what we believe will be a successful challenge to its validity. Very truly yours, SONNENSCHEIN CARLIN NATH & ROSENTHAL J ~~~~\ By JMG:sk / cc: City Attorney Mayor Stacey Standley 1"""\ ~ DR, & MRS, C. MAXWELL-,JOYNER Post Office Box 317 Aspen, Color<ldo 81611 U.S .A. March 21, 1975 Aspen City Council Post Office Box V Aspen, Color<ldo 81611 Re: M<lrch 24th 7:00 p.m. Meeting New Zoning Code Revision 24-3,7. De<lr Sirs: This letter is to advise you th<lt we feel very strongly th<lt limit<ltions on leasing should not be included in the zoning code for the west end. Also, <It this time, we would like to state that we do not approve of the proposed amendments regarding accessory buildings and off street p<lrking. Yours truly, G . ~~O-IQQQ ~~ ~ Dr. & Mrs, C. Maxwell-Joyner 600 W, Prancis 602 W, Prancis 215 N. Second CMJ : 1m ..-.. !!llTHE HEAIlHlf SKI COUNTRY, U.8.A. March 20,1975 Aspen City Council Post Dffice Box V Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: March 24th 7:00 p.m. Meeting New Zoning Code Revision 24-3,7. Dear Sirs: This letter is to advise you that we feel very strongly that limitations on leasing should not be included in the %oning code for the west end. Also, at this time, we would like to state that we do not approve of the proposed amendments regarding accessory buildings and off street parking. Yours tr.u~y, ~ Mrs, ~. V. N. Jones 215 N. Second VEJ: 1m BOH . ASPEN, GOUlRAIJIl 81611 lJ. S.I\. AREA COllE 303 TElEPHONE 925-1302 ~ ~ F. GEORGE ROBINSON 240 GAYL.ORD STREET DENVER, COLORADO 80206 March 17, 1975 The Planning & Zoning Board City of Aspen Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Board Members: It has come to my attention that a Hearing is to be held Monday, March 24, 1975, on a new Zoning Ordinance Number 111. I am particularly interested in Section 24-3.7, Sec. I, entitled "Limitations On Leasing." As I understand it, this would limit an owner of a residence to leasing his house more than twice a year. I built my home at First and Hallam in 1949, and have used it as a vacation home, in both winter and summer, ever since. I have four friends who I rent it to, for a week in the winter, each, and have to these same friends, for many years. I also give it, for a week, to each of two different employees who work in my Company. The rest of the winter, from Thanksgiving until April 15, the house is nearly always occupied by myself or a member of my family. I believe this provision of the new Zoning Ordinance would hurt Aspen, and would hurt property values all through the Westend District, with which I am quite familiar. I cannot see how this restriction would upgrade the quality, or increase the values of the property in this area. If passed, I believe this Section would be attacked through lawsuits, and I suspect that it might be found illegal and unconstitu- tional. I sincerely hope you will choose to reject this specific Section. BY~ J Very truly yours, FGR: drop cc: Honorable Stacey Standley, Mayor 'Jt. .~;",J" "......, "......, FRANCIS J. ROGERS PAUL SAUREL CHARLES S. MCVEIGH. JR. GUY G. RUTHERFURD A. PENNINGTON WHITEHEAD JOHN E. DUETSCH WILLIAM A. PRATT MACDONALD BUDD PAUL L MEADERS LEONARD B. BOEHNER MORRIS 8: M"VEIGH 450 PARK, AVEN U E NEW YORK, N. Y. 10022 .JOHN .J. MATTHEWS COUNSEL LEWIS SPENCER MORRIS 1915-1944 CHARLES S. MCVEIGH 1915-1952 DAVID F. COOKE MARIE FITZSIMMONS PAUL J. 0' NEILL, JR. PETER FRELlNGHUYSEN CABLE ADDRESS '.PARGET" TELEPHONE (212) 593-6200 TELEX 12-7687 CALL BACK-PARGET~NYK March 13, 1975 Mr. Spencer Schiffer, Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission Box V Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Mr. Schiffer: I am writing this letter on behalf of my wife, Louise Saurel, who owns a house at 117 North Monarch Street in Aspen, to protest against the proposed zoning restriction on leasing within the Residential District more often than twice in any calendar year. If this provision were to be adopted, it would make this house completely unusable for most of the year for the purpose for which it was designed, built and used since 1964 when it was built. This would be tantamount to destroying most of the value as it is totally unsuitable for permanent occupancy either in whole or part. The house was originally built by Robert Murri for use by him and his family as a vacation home for short periods and for leasing during the balance of the year for varying periods. My wife purchased the house in 1968 for the same purpose. At Christmas- time our family has occupied the entire house. It is the common ~. 1"".. .1""'., MORRIS & MC;::VEIGH Mr. Spencer Schiffer -2- March 13, 1975 meeting ground for those members of our family who live in the New York and Washington area and those who live on the West Coast. A few years ago, at considerable expense we razed an eyesore of an old out-building and added a wing to the house. This wing was designed and is suitable solely for the use for which the main house was designed and built. The tenants who occupy the house during the ski season are from allover the United States and are of the highest moral character and of impeccable deportment. I am certain that they make substantial purchases from the various merchants in Aspen. The members of the music faculty and the Aspen Institute have at various times been tenants in the summer. In recent years, i , the Institute has occupied the entire hous~ during the three summer i months. It is my firm belief that the ten~nts who occupy the house , , during the ski season would not wish to oC9uPY a condominium and i would presumably have to look elsewhere sU9h as Vail for a house to rent for a short term. i Adoption of the proposed restrict~on would not only result i , in substantial financial loss to property qwners but I am convinced i in substantial loss of revenue to many of 1he leading merchants in Aspen. It would also eliminate the substantial sums paid by the ! property owners to Aspenites for cleaning, maintenance, repairs, etc. on their property. '",,--.. ~. , I ;...,. MORRIS & M<;:VEIGH Mr. Spencer Schiffer -3- March 13, 1975 I I I i , I sincerely hope that this restriction will not be i adopted. I am taking the liberty of writing ia similar letter to Mayor Stacy Standley. Sinn~aMNt/ PS:gg ,,,",", Jalllea.LTuohy John L.Martin LAw OFFICBS TUOHY AND MARTIN JI.. South: laSalle Sfreet ~Svjte 1815 CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60603 March 13, 1975 Telepbone FRanklin 2-8678 Mr. Spencer Scn.iffw. Chaiman Planning and ZOning Commiuion Box V Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Mr. Sch.iffer: We wwe re<:ently advised .by our Rental Agents that Under a aeWcOde Pr(lJiOsed thwe woulclhe limitations on leaSing within R..Res.tdential dbtrict$. As ,Propwty oWnws, we Strongly ob1ect to such Proposed changes and wish same to be made of record. We Would contest the constitutionality of Slilme .if sUch Pl'.oPosed ordinance was, in fact, enacted. Yours very truly, TLT:b ee: Mayor Staoey Standley BOJl;V AsPen, Colorado 81611 /,__:UOHY AND~MAR~TIN ,'.. \ ...., ~...