Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.boa.90.20 PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT DATE ~ i ~ S 1' 19 °10 CASE # ~ ~!/" APPLICANT ~L~Va~n ~~MDJ V,n PHONED °Ia5- x-71 I ~ ~4~y~~ MAILING OWNER ~ So~.ne. ~~ PHONE Scw~ ~~ MAILING ADDRESS Sa,~.:. LOCATION OF PROPERTY 1-0-`' y~ {~`uc.~ Ii~C~n',col. ~ Iin~ ~ G~e,.~a~ o~ S,now+tigss ~b .,5 ~ uw~ Any pertinent data must accompany this application, and will be made part of this Case. The Board may return this application if it does not contain all the facts in grtpue1srtio},n. (('' Applicant Signature ~~erV~o,r..~n 1. ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- (To be completed by the Zoning Department) Provisions of the zoning resolution requiring the Zoning Official forward this application to the Board of Adjustment, and reasons for not granting a building permit: Requesting: ~j0 Zone District Lot Size ' Front Yard Setback Variance, where ' is required. ' Rear Yard Setback Variance, where is required. ~' ~ Side Yard Setback Variance, where SO is required. ' Side Yard Setback Variance, where is required. ' Height Variance, where ' is required. Square Feet where a maximum of sq.ft. is allowed. Other: Hardship: _~~ / n Zoning Official-/y~~=y~~+~'*q°- ~~ Application filed yl~ Date ~~ 7~~G L/'%C~ Notices mailed ~ I O ~~ Parcel ID # '9 - O ~D Secretary ~ e J ~ ~-J /, oooooi ~z~l NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS AFFECTED BY THE REQUESTED ZONING OR USE VARIANCE DESCRIBED BELOW: Pursuant to Pitkin County Resolution of June 5, 1955, as amended, a Public Hearing will be held in the District CourtRoom, Pitkin County Court House, Aspen, Colorado, (or at such other place as the meeting may then be adjourned) to consider an application filed with the said Board of Adjustment requesting authority for variance from the provisions of the County Zoning Resolution. All persons affected by the proposed variance are invited to appear and state their views, protests or objections. If you cannot appear personally at such meeting, then you are urged to state your views by letter, particularly if you have objection to such variance, as the Board of Adjustment will give serious consideration to the opinions of surrounding property owners and other affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for variance. THE PARTICULARS OF THE HEARING AND OF THE REQUESTED VARIANCE ARE AS FOLLOWS: Date and time of meeting: May O1, 1990 at 5:15 PM Name and Address of Applicant: Peter Van Domelen P.O. Box 1302 Aspen, CO 81612 Property Location or Description: Lot 4, Block 1, Third Filing Gateway of Snowmass Mesa Subdivision Requesting approval Por a 30 foot south side yard setback variance where 50 feet is required in the RS-30 zone district for construction of a single-family residence. The granting of this variance would allow the house to be 20 feet from the Van Domelen south side property line. Duration of Variance: Temporary Permanent: X THE P~TKIN COUN Y/ B~ ~ OF ADJUSTMENT l~ Cindy Christensen, Secretary ~DOU~ Pitkin County Board of Adjustment Aspen, Colorado Re: Van Domelen Variance Request Gentlemen: The property involved in this variance request is Lot 4, Block 1, Third Filing, Getaway of Snowmass Mesa Subdivision. The Subdivision Plat for Gateway of Snowmass, Third Filing, was recorded March 2, 1970. Protective Covenants had previously been placed on the subdivision and are evidenced by instrument recorded April 18, 1969 in Book 240 at Page 514. The Protective Covenants (Section 4 of Article IV) provide for the following setback requirements: Front Lot Line - 30 feet Side/street Lot Line - 25 feet Interior Lot Line - 20 feet Rear Lot Line - 20 feet The lots in the Gateway of Snowmass Mesa Subdivision are approximately 1 to 2 acres in size. The general area, including the Gateway of Snowmass Mesa Subdivision, was thereafter zoned RS-20. RS-20 zoning provides for 20-acre lots and the following setback requirements: Front Lot Line Side Lot Line Rear Lot Line - 100 feet - 50 feet - 50 feet The location of the proposed residence, as shown on the Site Plan, complies with the setback requirements as set forth in the Protective