HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.boa.93.10
PITRIN COONTY
BOARD OF ADJQSTMENT
DATE CASE # CI 3 ~ I ~~
/ y?~-It,38 ~'
APPLICANT I~TIP P_ / 2)~~ 1Tp ~ G U' PHONE 9 ZS - 7 R ~ S w
MAILING ADDRESS ~. C) , Pax Iq N 7 ASS eJ 8 i ~ t Z
(o~~GV,ey ~trOorK} ,9+vA ~1.~-~~3$ ~
OWNER 4Zd.Ckr, f7G!_~n .9n/ rflnJ ~.RSO .J PHONE a 2s-- 7 0 ~a /,/
MAILING ADDRESS ~. n . {3-oX I ~t ~I'7 A S 4~y.~ 'L[) ~ t L~ / Z
LOCATION OF PROPERTY oC.N~- ~g ~ ~a__f~~.n.d /`~'f.~~ Ga'`- ,~q~pq~Lf,
Any pertinent data must accompany this application, and will be
made part of this Case. The Soard may return this application if
it does not contain all the facts in question.
Applicant Signature y~~
(To be completed by the Zoninq Department)
Provisions of the zoning resolution requiring the Zoning official
to forward this application to the Board of Adjustment, and reasons
for not granting a building permit:
A ~-~ Zone District
Requesting: .8z ac. Lot Size
.SoZ ' Front Yard Setback Variance, where /oG ' is required.
' Rear Yard Setback Variance, where ' is required.
~' W Side Yard Setback Variance, where 30 ' is required.
t~ ~ ' ~ Side Yard Setback Variance, where -30 ' is required.
' Height Variance, where ' is required.
Square Feet where a maximum of sq. ft. is allowed.
Other:
Application filed
Date of Meeting _
Notices Mailed
Zoning Officia~ ~ '~v,~-,,,,~
13 Parc I~~7-~2l.~-lJi---~
Refer Resolution to Build
Jsecretary SLzG,(z./~/~.~. ~~(,~
Department ;_; Yes ~_~ No
;,-~ 0~3~
NOTICE OF PIIBLIC HEARING TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS
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 City Council Chambers,
City Hall, First Floor, 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
others 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:
Owner:
Name and Address of
Applicant:
Property Location or
Description:
June 15, 1993 at 5:30 p.m.
Council Chambers, City Hall
Gregory Kadota & Deborah Anderson
Gregory Kadota & Deborah Anderson
P.O. Box 1947
Aspen, CO 81612
Lot 16, Holland Hills at Basalt
Subdivision
Requesting approval for a 52 foot front yard setback variance, a
14.5 foot west side yard setback variance, and a 14.5 foot east
side yard setback variance, where 100 feet, 30 feet and 30 feet,
respectively, are required in the AF-1 zone district, for
construction of a single family residence. Approval of this
variance would allow the proposed residence to be 48 feet from the
front property line, 15.5 feet from the west side property line,
and 15.5 feet from the east side property line.
VARIANCES GREATER OR LESS THAN REQUESTED COULD BE GRANTED.
Duration of Variance: Temporary Permanent X
THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
,~s,~t,~-f-~~ ~l
zanne L. Wol Secretary
z ~.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERB
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 City Council Chambers,
City Hall, First Floor, 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
others 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:
owner:
Name and Address of
Applicant:
Property Location or
Description:
June 1, 1993 at 5:15 p.m.
Council Chambers, City Hall
Gregory Kadota & Deborah Anderson
Gregory Kadota & Deborah Anderson
P.O. Box 1947
Aspen, CO 81612
Lot 16, Holland Hills at Basalt
Subdivision
Requesting approval for a 52 foot front yard setback variance, a
14.5 foot west side yard setback variance, and a 14.5 foot east
side yard setback variance, where 100 feet, 30 feet and 30 feet,
respectively, are required in the AF-1 zone district, for
construction of a single family residence. Approval of this
variance would allow the proposed residence to be 48 feet from the
front property line, 15.5 feet from the west side property line,
and 15.5 feet from the east side property line.
VARIANCES GREATER OR LESS THAN REQUESTED COULD BE GRANTED.
Duration of Variance: Temporary Permanent X
THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Suzanne L. Wo f, Secretary
,: ~'
DEBBIE aC[ GUS KADOTA
POST OFFICE BOX 1947
ASPEN, COLORADO 81612-1947
(303) 920-1638
May 3, 1993
Deaz Pitkin County Board of Adjustment:
We are applying for a Variance from County Zoning AF-1. We own Lot 39 in Holland
Hills at Basalt.
The hazdship we face is Lot 39 in Holland Hills is a substandazd non-conforming lot as
per AF-1 Zoning. AF-1 Zoning cleazly states that the minimum lot area is 10 acres, with a
minimum front yard set-back of 100 ft. Lot 39 is .82 acres, which is similaz to the requirements
of R-30 Zoning. R-30 has a minimum front yazd set-back of 30 feet.
The variance we aze applying for will be based upon the can-ent protective covenants of
the Holland Hills Homeowners Association. The covenants state, "No structure shall be
constructed or located on any lot neazer than 50 feet to a road centerline; 20 feet to any of its
boundary lines." In accordance with our Homeowners Association, our minimum front yard set-
back would be 50 feet from the road centerline, and our minimum side yazd set-back would be
20 feet.
The proposed variance would comply with our current homeowners protective covenants
and give us the ability to build our home in a more efficient and useable space in the constraint
of our lot. If we conform to the current AF-1 set-backs our building envelope destroys the
useable space surrounding any proposed structure.
