Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutpitkin.boa.01.14 -J RESOLUTION OF THE PITKIN COUNTY, COLORADO BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT GRANTING SETBACK AND HEIGHT VARIANCES FOR JOEL TOWBIN Resolution No. 01-14 WHEREAS, Joel Towbin, owner of 0123 Mountain Laurel Drive, is requesting approval for a front yazd setback variance of 27 feet and a height variance of 6 feet 3 inches, for the construction of a detached gazage; and, WHEREAS, a 30 foot front yard setback is required and a maximum height of 20 feet is allowed for an accessory structure on this 15,291 squaze foot lot in the R-15-A zone district; and, WHEREAS, the subject property is described as Lot 44, Block 2, Filing 2 of the Mountain Valley Subdivision; and, WHEREAS, the Boazd of Adjustment is vested with the power to grant or deny such variances by virtue of Title II, Section 7-10.30, Pitkin County Code (band Use Code) and Colorado Revised Statutes, 1973, 30-28-118(2) (C); and, WHEREAS, based on the evidence presented, the Boazd 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 hazdship or practical difficulty has been established. 3. Granting such relief will not cause substantial 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 front yazd setback variance of 27 feet and a height variance of 6 feet 3 inches be granted for the construction of a detached garage as presented on Exhibit A, due to topographical hardship. WARNING: Any violation of the terms of this resolution may result in rehearing and possible revocation. The Resolution was adopted by vote of the Board of Adjustment of the County of Pitkin, State of Colorado. DATED: July 11, 2001 ATTEST: Conne Bazley, Sec e ary Pitkin County Boazd of Adjustment The Boazd of Adjustment of Pitkin County, Colorado„ Michabl Cooper, Chair) Pitkin County Boazd of ~0()U~1 ~ ~~ I I III III ~I III IIII IIII II III III III II~II II IIIII II IIII IIII I 4609 ~ 00 04:21P 0 D 0.00 L a H f N O ~ r ~--m ~ m O N ~ O Y ~ ~, ~ a m e m z 0 U T O U Z Y F ~~ 4 a a a J H !1(p n (1 f~ !) / ~. ~ ~ srA/RWa~INC ~1 \ ~ _ , . - - \\~LAXTNTINC `, ~ ~ J \, ~ ~ ~ `\ ` \ ~ N ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ I I~~ ~~ \~ \ I ~\ ~ '~RA'~EL DRIVEWAY ' . 1 `` I ~ i v,, / I I ~ \ PK ryAIL~ .. RAILING,. ~\ \ C \ ~ _ - o I I a I I ;. ---- - ~f ~.~ I / o `I ~ ~~F, 5~ EA yr, '~ I I~TyP) EN~ II ~ ~ ._ :..-- ~ ,` 1 ~ I \ ~f r ~ 95.2 ~' ~~ ~ ~ 3 T£~ PIN ~ 3` ~~ SEi`SP ~~'. ~EV ~ 99.51 ~ 1 'X I \I '~ t ~ is \ J r/a `~ \ 5 ,~ $ i \ Y ~l MN L ~~ 4 d1x.~ vt. r ~I .a'`ai~.te~ e.... ~ .. x..,45n,/x.~.x5«~ t'_ . . ~_pp pp N A O~ N 111 yz ~~ n li ~. 0 m w o~ a ~--- M~ 1 i ,~\ ,, ~__ ~ n • MINUTES of the Pitkin County Board of Adjustment Wednesday, July 11, 2001 Pitkin County Courthouse Members Present: Michael Cooper (chair) Rick Head (acting chair for Case 01-5) Jim Rifkin Deanna Olsen Bob Throm Members Absent: Jack Hunt Staff Present: Joanna Schaffner, Zoning Officer Conne Bazley, Zoning Tech Angela Rishel, Recording Secretary Head, the acting chair until Cooper arrived, called the meeting to order. I. NEW BUSINESS • Case #O1-13: Pugh, James H. Withdrawn by applicant • Case #O1-14: Towbin, Joel: Lot 44, Block 2, Filing 2, Mountain Valley Subdivision, a.k.a. 0123 Mountain Laurel Drive, Aspen Requesting a 27 foot front yard setback vaziance where 30 feet is required for construction of a detached gazage on this 15, 291 square foot lot in the R-15A zone district, and a 6 foot 3 inch height variance where 20 feet is the maximum height allowed for an accessory structure, to construct a detached garage. The applicant submitted the affidavit of posting. Chris Shipp introduced himself and the applicant, Joel Towbin. For the record, Throm noted that he personally knows the applicant but didn't believe there to be a conflict. Head noted that the BOA was in receipt of two letters, one from the Mountain Valley Homeowners Association and another from the Architectural Control Committee, both in favor of the application. There were no public comments. Shipp referred to a map to present their application noting that there is currently only space for two cazs because of the significant drop off at the road's shoulder. He stated that the main reason they aze above the height limit is because of the steep drop off of the slope. Shipp stated that they were attempting to keep within 20 feet of the main house, which would allow them more height, but that the house is an old kit house with a reflected foundation that comes in underneath it. ooaoo~ • MINUTES • of the Pitkin County Board of Adjustment Wednesday, July 11, 2001 Head asked if the house was in conformance with the height. Shipp responded that it was in conformance with the height limit, but that it was also in the setback. He stated that the house really has an odd foundation. He added that there azen't many places to put the garage; they'd considered other options but this is the obvious place to do it. Other options would disturb existing vegetation too much. Rifkin asked if the cars were parked in the open. Towbin responded that they were. Throm asked if anyone had complained about the trash enclosure. Shipp responded yes, and that they've agreed to put the trash in the gazage. Head asked about the hardship. Shipp responded that the hardship is the limitation on the pazking, which creates safety issues and a problem during snow removal. Schaffner noted that the hardship could be topographic. Rifkin stated that he thought the topography justified a topographical variance. There was discussion regarding whether Cooper should vote on this case since he arrive late, but all members agreed that he didn't miss enough of the case not to have all the facts, and that it would be acceptable for him to vote. Motion: Bob Throm moved to approve Case #01-14 as proposed due to topographical hardships. Deanna Olsen seconded the motion. The motion passed with members Throm, Olsen, Rifkin, Head and Cooper voting unanimously in favor of the motion. • Case #O1-15: Wyandt, Steve and Jan: Tract 11, Crystal River Estates a.k.a.: 0283 Cherokee Lane, Redstone Requesting a 30 foot front yazd setback vaziance where 30 feet is required to construct a driveway and landscaping improvements that will exceed 30 inches in height, on this 35,000 square foot lot in the RS-30 PUD zone district. Schaffner gave a brief presentation of the application as outlined above noting that this particulaz subdivision is located directly above Swiss Village. She referenced a map to point out the proposed access drive. Schaffner stated that the applicant has submitted letters to the adjacent property owners and that she hasn't heazd any objections from Homeowners Association or the neighbors. She stated that the vaziance request is for a zero setback. Head asked if they considered the driveway to be within the development envelope. Schaffner responded that it is outside of the envelope. Head referred to a prior approval noting that it indicated that there should be no development activity including grading, landscaping, vegetation removal or disturbance shall occur outside of the development envelope. There was brief discussion regarding this wording. Throm indicated that this is really just standazd language in 1041 Reviews. Schaffner added that that language typically does not refer to access drives since they are necessary to get to the envelope. Members Cooper and Head expressed concern for disregazding the language. Throm 000005 • MINUTES • of the Pitkin County Board of Adjustment Wednesday, July 11, 2001 added that application of the language occurs when, for instance, you apply for a building permit. Schaffner stated that development outside the envelope should not be an issue for the BOA. She stated that the issue is whether or not there is a hardship for the proposed development. There were no public comments Motion: Rick Head moved to approve Case #01-15, as per the plans submitted, based on a topographical hazdship. Deanna Olsen seconded the motion. Members Head, Olsen, Rifkin, Throm and Cooper voted unanimously in favor of the motion. • Case #O1-16: Two Mile Ranch, LLC: 3448 Woody Creek Road. Requesting approval for a Front Yard and Collector Street setback vaziance where 100 feet is required from the front property line and where 50 feet is required from the Woody Creek Road right-of--way to construct an addition to an historic structure. This parcel contains 79.106 acres and is zoned RS-20 PUD. Holly Hamilton introduced herself as the project manager. Eric Anderson introduced himself as a representative of Anderson Conger Architects. Schaffner briefly summarized the application as outlined above. She noted the location of the property stating that it has several historic structures on it. Schaffner noted that Suzanna Reid, the Historic Preservation Officer for the County, gave her support on this project. Schaffner also noted that she received one letter from an adjacent neighbor and a phone call from Joseph Edwards, who indicated he'd be here tonight. Throm