HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19940405
A-%' CJ
.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION
APRIL 5. 1994
Chairman Bruce Kerr called meeting to order at 4:30 P.M.
Answering roll call were Bob Blaich, Tim Mooney, Sara Garton, Roger
Hunt, Jasmine Tygre ar;d Bruce Kerr. David Brown was excused.
MINUTES
Roger made a motion to adopt minutes of March 8, 1994.
Jasmine seconded the motion with all in favor.
STAFF COMMENTS
Leslie: Our April 9th all-day joint meeting has been cancelled. We
will now schedule a meeting for April 15. The agenda for the first
couple of hours will be the parking issues, how the parking garage
fits in with the whole system of what Council is trying to do regarding
downtown parking. Then we will get into all of the design issues--
City Market, Kraut Property.
...
PUBLIC COMMENTS
There were none.
303 EAST MAIN STREET
LANDMARK DESIGNATION
Bruce opened the public hearing.
Amy Amidon, City Historical Preservation:
attached in record.
Made presentation as
Bruce asked if the applicant had a statement.
There was no applicant present.
Bruce asked if there was any public comment.
There was none and he closed the public hearing.
MOTION
Jasmine: I move to approve Landmark Designation of 303 E. Main Street,
Lot A and the west half of Lot B, Block 80, City and Townsite of Aspen,
finding that standards B, E and F have been met.
Roger seconded the motion with all in favor.
,
PZM4.5.94
'''-',''',,,......
UTE TRAIL TOWNHOMES
SUBSTANTIAL PUD AMENDMENT
Leslie, Planning:
Made presentation as attached in record.
Affidavit of posting and mailing was presented.
(attached in record)
Bill Lipsey, representative for applicant: Using blue prints described
this project to the Commission.
Roger: Is the walkway covered?
Lipsey: That is covered. The roof goes over the entire thing.
Leslie: Is the boiler and trash area included in the space where you
set up the story poles?
Lipsey: The story poles we put up just represent the garage. So that
is about another 6 feet there. And the full width about 19 to 20 feet
of the garages. There was a trash enclosure unit that was just about
in that same location that was approved right at the end of the
parking. In fact just about the same location that we are enclosing
in the garages now.
Bob: That above the garage--might people use that staircase to go up
and use the garage roof as a deck? And what might be done to prevent
that?
Lipsey: I suppose somebody could go up there and hop out onto the
garage roof, yes.
Jim Pugh, Epoch properties: One possibility would be to do a gable
roof instead of a flat roof.
Bob: It happens around town where people use whatever deck there is
and store things. I can show you places in the west end where people
put their cookers out and lawn chairs sit out all year.
Jasmine: With the garage where the doors are located it looks as
though you are going to have to relocate the staircase. It crosses in
front of a window of the lower unit.
Lipsey: The staircase will be closer to the windows of that unit.
However, in the previous design that unit would have looked out onto
some automobiles. And the wall will only be this high on this side.
The staircase is along that wall and this unit has windows that look
out onto the courtyard. So they are opening onto open space whereas
before these 2 windows would have looked right onto automobiles. Now
they look onto a garden wall so it is like a little San Francisco
courtyard. Things are very tight but very well done with nice
materials.. We are proposing brick on the back side also.
l'"
'.
2
PZM4.5.94
Discussion followed brick vs shingles on the garage.
Bruce then opened the meeting for public comment.
Pam Cunningham, General Manager Aspen Alps: Read into the record a
letter stating Aspen Alp's concerns regarding increased traffic on
Aspen Mountain Road, materials to be used on the garages, emergency
vehicle access on Aspen Mountain Road and the responsibility for
maintenance of that road.
There are other members of the association who wanted to make certain
that there is absolutely no use of that fire road on the south end of
the project. Visitors might feel that is for public parking. It is
not. It is private parking. We don't want to impact access to that
road. The Fire Department feels strongly about use of that road.
Lipsey: We can certainly handle that in the condominium documentation.
We will go on record as incorporating that into this project. She
makes a good point. We will address that and come up with something
that has got sufficient teeth in it to make sure people don't park
there.
Cunningham: We are referring to the road that goes on the south end
of Ute project. It is a private road and the Fire Dept wishes to keep
it open for access. Otherwise we shut it down with rocks and
shrubbery.
?: Spoke in favor of the brick for the garage.
Nicholas DeVore: Our feeling is that visually and aesthetically brick
is going to enhance the front and back design of the entire property.
Rick Neiley, representative for Black Swan: We looked at this for
some of the owners last week and we think the garage concept is a
really good concept. Certainly in terms of the types of visual impacts
that you experience in a really dense project you have an opportunity
to result in the enclosure of bicycles, snowmobiles, vehicles etc. The
east end of the garage structure right now is shingles I think.
Neiley: We are not really impacted by the type of material that you
use significantly. We don't see those. I think the types of impacts
that the surrounding property owners are more likely to be concerned
about, the Black Swan is concerned about, is the creation of the deck
areas with the new structure. In terms of materials, however, I think
that whatever the developer can work out with the other neighbors as
far as the Black Swan is concerned will be fine.
I think we would be unhappy if all of a sudden there is a lot of new
deck space on tops of these units because the impact then, which are
being mitigated by the enclosure of the structure, would rear their
head again. And certainly from the neighbor's point of view increasing
of the FAR on the project by building a lot of decks on top of this
3
PZM4.5.94
would be objectionable.
Leslie: If a deck were built on top of this structure--wewould never
approve railings or decking or anything like that.
Discussion followed for the possibility of sloped roof for the garage.
?: I don't think any of us had ever thought about sunbathing on top
of the garage. It wouldn't be a private or pleasant sort of place.
It seems to me that would be handled by the condominium covenants
that they don't put things up on top of the roof.
There were no further public comments and Bruce closed the public
portion of the hearing.
Dave Myler, Representative for Sister Cities: Sister City Housing,
Inc. is a non-profit corporation, the members of which are the City
of Aspen and the town of ? ,Japan. The corporation was formed to
acquire this property at apoint in time when it appeared as though it
could be sold by the then owners, the Nelson DeVore partnership to
anyone who might not follow through with the project that would produce
affordable housing. So as a way of salvaging this particular project
and maintaining the opportunity to produce some affordable units ?
and Aspen formed a nonprofit corporation to act as the vehicle-and
purchased the property.
Sometime later they negotiated a contract with Mr. Pugh and his company
to sell him the property and agreed to re-purchase the completed
affordable units--all seven of them for a fixed price. That price is
comparable to the price we would have paid if we had built the housing
ourselves and perhaps even a little less.