Thank you,
~~us Kadota
Debbie Kadota
2467-212-01-002
Frank Glatz
1255 S. Clay Street
Denver, CO 80219
2467-212-01-005
Rob & Karen Hillebrand
P.O. Box 553
Basalt, CO 81621
2467-212-01-006
William David McBmom
119A Atlantic
Aspen, CO 81611
2467-212-O1-001
Stephen Schutz
703 Holland Hills Road
Basalt, CO 81621
2467-212-O1-002
Roger Douglas
Box 481
Aspen, CO 81612
2467-212-01-003
Robert T. Morrow
240 Mary Street
Hackensack, NJ 07601
2467-163-01-001
John Schceller
779 Holland Hills Road
Basalt, CO 81621
2467-163-O1-002
Doug Lucks
647 Holland Hills Road
Basalt, CO 81621
~ l
NOTICE OF PIIBLIC HEARING TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS
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 City Council Chambers,
City Hall, First Floor, 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
others 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:
Owner:
Name and Address of
Applicant:
- ur^^@rtY Location or
'~,~
~_ ~ .. :~ 4..~
:.rr ;CD
William David McBroom
119A Atlantic
Aspen, CO 81611
June 15, 1993 at 5:30 p.m.
Council Chambers, City Hall
Gregory Kadota & Deborah Anderson
Gregory Kadota &
P.O. Box 1947
Aspen, CO 81612
Deborah Anderson
Lot 16, Holland Hills at Basalt
Subdivision
52 foot front yard setback variance, a
setback variance, and a 14..5 foot east
I, where 100 feet, 30 feet and 30 feet,
Fa in the AF-1 zone district, for
family residence. Approval of this
;oposed residence to be 48 feet from the
ifeet from the west side property line,
t side property line.
i
THAN REQUESTED COIILD BE GRANTED.
Temporary Permanent X
THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Su(+'~e LL W~/ rS' etary
1'J s,.
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS
BEFORE THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT '-_
2E
_~._
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 City Council Chambers,
City Hall, First Floor, 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
others 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:
Owner:
June 1, 1993 at 5:15 p.m.
Council Chambers, City Hall
Gregory Kadota & Deborah Anderson
Name and Address of
Applicant:
Property Location or
Description:
Gregory Kadota & Deborah Anderson
P.O. Box 1947
Aspen, CO 81612
Lot 16, Holland Hills at Basalt
Subdivision
Requesting approval for a 52 foot
14.5 foot west side yard setback
side yard setback variance, where
respectively, are required in
construction of a single family
~lJ~ ~ ~av ~ off. ~(~ ~~ ~
~~~~ 310
//~~ ,,,, p~ ~,
tip=Br'~.340 81~+S`liA~Ez li{ G5:`~4:'~?3
RETURN! T4 sEPdDEr?.
M!7 F~]R6dAR8 f1RDEk CPS ~lE
UNABLE TD 1=ClR
#~TURM Tt2 SEh~R
1!1„,N,,,,,11„ti„IL,d!„ dh„lt,,,,„1ltt,,, tL,.lL„t
front yard setback variance, a
variance, and a 14.5 foot east
100 feet, 30 feet and 30 feet,
the AF-1 zone district, for
residence. Approval of this
~`-` ~ the
-~_ -~
•~ , ,.
~--_
--1--
fJ~4~G
~' -t
LiE7
•
/~
-63250.134 GMP/Conceptual
-63270.136 GMP/Foal
-63280.137 SUB/Conceptual
-63300.139 SUB/Foal
•&3310-140 All-2 Step Applications
-63320-141 All 1 Step Appl'x;ations
X3330-150 Staff Approval
-63432-157 Zoning Plan Check
-63432-157 Sign Permit
-00100.00000-31070 Use Tax Ior Sign Permits
HISTORIC PRESERVATION:
-63335-151 Exemption
-63336-152 Minor
-63337-153 Major Devel.
-63338-154 SignN. Devel.
-63339-155 Demolitan
COUNTY:
-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 A112 Stop Applications
-63230-133 All 1 Step Applications
-63240-149 Staff Approval
-63450-146 Board of Adjustment s !~ ~
-63235-148
Zoning Plan Check _
REFERRAL FEES:
-63360-143 Engineering -County
00115 -63340-163 Engineering -City
00123 -63340-190 Housing
00125 -63340-205 Environmental HeaRh
PLANNING OFFICE SALES:
-63080-122 County Code
-69000-145 Other (Copy Fees)
TOTAL S~•=~/%
~Q ~ ~ n t
Name: (~` ~., . /e. r~%.r"r.' Phone: _ ~ rl ~ '
i ~
~ ~ / ~
Address: 1 /9~/7 Project: b~» A ~i3' t o
/-<h'-ten !,
Check#: /(,• ~ --~' Date: ~ ~ ~ ~~-' No of Copes: /
f .
LAND USE APPLICATION FEES
CITY:
•
•
County of Pitkin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE BY
} ss. POSTING OF A VARIANCE HEARI1vY.
State of Colorado } BEFORE THE PITRIN COUNTY
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
I
The undersigned, being first duly sworn, deposes and says as
follows:
I,
being ~r
an Applicant before the Pitkin County Board o
Adjustment, personally certify that the attached photograph fairly
and accurately represents the sign posted as Notice of the variant ~:
hearing on this matter in a conspicuous place on the subject
property (as it could be seen from the nearest public way) and that:
the said si n was ~`~
g posted and visible continuously from the S
day of ~~T.~~ ~ lg~ ~-
to the ~5
day of '~~ t~~ _ 19~. (Must be posted fc.~
at least nihe (9) full days
Subscribed and s or to before me
this ~ ay o
19~,
WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL. SEAL.
"`' ~` My Commi sion expires:
°~~,~.;~
~_a,r„ „~,,,,~ _
Notary Public's gnature
~~ G ~r ~ ~ U
Address
(y ~
~'. of ~ ~F~~ ~~ J~S
~,
'
4 ,
~ ~~ A F
'
l 'iv %
3~ i
d
~ Gy~4l:. ~ ~ +e Ap
r
~
µ
~
.. ~~. ~' i
~
1
~ ~ N.. I
GG
.
'
22
_r I
.
IE~~ ~
..
t~
~
~~ y[~ .
{
~
t
1
e~
f~ Q ' r I^F 1r .-- -.tTiYR~ YME ~ C~
T - ~ ~ ~ .. ~~. S~ ~ ~ °~ 8 t~ . t?i
N ct
~ ~ ,
.~ r
111
.j.