Covenants for Gateway of Snowmass Mesa Subdivision. However, the proposed location of the residence will require a variance with respect to the setback requirements of the RS-20 zoning. A variance is requested to reduce the South Side Lot Line setback from 50 feet to 20 feet. The South Lot Line abuts to B.L.M. property. The RS-20 zoning was placed upon the Gateway of Snowmass Mesa Subdivision after the subdivision was created and the lot size established. The setback requirements for the RS-20 zoning were formulated based upon 20-acre lots rather than upon the lot of RS-20 zoning create a hardship upon this property which was not caused by the Applicants. This is a recurring situation in the Gateway of Snowmass Mesa Subdivision and similar variances with respect to the RS-20 setback requirements have been granted in the past. ooaoo3 In addition to the hardship mentioned above, there is also a topographical hardship caused by the steep incline on the east aside of the lot. The Board of Adjustment has already done an on site inspection of the subject property and determined that indeed a hardship did exist(a copy of this finding has been attached). Upon commencing work on the project, it was discovered that unless the structure was turned slightly to the south an inordinate amount of landfill would have to be brought in to support the driveway turnaround area. This would create an unsightly effect, as virtually the entire hill would act as a spill-over for the new dirt. By turning the house slightly we will be able to accommodate the driveway turnaround area without any additional fill. We apologize for not recognizing this in our previous application to the Board. ~oQ~~~t! ~ri~~ ~a.~~,~~)~.; RESOLUTION OF THE PITKZN COU27TY, COhORADO BOARD OF ADJiJSTt~NT GRANTING SETBACK RELIEF FOR PETER VAN DOMELEN RESOLUTION NO. 8932 Y:HEREAS, Peter Van Dos~elen, owner of Lot 4, Bloc}: 1, Filing 3, Gatev;ay to Snowmass 1•;esa Subdivi.si_n, requests a 5 fcct north side yard setbacl: variance and a 30 foot rear yarc. setback variance for the const uction of a residential house; and hi3EREA5, the subject property is within ti;e ur,incorpo_ated area of P~tg;n County, CeJ~rade, (as described in F>:hibit "A", attached); and, WHEREAS, the Board of Adjustment is vested with the power to grant or deny such variances by virtue of Title IZ, Section 1G-1.3, Pit}:in County Code (Land Use Code) and Colorado Revised Statutes, 1973, 30-25-118(2) (C); and, ~,ERr,_,c, based cn the evidence presented, the Board of Adjustment -„a};cs the following findings: 1. Proper notice procedures, including the notification of all adjoining property owners, has been shown by the applicant. 2. The required hardship or practical difficulty has been established. 3. Granting such relief v;ill not cause substan- tial detriment to the public welfare and will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the Zoning Resolutions and the zoning maps. NOF--, THEREFORE, EE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment, that a 5 foot north side yard setback variance and a 30 foot rear yard setbac}: variance be granted on the condition that the house be '. as on the documents submitted (Exhibit "B"), dated June 16, _, due to topographical hardship. SdARIvI?VG: Any violation of the terms o` this resolution may result in rehearing and possible revocation. a c -~ ~-+1: cn n ,_ _ r ti T ~ +. u: _. o v m' ~-. --•~ c ~ ~ DUUUQJ _ °~, c~ PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS GEORGE AND KAREN DRAPER NORTH 6TH STREET ASPEN, CO 81611 FRANCIS CHIARAMONTE SOUTH MARYLAND HOSPITAL H-F 3 B1L3 7503 SURRATTS CLINTON, MARYLAND 20735 JO RACAK 0234 LIGHTHILL ROAD SNOWMASS, CO 81654 BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT U. S. DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR 2850 YOUNGFIELD STREET DENVER, CO 80215 ROBERT FREEAY.K 304 FAIRBANK ROAD RIVERSIDE, ILLINOIS 60546 OOOOvE eoau ~~~~~ ^~~_~~~ Exhibit "A" Legal Description for property owned by Peter Van Domelen Lot 4, Block 1, Filing 3, Gateway to Snowmass Mesa Subdivision, Pitl:in Count}~, Colorado 0000~?