Right now we are in a status of being the contract purchaser of the
7 affordable units when they are completed. At that point in time we
will offer them for sale to qualified buyers. It will be an owner
occupied project. There is a priority list of 11 individuals who were
prior tenants of this project before it was torn down who have the
first priority to purchase completed units from Sister City Housing.
I would like to comment on staff's recommendation with regard to the
other units. Sister City's mission and our direction from the Council
was to find a way to salvage this project and produce affordable
housing at the least cost to the taxpayer. I see nothing in the
original approvals on this proj ect that would have restricted or
required the original developer had it gone forward at that time in
1991 from selling the units to people on the priority list at the
maximum price allowed for category 2. We are not asking to do anything
different than that.
We gave you those prices not because it is something that needs to be
approved by you or the City Council for that matter. But for
informational purposes. Under the City's code in housing guidelines
...._".,~
4
PZM4.5.94
the developer of the project which for all intents and purposes on the
affordable side the Sister City Housing can sell those for the maximum
price in category 2. And we are suggesting that we do that. If the
City Council wishes to increase it's subsidy and reduce that price to
some lower level to accommodate the economic circumstances of somebody
on the priority list then so be it. But I really don't think it is a
Planning & Zoning Commission issue at this point in time. It is
strictly fiscal. I think it is a noble concept that these people
should pay what they can afford to pay. But they didn't have the right
to do that in the beginning so we would be giving them a right that
they do not now have. And at this point in time I would obj ect to that
and suggest that it not be a part of your recommendation.
Sara: Dave, there are 7 affordable units. How many and what category
at this point.
Myler: The original approval called for 1 to be resident occupied
and 6 to be category 2.
Roger: I have a problem with the first condition. I have a bias
towards brick as a more durable facia for the garage than wood
shingles. I am not enthralled with wood shingles in that kind of a
location from an endurance point of view. Other than that I don't see
any problems with the conditions of the Planning Office.
Jasmine: I agree with Roger.
Robert: I have the same opinion. I would suggest taking #1 out.
Leslie: I have an additional condition. On Condition #3 I would add
"And indicated on the amended plat".
Then the new condition #l--I think it is important that each one of the
7 parking spaces is assigned to each unit--that each unit has their own
parking space.
So condition #l--"One of each of the 7 parking garage spaces shall be
assigned to each affordable unit and shall be indicated on the
condominium plat and outlined in the condominium declaration."
Bruce: will there be a separation between each of these parking
spaces?
Lipsey: Yes. The separation as we are looking at it now consists of
a chain link fence. That is to maximize the space to each unit and
still provide security.
Bruce: I would like to have an additional condition. The same
condition we put in all of these things that the representations made
by the applicant especially as it relates to what we talked about on
the road and also the roof although there is no specific condition in
here about the roof of the garage. My personal feeling is it ought to
stay flat and there ought to be something in the condominium
5
.-.-
PZM4.5.94
-
declarations prohibiting use of the roof of the garage as a deck or
sunbathing area.
Pugh: I would like for you to consider the idea of a gabled roof that
we could work with Leslie on the possibility of the gable roof. With
the story poles out there and the massing of it, it appears to me to
be so inconsequential that that ought to be considered. I am not sure
that that is the right solution but if we approve it only with the flat
roof, that takes that option out.
Poll of Commission regarding gabled roof.
Jasmine: I would just as soon see the structure stay as a brick
structure without a gable or pitched roof. The amount of building
coverage on this site really bothers me. And I am willing to take that
tradeoff because I think it makes the units more liveable and will give
additional storage space to the people who are actually going to be
living there. But that one unit directly to the south of it is already
terribly impacted. And I think even if it is only a foot or so that
you are going to pitch it up I think is going to make it unlivable.
I would not be in favor of the pitched roof.
Tim: I think the applicant should have the option to put the pitched
roof on if he can work it out with Leslie and get the details right.
Sara: I prefer a flat roof.
',,-..
Bob: I think if they were going to do a pitched roof we should look
at it again with the sticks up and see what the effect is going to be.
I prefer the flat roof because I have seen it and I don't think you are
going to gain enough space inside if you are going to pitch that roof
considering your joists and everything up there. It is difficult to
gain storage space up there.
Pugh: One thing I have learned is how to count so I withdraw.
Roger: I am one who generally prefers pitched roof s . But in this case
I would be concerned about the pitched roof as the bulk effect on the
current bulk of the area. At least half of the roof would pitch down
towards the access to the garages which puts a snow load somewhere that
has to be dealt with on the surface. My present disposition is for a
flat roof.
Sara: I have a question about the flat roof. Are there drains in
it? So they don't look down on a lake from the free market.
Pugh: They are drained to a central system as are the free market
units.
MOTION
Roger: I move to recommend approval of the substantial PUD amendment
6
PZM4.5.94
for the Ute Trail Townhomes with conditions on Planning Office memo
dated April 5, 1994 as modified. (attached in record) Condition #1
to read "One of each parking garage spaces shall be assigned to a
specific affordable unit and shall be on the condominium plat and
declarations".
Condition #2 as in the memo.
Condition #3 modified to read "A 5 foot sidewalk area shall be provided
along Ute Avenue and indicated on the amended plat prior to issuance
of a change order for the garage, the applicant shall sign a sidewalk,
curb and gutter agreement".
Conditions #4 through #6 as in the memo.
Condition #7 "All representations made in this meeting by the applicant
and specifically regarding the road and garage roof as regarding the
non-usage of the roof are a part of this motion.
Jasmine seconded the motion.
Roll call vote: Robert, yes, Roger, yes, Sara, yes, Tim, yes, Bruce,
yes, Jasmine, yes.
GMQS AFFORDABLE HOUSING PORTION
Bruce: I feel we ought to make the recommendation to adopt the finding
of the Housing Office memo dated March 8, 1994, send it on and Dave,
Tom and Leslie work it out before it goes to Council.
Jasmine agreed with Bruce.
Sara agreed with Bruce.
Bruce: We are being asked to make a recommendation to Council as to
fiscal implications over which we have no control. So I don't know
what our recommendation ought to be other than to say "Take the
recommendation of the Housing Authority" .
Jasmine: I agree. We don't have any better information on which to
make a judgement like that. We don't know what the people can afford.
We don't have the kind of information that would make us be able to
make a recommendation.
Bruce: I know Dave mentioned a fairness issue involving the DeVores.
Again, that's an issue for which we can't make that decision. That is
one that involves money and Council makes the money decisions.
Myler: I couldn't agree with you more. The issues are not of a
planning and land use nature. They are strictly fiscal. It is all
a matter of money for everybody involved--the people on the wait list,
the DeVores and for the taxpayers who will be affected in terms of
7
PZM4.5.94
the total subsidy of the project.