- _,
i ,,
<r ^"' ~
' ~ a ~ ;
h JrtlR
a ,zs yrk~°~¢4 ~ , N a :: '2
" ai "; A s° d ~,~ , i" +i3h41
t
t Y ~ ,f~
.sw t Af~h
N ..f. 4 'P r ~'
,; ., r.
~• .'~ r
~~ + !,
I ~..r µ~
. ~ r,
A ~ `..ir.~.e...~ ~i`~v"IM"J~ ~ 1 +J. Aw, ~xf~~.4 f .1J.n~
A..x •~`
v >rc,~r~r+lrt<,~~R. ~ Sy .~,~y ~l ~ar+
,a ~~ rye+a ~ f,. ~,A,~, r u % ~, f, ''~.
X Y R ~~! ~4E ~~.'A
? , _~ R M
,.,1 .,~ ~ T3s z
,~~ ;. +
e r9
'~'' ~ b 1 v r! +~A1 I ~ It ! Y~
~:.
~ ~
I + ~~2r 'ti¢. r~' F'
',,: A h ~•
arv~ K u'.. ~~~,
a 4 ,. k
r x
+ `.7M
,`' . ' ~~ „n yl~ v~"'~`~ t + A ~i'~'F~~r" +~ $~;~;~ rt z~y A ~t YC
A {s~+ !
t %Xm}.
~, ~ ~ ~
I 'A
y
/' ~ $~ "y ~ "" s ~pR B X993 ~ ~ T ' ~ ~,
p h„ t
~ A~
,,, .~, ~ ,
` ~` .. C
Q ~~~~~
f~ ±e " ~ A ' 4~a
b ~~-
_s,,~
,;
.t
,~~~
:.F,
' .~ p~~.
~,:~
~:'~;
f._
»w~:y
is}s
;;y,~
~t1~
1
. ~ ` Tt , I .. ..
ya r 'F~" u fy
} ~^ S'
f
:.,,^ ~r4~Kji V}5 ~ ~xy~y4~~s.~X •AI'r ~:i. ~~.~'i. `.~
F ,,,j. rc
I ~~. k s y a ~p sy~ ~~ ,x.? L J~A,
} yl
n. ,A' • w~ ' ^'j6~ w ~. r q r
~~d , f ~ 'ru I~ ,yu ~' ~• :, A
4n1+ ~,v :S. T~ } „fk1~ .~~lf t..^'~yy'
7 ~ P ! I v 1 ~+! 4~ ~ ~xa~ ~ y+ ~
~'~ " .,~ ~. ', D r~~R"'1 ~'Y't~:~ 7~' Y. et Q_ Yf:;ii
P~
e
1
•
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS
BEFORE THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
? r
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 City Council Chambers,
City Hall, First Floor, 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 seLious
consideration to"the opinions of surrounding property owners and
others 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:
owner:
Name and Address of
Applicant:
Property Location or
Description:
June 1, 1993 at 5:15 p.m.
Council Chambers, City Hall
Gregory Kadota & Deborah Anderson
Gregory Kadota & Deborah Anderson
P.O. Box 1947
Aspen, CO 81612
Lot 16, Holland Hills at Basalt
Subdivision
Requesting approval for a 52 foot front yard setback variance, a
14.5 foot west side yard setback variance, and a 14.5 foot east
side yard setback ~rariance, where 100 feet, 30 feet and 30 feet,
respectively, are required in the AF-1 zone district, for
construction of a single family residence. Approval of this
variance would allow the proposed residence to be 48 feet from the
front property line, 15.5 feet from the west side property line,
and 15.5 feet from the east side property line.
VARIANCES GREATER OR LE88 THAN REQUESTED COIILD BE GRANTED.
Duration of Variance: Temporary Permanent X
THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
Suzanne L. Wo f, Secretary
00001?
~~ _
M
tl
t
1: }
~,! '
~ 3
+ ~~
V
~~
.-i
~~~
~p
~~~
j~
`--:s
t ~
3a
1:
u1
4i .~
i^1
~~ 7.~I
i.r.: is:~G::
i U ~ •%:1411
.'. l_.~1:.7 ~"1.:A
i.l'~'
,.i:a t'a1A3LA. ~f'1
~. y....1~F....i_.
t;.. 1,;::J,tt1T
>~; l;~v
3 :.~•~
C ~~ '.s LC. "4 i.1~
'....1 m1f1:
' }3,
i_. ...
V
OI
000013
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS
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 City Council Chambers,
City Hall, First Floor, 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
others 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:
owner:
Name and Address of
Applicant:
Property Location or
Description:
June 15, 1993 at 5:30 p.m.
Council Chambers, City Hall
Gregory Kadota & Deborah Anderson
Gregory Kadota & Deborah Anderson
P.O. Box 1947
Aspen, CO 81612
Lot 16, Holland Hills at Basalt
Subdivision
Requesting approval for a 52 foot front yard setback variance, a
14.5 foot west side yard setback variance, and a 14.5 foot east
side yard setback variance, where 100 feet, 30 feet and 30 feet,
respectively, are required in the AF-1 zone district, for
construction of a single family residence. Approval of this
variance would allow the proposed residence to be 48 feet from the
front property line, 15.5 feet from the west side property line,
and 15.5 feet from the east side property line.
VARIANCES GREATER OR LESS THAN REQUESTED COULD BE GRANTED.
Duration of Variance: Temporary Permanent X
THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT
~~~-Q-~~~~`l-~'~t,~~
Suz ne L. Wolf f_ , l' ecr
~~~~~~
,
; ~ o
.
~-~;
.