^ ~ .] L F/L /NG / i ~ F/L /NG 2 < N JII 1 FiL /NS 3 ~ ; ~ , BLOC 3 O z O Q O B OCK I O " ® a Q ~ n ,~ -- © ~O B O ~ O ' b= O ! O ~ yo s O O 6 O ~ N~ f ~~ w ~ C ~ 1 /, O ~ O ~ / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O z O ® OY o BOO ~ ®B~~.r ~ m b o ~ / ® o B~ o ,O O^ * O n BL 3 C ~~ ® C : ~ ~ ~ - _.. F/L /N6 3 I F/L /NG t I F/L /N6 / ~ ~~~ ~k,~ Ad~aer I ~o ~'~,~k ~}o u S e \^ i :' _ \ \'R SCA EE DATE RE VISONS 6 RURpSE SCALE/'+200' HOLY CROSS DErvL 1,(Ap sizana rnrrac OgAlf[NG _ KC.EA ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION 6ArE1VAr OF WAd,Rt t<n'ndmo~~. n.nn,n _wrur5 wo.rrr _ .-~ xcr• GLEHWOOD SPRINGS. COl01tAD0 MESI SUBON/S/ON VIO.T[ -- -- - COLORADO 3A EAGLE sr.rE • cwxrr rowNwn [w w. -- _____._____ ____ ow.xrixc ovr xov ceoss u[crR¢.ssN. nc. L'OLO. TeS. 7/ - .. __ _._ ___ w. xr _s. ~.,. ,,.,,.. .IlRwro er P/7K/N R. Q6 M. AREA _ _. mrno x - o~Te DTt r9 SEC.SI SI GATEWAY TO SNOWMASS MESA SUBDIVISION 00000 variance for a one acre parcel in the RS-30 zone district. The existing house is currently within the required setback, as it predates zoning. The proposed addition to this house is an encroachment of an additional four feet into the setback. Evins explained how this 700 square foot house is not meeting the demands of his growing family. They propose an addition of 1500 square feet, 550 square feet of which will be outside the original house footprint. The area, proposed for outside the footprint, is to enclose a basement entryway otherwise accessable only from the outside. The proposed addition will increase the height of the house to 23 feel. Evins believes his plans are simple and environmentally feasible. No natural landscape will be disturbed. Pictures were presented to the Board and added to the file. Brown observed that were the house to conform with required setbacks, it would be placed in the river! Shaffran made a motion to grant an 84 foot front yard setback variance as shown on the plans submitted, due to downzoning. Dobrovolny seconded the motion and it was passed with a 5-0 vote. Brown and another member did not vote. ~~nu~ I~2,om ~u,,~r.~ ~I~ I R~5 ~,A vvl Pe~~~~ Case #89-32. Van Domelen. Peter Lot 4 Block 1 Filing 3 Gateway to Snowmass Subdivision Peter Van Domelen, Jr. was present to request a 5 foot north side yard setback variance and a 30 foot rear yard setback variance. The Van Domelen lot is 1.05 acres and is zoned RS-30. The Van Domelen lot is a corner lot of the subdivision and is located, in part, on a ridge. He would like to build his house high enough on the ridge to take advantage of the views, yet not so high as to block neighbor's views. Van •Domelen explained to the Board that half his parcel has a steep slope and that he is trying to avoid building on that portion of the lot. He has worked with architects to design a tiered house to minimize the impact on surrounding neighbors. Neighbors, Norma Olsen, George and Karen Draper, Bill Landon, and Wayne Price were present to oppose the variance request because they all feared their view would be obstructed. A letter of opposition from neighbors, Joe and Janet Raczak, was read and added to the file. Many neighbors were concerned with the height of the building. Price felt the house was long in design, thereby exacerbating the problems. Landon invited the Board to .a site visit. Gull explained to the Board that Van Domelen has the right to build up to 28 feet in height. Zn trying to mitigate the impact this house will have on neighbors, the house was designed to be 000009 ~' r only 18 feet in height from the existing grade. According to Van Domelen, if the variance request is denied and he must build closer to the slope, he will build his house higher than 18 feet in order to see over the ridge. David Brown suggested that height poles be put in place and a site inspection made, whereby the impact on neighboring views can be better judged. Shaffran made a motion to postpone the hearing of this case until Thursday, July 13, 1989, at 8:00 a.m. Neiley seconded the motion and it was passed with a 5-0 .vote. (Please reference minutes for site visit.) Luke Hecht was present to request a 26 foot front yard setback variance and a 22 foot west side yard setback variance for the