Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminutes.apz.19950221 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 21. 1995 Vice-chair Jasmine Tygre called meeting to order at 4:30 P.M. Answering roll call were Steve Buettow, Bob Blaich, Roger Hunt, Jasmine Tygre, Tim Mooney and Sara Garton. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Steve: I was approached by Bob Langley concerning relate to our approval of his project on East specifically the setbacks. changes that Cooper Ave. Roger: The basic purpose for a total of 10 foot side yard setbacks was for visual relief of a monolithic type of structure in a neighborhood. Given that this project is broken up into smaller buildings, that visual relief is given by the breaking up of the buildings. So I don't have a problem with going to the minimum 5 foot side yard setbacks on each side in this case because of the breaking up of the structure. Leslie: Monday night is the public hearing at City Council. This will come up. I will bring it up in my memo. HPC makes the final decision on this. Tim: I was hoping that this project didn't have to encroach on the neighbors and could stand on its own and that whatever this site could fit that is what the Langleys got. I was always concerned about the setbacks. I can remember talking about fire and all kinds of access to get between the buildings. Why can't you move these building closer together and maintain your setbacks? Bob Langley: We end up having to re-design everything. The buildings have to be re-designed because of viewplanes. Tim: The viewplane is something that you just don't get at the expense of your neighbors. Bob Langley: When this was approved by P&Z we had a 3 foot setback on the southeast corner. After our first reading at Council we have pulled back to 5 foot everywhere. Sara: I argued that I wanted this kept as large as possible because this is now usable space. There were side yards for everybody. I felt it was a better street presence. And to pull those units at least the front parcel A and B in towards each other--B and D are almost touching each other at that point. Tim: This is where the density needs to be. We have thousands of acres of forest and parks that you can get to. To minimize this open space on this project to me I think it is your responsibility '- to do it. It is not your neighbor's responsibility to give up their space. Langley: We have given them the minimum setback of 5 feet. But the total setback that code requires is 15 feet. We are meeting the minimum setbacks but we are not meeting the total. Jasmine: Four of us, based on support the project. Therefore, convey this to Council. Roger's rational felt that we I think we need to have Leslie PUBLIC COMMENTS There were none. MINUTES JANUARY 3. 1995 Bob: Roger. I move to approve minutes of January 3, All in favor, motion carries. 1995, second by ELMORE CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT Jasmine opened the public hearing. Mary Lackner made presentation as attached in record. After discussion regarding sidewalk: Roger: Let's not address this at this point. It will be addressed in the future. Everyone agreed. Jasmine: Judging from the memo from the Planning Office there doesn't seem to be much controversy about the rest of the items involved in the Conditional Use Review. Roger: The handicap space on the north side of the Trueman building is the narrowest space of the whole row. It is next to a curb. It is next to impossible to get a van in there and if you do get a van with a chair lift on it, it can't be used. So that is the most worthless handicap space. It is underutilized because it is useless. Something has to be done about that and this is a good opportunity to get that straightened out. Roger: The parking situation from the last post office driveway to where the shuttle stops and then south of that where it is posted "No Parking" up until where you have the poles--everyone is parked there. That supposedly was for pickup and fire lane and -,.."...... "'-- 2 ,.."....... everything like that. So something needs to be corrected there and now is the time to address it. Maybe that area where it is all nicely lined that you shouldn't park there where everyone parks- -maybe that is what should become the handicap parking. It is a much better spot for handicap parking and it is useable handicap parking. I have no problems with the basic philosophy of having a bank branch there because there used to be one there. And they used the east end of that building where there is still a night deposi tory. I hope this bank is going to remove that night depository and put it down in their facility. '- Philip Blomesa, representative for bank: We are discussing that. It is a big concrete box and we may just block it up. Bob: I am in favor of this proj ect. It is a good place for the bank. I go down there a lot because I do all my shopping there. And I like the idea of hitting all the places at one time. Are you getting anywhere with getting rid of cars of people who have just been parking there particularly to get away from the City parking constraints? I have seen cars booted and taken out recently. Are you being aggressive about that. What I worry about is the bank is probably going to draw many more people than the photo shop. How are you going to deal with that from a parking point of view? .- Blomesa: We got a jump on the City of Aspen when we found out the City was going to paid parking. For the past 6 months or so we had new signs made up and we have been very aggressive in the 2 hour parking limit. Since the program has started the amount of cars in the parking lot is a lot less. We have had less cars booted in the last 2 months. People aren't driving into town is what it boils down to. '.....