~ '\ / ~es L. 'l\zohy . .' ~ I BOURNE...HOUS'B j89 'SLOANB'STREET LONDON:SW1X,8QT Ot-~34 7388 March 13, 1975 Mr, Spencer Schiffer Cha i rman, P and Z Commi ssi on Box V Aspen Colorado 81611 Dear Mr. Schiffer: As a property owner in Aspen let me say how much I appreciate your commi.ssion's intelligent approach to the many prob 1 ems faci ng the town. I know that at times it must feel like a thankless task. I was surprised, I must say, when I became aware of the particular aspect in your proposed new zoni ng ordi nance whi ch pertains to the number of times, etc., that one wou1 d be ab 1e to rent or lease one's property. I believe in retrospect you will agree with me that such a ruling would smack of being un-constitutional and certainly not in the spirit of free enterprize. Si"fJIL a",,,,,,, cc Mayor Stacey Standley EDWIN THORNE 14 WALL STREET CO 7-0725 ~ 12. 1975 ~.. ._~, .... SpEm.ceI" 8<lb1.t.f_ ~ PlA1I!tnit1g and ZolWls CalillI1u1Qa bV Aspen.. COlora4o 81611 ~. .. 8<lb1.t.f_= Ass. .tax ~ &lid ~ .of s. lIIOdeat hdU8e en Bed ._"'1)" I 'lII&8 lUANA_ to ~ 1r1 the ~ .If.ttJl8e tbat the new .cl~ ~1t1g 4<lde$ ~ 1nclv.ae 1'~ ~ ~\I1'lct.1oa$ on l,,"~ng 1'eSldect.1al ~Y.. It fA" to me that .GBe at the .pee.t u3Elta of As;p$n has "been 1$8 at:thet1on ov.. the J'8lU'$ to fMfH$lS . 1d.sh to baVe a p1e.ee fC11! a 'It'1at_ '9"aC&'tion .~ they can en.tCf~-lXl'8l eD1Wl~llt. of the ~ ~". at the ....t.. ~l1:lut~to the.ecom:mde viaWlt,. of the to'lili1. Also. the IIlatIYtalented peoPle 1Ibo .ve t1'a41t1<ma'}" COlle to Aspen dta'~ the St~ ~ and. ~. ~.so IlIW1lh for. the ~UI'&l ~il~ll\ljl1t of the c",,?A'\1,ty __ 'been at ~ ~1.))1.at~ b;y.the poa81.'OWtl. of :P1lllUe\t and. qu1et facll1Uea to __ m ~ the~ v141ta. 'fa .~~let the t~ of 8VA11,t.Jble l.Bes 1f1.tb1n the ~1al dt8t1'1eta ~8 tome to MJIII6UUt an unte.1ll> ~:l8(l1'>tI'l\1~J.en .1~1J't a oe1'ta1n categGt70f ~. OWl:'1<<PS. and I tIOUJ.d sd.ncel'el1 ~ that the 1IPa1'd ... .. .. 1'eCOnS:U't.e1' tJUs pa.rtieu1ar p:t'OV'i ei t)D. of tbe ~ code. ~ 7001'8. ~- .-::__. ~"7i" --~o-~~"^t,'~~ bc: Mayor Stacey Standley v' ~ ,-... .-., INGO PREMINGER 75 CENTRAL PARK WEST NEW YORK N Y 10023 March 10, 1975 Mr. Spencer Schiffer Box V Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Sir, my wife and I own a house at 401 Pearl Court in Aspen ( corner North 3rd Street). We consider the limitations on leasing within the R-Residential districts as proposed by the new city zoning code unfair and discriminatory. Such restriction denies us our property rights without due process and violates the equal protection provisions of our constitution. Why should a property owner of long standing be subject to restrictions that did not exist. at the time we purchased the property, and which restrictions do not apply equally to all ~operty owners in Aspen? We respectfully request that such restrictions be struck from the proposed zoning code. Sincerely, h/,-.(&~ rngo and Kate Preminger ,-., ~ THE CHIEF OF PROTOCOL DEPARTMENT OF STATE WASHINGTON. D.C. 20520 March 10, 1975 Mr. Spencer Schiffer Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission Box V Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Sir: I read in The Aspen Times of the proposed changes limiting leasing within the R - Residential Districts. I consider these proposals to be an outrageous abridgement of my property rights, and if they are passed, I will do everything in my power to see that they are overturned in the courts. I hope that you will make my views known to the members of the Commission and that they will not pass these limitations. Thank you for your consideration. Very o - Mardi 10, 1975 Mr. S Plarmtllf &ox V Aspei'l, Co lorado 8 I I I' 5e far, Chal nnan onlng C_lsslOn Re: Zon IIlf Chlmses !>ear Mr.. Schiffer: , have owned lIlYhomee.t )31t Fr.nch for a nllllliulr of yearS .tld I am veryalel'l!led at the p~ zoning clump. Iha...e been a .,.rtfclp"nt and supportar ofa~tfvltl.. such as the MilS Ie: Astoclete$, Aspen 'nstltvta, AS~ Rackat Chib . maay others. I lulve loved Aspen, !)lIt I 1u11j'e been able to do so bymalntalnlns lliy hoIm!l and by defraying S(lllljt of the e>cpensas byrentlllf the f.4I1ftlas. t would not consldar keeping lIlY !WlIlSe If the proposed zonln, was Changed. lhellev. a restrIction on tlul r.ntal ofprlvateresldenc.s Is hl-"IYlll1falr,for .1lOI:Ie of the many people In the uVesll End" evaI' would IuIve Aloqh.t houses If they ~1I1cf not IuI..... rented ..~wn.n lll1used. Many Oenverpeopla will *c:lIIl8 Incan.and wHI wlthdt'llW aU 1Il.1.. Sl.llll>>rt for the ~hy end IMfrect COllSflqlllNlcesto Aspen.traclesl*ll>le, cultural actIvities. and other ..tIYltlesw'" sUffer. It SOM anung,.ateful l!l8n- ner to treat many who have contdbuted time andlllOMyto Aspen's clevel~t.. Flnelly, tlul careandr.furbrlshlng of the prIvate homes IuIs been a beauty to Aspen. Do youbeHew thet: by el!Celudlll9.rentlng that the s_ Improvement of. the west end will COllt'l\lUe'l Hew tho.s. tlult heve Improve" theIr homes <lnd yardll abused thalrprMled..s In ~ pen twuty yean? I would say. the Ve.st lndi:t<ls b"'''e/Iltly. Improved ....,..wH I cobtlnve to fll'lPrcwe Jf the preSent ~r."'p and I'JiIrttal poHC'f 's Gmt( mse4. J 110.,. .you ..,.,nestly llOn$.l4ertbe above. end do net restrlet the rental of p~rtl.es'n tM R-6.ft-IS, ....40 and iii/{ dlurlct.. DeW/WI cc:: Hayor.Stacey Stanclley V' "'n. Kay Reid Youn trulv. ~9.~ Del/Ide. Wf"",h.. Pre'ldent Vllhelllt FOGds ~ ,-., DAVID C. WILHELM P. O. Sox 16086 . 