~ s 11 o
f-I
§
~ . ~
M
~
'~
" U ~
~. ~ ~
'
'~: ~ •r1 •rl GO
;,a
a'` ~
m
~
a~~
~rn a
•~+ ~ ~
3~~
a~
V
r.+
bA ~
0 y
~ ~~0~1
v
m
a
v
r •
#359442 O;/C9;93 10:16 Rec ~.0!~ bk: 719 FG 617
Silvia Davis, F'itk:in Cnty Clerk, Doc ~.i>0
RESOLUTION OF THE PITRIN COUNTY, COLORADO
BOARD OF ADJIISTMENT
GRANTING SETBACK RELIEF FOR GREGORY RADOTA & DEBORAH ANDERSON
RESOLUTION NO. 93-10
WHEREAS, Gregory Kadota and Deborah Anderson, owners of Lot 39,
Holland Hills at Basalt Subdivision, are requesting approval for
a 52 foot front yard setback variance, a 14.5 foot west side yard
setback variance, and a 14.5 foot east side yard setback variance,
for construction of a single family residence; and
WHEREAS, a 100 foot front yard setback and 30 foot side yard
setbacks are required in the AF-1 zone district; 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 52
foot front yard setback variance, a to foot west side yard setback
variance, and a 10 foot east side yard setback variance be granted
for construction of a single family residence, due to downzoning,
as shown on the revised plans (Exhibit "B"). ~~
WARNING: Any violation of the terms of this resolution may
result in rehearing and possible revocation.
0000 6
#35944 tj7/~9/93 it>:16 Rec ~.Ot> PFt: 719 FG 618
Silvia Davis, Fitkin Cnty C1erL::, Doc $.cJCi
Resolution No. 93-10
Page 2
The Resolution was adopted by vote of the Board of Adjustment of
the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado.
DATED: June 15, 1993 The Board of Adjustment of
Pitkin County, Colorado
ATTEST:
~~VV
Suzanne/ Wolff, Sec ary
00017
#35944 Il?/~9/93 1.6 fiec ~. ~?~> Bt::: 719 F'6 620•
Silvia Davis, F'itkin Cnty Clerk:. Doc $.t?~?
_.--I ~ ~ ~ h ,, li -
Y
~XH1Bl7 ..(3„
t7 ~ ~ '~O gET: R7=F3/~R ~+ C~`Y, L.Z. 20151
~Y~ENCH hMRK~ ^SSI.ME ELEVi~TION~(P-~.,
a _ -~ .. ..~5.°~ ~
~iET+ RCP~R ~ <
L..z. 2015
// o
/ ~o
i`/
ACT ~ 98
p12.~ ~ N~
-- ~ / \
~\
" ~ -
` ` .\ q4
nJV ~/i 4,~ / ~ ~1
NG ~ o`~
r ...
P
~O
/ ~ ~
3. S /7. 3.8 ~~
11~~ ~
~ ~ ~~
/ /
/ ~O ~ 90
L~ 3~t
p,g2 ac~.s
~/
\\ ' ~\
,`
r;
Q~llU
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, 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 others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the
request for variance. A VARIANCE GREATER THAN OR LESS THAN THAT REQUESTED COULD
BE GRANTED.
DATE AND TIME OF MEETING: Tuesday, June 1, 1993; 5:15 P.M.
Council Chambers, City Hall
Kaufman, Richard & Sylvia: requesting approval for an 8' height variance, where a maximum height of
28' is allowed for a principal structure, for wnstruction of an addition to a single family residence. Property
Location: Lot 1, Ridge of Red Mountain Subdivision.
Kadota, Gregory & Anderson, Deborah: requesting approval fora 52' front yard setback variance, a 14.5'
west side yazd setback variance, and a 14.5' east side yard setback variance, where 100', 30' and 30',
respectively, are required in the AF-1 zone district, for construction of a single family residence. Property
Location: Lot 39, Holland Hills at Basalt Subdivision.
Strom, Deborah: requesting approval fora 70' front yard setback variance and a 20' rear yard setback
variance, where 100' and 30', respectively, are required in the AF-1 zone district, for construction of a single
family residence. Property Location: Lot 36, Crystal River Park.
Summers, Monroe: requesting approval fora 30' front yard setback variance, where 100' is required in the
AF-1 zone district, for an addition to a single family residence. Property Location: Lot 16, Holland Hills
at Basalt Subdivision.
St. Benedict's Monastery: requesting approval fora 5'9" height variance, where a maximum of 28' is
allowed for a principal structure, for construction of a ventilation structure for the Meditation Hall. Property
Location: 1012 Monastery Road; Township 9, Range 86, Section 18.
Modell, Andrew: requesting approval fora 26' front yard setback variance for an addition on the north side
of the single family residence, and a 42' front yazd setback variance for a deck addition on the east side of
the house, where a 100' front yard setback is required in the AF-1 zone district. Property Location: Lot 5,
Block 2, Filing 2, Brush Creek Village.
Daks, Calvin: requesting approval fora 24' reaz yazd setback variance, where 30' is required in the AF-1
zone district, for construcfion of a detached garage. Property Location: Lot R-45, Block 5, Stanwood
Subdivison.
O'Donnell, William & Mary Beth and the Roaring Fork Ranch Partnership: requesting approval for a
50' front yard setback variance and a 40' east side yard setback variance, where 100' and 50', respectively,
are required in the RS-20 zone district, for the relocation of an existing ranch gate. Property Location: 6190
Upper River Road; Township 9, Range 85, Section 5, a portion of Lots 5, 6 & 10; and Lo[ 3, Parcel C &
a portion of Parcel B, Aspen River Village Homes.
Submitted to the Aspen Times on May 18, 1993.
To Be Published in the Aspen Times May 21, 1993.
County PO #301003
OOOOi9
NOTICI:OF PUBLIC H13AR1 ~ 131;hORIi'fHG PI"fKIN COUN"I~Y I ~IAkD OP n1~JUS'fM1iN"f
TO ALL 1'ROPGR'['Y OWLS AI~PI:C'1'LD 13Y TIiI:.RGQUGS"1~'LONING VARIANC
llLSCRII3LD I36LOW:
Pursuant to Pitkin County Zoning 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 [he
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 others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the
request for variance. A VARIANCE GREATER THAN OR LESS THAN THAT REQUESTED COULD
BE GRANTED.