Sara: I think that one of the things I would recommend is that you
carefully review the proceedings of the original application and
approval about what was approved. You have got to honor that.
Leslie: Category 2.
Tim: What would be the reason to go to category 3? If we are trying
to make as much affordable housing available as possible why would you
want to jump the category up if it is a non-profit organization?
Myler: Two reasons. #1 when the category was set there was no
anticipation of any public expenditure whatsoever. This was a
completely free market private sector development. A Robin Hood
project where the profits off of the 3 townhouses were going to be
sufficient to allow these units to be sold in category 2. Now the
City is looking at probably a minimum of $25 to $26,000 per bedroom
in cost on this project to complete it.
We can eat into that a little bit if we increase the category to
category 3 after we have exhausted the people on the priority list.
That is important to consider.
Leslie: The other question is if someone on the priority list
qualifies for category 3 they are also requesting that they be--
Myler: And their incomes have gone up---
Tim: That would reduce the subsidy on the City's part.
Myler: I think the statistics would bear out that the demand for
category 3 housing is just as great as it is for category 2. And
somebody who makes a category 3 income is locked out for category 2
housing. They don't qualify. So we are meeting the public needs if
this is category 3.
MOTION
Roger: I move to recommend to Council to amend the GMQS exemption as
necessary and support the Housing Authority in whatever those specifics
are.
Jasmine seconded the motion.
Bruce: I think one thing that does need to be clearly stated is that
displaced tenant list should still be given primary--
Roger: Then I will add. to the conditionsnCondition#l on the Planning
Office memo dated April 5, 1994. In addition to that we add the
condition concerning this our primary concern is satisfying those
tenants and if changes have happened in the existing tenants that would
8
PZM4.5.94
prevent them from getting into category 2 housing we have no problems
with the change to category 3 to support existing tenants.
Jasmine agreed to this condition as the seconder.
Tim: What about the conditions that are listed here. They pretty
much say that. If you look at condition #2 if you just eliminate this
specific price part and if you eliminate the specific price part of #3
they read pretty much what you are trying to say.
Bruce: Keep conditions #1, #2 and #4 and change #3 to just say that
we recommend that Council go with whatever the Housing Authority
recommends.
Roger: I will restate the motion.
I move to recommend proposed amendments to the GMQS exemption for
affordable housing with the following conditions.
Conditions #1, #2 and #4 as stated on Planning Office memo dated April
5, 1994.
#3 to read--Leslie--The Commission supports the Housing Authority in
their recommendation to Council with regard to fiscal matters--
Bruce: I like anything regarding the categories 2, 3 and RO to go
with the Housing Authority recommendations.
Roger: With any change of category. Let's put it that way.
Bruce: Let that be negotiated out between the DeVores and the Housing
Authority and City Council and Sister Cities.
Jasmine agreed with these changes.
DeVore: We would like on the record an issue that wasn't addressed
here. That is that Sister City Housing would like to amend the deed
restriction for the RO which is a little complicated because our
preference at this point is to degrade the RO down to category 3.
But we also object to the change in the deed restriction to the RO.
And we would just like to have that on record that the original deed
restriction that was recorded for the RO unit we feel should be honored
if indeed that unit stays as an RO.
Bruce: That will be in the record. And I am sure Dave will express
that to the City Council.
Tim: I would like to discuss the fact that we are establishing a
price of $85,000 for a studio and $115,000 for a 2 bedroom. Should
we do that at this time or should that be whatever the bidding will
allow within the category price.
9
PZM4.5.94
Leslie: So, Tim, your original suggestion for #2 was to just say
"Remaining units may be sold at the category 3 guidelines".
Tim: Right.
Roger: I amend my motion to state that for condition #2.
Jasmine: And the seconder will go along with it as well.
Everyone then voted in favor of the motion.
CREEKTREE SUBDIVISION/PUD AMENDMENT
Bruce opened the public hearing.
MOTION
Jasmine: I move we table this hearing and continue the public hearing
to date certain of April 19, 1994 at the request of the applicant.
Robert seconded the motion with all in favor.
EUROPEAN FLOWER MARKET
GMQS EXEMPTION
Mary Lackner, Planning Dept: Made presentation as attached in record.
Glen Rappaport, architect for applicant: They are going to continue
the flower market use. It is just going to be scaled down. The
building is kind of a marginal structure as it is. And we are working
with the zoning dept to establish our guidelines as to how to retain
the required amount of perimeter wall area in the redevelopment.
We are going to demolish the front wall where the primary change is
going to be. The cinder block building will stay the same. The
Planning Office questions how qualified that apartment is right now to
become a 2-bedroom unit. It is undersized. We would like the option
of working with the Housing Office to keep it a 2-bedroom. The amount
of mitigation that is required would still work even if it was only
a studio apartment.
We also have met with the Board of Adjustment and we have the problem
of being an undersized parcel. We had to legally go through the hoop
of being allowed of doing anything other than a single family residence
because it is a 4,500 square foot lot in a 6,000 square foot minimum
zone. We have also gone through HPC conceptual. They seem to be OK
with the mass and bulk.
We don't have any problems with the staff recommendations. We are
not changing the footprint other than to undercut the rear portion to
get the required amount of parking space in a new project.
10
PZM4.5.94
We have designated a trash area and we will be recycling.
fence is going to be removed anyway so that is not an issue
the encroachments.
The wood
as far as
Roger:
up and
unit?
The garage in the back right now. That is going to be opened
you say be a carport open area under the existing residential
Rappaport: Right.
to the alley. But
So we are going to
feet of legal size.
We can fit cars back there parked perpendicular
it is not a legal distance for the parking space.
undercut that building just enough to get the 19
Tim: It seems to me the use of the building is going to generate the
need for more parking than that.
Mary: The way the GMQS exemption reads it is not a change in use. So
we don't go back and ask them to provide parking for that space.
Actually if you were to go back and mitigate the space for retail or
office it would be at the same factor.
Roger: I think it is imperative to have at least one of those spaces
designated for the retail portion. Particularly the flower shop which
has to deal with deliveries.
~,.,.....
Rappaport: There is at this time a parking space on the front side
off of Main Street. Part of our requirements through the Engineering
Dept is to get rid of that parking space.
Roger: I would like to add a condition that there needs to be a space
designated for the retail portion of the project.
Sara: Leslie, would European Flower Market fall into the residential
permit program for parking on the street?
Leslie: The way I understand the residential permit program shaping
up is if you are on the street you will get so many passes. I don't
know if Main Street is part of that. If Main Street is in there they
will get 1 or 2 permits to park in front.