5590 HIGH STRI,:E:T DENVER, COLORADO 80216 PHONE:: (:303) 893-1115 March 10, 1975 Mr. Spencer Schiffer, Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission Box V Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Zoning Changes Dear Mr. Schiffer: I have owned my home at 334 Francis for a number of years and I am very alarmed at the proposed zoning change. I have been a participant and supporter of activities such as the Music Associates, Aspen Institute, Aspen Racket Club and many others. I have loved Aspen, but I have been able to do so by maintaining my home and by defraying some of the expenses by renting the facilities. I would not consider keeping my house if the proposed zoning was changed. I believe a restriction on the rental of private residences is highly unfair, for none of the many people in the "West End" ever would have bought houses if they could not have rented them when unused. Many Denver people will become incensed and will withdraw all their support for the community and indirect consequences to Aspen tradespeople, cultural activities, and other activities will suffer. It seems an ungrateful man- ner to treat many who have contributed time and money to Aspen's development. Finally, the care and refurbrishing of the private homes has been a beauty to Aspen. Do you believe that by excluding renting that the same improvement of the west end will continue? Have those that have improved their homes and yards abused their priviledges in the past twenty years? I would say the West End has been greatly improved and will continue to improve if the present ownership and rental policy is continued. I hope you earnestly consider the above, and do not restrict the rental of properties in the R-6, R-15, k~40 and RR districts. Yours truly, DCW/bh ~ . DC>. ~ cc: Mayor Stacey Standley Mrs. Kay Reid David C. Wilhelm, President Wi lhelm Foods r-. ~. MR. & MRS. T. C. TUPPER P. O. BOX 1851 434 WEST HALLAM ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 March 9, 1975 Mr. Spencer Schiffer, Chairman Planning & Zoning Commission Box V Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Mr. Schiffer, The February 20th Aspen Times carries on article on proposed zoning changes in the residential districts, stating that within R-6, R-15, R-30, R-40 and RR districts no dwelling unit may be rented more than twice within a calendar year, while within the R-MF district no unit may be leased for a term less than six months. To prohibit short term renting of houses in residential areas after they have been rented for years would be passing ex post facto legislation and clearly be illegal. Certainly, it would destroy values in those areas where owners, like ourselves, rent in order to maintain and improve their properties year after year. The six month rentals with which we have been fam- iliar have been dis'sstrous. Friends of ours have had their house turned into a shambles and evacuation has been most difficult. The short term rentals are supervised, the houses checked and kept in tip top condition. We come to Aspen frequently and are vitally inter- ested in its welfare. Surely, the desire of its Planning and Zoning Commission should not be the downgrading of Aspen properties. we are Hoping you will withdraw these changes in zoning, --:? V~trnrs, T. ~TUPPtyj~_- ~~ '" Gr<l~",J. ~p~. ~ 2660 S. Warson Rd. St. Louis, Me. 63124 t"',. ,-, March 8, 1975 St.Louis,Mo. Mr.Spencer Schiffer Chairman.Plannin~ and Zonin€ Commission Box V Aspen,Colorado 81611 Dear Mr. SChiffer, It has just come to our attention that the P & Z Commission plans to limit the renting of homes in our area to two times a year or for not less than 6 months at a time. We cannot imagine what benefit for the area the Commission would acquire by this measure. We would assume that we all want the area to remain a quiet residental section. When we bought our house (624 W. Hallam) from Wes Thorpe most of Our neighbors were Thorpes which we liked, ie old-time residents. We hope to be permanent residents Soon but for the moment with~ildren settled in schools it is best that We not move at this time. Until then, shert term rentin~ permits us te keep up the house,and enables us to come out frequently to work on the house and yard throughout the year and keep in tou.h with Aspen and its particular problems. We do not make a profit but the house supports itself and actually we keep it in better shape than if we had it for just our own use I Until last summer when we reserved the house for ourselves we have rented to the Same Musician:for the Music Festival for years. We both speak of it as -our- house. This area is convenient for the Musicians..and we want to encoura€e and help the Music Festival..yet this would be considered .short-term-. We have seen the results of lOn€-term rental. Houses deteriorate rapidly and often it is very difficult to ~et the tenants out. We are as interested as anyone 1n keepi~ the residential quality of this part of town. That is Why.. we chose it. We do not see how the proposed chan~e wQuld hejl:ip. Please reconsider Thank you. copy to: Mayor Stacey Standley Sin~el~. ' ~~ C~ 0~ Mrs.James Boyd Ware ~ ,~. As,en, Colorado January 7, 1975 Aspen City Council A.spen, Colorado Dear Members of the Aspen City Council: This letter is intended to strongly object to 'the down-zoning of. our 'lots. We are.the owners of tl)reeunimproved lots and a residence in Block 34 on the east side of the City of Aspen. Our residence is situated upon a 4O-foot by.lOO foot lot specifically described as Lot L and the west 10 feet of Lot M in Block 34. The address of our residence is 1006 East Cooper. Ourthreeunl,lIlproved lots are directly across the alley behind us andt~-t;911 Hyman Street. Theyare described as, Lots B, C andD in Bloek' 34. .., It is' our understanding that all of the above property is DOW zoned as accommodation and recreation (ARl). It is our further understanding that your planning department is now propsing to rezqnetheunimproved lots to residential (R6) and to rezone our residen(le~ro~erty to residential-multi-fllmily (RMFk We want you to kl!olf how unjust, unfair, discriminatory and ar91trary these chal'l,gesare, especially when considered in the light of past cballges in z?riing to our immediate neighborhood. We, feel that the original cban~eEl,to .ARl have permanently and substantiallyehaIlged. the 9~llcter of our neighborhood to our detriment an~t()..the detriment of others who have lived in this neighborl1oOd forY/3ars. Our taxes have gone up considerably as a result of the original zoning to ARl. ~e ut!cier~1#rdthat y-ou feel economkconsi~era.tiOlls'are not material, tl1ei~$q~ite, matedal. tons. The prop~ed~oni~,plan says in etf$ct that the property of long~imeresidents who'have devoted their full life to the City of Aspelb.:~etii!1\~~~~;,l~t. We'donot think it is fair to be down-zoned mor,e than the surround- ing,ne;l.ghj).orhood. As citizens ,of the iJni ted Sta.:tes ,and tax-payers of' PHkinCounty and the City Of Aspen, we demand equal rights. Very truly yours, _ -n;~"m ~~ ~qn~ Kertneth Maurin -<< f Molly Maurin ;~ ~~--4 k~~ ~ ~~~ /.2Aj rw:d./~ ~ 4L # /k /U~ Ci7A--7- 7~ ~ ~ d~(j-'~ ~r 4~~.. . ~ HA L.1..1I11' 8 IlE' ''''',6 SKI ""GI APT$. THREE BL()CK.$ FROM OOWN,()WN ASPEN ,." TlJO BLOCKS FROM #.L CHA/ R/..I FT AI ALL AREA .$I<.[ BUSE'S STOP FORTY FEET FROM I.ODOE. .e~e.ie~ 11, 1'74 As)ea City C....11 l....., Cel.rad. >>ear Oe"811 M....r: As e ..ar ..1ci..r .t tie ftW.st Aspe. Mt..ft t.yele). aeat. I .treaCly apprey. et haY1J1.C the least 1.,a.t, ...l.c1eally. iy kay1J1.C tie iu1ld1aca ....t~.t.d d... .. tie tlat Cr.DId . JI..t C.1ac up ti. sid. .t ti. ...ita1J1.. ~e serei1ty .r tie y1.w. et tie aat1ye ......r CD"" cr.1'11ltC r1cit den te tile ...alley tleer. 