DATE AND TIME OF MEETING: Tuesday, June 15, 1993; 5:30 P.M.
Council Chambers, City Hall
Kaufman, Richard & Sylvia: requesting approval for an 8' height variance, where a maximum height of
28' is allowed for a principal structure, for construction of an addition to a single family residence. Property
Location: Lot 1, Ridge of Red Mountain Subdivision.
Kadota, Gregory & Anderson, Deborah: requesting approval fora 52' front yard setback variance, a 14.5'
west side yazd setback variance, and a 14.5' east side yazd setback vaziance, where l00', 30' and 30',
respectively, are required in the AF-1 zone district, for construction of a single family residence. Property
Location: Lot 39, Holland Hills at Basalt Subdivision.
Strom, Deborah: requesting approval fora 70' front yard setback variance and a 20' rear yazd setback
variance, where 100' and 30', respectively, are required in the AF-1 zone district, for construction of a single
family residence. Property Location: Lot 36, Crystal River Park.
Summers, Monroe: requesting approval fora 30' front yard setback variance, where 100' is required in the
AF-1 zone district, for an addition to a single family residence. Property Location: Lot 16, Holland Hi11s
at Basalt Subdivision.
St. Benedict's Monastery: requesting approval fora 5'9" height variance, where a maximum of 28' is
allowed for a principal structure, for construction of a ventilation structure for the Meditation Hall. Property
Location: 1012 Monastery Road; Township 9, Range 86, Section 18.
Modell, Andrew: requesting approval fora 26' front yard setback variance for an addition on the north side
of the single family residence, and a 42' front yard setback variance for a deck addition on the east side of
the house, where a 100' front yard setback is required in the AF-1 zone district. Property Location: Lot 5,
Block 2, Filing 2, Brush Creek Village.
Dales, Calvin: requesting approval fora 24' rear yard setback variance, where 30' is required in the AF-1
zone district, for construction of a detached garage. Property Location: Lot R-45, Block 5, Stanwood
Subdivison.
O'Donnell, William & Mary Beth and the Roaring Fork Ranch Partnership: requesting approval for a
50' front yazd setback variance and a 40' east side yazd setback variance, where 100' and 50', respectively,
are required in the RS-20 zone district, for the relocation of an existing ranch gate. Property Location: 6190
Upper River Road; Township 9, Range 85, Section 5, a portion of Lots 5, 6 & 10; and Lot 3, Pazcel C &
a portion of Pazcel B, Aspen River Village Homes.
Smith, Chris/Airport Amoco: requesting approval for an 18' front yard setback variance, where 30' is
required in the B-2 zone district, and a 26' arterial highway setback variance, where 200' is required.
Property Location: Lot 1, Block 6, Aspen Airport Business Center.
Submitted to the Aspen Times on June 1, 1993.
To Be Published in the Aspen Times June 4, 1993.
County PO #301003 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ O
;, t
Minutes
C~
Pitkin County
Board of Adjustment
special Meetinq
June 15, 1993
Members Present:
Evan Gull, Acting Chair
Michael Cooper
Bill Lukes
Rod Dyer
John Wheeler
Members Absent:
Staff:
Rick Neiley
Joanna Schaffner, Zoning Enforcement
Gull opened the meeting at 5:30 p.m. and introduced the Board to
those present.
Case.. 93-05, Robert F. Leonard. Lots 10, it & 12, Block 5, Kistler
Subdivision
This case was tabled at the April 6, 1993 and May 4, 1993 meetings.
Dyer moved to table this case to the July 6, 1993 meeting. Cooper
seconded the motion, and all were in favor.
David Finholm was present, representing the applicant, to request
an 8 foot height variance, where a maximum height of 28 feet is
allowed for a principal structure, for construction of an addition
to a single family residence.
Finholm noted that when the house was built, height was measured
perpendicular to the natural grade. The definition of height has
since changed to state that height is measured from existing or
finished grade, whichever is most restrictive. The building
exceeds the current height limit, as the site was excavated during
construction of the house. He stated that the plans for the house
include adding a roof to shade the windows and a deck on the
southwest .side of the house for sun control, and a minor remodel.
Schaffner stated that it is difficult to match the existing roof
lines because of the change in the way height is calculated. She
also noted that the applicant received scenic overlay approval from
the Planning Office.
Gull noted that the Ridge of Red Mountain Homeowners Association
endorsed the proposed change in a letter to David Finholm, dated
April 6, 1993.
1
0000?1
There was no public comment.
Dyer moved to grant an 8 foot height variance, where a maximum
height of 28 feet is allowed, based on downzoning. Cooper seconded
the motion, and all were in favor.
Case 93-10 Greaorv Kadota and Deborah Anderson, Lot 39, Holland
Hills at Basalt Subdivision
Gregory Kadota was present to request a 52 foot front yard setback
variance, a 14.5 foot west side yard setback variance, and a 14.5
east side yard setback variance, where 100 feet, 30 feet and 30
feet, respectively, are required in the AF-1 zone district, for
construction of a single-family residence.
Kadota stated that the .82 acre lot is located in a zone district
for 10 acre lots. He based his setback variance request on the
setbacks in the Homeowners Association guidelines.
Lukes stated that the subdivision guidelines require a 20 foot side
yard setback, but that Kadota's proposed house only has 17.5 foot
side yard setbacks, and is therefore not in compliance with the
subdivision requirement.
There was no public comment.
John Wheeler arrived at 5:55 PM.
Gull stated that he would be willing to approve the request because
it conforms with the 15 foot side yard setback requirement in the
R-30 zone district, which is the closest conforming zone district.
Kadota stated that he would be willing to comply with the 20 foot
side yard setback requirement.
Lukes stated that there is no clear hardship for the Board to grant
the side yard setback variances as requested, but that a clear
hardship was exhibited with the front yard setback variance
request. He noted that he thought Kadota should comply with the
subdivision's setbacks.