asked who the prior owner was. Hamilton responded that it previously belonged to Stanley Natal. Hamilton referred to a map to indicate the existing conditions, the road and proposed addition. She discussed the problems with snow removal off Woody Creek Road, noting that it piles up behind the existing building and rots the historic logs. Rifkin asked what the variance was for. Holly responded that the vaziance is requested because they can't move the building in order to preserve it. They aze seeking a vaziance to develop within the setback. There was discussion regazding the BOA power to grant a variance in this case. Rifkin read the language that allows the BOA to grant a vaziance into the record; "...the BOA has the power to grant variances whereby reason of unusual narrowness, shallowness or shape of a specific piece of property at the time of the enactment of the regulations, or by reason of unusual topographic situations, or other situations, or condition of such piece of property... ". He stated that this is a very broadly worded power that the BOA has. Motion: Jim Rifkin moved to approve Case #01-16 based on peculiaz or practical difficulties, and on the intent of the County to preserve historic structures. Michael ooooas • MINUTES • of the Pitkin County Board of Adjustment Wednesday, July 11, 2001 Cooper seconded the motion. Members Rifkin, Cooper, Olsen, Head and Throm voted unanimously in favor of the motion. II. MINUTES • June 5, 2001 Throm noted that he had seconded the motion to approve the minutes of May 4, 2001. Head clazified that on Case #01-12, the acreage should be 2.142. Motion: Rick Head moved to approve the minutes of June 5, 2001 with the corrections as noted. Bob Throm seconded the motion. Members, Head, Throm, Olsen, Cooper and Rifkin voted unanimously in favor of the motion. III. OLD BUSINESS Case #O1-11 Johns, Dan: presenting a landscape plan as requested by the Board for the proposed bam. Head left for this portion of the meeting since he was not at the meeting last month when the item was first presented. Johns presented a landscape plan as promised at the last meeting, when his application was tabled. He noted the location of the existing and proposed cottonwoods on the plan provided. Johns also noted a proposal to expand the berm. Schaffner pointed out that he'd need another variance for this. Rifkin stated that there is no indication on the plan as to the proposed height of the trees. He stated that the purpose of the landscape plan is to shield the barn. Johns stated that the intent is that the trees would vary in height from 20 feet to just a couple feet high so that they blend in. There was discussion regarding the existing and proposed types of trees. Rifken asked if Johns was going to plant 27 Spruce trees. Johns noted the proposed new trees, indicating 13 new Spruce trees and a handful of Cottonwoods. Cooper pointed out that Johns had indicated that the trees would be up to 20 feet high and he noted the high price of those types of trees. Referring to irrigation, Cooper asked if there would be a drip system in place for this. Johns responded yes, and added that there already is a drip system in place. Rifkin stated that the proposal has to specify the height and number of trees. Johns stated that there would be at least 9 new Cottonwoods and they will be at least 10 feet high. Johns stated that they've planted about 160 small trees on the existing berm. He stated that about half of those were Spruce trees. ~~~~~~ • MINUTES • of the Pitkin County Board of Adjustment Wednesday, July 11, 2001 Rifkin asked how many large Spruce (6 to 12 feet high) trees they intend to plant. Johns responded that six would be over 6 feet. He stated there would be at least 9 new Cottonwoods over 10 feet high. Prompted by Olsen, Johns indicated the location of the trees on the map. Motion: Rifkin moved to approve the variance with the landscape plans and the type of trees as identified on the record. Throm seconded the motion. Members Rifken, Throm, Olsen, and Cooper voted unanimously in favor of the motion. Motion to Adjourn: There being no further business before the Board, Bob Throm moved to adjourn the meeting. Cooper seconded the motion. Members Throm, Cooper, Olsen and Rifken voted in favor of the motion. Respectfully submitted, Angela ishel, Recording Secretary ~- ~ , 2001 Date Approved as submitted, prov d with note anges(s) Michae ope air / ( , 2001 Date ooouos Joel Towbin 0123 Mountain Laurel Aspen, CO 81611 970/920-4128 June 