18 really "wiat ~.peJl. is all ai..tft. C.rd1elly $ 4-.~~ FOR RESERVATIONS: PHONE (303) 9~S-22. fO I.JRITE .BOX 3038 ASPEN, OOt..O. 81611 r-, I~; PHONE (303) 222-3888 ALPINE LAND COMPANY, INC. 555 SEVENTEENTH STREET DENVER, COLORADO 80202 August 23, 1974 The Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission City. of Aspen Aspen, Colorado 81611 Dear Sir: This letter is intended to protest the proposed zoning or- dinance in the City. of Aspen and its amendments to Chapter 24 of the Aspen Municipal Code. I speak as representative of all the Cottonwoods Condominiums located at 124 West Hyman Street, Aspen, .Colorado. Your propos.ed map shows the north side of Hyman Street in the 100 block as proposed lOdge zoning. We feel that the zoning should be R/MF. The entire half block is covered wi.th two con- dominiums namely the Cottonwoods and the Townhouse East. As R/MF it would be conforming. use though probably. non-conforming structures. This would at least minimize the non-conformance of the condominium on that half block. I can see no reason for the potential penalty. to the owners of the condominiums by making the use non-conforming. Accordingly, you are respect- fully reques.ted to change the designation in the proposed zoning code from "Lodge" to "R/MF". Your acquiescence to this request will be greatly appreci- ated. Copy to Mr. Larry. Dempsey Villa International Corp. Aspen, Colorado Very truly yours, -;? '/./ /7' ! 821/'/7'I?c;f/. ~ /i. Edwin W. Baker, Jr. ; ;.. .~ .~ '-'. .... ~ ghe cAgpell cAgellC~ 9I1gU/((lllce P.O. BOX 1360 . ASPEN, COLORADO. PHONE 303/925-7285 August 20, 1974 Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission Aspen, Colorado Re: Proposed Rezoning Lots Q, R, & S Block 92, Lots 10, 11, 12 Block 19 Gentlemen: The subject rezoning proposes a change in the d~signation of the indicated property to office/multi family. I hereby request that you reconsider this change for the following ~easons: I The bUilding proposed for this site will actually have less impact and is of a lower density occupancy than the proposed rezoning. R.B.H. Joint Venture, has proposed and planned a pro- fessional office bUilding of low traffic use for a limited number of hours per day. The addition of multi-family occupancy will create additional and increased building occupants on a 24 hour basis. We do not believe this is the intent of the rezoning. II The designation of family Occupancy in a high traffic cOmmercial area .is not in the best interests of the family occupants. I believe that the location on the State highway and the Main Street traffic flow is detrimental to the health and safety of families who may live in this building as residents. III The increased Occupancy from multi-family use will create additional traffic and parking prob- lems that will not be a factor if the use remains as presently proposed for professional offices. .1-: . , , ~. - Aspen Planning and Zoning Commission 2 August 20, 1974 IV This site is on the extreme northeast corner and within the historic boundary for the central area. All other sites within this boundary are desig- nated as CC, a Change to mUlti-family for this one site does not appear to be in conformity with the rest of the area. V All eXisting plans have been approved and accepted by the Historic COmmitte, as well as all other boards and'committes, and are designated for the low density Use as outlined above. Based on the above, please consider this letter as my formal request to redesignate the above site to CC or to an office only designation which will allow the use as presently proposed and approved. Yours very truly, CDB!vlp cc: City Planning Department City Council . TEL. 925.7267 (AREA CODE 303) ,-., .- SITE OF PROPOSED RESTAURANT 8< NIGHT CLUB HANS OF ASPEN REALTY HANS R. GRAMIGER. LICENSED 8ROKER BOX 67 ASPEN. COLORADO. U.S.A. 81611 Selling & Buying Agent for, Homes BuiidlngS;!"s Businesses Motels Ranches Speculative l~nd Values LOdns Property Development Consultant App'<lisals Property MJt1agement Tr~de Intermediary Building Contracting Feasibility Studies Cormspondents InAIIPrinc;pal U. S. Cities, Resorts andin Foreign Countries Espanal Deutsch Fran~ais August 20, 1974. to the: Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission Mr. Spencer Schiffer, Chairman c/o City Council Chambers Aspen, Colo. Re: Proposed Rezoning - Amendments to Chapter 24 Aspen Municipal Code. Gentlemen : The proposed Rezoning Ordinance with Map as presented on the Special Public Hearing of August 8, 1974 lacks in imagination and foresight and will be a detriment to the orderly growth of Aspen. - It does not provide and incen- tive for obsolete tourist-accomodation facilities to upgrade, phase-out and rebuild which would be necessary if Aspen's image as a quality resort should be preserved. Nowhere in the proposed rezoning can I find any language or provision which would lessen Aspen's heavy dependence on tourism. The Rezoning Ordinance and the "Summary of Rationale & Support Materials" clearly indicated to me that the Planning Department has very fixed ideas what is good for the City and then dreamed up language to support its planning philosophy, A case in point is that the Planning Department advocates that only uses which are tourist oriented should be con- centrated in the downtown area and that the immediate downtown area should be surrounded with tourist-accomo- dation facilities. At the same time it wants to eliminate "PrOfessional-Office Buildings'or comlbination- "Professio nal-OfficejApartment" Buildings from Main Street, Hopkings Avenue and similar locations. .1, . HANS R. GRAMIGER BOX 67 ASPEN. COLO.. U.S.A. r-. r-. - page two - TEL. 925.7267 (AREA CODE 303) to: Aspen P. & Z. 08-20-74 I find that the proposed Zoning Map lists as many as five (5) different uses within one given Block and I am very enthusiastic about this because I have for years maintained that various uses in a given geo- graphic location may very well be compatible with each other. (The old-fashioned zoning idea that all within a given area must be zoned alike seems to leave us, hopefully for good) . I find no quarrel with the general idea to further reduce density requirements and I am not complaining that the proposed rezoning will affect land values negatively. As a matter of fact I would even go as fa~ as to say that real estate values may increase in many specific instances because of the proposed rezoning. My o~jections to the proposed rezoning are at least as well documented and