Dyer moved to grant a 52 foot front yard setback variance, a 10
foot west side yard setback variance, and a l0 foot east side yard
setback variance, due to downzoning. Cooper seconded the motion,
and all were in favor. Wheeler did not vote on this case.
93-07 Willouahbv Ponds Trust Lots 5 and 7 Willouahbv Ponds
Subdivision
This case was tabled at the May 4, 1993 meeting.
Jim Curtis, representing Kay Bucksbaum the owner, was present to
2
0000?
request a 6 foot west side yard setback variance for Lot 5 and a
6 foot east side yard setback variance for Lot 7, where a 15 foot
side yard setback is required in the R-30 zone district, for
construction of a ranch gate to cross Wildflower Lane.
Curtis stated that the 7 lot subdivision was approved in 1988, and
that the Bucksbaums subsequently purchased all 7 lots. They are
building a house on Lot 3, and want to build a ranch gate 50 feet
back from Willoughby Way. They are requesting variances for the
gate because they did not want to increase the width of the gate
to comply with the setback requirements.
Julie Augur, a neighbor, was present to state her opposition to the
ranch gate. She stated that a ranch gate was not appropriate in
the neighborhood, and questioned the height of the gate.
Gull read into the record letters from John W. Cronin, Jr. and
Yvonne Thomas, neighbors, stating their opposition to the request.
Schaffner noted that the height of the gate is within the County
standards.
Lukes stated that ranch gates do not provide a benefit to the
County, that a hardship was not evident, and that the gate would
impact the adjoining properties.
Wheeler stated that ranch gates are acceptable to him, if they can
be constructed outside of the setbacks.
Gull noted that the neighbors would have no recourse if the gate
was constructed outside of the setbacks.
Gull moved to deny the applicant's request, due to lack of grounds
for a variance. Dyer seconded the motion, and all were in favor.
Case 93-12, Deborah Strom, Lot 36, Crustal River Park
Jochen Wolf was present, representing Deborah Strom, to request a
70 foot front yard setback variance and a 20 foot rear yard setback
variance, where 100 feet and 30 feet, respectively, are required
in the AF-1 zone district, for construction of a single family
residence.
Schaffner stated that the applicant received approval for a
variance request in November, 1992, but that the configuration of
the house has changed.
Wolf stated that they would now like to attach the carport to the
house. This change will enable them to cut fewer trees, shorten
the driveway, and lessen the amount of excavation.
Pat Gleason was present, representing the Crystal River Park
3
0000?3
Homeowners Association. He sent a letter to the Board after an
owner expressed concern for the septic field. However, since then
he has spoken with Tom Dunlop of the Environmental Health
Department, and the septic issues have been resolved. Therefore,
he stated that the Association was in favor of the variance
request.
Wheeler noted that the variance was not being increased, just
modified.
Wheeler moved to grant a 7o foot front yard setback variance and
a 20 foot rear yard setback variance, due to topographical hardship
and downzoning, as per the plans submitted. Lukes seconded the
motion, and all were in favor.
Case 93-13 Monroe Summers Lot 16. Holland Hills at Basalt
Subdivision
Monroe Summers was present to request a 30 foot front yard setback
variance, where 100 feet is required in the AF-1 zone district, for
construction of an addition to a single family residence.
Summers stated that his 1.23 acre lot is a substandard lot in the
AF-1 zone district, and that his house was built before downzoning.
The house is currently 80 feet from the front lot line. The
addition to the house would remain within the 80 foot front yard
setback, and a covered deck would extend 10 more feet into the
setback. He noted that it would be difficult to expand in another
direction because of the slopes on the lot and a historic
irrigation ditch above the house.
Wheeler stated that the deck increases the encroachment into the
setback, and added that 1 and 2 acre lots require a 75 foot front
yard setback.
Summers stated that the AF-3 zone district, which is based on 1
acre lots, has a 50 foot front yard setback requirement.
There was no public comment.
Wheeler moved to grant a 30 foot front yard setback variance, due
to downzoning. Lukes seconded the motion, and all were in favor.
Case 93-14 St Benedict's Monasterv. 1012 Monasterv Road
Steve Conger and Scot Broughton were present, representing St.
Benedict's Monastery, to request a 5'9" height variance, where a
maximum height of 28 feet is allowed for a principal structure, for
construction of a ventilation structure for the Meditation Hall.
Broughton stated that the proposed ventilation structure is non-
mechanical, and will provide natural, passive ventilation. The
4
QO~~~~
Code permits mechanical units to extend beyond the height limit.
He added that the structure is similar to a steeple, and gives the
"impression of being on a religious building."
Schaffner stated that Bob Child, a neighbor, asked her to state for
the record his support for the the variance.
There was no public comment.
A note from Connie Harvey, a neighbor, stated that she had no
objection to the request.
Schaffner stated that the Zoning Office does not consider this to
be a mechanical structure, therefore, a height variance is being
requested. The Board agreed that the structure was not mechanical.
Gull mentioned that the Meditation Hall is a religious structure,
and the Board asked Schaffner whether the Code addresses steeples.
Schaffner replied that the Code does not address steeples. She
quoted from Board of County Commissioners Resolution No. 90-06,
which amended the definition of height, and states "Antennae,
chimneys, flues, vents, and similar structures shall not extend
over three feet (3') above the specified maximum height limit. In
no event shall any structure, including antennae, chimneys, flues,
vents, water towers, mechanical equipment, solar equipment, and
similar equipment exceed thirty-eight feet (38') in height."
Lukes noted that the County benefits by good design at the
Monastery, which is a unique situation in the County.
Wheeler noted that another applicant to the Board was not granted
a height variance because design was not considered to be a
hardship.
Lukes stated that the Code does not address steeples; therefore,
the Board must make a judgment.
Gull moved to grant a 5'9" height variance, due to the unique
nature and character of the property. Dyer seconded the motion,
and all were in favor.
