Plans for Snowmass Center are rife with issues
Regarding “Snowmass Center project complicated by phasing, supply chain and legal logistics” (Oct. 26, The Aspen Times), should a community follow its own comprehensive plan: A) Faithfully? B) Never? C) Unless it is inconvenient to do so? (see B)
Citizens gather to make comprehensive plans for a reason. A wise citizenry listens to the voice of experience. Over time their representatives apply priorities accordingly. Or do they?
From the Snowmass Village comprehensive plan: a) Minimize single occupancy vehicle trips and vehicle/pedestrian conflicts. b) Connect Base Village to Snowmass Center. c) “…be the leading … family-oriented … resort community.” d) Offer high quality social meeting places.
Clearly the Base Village layout complies, even celebrates, all of the above, … except b), and it “leapfrogs” conventional resort planning with a happy spirit.
Clearly the Snowmass Center plan does not have much to celebrate: a) A hazardous “Main Street” design maximizes vehicle/pedestrian conflicts; b) Offers no connection to Base Village; c) Is no place for children; d) Offers no quality social meeting places.
The Snowmass Center plan is riddled with practical, unattractive, failings.
Suggestion: Sponsor an Eastwood collaboration with the experienced artists of East West to follow the Snowmass Village comprehensive plan, faithfully. Space doesn’t permit elaboration here, but the Snowmass Center file is full of public comment should this paper wish to research context to my suggestion.
Member, Snowmass Arts Advisory Board