construction of a garage. The lot is 220 feet wide, and is zoned RS-30. Hecht explained that the area north of the house and garage slopes down very fast, and makes it undesirable and impractical to build the garage at the "end of the driveway". In 1980, a variance was approved for the location of the house because of this hardship. Gull made a motion to grant a 26 foot front yard setback variance and a 22 foot west side yard setback variance as shown on .the plans submitted, due to downzoning. Shaffran made a motion to adjourn the meeting. The motion was seconded by Dobrovolny and passed with a 5-0 vote, with Brown and another member not voting. Respectfully Submitted, CFA /.~C',~1. .1,! Jo~hna S. Sch ffner, ~ Secretar Kandi Shaffran, Chairman OOOOIU - - - - - - ,. -r:.~ -. .. - 'SPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 920-5090 LAND USE APPLICATION FEES City 00113 -63250-134 GMP/CONCEPTUAL -63270-136 GMP/FINAL -63280-137 SUB/CONCEPTUAL -63300-139 SUBJFINAL -63310-140 ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS -63320-141 ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS/ i CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS REFERRAL FEES: 00125 -63340-205 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 00123 -63340-190 HOUSING 00115 -63340.163 ENGINEERING SUBTOTAL County 00113 X3160-126 GMP/GENERAL ii -63170-127 GMP/DETAILED ~, -63180-128 GMP/FINAL -63190-129 SUB/GENERAL -63200-130 SUB/DETAILED -63210-131 SUB/FINAL ~, -63220-132 ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS I~ -63230-133 ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS/ i ~ CONSENT AGENDA FTEt~S ~ ~ '!'~` '~., -63450-146 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT -~~ J '. REFERRAL FEES : 00125 -63340-205 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 00123 -63340-190 HOUSING 00113 -63360.143 ENGINEERING PLANNING OFFICE SALES 00113 -63080-122 CITY/COUNTY CODE -63090-123 COMP. PLAN X3140.124 COPY FEES F>9000.145 OTHER _ SUBTOTAL ~~ TOTAL ~ r ~,~z ~= , B~,~ ~ Name: ~ ~>, - Phone: Address: ~ ~.I (J j ~ L? ~ / !~ ; Project: ~ ,~ ~ n 'C- % ~ J (`' ,, i~ / ~ ~ / Check # Date: Additional billing: Jt of Hours: Q~~V~~ County of Pitkin State of Colorado r~ \I ) AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE BY }ss. POSTING OF A VARIANCE HEARING BEFORE THE PITRIN COUNTY } BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT The undersigned, being first duly sworn, deposes and says as follows: I,_~-~er~c+~.~o.~u~ being or representing an Applicant before the Pitkin County Board of Adjustment, personally certify that the attached photograph fairly and accurately represents the sign posted as Notice of the variance hearing on this matter in a conspicuous place on the subject property (as it could be seen from the nearest public way) and that~~.fft~~he said sign was posted and visible continuously from the a~ day of t171S i ~ 19 90 , to the day of ~ "~ ~~ 19 ~C-~ _ (Must be posted for at least (09) fu~ daycsf b fore tithe hearing date). ~C~ V c~~~ ~X ~. Applicant's Signature Subscribed and sworn to before me this -~ da,,~~'' of , 19gJ~, by i'0~l'Q/ dYl /11Q1Q/l WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL_ My Commission expires= (O~'-~~`~~ _f-- Notary Pub c's Signature ~-- ~ Address ;s:• r ~..- i oooo~ ~_ ;t't',:'3t..:.'._(~ i16/C}~/9+_i 15:54 ~'E'r 4.~~i) PF~ 622 ~'G 576 S;. :Lv:a Davis, Pi`4;in Cnty ripr~~.:.r nr,,.- ~y.~OG RESOLUTION OF THE PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTING SETBACK RELIEF FOR PETER VAN DOMELEN RESOLUTION NO. 90-20 WHEREAS, Peter Van Domelen, owner of Lot 4, Block 1, Filing 3, Gateway of Snowmass Subdivision, requests a 30 foot south side yard .setback variance where 50 feet is required in the RS-30 zone district, for the repositioning of a proposed single-family residence; and WHEREAS, the subject property is within the unincorporated area of Pitkin County, Colorado, (as described in Exhibit "A", attached); and, WHEREAS, the Board of Adjustment is vested with the power to grant or deny such variances by virtue of Title II, Section 16-1.3, Pitkin County Code (Land Use Code) and Colorado Revised Statutes, 1973, 30-28-118(2) (C); and, WHEREAS, based on the evidence presented, the Board of Adjustment makes the following findings: 1. Proper notice procedures, including the notification of all adjoining property owners, has been shown by the applicant. 