MOTION
Roger: I move to approve the applicant's request for the remodeling
of the European Flower Market located at 340 West Main Street with the
following conditions:
#1 through #6 as on Planning Office memo dated April 5, 1994.
(attached in record.
Addition of condition #7 to read "One of those parking spaces on the
alley shall be designated for the service delivery of the retail
space" .
~""~'t""
11
PZM4.5.94
I assume they need a space for their delivery vehicle and that is what
they would use that space for. Now I can't prevent the owner of
European Flower Market from parking his vehicle there.
Tim seconded the motion with all in favor.
WEST END TRAFFIC STUDY
Diane Moore, Planning: Back in November this was re-assigned to Bob
Gish to take the lead on it with assistance from other departments in
the City.
Bob Gish, Engineering: Made presentation as attached in record.
Tim: This doesn't address special events that happen such as banquets
or conferences or weddings when there is a whole entourage of people
going in and out of there for specific events.
Gish: These events do have a tremendous impact on the new Meadows
Road going in--traffic to the west end. A lot of events are short
time. They end at one time and a lot of vehicles come out. Our
citizens have concerns about just this problem.
,~,,_....
Mac Cunningham: I represent the group that is closest to the Meadows
Road. I would like to specifically address the points and responses
of the Institute. All of us who were on the public committee working
with Bob and the staff and attempting to get things done. We are very
disappointed about the lack of attention and respect to this process
by these two. Specifically what the original plan addressed was
"During the summer months are used almost exclusively by the Consortium
utilizing the Meadows system. Whether it is the Physics Institute or
the MAA. During the winter season it is anticipated the Lodge may be
operated for public use. "
I~-"r"
The reality of the situation is this Lodge is operated as a hotel
which is larger than the Little Nell. It has absolutely no policing
of any kind. In fact when I called Cleve specifically about one of the
issues here his response was "I can't do anything about it". That is
a direct quote. He said "I can't control these people" .
The second issue related to this is that the Trustee's Townhouses
which traditionally were only used in the summer for the trustees were
leased all winter for employees of the Ski Company. We have very maj or
problems with speeding, lack of respect, driving through stop signs,
drunkenness. I was standing out there one morning and a girl was so
drunk she didn't even know I was standing in the road. Literally.
When I talked to the Institute about it Cleve's response was "Well,
I can't do anything about it. I can't control these people.
My point to this is they have taken virtually no responsibility to
12
PZM4.5.94
meet the criteria that were set. That was a promise made to the City
and made to the residents of the west end. It is important to note
that the traffic generation in this area was proposed to be 3 times
that anywhere else recorded in the mitigation in the traffic flows that
have been checked by the City recently.
Van service: "The Van service will utilize a relatively small vehicle
that will have regularly scheduled service. "
It operates like a taxi at this juncture. It is nice to say somebody
is parking their car. !Jut if you are replacing their car with a van,
there is absolutely no mitigation at all. And the vans run non-stop.
I know. I use them. I walk out my door at any time, morning or night,
and there is a van going by. In fact when I have had guests who want
to go downtown, I have called them up and they zip right up there just
like a free taxi.
It said no parking will be provided. The reality is and I think there
was a published number of vehicle percentage of people coming to Aspen
in 1993. And it was something like 86% of the people that come up here
as guests use their cars. And if you are running a 110 room hotel
86% of those people are coming by car. And they have got to get there.
.....".
The point is there is very little van use. You are seeing 1 or 2
riders at the most on the vans. They are doing nothing in their
promotional material to alert guests that they are going through a
residential area. Nothing.
The MAA goes out of their way to alert people and encourage them to use
other transportation.
Employee parking: We have got another major problem and the police
are down there. They are working. They leave at 2 or 3 0' clock in the
morning and they are screaming up there intoxicated or not. They have
absolutely no idea of where they are nor any respect to the area.
Delivery trucks: It was very specific in the original plan of when the
times were to be. 9:00 to 11:00 and 2:00 to 4:00. Vehicles start at
5:20 A.M. I can guarantee it because I am woken up every morning at
5:20 by either Red Hat or the BFI dump truck every morning. These
vehicles run until after dark. There is absolutely no compliance.
Tim mentioned special events. I was married down there. It is a
delightful facility. But what you have is 2 to 300 people going to
special events usually twice a weekend, sometimes more in higher
seasons. These people are drinking. They are leaving- -they are
hauling their vehicles and it is a parade out of that facility.
Additionally they are advertising as a public restaurant. The
restaurant was never used as a public facility or at least advertised
that way. It was always to the benefit of the Meadows users. It is
13
PZM4.5.94
now advertised as a full-blown restaurant. They are promoting specials
on Friday and Saturday nights. What we have here is use way and above
of what was projected in this facility with absolutely no mitigation.
The MAA has made a very strong effort to make sure there is compliance
with what their promises were. The absolute reverse is true with the
Institute. I brought this to the attention of the Planning Office
quite a while ago. We were told we had to go through this process.
A lot of these things that are in here are addressed as "We will do
this and we will do that". This facility has been operating for one
full year and they have done nothing in that period. I think it is
incumbent upon P&Z to put the hammer down on them immediately and force
compliance. This was a promise complicit to their approvals. They
have been running a construction project down there now for a year and
a half. I now find out they are about to start the townhouse
construction which we will be looking at for another 8 to 10 months.
I will say the Shaw Construction has done an excellent job of making
sure their employees are in compliance. But the point is that this is
an ongoing process and one of the major factors in this--the Institute
has absolutely not participated in any way and has ignored this thing
even when they have been requested. I think it is incumbent upon P&Z
specific to this part of the mitigation plan that they enforce or shut
down the facility in order to wake somebody up. I know that sounds
extreme. But the Institute made promises to the neighborhood and to
the City that they ~lOuld comply. And these were negotiated over a two
year period and they have done zero! And that is very, very serious.
Bruce: Who is the management operator over that facility?
Cunningham: Well, they keep passing it around.
Diane: Well, I know the Ski Company is involved in some capacity of
the management and operation of the Lodge down there. The
responsibility for this is laid out in the plans of the Institute.
And that is their contractual obligation.
Bruce: I understand that. But if they have hired a management company
to operate it, we need to know who that is.
George Vicenzi: We are a little disheartened that we weren't allowed
to respond to the mitigation plan item by item as the Institute was
and the MAA was. We had concerns on each item. You gave a mandate to
start this process on September 7th. The first meeting was in the end
of Feb and that was 54 and 1/2 months after it was supposed to get
started. We tried to do a job in a month and a half that you had
allowed 7 months for. So there was a lot of work to be done.