reasoned-out as the Planning Department's official philosophy. It should be a sound planning policy to allow professional office building? and/or combination of office-buildings with multi-family dwellings whereever Multi-Family dwellings would be allowed. Employee-Housing on premises in the L "Lodge" District is very discriminatory. Would not a Lodge-Owner give preference in hiring employees to job-seekers who need housing. After all the law told him to provide employee housing on the premises and he therefore may as well use such housing at a saving in salary to the employee. Has anybody come up yet with a definition or criteria for "employeebhousing" within a Ski-Lodge? XShould it be with kitchens or without it? Should it be of dormitory-type or of Apartment-type?) How about married employees; how about employees with children and/or pets??? The proposed rezoning designates very. small parcels "T," (Lodges) - would it not be better to zone such small parcels Multi-Family so that small apartment houses (Triplexes to Eight-ple2es) can be built there which can be used for permanent housing of working residents within walking distance to their jobs in nearby Ski-Lodges and Hotels. Page 2, Art. II 24-2.1 (B) Non-Cumulative Uses - Determination by the Zoning Commission. - This is too vague, too arbitary, too much power and/or responsibility given to the Zoning Commission/ too much uncertainties, too much burden on devel- opers and invites litigation. .1. . r". "'"' HANS R. GRAMIGER BOX 67 ASPEN, COLO.. U.S.A. TEL. 925-7267 (AREA CODE 303) to: Aspen P. & Z. - page three - OB-20-74 Page 5, 24-2.7 "Mandatory Economic Studies": such a provision is a typical "passing the buck" clause by which a developer has to incurr additional expenses without assurance that his project will be approved, if its legal then it still is grossly unfair. Page 7: item J. "Lodge" and item M. "Motel or Hotel" does not allow for any type of kitchens within such a complex. Who says that a guest-unit can not have some kind of efficiency or pullman-type kitchen or a wet-bar or. a breakfast counter. - What is all this big-noise of "upgrading" Aspen's Tourist Accomodations and then planning and zoning against the trend to give patrons more and more for their money. wpy should a LOdge or Hotel or Motel not become cOmpetitive and be able to offer versatility in accomodations??? Pages 17, IB"cl!F& 20: 24-4.6 "Number of off-street Parking Spaces required": Single and Two-Family Dwellings would require one space per dwelling unit whereas Multi-Family-Dwellings with three bedrooms would require 2 spaces. - Why differentiate? Who real~y creates parking problems for the street maintenance and the utility departments and also for trash removal company? It is the permanent resident whether he lives in an apartment or in a sing~e or a two-family dwelling. The permanent resident has two to three cars per family (his, hers and the jeep) plus a boat on a trailer and perhaps a camper and a ski-do. Parking Requirements are still kept at the old inadequate level, look what the proposed off-street requirements are for a grocery~store or a Movie-Theater or a Bowling Alley. On the other hand off-street parking requirements for Ski-Lodges and/or HotelsjMotels now are proposed to become stricter again, namely One Space per Limited Dwelling Unit. This should be carefully investigated and analyzed, because my research clearly proofs that this is a matter of size. The heaviest use of Ski Lodges/Motel/Hotel combinations is still in the winter season but the Ski-Economy has changed quite a bit in the last few years. Condominiums and Condo- minium-Hotels are now appealing more to families and smaller groups of friends whereas the larger Ski Lodges and Hotels now are literaly taken over by Ski-Clubs and other types of organized groups who come by charter plane and charter bus~ I know of many large Ski-Lodges which are at a given time completely full (including closets and laundry rooms:::) but have at the same given time a zero-demand on off-street parking, whereas a medium or small LOdge or Motel with only a 75% occupancy may have already exhausted its off-street parking space. - I repeat it is a matter of size of a given tourist accomodation facility on what the off-street parking ./, , ,.-, - HANS R. GRAMIGER BOX 67 ASPEN, COLO.. U.S.A. - page four - TEL. 925.7267 (AREA CODE 303) to: Aspen P. & Z. 08-20-74 requirements should be. I would recommend a formula depending on number of units. Wherever R/MF is allowed there should alos be Professional Office~Buildings allowed; these two uses are very compatible; there will be better design and mmre versatility in such a way. Why dictate that professional-Office buildings shall only use street-flo0r space and must have Multi-Family units on the additional floors?? Perhaps an imaginative Office/MF building would be where the division between the uses not be a horizontal one. A vertical division between the uses right-angle to the front-~ot line or perhaps paralell to the front-lot line may become more feasible on a certain building site. Why be so rigid? Why not provide some ground floor residential units for elderly people and why not allow a real quiet profession (like perhaps architects) the privilege to follow their occupations away from street- level noise and other distractions?? - How about special sites such as corner lots where a vertical di- vision between uses may be just the right thing to do? The Aspen Planning Department has no knowledge of economic factors and the law of supply and demand when it zones against restaurants and office buildings on Main Street. Ddes the Planning Department seriously advocate that if such uses would be allowed on Main Street that the entire length of Main Street would become either a Restaurant Rowand/or an Office Corridor???? I think that the contrary would become true, namely that a beautiful blend of a few offices with apartments would enhance Main Street and become "happy interruptions" between some of the existing Lodges and some of the Victorian Houses that will be preserved. E~ch District Designation should list the entire criteria instead of referring to other Districts and/or other pages. An Attorney, Real Estate Broker, Contractor, Lender, Appraiser, etc. etc. who has to work with a project within a given District would certainly prefer to read all within one District Title instead of referring forth and back. I believe that anybody who has to work with the Code (inClUding the Building Inspector) would gladly pay the extra charge caused by the additional printing costs. Page lOa) (Area and Bulk Requirements): for R/MF should be so calculated as to fully divisible into the 6000 sq.ft. minium lot area. This should be obvious. ,I. . ~\ .