2. The required hardship or practical difficulty has been established. 3. Granting such relief will not cause substan- tial detriment to the public welfare and will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the Zoning Resolutions and the zoning maps. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Adjustment, that a 30 foot south side yard setback variance be granted to allow for the repositioning of a proposed single-family residence, as shown on the plans submitted, Exhibit "B", due to downzoning. WARNING: Any violation of the terms of this resolution may result in rehearing and possible revocation. 000013 .tN. z ~n,. H: v.. ~ ;i, j: !<'?3425 Cif; <; ~ : ~~?r i ;. S: 59 Rec ~, 00 Pt_: 622 PG 577 ~±?via Davi,, 1='iti::an Cni-i _} Cl.er4:., Doc 8'~.Cur Resolution No_ 90-~_ Page 2 The Resolution was adopted by vote of the Board of Adjustment of the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. DATED: May 1, 1990 The Board of Adjustment of Pitkin County, Colorado ATTEST: ////% ~u~ ~Cc.,,~-¢o..~ Cin y L. Christensen, Secretary Ka- nos of-~---- - Chairman ~~Q~~~ .- ' • M ?2345'8 O6/t,-~ iqt=} ~ ~: `.S~r_ s~ ~-,C ;.,~ 622 ."C: 578 Sil~,~i.a Davis, P;.th.,n ~~.*, i. r - EXHIBIT "A" Legal Description for property owned by PETER VAN DOMELEN Lot 4, Block 1, Filing 3, Gateway to Snowmass Mesa Subdivision, Pitkin County, Colorado. 00001 \~\ }, ~ ~ ~ m Q o c' 0 EXHIBIT "B" \ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ O cn \ ~ -#32342 8 Gb/0/90 15::,9 Rec x.00 Pk' 622 F'r 579 \Siivi.a. Dads, PitE.i.n Cn`y Cl.er4-. , Doc ~.c-~O N~ \ ~ _ ~~ \ -~ ~f\ ~ ~ - \ 'I~ J \ G w- ~ 6 ' a ~ f ~! ^ ` .+ ~ I . -~ 1 '. ./b0 J . _ \\ O Q\~ ~ \\~ \ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~~ `_J , ~'a~ \ ~ \ ~ ~ T ~ \ 4. _ ` ~ \ I`. sL s ~ ~~.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Q l~ ~~L •~- ~~ Z ~ ~ J m ~. ~ 3 0 f~ p f ~ o- } 2 I V~ } ' i ~ ~ ~ r 7 ~ ~ J ~ a ~, J r~-' , N Q ~ ~ L~ Q OOOU15 Q W ~ d 1 ~~ V ~ ~ Y ~ i w N>w c~tz¢ r a a o ww tz _» ^ ow rwfwc zw uw cg .zx W~iEz iz~oc £=WUN £1-O W u 3 Z ~ O a1- .Z.>4 N> WQ 7W >U L> (L~ . V. ~- -' Li Li F > U1 L NLL W 3 ~ 'w 2 U GSOF Jf W Z CZU~~ 0^~ LL C NHO ~~ u ou ww JW CLLF~ OLLWW¢ UW>00 OO _ U I~ F Y - F Z.G E 22 ~z~~~ ~~.~w a J ~ ~ _ i^ o o - _ C L: W lJ L: ~¢CGy e>::Z LZ Zr oa_o ~ry~¢ ~e~ar NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS AFFECTED BY THE REQUESTED ZONING VARIANCE DESCRIBED BELOW: Pursuant to Pitkin'COUnty Zoning Resolution of June 5, 1955, amended, a Public Hearing will be held in the District irtroom, Pitkin County Court House, Aspen, Colorado, (or at .,:ch other place as the meeting may then be adjourned) to consider an application filed with the said Board of Adjustment requesting authority for variance from the provisions of the c~unty zoning Resolution. All persons affected by the proposed variance are invited to year and state their views, protests, or objections. If you • c ~~not appear personally at such meeting, then you are urged to ' ate your views by letter, particularly if you have objection to . ch variance, as the Board of Adjustment will give serious c nsideration to the opinions of surrounding property owners and `~ers affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request variance. iE AND TIME~OF MEETING: May Ol, 1990 at 5:15 PM. Wiley, James and Kathy: requesting a 59 foot front yard setback variance, where 100 feet is required in the AF-1 zone district, for the construction of a single family residence. Property Location: Lot #33, Holland Hills, Pitkin County. Van Domelen, Peter: requesting a 30 foot south side yard setback variance, where 50 feet is required in the RS-30 zone district, for the construction of a single-family residence. Property Location: Lot 4, Block 1, Third Filing, Gateway of Snowmass Mesa Subdivision, Pitkin County. Kittle, Wyland: requesting a 10 foot west side yard setback ~, sriance, where 30 feet is required in the AF-1 zone