At all of those meetings we the citizens basically everybody at the
meetings would like to see the speed limit reduced. Right now it is
14
PZM4.5.94
30 miles an hour in the west end. We would like to see it reduced to
20 miles an hour.
Bruce: In regard to the 20 mile an hour speed limit I want to hear
from Bob and the Police Dept. Then we will hear from the public.
What were your objections if any to the 20 MPH speed limit?
Gish: We felt that we had agreement from everybody that we would
probably go through the summer and evaluate what these devices would
do to the west end before we actually discussed a reduction of the
speed limit.
Vicenzi: I was at those meetings and we never agreed that we would
go through the summer, Bob. Everybody at the meetings was very adamant
that we should reduce the speed limit. And in conjunction with all
these--reducing the speed and the elements here would be a
comprehensive approach to reducing the traffic, the cross east/west
traffic.
Bruce: I am understanding that you are saying 20 MPH in the whole
west end? Is that basically what you are proposing?
Vicenzi: And the west Meadows also.
Bruce then asked for comment from the members of the public.
Maggie DeWulf: I live at 233 West Bleeker Street. I would like to see
the speed limit in the entire west end posted at 20 MPH. People not
only cut through the Bleeker Street. They cut through the alley.
They don't stop at the alleys. They just use the alleys as a place to
speed, really. And late at night when the bars close, people cut
through the west end because they are less likely to be caught by the
police.
I would also like to see spot enforcement done. I think with some
spot enforcement we have a chance. All the stop signs in the world
people will run unless they are enforced.
Christie Kienast. I live at 406 Smuggler. I echo everything Maggie
said. Children can't be outside between 4:00 and 6:00 in the
afternoons because it is too dangerous. These people are hellbent.
I am not kidding. They are hellbent through that area and they aren't
looking at anything. I have called the police repeatedly in the summer
and I have never to this moment had anyone show up.
Jan Collins: I live at 531 Gillespie. And I just think we need
enforcement out there and it needs to be 20 MPH. I think 30 MPH
through a residential neighborhood is entirely too fast. And I think
this one in particular because we have east-west traffic and it is
causing a problem. It does not make a residential neighborhood very
comfortable to live in.
15
PZM4.5.94
Ann Ibbotsen: I live at 505 North Fifth. Last evening I called a
number of my neighbors to talk to them about their feelings on the 20
MPH speed limit. And all of them thought that it was a wonderful idea.
Several of them made an attempt to get here and comment.
She then read a letter from Mike Flynn: "I live at 721 West Francis
Street. I have 3 children ages 10, 8 and 5. I have lived on this
block for most of my time in Aspen since 1968. I have owned a home at
this address since 1977 and I have taught school for 27 years.
The traffic situation in and around our block is dangerous for my
family. Our children are no lo"-ger permitted to ride their bikes from
the hours of 4:00 to 6:00 P.M. in our alley or on our local streets.
In the summer they cannot safely play near the streets or ride their
bikes during the hours of 4: 00 to 6: 00 or as the traffic from the music
tent arrives or departs.
The situation has reached a point of danger such that I actively look
to move from where we live to either a safer environment locally or to
a new community. I feel the problem has developed over the years as
threefold.
One--hostile drivers racing through the west end to beat the traffic
congestion on Main Street. Two- -an influx of drivers from construction
as the trade industry is trying to beat the traffic congestion on Main
Street. These drivers originate in the west end as the massive
construction in the area demands an enormous work force. Three--
Aggressive drivers departing the music tent trying to beat congestion
so as not to wait in line at their favorite restaurants in town.
No matter the source of traffic in the west end it tends to be hostile,
aggressi ve and dangerous. There are a variety of socio-economic
reasons for this behavior. But the point here is that the kids are in
danger.
I have a few suggestions that might alleviate part of the danger for
children who live and play in our area. One--Lower the speed limit
to a crawl. Two--4-Way stops at every corner. Three--Active police
monitoring with no warning or second chance scenarios. In fact there
is so much irresponsible driving in the area that fines alone could
support an officer's salary.
Please do something."
I think that pretty well sums it up for my feelings on it too.
Caroline McDonald: I live at 109 North Second Street. I have 2
children. Our alley is parallel to Main Street and it has always been
an exit out of town. Hopefully with the HOV lane it won't be used as
much. But we tried putting in speed bumps and the City was nice enough
to install a stop sign at the end of the street. But there is no
enforcement in alleys at all unless you post it and the streets too
16
PZM4.5.94
really need to have a 20 MPH limit there to let people know and to
stop them. So a 20 MPH enforced speed limit is very much needed here.
Margie Musgrave: I live at 629 West North. I have got 2 kids. In
our 2 block by 2 block area I just counted about 15 kids and I say a
prayer every time they go out into the street between 4:00 and 6:00.
Drivers are totally focused on getting out of town. They are oblivious
that this is a neighborhood and that there are people living in it and
I think spot traffic checks would be good. I know they were effective
over on Cemetery Lane in slowing people down. I couldn't believe the
speed limit was 30 in the west end. That is really fast. If we could
slow the traffic down I think that would be helpful.
She then read into the record letter from Marcia Korbin: "I live at
610 West Smuggler Street. There are 6 children through the age of 8
who live on the block. As you know we have no sidewalks in the west
end to maintain a rural atmosphere. Because of this the children ride
their tricycles and bicycles, push their baby carriages and try their
roller blades on the edge of the street. Having never driven cars they
are not certain where the edge or the middle of the roads are. The
safety of the children as well as the rural ambiance is often
threatened by adults speeding down the street and more often than not
disregarding the stop signs.
Anything the City can do to encourage safety awareness and compliance
with the law including educating that the driver on the right has the
right of way where there are no stop signs at all would be appreciated
by cur neighborhood. II
""'_,_,oY
Linda McCarthy: I live at 214 West Bleeker. My experience is the
same as everybody else's. My personal experience is if I get stopped
or I see a cop in a certain area I don't speed there anymore. I think
that having spot enforcement would make an enormous difference around
the Meadows. Bleeker Street has a lot of traffic for reasons stated
in the letters- -people trying to get out of town and avoid the traffic.
If you have to stop at every street and
not really worth it. That would make a
itself and in the speed of the traffic.
a 20 MPH speed limit.
if there is enforcement it is
big difference in the traffic
I would very much like to see
I hope you are listening to us.
Cunningham: One last comment in relation to the 20 MPH speed limit.