~- Sara: I think the sidewalk is too large an extraction. who do banking will walk that South Mill stairway. People I want to support Roger, though. That is one of the most dangerous situations going on that people are allowed to pull in, park for a while and leave their motors running and run in for a quart of milk or a video. Someone is going to get killed there. I would ask that you reassure something will be done or remarked about the parking right there. Blomesa: I want to support the handicapped. If that is an inappropriate space, that space is in fact the largest space in front of the building. It is a 10 foot space. I found out today it still doesn't meet the requirements of the City of Aspen which requires 12 feet and we want to meet that. Roger: It is at the wrong end of activities. ,...-., Blomesa: I don't know what to do about the fire lanes. It has been a problem. I have spoken to Ed Van of the Fire Dept about it - 3 and asked him if there is a fire hazard. And he said "No, in fact there is not a fire hazard. Should there be a fire at the building any vehicles that are parked in the fire lane will not be able to get out until the fire is extinguished and the trucks moved. I don't think we want to put a handicap space in the fire lane. As far as policing the fire lane we have to think about how we go about being the bad guy and telling people they can't park there. How necessary is booting of cars. Steve: area. The handicap space would be good right to the left of that The first spot there and people could use that entry. Roger: There is a problem with that so-called "No Parking" area including back to the curb. People aren't so bad parking right next to the post office driveway because they know the shuttle stops there. But just ahead of that it is solid along that curb. Blomesa: The City of Aspen won't police that. property. It is private Bob: You can put obstructions up to make it impossible to park there. You can use the kind they use in the streets that actually just bend over. When the fire truck comes they just go through it. It is a flexible post. We use them at the Music Festival and they are effective. ,,,.,.--.. '-' Jasmine: I think that there are certain things that go along with the location of the bank and therefore relevant to the conditional use review and then the parking lot overall which may not be. I get the feeling that most of the Commission feels that the areas of the parking lot that are immediately adjacent to the building would be affected by the bank's being there plus the handicap spot are something that would be within the purview of this particular conditional use review. Roger: Also in effect we are dealing with--not because of the applicant's desire--but we are dealing with a non-conformity of a previous approval and that is the parking situation in the fire lane and "No Parking" area. That was spelled out in the original Trueman approval. Sara: Not only are we looking at this parking area right adjacent to the bank because now we have got the Conditional Use there. We have a right to look at it because as Roger says it doesn't even meet the original approval. Roger: That is not because you don't want it to meet it, it is because usage is that way. I am not coming down on you because all your customers can't read signs but we have to figure out a way for those customers not to use those spaces. ""-- 4 Mary: I have a suggestion. "Prior to issuance of co for the Bank they shall provide a 12 foot wide handicap parking space adjacent to the fire lane and to increase enforcement of no parking in the fire lane". Roger: I understood the handicap space was going to go just to the east of the entry. Blomesa: It will be right in front of the bank space. Roger: Not over in the fire lane space. Mary: It will be right adjacent to where the fire lane js. Bob: It will open up that space considering the number of times a handicap van will use it, it is going to essentially open up that space. Roger: Then if you sign it appropriately like "Don't Dare" "You can't park here or else" "Fire Lane" Handicap"--People will get the message. Jasmine closed the public hearing. MOTION: Sara moved to approve the Conditional Use for a satellite branch office at pitkin County Bank at Lot #1 of the Trueman Subdivision with the condition of moving the existing handicap parking space and establishing a 12 foot handicap parking space immediately to the east and adjacent to the fire lane and increased enforcement of non-parking in the fire lane be undertaken. Also that the existing night drop be removed or disguised; second by Bob. All in favor, motion carries. CODE AMENDMENTS Jasmine opened the public hearing. VESTED RIGHTS Roger: I think we should specifically limit the approval--have an expiration time for the approval so that people just can't hold onto something for 9 years without it being reviewed. Sara: I agreed. Bob: I tend to agree. I think there should be some wording in there to alert people to this. Tim: I really think it is a good point. I don't think it stares us in the face that often but if it does anything it confirms people who are speculating. -- ""-' 5 /""""",,- ,.- _. ,.... J,r-'._ -- Steve: People do get their approvals. together and then they sell the package. They put everything Jasmine: The Commission seems to be pretty much in accord in the sense that we don't necessarily have anything in detail but you understand what our concerns are and try to get in a time limit. MOTION: certain carries. Jasmine moved to continue this public hearing to a date of March 7, 1995; second by Roger. All in favor, motion Kim: At that time we Greenline, Landscape, envelopes. will review Stream Margin changes, 8040 Satellite Dish Antennas and building MOTION: Jasmine moved to adjourn; second by Sara. All in favor, motion carries. Meeting adjourned at 6:45 P.M. Kathleen J. Strickland, Deputy City Clerk 6