2, 2001 Pitkin County Board of Adjustment Aspen/Pitlon Community Development Dept. 130 South Galena Aspen, CO 81611 Re: Lot 44, Mountain Valley Ranch Subdivision, Block #2, Second Filing To Whom Jt May Concern: I am requesting a setback and accessory structure height limit variance to build a two~ar garage at 0123 Mountain Laurel Drive in Aspen, Colorado. The following summary highlights my reasons for requesting a variance and offers a solution to improve public safety and convenience for anyone using Mountain Laurel Drive. Parking options in the Mountain Valley Ranch Subdivision are limited or non- existent. My curnnt parking area is approximately the size of two mid-size cars. Dehvery trucks and guests are forced to park on the roadway. These vehicles and their occupants are vulnerable to ottwming traffic and snowplows in the winter. Even in summer hit and tun incidents involving parked vehicles have occurred, Tn my quest to remedy this problem T explored expanding the existing parking tv the southwest over the roof of a garage below. This was stied out for the following reasons: it destroyed an attractive grove of aspen trees along Mountain Laurel Drive, created an unnecessary driveway scar, encroached on the utility easement along the property line and required a dangerously steep driveway. The potential area to the north is too steep and is in the road right-of-way. A review of the survey placed the expanded parking (including the garage) along the southeast side of the present parking area. This location keeps the proposed garage closer to the existing grade below, and uses the existing trees as an attractive visual break from Mountain Laurel Drive, The final design emphasizes simplicity and practicality. The size has been minimized from the 750 square feet allowed to 595 square feet. The height at the back of the roof to the lowest point of existing grade below will be 26' 3" (See: Plan A3.1). T hereby propose to the Pitkin County Board of Adjustment a substantial improvement to the public parking problem, which respects the rights of my neighbors without impairing the intent and purpose ofthe comprehensive plan and Land Use Code. Re/spectfu~lly, v DOOOL~9 List of Adjacent Property Owners Towbin Residence, 0123 Mountain Laurel Drive, Aspen, CO 81611 Lot 44, Mountain Valley Ranch Subdivision, Block #2, Second Filing Lot 3l Irene Kidder Taut 3928 University Blvd., Dallas, TX 75205 Lot 32 Michael & Robin Bethke Box 10053, Aspen, CO 81612 Lot 33 Christopher & Sally Faison 0143 E. Lupine Dr., Aspen, CO 81611 Lot 34 Charles & Heather Hopton 0149 E. Lupine Dr., Aspen, CO 81611 Lot 45 Terry Haynes 0153 Mtn. Laurel Dr., Aspen, CO 81611 Lot 69 Donald Harris 0178 Mtn. Laurel Dr., Aspen, CO 81611 Lot 70 Virginia Ford Lot 71E Peggy Luke Brisco Lot 71 W Ellen & Steve Busman 130 Mtn Laurel Dr., Aspen, CO 81611 Box 1283, Aspen, CO 81612 10 Shedder Way, Houston, TX 77019 ~~~~~~ Li Joel Towbin 0123 Mountain Laurel Aspen, CO 81611 970/ 920-4128 Pitkin County Board of Adjustment Aspen/Pitkin Community Development Dept. 130 South Gelena Aspen, CO 81611 Exhibit ~°A" Lot 44, Mountain Valley Ranch Subdivision, Block #2, Second Filing 000011 M~tr~T:~t~ `ALLEY HOMEOWNERS AssoctaTto>\ POST OFFICE HOX 1115.9 ASPEN, C~OLOHADO SIG12 June 28. 2001 Re: Joel Towbin Garage Addition Lot 44, Block 2, 2"~ Filing a.k.a. 123 Mountain Laurel Drive Mountain Valley Subdivision To Whom It May Concern: As the head of the Mountain Valley Homeowner's Association, we, the Board support and approve the garage addition proposal submitted by Joel Towbin. Additionally, our Mountain Valley architectural committee has reviewed and also approved the proposal plans. If I can be of further assistance, please feel free to contact me at 920-2006 Sin-cere~ly. Evan F. Boenning President, Mountain Valley Homeowner's Association EB/mk ~~~1U~? ~iosrzool To: Chtis Shipp Re: Towbin Residence MOU~in Valley 0123 Maumain Lauroi B[ive ..Plans for Towbin.gatage dated 3/08!2001 and revised 5/012061 have been reviewed and approved hY the Monmain Valley.Arehitccdual Committee. We would recommend that the trash shed be incotpotated into the garage interior. Richard.Flabcrman ,,~eL~+~G ""'/ ~~~~ Erik Peltonen ICet~h D&~ic~ Wat3an 000013 Td 4ki82:60 T00Z L0 '1nf bOLZSZ60L6 'ON Xtl~ WOad OOU01~ • County of Pitkin } AFFIDAVIT OF NOTICE BY POSTING } ss. OF A VARIANCE HEARING BEFORE State of Colorado } THE PiTKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADNSTI~IENT The undersigned, being first duly sworn, deposes and says as follows: I, C~I~IS'12~PN~JQ S~ l ~}' ,being or representing an Applicant before the Pitlcin 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 the said sign was posted and visible continuously from the ~~ day of ~~tJ~ . 