district, for an addition to a single-family residence. Property Location: 24150 Highway 82, Pitkin County. comer, Christopher: requesting a 20 foot and 10 foot front yard tback variance, where 30 feet is required in the AF-1 zone o strict, for the construction of a proposed entry and proposed 'ition, respectively, to a single family residence. Property I ration: Lot 7, Ardmore Subdivision (138 Ardmore Drive), Pitkin C ;nty. S ~litted to the Aspen Times on April 17, 1990. Z e Published in the Aspen Times on April 19, 1990. C my PO # 46817 00001? ~ ~ ! Minutes Pitkin County Board of Adjustment May O1, 1990 Members Present: Kandi Shaffran, Chairman Rick Neiley Ted Guy Member Absent: Stan Mathis Evan Gull John Ostwald Buddy Lucero, Acting Pitkin County Zoning Administrator, and Joanna Schaffner, Zoning Technician, were present with staff recommendations and comments. Shaffran opened the meeting at 5:22 p.m. and introduced the Board to those present. Tom Smith, County Attorney, addressed the Board regarding Case #90-16, Hillary Ossario. Smith reiterated that the Stouffer's, through Nick McGrath, their attorney, are requesting a rehearing regarding the variance. Smith recommended that the Board deny the request for rehearing, but may reconsider the issue after the Pitkin County Plannincf & Zoning Commission (P&Z) and the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) have reheard the 1041 review. McGrath stated that the main issue is the relationship of the BOCC's determination of the 1041 envelope and the Board of Adjustment's (BOA) duties in granting a variance consistent with the envelope. Gull stated that there were no grounds upon which to treat a variance which has been approved by the Board to retract it temporarily via tabling. There were no irregularities in the BOA's approval process, but apparently irregularities preceding this process. What McGrath is requesting is that the rehearing be granted subject to what the BOCC and the P&Z decides regarding the 1041 envelope. Smith suggested that the Board draft the resolution granting the 80 foot front yard setback variance on Case #90-16, but table approval of the document until after the 1041 review has been reviewed before the P&Z and the BOCC in July. Shaffran moved that the Board table approval of the resolution until such time that a decision is rendered from the rehearing by the BOCC and P&Z later this summer. Guy seconded the motion and it was passed 5-0. Case #90-19. Wiley James & Kathy Lot 33 Holland Hills James and Kathy Wiley were present to request a 59 foot front yard setback variance where 100 feet is required in the AF-1 zone district, for the construction of a single-family residence. 1 000018 p T ~~ ~ .n. +s n ~ ~ a. Shaffran commented that the house is as centrally located on the lot as possible. Guy stated that the size of the lot relates to R-30 zoning. Shaffran asked if there were any members of the public to respond to this case. Neighbor Jeannie Wilder, owner of Lot 33, stated that she will be building a two-story dwelling across the street from the Wileys. The Wileys stated that this was not a problem with the location of their house as sited on the plans. Guy made a motion to grant the requested 58.5 foot front yard setback variance as reflected on the plans submitted, due to downzoning. Gull seconded the motion and it passed 5-0. Case #90-20, Van Domelen, Peter, Lot 4, Slock 1, Filing 3, Gateway of Snowmass Peter Van Domelen was present to request a 3o foot south yard setback variance where 50 feet is required in the RS-30 zone district, for the construction of a single-family residence, because of topographic hardships. Van Domelen mentioned that this lot has gone before the Board of Adjustment previously, Case #89-32, and a variance was granted. Once Van' Domelen started to excavate, he. found that the hillside would be greatly scarred and alot of fill would have to be brought in for the house. By changing the angle of the house, there is less disturbance of the hillside and less of a road cut. There was no one from the public present to comment on this case. Guy stated that this is a 1 acre lot, comparable to AF-3 zoning