~ HANS R. GRAMIGER BOX 67 ASPEN, COLO., U.S.A. - page five - TEL. 925.7267 (AREA CODE 303) to: Aspen P & Z. 08-20-74 In closing I would like to state that you members of the Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission have dedicated much of your time and efforts to the rezoning problem since Ordinance # 19 was first introduced last year. The problem, the way I see it is that the Planning Department and the City Attorney's office have not enough Public Relations with what is going on in town and that you members take too much for granted that these two offices (since they are well trained and experts in their fields) always know what they are doing. I would like to see things turned around again whereby you members who have more contact with the community give guide-lines to the Planning Department and that the Planning Department then puts your ideas in proposals and drafts that more truly represents your own ideas and with which the majority of taxpayers can live with. Very sincerely, HRG: se P.S. I may record this entire letter at the Pitkin County Court House. TEL. 925-7267 (AREA CODE 303) .~ ~ SITE OF PROPOSED RESTAURANT 8: NIGHT CLUB "ON THE ROCKS" HANS OF ASPEN REALTY HANS R. GRAMIGER. LICENSED BROKER BOX 67 ASPEN. COLORADO. U.S.A. 81611 Sell;l1g& Buying Agent for: Homes Building Sites Businesses Motels Ranches SpeculMive land Values Loans Property Devolopment Consultant Appraisals Property MJnagement Trade Intermediary Building Contracting Feasibility Studies Correspondents InAllPrincipal U. S. Cities, Resolts andi" Foreign Countries Espanal Deutsch Fran<;dis August 20, 1974. TO THE: Aspen Planning & Zoning Commission c/o Aspen City Council Chambers Aspen, Colo. Attention: Mr. Spencer Schiffer, Chairman, Gentlemen : Re: Proposed Rezoning as per Special Public Hearing of August 8, 1974 (continued to August 15, 1974 at which time and exten- sion of time was granted for written objections to August 20, 1974, 05:00 P,M, I herewith formally object to the proposed rezoning ordinance and map as it would rezone lots A, B & C, Block 19, City & Townsite of Aspen from the present A/R-l (Accomodations/ Recreatiozi District which lists under permitted uses "pro- fessional offices" to a R/MF (Residential/Multi-Family) District which does not permit professional-office buildings or combinations of professional-offices with apartments, My property is located on the South-East Corner of the intersection of West Main Street and South Seventh Street which happens to be the routing of Colorado State Higliway # 82. This corner is to-day without question the noisyest part of the entire State Highway going through Aspen and to designate it to strictly residential use is not logical at all. I also object to the proposed Section 24-4,4 "Main-Street- Off-Street-Parking" - Access from alley only, Good archi- tectural and traffic-engineering may well incorporate access to off-street parking from South Seventh Street and/or alley with exit to Main Street or vice versa, t .".'" .v~ JOSIAH G.HOLLAND STEPHENH.HA!n JOHN l.J.HART WILLIAM D.EM8REE,JR, JAMES l.WHIH: PATRICK M,WESTF"ELDT CLAUDE M. MAER,JR. ROBERT P. DAVISON JONN ,lEMING KELLY F"RANK H.MORISON WilliAM C.MeCLEAFIN JAY W.TRACEY,JR. JOHN ALLEN MOORE BEN E,CHIOlAW JAMES E.H€GARTY F"I€LD C, B€NTON DAVID BU'rLER J.MICHA€L F"ARLEY WARR€N L.TOMlINSON SRUCET.BUELl DON D. E.:TTER JAME.:S T. MORAN ~ ~ HOLLAND & HART ATTORN EYS AT LAW HARRY L, HOBSON KE.:NNETHD.HUBBARD ROBERT L.VER SCHURE GORDON G.GR€INER ROBERT H. OURHAM,JR WilliAM €.MURANE l,WllLIAM SCHMIDT,JR. JAMESP.LINDSAY EDWIN S.KAHN SAMUEL P. GUYTON JOHN S.CASTEllANO DENNIS M.JACKSDN R08€RT €. BENSON DONAlO O.KINONEN RICHARD '1, KOON CHARLES T. BRANDT ROBERT T.CONNERY HARADON BE:ATTY ARTHURC.DAILY JEFFREY C, POND JOHN UNDEM CARLSON 500 EQUITABl..E: eUIl..DING 730 SEVENTEENTH STFOIEET OENVEFOI;COl..ORADO 80202 RANDYl.PARCEL MARKR.lEVY DAVID G. PALMER R. BROOKE JACKSON JUDITH BONNIE: K02LOFF PAUL T. RUTTUM MICHAEL D. MARTIN BRITTON WHITE.:, JR. BRUCE W,.SATTLE.:R WilEY E. MAYNE,JR, RAUL N. RODRIGUE2 RICHARD T. CASSON JACK L.SMITH GREGORY A. E:URICH JOHN D. COOMBE CHRISTOPHER N. SOMMER EUGENE F, McGUIRE EDWARD M. GilES llNDELL L.GUMPER ALAN E.BOlES,JR SOLOMON N. BARON GeRALD W, GRANDEr THOMAS A. FAULKNER STePHEN L.PEPPER ROBERTJ. MOIR THERESA W. DORSEY TEl..EPHONE AREA CODE 303 292-9200 CABl..E ADDRESS HOl..HART, OENVER MOUNTAIN PLAZA BUILDING P. Q. BOX 1128, ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 TELEPHONE 925-3476 AREA CODE 303 August 20, 1974 City Planning Commission City of Aspen P.O. Box V Aspen, Colorado 81611 Re: Rezoning Proposal Ladies and Gentlemen: In connection with the rezoning and zoning code amendments initiated by the City Council, I have pre- viously made some general comments and objections at your public hearings. In this letter I would like to voice some additional comments and objections with re- gard to the pending proposal as it specifically affects the properties of two of our clients. are: The landowners and their respective properties Curtis C. and Mary Elizabeth Chase Lots D, E, F, G, H & I, Block 91 .Zone District: Presently C-l; Proposed, Lodge for Lots D and E, Commercial/Lodge for Lots F, G, H and I. . G. E. Buchanan and The Colorado National Bank, Trustee The old Riverside Trailer Court property lying southeasterly of the south end of Spring Street down to the Roaring Fork River, consisting of approximately 95,000 square feet. . Zone District: Presently C-2; Proposed, R-6 P.U.D. General Observations Both of the subject properties are within the existing commercial zones. A glance at the original r-. HOLLAND &HART - , City Planning Commission August 20, 1974 Page Two zoning map will reveal that its underlying plan was to concentrate commercial and retail uses in the core area, to phase outward to less intensive but similar uses, including accommodations, in the C-l Oistrict and finally to add limited industrial uses in the C-2 District south of Main Street. The validity of that plan has in the main been proven by the actual development which has taken place. The proposed relocation of the Commercial Core District one block to the west tends to place the Chase property more to the center of the commercial zone than pre- viously. This indicates that a preservation of some commercial uses is warranted on all 6 lots rather than, as proposed, only on 4 of them. The current proposal would isolate a minimum bUilding site (2 lots or 6,000 square feet) in the middle of the block restricted solely to use as a lodge. In the former C-2 District the Schottland tract re- tains Neighborhood Commercial and Service