Case 93-15, Andrew Modell, Lot 5, Block 2, Filina 2, Brush Creek
Village Subdivision
Glen Rappaport was present, representing Andrew Modell, to request
a 26 foot front yard setback variance for an addition of the north
side of the single family residence, and a 42 foot front yard
setback variance for a deck addition of the east side of the house,
where a 100 foot front yard setback variance is required in the AF-
1 zone district.
5
DOOO?~
Michael Cooper announced that he was an adjacent property owner,
and asked if anyone objected to his voting on the case. There were
no objections.
Rappaport stated that the existing house is in the setback, and
that the applicant is asking for an additional 12 foot encroachment
into the setback. He noted that the addition could not be designed
for the other side of the house because the owner wanted
specifically to enlarge the kitchen and create a definite entry for
the house to improve circulation. He also proposed to add new deck
area to the house.
Schaffner clarified that there are two separate front yard setback
variance requests.
Gull stated that the zoning for a 2 acre lot would require a 75
foot front yard setback and a 20 foot side yard setback, and that
it would be difficult to justify granting a variance that would
lessen those setbacks.
Rappaport noted that the slopes on the property probably determined
the original building site, and added that he could not find any
variance requests for the property on file in the Zoning office.
Bob Krueger, an adjacent owner, was present. He stated that he
complained to the Building Department during the construction of
the house that the house was being built in the setbacks, but
Building would not come to investigate. He also added that
visitors to Modell's house use his driveway for parking, and that
Modell's house is directly visible from his house.
Wheeler stated that he would support a 75 foot front yard setback
for the addition, but would deny the proposed setback for the deck
which would increase the nonconformity of the residence.
Rappaport stated that he designed the addition to direct the public
space away from the neighbor's property to lessen the impact.
Lukes agreed that it makes more sense to expand in the direction
shown to minimize the impact on the neighbors.
Gull noted that the owner has the right to expand in the other
direction without a variance.
Krueger stated that he does not have a problem with the variance
request, but that his complaint was related to previous events.
Wheeler stated that the encroachment into the setback should not
be increased because the structure already encroaches 60 feet into
the setback.
The Board discussed how to define the setback variance, and
6
~~U~~~
recommended tabling the application for the applicant to provide
a revised plan.
Lukes moved to table the application to the meeting on July 6, 1993
at the request of the applicant. Dyer seconded the motion, and all
were in favor.
Case__9_3_-16, Calvin Daks, Lot R-45, Starwood Subdivision
Calvin Daks was present to request a 24 foot rear yard setback
variance, where 30 feet is required in the AF-1 zone district, for
construction of a detached garage.
Daks noted that a drainage ditch runs through the property, and
creates a topographic hardship. The Starwood Subdivision Covenants
prohibit interference with the neighbors' viewplanes; in the
proposed location the garage would only impact one neighbor, Dick
Fenton, whereas in any other location it would impact more
neighbors.
Gull read into the record a note from Dick Fenton, stating that he
has no objection to the proposed variance.
Daks stated that Starwood has not yet reviewed the proposal, but
that the Association would only object if the garage impacted the
neighbors' views.
Lukes noted that the garage is buried in the slope at its highest
point.
Wheeler noted that the setback reduction was rather severe. He
questioned why the garage was being built away from the ditch so
as not to interrupt the flow, but the driveway and retaining wall
were being constructed across the drainage. Daks replied that
raising the driveway will not interrupt the drainage.
Lukes stated that he would be reluctant to make a decision before
Starwood reviews the application.
Daks requested tabling the application, pending approval from
Starwood Subdivision.
Dyer moved to table the application to the July 6, 1993 meeting.
Cooper seconded the motion, and all were in favor.
Case 93-17, William and Marv Beth O'Donnell and the Roarina Fork
Ranch Partnership, 6190 Upper River Road
Brooke Peterson and Greg Mozian were present, representing the
owners, to request a 50 foot front yard setback variance and a 40
foot east side yard setback variance, where 100 feet and 50 feet,
respectively, are required in the RS-20 zone district, for the
7
oo~nti!
relocation of an existing ranch gate.
Peterson stated that they are proposing to relocate an existing
ranch gate, which is owned by the o'Donnells, but is presently
located on property owned by Mike Underwood. The O'Donnells have
agreed to move the access road onto their ranch property and to
relocate the ranch gate. The variance requested is based on the
size of the parcel where the gate is to be located, and the
existing topographic conditions. He added that the existing gate
was approved as part of the original building permit, and that
relocating the ranch gate will decrease its non-conformity because
it will be 20-25 feet farther back from the road. Also, one
entrance to Lower River Road will be eliminated, which is important
from a safety standpoint.
Peterson noted that Mike Underwood authorized him to state that he
is in favor of the plan and has no objections.
Mozian stated that the gate is being relocated onto a non-
conforming lot, which creates setback restrictions. The requested
50 foot front yard setback would put the gate approximately in the
middle of the property. The proposed location of the access road
was determined by safety concerns because further west the grade
of River Road gets steeper and the sight lines decrease. The side
yard setback is restricted because of the location of a high
pressure gas line and the existing cottonwoods, which they would
like to maintain. He added that the gate has more visual impact
in its current location, than it will have in the proposed
location.
Lukes noted that the relocation would decrease the non-conformity
of the gate. Wheeler added that the gate is existing, and is
located on a ranch property.
There was no public comment.
Dyer moved to grant a 50 foot front yard setback variance and a 40
foot east side yard setback variance for relocation of an existing
ranch gate, due to downzoning and that the gate is existing.
Cooper seconded the motion, and four were in favor, with Gull
opposed.
Chris Smith was present, representing Petrol Aspen, Inc., to
request an 18 foot front yard setback variance, where 30 feet is
required in the B-2 zone district, and a 26 foot arterial highway
setback variance, where 200 feet is required, for construction of
an additional fuel pump island at the Aspen Airport Amoco.