20d~ to the ~0`~ day of ~UL~ , ?OQ(. (1vlust be posted for at least nine {9) full days ~- ~ L, ~? AppIicant's Signature a Subscribed and sworn to before me this ~ ~~h day of , 20C~~ by InI(~~~U~11~ ~~` ~ ~~ Y HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. WITNESS NI ,, ' My Commi sion expires: ~ `~ ~~~ ~ ~ '~`'~'~~~ ~; ~ Notary nblic`s ~ 'gnature „. ~y +a. V ~ ~ b.~Ef 2 ~C1 SCt. F ~. ~/' , y ~ ~~;" ~ O < f~ ~ f~ Address 4. M OOOE1~5 ~ i Joel Towbin 0123 Mountain Laurel Aspen, CO 81611 970/ 920-4128 June 5, 2001 Terry Haynes 0153 Mountain Laurel Dr. Aspen, CO 81611 Dear Neighbor: Off street parking is an ongoing problem in the Mountain Valley Subdivision. My current parking area on the shoulder of Mountain Laurel Drive is approximately the size of two mid-size cars. Delivery trucks and guests aze forced to park on the roadway. These vehicles and their occupants are vulnerable to oncoming traffic and snowplows in the winter. Even in summer hit and run incidents involving pazked vehicles have occurred. To help alleviate my pazking problem I would like to add a small two-car garage in the setback area of my lot adjacent to the present parking area. I have received approval from the Mountain Valley Architectural Review Boazd to proceed. As your neighbor, I want to proceed knowing that you are supportive of this project. I (or my designer) would be pleased to show you the simple solution we aze proposing. We feel that it improves public safety and convenience for everyone using Mountain Laurel Drive. Please call me at the number above or Christopher Shipp at 927-9274 (Designer) Respectfully, ~C- ~~~ ~(„ ~~ ~~~ ~~ ~1~~~~ 000016 1 • NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS BEFORE THE PITKIN COUNTY BOARD OF ADNSTMENT 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 Heazing will be held to consider an application filed with the said Boazd of Adjustment requesting authority for vaziance from the provisions of the County Zoning Resolution. All persons affected by the proposed vaziance aze invited to appeaz and state their views, protests or objections. If you cannot appeaz personally at such meeting, then you aze caged to state yow views by letter, pazticulazly 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 vaziance. THE PARTICULARS OF THE HEARING AND OF THE REQUESTED VARIANCE ARE AS FOLLOWS: Date and time of meeting: Wednesday, July 11, 2001; 5:15 P.M. Location of Meeting: Commissioners Meeting Room Pitkin County Courthouse 506 East Main St., Aspen, CO Owner: Joel Towbin Owner's Address: P.O. Box 1060, Basalt, CO 81621 Property Location: 0123 Mountain Laurel Drive, Lot 44, Block 2, Filing 2, Mountain Valley Subdivision. Requesting a 27 foot front yard setback variance where 30 feet is required for construction of a detached garage on this 15,291 square foot lot in the R-15A zone district, and a 6 foot 3 inch height variance where 20 feet is the maximum height allowed for an accessory structure, to construct a detached garage. Property Description: Lot 44, Block 2, Filing 2, Mountain Valley Subdivision, aka: 0123 Mountain Laurel Drive, Aspen. VARIANCES GREATER OR LESS THAN REQUESTED COULD BE GRANTED. Duration of Variance: Temporary Permanent X For inquires please contact Joanna Schaffner, Zoning Officer, Community Development Department, 130 S. Galena St., Aspen (970) 920-5105. OOOU17 94ii J South Galena Street seen, Colorado 81611 (970) 920-5090 Pitkin County .nd Use: /j{-~--- 3oard of Adjustment / u County land Use Code _ Deposit Flat Fee Zoning and Sign Public Notice Planning Enforcement Referral Fees: ,B115 Access Permit !LUCO1 County Clerk ~' 193 County Engiucer / 194 Environmental Health 198 Housing 190 Land Management 196 Wildlife Officer Building Fees: 170 Board of Appeals 135 Building Code Sales 105 Building Permit 100 Contractor License 120 Electrical Permit. 195 Energy Code Review 115 Mechanical Permit 150 Plan Check 110 Plumbing Permit 130 Reinspection 151 Aspen Sanitation 152 AV FD Fire Marsha] Other Fees: 155 Use Tax 165 Copy Performance Deposit 185 Park Dedication IS6 Parking Cash in Lieu 166 GIS Maps 1S GIS Requirements RB116 Road Impact Fees B1202 Road Impact Fee B1203 School Impact Fee TOTAL ADDRESS/PROJECT: Lea CHECK#_ CASE/PERM CfH~ ~ HOF COPIES. DATE. ~ ~ O~ INITIAL.