where setbacks are 50/20/20. Schaffner requested that any approval be based on the condition that the height not exceed the maximum height limit. Discussion ensued if the Board should be considering the height of the house. Lucero commented that if the height is to remain the same as when the case was first heard (Case #89-32), there is no need to renotify. If the height does change, then the public has to be renotified since height was a major concern in Case #89-32. Denis Cyrus, architect for Peter Van Domelen, reiterated that the height of the house would not change. Ostwald made a motion to grant a 30 foot south side yard setback variance, with the condition that there is no other change to the original submission, due to topographical hardships. Gull seconded the motion. The vote was approved 5-0. Case #90-21, Kittle, Wvland, 24150 Highway 82, Basalt Wyland Kittle was present to request a 10 foot west side yard setback variance, where 30 feet is required in the AF-1 zone district, for an addition to a single-family residence, because of a non-conforming lot size. 000019 2 ~ _ Shaffran asked if anyone from the public was present to comment. There was no one present. After a brief discussion, Guy moved to grant a 10 foot west side yard setback variance due to downzoning. Shaffran seconded the motion and it was passed 5-0. Ostwald added than any overburden from the excavation cannot be dumped into the river without approval from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Case #90-23, Sommer. Christopher, Lot 7, Ardmore Subdivision Christopher Sommer, and architect Al Byer, were present to request a 20 foot front yard setback variance and a 10 foot front yard setback variance where 30 feet is required in the R-15 zone district, for the construction of a proposed addition and a proposed entry way, respectively, for a single-family residence. Sommer was also requesting increasing the FAR, but through extensive discussion it was found that there was not going to be an increase in the FAR with the proposed changes. Lucero and Schaffner both agreed. Sommer submitted photographs of the house and the area. Byer explained how the outlay of the subdivision and how entry is obtained to Sommer's house. The Board asked Lucero whether this area was going to be annexed into the City. Gull, who lives in the Ardmore Subdivision, stated that there was an attempt to annex this subdivision some time ago, but there was some opposition so it was dropped from consideration. Shaffran read a note from Mrs. Blade, a neighbor, who called and stated the Blade family has no objections and, in fact, favor the Sommer's proposed plans. A model of the house as it would appear after the remodeling was presented to the Board for further clarification of the changes as explained by Byer. Neiley stated that the Pitkin County Land Use Code makes reference to all sorts of exceptional hardships not caused by the applicant. Neiley continued that a house built in the 1960's, was not designed to meet current code standards, is inefficient with respect to energy, and may be considered a hardship to allow modest increases in FAR to rectify those conditions. Guy made a motion to grant a l0 foot front yard setback variance for an entry and a 20 foot front yard setback variance for a proposed addition to a single-family residence, as shown on the plans submitted, due to downzoning. Shaffran seconded the motion and it was passed 4-1 with Ostwald abstaining because of the prior discussion regarding FAR. Neiley made a motion to approve the minutes of the April 3, 1990, meeting as amended. All were in favor. ~~~~7~ 3 w .., ~ ,, ~.. _ . Lucero advised the Board of an Association of Code Enforcement Officials (ACED) workshop to be held in Vail on June 22. A major issue that will be discussed at this workshop is the land trade issue presently occurring in Vail. Also to be presented will be zoning and land use problems in mountain resorts. Lucero will make arrangements if any Board members want to attend, the County may pick up the cost. Ostwald expressed an interest in attending the workshop. Neiley moved to adjourn the meeting; Guy seconded the motion