We had a lot of discussions within the committee over the effectiveness
of stop signs and the relation to 20 MPH. I know that Becky has
concerns because of the enforcement requirements. But as Bob Gish has
observed in visits he has made in the west end, stop signs are useless
of there is no enforcement. And the purpose of the whole plan that Bob
is going to present to you is to reduce the incentive for people trying
to get out of town and for people who are utilizing services within the
west end to use their vehicles.
-"
17
PZM4.5.94
Stop signs are very effective if there is enforcement. And I invite
any of you to dare stand out at the corner of 7th and North any night.
I guarantee you, you will not be standing within an hour when you are
there. I guarantee you, you won't be standing there within 5 minutes
in the middle of the road because there is no spot enforcement. With
all due respect to Becky, there is no spot enforcement.
I called last night because there was an event going and everybody
was tearing through. No police vehicle came out and the net result was
there was not one vehicle in the course of about 3 minutes that
stopped. Not one. If you don't have enforcement, people are not going
to stop. A 4 point violation will stop people in a hurry. And the
word will get out very quickly. So I think you need both. Reduction
in the speed and enforcement.
Gish: We are going to reserve comment to the speed until we get to
that portion of our non-consensus item. Now we will run through the
mitigation plan for the MAA facility.
Bruce: I seem to hear that there was seeming agreement with the steps
MAA had taken. I want to find out of the public is upset with the MAA
or whether we can skip through this section.
Vicenzi: We do have problems with some of the MAA responses.
Basically the bus system as it was laid out in this mitigation plan
has not been followed. They do not exit 4th street. Part of the plan
called for the circulating vehicles would be Napa gas powered vehicles.
They were never used. So that is the basic part of the plan that we
don't agree with. It hasn't been done.
A lot of these items we don't have a problem with--the promotional
material, pedestrian bikeways. The committee has suggested more
lighting. The City Council has agreed to funds for that. A lot of the
things are being done.
Bruce: Are there any of the areas listed areas of general consensus
of which the neighbors have problems. I want to cut right to the non-
consensus items and start dealing with them.
Vicenzi: Actually most of the consensus items basically we would like
to clarify a couple of them. One is that west end residents generally
have less of a problem with autos and buses. We have a problem with
autos. We would try to reduce the amount of buses. And the argument
is that you reduce the service that will put people back in their cars.
We don't mind a few more cars if we can get rid of a lot of buses. We
could live with that. There are currently 16 bus trips per day through
the west end. That was what RFTA said.
A big one is the passive restraints to be enacted to make the plan
work. We are willing to try passive restraints. But we also think
that if they don't work then we need all of the active restraints
18
PZM4.5.94
possible. That would be enforcement of speed limits, stop signs,
speed bumps- -whatever it takes.
Cunningham: I think the process has been very positive. I really
do. And I think that the charge that went to the group and what Bob
has done, what staff has done, what everybody in voicing their concerns
over has done is an enormous step. I personally feel that when this
plan is enacted there will be a tremendous--provided there is
enforcement--therewill be a tremendous change in use patterns which
is critical to the wellbeing of the community.
Vicenzi: This is a very big process. It has been broken down into
2 elements. One is the east/west traffic. Two is the bus situation.
We have had total consensus on the east/west solutions which Bob has
a plan up there. And we went to City Council and they approved it in
concept.
We wanted to bring it back to the neighbors and they could see exactly
how the stop sign configuration affects them. I talked to the Early
Learning Center. They have problems with removing the 4-way stops
around the ELC because of traffic. There are some confinements to it.
At this meeting I was hoping we could deal with what we agreed on.
The only non-consensus that we were really concerned with that affected
this was the 20 MPH speed limit. We would like to get a feeling from
you on that.
Basically we agree with the planning concept. We have agreed to the
increase of barriers on 4th Street. We encourage the pedestrian path.
We agree to that assuming that we would have some type of compromise
solution on the bus situation. One of the ideas was to drop people off
on Main Street and have them walk on 4th more. We would like to put
that on hold until we deal with the bus issue. Basically everything
we agreed with on that plan subject to some details working on a
smaller level on some of the blocks. That is basically how we feel.
Bruce: There are 2 or 3 things we need to try to resolve. One--is
there an allegation made that there is non-compliance, in spite of
the response that we have related to the west end and west Meadows
mitigation plan that the Institute has not done what their response
says that they were going to do. So we need to deal with that issue.
We need that applicant here to deal with that.
Gish: What I am recommending--ifwe go to my recommendation on page
14--"City staff recommends that a committee comprised of members of
City staff, MAA, RFTA, Aspen Institute continue to meet on a regular
scheduled basis. The purpose of the meeting would be to foster
communications and develop expectation levels for evaluating and
implementing the approved mi tigation measures.
19
PZM4.5.94
The coordinator's position which will be emphasized by MAA this year
is an essential position and we are recommending that a similar
position for the Institute be initiated."
If you go back to the mitigating measures, there is no form of
enforcement. So what I am recommending we do for this summer and
until we can have a joint meeting with the City P&Z and City Council
is to initiate a smaller more effective committee where we talk about
what our expectation levels are and develop some of these things.
Because I don't think there is any mechanism for enforcement. And I
would like to propose at least this committee look at enforcement
throughout the rest of the summer and report back to you next Fall at
the same time we report back to City Council. I would be glad to chair
that.
Diane: Another thing that should be ongoing is if for some reason if
the Institute does not respond, we have some abilities within the SPA
approval to enforce those violations. And that is something we
probably will discuss with our City Attorney how we would deal with
those particular violations.
Sara: Becky, when I was reading this last night I thought of Cemetery
Lane too. The 25 MPH is enforced on Cemetery Lane. It's monitored
and, boy, did it change things over there. Why would you have a 30 MPH
speed limit through the west end?
Becky Blaine, Assistant Police Chief: The State of Colorado through
their model traffic code has adopted set speeds unless otherwise
posted. The State speeds throughout the entire State for residential
neighborhoods are 30 MPH and 25 in residential areas. The Aspen
Municipal Code has adopted the State Code in it's entirety.
Sara: Now if we designate that a residential area why can't we post
it 25 MPH?
Blaine: It's not that we can't.
Roger: It already is on Hallam.
Blaine: The State says you must conduct a warrant study to reduce or
increase any speed limits.
Sara: Well, let's conduct the study.
Blaine: I am all for it. My position is I cannot support reducing
a speed limit without a warrant study.
Diane: But, Becky, essentially we have all of that in the work we
have done in the past 6 weeks.
Blaine: We have not studied the west end. My hunch is that the stop
20
PZM4.5.94
signs will mitigate many of the speed problems and complaints that we
are hearing. I would like to see us go ahead with this as phase 1 and
then see if there is still a problem after the stop signs have been put
in place.