Smith stated that other fuel pumps encroach in the highway setback,
~0~®G
including those at the Airport, Aspen Village, and Stutsman-
Gerbaz. He also noted that there are encroachments into the
highway setback at the AABC, including the RFTA terminal, signage,
and post office boxes, and that there are many encroachments at the
airport. He quoted BOCC Resolution No. 87-34, which states, "Uses
other than structures (off-street parking, lights and signs) shall
meet the minimum setbacks as follows: This is required in order
to provide essential sight distances along arterial highways, major
roads, and collector streets for vehicular traffic and pedestrians
entering and leaving such right-of-way." He noted that this
resolution has been interpreted to allow gas pumps and
miscellaneous structures in the setback, and added that the
encroachment at the Amoco will not materially impact the "essential
sight distances".
Schaffner quoted Section 3-8.2(a) of the Land Use Code, which
states, "...the minimum yard requirement for all yards adjacent to
such rights-of-way shall not be less than 200 feet from an arterial
highway right-of-way"; and Section 3-8.2(b), which states, "In
order to provide essential sight distance along arterial
highways..., no accessory structure or use shall be located within
100 feet of the arterial highway right-of-way". Schaffner noted
that in the past, she has interpreted this to mean that the first
100 feet of the right-of-way is sterile, that the second 100 feet
accepts accessory structures, and that principal structures must
be located 200 feet from the right-of-way. She noted that Francis
Krizmanich of the Zoning Office determined that her interpretation
does not represent the intent of the Code, and that BOCC Resolution
No. 87-34 clarifies that the first 200 feet from the right-of-way
should remain sterile. Therefore, uses in the second 100 feet from
the right-of-way have been erroneously approved.
Smith stated that the County has proposed to create a business
center frontage road between Highway 82 and the Amoco, which would
provide access to the bus barn and the County maintenance bldg, as
well as to 22 acres of potential commercial property. He noted
that the creation of this road would essentially neuter any impacts
that might be created by his encroachment into the highway setback.
He noted that only approximately the top two feet of the gas pump
will be visible from the highway, and that the new pump will
substantially alleviate traffic problems by preventing gas
customers from creating gridlock on the road while waiting for
pumps. He stated that the new pump could not be located on the
other end of property because the dogleg in the road makes egress
very dangerous, he would have to relocate the carwash, and he would
have to redevelop the entire property and relocate the cashier.
He noted that the Amoco provides a public benefit, and that it is
in the public benefit to maintain efficient flow and safe egress
at the Amoco. Currently, circulation is awkward and unsafe; during
peak periods, traffic on the County road backs up as far as the
Amoco from the Highway 82 intersection. Smith noted that the
traffic light at the AABC/Highway 82 intersection will provide
9
000` 43
predictable exiting from the AABC, which should control the
gridlock, and added that the Amoco suffers a hardship because of
the County's disregard for the safety of the roads and traffic flow
at the AABC.
Lukes stated that in site planning, one generally does not develop
towards an intersection that is increasing in density, and that as
much of a buffer as possible should be maintained from such an
intersection. The new intersection will only increase the
congestion near the Amoco. He also added that the 200 foot
arterial highway setback is a fundamental zoning concept, which
should be maintained intact, and that the setback is not
implemented only for vehicular safety.
Smith stated that his hardship results from the design of the
station, and from the necessity that they provide their service
while maintaining safe egress and good circulation.
Wheeler stated that he was opposed to granting the highway setback
variance.
Wheeler moved to deny the applicant's request for a 26 foot
arterial highway setback variance for construction of an additional
fuel pump island. Lukes seconded the motion. Three were in favor,
with Cooper and Dyer opposed.
After discussion, Wheeler moved to deny the applicant's request for
a 26 foot arterial highway setback variancF•for construction of an
additional fuel pump island. Lukes seconded the motion. All were
in favor.
*****************************************************************
The May 4, 1993 minutes were approved as written.
The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Su a ne L. Wolff, 3e~retary
l0
~OQ~~~
r -
ASPEN/PITKIN PLANNING OFFICE
130 South Galena SVeet
Aspen, Colorado 81611
(303) 920-5090
LAND USE APPLICATION FEES
CITY:
-63250-134 GMP/Conceptual
-63270-136 GMP/Final
-63260-137 SUB/Conceptual
-63300-139 SUB/Final
-63310-140 All-2 Step Applications
-63320-141 All 1 Step Applications
-63330-150 Staff Approval
-63432-157 Zoning Plan Check
-63432-157 Sign Permit
-00100-00000-31070 Use Tax for Sign Permits
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
-63335-151 Exemption
-63336-152 Minor
-63337-153 Major Devel.
-63336-154 Sign'rf. Devel.
-63339-155 Demolition
COUNTY:
-63160-126 GMP/General
-63170-127 GMP/Detailed
-63180-128 GMP/Final
n
-63190-129 SUB/General
-63200-130 SUB/Detailed
-63210-131 SUB/Final
-63220-132 All 2 St•3p Applications
-63230-133 All 1 Step Applications
-63240-149 Staff Approval
-63450-146 Board of Adjustment ~ O r-~ ~'
-63235-148 Zoning Plan Check
REFERRAL FEES:
-63360-143 Engineering -County
00115 -63340-163 Engineering -City
00123 -63340-190 Housing
00125 -63340-205 Environmental HeaRh
PLANNING OFFICE SALES:
-63080-122 County Code
-145
-69000 Other (Copy Fees)
j
O O O O? 1 TOTAL S~ J•lJ~l
~ ~ ~
~
~~ ~ f1G' r,...,:._.
Name: ~~ lr ~i/,r
~v,' Phone: / ~) % b
Address: ~~/ / /~ Project ~~ ' ~ ~~ ~ ~ O
/i t t,,
Check #: _/~ ~ ' ~ Date: ~ • ~ - No of Copies:
~. /
.'..
":L`
T •`1
r ~ ;
•
.f
~[
~ ~
~" '~ <
~rA ~~~~
!'. .
°~,
`i, ~. i .. ...r -
Scanned 3/27/08
File Finders Box
#18
LARGE PLAT(S)
AVAILABLE TO VIEW AT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
AVAILABLE TO BUY AT
CLERK & RECORDER