and the meeting was adjourned at 6:45 p.m. Respectfully Submitted, ,J Cind L. Christensen, ecretary ~; ~~~ Kan Shaff n, Chairman ~0~~~7 4 Minutes Pitkin County Board of Adjustment Site Visit July 13, 1989 Case $ 89-32, Peter Van Domelen, Lot 4, Block 1, Filing 3, Gateway to Snowmass Mesa, Pitkin County, Colorado Members Present: Kandi Shaffran, Chairman Evan Gull Stan Mathis Rick Neiley John Ostwald David Brown Mary Lackner, Pitkin County Zoning Officer, was present for staff recommendations. Shaffran reopened the case at 8:10 a.m. Peter Van Domelen was present to request a 5 foot north side yard setback variance and a 30 foot rear yard setback variance for the construction of a residential house. Stakes were posted to depict the height of the proposed house. The Board inspected the property, evaluated the impact the proposed house would have on the view of neighboring homes; the impact an alternate path for a driveway would create; viewed the lot from above and below; and considered the effects of the house with an increased height of 10 feet. Shaffran asked the Board for their comments. Brown thought the house could be redesigned to conform to the required setbacks, but agreed that the proposed house was designed with minimal impact to the neighbors considering the topography of the lot. Mathis stated that topography was a valid hardship for Van Domelen. After reviewing alternative driveway possibilities, he noted to the Board the adverse impact a new driveway cut would create, as well as the .impact created by the reduction in off- street parking capabilities. Neiley agreed that topography was a valid hardship, and felt that Van Domelen worked to minimize the overall impact by restricting the height to 18 feet. Neiley pointed out that legally, Van Domelen's proposed house could have been much more obtrusive. Ostwald also felt that nothing would be gained by requiring the house to conform to setback requirements. Neighbors, Raczak, Olsen, and Landon were present. All agreed that the proposed house would have a greater adverse impact were it to be built according to regulations and without this variance. Raczak, observing the height stakes, admitted that it "wasn't as bad as I first thought". 000022 ~ r ~ • Brown made a motion to grant a 5 foot north side yard setback variance and a 30 foot rear yard setback variance, on the condition that the house be built as on the documents submitted, dated June 16, 1989, due to topographical hardship. The motion was seconded by Shaffran and passed with a 5-0 vote, with Mathis abstaining from the vote. Respectfully Submitted, ~ ~ ~ Joanna chaff e , Secr tary ~, Kandi Shaffran, Chairman 000023 PEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICF ~ ~ 130 South Galena Street Aspen, Colorado 81611 (303) 920-5090 LAND USE APPLICATION FEES city 00113 -63250-134 GMP/CONCEPTUAL -63270-136 GMP/FINAL -63280-137 SUB/CONCEPTUAL -63300-139 SUB/FINAL -63310-140 ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS -63320-141 _ ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS/ CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS REFERRAL FEES: 00125 -63340-205 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 00123 -63340-190 HOUSING 00115 -63340-163 ENGINEERING SUBTOTAL County 00113 -63160-126 GMP/GENERAL -63170-127 GMP/DETAILED -63180-128 GMP/FINAL -63190-129 SUB/GENERAL -63200-130 SUB/DETAILED -- -63210-131 SUB/FINAL -63220-132 ALL 2-STEP APPLICATIONS -63230-133 ALL 1-STEP APPLICATIONS/ CONSENT AGENDA ITEtv)S . - -63450-146 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENY , , REFERRAL FEES. 00125 -63340-205 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 00123 -63340-190 HOUSING 00113 -63360-143 ENGINEERING PLANNING OFFICE SALES 00113 -63080-122 CITY/COUNTY CODE -63090-123 COMP. PLAN -63140-124 COPY FEES -69000-145 OTHER SUBTOTAL ~ GISTci {.,,Oo~,, Name ~ ~®7'?')E` TOTAL ,~ ' 't w/ : r ) ~ _~ - Phone: Address: !! Project: ~~ ~~ Check k Date: Additional billing: ~ o l l ~ ? ~ qof Hours: Scanned 11/14/07 File Finders Box #15 /.' LARGE PLAT(S) AVAILABLE TO VIEW AT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AVAILABLE TO BUY AT CLERK & RECORDER