?: Stop signs AND enforcement?
Blaine: The reality is there is 3 people on a day shift. That's all
we have. Between 4 and 6 which is your highest demand time we have 1
that is constantly going to calls downtown of shoplifters and 1 that
is monitoring the HOV lane. At least 1 supervisor who is mopping up
the entire day. That is all we have. We would love to help. We don't
have the people.
Bruce: What is involved in this warrant study? Is it a $5,000 item?
Blaine: The State is willing to assist. My understanding is it is a
very, very nominal fee, if any. The problem is it does no good to do
a warrant study today in that area because the traffic in June, July
and August is so different from today. A study is not impossible by
any means.
Bruce: Are we talking about a 2 year study? A 2 week study?
Blaine: My understanding is it can be done reasonably in a week.
,.,-.-.,.,..>
Roger: I was one of the early advocates of 20 MPH speed limit in the
west end. But I was convinced to hold off on that with the thought
that if this grid pattern of stop signs gets put in place that may
reduce the speed as much if not more than speed limit signs. And if
that doesn't limit the speed and there is a problem than we should go
to this warrant. But with the stop signs in place that will probably
even improve the ability of the warrant to reduce the speed.
I would encourage the west end folks to hold off on the 20 MPH speed
limit signs at this point and let's see if this stop sign pattern will
have some affect. We will certainly know this summer. That is what
Gish then using maps explained the traffic control plans for installing
stop signs, speed bumps, changes in bus stops, pedestrian walkways,
additional lights for the pedestrian walkways and new configuration of
the parking lot.
Gish: We are going to have this implemented by June.
Bruce: Irregardless of whether I am on P&Z or not it seems to me that
these are going to be improvements. They may not fully satisfy every
member of the public or every resident of the west end. But they are
going to be improvements for the safety of everybody in that area. And
whether the Institute is in compliance with the mitigation plan it
21
PZM4.5.94
seems to me this plan doesn't say anything about that. We haven't made
any kind of finding about the Institute or the MAA. So I don't see
anything to prohibit us or preclude us from saying "Let's make a stab
at this". And then we still have to deal with whether the applicants
are in compliance with the mitigation plan. And we still have to deal
with how we structure the committee and how we carryon from this point
forward. So we need a motion to get this deal done and then we figure
out how we proceed from here as it relates to the whole mitigation
plan.
McDonald: You have got a real hole there. You don't have anything
for the alleys. And if you don't have a speed limit, and I have called
the PD and they can't enforce any speed limits in the alleys. And you
don't have any stop signs in the alleys. People soon find that out.
They do every summer. They really speed down those alleys. And there
is nothing we can do to stop them. You have got them wide open wi thout
any stop signs or speed limit signs.
Gish: We recognize that this may be considered visual pollution.
The more signs you put up it could be considered visual pollution and
you can't put signs everywhere.
?: But you can also have someone killed. Then it is too late. Visual
pollution can go to hell!
Roger: Isn't the State speed limit for alleys 15 MPH?
Gish: Yes.
McCarthy: Especially in the alley Caroline is talking about which is
the one between Bleeker and Main Street. They speed through there in
order to avoid the Main Street traffic. They really speed down there.
Robert Harth, MAA: I was determined not to say anything today. But
just one point. We have been working very hard with a lot of people
for a long time on traffic mitigation in the west end. I fully endorse
working harder in trying to reduce the traffic more. We are supportive
of the lower speed limit. I hear very well what Bob and Becky are
concerned about. We need to reach some conclusions on that. We are
not against that at all. But I do understand where the PD is coming
from and where Bob is coming from.
My understanding is that we are supposed to review the traffic
mitigation to the west end for the Meadows. The Music Festival is
what I am concerned about right now for a minute. We are supposed to
review that every other year with P&Z. And that is the process we have
been going through right now. With all that is being said about speed
bumps and about speed limits and about the Institute's non-compliance
I am here to tell you that the Music Festival has been in compliance.
And we would like to hear from P&Z that we are in compliance. We would
like to continue to work with the west end to make things better.
22
PZM4.S.94
There are issues of non-consensus that are very important that we try
and resolve. And we are committed to resolve those with our west end
neighbors because we live there too. I have heard a lot tonight.
But I haven't heard anything about where we are in compliance which is
with literally the entire traffic mitigation plan as it was established
by City Council and P&Z 2-plus years ago. So to look at everything
that has been done not in the context of the mitigation plan, I have
a problem with.
Diane: I would say to you that the MAA has been an active player in
all of this. And they have, in terms of the mitigation plan, certainly
put forth the effort and addressed all of those concerns.
I look at the Institute as being somewhat separate. They are not here
this evening. I think that says something. I wouldn't lump the MAA
and Institute in terms of responding to the mitigation plan.
Vicenzi: Robert has said that he is in total compliance. We would
like to say that he is mostly in compliance. There is one paragraph-
-On page 9, ---mumble---That clearly has not been done.
Robert: Wait a minute, George, that clearly was tried and it failed
miserably because nobody road it. So RFTA stopped running the shuttle
because nobody got on it. So we did try it in the first year so please
don't say we didn't try it.
"'-..'
Vicenzi: We did not feel it was given a good enough try. The streets
weren't blocked the way they were supposed to be. After the concerts
the buses are supposed to exit on 4th Street so that that would
encourage people to take the bus because the buses would be going more
quickly on 4th and they wouldn't have to be with the traffic on Sth and
3rd. So that also isn't being done. The buses haven't been exiting
on 4th Street.
Roger: They have been. I can attest to that.
I live on 4th Street.
Blankenship: In response to the shuttle. We did try it. But the
deal was that we were going to transfer if we had a certain number of
people on the bus that we felt a certain threshold then we would drop
them off at 4th Street and the shuttle would pick them up. But we
seldom fell below that threshold. So this shuttle bus was not carrying
very many people when it did go and it really created actual additional
traffic because it was running sometimes and then the other buses were
going down there anyway.
The other thing is that that shuttle which was a natch-gas vehicle
wasn't really a program on RFTA's part anyhow. It was an experimental
technology and it quit running. I mean it doesn't work. So it doesn't
run on natural gas. Then we got into a budget crunch and we have
$300,000 shortfall and the Board was cutting back services throughout
the community. They were looking forward to next year and they said
they were evaluating ridership on various aspects of the various routes
23
PZM4.5.94
that we provide. And because this one wasn't hauling anybody they
really couldn't justify the expenditure of funds for it. They thought
it was superfluous and it was really one of those things that you do
if you are going to try to discourage people from using bus service.
You get them on one bus and transfer them somewhere else and make them
walk.
