HomeMy WebLinkAboutcoa.apz.min.051756letter
.
-
--
",
.
...
-"
L.OOAL.
PL.ANNING
..""10.
222' .tM nIUT. eOULDIR. COLoa.DO
/My n.!~
"\
~
Clinton B. stewert
stewert end Gellegher. Attorneys et Lew.
Box 62
,upen, Co loredo
Dear CII nt:
Thank you for your letter of May lOth su~..rlzlng the prlnclpel points of
discussion at your publIc hearing held on /My 7th. CertaInly none of the
proposed changes appear extreme or difficult to Incorporate In the pro-
posed zonIng ordinance. My reco~ndatlons are contained In the aCCOMpeny-
Ing third draft. In addition, the following co..ents ..y explain additional
thoughts regarding the proposed a..ndMents. using your letter of May lOth
as a guide for my own suggestions. I WDuld reCOMMend the following - all
subject to the faet that I ~y lack suffIcIent local InformatIon and re-
actions they expressed at the public hearIng.
SectIon 11\ (Residential DistrIct). I. Due to the very liMIted emount of
area proposed for residential zoning In the City of Aspen. and the diffI-
cultyof properly controllIng ~Itlple faMily housing. I would not reco..end
the Inclusion of such buildings In this zone. General experience has In-
dIcated that multiple units ere not as well aalntaloed. create seriouS
parking problems (even with off-street perking requlr_ntS) and aay be
a detriment to other houses becau.e of excessive bulk.
!
?
2. Mlnlmu~ Rear vard. The set back of 5 feet Is certainly proper If
local reectlon Is f&voreble.
J/.-<
~ 3.
)q. ~f
Minimum Floor Area.
600 square feet Is very reesonab1e.
I f you deel de to I nalude MUlti pie faM11 Y dwell I n9S. the defl nl tlon
"dwellIng unit" should be sufficient to require perking for eech f..lly.
~
..--
section IV (TourIst District). I. I would not reeo..end t~e Inclusion of
drive-In restaurants due to their "sually excessive noise, car light.,
litter of paper and garbage and resulting sanitary probl.... The present
lIsting under Mo. 3 in SectIon V (Business DIstrict) would .... proper.
2. PlacIng traller~- subject to all other city ordinances refUlatlng
sueh uses _ In the ~ess DistrIct WDuld saem much lass debet.-Ie than
placing them In the unrestricted zone; however. you aay not prefer thl.
from, practIcal stendpolnt.
'Ie-' {:
~~:'Y
~t.-
t~
.-
---
-
(! "'-' ....-
ZG.:i'
~J:1~~
~ .wI...ISectlon v (Business District). I.
~~would be very unusual.
Section VII (Supplemental Regulations).
~ a Building Review Committee would seeM a
design and size of signs. Perhaps their
on small signs.
~
oi
~
~
~.
...;. .,.. :.:J..!...( _
C II nton S tewert
"/17/56
,.. 2
.......
3. MInimum Rear Yard. 2 feet could certainly be used.
4. Minimum Floor Area. By definition a MOtel would not ba required to
have any miniMUM floor area; ~..ver. with the reduction In the residential
district this figure alght be reduced to 300 s~uare feet.
5. MlnlMUa Off Street Parking. Ordinarily residential properties would
not be ex..pt f~M off-street parking requireMents In such a zoning district.
Ihl Ie requlre..nts can be based on the nuMber of roo.. or rental units,
tha.e ..y change after original construction and are often thus difficult
to detennlne.
The set back for hotels and MOtel.
I. The CI ty CaJOell, actl ng ..
proper agency to control the
review could be omitted, however,
Section XI I (Enforcement).
Section XIV (Definitions)
now Included. a listing of
your consideration.
Both proposed changes seem good.
While I believe all Important defInitions are
others which might be Included Is Inserted for
These COMments have taken more space than I expected, .nd you May wish to
forget them all by this time. Whatever you and Fred decide, we will be
glad to print copies of the proposed or adopted law at any time.
Certainly al I of your work and that of the ...oers of the Planning Commission
has resulted In a very worthwhile set of zoning standards for Aspen.
Sincerely,
kr
Trafton Been
,
TB.lb
- .
J- cl...1J. ,.L/ c 4J. h CJ..j. I- ~ v-kJ '" C ~
cot ~rJ.-
.. ._~-,""""""'------