HomeMy WebLinkAboutExhibit C Public Comments.134 E Bleeker StFrom:Denise Diers
To:Sarah Yoon
Subject:Re: Historic Preservation Project: 134 E. Bleeker
Date:Wednesday, March 4, 2020 7:45:10 PM
Attachments:image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
image005.png
I am not able to get you anything formal by 3 tomorrow, except for this email.
My comments are primarily related to the reduction of parking spaces, as there are currently 3
spaces to park: a space from the alley, on the west side of Barn/ADU, as well as a full size
space in the barn/garage, plus the driveway to the garage. In the plans, I see the only proposed
space is in the garage/barn, and is only designed for a small car - quite inappropriate when the
new owner drives a Cadillac Escalade, and as most owners have large SUVs these days. HPC
has already approved, (and/or given variances), to have only one car parking space for the 3
redeveloped homes on the other end of the Alley, which has created issues with alley parking,
snow removal, and in my opinion - emergency response to my home in the Alley, when
owners, their service providers and contractors all deem the alley the best place to park
(whether its for a few hours, a day, a month..... Street parking is also limited in this area with
the Yellow Brick at the west end of alley, the Red Brick, and the Community Church across
Aspen Street from 134 E Bleeker. Even Ecos Car Steamwash appears to have set up his
business on Aspen Street, a half block towards Hallam, in this block, since being evicted from
the Conoco Station when it was closed for redevelopment. He even at times has parked his van
in the street, blocking the lane, while he worked, for up to a day.
The applicant needs to create a full size parking space in the Barn/garage, which may require
an angled entry from the alley, as well as to keep the other space on the west end, that is not
visible from either Aspen, Bleeker or Hallam St, only from the alley, whether it is historically
correct or not. Times have changed, including the average number of vehicles per household,
as well as their size. Current zoning requires 2 parking spaces, so let's not issue anymore
parking variances in this 2 block+ area. It is a very congested area that really does not have
additional space for more residential home parking variances.
This doesn't even address the concerns on the elimination of the ADU, which has been used by
4 different local professionals as their home, since it was completed in 1992. Isn't this going
the wrong direction for local employee housing. 2 of these individuals still provide a n
important service to the Town, witth one required to be on call at the hospital for surgical
emergencies and within 20 minutes max. The other is currently an executive with the Aspen
Institute. This small ADU created a place for them to remain and thrive in the community,
while offering invaluable services. Now we just have an empty unit that is seriously affecting
the Town's Canary initiative as the lights burn all day and night, no matter whether the owners
are in town or not. The light pollution as well as the required energy is disheartening. Can't
really enjoy the night sky any more from my back yard. This is also hampered by the 100%
night lighting on all the redeveloped homes in the alley - is this a new code requirement? Or
just the big city mentality?
I will provide more formal comments and photos before next weeks hearing.
Thank you Sarah.
Warm regards,
Denise Diers
EXHIBIT C - PUBLIC COMMENTS