The other thing that George hasn't given us much credit for is that
in the plan it talks about enhanced mass transit service. Since this
plan has been enacted we have reduced the number of trips the buses we
have going through the west end. There used to be some 70 odd trips
a day that would go through there and we are down to about 16 now. We
feel like we have reached a point where we can't go down much further
without really jeopardizing the convenience of the service to the
people that use it.
George has said on record that really they don't want any bus service.
There is no room to compromise. We have reached an impasse there. If
the community tells us they want us to drop students off on Main
Street, we will do it. That is what we will do. But this is a larger
issue than just the west end when it comes to transit service to that
area of town. And I think we ought to put it to a vote of the
community if that is what it comes to. We should open this up--this
whole debate up and say "Do the rest of the people that live in this
town want to be dropped off on 4th Street in the rain and walk down
there or do you want to ride the bus and have it be convenient". You
should not necessarily limit something which is a facility that __?__
this whole community when it comes to mass transit services to the
decisions made by these 5 or 6 people who are sitting in this room.
McDonald: Just so we don't have to come back here again to request
funds for another patrol person which would cut out--we really want
something to go to the west end. We are leaving here with nothing that
is really going to change because nobody is going to enforce any of
those stop signs.
Diane: That is a budget issue. You have to go to City Council.
Bruce then closed the public portion of the hearing.
MOTION
Sara: I move to endorse City Council to invoke the west end traffic
control devices and installation of the 6 antique lights on Lake
Avenue. I STRONGLY move to endorse the continuing committee to
evaluate the impacts of the changes to the traffic control devices
throughout the summer and to review throughout the summer the Aspen
Meadows traffic mitigation plan and report their findings and
conclusions to a joint Council and P&Z meeting after the summer music
season.
Jasmine seconded the motion.
24
PZM4.5.94
Tim: Some of the points that came out of this meeting I think should
be put into this motion. I think it is important that we have a
leadership group. I think we should notify the Institute that they
need to have a representative on this leadership group. I think that
the warrant study should be in this motion and that we should move
forward on that so that we have that information by the end of the
summer when we get this next report back. So whatever it takes.
Whatever. Period. I want a warrant study to know whether or not we
should reduce the speed limit. I think that we basically should enact
this traffic grid.
I recommend that we send a certified letter from the City Attorney
that informs the Institute that we find that they are in non-compliance
wi th uses such as the expansion of the hotel uses, the expansion of the
trustee's houses being rented for short term, employees leaving late
at night after business luncheons that get out after certain hours-
-that they are not participating with the leadership group and that
they are required to do that. And that special events that they are
holding are in non-compliance with the hours of operation and that
deli veries have to be restricted to and garbage pickup has to be
restricted to certain hours.
-.............
I think that we should include in this that this traffic grid should
be printed through and publicized through the newspapers, through the
ACRA maps that they have to tell people through community information.
That this map should be put up during the summer during the music
season and during the Institute season on Grass Roots TV so that people
are informed that this type of traffic grid and restriction system is
in place.
--
I think that it is a good idea that if the alley's speed limits are
15 MPH that they should be posted.
Sara: As the motion maker I will respond. I agree that I think it is
a good idea that the warrant study should be done during the summer
because if we decide at the end of the summer the stop signs aren't
working and they take the study in September that would be too bad.
I think the maps are very well publicized--at least the walking maps
are in all the promotional literature but I think it is a great idea
that the new traffic signs ought to be publicized in the newspaper.
Tim: Not just once. I think they should come in some kind of re-
occurring schedule on a weekly basis or even in the Aspen Magazine or
as part of the program for the MAA that this traffic pattern is
explained to the people. We have to keep telling these people the
way it works.
Sara: The MAA does a great job with advertising in their program
about the walking experience. They are doing it.
25
PZM4.5.94
Diane: Tim, could I ask you to consider and Sara amending the motion-
-in your finding that the Institute is in non-compliance are you saying
the MAA is in compliance?
Sara: I find the MAA in compliance.
Bruce: So you are including that as part of your motion?
Sara: But I ask that they continue to work as part of the biannual
review.
Bruce: Tim, I would rather- -rather than sending a letter to the
Institute that we find that they are not in compliance. All we have
heard is Mac and the neighbors.
Tim:
that
they
Well, the City Attorney
they should be made aware
are not in compliance.
is now studying these issues. I think
that we are investigating the fact that
Diane: I would say that issues have been brought to our attention
that you perhaps may not be in compliance.
Sara: I am moving for the recommended motion on page 14 with the
additions of that the warrant study should be taken during the summer.
This plus the findings that the MAA is in substantial compliance and
finding that there are reasonable concerns that the Aspen Institute may
be in non-compliance, that a warrant study be implemented in the summer
and that alleys be posted.
Jasmine agreed to these conditions for her seconding of the motion.
Roger: I would request that posting of the alleys be kept off the
motion at this time.
Sara: I think it is part of the mitigation plan because they are
trying to get to the tent or the Institute in a hurry and they know
they have a lot of stop signs ahead of them and they go through the
alleys.
Roger: I think there is a more effective way of dealing with the
alleys and that is probably with a speed bump in the middle of each
problem alley as opposed to a speed sign. I just don't want to put in
hard speed limit signs in alleys at this time.
Sara: I withdraw this from the motion.
that continues to meet to know that it
Commission and they should determine the
for certain alleys.
But I would like the committee
is an area of concern for the
best speed mitigating solution
Jasmine: I will amend my second.
Roll call vote:
Bob, yes, Timl yes, Sara, yesr Roger, yes, Jasmine,
26
PZM4.5.94
yes, Bruce, yes.
Roger: We really don't need another motion specifically to identify
the non-consensus items. I feel that the non-consensus items are
extremely important to be resolved. And I don't want to give George
and the rest of our west end residents the idea that we are giving them
a short shrift on the non-compliance items.
Bruce:
them.
Staff has put it on our future agenda so we could deal with
Sara: Staff recognized that we could not deal with those non-
conforming items in one meeting.
Bruce: We need to deal with those items and we also need to deal with
possible non-compliance of the Institute. So staff needs to put on a
future meeting where we deal with the non-consensus items and the
potential non-compliance by the Institute. And we deal with those
issues at that time. In the meantime we have tried to take some
positive steps.
We made a finding that the MAA was in substantial compliance. And
then we are going to deal with the non-consensus items and the
potential non-compliance by the Institute at a future meeting. Does
somebody want to make a motion to direct staff to place it on a future
agenda.
Robert: I make such a motion.
Sara seconded the motion with all in favor.
Meeting was then adjourned. Time
ty Clerk
'''-'..,'.' ~
27