Commercial Industrial zoning; the City land (Rio Grande) retains all of the options and uses available to Public lands, while the Buchanan tract alone becomes zoned for resi- dential uses. Heretofore, in that area the boUndary between the commercial zone and the residential zone was the Roaring Fork River. We question the creation of a limited R-6 enclave on the south side of the river especially when other lands similarly situated and zoned retain a variety of uses. The original plan seems to us more valid than the current proposal in planning for the present and future needs of the City. Chase Property - Specific Comments On behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Chase, we object to the zoning of Lots D and E as LOdge. These two lots should be in the same zone district as the remaining 4 lots, namely Commercial/Lodge. I have previously indicated to you that our best information on lodge economics is that at least 100 units are required for an economically feasible operation. The two lots in question contain 6,000 square feet upon which a single family residence has been built. If you will look at the 1973 Land Use Plan you will observe that Rubey Park directly across the street is planned for a transportation center and that the proposed transit system circles the Chase pro- perty. Obviously the days are numbered for the two lots in question to remain desirable for single family resi- dence purposes. Applying then the proposed floor area ratios the result is that a lodge containing 4,500 square ^ , HOLLAND &HART ,.-,., City Planning Commission August 20, 1974 Page Three feet is the maximum permissible structure. Of this floor area only 3,000 square feet could be devoted to guest rooms and lobby facilities; the remaining 1,500 square feet could be used only for employee housing. We have heard that Aspen needs first class lodge facilities and, in that context, believe that 500 square feet (including halls and stairs but no other amenities) is the minimum floor area required for a semi-deluxe lodge room with private bath. An equal amount of space would have to be devoted to lobby. This means that only 5 lodge rooms could be constructed on these two lots. Add the on-site parking requirements of one space per unit and we are convinced that a two-lot lodge is economically unfeasible. We further believe that the transportation activities planned for this area make it unsuitable for street floor lodge accommodations and dictate that the street floor should instead be devoted to COmmercial and retail ac- tivities. We request that you recommend the proposed zoning map be revised to zone these 2 lots in conformity with the other 4, namely Commercial/Lodge. Buchanan Property As previoul'1ly stated we believe that the eXisting C-2 zoning has validity from a planning standpoint which the proposed R-6 zoning lacks. This is fairly apparent from the fact that a wide variety of commer- cial and public uses are proposed to be retained in the remainder of the C-2 district. Apart from an apparently overwhelming desire to cut densities, is it really sound planning to drop an R-6 district into an area surrounded by cOmmercial uses where access to and from the proposed residential enclave is through the cOmmercial zones. Although it may be debated which uses, commercial or residential, generate more traffic, it is at least clear that safety requirements will be better served if residential districts are further re- moved from the commercial area. We do not believe that the Buchanan property is suited at all for residential purposes. We request that you recommend the proposed zoning map be revised to zone this tract for appropriate service commercial and/or light industrial uses. JTM: mm truly, , ,. , ~ ~. RUSSELL SCOTT, JR., M.D. P.o. BOX 4257 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 PRACTICE LIMITED TO UROLOGY lWID-DELIVER August 20, 1974 (A/C 303) 925.2018 Mr. Spencer SChiffer, Chairman Planning and Zoning Commission City of Aspen Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Mr. Schiffer; I own nine lots on the north side of Hopkins between Third and Fourth Avenue and four lots on the south side of Hopkins between Third and Fourth Avenue. I am opposed to the proposed rezoning of these lots to what is basically a residential house for each two lots for the following reasons: l. The area was previously zoned for lodges and I purchased the lots and paid lodge prices for them and not residential lot prices. 2. The above-mentioned property has on one side the Boomerang Lodge; on another side it has~the Swiss Chalet; Within 75 yards of my property there are two additional lodges, thus not making the area ideal for residential construction. 3. To change zoning in this manner constitutes "spot zoning" and is unfair to a landowner who has paid lodge land prices in an area zoned for lodges and surrounded by lodges, It is Illy hope that the above facts can be taken into consideration in developing a zoning program for Aspen which entails a much more long_term approach. Si~b~ Russell Scott, Jr., M.D. -- ,-, Aspen, Planning & Zoning Commission Aspen, Colorado Box 2102 aspen, COlo. 81611 tugust 20, 1974 I strongly urge that the Oklahou~ Flats area be down-zoned to straight single family dwellings. By "area" ,-r-refer to a 11 the land between the holy Cross buildings and Neal Street and from the Roaring Fork to Gibson Street. Any further duplexes, triplexes Or PUD's will be disastrous to those of us living within the above mentionedboundries. The original densities given xx by the developers never are a true picture, in that whoever rents the apartments always brings in more people to help pay the high rental cOsts. These extra sub-renters invariably own cars. The two duPlexes now in Oklahoma Flats sometimes have as many as twenty cars parked arOund them causing an impossible traffic situation besides being an eye-sore. The PUD units being planned witl bring te!rible traffic conditions to Gibson Street at the entrance to Smuggler Trailer Court and the single family dwellings on Gibson will be adversely affected b.y it. The b~oader tax base for the cow~unity brought by condos and PUD's has long since proven to be a myth, as the expense and headaches they cause to all concerned far exceed the;lt extra taxes. tnother myth is low cOst housing for working people, as the Silver King disaster has proven to be. Oklahoma Flats is the last country-like, unspoiled area in the city limits of .ASpen. -'.;e do not want increased traffic (pede$trian or auto). Lets save this one last area frcmurban blif:ht. \ ~ncerely, . ~c;t~~ . Drummond Mansfield jJ ~<V<-r 55(~(9;~#4. / / -. c~ . , < c" V .'1 ~ dO;J9p!J ~'. ~~/h ~ ~ t1.