My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Planning Commission Minutes 2009 12 10
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
PLANNING COMMISSION
>
2000-2019 Planning Commission
>
2009 Planning Commission Agendas Packets Minutes
>
Planning Commission Minutes 2009 12 10
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 9:55:19 AM
Creation date
3/15/2010 11:36:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
PCMIN 2009 12 10
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />DECEMBER 10, 2009 <br />Page 3 of 6 <br />McMillan stated it is not included. <br />Sheets asked how it would be included in a deed. <br />McMillan stated it could be included and then it becomes part of the recorded <br />deed document. <br />Hartman questioned the remote parking concept. She asked how many would <br />really use it and how do we protect downtown. <br />McMillan stated remote parking has to be in same zone district and could be <br />used in the Old Town Area. <br />Hartman stated people are going to park where they are going to park and we <br />need to establish some regulations to protect them. <br />McMillan stated there could be neighborhood permit parking. <br />Loo asked if a credit for continuous parking at 25% would be rounded up. <br />McMillan stated the wording “not to exceed” implies it would be rounded down. <br />Lipton asked if the item at 5.c. in the staff report regarding the parking credit <br />reduction applied to both shared and on-street. <br />McMillan confirmed it is a total for both. <br />Sheets stated “total cumulative of A and B (above)” should be added to provide <br />clarity. <br />Lipton asked how changing a use would affect the parking. <br />McMillan stated the ratio would continue to be 1/500 SF. <br />Lipton asked what if the building is a condo. <br />McMillan stated the building has not changed so the parking would not change. <br />Sheets stated the City Council is given a considerable amount of flexibility, but <br />the proposed language is detailed. How do we handle reduction of discretion? <br />McMillan stated the new requirements are less subjective. <br />Loo asked how other municipalities are addressing the parking issues. <br />McMillan stated he knows Boulder is but he does not know about other <br />communities. <br />Sheets asked if all issues would be complaint driven. <br />McMillan stated that is why we will require an agreement between parties. <br />Sheets asked if both parties would need to complete a parking study. <br />McMillan stated only the party that is developing a site. <br />Sheets asked if deed restrictions are recorded documents. <br />McMillan stated they are recorded. <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.