~-hcL,- ~r4 f f!)~TJZ,r -h l?- 30 \ " .-.. f""". . . f~ ~~~ ~ ~.tS. C ~ ~ .hv ~ c..,&yi:z:tS r ~~~. ~ .a~er: ~ ~ ~~ % ~~ "77A-. ~ ~ ....L~""()~-". ') ~ Iu1P ~ f/ ~~7 ~~v , ~ ., ~ - ~;.-u. ~, / ...... ... <> ../ er/ ~-,..J ~ ~ /~.::.~..... ~ ~/"" / cv J::J.d~_, 4:,-' ~ _~ ~ a-J k.. ~ ~.1 ..~ ..c/J.. ~./ ~. ~~ ~r'~ ~ 7' A. ~. ~.P'... if ~ ~- ~. ~ ~ ~ /;20'7..1 . '. 1"""\ 1"""\ ,. :i)uJ1Z.. tJ4.. OWN ciJ6 1c:I,es IN 0/(/4/'0,..,11( f/lfl-s. 7Ae ZCI'U/J1N1 /1-1 f>Jll.es;e~i /N +1", QI'L(2,Q /s sf/II -1-00 deNse. mdff,.e.. d(JuJ,v - 'Zf!I,vNI'1 Ia~s <"'I"l.. 5"flf1(J!e f . 71Je. ~/l9r.s Q,,"~ /5 -the o~ !.t I/Ns~/~d sec.fu'N Ie +~ IN AS/1f'U1J. -Ie; -Il.il'LnJ -I I'l/s qtee~ INr(/) evlrq-l ~4 S' """'/""" .. '" -h + J. ... JOeS ~ '" (' 11 "I"~ .v ~d/ ,,veleecl .he. sqe:/. SiltS' J If,,::/ .,It /I~s t- . - T+ ~/'e Ii/;.;t? C'd,vh,.)(,u! s P1/$ i.fsed Se"etl. ot.( ~''''1 liS ~Cit 1t4ve. /tJ(/) 6-fl,ellf.. c. h6/C.e. -fl.eN RUIIV +J.c. t:/,v!l "wel.ecJe/tfJl'cd q/2.C-tf +-WN 11.1,,$.' t>>c. I()"c.d -1-1,,5 f'/<:Ic.-c. ./'-A... /h I .beaf"f.'r IN ~/ .be/NY -Sf..l"-/'l-Ouwe/eq1 ~ It(,(Neltete.t:1ff of c "",.s "."'./ I-;I.I;",,/>, Mil dU"- ~_d /'.;z. NO -I oS ILl / ;""./? Qwd,e ,,/,.J I "'f 411I C. ,.,., tU2. <- ('Ioe<- .be.. +. 6... ",.,,,no "..,./.../ ~ /1/", J",..k J."'/~,,vs f'~",......I ~/o.J,; fJk-s .1..,)",-...-.. ;..../M<... rI /$ T Mtc.. 61& 0: ~ ~., ./..... .~~~ 1// . fAeMJ~ IIU .&C. ~.ctel 7~4.- g\l ~.A111 ~ 17f +0. -:he.... & 11.// -10 +~ -C- 01-#' """- ~?2~~" ....~~~~ August 19, 1974 Aspen City Council, Box V, Aspen, Colorado. Ladies and Gentlemen, I wish to express my opposition to the latest proposal for another "parking survey", for underground parking under Aspen's streets. Besides the unknowns, there are other important aspects to this proposal. It would assuredly result in stimulating development in the commercial core. It would concentrate a large number of vehicles in one place. It would apparently not be self supporting. Since the current efforts a:t"e towards reducing density, development, congestion and preserving the view of the mountain, I suggest considering an alternate plan. Two years ago, Fritz Benedict prepared a plan, basicly to acquire enough vacant land around the commercial core to make up for the loss of parking created by the malls. Unfortunately, at that time, the grandiose schemes surrounding the old Rio Grande property prevented a careful analysis of this plan. The plan would have accomplished three major objectives, all of which are in line with present thinking. It would provide enough parking to offset the loss due to the malls. It would prevent the overdevelopment of the downtown commercial zone. It would most effectively preserve the view of the mountain. It would prevent the concentration of large numbers of vehicles in one place. Looking back, when the City of As~en was faced with the construction of a large building on Rubey Park, the Council took its case to the voters - result - a beautiful landscaped parking lot conveniently located. Hany Rubey.Parks could be developed under the Benedict plan, all within a block or two of the commercial zone. As an example, I note that the Gaevernitz property, just west of the Crystal Palace ,is for sale to the City. rrake a look at this property, more cars park on it, although it is privately owned, day and night, than pa:t"k on the old Rio Grande property. The reason? It is a block from the Hyman Street Mall. This .... )- ,-., 2. ~ half alack could be developed into another. landscaped lot, ~~d would be heavily used. It is time that we recognized the obvious, unless cars are completely excluded from downtown, they will be parked as close as poss.tble to the i=ediate destination. If we 'Nant to protect the downtown area from full forty feet high development, if we want to protect the view of the mou-lltain, there is no better way than to acquire as muoh open land as possible. It might be possible, if there is a surplus in the open space fund, to use some of this money for acquiring land dedicated to open space. Now that the approaches to the City are protected, we should look to the protection of the dm-mtown area. I suggest that you give Pri tzBenedict~s pla.~ careful sj;udy before embarking on another survey, respectfully yours, -1.A&~~ W~ Francis \'lhi taker Cof~' ~cJJ2 ' 1)-;-1- ~~~.. , -- .--, STEFAN AND ILSE SENONER BOX 2678 ASPEN, COLORADO 81611 To the Aspen Planing and Zoning Commission Aspen, Colorado Re.: Down zoning. Dear Sir: 1) The ne1'T QOH'D zoning recommanda tions for II Lodges tI near Aspen l/,oun tain is tota11y uneconomioal under present land and construction costs. With crowded restaurants - particularly during oreakfast and dinner hours - many tour-ists, especially f'li th child::cen, :prefer to have their mea_LS at home - IllB-ny for convenience 01' because they just can not afford to go out every day. On the other' hand, no eating IJlace can be sup:ported a limited number of guests staying in a small ox' medium size lodge. To su:rvi vo it would have ';;';l"ou1(: cc"use traf'fio and :parking pr'oblems. to depend to a certain extend On business from the outside. This in turn 2) Aspen is totally surrounded by public land which belongs to every citizen of the United Staates anu tbe maintenabce costs are also shared by all the Taxpayers of the land" 1:J.1he:eefore; is it not high time to listen to the needs of OUr tourists ~{ho are carrying the main buJ.k of .l.6..spens high 7% 3a1es Tax- 1'1i thout it, our city officials couJd. never pay for their granci ideas... 3) As AH-I Property owners - and heavy tax payers _ we strongly oppose the re- strictive zoning for I'ILodges~' For the convenience of our winter c~nd summer guests and for times of crises the only wa~y to warrant any investment is a combination of apartment - hotel type operation ( the demand of the future) - be it studios or small one bedroom hoteJ style accommodations. 4) As a hardworking family with our Jife savings invested in a piece of land on #1 lift, we do not wish to see Our dreams destroyed. Thanks for youX' kind consideration, L ." ~ """ ~. ~. ~ iLv~., . . .~~~ .. ~ ~;;~~.e .~ ~ ~~..~ ~~~- ~ " ~~~;r-. .~~. . f2.., :4.~ ~ ' ~~~ "~y- .. ' ~~.f'Z /~~d ~ak~~~//~'/ r ;:Jk~~~~ ~ . . ~ r ~. 1",. ........... > I ...._..~_..-......- ......-r.... I --..-", ....... I .. .~. ... - . I u.,.-.t . ~ -~~ . ,.., - ..~ =~.j~~:':;"'~ .~ ~.~ -~ -..... - . - -== _~~# ~i?~l_t- ..~~~..d'J-!t_ __C.,U2-7/ - ~- " .,:,:- ~... 'C . - ..1 / ... , ~L. ~ " .._..~......~ . ~~~,;-.:-~"C . .A"-~c.c. """.'~ 4,.... . -,-- ~ ~ -~, '- "'~~f~--~~ a ...~~ . . .~, .. ., n .~....w.~ .~ m~ I ' 1 .~.~ I I I 1 --It- .. _ JI II. - ."~~::;.. - A i ./ .~ I - ~... ~~__I f- /